DAM asked: "Is being born worth it - or is it better to have never been born?"

For all things philosophical.

Moderators: AMod, iMod

surreptitious57
Posts: 4225
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 6:09 am

Re: DAM asked: "Is being born worth it - or is it better to have never been born?"

Post by surreptitious57 »

Age wrote:
Other than through a human being made up distinction where would the separation between life and no life lay
I could say that separation between life and non life lies between that which exists and that which does not exist but as
I am a human being I cannot give a non human perspective on this question so the only true answer must be I dont know
surreptitious57
Posts: 4225
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 6:09 am

Re: DAM asked: "Is being born worth it - or is it better to have never been born?"

Post by surreptitious57 »

Age wrote:
To me ALL matter is with life as it is alive
What does it mean to you for something to be alive / what does it mean to you for something to be dead
When a living thing dies it is to you really dead or still alive / to you is it possible for a living thing to die
Ferdi
Posts: 88
Joined: Tue May 24, 2016 4:23 am

Re: DAM asked: "Is being born worth it - or is it better to have never been born?"

Post by Ferdi »

Dontaskme wrote: Sat Sep 28, 2019 11:43 am
The human being is just a sophisticated version of a tubeworm, it's got no more meaning or purpose other than the function of every other living functioning creature.
F: - - - Surely you do not consider yourself to be equivalent to a worm. - - -
Knowledge of birth and death is a fictional story arising within the sentience self aware creature that is unique to the human being who believes it has a mind. But on closer inspection it can be seen that the mind of knowledge informs only the illusion of separation aka the dream of being within a space-time duality, in that concepts known are known by NOT-A-THING known, and that the mind is the only APPARENT divider of reality. . albeit illusory. Concepts aka knowledge is that which mind is identified with within it's own illusory constructed world of separation as existing in and of itself...but is NOT

However, there is no mind in reality.
F: - - - - Are you not really reading this, are you mind-less? - - -

There is no reality, for infinity never happens/happened except in the illusory dream of separation that is the apparent mind of things, aka imagination.
F: - - - If you want me to take that seriously, I’ll take the risk of falling into a mental trap that you may have set-up. Look at some simple facts.Take a matchstick or your ruler or any length, and multiply such length by 2. Keep doubling that distance until it gets beyond your reach, beyond the ceiling of your room, beyond the height of your house, beyond the moon, beyond whatever the most powerful telescope can see. Such distance is beyond our imagination but it’s existence remains an undeniable fact and we have labelled it INFINITY. After this child’s play, decades later, I came to apply the fractional of ½ repeatedly. Make things smaller than small. We may reach a limit of our cutting ability but if we know that a particle exists we have not yet reached infinity. - - -

Therefore in the context of illusory knowledge: That which lives never dies, and That which dies never lives. Except in this illusory conception, within the dream of separation no thing is dreaming. You are THAT and so AM I
F: - - - Are you confusing yourself by not separating facts and fiction? - - -

If there is knowledge of a human birth then that same knowledge that knows human birth can be used to stop human birth from coming into existence.
F: - - - Abortion serves that purpose. The problem is that widely held religious beliefs decree that abortion is murder. Such believers are driven by religious indoctrination (like I was for many decades) or by sentiment or by ignorance or by political ploy. - - -

Knowledge can allow the peace of the unborn to remain unborn, this is simply known because knowledge of the born cannot be known without it's opposite unborn. So the unborn are not missing out on anything at all by not being born. The unborn cannot desire what they have no knowledge of. To bring the unborn into existence knowing what is already known is a violation of the unborns peace. By knowingly creating new lives is sentencing them to death and a life of suffering to boot. Knowledge is suffering. If you had prior knowledge of your entire life existence before you were born would you agree to it? and yet we impose that existence on every new life we choose to recreate. Anything in reality that has knowledge of itself will be born to suffer that same knowledge.
"I was waiting for something extraordinary to happen, but as the years wasted on nothing ever did unless I caused it…" – Charles Bukowski
Infinity never happens/happened. Life is a dream dreamt by no one full stop.
F: - - - Infinity is not a matter of happening. Infinity IS; timeless, no start, no end. - - -

The human model of infinity is inseparable from the figment of self-deception.
F: - - - Deception does not apply to facts. - - -
As philosopher John N. Gray pointed out “ humans cannot live without their illusions”.
For those whose illusions sustain them through life, in that they will replace one illusion with another as long as there is the desire to believe their illusion is real.
F: - - - Granted; they need facts. One may lead a horse to water but one can’t make it drink. - - -

.
surreptitious57
Posts: 4225
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 6:09 am

Re: DAM asked: "Is being born worth it - or is it better to have never been born?"

