meaning is God.

You speak of the delimiting, you speak of the cellular degeneration, you speak of reaction, and every other thing regarding the function of the organism AFTER it has been endowed with that life giving force

These genetic errors you spoke of, does anyone know what caused the error?

Sorry not sure what you mean here by delimit any human, by intrinsic biological characteristics. Do you mean by intrinsic that it is natural and a healthy element? By delimit, do you mean limit size, body hair ect,,.Delimit does not sound like disease.

You know, I always listen with great amazement as people talk about things as though they are speaking in great depth and really getting to the nitty gritty of a matter, when in fact they are actually simply talking all around the real truth of what they are trying to dissect.

Here you are breaking down biological function to its genetic levels trying to come up with answers that appeal to your way of thinking, and yet when asked to go deeper to the chicken and the egg you will not do it.

However if you are going to go to the molecular level of biology you cannot do so without going all the way to the actual second that the life of this biological organism as you call it began.

You speak of the delimiting, you speak of the cellular degeneration, you speak of reaction, and every other thing regarding the function of the organism AFTER it has been endowed with that life giving force, yet you will not entertain where that spark of life came from in the first place that even started the engine.

Its like trying to study the dynamics of a running engine from the exterior of it, and not being able to figure out the actual internal combustion aspect of it because you dont know what causes the spark, and never bothering to look inside you continue to study the thing as though you are intensely aware of its every aspect.

I think its time to really get in there if you really want to know what makes the frog work Boagie. Maybe instead of trying to figure out why its dying, you should try to figure what brought it to life in the first place to begin all these reactions that you are talking about.

Take the dissected frog off of the table and lets look at a lifeless frog embryo and wait for it to be sparked to life and study that process. I am certain that anyone that works with cloning is always amazed at that instantaneous instilling of life that takes place when they do nothing other than an insemination with a dropper.

And I also think that many of them think that THEY are actually the ones that create an entire sheep with nothing more than the tip of a needle, how great they are. They should be careful where they poke that awesome power of theirs.

For that lifeless form on the biology dissection table life has absolutely no meaning whatsoever, and yet the split fraction of a second that it becomes endowed with life from some force that no biologist can understand or define, that frog's life suddenly has great meaning.

While it lives a biologist can study all of those reactions to stimuli and think they have it all figured out as long as nobody asks them the unanswerable question, but as soon as the frog is dead, they poke and prod at it to find out what killed it looking for a physical failure of some organ function, and overlook completely that for some reason that actual spark of life is also missing. Why is that? Why does an organism have to die just because something stops working? An embryo was alive without all of these developed organs. A cell lives without a brain or a liver as it begins to mulitply into a human. But for some reason when the human dies because of a stroke the biologist stops looking for that lost life at the brain.

When a car runs out of gas, the biologist would concur than that the essence of that car must have only been a gas tank?

Just my highly enlightened thought process, which is actually probably nothing more than a few electrons firing off here and there, of course nowhere near the fireworks display going off in your heads! lol :whistling:

Devastatingly Delighted,
Pathfinder

Here you are breaking down biological function to its genetic levels trying to come up with answers that appeal to your way of thinking, and yet when asked to go deeper to the chicken and the egg you will not do it.

However if you are going to go to the molecular level of biology you cannot do so without going all the way to the actual second that the life of this biological organism as you call it began.

Let's solve this once and for all. Chickens cannot come into existance except in eggs, as little chickens. Where did this egg come from? ...from a creature virtually identical to a chicken, but not a chicken. Evolution.

'Life' is not a magical property; it is only mysterious to the extent that the specifics of any given set of microscopic systems of chemical-electrical-physical reactions (an organism) are not known. Moreover, 'life; has been defined arbitrarily, in relation to what is most like us. A 'living' amoeba and a 'dead' amoeba look pretty similiar; its a matter of reactivity (sensitivity to stimuli) and of degree.

A dead anything looks like a live one if it hasn't been mangled. What's your point.

Bright Noon you have dome what theologians and philosophers have not been able to do after a thousand years of study.

God is a creature similar to some kind of chicken.

what if the meaning of one's life is to murder innocent chiuldren in order to reduce the population problems?

Bright noon,

Same old attempt at evasion.

What you call a primitive first organism is actually higly complex life form already bearing that spark of life. How else could it reprodeuce in the first place.

Your primordil stew is just a poor attempt at distraction of the facts.

The facts are that somewhere back in the origin of life and continuing today, there was/is something that grants life to living things. Which are dead without that life force.

Biologists use the excuse that it is simply a reactionary continuation of what has happened since this primordial stew, OR that it just IS and always has been some sort of transfeerrance of already existing life.

Ridiulous.

Everything has a beginning.

No mattter what you want to use to represent your first organism, amoeba, molecule, space dust, electron, quark, whatever, it had to be created from something and have life given to it from somewhere.

That is simply logic.

What has life now, was given life from somewhere else, and wherevr that first life came from is the question.

My two cents is worth about a penny.

But I have to ask exactly what the author of the thread meant by 'meaning'.

If they meant to address what the goal of living this life should be than I am a staunt proponent of harmonious community. I thoroughly believe that before the human will ever evolve into any improvement they must first learn how to cohabitate.

IMHO, meaning would then be to create in you the person that you would think would be someone that you would want to live with. Too many of us live life as though we are the focus and improvement has to do with enhancing our lives, when in reality that would be a great goal if we were the only ones on the planet.

But when we live side by side with 6 billion other people we have to realize that we are more than individuals, we are humanity as well.

So meaning should take that into consdiration before we place ourselves above everything else.

The facts are that somewhere back in the origin of life and continuing today, there was/is something that grants life to living things. Which are dead without that life force.

With all the biology and physiology I've studied in my life, no one has ever mentioned the existence of a "life force".

For something to be alive requires that it be self-contained, have mechanisms for homeostasis, metabolism, and reproduction. That's all mechanistic, and it's in a way the sum of its parts. A "life force"? How do you measure that?

Well, I think that in this thread it's about value/point.
If we know that the universe is dying, turning into dark cold matter, then what actions would/could matter? In the end everything is pointless. If there is a God, then death is nothing to worry about. Our existence would have meaning. (?)

If a hurricane is coming your way and you knew about it, you wouldn't start building yourself a house before it hit.
If there is only darkness/nothing after death, what meaning does life really have?

If you ask me if I eat when I'm hungry then I'd say yes.
But what meaning does eating really have when I'm going to die anyways and there is nothing after death?
Saying that eating has value is a subjective opinion.

If truth be told: What has meaning? (in the end)