The Greatest Value May Surprise You
Moderator
consider the most important and fundamental component to existence?
Please think carefully, supply a one word answer and include your
reasons.
I will not provide mine until enough opportunity is given to
respondents.
Sir Frederick
Meaning.
Either through breeding or meaning giving stories.
(Though the situation is actually quite meaningless.)
(�`�.�Craig Chilton�.���) <www.LayoffRemedy.com>
Moderator <meld...@gmail.com> wrote:
FAIRNESS
Any person who is not FAIR to all other people, and who
is not supporting and defending all of their personal liberties
is falling SHORT of being a sensible and decent human being.
-- Craig Chilton <xana...@mchsi.com>
www.LayoffRemedy.com -- Unemployment Solution!
www.ChristianEgalitarian.com -- Fight the RRR Cult!
http://apifar.blogspot.com -- Tactics: Defending Human Rights
http://pro-christian.blogspot.com -- Exposing RRR Bigotry
www.shadowandillusion.com -- Learn "The LOPAQUA Secret!"
www.TravelForPay.org -- Learn how to get PAID to TRAVEL!
Heidi Graw
>"Moderator" <meld...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>news:e9f11e61-022e-4924...@15g2000yqy.googlegroups.com...
The asshole. Without an asshole, you die.
Heidi
TruthSlave
Understanding.
Whilst it is possible to exist without understanding, I
would say our existence is bound to our evolved understandings.
One could say our perception of truth is bound to our evolution
and our survival. Quite an irony given our control/ers.
Archie
Phosphorus.
Roy
Water...without water we cannot exist.
Archie
Most important - yep, I reckon you're right Roy. I mentioned
phospherous because it is a limited resource.
Neil K
"Archie" <aken...@googlemail.com> wrote in message
news:0dd302dc-9e67-4c59...@r27g2000vbp.googlegroups.com...
Phosphorus.
I won't try to match that ....... wadda think I am? A hothead?
Ed
> x-no-archive: yes
> would be no oxygen for us to breath, no water to drink, and no way way
> to get it.
>
> Life itself could not begin, and if it had begun, would be in stasis.
This seems like the best and most fundamental answer. I would be very
surprised if someone comes up with a more important or fundamental
component.
Ste
A bit like saying "What is the *most* important component of water,
hydrogen or oxygen? Please give a one word answer only."
Sir Frederick
Yes, also, "value" and "component", refer to different
levels in the extent situation, IMO.
turtoni
carbon.
Ste
A bit like saying "What is the *most* important component of water,
Clave
news:8d03fe68-1e1a-4fa3...@s31g2000yqs.googlegroups.com...
Scotch.
HTH,
Jim
Immortalist
The term self-organization, after decades of specialists' interest,
has become an increasingly popular label for phenomena which appear to
determine their own form and process(es). There is now widespread
interest in applying theories of self-organization to analysis and
(re-)engineering of enterprises. 'Enterprise' is used here to denote
purposeful social collectives of any scale. This term is employed for
two reasons: (a) it carries the dual connotation of 'the actors' and
'the activity', and (b) its usage avoids confusion with the very
specific usage of the term 'organization' in the framework introduced
and discussed later -- autopoietic theory.
http://www.acm.org/sigois/auto/Main.html
AUTOPOIESIS: the process whereby an organization produces itself. An
autopoietic organization is an autonomous and self-maintaining unity
which contains component-producing processes. The components, through
their interaction, generate recursively the same network of processes
which produced them. An autopoietic system is operationally closed and
structurally state determined with no apparent inputs and outputs. A
cell, an organism, and perhaps a corporation are examples of
autopoietic systems. See allopoiesis. (F. Varela)
Literally, self-production. The property of systems whose components
(1) participate recursively in the same network of productions that
produced them, and (2) realize the network of productions as a unity
in the space in which the components exist (after Varela) (see
recursion). Autopoiesis is a process whereby a system produces its own
organization and maintains and constitutes itself in a space. E.g., a
biological cell, a living organism and to some extend a corporation
and a society as a whole. (krippendorff)
turtoni
word.
Dirk Bruere at NeoPax
Knowledge
--
Dirk
http://www.transcendence.me.uk/ - Transcendence UK
http://www.theconsensus.org/ - A UK political party
http://www.blogtalkradio.com/onetribe - Occult Talk Show
Moderator
All:
With the rise in this discussion of biology, the basic elements and
therefore chemistry and eventually nuclear physics, we have unarguably
arrived at a fundamental level in this discussion so I am taking this
opportunity to offer some thoughts.
Sir Frederick:
Although you’ve included examples of how meaning can be passed or
possibly created, you haven’t provided reason. Regardless, “meaning”
appears to be a function of only the highest of life forms and though
important and to an extent valuable to humans cannot be fundamental to
existence since other life forms do not share the ability for
meaning.
Craig Chilton:
Your answer has at its heart a noble concept but fairness is open to
interpretation which could prove fallible. This is not to say however,
that fairness is not a necessary component for a well functioning life-
form including humans and by extension a society.
Heidi:
Its an interesting answer. I have often wondered why some people
exhibit a fascination with the anus although I’m not alleging you are
one of them. Your response has allowed me to recognize in myself a
personal aversion by dismissing its importance. Clearly, without a
means of eliminating waste from its body, most life forms including
humans would have difficulty surviving however, plants survive without
one.
Truth Slave:
Also a good answer however your first claim may be debatable insofar
as I would argue existence without understanding may indeed be
impossible. You’re touching on something very interesting when you
refer to evolved understandings and further tying this to existence.
You go further to include a perception of truth. Although the
explanation may be somewhat sparse considering the nature of the
subject, I find this very encouraging. I also find you comment
regarding “controllers” to be relevant and perhaps less ironic than it
is disturbing.