Post by surreptitious57 »

Age wrote:
Are you saying you see plants as matter with life but the fetus in the womb as lifeless
No because to me both plants and a foetus are biological for both are alive
I therefore see all plants and animals as being alive and all bacteria as well
surreptitious57
Posts: 4225
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 6:09 am

Re: DAM asked: "Is being born worth it - or is it better to have never been born?"

Post by surreptitious57 »

Age wrote:
What examples do you observe as lifeless
Anything that is only physical / chemical and therefore non biological which is any object for example
Now I am not saying that this is true but its how I see the distinction between what is life and non life
However everything is connected to everything else so physics and chemistry are connected to biology
Ferdi
Posts: 88
Joined: Tue May 24, 2016 4:23 am

Re: DAM asked: "Is being born worth it - or is it better to have never been born?"

Post by Ferdi »

Lacewing wrote: Sat Sep 28, 2019 4:23 pm
Ferdi wrote: Sat Sep 28, 2019 11:40 am I see a difference between the chemical assemblies of lifeless matter and that of matter with life
Makes sense. Do you see it ALL as energy...in a multitude of forms and states?
I do not see LIFE as energy but something that has life will produce its energy. Life would be the facilitator, not a god but more like a catalyst.
Ferdi
Posts: 88
Joined: Tue May 24, 2016 4:23 am

Re: DAM asked: "Is being born worth it - or is it better to have never been born?"

Post by Ferdi »

surreptitious57 wrote: Sun Sep 29, 2019 8:04 am
Age wrote:
Are you saying you see plants as matter with life but the fetus in the womb as lifeless
No because to me both plants and a foetus are biological for both are alive
I therefore see all plants and animals as being alive and all bacteria as well
I Agree.
Ferdi
Posts: 88
Joined: Tue May 24, 2016 4:23 am

Re: DAM asked: "Is being born worth it - or is it better to have never been born?"

Post by Ferdi »

Ferdi wrote: Sun Sep 29, 2019 8:22 am
surreptitious57 wrote: Sun Sep 29, 2019 8:04 am
Age wrote:
Are you saying you see plants as matter with life but the fetus in the womb as lifeless
No because to me both plants and a foetus are biological for both are alive
I therefore see all plants and animals as being alive and all bacteria as well
I Agree with surreptitious and let me add that a healthy fetus is alive but has as yet not come to life.
Age
Posts: 6259
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: DAM asked: "Is being born worth it - or is it better to have never been born?"

Post by Age »

surreptitious57 wrote: Sun Sep 29, 2019 7:32 am
Age wrote:
Within infinity there could not be some things with life and some with none
What is your definition of life and non life / within infinity could non life become life
The Meaning (definition) of Life is; living, being alive.

To me, EVERY physical thing is living, or being alive. If, and when, human beings do not observe and see this also, then this is because they are LOOKING AT things from the human being perspective only. From what I observe there is nothing that is non life (not living) to which it could then become life (living). So, to me, EVERY physical thing is alive. Their spans of just being in existence are just different. Human beings have the tendency to only observe and see things relative to themselves only. This is WHY most of life is still a mystery and perplexing to them.

The reason also WHY human beings think there is a difference between quantum physics and classical physics is because they again are only LOOKING AT things from the perspective of the human being. When ALL things are LOOKED AT from the Truly OPEN perspective, then NO actual difference, separation, nor distinction is observed or seen. ALL of this is unified and becomes understood as One unified. Understanding WHY there is an appearance of difference also becomes FULLY understood.
Age
Posts: 6259
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: DAM asked: "Is being born worth it - or is it better to have never been born?"

Post by Age »

surreptitious57 wrote: Sun Sep 29, 2019 7:48 am
Age wrote:
Other than through a human being made up distinction where would the separation between life and no life lay
I could say that separation between life and non life lies between that which exists and that which does not exist
And that would be fair enough and I would say a True separation. Unfortunately though, is there anyway of KNOWING 'what does NOT exist', especially considering observations are only being made from the existing "side" of things? Is there a place where things that do not exist, "exist"? Also, is there actually any thing anyway that 'does not exist'?
surreptitious57 wrote: Sun Sep 29, 2019 7:48 ambut as I am a human being I cannot give a non human perspective on this question so the only true answer must be I dont know
The answer is great as it reveals the actual Truth of things. However, your response "but as 'I' am a human being is now up for question. Are 'you' saying that the 'I' and thus the answer, in the question 'Who am 'I'?' is 'a human being'?

