all humans are built on chemicals , any one dont agree?

February 17, 2006

"I attempted to show that a man can keep its physical identity (its likeness with himself) without necessarily having a soul."

No. One day He has to die...and according to his karma, he may become a rat in his next life, and his so called identity(flesh, blood, bones, skin, urine, bile and mucus) will be mixed and lost in the earth. Where is his identity (of a human being) now? The only think which is still the same is the soul. whereas, you are rejecting the existence of soul itself.

To explain the identity of the man by a soul is a lazy and unscientific explanation. Life sciences are bringing the answer without resorting to the soul.

So what you are saying is another form of cheating. If you are so confident on the life sciences, why cant your science conquer death?

Sephiroth · February 20, 2006

The name house points to something real and definite. It does not point to anything. But I have shown that the name goes on to apply even when the thing named undergoes changes.

Here's Scientific and Historical FACT to hit the nail into that thick head of yours.

The Humans which appeared 3.1 Million years ago and what we have today are different physically. Matter a fact, the Modern day humans - known as Homo Sapiens - only appeared 1.3 million years ago in plains of Africa. This is PROVEN FACT.

If you say Humans are the same - real and definite, then I say you are lying. In Scientific Community, they already labelled different sub-humans according to the place and time they were found - for example - Peking Man, Javanese Man, Homo Eretus etc.

So, there is NO such thing as defining humans as real and definite as you claim. Humans begins had underwent Evolutional changes and will continue to undergo Evolutional changes.