Living or Dead?

@paulhanke,

I agree with both.....I do however read-between the lines so to speak.

We get caught easily by trying to make sense of meta-physcial natures..in the physical realm....
Do not compute,comes to mind.heheh

Reminds me of a divide by zero<--ohh man here comes that Null-Axion again!

Doesn't work that way to me..

Well as they say...If it was that easy everyone would be doing it...
-BaC

paulhanke wrote:

... autopoiesis is a higher-level theory that sits atop autocatalysis ... here are Thompson's rules for autopoiesis:

... Kauffman's is a universal theory of life; Thompson's is a terrestrial (cellular) theory of life ... would you agree with either?

1 Reply

@BaCaRdi,

BaCaRdi wrote:

We get caught easily by trying to make sense of meta-physcial natures..in the physical realm....

... and/or physical natures in the meta-physical realm? Wink

1 Reply

@paulhanke,

haha very good...I am off for now...Need valance rest.lol

-BaC
Farts a photon...lol

paulhanke wrote:

... and/or physical natures in the meta-physical realm?

0 Replies

@BrightNoon,

BrightNoon wrote:

Alright everyone, you took things in not the direction I intended. Obviously, life is consciousness from an individual's perspective. What I am interested in, and what I hope you can comment on, is what might constitute life in the 'external world'. Of course, we are assuming that such a world exists, but that's fine if we ackowledge the assumption. I'm really thinking about very simple organisms and their environment. Consider a bacterium; what is the essential difference between that structure and the surrounding solution? Obviously, it is a matter of complexity of organization, but is there anything else?

If we cant work out if a pea is alive or dead what chance have we got....the ability to sustain itself...to reproduce...

1 Reply

@xris,

Yep, bingo!
If we can't agree on a definition..well there seems to me to be "doubt" we truly know what either is...

And so it is...

-BaC

xris wrote:

If we cant work out if a pea is alive or dead what chance have we got....the ability to sustain itself...to reproduce...

0 Replies

@BrightNoon,

Hmm. To be honest, I was hoping some religious person would take up the opposing argument: that life is more than its physical structure. That has not happened, so we have an annoying consenses; I think we all agree that complex, autocatalytic, and contained are apt adjectives for describing life. Let's move up the evolutionairy incline now. I'd like to consider Boagie's favorite idea, that consciousness is reaction, which, incidentally, is shared by Nietzsche, amoung others I assume.

Does consciousness gradually arise as we progress toward more complex organisms? As reaction is not unique to ennervated organisms, what role does the nervous system play; is there something more than an increase in degree of consciousness: self-consciousness? What is the nature of a primitive consciousness: a bacterium: a ennervated dog? Anyone care to speculate?

1 Reply

@BrightNoon,

Did you miss it?

"The more seriously you take the story the more you want to tie everything up....Neglect of these points, whether in writer or reader, means that the whole thing is merely conventional or playful. Multiplication of marvels goes with the same attitude. Those who love them, as alone they can be loved, for their suggestiveness, their quality, will not increase their number. Two enchanters, two ghosts, two ferlies are always half as impressive as one. Every supposedly naturalistic change that Malory made in the story might proceed from a far fuller belief and a more profound delight in it than the French authors had ever known"
C.S Lewis

-Marc Ricciardi PHd

BrightNoon wrote:

Hmm. To be honest, I was hoping some religious person would take up the opposing argument: that life is more than its physical structure. That has not happened, so we have an annoying consenses; I think we all agree that complex, autocatalytic, and contained are apt adjectives for describing life. Let's move up the evolutionairy incline now. I'd like to consider Boagie's favorite idea, that consciousness is reaction, which, incidentally, is shared by Nietzsche, amoung others I assume.

Does consciousness gradually arise as we progress toward more complex organisms? As reaction is not unique to ennervated organisms, what role does the nervous system play; is there something more than an increase in degree of consciousness: self-consciousness? What is the nature of a primitive consciousness: a bacterium: a ennervated dog? Anyone care to speculate?

1 Reply

@BaCaRdi,

... if consciousness is simple reaction, is an 8-ball conscious? (given that it reacts to being hit by the cue ball?) ... or does a discussion of consciousness necessarily require the addition of higher-level phenomena such as memory, learning, and prediction? ...

