The question that I began with was: Which is bigger/which came earlier - Will to Power or Will to Live? Basically Nietzsche vs Schopenhauer. Or is it Will to Freedom (Buddha)? Which of these drives the life? Organic life was created by a molecular structure that was able to replicate itself. It was able to attract particles from the organic pool in a shape similar to itself and thus created its copies. So it clearly showed property that it wanted to live, that's why it created copies of itself so that they can live incase it dies. Basically it made copies of its soul so that it can live through them even after its own death. So there is clearly a will to live. But why do that? Why so much thirst for life? To exert its power over the world? I don't think so. I think it just wants to be, and is doing everything so that it can.
But then came to my mind, is there really a strict difference between living and non living? that molecular structure merely happened to have a shape that attracted other similar particles and led to its copies. There are trillions of other molecular structures in which no such thing happens. "Conway's Game of Life" video game shows how a few very simple rules can lead to inanimate particles making copies of themselves. So maybe (organic) life is not the culmination or purpose of universe, it is merely an offshoot, a branch of it, just one consequence of universe's rules.
What do the particles want? What does the universe want? How does a planet view the world? Does it have a subjective world? How does it perceive law of gravity? scientific logic tells us that human's subjective view of the world cannot be a supernatural thing, so maybe everything has a subjective world, something Schopenhauer also said - that subjective cannot be separated from objective and they always co-exist.
Does everything just want to live, to be, or can it have some other motive too?
Maybe it is an ongoing, decentralized process. In the beginning, that molecule structure making copies of itself was merely an event, something that just happened because of its properties. But as that thing evolved, became more sophisticated, this reproduction property became its god, became an unbreakable rule for it. In us, it gives the feeling of sexual drive. Acquiring raw material for reproduction became another necessary rule. In us, it gives the feeling of hunger. Earlier, making a copy was merely an inanimate event that happened to that molecular structure; In us, it is a whole subjective feeling. Because we are children of that event, we are beneath it, we are created from it, so for us it is a god. Making a copy became an essential rule for this whole lineage of organic life because without it, the entity would no longer be part of the lineage, the legacy. To disconnect from lineage is called DEATH.
The legacy of that molecular structure is called organic life on earth. Recurring events of previous beings of lineage became subjective feelings for next beings of lineage.
So pain and hunger and sex drive are all subjective things? I would say yes. They sure feel objective. Event of father is reality of son.
So is that how inanimate turns into animate, non-living turns into living? Because of the subjectivity and similarity of subjectivities. The copying mechanism made subjectivity of lineage similar and similar feelings emerged and thus led to regarding each other as living. We share a similar past and roads that led to present are similar and thus our subjectivity is similar.
So yeah, that structure of molecule was alive. And it did have some properties. Its property of attracting similar molecules can be called rudimentary form of hunger or sex drive. It must feel that hunger. Evolution of body is parallely accompanied by evolution of feelings/subjectivity. I am not sure if they are one and the same thing but it's like from outside an alien sees that we eat food but from inside only we know that we feel hunger and need to eat food and that's why we eat food. The structure of molecule, from outside, appears to be just attracting particles, but from inside it must have felt a hunger to bring particles close to it.
But then came to my mind, is there really a strict difference between living and non living? that molecular structure merely happened to have a shape that attracted other similar particles and led to its copies. There are trillions of other molecular structures in which no such thing happens. "Conway's Game of Life" video game shows how a few very simple rules can lead to inanimate particles making copies of themselves. So maybe (organic) life is not the culmination or purpose of universe, it is merely an offshoot, a branch of it, just one consequence of universe's rules.
What do the particles want? What does the universe want? How does a planet view the world? Does it have a subjective world? How does it perceive law of gravity? scientific logic tells us that human's subjective view of the world cannot be a supernatural thing, so maybe everything has a subjective world, something Schopenhauer also said - that subjective cannot be separated from objective and they always co-exist.
Does everything just want to live, to be, or can it have some other motive too?
Maybe it is an ongoing, decentralized process. In the beginning, that molecule structure making copies of itself was merely an event, something that just happened because of its properties. But as that thing evolved, became more sophisticated, this reproduction property became its god, became an unbreakable rule for it. In us, it gives the feeling of sexual drive. Acquiring raw material for reproduction became another necessary rule. In us, it gives the feeling of hunger. Earlier, making a copy was merely an inanimate event that happened to that molecular structure; In us, it is a whole subjective feeling. Because we are children of that event, we are beneath it, we are created from it, so for us it is a god. Making a copy became an essential rule for this whole lineage of organic life because without it, the entity would no longer be part of the lineage, the legacy. To disconnect from lineage is called DEATH.
The legacy of that molecular structure is called organic life on earth. Recurring events of previous beings of lineage became subjective feelings for next beings of lineage.
So pain and hunger and sex drive are all subjective things? I would say yes. They sure feel objective. Event of father is reality of son.
So is that how inanimate turns into animate, non-living turns into living? Because of the subjectivity and similarity of subjectivities. The copying mechanism made subjectivity of lineage similar and similar feelings emerged and thus led to regarding each other as living. We share a similar past and roads that led to present are similar and thus our subjectivity is similar.
So yeah, that structure of molecule was alive. And it did have some properties. Its property of attracting similar molecules can be called rudimentary form of hunger or sex drive. It must feel that hunger. Evolution of body is parallely accompanied by evolution of feelings/subjectivity. I am not sure if they are one and the same thing but it's like from outside an alien sees that we eat food but from inside only we know that we feel hunger and need to eat food and that's why we eat food. The structure of molecule, from outside, appears to be just attracting particles, but from inside it must have felt a hunger to bring particles close to it.