Archie:
You haven’t provided a reason but later acknowledge another post and
provide an argument. Its still a bit vague but I think I understand
what you’re getting at.
Roy:
Good answer and although no life form that I am aware of can survive
outside of stasis without water, there remains a challenge of
obtaining it. For instance, a plant requires water but without its
roots or some other mechanism for extracting or acquiring it, water
becomes useless.
Neil K:
We have to assume you wish to avoid an argument with Archie as
inferred by your reason.
Cut Off By Google:
This is an interesting answer. It forces me to think deeply about any
assumptions I may have regarding the answer I have already determined.
The assertion that there would be no way to obtain energy however, may
be a false conclusion. It however cannot be doubted, that your answer
and reason indicates a well thought response worthy of further
exploration.
Ed:
In agreement with COBG by is sparse on reason. That’s not a bad thing
since even without knowing a reason why, you recognize and understand
the validity behind COBG’s argument.
Ste:
An examination of the basic elements (chemistry) is also an
interesting and for me unexpected avenue to explore. However, at that
level we open up further discussion that will lead to particle and
nuclear physics. This is not to diminish the importance of each of
these subjects but at this stage of the discussion we have assumed the
importance of the basic universal laws and their importance to a life
form’s existence. A good answer nonetheless and it will become more
important as the discussion progresses. As a sub note, I would advise
caution in not providing reason. Without it, the possibility for a
reader to make incorrect assumptions about an answer begins to enter
the discussion.
Turtoni (and Ste):
As I stated in regard to Ste’s answer, the importance of chemistry
cannot be ignored. This will become more evident but at this stage in
the discussion it is assumed the universal laws of chemistry of which
the elements are part and at a lower level a discussion of physics,
are premature.
Clave:
Hilarious! Perhaps unintentionally, you have introduced what is
unarguably of fundamental importance to human existence that being
humor. I appreciate this insertion but of course, Scotch can only be
important when a creature’s ability to produce it is realized. While
animals can enjoy Scotch, humans would have to first produce it. It
was also some time before humans produced Scotch. Humor or the
capacity for it, may be present in animals but may not be present in
plants.
Immortalist:
A particularly interesting post. Perhaps a bit lofty for most but
somewhere in between chemistry and biology the term (which I am
previously unaware) is indeed fundamentally important to life forms as
we know them. This level of discussion just as in chemistry and
physics will become more important later in the discussion.
Dirk Bruere:
Not dissimilar to Truth Slave’s post naming understanding. In either
case, they may require further exploration but I can provide a
challenge to the specific term for example, it could be argued an
infant child has little understanding or knowledge yet is somehow able
to acquire what is necessary to its existence. This is not to diminish
the importance of either of these two concepts but they may need to be
refined. Each of these terms will require a careful analysis of what
they actually are. This also applies to my answer which I will not
reveal at this point.
All:
So far, this for me has been a very interesting and encouraging
discourse. Interesting because of the unexpected answers, and
encouraging because it suggests the participants have more than enough
capacity for, and are willing to engage in, civilized and intelligent
conversation.
I would like to continue withholding my own answer to the question in
order to provide further opportunity for more respondents. However,
feel free to explore any of the respondents’ current answers or
reasons or to challenge the responses I’ve provided in this post. I
might also take the opportunity to correct a typographical error in
the original post. “For a living all creatures..” should read, “For
all living creatures…”
Canuck57
Propagation. To breed, make more of a kind. As if no more come after
us, there will be no more of the species to replace us. As much
specific to humans as any other species or organism in the entire world
bar none. Even a simple yeast bacteria needs to multiply to survive.
Self awareness, love, god, money, all secondary.
Canuck57
Carbon, or any other base element is useless by itself.
turtoni
Energy.
"Any living organism relies on an external source of energy"
Heidi Graw
>>>On Nov 8, 7:02 am, Moderator <meldo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> For a living all creatures and specifically humans, what would you
>>> consider the most important and fundamental component to existence?
>>> Please think carefully, supply a one word answer and include your
>>> reasons.
>
>>> I will not provide mine until enough opportunity is given to
>>> respondents.
>>Heidi answered:
>>The asshole. Without an asshole, you die.
>Meldon wrote:
>Its an interesting answer. I have often wondered why some people
>exhibit a fascination with the anus although I�m not alleging you are
>one of them.
I wasn't sure just how fundamental you wanted to go given your
reference to "all creatures...specifically humans" and their
"fundamental component" to existence. All creatures, including
plants need to expell something in order to survive. Intake and
expulsion. The fundament is at the bottom. So, given the question
as you asked it, the asshole sprang to mind. LOL... ;-)
>Your response has allowed me to recognize in myself a
>personal aversion by dismissing its importance. Clearly, without a
>means of eliminating waste from its body, most life forms including
>humans would have difficulty surviving however, plants survive without
>one.
Yet, even plants have mechanisms in place for expulsion.
The ability to expell can also be taken to the cosmic level.
Expulsion...blast...the big bang theory. From the deep black void
came the big blast...the cosmic fart.
Yet, how can something come from nothing?
In the beginning was nothing. Nothing begat more nothings.
These nothings became so numerous they ended up colliding
with one another. Friction and the nothings became something!
Sort of like two negatives give you a positive. Hmmmm....the nothing
expelled a something. The ability to take in and to expell is fundamental
to all living things.
Heidi
Ted
> >>>"Moderator" <meldo...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> >>>news:64207c3e-92f9-4931...@m20g2000vbp.googlegroups.com...
> >>>On Nov 8, 7:02 am, Moderator <meldo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> For a living all creatures and specifically humans, what would you
> >>> consider the most important and fundamental component to existence?
> >>> Please think carefully, supply a one word answer and include your
> >>> reasons.
