life: purposed to continue

spidergoat,

But they do have purpose, right?

So humans have more responsibility.

jan.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

exactly!

You hit the nail on the head.

it is why we are such cool critters, we can actually create too.

now since the thread has performed and the reality is pure that "life is purposed to continue" (no matter if the fools who argue with zero substance) there is much more to be understood of choices; "good and bad"

Good: supports life to continue

Bad: loss to the common

One is a part of existence (the processes) and of purpose to contribute (support), the other thinks it is separate from existence (isolating itself by choice), and imposes actions purposed for self (includes selfish predeterminations), by choice.

Notice the thread, read to comments and see how the rules fit and can measure (judge) our peers.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Bishadi, please unpack the statement "life is purposed to continue".
What does it mean?

jan.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Wrong.

So getting one agreement and at least four disagreements classes in your book as verification?
So much for integrity.

No that's a fantasy.

"Zero substance" meaning, in this case, "I have refused to even acknowledge any contrary position".

 

Oli,

So there is no purpose in feeding and protecting yourself, and your family?
When go to work from one end of the day to the other, it is done purely on
instinct.
When we take out insurance on property and life, write out a will, there is no
purpose to these actions, as we would do them anyway due to our nature?

jan.

 

Humans have their individual purposes.
And for that matter, what percentage of humans take out insurance or write a will?
That's not only an anthropocentric view of life it's also culture-centric.
What "purpose" does a sponge have?
What "purpose" does a dandelion have?

 

if life 'just is' alive, then it is 'purposed'

so anything you can observe, that is alive; has purpose or it would not exist!

has nothing to do with, what that purpose is, nor where it is going or has been; the reality is; if it is, then it exists and has purpose, all cases!

remember the old item; "i am therefore i exist"

some consider that philosophical statement "profound"

it does not cover, who what when why and where, it just make a philosophical analogy that is true

same difference: life: purposed to continue! (across the board; it is true)

 

By what?
For what?

Assumption.

Not true.

Irrelevant.
And incorrectly quoted.

It's not an analogy.
It can't hold for, say, sponges, dandelions....

Simply not true.
You are using your belief that it's true to sustain the argument without presenting one shred of support.

 

Oli,

Yes they do, but they also have universal purpose the basis of which is as spidergoat mentioned, and I followed up on.
Every human being has to work to survive.

There are equivalent actions which amount to the same reasoning, protection.

eat, sleep, reproduce, and defend. Of course within their own capacity.

jan.

 

Oli, how do you endure such horrendous stupidity ?

 

Some questions before I dip in too far...

What do you mean by "purposed"?
And by who or what, exactly, is life thus purposed?

Or are you proposing that life provides its own purpose, rather than one assigned to it?


Next, if your definition of life includes within it the nature of "continuing" then your comment is tautological, and offers nothing... i.e. "Life: Purposed to do what life is defined as doing."

You might as well say "A rock: Purposed to do what a rock does"

 

Oli..................... have you ONCE provided evidence of a life not having "purpose"

if not, then shut up as not a single post you have made can offer anything contrary..................

ALL LIFE has purpose............. and since you do not comprehend, that then i see why yours doesn't either.

The only purpose you have shared is to put up arguments that do not even apply to the context

then when asked if you would provide something that can show that life has no inherent purpose and anyone can see in the list defining WHAT LIFE IS, per any dictionary; that every single item on the list is representing and inherent duty to even be considered 'alive'

so show ONE SINGLE item of living matter that does not have purpose?

You are being asked to perform or by default purely admitting you are just not capable of supporting your argument as not one line item can go against what is easily observable:

life: purposed to continue!

 

Um, Spidergoat wrote:

Or not.
Depends whether the individual wants to survive.
Depends what you mean by work.

Dandelions do most (all?) of the above: is it through INTENT (purpose) or just function?

 

Incorrect.
And you are the one that made the initial post: it is your duty to support it.
Read the rules...

The comprehension failure is not on my part.

If that is the case then have clearly failed to explain your "context".

I think you're getting even more confused now.
Duty?

So you haven't read ANY of my posts then?

That is an assumption that you have yet to prove.
You cannot use the assumption that your proposition is true to support the proposition itself.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

the word 'purposed' resolves to already existing. So the beginning and ending or even what for, is not of context. It blankets, that 'life' if observed alive, is existing. Therefore if mass is alive to measure, then it is 'purposed to continue' as soon as observed alive.

to observe that aspect, then say 'the previous generation'

as for why? to continue living

'inherently', the life is assigned (evolved into) a niche within its environment but the individual life is not choosing other than by the genetics (prewired) yet, it can evolve based on the changing environment, which provides the awareness, that the life is not just living, but developing by the 'intent to continue'

but 'does' and a rock 'does nothing'........... so since a life, moves, eats, consumes, reproduces, etc..etc... within its own genetic parameters of duty, it is set in motion (via the evolutionary path) to continue.

The 'purposed' aspect is to acknowledge 'it exists'. (life: purposed to continue)

It 'exists' therefore inherently 'purposed'.

Has nothing to do with 'creation' ID'ing, magical dudes on a thrown.. or what have you but life has an objective to survive, no matter which kind of life it is.

and if 'alive' then "purposed"

 

Oli,

Um, post 59.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

That is their choice, as spidergoat implied, humans have a higher capacity.

The type of work which ensures survival.

As it ever occured to you that intent can be extremely basic, so basic there
seems to be no intent?

jan.

 

and it is all within the thread just by observing the list of what the dictionary shows is required to observe that something is alive.

The issue on you part is you are not nor have once provided an argument other than perhaps you cannot find the analogy written somewhere else.

By logically, practically and philsophically; the OP line item is true.

sure it is, if you cannot comprehend that life is/has intent to continue, then you don't comprehend enough about what life is to understand the statement

and if you do understand that life has an innert intent and just do not wish to face it; then it is just your own self purpose to remain argumentative; (a loss to the common)

all i ever asked from you was to simply show an example to contradict the ideology and you just can't

then to address each word in the item, you will not observe how life works

you compared yourself to a rock (i am thinking intellectually, you are equal) and you would not address what you consider different between you and a rock.

this argument Oli is about your integrity at this point

 

So you're redefining the meaning of the word "purpose"?
Effectively then your initial post is actually: "Does everything that is alive exist?"

Either meaningless or tautological.

Gibberish.

It is not "assigned".

Exactly: no choice, no purpose.

What "awareness"?
Where does the "intent" come from in non-conscious species?

Does a dandelion acknowledge that it exists?
Life is not "purposed to continue".

A rock exists is that also "inherently purposed"?

No it doesn't have an "objective" since an objective requires will and cogitation.

You're back to supporting your argument with your argument.

 

What's the purpose of a fish? Not- as a fish, my purpose is...

The first question is meaningless, the second may have an answer if you are fish.

 

Yep

And therefore humans can have a purpose, but life itself doesn't.

Nice cop out - tautology.

Has it ever been shown to exist?
Or are you using an assumption to prop up the original assumption?

The observation that something is alive does not indicate that that thing has purpose.

Then you are either blind or lacking in comprehension.
I have provided examples many times.

Only if you hold it to be true without proof in the first place.

You have yet to prove it.

The "inert intent" has yet to be shown.

I have, many times.

And you do?
Hardly.

Another failure to understand English?

You think? Ho ho.
Strange, I explained several times, and you have even responded that you understood what I'd posted.
Now you're retracting?

Oh no.
It's about your intellectual duplicity.