For the context of the following comments and to reply, please click on the DATE/TIME above them.
Dinodrum – “Life and existence ends with death, that is the sad truth (or happy, depending on your position).“
You’re talking about the specific life and existence of an individual, I’ll assume.
What exactly is that? Just the body and mind? Or, the cascade of relationship and inertial effects?
All thought and action peculates throughout the universe.
Like when a star collapses (or what ever it is they do) at the end of it’s existence. We still see it’s light 100 million years hence.
Dinodrum – “Yes, I’m talking about the life of an individual. I’m not the persistent effects that person may have on the people closest to them or if they were outstanding in some way the effects on their community or society at large – though that I suppose could be considered a different form of ‘life’.
I get your analogy about the star, but stars aren’t alive… that’s like saying Hurricane Katrina is still alive because its impact is still visible in parts of the South.“
Interesting, makes me ask: Is Life more particle than wave? And under what circumstances?
As for Katrina, I was thinking more about the kinetic repercussions, which still persist.
I’m only mentioning all this to dramatize the sense of certainty found in your statement. (the first part of it, that is.)
“Life and existence ends with death, that is the sad truth (or happy, depending on your position).”
Can we say that Life as a force, is definitely not similar to light? i.e. Subject to Relativity, or any of the various laws of physics etc.? Quantum or otherwise?
What about sentience?
Dinodrum – “Life is neither a particle or a wave – I’d say it’s more of a concept, for lack of a better word.
Wikipedia defines ‘life’ this way, and I think it’s pretty good:
//Life is a characteristic distinguishing physical entities having biological processes (such as signaling and self-sustaining processes) from those that do not, either because such functions have ceased (death), or because they lack such functions and are classified as inanimate.//
It is widely agreed that there are 7 qualities which must be met in order to be considered ‘life’:
6) response to stimuli
A rock meets most of these definitions but lacks metabolism, adaptation and response to stimuli. Fire meets nearly all of these but lacks organization. Viruses, considered to be on the edge of life, lack only metabolism (they use the cells they infect for this).
I took the time to lay all of this out so you understand what I mean by ‘life’ and will understand why I’m shooting down your pseudoscientific qualification of life as a ‘force’.
Sentience is an entirely different concept and doesn’t have much to do with life… other than that we think sentience requires life.“
I’m happy that you are satisfied.
Dinodrum – “I take it you’re not?
I expected a less dismissive response from you.. But I guess I expected too much.“
I’m satisfied with the trajectory of my views. Yours are yours.
Since it was the end of my writing day and clear that we have very different criteria about what makes sense, I just went home.
Not having an urgent need to convince you of anything, and also being under the impression that we may have covered a lot of this ground before.
Anyway if I were to try again, It would go like this:
Dinodrum – “Life is neither a particle or a wave – I’d say it’s more of a concept, for lack of a better word.“
If ‘life’ is a concept, what is ‘death’?
I’d prefer to use language in a way that invokes reality and not concepts.
To do that, one has to at least acknowledge the absolute interdependence of phenomena.
Dinodrum – “Well I guess I thought you were interested in having a conversation with someone who has views which differ from yours. If you’d prefer to operate in an echo chamber though we don’t have to keep talking.
Death is just the termination of life.
I’m not sure how you make the leap that concepts aren’t representative of reality.“
This is the worthwhile starting point.
First and foremost, concepts ARE representative of reality. But NOT ‘reality’.
The process that I represent, and, that you are calling an ‘echo chamber’, is just the practice of ‘that’ awareness.
It is classically represented in any number of ways.
Yes, you can be thought of as right, in saying, that “Death is just termination of life”, but, are you acknowledging the absolute interdependence of these phenomena; of all phenomena, when you say it?
Interdependence, as in sentience being interdependent with life, and life interdependent with existence; existence, with the potential to exist; the potential to exist, with infinitude.
Interdependence, when completely acknowledged, means not different from.
From what? Who dies?