>
> >>> I will not provide mine until enough opportunity is given to
> >>> respondents.
> >>Heidi answered:
> >>The asshole. Without an asshole, you die.
> >Meldon wrote:
> >Its an interesting answer. I have often wondered why some people
> >one of them.
>
> I wasn't sure just how fundamental you wanted to go given your
> reference to "all creatures...specifically humans" and their
> "fundamental component" to existence. All creatures, including
> plants need to expell something in order to survive. Intake and
> expulsion. The fundament is at the bottom. So, given the question
> as you asked it, the asshole sprang to mind. LOL... ;-)
>
> >Your response has allowed me to recognize in myself a
> >personal aversion by dismissing its importance. Clearly, without a
> >means of eliminating waste from its body, most life forms including
> >humans would have difficulty surviving however, plants survive without
> >one.
>
> Yet, even plants have mechanisms in place for expulsion.
>
> The ability to expell can also be taken to the cosmic level.
> Expulsion...blast...the big bang theory. From the deep black void
> came the big blast...the cosmic fart.
I never could understand all that stuff about intersecting branes.
The asshole theory of creation, now *that* I can relate to.
Maria
> For a living all creatures and specifically humans, what would you
> consider the most important and fundamental component to existence?
Accepting that the whole reason one exists is purely in order to further
the species - that way people might stop being depressed wondering why
they exist and actually do something productive or useful instead.
John Stafford
> For a living all creatures and specifically humans, what would you
> consider the most important and fundamental component to existence?
Our consciousness could be a consequence of the intelligence of the
universe pondering means to escape entropy - a universe-wide effort to
go to the next, timeless dimension - a survival effort.
John Stafford
<0dd302dc-9e67-4c59...@r27g2000vbp.googlegroups.com>,
Archie <aken...@googlemail.com> wrote:
Actually, one essential element to life is Molybdenum, and it is quite
rare - and also element #42. So now you have the "Answer to the Ultimate
Question of Life, the Universe, and Everything".
If you look to representations of 42 in binary.... anywho, I'm not
perfectly serious, but it is great fun.
Ste
Or, if you accept the reality which is that there is no over-arching
reason behind existence, then you may start becoming very depressed.
ZerkonXXXX
> For a living all creatures and specifically humans, what would you
> consider the most important and fundamental component to existence?
Becoming
Dirk Bruere at NeoPax
If you want the absolute basic requirement, it's information processing
capability (which does not necessarily mean a nervous system).
turtoni
Nice response. I've updated my answer to energy. It's probably not
along the line you're thinking but anyway.. Everything breaks down to
being about energy moving through systems.
Obviously the greatest value to humans is "love".
"Love is any of a number of emotions and experiences related to a
sense of strong affection and attachment. The word love can refer to a
variety of different feelings, states, and attitudes, ranging from
generic pleasure ("I loved that meal") to intense interpersonal
attraction ("I love my boyfriend"). This diversity of uses and
meanings, combined with the complexity of the feelings involved, makes
love unusually difficult to consistently define, even compared to
other emotional states.
As an abstract concept, love usually refers to a deep, ineffable
feeling of tenderly caring for another person. Even this limited
conception of love, however, encompasses a wealth of different
feelings, from the passionate desire and intimacy of romantic love to
the nonsexual emotional closeness of familial and platonic love to the
profound oneness or devotion of religious love. Love in its various
forms acts as a major facilitator of interpersonal relationships and,
owing to its central psychological importance, is one of the most
common themes in the creative arts."
Dirk Bruere at NeoPax
> On Nov 8, 8:18 pm, Moderator <meldo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Nov 8, 7:02 am, Moderator <meldo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> For a living all creatures and specifically humans, what would you
>>> consider the most important and fundamental component to existence?
>>> Please think carefully, supply a one word answer and include your
>>> reasons.
>>> I will not provide mine until enough opportunity is given to
>>> respondents.
>> All:
>> With the rise in this discussion of biology, the basic elements and
>> therefore chemistry and eventually nuclear physics, we have unarguably
>> arrived at a fundamental level in this discussion so I am taking this
>> opportunity to offer some thoughts.
>>
>> Sir Frederick:
>> possibly created, you haven�t provided reason. Regardless, �meaning�
>> appears to be a function of only the highest of life forms and though
>> important and to an extent valuable to humans cannot be fundamental to
>> existence since other life forms do not share the ability for
>> meaning.
>>
>> Craig Chilton:
>> Your answer has at its heart a noble concept but fairness is open to
>> interpretation which could prove fallible. This is not to say however,
>> that fairness is not a necessary component for a well functioning life-
>> form including humans and by extension a society.
>>
>> Heidi:
>> Its an interesting answer. I have often wondered why some people
>> one of them. Your response has allowed me to recognize in myself a
>> personal aversion by dismissing its importance. Clearly, without a
>> means of eliminating waste from its body, most life forms including
>> humans would have difficulty surviving however, plants survive without
>> one.
>>
>> Truth Slave:
>> Also a good answer however your first claim may be debatable insofar
>> as I would argue existence without understanding may indeed be
>> refer to evolved understandings and further tying this to existence.
>> You go further to include a perception of truth. Although the
>> explanation may be somewhat sparse considering the nature of the
>> subject, I find this very encouraging. I also find you comment
>> is disturbing.
>>
>> Archie:
>> You haven�t provided a reason but later acknowledge another post and
>> provide an argument. Its still a bit vague but I think I understand
>>
>> Roy:
>> Good answer and although no life form that I am aware of can survive
>> outside of stasis without water, there remains a challenge of
>> obtaining it. For instance, a plant requires water but without its
>> roots or some other mechanism for extracting or acquiring it, water
>> becomes useless.
