"How can you support from experience the notion of all energy, including "selves" being constantly recirculated? By analogy only, or can some "scientific" demonstration be made?"
- Just like all beliefs there is no physical evidence that makes one true or better than another, but people find ways or reasons to believe in what makes them able to continue life. The earth itself is always recirculating. When anything dies, something new is born, when ever it rains the water is reabsorbed into the earth and then evaporated back into the sky again. You personally showed us a tree at Shenk's Ferry that has been decaying for 15-20 years or so and all around it was new growth. If this is possible with nature... well aren't we a part of nature. You can not ask a plant why it exists, but if you could what would it say? Would we say they exist for the soul purpose of providing us with food and air. Are we that selfish? I think we have all taken for granted what we have been provided with. But in the end we will all eventually die, and whether we are buried or burned, our remains will eventually become part of the earth again. And from that something new will grow. I can not say what happens to our energy with evidence, but I really don't think it just disappears.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Don't be in too much of a rush to suppose that no physical evidence can be brought to bear to support beliefs... especially since you proceed directly to bringing physical evidence to bear on your belief!
You give examples from non-human nature of the force of life continuing despite or around forces of decay. Yet forces of decay may also be forces of life (fungus working in heartwood of a tree -- decay for the tree, life for the fungus).
Simply because several perspectives can be offered does not mean that none is more true or better: the perspectives can be assessed on their own merits, and relative to other arguments.
Your basic argument that our experience is one of circulation of energy is based on analogy from observable processes. Analogies are increasingly valid in proportion to the closeness of match between the situations compared in the analogy. "Henry Ford is like Thomas Alva Edison because they lived about the same time in America" is not a particularly strong analogy, although others may be imagined which would be.
Post a Comment