RE: Where does life even come from?
You are viewing a single comment's thread:
I don´t agree that the aether was debunked/not recognized by science because according to it "dead emerged from the living". No, it was just because it was disproven by hard facts like the Michelson-Morley-experiment and later by Einstein. In the relativity theory you simply don´t need that hypothetical aether anymore.
The simulation/matrix just "postpones" the problem to the next level. Where did the people who run the simulation stem from?
But why you think the solution that life emerged from dead is not explainable? Ever heard about the concept of evolution? There are many tiny steps in between both statuses (life/dead). Organic molecules -> more complex organic molecules ->self replicating molecules ->compartments/proto cells that combine several self replicating molecules, etc. Same with consciousness, animal research shows that some animals have a limited self-consciousness.
Even today people debate if viruses should be considered living or dead. So there is no a clear border, no black&white like you point out throughout your essay.
Yeah cuz we live in a materalistic simulation (doesnt need to be run by anyone)
And life / conciousness is just a mechanistic tool/ side-effect.
There is no soul and also no world soul.
Everything is dead.
Religions at least believed & worshipped the Demiurg (geometric, mechanistic, materalistic) , but atheistic science only believes in crazy ideas and models while at the same moment denying the exact basis you need to think about those ideas and models.
Maybe you should come out of the dualism
There is not only believing or atheistic denying.
Life is the Basis. For everything.
Without life, it is unimportant what matter "does"
Or have fun without the aether tech and instead with big science cancer
"Organic Chemistry"
But now we first need to wait for instrumentalized alien agenda
Not sure, that I got what you are talking about.
Just
You are the one categorizing everything in living/dead. So who is stuck in the dualism?
Okay so for you live = death
Then where do you disagree with the aether?
Erklär mir doch mal die Gegenfunktion zur Entropie.
Wo ist die?
Erklär mir doch mal Begeisterung.
Was soll man damit? Ist ja nicht materiell. Immaterielles gibt es ja nicht, bzw ist lediglich eine Illusion aus dem Materiellen.
Aber dann will man die Menschen mit einmal von Wissenschaft begeistern. xDD
Indem man alles leugnet.
Viel Glück
Habe nie behauptet, dass Leben = Tod. Rein phänomenologisch sind das 2 komplett verschiedene Kategorien.
Es gibt einfach verschiedene Zustandsformen der Materie, einige sind unbelebt, andere belebt und wenige self aware. Alle sind aber immer basierend auf Materie. Ohne Materie gäbe es nichts. Materie und Energie sind ja auf grundlegender Ebene eins (E=mc2), daher sehe ich da keinen Widerspruch, dass Lebewesen Energien in sich tragen können. Und das Gehirn als komplizierteste Entität im bekannten Universum ist irgendwie fähig, obwohl es auch aus Materie besteht, über solche Dinge nachzudenken. Wie genau Bewusstsein entsteht, weiß man noch nicht, und es wird verdammt schwer sein, das herauszufinden, da wir mit unserem Verstand diesen nicht selbst ergründen können, ohne auf die Metaebene zu gelangen.
Einen möglichen Ansatz untersucht Max Tegmark.
lol mit der Logik kommt man sicher nicht dort an wo man hinmöchte.
Erstmal als Grundhaltung das leugnen was man eigentlich sucht?
Alles klar.
Ever heard of Evolution?
Without life. How shall there be life?
What evolves?!
What gives and takes impulses?
Without life how shall life start?
You just go from the wrong basis
As the whole science
Michelson-Morley-experiment has been tried out of materialistic/ scientific premises.
How was that supposed to verify the aether? a dead aether?
They tried to measure aether winds xD
enough with that, even Einstein later said that we need the aether, but a not materialistic thought aether.. but noone listened to him anymore then