0
   

"Why" not "how" we are here.

Forums: Spirituality And Religion
Email this Topic • Print this Page
 
 
baddog1
 
  1  
Reply Wed 6 Dec, 2006 02:22 pm
Diest TKO wrote:
aperson wrote:
Okeydokey. Can someone please explain what is going on here?


Discussing what the most valueable information in the universe is.

Who?
What?
Why?
How?

I don't think anyone has given any value yet to

Where?
When?


Or how much! :wink:
0 Replies
 
JLNobody
 
  1  
Reply Wed 6 Dec, 2006 03:32 pm
I kinda like WHOA, as in the zen quip: "Don't do something; just sit there."
0 Replies
 
aperson
 
  1  
Reply Thu 7 Dec, 2006 01:06 am
I reckon how.

What do you mean when you say "why?". Why as is theological why? Why as in how why?
0 Replies
 
Diest TKO
 
  1  
Reply Thu 7 Dec, 2006 10:06 am
aperson wrote:
I reckon how.

What do you mean when you say "why?". Why as is theological why? Why as in how why?


"why we are here"...i.e.- he meaning of life as opposed to the origin of life.
0 Replies
 
Gelisgesti
 
  1  
Reply Thu 7 Dec, 2006 12:08 pm
Diest, are the Deist from abuzz?
0 Replies
 
Diest TKO
 
  1  
Reply Thu 7 Dec, 2006 12:55 pm
huh?
0 Replies
 
Gelisgesti
 
  1  
Reply Thu 7 Dec, 2006 01:23 pm
The NYT Abuzz. A person that used Deist posted a couple of threads there ... Diest --- Deist ...... just curious
0 Replies
 
Diest TKO
 
  1  
Reply Thu 7 Dec, 2006 05:33 pm
Nope Sorry. There exists more than 1 Deist in the interwebnet. Some can actually resist clicking on submit before spellchecking.
0 Replies
 
Cyracuz
 
  1  
Reply Thu 7 Dec, 2006 09:41 pm
diest wrote:
Discussing what the most valueable information in the universe is.

Who?
What?
Why?
How?

I don't think anyone has given any value yet to

Where?
When?



That being said, the most important question is now 'which'.
0 Replies
 
Eorl
 
  1  
Reply Thu 7 Dec, 2006 10:32 pm
Cyracuz wrote:
diest wrote:
Discussing what the most valueable information in the universe is.

Who?
What?
Why?
How?

I don't think anyone has given any value yet to

Where?
When?



That being said, the most important question is now 'which'.


What !?
Why "which" !?
0 Replies
 
rosborne979
 
  1  
Reply Thu 7 Dec, 2006 10:37 pm
Eorl wrote:
Cyracuz wrote:
diest wrote:
Discussing what the most valueable information in the universe is.

Who?
What?
Why?
How?

I don't think anyone has given any value yet to

Where?
When?



That being said, the most important question is now 'which'.


What !?
Why "which" !?


Huh?
0 Replies
 
real life
 
  1  
Reply Thu 7 Dec, 2006 11:43 pm
JLNobody wrote:
There are no causes in nature (cf. David Hume). Causation is one way to think about observations we make. We do not SEE causality, we THINK it. But evolution is obviously not something that has been planned. Causation has to do with mechanical chains of events. "Why-explanations" presume intentions, goals, plans and a planner. This is the fallacy of teleology when applied to nature. As far as we know only humans make long-term plans, and our tendency to project that human orientation onto the Cosmos is part of the fallacy of theism.


'Why' explanations do not need to presume intent.

'Why did the prarie catch fire?'

'Lightning struck a tree on the prarie, causing the fire.'

Many things can 'cause' something (mechanical chain of events) thus supplying the answer to a 'why' without intent being involved.

My question was: is anything 'causeless' ?

Does not everything in the natural world have a cause?
0 Replies
 
Eorl
 
  1  
Reply Fri 8 Dec, 2006 12:16 am
real life wrote:


'HOW did the prarie catch fire?'