>>
>> Neil K:
>> We have to assume you wish to avoid an argument with Archie as
>> inferred by your reason.
>>
>> Cut Off By Google:
>> This is an interesting answer. It forces me to think deeply about any
>> assumptions I may have regarding the answer I have already determined.
>> The assertion that there would be no way to obtain energy however, may
>> be a false conclusion. It however cannot be doubted, that your answer
>> and reason indicates a well thought response worthy of further
>> exploration.
>>
>> Ed:
>> since even without knowing a reason why, you recognize and understand
>>
>> Ste:
>> An examination of the basic elements (chemistry) is also an
>> interesting and for me unexpected avenue to explore. However, at that
>> level we open up further discussion that will lead to particle and
>> nuclear physics. This is not to diminish the importance of each of
>> these subjects but at this stage of the discussion we have assumed the
>> importance of the basic universal laws and their importance to a life
>> important as the discussion progresses. As a sub note, I would advise
>> caution in not providing reason. Without it, the possibility for a
>> reader to make incorrect assumptions about an answer begins to enter
>> the discussion.
>>
>> Turtoni (and Ste):
>> cannot be ignored. This will become more evident but at this stage in
>> the discussion it is assumed the universal laws of chemistry of which
>> the elements are part and at a lower level a discussion of physics,
>> are premature.
>>
>> Clave:
>> Hilarious! Perhaps unintentionally, you have introduced what is
>> unarguably of fundamental importance to human existence that being
>> humor. I appreciate this insertion but of course, Scotch can only be
>> animals can enjoy Scotch, humans would have to first produce it. It
>> was also some time before humans produced Scotch. Humor or the
>> capacity for it, may be present in animals but may not be present in
>> plants.
>>
>> Immortalist:
>> A particularly interesting post. Perhaps a bit lofty for most but
>> somewhere in between chemistry and biology the term (which I am
>> previously unaware) is indeed fundamentally important to life forms as
>> we know them. This level of discussion just as in chemistry and
>> physics will become more important later in the discussion.
>>
>> Dirk Bruere:
>> case, they may require further exploration but I can provide a
>> challenge to the specific term for example, it could be argued an
>> infant child has little understanding or knowledge yet is somehow able
>> to acquire what is necessary to its existence. This is not to diminish
>> the importance of either of these two concepts but they may need to be
>> refined. Each of these terms will require a careful analysis of what
>> they actually are. This also applies to my answer which I will not
>> reveal at this point.
>>
>> All:
>> So far, this for me has been a very interesting and encouraging
>> discourse. Interesting because of the unexpected answers, and
>> encouraging because it suggests the participants have more than enough
>> capacity for, and are willing to engage in, civilized and intelligent
>> conversation.
>>
>> I would like to continue withholding my own answer to the question in
>> order to provide further opportunity for more respondents. However,
>> reasons or to challenge the responses I�ve provided in this post. I
>> might also take the opportunity to correct a typographical error in
>> all living creatures��
>
> Nice response. I've updated my answer to energy. It's probably not
> along the line you're thinking but anyway.. Everything breaks down to
> being about energy moving through systems.
>
> Obviously the greatest value to humans is "love".
Not at all obvious because it's not true.
Dare
> For a living all creatures and specifically humans, what would you
> consider the most important and fundamental component to existence?
> Please think carefully, supply a one word answer and include your
> reasons.
Belonging
Beam Me Up Scotty
turtoni
wrote:
> turtoni wrote:
> > On Nov 8, 8:18 pm, Moderator <meldo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> On Nov 8, 7:02 am, Moderator <meldo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >>> For a living all creatures and specifically humans, what would you
> >>> consider the most important and fundamental component to existence?
> >>> Please think carefully, supply a one word answer and include your
> >>> reasons.
> >>> I will not provide mine until enough opportunity is given to
> >>> respondents.
> >> All:
> >> With the rise in this discussion of biology, the basic elements and
> >> therefore chemistry and eventually nuclear physics, we have unarguably
> >> arrived at a fundamental level in this discussion so I am taking this
> >> opportunity to offer some thoughts.
>
> >> Sir Frederick:
> >> possibly created, you haven’t provided reason. Regardless, “meaning”
> >> important and to an extent valuable to humans cannot be fundamental to
> >> existence since other life forms do not share the ability for
> >> meaning.
>
> >> Craig Chilton:
> >> Your answer has at its heart a noble concept but fairness is open to
> >> interpretation which could prove fallible. This is not to say however,
> >> that fairness is not a necessary component for a well functioning life-
> >> form including humans and by extension a society.
>
> >> Heidi:
> >> Its an interesting answer. I have often wondered why some people
> >> one of them. Your response has allowed me to recognize in myself a
> >> personal aversion by dismissing its importance. Clearly, without a
> >> means of eliminating waste from its body, most life forms including
> >> humans would have difficulty surviving however, plants survive without
> >> one.
>
> >> Truth Slave:
> >> Also a good answer however your first claim may be debatable insofar
> >> as I would argue existence without understanding may indeed be
> >> refer to evolved understandings and further tying this to existence.
> >> You go further to include a perception of truth. Although the
> >> explanation may be somewhat sparse considering the nature of the
> >> subject, I find this very encouraging. I also find you comment
> >> is disturbing.
>
> >> Archie:
> >> You haven’t provided a reason but later acknowledge another post and
> >> provide an argument. Its still a bit vague but I think I understand
>
> >> Roy:
> >> Good answer and although no life form that I am aware of can survive
> >> outside of stasis without water, there remains a challenge of
> >> obtaining it. For instance, a plant requires water but without its
> >> roots or some other mechanism for extracting or acquiring it, water
> >> becomes useless.
>
> >> Neil K:
> >> We have to assume you wish to avoid an argument with Archie as
> >> inferred by your reason.
