[Mr. Nobody]

I can explain love:
Love is a chemical reaction in your brain that can be traced to a simple mating urge. Mating is the propagation of your genes. You, as conscious matter, are exposed to competition for the survival of the most succesfull adaptations to a fluid environment. The fluid enviroment is built in instabilty (quantum mechanics) in order to prevent stagnation of matter organization.
It seems that life is all about matter achieving the highest order within a local domain of the cosmos that is programmed to move relentlessly towards highest entropy.

[mkirkpatrick]

Originally Posted by Mr. Nobody I can explain love: Love is a chemical reaction in your brain that can be traced to a simple mating urge. Mating is the propagation of your genes. You, as conscious matter, are exposed to competition for the survival of the most succesfull adaptations to a fluid environment. The fluid enviroment is built in instabilty (quantum mechanics) in order to prevent stagnation of matter organization. It seems that life is all about matter achieving the highest order within a local domain of the cosmos that is programmed to move relentlessly towards highest entropy.

Mr Nobody,what a wonderful way of putting things,I will now
look at Love rather differently,I only hope that I can remain in a Fluid-enviroment???

kind regards michael.

[SinJin]

Originally Posted by Mr. Nobody I can explain love: Love is a chemical reaction in your brain that can be traced to a simple mating urge. Mating is the propagation of your genes. You, as conscious matter, are exposed to competition for the survival of the most succesfull adaptations to a fluid environment. The fluid enviroment is built in instabilty (quantum mechanics) in order to prevent stagnation of matter organization. It seems that life is all about matter achieving the highest order within a local domain of the cosmos that is programmed to move relentlessly towards highest entropy.

Nicely put, Mr. Nobody. I tried explaining the same thing on a different thread some months ago. Life is matter achieving the highest order amongst a universe increasing its disorder. I would go further to say that life is matter that 'found' a way to exploit the increase of entropy to its benefit. Because as disorder continues, heavy elements are formed, stars release heat, all things life has 'piggybacked' onto to order itself.

[Guille]

Originally Posted by mkirkpatrick there is no Real thing in this universe that can ever be Proven,can you prove Love!you can see effects of what you call love,but you try and Prove it!you will fail my Amigo! we all accept love,but we cannot prove it,we cannot see it,we do not know what shape it is!there is know mathamatical formula that can find the square root of it,we take these things on faith,or from personal experiance,the soul is real to many millions of humans,with some it is just a theory,with others it is a fact,to you it has no merit or reality,well that is today,fastforward your life to say 50 years from now,and maybe it will be a different story?If a UFO landed on the lawn of the white-house so would believe that aliens had landed ,while the skeptics would say that iswas really just some new Stealth Plane! kind regards michael.

First, I know perfectly what all of those liek you are talking about when you say "ntohing can be really proven" but I mean proven for human minds. If we jsut assume that we cannot proof anything, then why on earth is it worth living? I would go and suicide myself tomorrow if I really thought there is ntohing to be proven. But we humans have develope dmethods of proof whcih are good enough to base on our knowledge.

Now, love is a feeling, a sensation, something from the brain/mind. It is studied by cognitive scieces, and this is a group of sciences which still are not developed enough. But philsohpy of mind has givena few things: for example, love can be observed in the behaviour of others, you can't accept love in itself, but you cans ay "jack is in love with julia because he kisses her, he byes her roses, he hugs her, he tells her that he loves her" of course, it could happen that he is just acting as if he like her for any reason, and this is where cognitive science has gone up to. If I develop solutions for this myself, I'll let you know immideatelly.

[mkirkpatrick]

Originally Posted by <<>> Ok, I'm going to make one more reply in this thread, this time about it's retarded title. First: 1. The soul is NOT a scientific element. 2. Scientific proofs can only be made about scientific elements. __________________________________________________ ______ 3. Thus, there can be no scientific proof about the soul. And Second: 1. The scientific proof cannot proof elements in the way that the soul can be proved. 2. The way the soul can be proven is a proof that is not proof. __________________________________________________ _________ 3. Thus, the soul cannot be proven in any way.

I agree Amigo there
is at the moment no scientific proof ofthe soul,But There is Intelligent Proof
and that is rather different!!

kind regards michael.

[Guille]

Michael,

If there is trully a proof of the soul and/or of god whcih according to you is "inteligent", post it here, please.

[Mr. Nobody]

Originally Posted by SinJin Nicely put, Mr. Nobody. I tried explaining the same thing on a different thread some months ago. Life is matter achieving the highest order amongst a universe increasing its disorder. I would go further to say that life is matter that 'found' a way to exploit the increase of entropy to its benefit. Because as disorder continues, heavy elements are formed, stars release heat, all things life has 'piggybacked' onto to order itself.

Yes, I remember that discussion as well.
I think local entropy differences or different rates of individual systems degenerating from order to disorder creates "pressure differences" that life is harnassing

[mkirkpatrick]

Originally Posted by <<>> Michael, If there is trully a proof of the soul and/or of god whcih according to you is "inteligent", post it here, please.

There is no proof that would satisfy
a skeptic,If God Picked up Spain in his hand with you on it,you would still ask
to see his Credentials,and although you might be a little nevous,and have a
slight tremor of the hand!you still would not believe or accept.I know that we
all our Souls,and I know that I know,I also Know that we live and move and have our Being,within that universal mind,One day you will know the same,but
not today,when I wasyour age I thought that I was God,Thankfully my ego has
deflated a little since then!

kind regards michael.

[Graybeard]

There is no proof that would satisfy a skeptic,

I once tried to prove if there was a God ........
Our local Priest, Father Pender was a very clever man ...
so I decided to test him.

Standing in front of him one day after Mass, I suddenly
reached down to the ground and clutched my hand around
an imaginary object. Standing erect again, I said to the Priest,
"Father, if there really is a God, ask him to tell you what is in my hand ?"

The Priest looked to the sky for a brief moment and then unhesitatingly
replied "In your hand is a Porsche GT3, with full racing complement,
including ...yes, including ..ceramic disk brakes!"

Frankly, I admit, this scared the crappa out of me, as that is exactly
what I held. But afterwards I realised, with a great deal of consolation,
that my scientific test was flawed.

Because after all............ he had seen me pick it up !!

Asceptic

[Guille]

Originally Posted by mkirkpatrick There is no proof that would satisfy a skeptic,If God Picked up Spain in his hand with you on it,you would still ask to see his Credentials,and although you might be a little nevous,and have a slight tremor of the hand!you still would not believe or accept.I know that we all our Souls,and I know that I know,I also Know that we live and move and have our Being,within that universal mind,One day you will know the same,but not today,when I wasyour age I thought that I was God,Thankfully my ego has deflated a little since then! kind regards michael.

Here we deal again with terminology.

It depends with what you call skeptic, if I am or not, so let me know it.

And no, if I reall have proof of god, I would probably believe. You see, all of those who are rleigious are religious by nature. But I am atheist, not by nature, but by thought. This means that if tomorrow I recieve a proof or a very well argumented thesis aboutt he existence of god, I would be convinced by it. But of course, it depends in what definition of god is given here.

Anyway, I can asure you that no matter how much time happens, if I still keep without recieving a proof, I will never be as blind as to believe.