RE: Do You Believe In Love?
July 23, 2010 at 4:43 pm
(This post was last modified: July 23, 2010 at 4:49 pm by Violet.)
(July 22, 2010 at 8:20 pm)Shell B Wrote:(July 22, 2010 at 7:14 pm)Cecco Wrote: love is not the chemical reaction. love is just a name we give the feeling the reaction brings us. love is an abstract concept, is it not? nobody defines love as a chemical reaction. the chemica reaction is the chemical reaction. love is a name for a feeling created by man. it doesn't exist as a thing.
Argh, semantics! That's like saying skyscrapers don't exist because 'skyscraper' is just a name we give to a building.
Actually... they exist as your interpretation of what an apparent thing you have interpreted as a building to be.
And yes... the interpretation of what it is would likely be the same even if the word "skyscraper" did not exist. You would probably give it a name.
Everything exists as a thing, Cecco... love exists as a thing... insomuch as Jesus exists as a thing... as you also exist as a thing. Of course... others might not (yet) recognize the existence of such things ^_^
(July 22, 2010 at 9:06 pm)Cecco Wrote: i see shell also comes from that overpopulated school of belittling atheists. i have never said god exists. it was never leading that way. and i have no idea where you get the idea that i am saying atoms don't exist. it's not a ploy for anything other than getting a discussion started. that's the whole point of this place isn't it?
If nobody else is saying it, then I will: 'God' exists. It would have to for us to be talking of it. It ('God') exists as a number of things, although I do not recognize it to exist as an objective manifestation what created the universe or guides our progress through it.
Please give me a home where cloud buffalo roam
Where the dear and the strangers can play
Where sometimes is heard a discouraging word
But the skies are not stormy all day