Does everything relate to everything else?

On what level? We’re all made of the same stuff.

The implications, or at least one of them, is that each and every one of us is as much a part of the universe as the stars and galaxies, and that we are therefore all of one family.

nope.

@blueiiznh

Most of modern physics would strongly disagree with you on that.

Most things are relative.

@CaptainHarley If you are speaking of the Final Theory, please provide some detail on how to unify the theory.

We are all stardust – and thus connected.

Yep, we’re all little bits of pepper in the cosmic soup.

I’m pretty sure it’s related that having a few glasses of wine just made me dump a bucket of soapy car wash water all over myself. It will be related when in the morning when I see how good of a job I did in the dark. lol

Are you washing the car at night naked – again!!??

Everything is part of a larger whole, but they’re not necessarily related individually.

Everything correlates with each other. Electricity functions all living things, and we are made out of minerals (Fe, Iron). Water allows us to flow freely with the Earth.

Yes: “In the mere encountering of something, it is understood in terms of a totality of involvements; and such seeing hides in itself the explicitness of the assignment-relations (of the ‘in-order-to’) which belong to that totality.” —Heidegger, Being and Time 150 (MQ&R trans)

Which means: 1) The everyday way we take things is as according to their use – what Heidegger refers to as the ‘in-order-to’. 2) This ‘in-order-to’ is meaningful to us in the context of the world’s web of significance.

A person’s understanding of a hammer as a hammer, a nail as a nail, a doghouse as a doghouse, indicates her effortless, pre-conscious awareness of the totality of involvements of things with other things. This is the basic outline of how things are related in Being and Time – Heidegger gets much more detailed about it, taking into account factors like spatiality and the possibility of taking things in an authentic rather than everyday (aka inauthentic) manner.

For Heidegger, the implications of this idea are vast. However, Heidegger did once say that the main takeaway of Being and Time is that Dasein is ecstatic. Dasein is the Being of those beings who examine Being as an issue (i.e., humans). To be ec-static is to be always already beyond; outside of – so what Heidegger meant (to bastardize it a bit) is that humans are anticipatory; are always already beyond themselves in their being-in-the-world.

that’s a metaphysics-answer. I’ll try to make it back later for a philosophy-of-language-answer

Only on Seinfeld.

@blueiiznh

I am speaking of quantum theory, where all things are correlated. If you’re concerned about gravity, that’s not a “thing,” it’s a force.

I believe so. I once read the “I Ching”, which proposes the Eastern concept that everything is relative to everything else, as opposed to the Western view that things are merely coincidental.

Yes, I think so.

On a practical level, we do have to make distinctions. The rose and the dung-heap may be one, but I’m not going to put the dung-heap on my table. If I don’t differentiate between a dragonfly and a bus, I’m going to get killed crossing the street.

But below the illusion of difference, I think the unity is real because everything is in a state of change, evolving from one form to another, and it can be very hard to find the dividing line between the forms. The difference between the rose and the dung-heap is a matter of when, not what. After the bus takes me out and the cells of my body begin to be reused in other compositions, I—or what I used to be—may well become the dung-heap, the rose, and the dragonfly. And your breakfast.

For every action, there is a reaction. Think about that.

It’s like for every move we make, like walking from one room into another, we leave traces of being there. A good example is a persons hair falling out upon leaving one point to another point.

Yes.
The implications are that ‘Its all one’.

Seems although you may be coming to recognize the Yin Yang theory.
Opposites and equals only exist because of each other and Everything is intertwined into a singular.

Strictly speaking, no. The sight of a distant star will have some small impact on my life. My effect on the star is immeasurably small.

Closer to home, however, there are many strange and wonderful ways that things relate to one another. For example, according to Gaia theory, organisms react with the inorganic in such a way as to maintain conditions favorable to life.

@LostInParadise . Many creatures occupy one planet, many planets occupy one galaxy & many galaxies create one universe (one dimension of it at least)
You cannot argue with “its all one”

we can even reverse this,
From One universe, down to ONE person down to one cell and on to ONE Neutrino. Everything in its-self is a singular part of one and everything is
still 1 !

At the most profound level I think everything is not only linked to everything else but actually is everything else. It all emerged from the same point 14 billion years ago after all when nothing was distinguishable from anything else because everything was the same. Nothing fundamental has changed since then apart from space and time appearing to separate things out. I say appearing because the separation of things is an illusion and this illusion is what we call reality. This idea has no implications; we must carry on as before. Reality is all we will ever have, but it is not absolute.