1 Reply

@paulhanke,

paulhanke wrote:

... if consciousness is simple reaction, is an 8-ball conscious? (given that it reacts to being hit by the cue ball?) ... or does a discussion of consciousness necessarily require the addition of higher-level phenomena such as memory, learning, and prediction? ...

looking at the stars...try getting your dog to look at them...

2 Replies

@xris,

Don't have to look..you are indeed made of many.....

Heavy metals anyone? <--Pun Intended My GoD Rocks!!

Wow fractal trip Razz

-BaC

xris wrote:

looking at the stars...try getting your dog to look at them...

0 Replies

@xris,

xris wrote:

looking at the stars...try getting your dog to look at them...

... yep - emotion (in this case, wonder) may also need to be brought into a discussion of consciousness ... for an animal that inhabited a dwindling environment of trees during a period where the open savannahs were rapidly expanding, a sense of wonder about the wide open spaces and the starry night would have been adaptive, allowing such an animal to descend from the trees and fearlessly walk upright across the African plain ... thus the human sense of the sublime may be a vestige of the evolutionary path we followed ... I'm curious as to what evokes a sense of the sublime in a dog's consciousness - that is, what may have been so important during their evolution to require such an emotional adaptation? ... and do they think it odd that humans do not share that sense? (woof!) ...

1 Reply

@paulhanke,

be careful they may think your barking mad..

1 Reply

@xris,

xris wrote:

be careful they may think your barking mad..

... yep ... mine already think I'm antisocial (I won't sniff their butts to say "Hi!") ...

2 Replies

@paulhanke,

do they tuck their legs out of sight?

1 Reply

@paulhanke,

Seem social to me:P

-Scooby Doo

paulhanke wrote:

... yep ... mine already think I'm antisocial (I won't sniff their butts to say "Hi!") ...

1 Reply

@xris,

xris wrote:

do they tuck their legs out of sight?

... one of 'em does ... we adopted her about six months ago from an organization that rescues dogs from puppy mills ... she spent the first four years of her life in a suspended cage doing nothing but having babies ... she's able to run around the yard now without stumbling, and has nearly doubled her body weight - but she's still wary around us and very easily startled ...

0 Replies

@BaCaRdi,

BaCaRdi wrote:

Seem social to me:P

... as long as you don't want me to sniff your butt, that's true Wink

...

0 Replies

@BrightNoon,

BrightNoon;30052 wrote:

My question is very simple; what defines living from non-living structures?

I would imagine that
the basis of any definition of 'life' would somehow involve the 'notion of motion'.
As 'motion' is impossible,
("On the Impossibility of Motion")
then the notions of 'life' and 'death' are relics of (oneandthesameas) 'thought' from certain Perspective, not inherent in existence. 'Life' and 'death' are 'word-constructs'. In the 'mind'.

"There is no life before death!" -Book of Fudd (6:66)

2 Replies

@nameless,

A truly bright star:)

-BaC

nameless wrote:

I would imagine that
the basis of any definition of 'life' would somehow involve the 'notion of motion'.
As 'motion' is impossible,
("On the Impossibility of Motion")
then the notions of 'life' and 'death' are relics of (oneandthesameas) 'thought' from certain Perspective, not inherent in existence. 'Life' and 'death' are 'word-constructs'. In the 'mind'.

"There is no life before death!" -Book of Fudd (6:66)

0 Replies

@nameless,

nameless wrote:

I would imagine that
the basis of any definition of 'life' would somehow involve the 'notion of motion'.
As 'motion' is impossible,
("On the Impossibility of Motion")
then the notions of 'life' and 'death' are relics of (oneandthesameas) 'thought' from certain Perspective, not inherent in existence. 'Life' and 'death' are 'word-constructs'. In the 'mind'.

"There is no life before death!" -Book of Fudd (6:66)

I am aware of the impossiblity of definitively defining anything. That is not the issue at hand. 'Word-construct' is also a word-construct. As for your ideas about motion, if you would like me, or anyone, to accept that view, please provide a verbal explanation; I refuse to read a mathematical proof, especially one involving calculus...shudder.

As for the eight ball question raised by someone on the previous page, I forget who; memory and learning are functions of reaction. Memory is a name for an extremely delayed reaction. The brain is a kind of rube goldberg machine, which delays reactions so that one affects another; all one's previous reactions affect the current reaction; this allows for adaptability, learning. In that sense, an 8-ball has the same properties, just on a very small scale.

2 Replies

Living or Dead?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know