Life

[Russian_Assassin]

I wish you had asked that question in a way that I could give the answer 42... Anyways, I feel that this thread was done before. I don't really have to say anything about the meaning of life, since I have yet to think of my theory about it. Until then, the meaning of life and universe for me is 42.

 

[Iampringles]

What I do not understand is how we have built in instincts, such as the desire to reproduce.

This desire, along many other things, leads me to question the possibility of some kind of 'force', that wants life to carry on, even though there is no real need for it to do so.

 

[WrongSprite]

What's it all about?

Well, you put your left hand in, and you put your left hand out.
you put your left hand in, and you shake it all about.
you do the Hokey-Pokey, and you turn yourself around.
That's what it's all about.

I...I think you may have just won the internet.

Congratulations.

 

[ItsAChiaotzu]

But it's just, we never think about this, and get wrapped up in our lives

I think about it all the time. I'd probably be better off if I didn't.

The point of life is to procreate, that logic engine in your head is just designed to make sure you do that, and do it well.

While I agree that logic is true to a point, it doesn't account for homosexuality, people who adopt or people who don't want kids.

Saying that these people are erroneous/defected would be insulting and impossible to prove.

They are defected, thats the point, it's a mutation. I'm not a homophobe, if you read most of my posts on the subject it's pretty obvious I'm not but Homosexuality is a defective gene.

People who don't want kids are just people who have used their free thought to make a decision.

I prefer my theory: They are homosexuals as a way of stopping overpopulation. If there are lot's of humans but not all of them procreate overpopulation won't be an issue.

I think it makes much more sense to be honest. Especially as humans are not the only species with homosexuality. Assuming we are going with the scientific approach of course.

I'm sorry but you're just wrong. Are you religious? Because that makes sense.

The vast majority of humans are straight and a lot of gay people adopt children or acquire them through other means so a few who don't wouldn't make much of a difference.

And sure we can take the scientific approach, it's a mutation in other animals as well!

Obviously if homosexuality is a mutated gene in humans (which it is), then it follows, not just scientifically, but logically, that it is in animals also!

 

[A random person]

There are some questions that require centuries of contemplation by many great men. You've just asked one.

Luckily, I know the answer.

It's 42.

Beat me to it.

 

[cobra_ky]

Well it's just that, thought is not merely chemical reactions, that's what causes it, but thought... is something else entirely different.

In what way does it show this?
An elephant can paint colours if given a brush.
Whales sing to eachother.
Birds chirp.

Why is what they produce not art?

Because they cannot think like we can...

They might be able to, but we don't know. Birdsong is really only them talking - same with whales.

you keep asserting things like this. why do you believe that thought can't be conveyed by chemical reactions? why do you think that we think in a fundamentally different way from animals? intuitively they might seem different, but appearances are far from conclusive.

I agree, but it is what you create with them that is so special. Music is illogical.

Music is merely a rhythm of vibrations in the air. Again special is a relative term, one might think that a dancer's art is completely foolish while another may think it beautiful.

No it isn't, music means things. It can carry emotions and feelings. Vibrations in the air cannot convey the beauty in music.

music doesn't mean anything to the deaf. any emotion we feel as a result of listening to music is simply a product of how our brains interpret patterns of sound waves. meaning is ultimately inherent to the individual human mind, regardless of our ability to communicate it to others.

 

[Mockingjay]

I don't think it matters... I hope no one ever finds out.

 

[Cowabungaa]

That's personal, in other words everyone finds out his/her own purpose of life by him/herself. I have yet to see any evidence suggesting an overarching purpose of life that counts for everyone.

 

[Legion]

But it's just, we never think about this, and get wrapped up in our lives

I think about it all the time. I'd probably be better off if I didn't.

The point of life is to procreate, that logic engine in your head is just designed to make sure you do that, and do it well.

While I agree that logic is true to a point, it doesn't account for homosexuality, people who adopt or people who don't want kids.

Saying that these people are erroneous/defected would be insulting and impossible to prove.

They are defected, thats the point, it's a mutation. I'm not a homophobe, if you read most of my posts on the subject it's pretty obvious I'm not but Homosexuality is a defective gene.

People who don't want kids are just people who have used their free thought to make a decision.

I prefer my theory: They are homosexuals as a way of stopping overpopulation. If there are lot's of humans but not all of them procreate overpopulation won't be an issue.

I think it makes much more sense to be honest. Especially as humans are not the only species with homosexuality. Assuming we are going with the scientific approach of course.

I'm sorry but you're just wrong. Are you religious? Because that makes sense.

The vast majority of humans are straight and a lot of gay people adopt children or acquire them through other means so a few who don't wouldn't make much of a difference.

And sure we can take the scientific approach, it's a mutation in other animals as well!

Obviously if homosexuality is a mutated gene in humans (which it is), then it follows, not just scientifically, but logically, that it is in animals also!

Ok:

1)You cannot say for a fact that I am wrong, yours is an opinion, and so is mine.
2)My theory has just as much of a scientific basis, so saying me being religious because of that view is just plain idiotic, as it has no religious basis whatsoever.
3) Homosexuals adopting kids has absolutely nothing to do with the point you are making as the straight people don't usually have kids just to give them to gay couples, usually they are unwanted children that are taken in.
4) You cannot say for a fact that homosexuality is a mutated gene unless you have found conclusive evidence through research to prove the belief.

 

[eleanora]

You are asking questions there are no answers to. God I wish there were answers...

As far as I'm concerned, it's whatever you make of it. It's all up to you.