>
> >> Cut Off By Google:
> >> This is an interesting answer. It forces me to think deeply about any
> >> assumptions I may have regarding the answer I have already determined.
> >> The assertion that there would be no way to obtain energy however, may
> >> be a false conclusion. It however cannot be doubted, that your answer
> >> and reason indicates a well thought response worthy of further
> >> exploration.
>
> >> Ed:
> >> since even without knowing a reason why, you recognize and understand
>
> >> Ste:
> >> An examination of the basic elements (chemistry) is also an
> >> interesting and for me unexpected avenue to explore. However, at that
> >> level we open up further discussion that will lead to particle and
> >> nuclear physics. This is not to diminish the importance of each of
> >> these subjects but at this stage of the discussion we have assumed the
> >> importance of the basic universal laws and their importance to a life
> >> important as the discussion progresses. As a sub note, I would advise
> >> caution in not providing reason. Without it, the possibility for a
> >> reader to make incorrect assumptions about an answer begins to enter
> >> the discussion.
>
> >> Turtoni (and Ste):
> >> cannot be ignored. This will become more evident but at this stage in
> >> the discussion it is assumed the universal laws of chemistry of which
> >> the elements are part and at a lower level a discussion of physics,
> >> are premature.
>
> >> Clave:
> >> Hilarious! Perhaps unintentionally, you have introduced what is
> >> unarguably of fundamental importance to human existence that being
> >> humor. I appreciate this insertion but of course, Scotch can only be
> >> animals can enjoy Scotch, humans would have to first produce it. It
> >> was also some time before humans produced Scotch. Humor or the
> >> capacity for it, may be present in animals but may not be present in
> >> plants.
>
> >> Immortalist:
> >> A particularly interesting post. Perhaps a bit lofty for most but
> >> somewhere in between chemistry and biology the term (which I am
> >> previously unaware) is indeed fundamentally important to life forms as
> >> we know them. This level of discussion just as in chemistry and
> >> physics will become more important later in the discussion.
>
> >> Dirk Bruere:
> >> case, they may require further exploration but I can provide a
> >> challenge to the specific term for example, it could be argued an
> >> infant child has little understanding or knowledge yet is somehow able
> >> to acquire what is necessary to its existence. This is not to diminish
> >> the importance of either of these two concepts but they may need to be
> >> refined. Each of these terms will require a careful analysis of what
> >> they actually are. This also applies to my answer which I will not
> >> reveal at this point.
>
> >> All:
> >> So far, this for me has been a very interesting and encouraging
> >> discourse. Interesting because of the unexpected answers, and
> >> encouraging because it suggests the participants have more than enough
> >> capacity for, and are willing to engage in, civilized and intelligent
> >> conversation.
>
> >> I would like to continue withholding my own answer to the question in
> >> order to provide further opportunity for more respondents. However,
> >> reasons or to challenge the responses I’ve provided in this post. I
> >> might also take the opportunity to correct a typographical error in
> >> all living creatures…”
>
> > along the line you're thinking but anyway.. Everything breaks down to
> > being about energy moving through systems.
>
> > Obviously the greatest value to humans is "love".
>
> Not at all obvious because it's not true.
You can cry on my shoulder buddy.
/hug
Moderator
Ok, I think its time I made my entry into the fray. I hope this is not
an anti-climax.
Wisdom.
Without it nothing else can matter; even inherent wisdom or that which
we might not consider wisdom. Let me explain.
Water is essential but it still has to be acquired. In a scenario
where we have absolutely no idea where to get it and we observe the
animals at one pond but not another, wisdom will guide us to the
correct pond. Another example; the infant child “knows” how to acquire
its water or in this case its milk. It has inherent wisdom even before
it has knowledge.
The plant “knows” where the sun is and bends toward it. Without a
brain, it still has wisdom even without a capacity for knowledge.
Two oxygen atoms have an ability to combine with hydrogen and indicate
some innate wisdom. Other atoms “obey” the laws of chemistry. To obey
requires some essence of wisdom.
Universal laws are “obeyed” by the smallest of particles. An innate
wisdom somehow exists.
Some may suggest it is an intelligent god whose wisdom is responsible
for creation but is it intelligent or is it wise? Even without a god,
there is some essence of wisdom pervading the entire universe.
Darwin’s evolution appears to be a “wise” system. Natural systems
appear to be “wise”.
If we can accept a broad definition of wisdom, the universe is replete
with wisdom.
If it is wisdom at the heart of everything, it is wisdom we need to
revere. When we are void of wisdom, we can no longer be human.
I accept your challenges.
Dirk Bruere at NeoPax
> On Nov 10, 9:03 am, Dirk Bruere at NeoPax <dirk.bru...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> turtoni wrote:
>>> On Nov 8, 8:18 pm, Moderator <meldo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Nov 8, 7:02 am, Moderator <meldo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> For a living all creatures and specifically humans, what would you
>>>>> consider the most important and fundamental component to existence?
>>>>> Please think carefully, supply a one word answer and include your
>>>>> reasons.
>>>>> I will not provide mine until enough opportunity is given to
>>>>> respondents.
>>>> All:
>>>> With the rise in this discussion of biology, the basic elements and
>>>> therefore chemistry and eventually nuclear physics, we have unarguably
>>>> arrived at a fundamental level in this discussion so I am taking this
>>>> opportunity to offer some thoughts.
>>>> Sir Frederick:
>>>> possibly created, you haven�t provided reason. Regardless, �meaning�
>>>> important and to an extent valuable to humans cannot be fundamental to
>>>> existence since other life forms do not share the ability for
>>>> meaning.
>>>> Craig Chilton:
>>>> Your answer has at its heart a noble concept but fairness is open to
>>>> interpretation which could prove fallible. This is not to say however,
>>>> that fairness is not a necessary component for a well functioning life-
>>>> form including humans and by extension a society.
