Re^4: Which came first?

A more narrow speciation angle (which seems to be what you are driving at)

No, what I was driving at is the timelessness of being and wording (related to what jdporter wrote)

(in the beginning was energy, evolving (given time and negative entropy) to egg, chicken -- and in the end : a lot of words... :)

I personally ~~believe~~ wonder why there isn't any serious research investigating the linkage between love (which is the highest (and source of all) energy, as we all know) and energy as physicians understand it...

--shmem

_($_=" "x(1<<5)."?\n".q·/)Oo.  G°\        /
                              /\_¯/(q    /
----------------------------  \__(m.====·.(_("always off the crowd"))."·
");sub _{s./.($e="'Itrs `mnsgdq Gdbj O`qkdq")=~y/"-y/#-z/;$e.e && print}

Comment on Re^4: Which came first?

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^5: Which came first? by ady (Deacon) on May 07, 2008 at 05:21 UTC
OK, this is another line of research (than biology). There is an increasing amount of investigation these years into the nature of consciousness (including emotions), but THAT egg seems hard to break on a purely physiological or even higher functional level. Maybe consciousness is a Gödel kind of self referential proposition hard to crack inside the axoiom system of current biology... There's also a growing understanding - at least among people working with serious introspection such as yoga or zen meditation - that consciousness is deepely integrated in the senses, body, - even matter/time in a broader sense. Allan	[reply]

Replies are listed 'Best First'.

Re^5: Which came first?
by ady (Deacon) on May 07, 2008 at 05:21 UTC

[reply]