Yet if you change it to I knew the future and in the future I stopped my car for no reason, the feeling just came over me. Right as I stopped the car a child ran in front of my car. If I hadn't stopped the kid would have been ran over.

From this the future is now the past. But when the future was still the future if an outside force knew that I had to stop to save the child than the outside force could say stop the car.

Now the future isn't changed, but the outside force already knew I had to stop and therefor caused me to stop.

logic can get you turned into a knot.

But an outside force also has the power to not stop the car (because he IS omnipotent) in which case, what the outside force knew would be wrong.

If the outside force already knew "I" had to stop, then he doesn't have the power to change that (in which case, he's not omnipotent). Lot of assumptions up there.

And your point is?


Examples, or I'm going to ignore. And what is so unexplainable about love?

The fact that it's animalistic nature to go for different partners, yet the force of love makes us human? that Love can make you feel a way in which you would sacrifice yourself? that there's no logical explaination for the comlete dedication of yourself to another person, yet it still feelss completely right?

and my point about the stone is that even if God cuts his strength, he still has his strength, he's just not putting it into use. like when you lift a feather, you dont put all of your strength in it, but it doesnt make you any less powerful.

There are quite a few sexual reproductive strategies present in nature, including life-long monogamy, serial monogamy, and polygamy. "Love" is a word we use to describe certain hormonal changes that occur when attraction is present.

There are quite a few ideas about how altruism has developed, which will only be borne out by more observation, but it does make sense that when we were in small, much more isolated communities, the odds of our genes being present in others in the area were much higher than it is currently. This would make a "sacrifice" of the individual much easier to understand, as it would still be beneficial to the genes themselves, especially if more than one individual would be saved.

Anthropology is a fascinating field, I wish I had more time to dedicate to it.

*shrugs* i choose to believe that it's something much deeper than that.

And how would being related distantly without knowing it affect instinct? if you dont know of any relationship, then it shouldnt really matter. Unless you're somehow implying that instinct makes you psychic.

I guess that's just a fundamental difference. I'm not satisfied with mysteries staying mysteries.

Define human, as you used it.

To whom?


Before I answer this, and Hrae has given a pretty good explanation, why do you think it is impossible to love multiple partners? We can love two parents, both sets of grandparents, multiple siblings, cousins, uncles and aunts, but it is criminal to love two people equally.

IMO one of the reasons we commit to only one partner is because of recent pressure by society. Polygamy and polyandry were pretty common during the olden days.


But I would still like to hear your explanation for this


I fail to see how this negates my point, or even addresses it.

Hm... i guess that goes down to whether you're the kind of person who wants everything explained, or the person who looks for the beauty of the painting that the universe itself makes. emotion vs. rationalism.

the problem is that not everything can neccesarilly be explained, Love being my favorite example.

We will honestly probably never know where we come from simply because us existing before whatever created us through time travel (the only definite way to see what happened, seeing as that's the only way to get a definite picture of it all, if time travel itself is in the least bit possible) would create a bit of a paradox; existing before existance. All we'll ever have is theory, really.

EDIT: sorry vas, your post didnt show up till after i posted.

If you dont see how it addresses your point, im sorry, but i cant make it any more simple. he would have to use less of his strength.

To be human, to me, is to feel. to to care for a specific person. to see the beauty in life. to see have emotion. If you feel love to multiple persons, it's honestly not love. Love is also the dedication of your heart to one person. Romantic Love =/= Familial love, btw.

And we know nothing other than what we've learned through personal experience. i would never cheat on my girlfriend though. Love is the feeling of wanting nothing more than to simply be by the side of someone; to care for them, and protect them from all the sadness and fear and crappiness in the world.

Popping in to answer this part.


There are many reasons for a monogamous relationship being the norm. Western society as a whole developed into this standard due to the fact that it's simply more convenient in most populations where M:F ratio is close to equal. The reasons for it staying that way are many: social stigma, ostrascization, the fact that polygamy is illegal in many countries, shame, upbringing etc.


Explaining it all away in the name of love is frankly, oversimplifying,