>>>> Heidi:
>>>> Its an interesting answer. I have often wondered why some people
>>>> one of them. Your response has allowed me to recognize in myself a
>>>> personal aversion by dismissing its importance. Clearly, without a
>>>> means of eliminating waste from its body, most life forms including
>>>> humans would have difficulty surviving however, plants survive without
>>>> one.
>>>> Truth Slave:
>>>> Also a good answer however your first claim may be debatable insofar
>>>> as I would argue existence without understanding may indeed be
>>>> refer to evolved understandings and further tying this to existence.
>>>> You go further to include a perception of truth. Although the
>>>> explanation may be somewhat sparse considering the nature of the
>>>> subject, I find this very encouraging. I also find you comment
>>>> is disturbing.
>>>> Archie:
>>>> You haven�t provided a reason but later acknowledge another post and
>>>> provide an argument. Its still a bit vague but I think I understand
>>>> Roy:
>>>> Good answer and although no life form that I am aware of can survive
>>>> outside of stasis without water, there remains a challenge of
>>>> obtaining it. For instance, a plant requires water but without its
>>>> roots or some other mechanism for extracting or acquiring it, water
>>>> becomes useless.
>>>> Neil K:
>>>> We have to assume you wish to avoid an argument with Archie as
>>>> inferred by your reason.
>>>> Cut Off By Google:
>>>> This is an interesting answer. It forces me to think deeply about any
>>>> assumptions I may have regarding the answer I have already determined.
>>>> The assertion that there would be no way to obtain energy however, may
>>>> be a false conclusion. It however cannot be doubted, that your answer
>>>> and reason indicates a well thought response worthy of further
>>>> exploration.
>>>> Ed:
>>>> since even without knowing a reason why, you recognize and understand
>>>> Ste:
>>>> An examination of the basic elements (chemistry) is also an
>>>> interesting and for me unexpected avenue to explore. However, at that
>>>> level we open up further discussion that will lead to particle and
>>>> nuclear physics. This is not to diminish the importance of each of
>>>> these subjects but at this stage of the discussion we have assumed the
>>>> importance of the basic universal laws and their importance to a life
>>>> important as the discussion progresses. As a sub note, I would advise
>>>> caution in not providing reason. Without it, the possibility for a
>>>> reader to make incorrect assumptions about an answer begins to enter
>>>> the discussion.
>>>> Turtoni (and Ste):
>>>> cannot be ignored. This will become more evident but at this stage in
>>>> the discussion it is assumed the universal laws of chemistry of which
>>>> the elements are part and at a lower level a discussion of physics,
>>>> are premature.
>>>> Clave:
>>>> Hilarious! Perhaps unintentionally, you have introduced what is
>>>> unarguably of fundamental importance to human existence that being
>>>> humor. I appreciate this insertion but of course, Scotch can only be
>>>> animals can enjoy Scotch, humans would have to first produce it. It
>>>> was also some time before humans produced Scotch. Humor or the
>>>> capacity for it, may be present in animals but may not be present in
>>>> plants.
>>>> Immortalist:
>>>> A particularly interesting post. Perhaps a bit lofty for most but
>>>> somewhere in between chemistry and biology the term (which I am
>>>> previously unaware) is indeed fundamentally important to life forms as
>>>> we know them. This level of discussion just as in chemistry and
>>>> physics will become more important later in the discussion.
>>>> Dirk Bruere:
>>>> case, they may require further exploration but I can provide a
>>>> challenge to the specific term for example, it could be argued an
>>>> infant child has little understanding or knowledge yet is somehow able
>>>> to acquire what is necessary to its existence. This is not to diminish
>>>> the importance of either of these two concepts but they may need to be
>>>> refined. Each of these terms will require a careful analysis of what
>>>> they actually are. This also applies to my answer which I will not
>>>> reveal at this point.
>>>> All:
>>>> So far, this for me has been a very interesting and encouraging
>>>> discourse. Interesting because of the unexpected answers, and
>>>> encouraging because it suggests the participants have more than enough
>>>> capacity for, and are willing to engage in, civilized and intelligent
>>>> conversation.
>>>> I would like to continue withholding my own answer to the question in
>>>> order to provide further opportunity for more respondents. However,
>>>> reasons or to challenge the responses I�ve provided in this post. I
>>>> might also take the opportunity to correct a typographical error in
>>>> all living creatures��
>>> along the line you're thinking but anyway.. Everything breaks down to
>>> being about energy moving through systems.
>>> Obviously the greatest value to humans is "love".
>> Dirk:
>> Not at all obvious because it's not true.
>
> You can cry on my shoulder buddy.
> /hug
Let's see how long you can hold out without air, versus without love.
Moderator
Dirk, if we said relationships (a bit more definable), there would be
no need for air. While one might live and survive without
relationships (a representation of love), it could not procreate. By
extension, there would be no species. IMO, love is indeed more
essential to air and even water for that matter.
This could and perhaps should serve as a warning for those who seek to
develop reproductive technologies based on stem cells, ie., cloning.
Dirk Bruere at NeoPax
>
> Dirk Bruere at NeoPax wrote:
>> turtoni wrote:
>>> On Nov 10, 9:03 am, Dirk Bruere at NeoPax <dirk.bru...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>> turtoni wrote:
>>>>> On Nov 8, 8:18 pm, Moderator <meldo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On Nov 8, 7:02 am, Moderator <meldo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> For a living all creatures and specifically humans, what would you
>>>>>>> consider the most important and fundamental component to existence?
>>>>>>> Please think carefully, supply a one word answer and include your
>>>>>>> reasons.
>>>>>>> I will not provide mine until enough opportunity is given to
>>>>>>> respondents.
