|
Post by Archagon on Feb 22, 2004 15:29:35 GMT -5
That can't be proven, as well as the reverse.
|
|
|
Post by Antid on Feb 22, 2004 16:27:11 GMT -5
You can prove that nothing is undefinable by defining everything. Is there anything you can think of that cannot be defined one way or another? If you name such a thing, you're already contradicting yourself, because even a name is a definition ;D
|
|
|
Post by Archagon on Feb 22, 2004 16:47:59 GMT -5
What about the things we can't sense and haven't discovered because they are above our perceptions?
|
|
|
Post by Antid on Feb 22, 2004 16:50:28 GMT -5
Like what?
As it was said, "I think, therefore I am."
|
|
|
Post by Archagon on Feb 22, 2004 17:06:54 GMT -5
Like what?? You crack me up. Are you saying my senses extend outside the typical human boundry?
|
|
|
Post by Antid on Feb 22, 2004 17:17:56 GMT -5
That's my point! If you can't feel it or think it, how do you know it even exists?
But that aside, back to love. You can feel love, can't you? Therefore you can define love.
Everything you feel or sense has an explanation.
|
|
|
Post by Archagon on Feb 22, 2004 18:09:12 GMT -5
You can prove some things undefinable the same way that you can try to prove everything definable.
As for love, define it then.
|
|
|
Post by Antid on Feb 22, 2004 18:16:59 GMT -5
I can't define it because the chemistry is too advanced for me. But all of our feelings, EVERYTHING we experience is nothing more than the interaction of molecules. Life, the seemingly ultimate indefinable concept, can be defined in terms of chemistry, which can in turn be defined by physics, which can in turn be defined by good old mathematics.
All of these indefinable sensations are merely emergent properties of chemical interactions.
But still, love means different things for different people. To me love is affection for another to the point of valuing them more than yourself, which is in itself a very unusual feeling (because normally what we value most of all is ourselves). That's my own, scanty, verbal definition. Science may do a better job than me.
But it is definable.
|
|
|
Post by Archagon on Feb 22, 2004 18:26:21 GMT -5
I disagree; I believe that human emotions and feelings (or at least some of them) are triggered by other things besides molecules and their interactions.
Take creativity, for example. Such a simple thing, it seems at first; but how can someone take nothing and form an idea out of it that has never been created before?
|
|
|
Post by henry on Feb 22, 2004 18:31:09 GMT -5
They can't. People don't create something from nothing; they (perhaps subconsciously) develop and expand ideas from past experience into something new.
And why can't human emotion be the product of chemical interaction?
|
|
|
Post by Archagon on Feb 22, 2004 18:33:22 GMT -5
Well, why don't animals experience love?
|
|
|
Post by Antid on Feb 22, 2004 18:57:37 GMT -5
How do you know that they don't? For that matter, humans are animals, and humans experience love. And for THAT matter, human chemistry differs from that of animals, so - who knows?
BTW, creativity is simply a quality describing efficient interactions between neurons in the brain.
I hate to sound so dogmatic, but Biology AP really opened my eyes to a whole new world.
Anything "undefinable" is simply that which we do not yet know.
|
|
|
Post by Archagon on Feb 22, 2004 19:06:24 GMT -5
Who knows? Maybe you're right. But new theories are keys that open new doors...
I'll stick with my theories for now.
|
|
|
Post by Antid on Feb 22, 2004 19:10:29 GMT -5
Theories are based off of observations, which are definable. Theories are extremely important in defining the seemingly "undefinable"
Theorize away, and share your theories with others!
Mr. Einstein said - "imagination is more important than knowledge" and I couldn't agree with him more. The hard part is finding a way to define what you imagine.
|
|
|
Post by BlueDolphin on Feb 22, 2004 21:00:40 GMT -5
Well, why don't animals experience love? Don't they experience love? They are attracted to one another. You might define that as lust, but then I have no way of determining if other humans are lusting as apposed to loving either...
|
|