Greta wrote: TSBU wrote: Greta wrote:
All fair enough observations IMO, despite protestations from the gallery (that's what they're not paid for).
The idea of the universe being all one thing is interesting because it seems to me that that "one thing" has always been in the process of turning itself into many things. With the separation of galaxies with dark energy, in a sense each galaxy will increasingly become its own universe. Maybe humans will form institutions run by AI that will split off from the rest of humanity in the same way humans split off from nature? It would be hard to blame them if they did
Some day we'll know what do you think alone, without talking about "biology" and all that crap, if you think something.
If you learned something about biology you might understand.
Greta, I know biology. It isn't my job,but it's something that I like a lot and something I had to study at University.
Starting by evolution, evolution does not necesarily rewards what is the best for the survival of specie, and, out of rewardings, it certeanly has no explanation to all the individuals of a specie.
For example, take lions. Their males, when they get to be the king, like many other mamals, usually kill the actual babies to make new babies, their babies. That's bad for the specie in a long term, and probably for them as individuals too, since they are going to be less when they hunt for a while. It doesn't give better gens for survival to the new generation either, since the last king probably lost because its age and was as strong and fast as the actual one when he was young (lions live around 7 years). It just spread the "killing babies gen", and, of course, that gen, wich is bad for the specie (specially knowing how bad is lions sperm because of their semi endogamic relationships, specially knowing that there are not som many lions), is going to be there for a while, cause those who don't have it will spread their gens less than tose who have it.
Evolution works with mistakes, and some mistakes get here for a while. That's all.
Biology just says that there are some things,like parasytes, that tend to appear, that there are some things, like the form of the fishes, that is going to be there. But biology works more with statistics and pure study, than with theorys (real biology), I mean, the Golgi... how do you call it in English? XD. Well, what I mean, is that biology is not "explanations", it is "facts". It is a real science, not like sociology", first, the facts, the statistics, then, you can give all the theorys and models you want, but the facts are there.
If you talk about biology trying to explain humans behavour, it's like trying to explain human behaviour talking about phisics.Of course, we are ruled by phisics laws, but, hell, that's not enough, and that's far enough of the point to talk about a new subject.
What about enjoying music? When you enjoy a song, are you thinking in why biology and being a human makes you enjoy that song, or are you just enjoying the song and thinking in your own taste? What about gays? What about vegetarians... in the end, everything? Of course, we are mammals (oh, eiffel XD), but we are not equal, we are individuals, and philosophy is not just saying "biology", (and less "sociology") that's the kind of philosophy done by countries specially when they talk about races, talk with a racist and he will talk about biology, but we both know that he doesn't think what he thinks because of biology. Talk with a horny man and (if he is stupid) he will talk about biology... no, man, you are just horny. Brutality? That's a human term, just human, out of biology. And plants taking sun are not brutal by the way. Biology would be a good explanation if you could look at biology and only with that knowing how humans will move, but it's all the oposite, humans do things, and then someone finds a relation with something similar in biology, a curiosity that is never a rule. Are we what we are because of evolution? Yes, of course. Hell but you don't have to say that in every post.
Nanananana, I don't care about that, if someone is talking about causality, for example, I want to know why does he tink what he thinks, I don't want him to say "i think that because of biology", that's not more usefull than saying "I know it because I'm alive, if I were dead I wouldn't know it" or "i feel that way because of phisics laws".
You get it?
"How can you solve that equation?" no need to talk about biology.