Anyway, as a human being is there any one of 'you' that is able to say where life IS, and where life is NOT? Could there even exist a place of NO life? If this Universe is eternal and infinite, then any other place would be impossible.

To me, EVERY physical thing is alive and living, just changing in shape and form continually always, and in all ways. For example, to me, a human body just comes from the physical sperm and the physical egg when they join together as one (apparent own separate) thing, which then changes in shape and form continually. This change NEVER stops. Even after that human body stops breathing and pumping blood that body just keeps on changing in shape and form, continually forever more and always.
Age
Posts: 6259
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: DAM asked: "Is being born worth it - or is it better to have never been born?"

Post by Age »

surreptitious57 wrote: Sun Sep 29, 2019 7:56 am
Age wrote:
To me ALL matter is with life as it is alive
What does it mean to you for something to be alive / what does it mean to you for something to be dead
For some thing to be alive it just means existing and changing.

To me, some thing is not dead. Maybe the things existing previously when forgotten are 'dead', in a sense, but when they are forgotten, then being 'dead' is of no consequence at all to any one anyway.
surreptitious57 wrote: Sun Sep 29, 2019 7:56 amWhen a living thing dies it is to you really dead or still alive / to you is it possible for a living thing to die
A physical thing never dies as it just changes in shape and form.

A spiritual being, which is just a person, although it came into existence, it also never dies, in a sense, because its affect will last forever more. It, however, maybe dead, in the sense, that it is completely forgotten about, like I said above, but this is of absolutely of no concern to any one anyway.

Thee Spiritual Being, the Mind, obviously never dies as It exists ALWAYS.
Age
Posts: 6259
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: DAM asked: "Is being born worth it - or is it better to have never been born?"

Post by Age »

surreptitious57 wrote: Sun Sep 29, 2019 8:04 am
Age wrote:
Are you saying you see plants as matter with life but the fetus in the womb as lifeless
No because to me both plants and a foetus are biological for both are alive
I therefore see all plants and animals as being alive and all bacteria as well
I asked that question to that person because they had written that a fully grown fetus, although alive, is also without life and is awaiting the arrival of its “life”.

I was just trying to gain more clarity of what they meant so that I can understand more and better, from them.

But while we are here, How do you distinguish between what is alive and what is not alive?
surreptitious57
Posts: 4225
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 6:09 am

Re: DAM asked: "Is being born worth it - or is it better to have never been born?"

Post by surreptitious57 »

I do not think every physical thing is alive but that given long enough something that is non living and physical can become living and physical
I say this because before life came to exist on Earth there was non life but when this non life became sufficiently complex it then became life

To me non life and life are not polar opposites merely different points on the same spectrum
I call them physics and chemistry and biology rather than life and non life which is too binary
Last edited by surreptitious57 on Sun Sep 29, 2019 12:04 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Age
Posts: 6259
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: DAM asked: "Is being born worth it - or is it better to have never been born?"

Post by Age »

surreptitious57 wrote: Sun Sep 29, 2019 8:13 am
Age wrote:
What examples do you observe as lifeless
Anything that is only physical / chemical and therefore non biological which is any object for example
Now I am not saying that this is true but its how I see the distinction between what is life and non life
However everything is connected to everything else so physics and chemistry are connected to biology
I always have a chuckle to myself when I hear some thing like; "Scientists are traversing the Universe looking for 'life'". To me, they are traversing through Life, Itself, which is the very thing they are looking for. Life is EVERY where 'staring them in the face," as they say. If only they were OPEN to seeing It?

To me, each and EVERY planet, star, object in the Universe is alive and living. Their lifespan, from coming into existence to not existing anymore, is just unnoticeable to the human being, from the human beings perspective, so they just ASSUME that it is not alive and living.

Some human beings say the planet earth is a living thing, but those same ones will say that the moon or mars are dead, or not living. But WHY?

These things also come into existence, have a life (span) changing in shape and form continuously, and then stop existing as well, exactly like earth does. So, WHY is earth supposedly a living thing but these other objects or planets are not supposedly a living a thing?

The answer is very easy and simple.
surreptitious57
Posts: 4225
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 6:09 am

Re: DAM asked: "Is being born worth it - or is it better to have never been born?"

Post by surreptitious57 »

I do not think every physical thing is alive but that given long enough something that is non living and physical can become living and physical
I say this because before life came to exist on Earth there was non life but when this non life became sufficiently complex it then became life

To me non life and life are not polar opposites merely different points on the same spectrum
I call them physics and chemistry and biology rather than life and non life which is too binary
Post Reply