Precisely!
Make the most out of everything you do... keep your chin up and get through whatever life throws at you... being really cheesy here but after all you only have one life to live!

 

[keyton777]

im guessing life is a really big series of accidents, and shear retarded luck

 

[ItsAChiaotzu]

But it's just, we never think about this, and get wrapped up in our lives

I think about it all the time. I'd probably be better off if I didn't.

The point of life is to procreate, that logic engine in your head is just designed to make sure you do that, and do it well.

While I agree that logic is true to a point, it doesn't account for homosexuality, people who adopt or people who don't want kids.

Saying that these people are erroneous/defected would be insulting and impossible to prove.

They are defected, thats the point, it's a mutation. I'm not a homophobe, if you read most of my posts on the subject it's pretty obvious I'm not but Homosexuality is a defective gene.

People who don't want kids are just people who have used their free thought to make a decision.

I prefer my theory: They are homosexuals as a way of stopping overpopulation. If there are lot's of humans but not all of them procreate overpopulation won't be an issue.

I think it makes much more sense to be honest. Especially as humans are not the only species with homosexuality. Assuming we are going with the scientific approach of course.

I'm sorry but you're just wrong. Are you religious? Because that makes sense.

The vast majority of humans are straight and a lot of gay people adopt children or acquire them through other means so a few who don't wouldn't make much of a difference.

And sure we can take the scientific approach, it's a mutation in other animals as well!

Obviously if homosexuality is a mutated gene in humans (which it is), then it follows, not just scientifically, but logically, that it is in animals also!

Ok:

1)You cannot say for a fact that I am wrong, yours is an opinion, and so is mine.
2)My theory has just as much of a scientific basis, so saying me being religious because of that view is just plain idiotic, as it has no religious basis whatsoever.
3) Homosexuals adopting kids has absolutely nothing to do with the point you are making as the straight people don't usually have kids just to give them to gay couples, usually they are unwanted children that are taken in.
4) You cannot say for a fact that homosexuality is a mutated gene unless you have found conclusive evidence through research to prove the belief.

Sorry if I sounded abrasive but I'm just trying to bring you round to my opinion, it's what people do.


Your argument sounds suspiciously religious is all, as in you are either saying that homosexuals have a choice in the matter, which there is conclusive evidence to show that they don't, or you're saying someone put them there i.e. God.

Just give me one logical explanation for it not being a defective gene. There must be a gene that gives our sexuality because most men and women have a different one, so my explanation, while not absolute fact, is the logical conclusion.

Homosexuals sometimes use their sperm to acquire a child through an "outside" mother so to speak. I was just making the point that the amount of Homosexuals without children is so insignificant, then putting them there to slow population down is a futile attempt.

 

[Abedeus]

LIFE IS LIFE!

WHEN WE AAALL FEEL THE POOWEEER!!

Pointless thread IMO.

 

[antipunt]

"If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way."

In short, man wants to be 'special', man believes it 'can't just be chemicals', man finds others who believe similarly, and presto: denialism (lol)

I'm emphasizing that this is just my opinion, but oh do I believe it. Life is essentially: learning how to deal. Life is a set of rules and you spend your time learning what they are and/or how to bend them.

 

[Legion]

Sorry if I sounded abrasive but I'm just trying to bring you round to my opinion, it's what people do.


Your argument sounds suspiciously religious is all, as in you are either saying that homosexuals have a choice in the matter, which there is conclusive evidence to show that they don't, or you're saying someone put them there i.e. God.

Just give me one logical explanation for it not being a defective gene. There must be a gene that gives our sexuality because most men and women have a different one, so my explanation, while not absolute fact, is the logical conclusion.
[/quote]

Not at all. I am suggesting it is genetic, just not defective. A gene that means that they are not attracted to the opposite sex, which is natures way of reducing the population (because people like sex, so it can be hard to manage with self control).

Bear in mind that there are more homosexuals than people know, not everyone is open and expressive about it.

Arguably there is a certain level of choice, hypothetically if you raised somebody among their own sex only, and never told them that the opposite sex existed, when they awaken sexually would they be attracted to their own gender? I believe they would. Hormones demand sexual release, and if they only have their own gender then I think they would be urged towards homosexuality.

Of course that is purely hypothetical and not something that could be easily proved (nor am I saying that it is my opinion), it's an interesting idea I think though.

 

[xXGeckoXx]

What's it all about? I've been thinking long and hard about this and I find that thought is the strangest thing in the universe, I mean, life - it can't just be all chemicals can it? Evolution simply can't account for thought - or can it? But it's just, we never think about this, and get wrapped up in our lives, so anyway, what's it all about?

Science:

I think that life is

the 5,520 amino acids (building blocks of life) which managed to combine in the PREFECT order to create a Protein. Now combine DNA with a protein and you are already almost singular celled organism. You just need the proteins to structure correctly. The thing is, Proteins are useless without DNA and DNA (which is not alive/organic) is useless without proteins. We have to beleive that proteins where formed at the same time as DNA Just for each other. The real miracle is the fact that the amino acids managed to order.
Imagine a one armed bandit with 5,520 wheels, One combo creates a certain protein. How long would you have to spin it. What amazing luck we have.

 

[Mongodyr]

What's it all about?

Well, you put your left hand in, and you put your left hand out.
you put your left hand in, and you shake it all about.
you do the Hokey-Pokey, and you turn yourself around.
That's what it's all about.

I love you.

On topic, I don't think there is a purpose in life. What matters, though, is being able to live yours like you want.