>>>>>> All:
>>>>>> With the rise in this discussion of biology, the basic elements and
>>>>>> therefore chemistry and eventually nuclear physics, we have unarguably
>>>>>> arrived at a fundamental level in this discussion so I am taking this
>>>>>> opportunity to offer some thoughts.
>>>>>> Sir Frederick:
>>>>>> possibly created, you haven�t provided reason. Regardless, �meaning�
>>>>>> appears to be a function of only the highest of life forms and though
>>>>>> important and to an extent valuable to humans cannot be fundamental to
>>>>>> existence since other life forms do not share the ability for
>>>>>> meaning.
>>>>>> Craig Chilton:
>>>>>> Your answer has at its heart a noble concept but fairness is open to
>>>>>> interpretation which could prove fallible. This is not to say however,
>>>>>> that fairness is not a necessary component for a well functioning life-
>>>>>> form including humans and by extension a society.
>>>>>> Heidi:
>>>>>> Its an interesting answer. I have often wondered why some people
>>>>>> one of them. Your response has allowed me to recognize in myself a
>>>>>> personal aversion by dismissing its importance. Clearly, without a
>>>>>> means of eliminating waste from its body, most life forms including
>>>>>> humans would have difficulty surviving however, plants survive without
>>>>>> one.
>>>>>> Truth Slave:
>>>>>> Also a good answer however your first claim may be debatable insofar
>>>>>> as I would argue existence without understanding may indeed be
>>>>>> refer to evolved understandings and further tying this to existence.
>>>>>> You go further to include a perception of truth. Although the
>>>>>> explanation may be somewhat sparse considering the nature of the
>>>>>> subject, I find this very encouraging. I also find you comment
>>>>>> is disturbing.
>>>>>> Archie:
>>>>>> You haven�t provided a reason but later acknowledge another post and
>>>>>> provide an argument. Its still a bit vague but I think I understand
>>>>>> Roy:
>>>>>> Good answer and although no life form that I am aware of can survive
>>>>>> outside of stasis without water, there remains a challenge of
>>>>>> obtaining it. For instance, a plant requires water but without its
>>>>>> roots or some other mechanism for extracting or acquiring it, water
>>>>>> becomes useless.
>>>>>> Neil K:
>>>>>> We have to assume you wish to avoid an argument with Archie as
>>>>>> inferred by your reason.
>>>>>> Cut Off By Google:
>>>>>> This is an interesting answer. It forces me to think deeply about any
>>>>>> assumptions I may have regarding the answer I have already determined.
>>>>>> The assertion that there would be no way to obtain energy however, may
>>>>>> be a false conclusion. It however cannot be doubted, that your answer
>>>>>> and reason indicates a well thought response worthy of further
>>>>>> exploration.
>>>>>> Ed:
>>>>>> since even without knowing a reason why, you recognize and understand
>>>>>> Ste:
>>>>>> An examination of the basic elements (chemistry) is also an
>>>>>> interesting and for me unexpected avenue to explore. However, at that
>>>>>> level we open up further discussion that will lead to particle and
>>>>>> nuclear physics. This is not to diminish the importance of each of
>>>>>> these subjects but at this stage of the discussion we have assumed the
>>>>>> importance of the basic universal laws and their importance to a life
>>>>>> important as the discussion progresses. As a sub note, I would advise
>>>>>> caution in not providing reason. Without it, the possibility for a
>>>>>> reader to make incorrect assumptions about an answer begins to enter
>>>>>> the discussion.
>>>>>> Turtoni (and Ste):
>>>>>> cannot be ignored. This will become more evident but at this stage in
>>>>>> the discussion it is assumed the universal laws of chemistry of which
>>>>>> the elements are part and at a lower level a discussion of physics,
>>>>>> are premature.
>>>>>> Clave:
>>>>>> Hilarious! Perhaps unintentionally, you have introduced what is
>>>>>> unarguably of fundamental importance to human existence that being
>>>>>> humor. I appreciate this insertion but of course, Scotch can only be
>>>>>> animals can enjoy Scotch, humans would have to first produce it. It
>>>>>> was also some time before humans produced Scotch. Humor or the
>>>>>> capacity for it, may be present in animals but may not be present in
>>>>>> plants.
>>>>>> Immortalist:
>>>>>> A particularly interesting post. Perhaps a bit lofty for most but
>>>>>> somewhere in between chemistry and biology the term (which I am
>>>>>> previously unaware) is indeed fundamentally important to life forms as
>>>>>> we know them. This level of discussion just as in chemistry and
>>>>>> physics will become more important later in the discussion.
>>>>>> Dirk Bruere:
>>>>>> case, they may require further exploration but I can provide a
>>>>>> challenge to the specific term for example, it could be argued an
>>>>>> infant child has little understanding or knowledge yet is somehow able
>>>>>> to acquire what is necessary to its existence. This is not to diminish
>>>>>> the importance of either of these two concepts but they may need to be
>>>>>> refined. Each of these terms will require a careful analysis of what
>>>>>> they actually are. This also applies to my answer which I will not
>>>>>> reveal at this point.
>>>>>> All:
>>>>>> So far, this for me has been a very interesting and encouraging
>>>>>> discourse. Interesting because of the unexpected answers, and
>>>>>> encouraging because it suggests the participants have more than enough
>>>>>> capacity for, and are willing to engage in, civilized and intelligent
>>>>>> conversation.
>>>>>> I would like to continue withholding my own answer to the question in
>>>>>> order to provide further opportunity for more respondents. However,
>>>>>> reasons or to challenge the responses I�ve provided in this post. I
>>>>>> might also take the opportunity to correct a typographical error in
>>>>>> all living creatures��
>>>>> Nice response. I've updated my answer to energy. It's probably not
>>>>> along the line you're thinking but anyway.. Everything breaks down to
>>>>> being about energy moving through systems.