'Lightning struck a tree on the prarie, causing the fire.'



Why did the prarie catch fire? Because the locals had decided not to backburn in preperation for the fire season.

"Why", to me, presumes a reason or purpose...."how" presumes a method or process.
0 Replies
 
real life
 
  1  
Reply Fri 8 Dec, 2006 12:26 am
Eorl wrote:
real life wrote:


'HOW did the prarie catch fire?'

'Lightning struck a tree on the prarie, causing the fire.'



Why did the prarie catch fire? Because the locals had decided not to backburn in preperation for the fire season.

"Why", to me, presumes a reason or purpose...."how" presumes a method or process.



The way I see it, 'Why' can include purpose (intent) but may not. It does include causation. (You can always answer 'why' with 'because'.)

'How' does denote method or process. (Answering 'how' with 'because' is clumsy, missing the point of the question which is about method, sequence or process.)

I'd love to hear Neo's take on this, and some of our other A2K language experts as well.
0 Replies
 
Eorl
 
  1  
Reply Fri 8 Dec, 2006 12:45 am
Agreed.

(and apologies for the misquoting rl, wasn't intentional)
0 Replies
 
real life
 
  1  
Reply Fri 8 Dec, 2006 01:01 am
Not a prob, my friend. Hope you're having a good day.
0 Replies
 
Diest TKO
 
  1  
Reply Fri 8 Dec, 2006 01:27 am
So, Being that we have strayed from my original question greatly, I'll just go ahaed and go with the flow but purpose a new question more congruent with the current disscussion to keep us on track.


"Philosophically speaking, what is the most valuable information is the universe to you"


This question redirects us to talk about our opinions and grants us permission to just listen to other's opinions without feeling the need to retort.

My desire here is to hear about what people believe, there are plenty of threads to demand proof/evidence in.
0 Replies
 
Eorl
 
  1  
Reply Fri 8 Dec, 2006 01:38 am
Deist, the answer has to be DNA.

But you meant the question differently I think. I think short term the most important information is "how" to get off the planet in a permenantly sustainable way.
0 Replies
 
Gelisgesti
 
  1  
Reply Fri 8 Dec, 2006 08:10 am
Diest, what would you say to the suggestion that dna could be encoded with a 'thought' that could be passed upward through time?
0 Replies
 
Gelisgesti
 
  1  
Reply Fri 8 Dec, 2006 08:23 am
Eorl .... read the following conversation ..... then

Eorl wrote:
Gelisgeti,

No, I am saying there is no intelligence behind, no rythmic driving force. Nothing in the least magical about life. It's simply natural. Expected. Inevitable in the right conditions. I'm quite certain it's occured elsewhere than earth, though we may never find it without being extremely lucky.

The idea that there is an objective "why" seems utterly ridiculous to me. It would change everything, and would therefore require some extraordinary evidence to support the notion.

(Indeed, many use the assumption of a "why" to pretend to prove the existence of a "why"-er. )

real life, I think we were all quite comfortable with our definitions of "why" and "how" in this discussion so far.
klik me
To succeed in our quest we have to merge .........
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

700 Inconsistencies in the Bible - Discussion by onevoice
Why do we deliberately fool ourselves? - Discussion by coincidence
Spirituality - Question by Miller
Oneness vs. Trinity - Discussion by Arella Mae
give you chills - Discussion by Bartikus
Evidence for Evolution! - Discussion by Bartikus
Evidence of God! - Discussion by Bartikus
One World Order?! - Discussion by Bartikus
God loves us all....!? - Discussion by Bartikus
The Preambles to Our States - Discussion by Charli
Family files lawsuit against school over Jesus - Discussion by Baldimo
 
  1. Forums
  2. » "Why" not "how" we are here.
  3. » Page 4
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 12/28/2024 at 10:22:44
▲ ▼