Welcome Visitor: Login to the siteJoin the site



The logic of logic. Please read this and let me know what your logic tells you. I'm not the best at expressing my thought so bare with me.


Submitted:May 4, 2007    Reads: 140    Comments: 3    Likes: 1   


I have a hard time understanding the logic behind the idea that death is the end of life. One of the first things I learned in science was that no energy that exist can stop exsisting. Radeo waves sent into spacecan not just stop exsisting, it is and will always be somewhere untill it is received. Energy also is known to transform from one state into another, just as a radio wave transforms by what ever is receiving it. Our eye receive images up-side down and translates these images into electricity(transformation)into understandable images.

Everything around us and in us is transforming. Transformation is everywhere, from the world around us, to the things we use everyday to the way we think. There is evidence everywhere that change is happening. One uses tools created by someone else to build a wall, then someone else uses tools to take down this wall, does the wall stop exsisting? No it has changed into something else. Now here is the kicker, depending on how one feels about that wall being torn down, that feeling affects how one reacts to the action of energy involved. If I created the wall and did not want that wall torn down I will call the action involved something negitive. From the tools used to build the wall and the tools used to take down the walls, to the wall its self were just states of transformation.

Lets say that a man meets a woman and the energy between the two is translated into attraction. This attraction then turns into interaction, this interaction tranforms into a lifeform- the woman is with child-and during the 9 months that the child is inside the woman it goes through various states of transformation. After the child is delivered it contiues to transform. With that said, why would it be considered "logic" or "scientific" that death would be the end of the child's exsistence?

I also can not understand how people who have never died can state with fact that death is the end of man, when there are people who have died and state that death is not the end of exsistence. Whether one believes in ghost, God, gods, self enlightenment or reincarnation, there is a underlining sense that death is not the end.

The whole idea that everything we know started with the "BigBang". Zero is zero, nothing is nothing. For the big bang to have happened there would have to have been something. That something would have to have a start. Was that something a act of God?

I am a man that, I think, of logic, and evolution sounds logical, unless you listen carefully to the way it is explained. Anytime a statement is made or a question is asked about evolution the words "probably", "maybe", and "most likely", are mixed in with facts giving the idea that everything being said is indeed fact. Try this out, ask a evolutionist questions about evolution and count how many times the stated words come up in their statement and where they are placed in the statement. Being the logical person I am, these words indicate a belief, not facts.

There is a wall between spiritual and science, and the tools are being used to reinforce the wall or take it down. I stand and look at this wall and hope it comes down because for me, my transformation has me believing that science tells us how God created everything and faith tells me how to connect with God. Science can not agree-evolution vs. intelligent design- and the spiritual can not agree on who God is, what He is saying and what He wants. To seek the begining of everything and not assuming to have all the answers is the only true logic





1

| Email this story Email this Short story | Add to reading list



Reviews

About | News | Contact | Your Account | TheNextBigWriter | Self Publishing | Advertise

© 2013 TheNextBigWriter, LLC. All Rights Reserved. Terms under which this service is provided to you. Privacy Policy.