Why Do Organisms tend to exist?

Why do organisms chose existence over non-existence? What drives organism so that they must survive

 

curiosity. the real answer is way to big to put in words, but look around...

 

Makes me wonder if at some point....we, as the essence of who humans really are, chose to exist-in general and in this form..

 

All things, living and dead, have a nature. Which is not driven by choice, so the nature of a living organism is not to choose not to exist, but rather to fulfill its innate nature to survive.

 

.

 

Some organisms choose non-existence, it's called suicide.

Did you have a choice concerning your existence?

The answer is simple, we don't have a choice whether to exist or not, only when to end it.

 

The tendency for organisms to exist is probably largely due to DNA which provides the organism with information to exist. Organisms tend to be driven by their biological imperatives and many animals have autonomic functions (I.e. breathing) to support existence and pass on DNA and genetic material.

 

It's all about Identity existing at no particular time requiring Difference throughout the Space of Identity. Liberals know well that this priorly an understanding for the human nature experiencing from moment to moment the moment-to-moment of by definition the living organism.

Really say conservatives. Then why all the other definitions for Life, not to mention reproduction?

 

Yea but our lives are mostly filled with suffering. Like take for instance a mole it lives it's whole life in misery in the dark and it still wants to reproduce,look at the bees they work all of their life they still want to reproduce,look at the ants they only work and work and still they reproduce to continue this vicious cycle all this animals are no difference from us ,so why do people or other organism still tend to reproduce if all existence is suffering? Now there are sometimes when you are happy or life seems perfect but those moments lasts for a very short time when suffering on the other side is much longer and stronger,...

Sorry for an such pessimistic post.

 

How do we know a mole,or a bee or an ant is necessarily suffering.It is said for one that such animals are free of sense of death,and are living instinctual lives that they are naturally attuned to.Suffering is more common to human life I agree.I personally try to follow a philosophy of "infinite resignation" which I try to use to take away the sense that it is "I" "myself" that is suffering,to patiently accept the inevitability of loss and sadness that much of life consists of,and that there is no particular "reason" or "motive" on the part of the cosmos that this suffering is directly being sent to "me".

 

As to the op,I would say "existence",however unlikely,is more probable that "non-existence"...There had "to be" rather than "not be"...Why does it happen...Because it happens.

 

because u spank the monkey..

 

Thanks.

 

Cue the parody thread "Why do orgasms exist?"

 

Time has no non-existence. Probably it can be for the non-existence of the eternity to wait for it passing-away. Thus if I don't make it to eternity you mean to say (count on that) someone else might.:2thumbsup:

 

wait, wut, oh..

 

From a biological perspective, it's pretty much an evident certainity that a mole suffers and on a brief Google search evidence points towards insects experiencing something like suffering as well.

I mean given this forum we can invoke some solipisim or something and it may not be that clear they suffer but one could carry out that argument to such an extent of 'how do I know you suffer?' Which is not a viewpoint that I find very tenable but that's kind of the devils advocate extreme...

I'm not sure I completely follow but wouldn't this viewpoint confirm that the mole, bee, and ant suffer for you as well? Like giving up your ego yet still retaining the concept of life as opposing loss, which you have deemed as a form of suffering, seems like it would make all life that experiences loss experiences suffering?

 

/Thread


Why do Salmon die in an attempt to swim back up stream to the breeding grounds.

Not like their brains are big enough for them to consciously know they might die.

In the end that drive is just the result of a set of certain chemical reactions that fire at a certain altitude.

100s if not thousands of different salmon species over millions of years that dont exist anymore cos if they bred at a lower altitude their offspring more likely to get eaten, or the smallest differences in pressure and temperature mean their offspring wouldnt survive

A whole bunch of factors that determine their existance, based on things that arent even alive, the moons gravitational pull, chemical composition of the water, temperature

It looks like will or instinct to us, because we only see now what exists, we dont see all the other related species that dont exist, or why they dont exist

 

There is no choice. Not with single celled organisms, no brain, no consciousness, just programming. Programming based on basic laws of natural selection. Long before consciousness, long before even cellular organisms, natural selection was involved in building molecular bonds.

In a hot primordial soup, chance arrangements of molecules happened to outlast other molecules. Some bonds were simply more enduring than others. Through natural selection they grew more complex, protein chains and continued complexity until eventually cellular structures.

Any protein or organism that is lacking or has lost the basic ability to replicate is automatically disqualified from any natural selection process. Replication is a prerequisite to the race of life and is a process that began automatically through basic chemical reactions of atoms and molecules.