You can learn from good things. It requires a different skill set maybe. Today’s culture doesn’t teach us. It teaches us to solve problems. To look for issues and “fix” that.
To begin the subject of Life Force, some terms need to be defined and agreed upon. Are we in agreement that there is such a thing as life and things that could be called living? And I will be using the term “force” to describe a pattern of action observable in matter. Then, we are ready to begin.
Science tends to dismiss concepts of life force, because they do not detect any energy independent of the physical forces they recognize operating in anything, be it a living body or a rock. So they avoid any questions pertaining to life as we experience it subjectively.
Yet, at every turn, the rules they seem to establish regarding life, and its behavior as an emergent quality of matter, wind up being really fuzzy. This seems short sighted to me, but that is my opinion. They do not deny that something called life exists, and since they cannot distinguish a difference between living matter and inanimate matter, does that mean that nothing acts to establish and perpetuate life?
I find people use mechanistic terms to describe life, yet when those mechanisms are duplicated in an inanimate robot of some sort, they deny it’s life. They often fail to establish a proper reproduction of what they try to synthesize. I blame the mechanistic model.
So if there is life and it shows up in matter (even to the point of the types of matter that we know to be included in life being rather common), then perhaps all matter has or is some measure of life? Otherwise, you have to deny all life, and getting living things to accept that they are just objects has proven really very difficult. My cat won’t tolerate being treated the same as my shoes.
Your thoughts are welcome. Be well friends.