Intesting, I think change is a fine definition of time.

The first law states that energy can not be created or destroyed. So everything (=energy/ God/ love) will exist forever.

Definitely, one uses medication to ease up on the anxiety. Others use amphetamine as to escape from emotional pain. I see no difference.

I had epilepsy with convulsion. Officer found me on the ground I screamed to people for help, no one replied….

I feel you.

No one els?

Well put! Unfortunately lots of people here in Netherland are dependent on benzodiazepines. They estimate even more than people on alcohol. There is an overlap of course that have dependency on both. Still I find this disturbing because 99% think it is all right and does not damage them. Possibly because it is medication. Trust me, kicking off benzos is hell and dangerous. Whereas speed, cocaine and heroin is harnless to quit.

My point: there is a distorted view on drugs. You get benzos from doctors people are naively taking them without reading the manual or internet.

I agree completely. A person that is prescribed anti-anxiety medication to help with anxiety is equivalent to a person who uses amphetamine or ecstacy to enjoy his/her life more or to distract themselves from emotion pain.

Yeah, I was bringing up arguments that are useless. I am now aware of this. Thanks for making me realise.

But it is not useful in discussion

I concede. There is actually only one thing to say then: we are all one. We are everyone and no one.

So it's best to conceptualise and differentiate. But in the end I believe we are truly one and the same.

It is just not convenient to apply this to everything, I agree.

Look up the matter-energy equivalency.

Flour is energy, energy can transform into matter. If you transformed the energy in such a way so that some matter assumes apple.

This is what the ultimate idea is. And I know that it is very inconvinient if we don't differentiate between things. So I believe they are different but only because we differentiate and conceptualise.

But they are both energy, so they must be the same. I think everything is the same. We are one. We are all the big bang.

I in fact, see thoughts as energy and energy was, is and will always be the same. Perhaps this definition is way too basal. But I mentioned that thoughts are electrical signals and neurons just in a different configuration. And that may change, so from this point of view new thoughts are created.

The ego is afraid of becoming non-existent. But that's the only thing that will vanish when we die. The energy we consist of will always be there.

Realising we can die, makes us make precautions.

In fact, it does not matter a bit if we live or die. We will always exist.

Knowing my ego will die at some point certainly makes life worth so much more worth living and enjoyable of moments. Any could be my lasg.

What has been said above, awareness of being an individual is necessary. A rabbit needs to know the fox at the hill is not himself, otherwise it wouldn't run away. And having a conscious ego is more difficult to explain. Self-awareness tends to make organisms more greedy and protective of their 'belongings'. And maybe it makes us extremely egoistic. Since consciousness is possessed by the individual. Since it is only yours I believe it creates a belief of superiority. And an urge to better ourselves. Also the sexual selection is an excellent point. Having a consciousness means you are aware of how to attract more females/males and you want them more for yourself than animals are possessive. We also believe the world is ours. Since we think so we are more prepared to protect it from threats.

Still it is a very tricky instrument, the ego. Scientists still do not fully understand what purpose it serves.

Because it is apparently extremely useful in nature. Humans are very successful species. They rule basically the world. Granted, there are other traits involved too. Curiosity, trial and error. Humans have seven times bigger brain than what is expected for an animal of our size. That means you have more neurons at disposal that aren't already regulating body and muscles.

Evolution means that those that have characteristics that are more suitable for some situation are going to have an advantage and thus greater chance at surviving.

Also, the more aggressive and dominant a species is, the better chance at vigorous organism. Our ego makes us dominant and even aggressive at times.

What is a thought? In pure sense, there are no new thoughts. They always show up as a combination of signals in the brain that were composed of previous thought. Actually new thought is a different compositiom and form of the other thoughts that already existed. — ttjordy

I stand by this statement. Give me a counter argument.

I caused so much confusion with that sentence. Excuse me. I did not mean that he did not say infinite regress. But that my reply to him contradicted what he said.

Oh that was indeed not what @creativesoul said . So in my thoughts about new thoughts I used the infinite regress argument?

All the thoughs we had, have and ever will have already existed forever?

Okay maybe I misunderstood what you meant by infinite regress.

I know, I was cynical.

Exactly everything turns to original state. Or in fact everything already is and will always bs.

You do not. Maybe our dreamworld is the one we live and leave it upon awakening. You can't proof wich one is real.

You can't know of others are conscious or just philosophic zombies.

We don't know. It is definitely evolved. Possible it gives the animal advantages to have a high awareness and conscous level.

No, nothingness does not exist. Nothing to something is not possible by definition

No, it is just a thought that developed within ourselves.

What is a thought? In pure sense, there are no new thoughts. They always show up as a combination of signals in the brain that were composed of previous thought. Actually new thought is a different compositiom and form of the other thoughts that already existed.

Interesting question. What is your definition of a natural right?

If you mean right as in a legit reason for certain behavior, I think everyone has them. There is not a reason needed for something to be precise, so actuallu nobody has them. They do not even exist.

Objectively would be like sexual education. And subjectively would mean your own prefences, fantasies or fetishes?

Why is that information useful and interesting to this discussion?

Currently, yes.

Completely agree with you! The perception is very real. There have been experiments where they stimulated parts of brain that caused people to use their left hand 60 percent of the time, when usually righthanders use 80% their right. What is interesting is that people reported having chosen their left hand instead consciously.

Your perception is all you have, so that is ths truth for you.

That's fine by me.

Thanks for a very detailed and explanatory comment!

I am reporting on the societal norm. I actually find it normal for both sexes to be as open.