>>>>> Obviously the greatest value to humans is "love".
>>>> Dirk:
>>>> Not at all obvious because it's not true.
>>> You can cry on my shoulder buddy.
>>> /hug
>> Let's see how long you can hold out without air, versus without love.
>>
>
> Dirk, if we said relationships (a bit more definable), there would be
> no need for air. While one might live and survive without
> relationships (a representation of love), it could not procreate. By
> extension, there would be no species. IMO, love is indeed more
> essential to air and even water for that matter.
A quick fuck could accomplish as much.
> This could and perhaps should serve as a warning for those who seek to
> develop reproductive technologies based on stem cells, ie., cloning.
You asked:
"For a living all creatures and specifically humans, what would you
consider the most important and fundamental component to existence?"
If you had asked about relationships you would have received different
answers. But you did not.
Moderator
I must be having a bad day. My post was poorly constructed. First, I
thought you had proposed the importance of love but that was Turtoni.
You in fact proposed the importance of air over love. This error may
be less critical than another.
When I suggested relationships, I was not clear what was being
substituted, namely, substituting love with relationships for purposes
of discussion. I hope that is now clear. I would like to challenge
your assertion about air and the “quick fuck”.
I still maintain that relationships, however brief are necessary for a
vast majority of living organisms and for the same reasons I have
stated. I agree with your point about air. Without air even
relationships would be challenged however, anaerobic bacteria exist
without it.
Some organisms can reproduce asexually and so even relationships
cannot be a fundamental requirement for a living all creatures and
specifically humans. Reproduction however, seems an essential
component and is fundamental down to the DNA molecule.
Dirk Bruere at NeoPax
Which is why my view is that information processing is fundamental.
No information processing, no life.
turtoni
I think the wisdom you are referring to is some type of
"consciousness".
But without "energy" to stimulate the "consciousness" there would be
nothing.
Ste
>
> If we can accept a broad definition of wisdom, the universe is replete
> with wisdom.
Yes, but to be honest I think you're offering us a definition of
"wisdom" so broad as to be meaningless.
Moderator
It’s difficult to dispute your claim.
The problem is finding a suitable substitute. Some offerings within
this thread may be appropriate but still retain some weakness. I think
someone offered, “becoming”. It’s difficult to gauge the context that
poster intended but to me this may be similar to evolving which might
be applicable. I would then argue, to evolve requires wisdom even if
its inherent wisdom.
We can’t make the mistake of equating wisdom and knowledge, and it is
not unusual for definitions to be revised. It could be that wisdom is
incorrectly defined.
Demon Buddha
> For a living all creatures and specifically humans, what would you
> consider the most important and fundamental component to existence?
> Please think carefully, supply a one word answer and include your
> reasons.
>
> I will not provide mine until enough opportunity is given to
> respondents.
Freedom. All other goodness flows directly from this single realized
precept.
Demon Buddha
> "Ste" <ste_...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:8d03fe68-1e1a-4fa3...@s31g2000yqs.googlegroups.com...
>> On 8 Nov, 12:02, Moderator <meldo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> For a living all creatures and specifically humans, what would you
>>> consider the most important and fundamental component to existence?
>>> Please think carefully, supply a one word answer and include your
>>> reasons.
>>>
>>> I will not provide mine until enough opportunity is given to
>>> respondents.
>> hydrogen or oxygen? Please give a one word answer only."
>
Wrong. *Good* scotch is correct, but not a one-worder.
Dang.
Demon Buddha
>> You can cry on my shoulder buddy.
>> /hug
>
> Let's see how long you can hold out without air, versus without love.
Gee I dunno... without at least some *self* love, some people wouldn't
last 2 days.
Arf arf arf...
turtoni
>
>>> Dirk:
>>> Not at all obvious because it's not true.
>
>> You can cry on my shoulder buddy.
>> /hug
>
> Let's see how long you can hold out without air, versus without love.
Your mothers love didnt hold out your air.
Clave
news:8MqdncXP79RYDWDX...@giganews.com...
Fine.
MacAllen.
Jim
Demon Buddha
Good 12 and 25 year. The 18 I never cared for... must be some weird
bump it goes through in the process. Have not tried the 30 year yet -
too po'.
Balvenie - great for an inexpensive single malt.
LaPhroaig - the only lowland I fancy, but it is nice.
Others, too, but we're already way OT. :)
turtoni
> Clave wrote:
> > "Demon Buddha" <Nob...@no.where> wrote in message
> >news:8MqdncXP79RYDWDX...@giganews.com...
> >> Clave wrote:
> >>>news:8d03fe68-1e1a-4fa3...@s31g2000yqs.googlegroups.com...
> >>>> On 8 Nov, 12:02, Moderator <meldo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>> For a living all creatures and specifically humans, what would you
> >>>>> consider the most important and fundamental component to existence?
> >>>>> Please think carefully, supply a one word answer and include your
> >>>>> reasons.
>
> >>>>> I will not provide mine until enough opportunity is given to
> >>>>> respondents.
> >>>> A bit like saying "What is the *most* important component of water,
> >>>> hydrogen or oxygen? Please give a one word answer only."
> >>> Scotch.
> >> Wrong. *Good* scotch is correct, but not a one-worder.
>
> >> Dang.
>
> > Fine.
>
> > MacAllen.
>
> Good 12 and 25 year. The 18 I never cared for... must be some weird
> bump it goes through in the process. Have not tried the 30 year yet -
> too po'.
>
> Balvenie - great for an inexpensive single malt.
>
> LaPhroaig - the only lowland I fancy, but it is nice.
>
> Others, too, but we're already way OT. :)