Reply
Tue 28 Nov, 2006 08:51 am
There is an ongoing conversation regarding 'the right to life'. This 'right' is truly a noble and legitimate concern of a civilized society. This also becomes problematic in that the definition of 'life' is open to semantics.
What is the definition of life?
Should a fertilized egg be considered alive?
Should the utilization of a stem cell be considered deprivation of life in view of the fact that the cells will propagate in perpetuity?
Klik for facts
Your thoughts.
pararover wrote:LIFE is CONSCIOUSNESS
How would that apply to my tomato plants?
OHMIGOSH! I had salad last night. . .
How COULD I? . . .
Was that sarcasm or horror?
pararover wrote:LIFE is CONSCIOUSNESS
I'm afraid this path leads directly to the chicken or egg problem.
Neologist, do you talk to your tomatoes?
Shades of Little Shop Of Horrors
Worse. Now I have become aware of the fact they may have been talking to me all the while.
I have resolved to treat catsup with more respect.
There are a lot of definitions of life. My view is that if it has DNA and the potential for reproduction and/or metabolism, it is alive.
Eggs, sperm, fertilized eggs (fresh or frozen), stem cells, blood cells, organs harvested for transplant, plants, animals, bacteria and viruses are all alive.
Hey .... every time I open a can of vegetables I hear an almost inaudible whisper 'Ho Ho Ho'
I'm telling you it's making me nuts!
Terry wrote:There are a lot of definitions of life. My view is that if it has DNA and the potential for reproduction and/or metabolism, it is alive.
Eggs, sperm, fertilized eggs (fresh or frozen), stem cells, blood cells, organs harvested for transplant, plants, animals, bacteria and viruses are all alive.
Hi Terry, thank you for responding.
What you describe are more like vessels or containers of life, like an shell is to an egg or watermelon is to seed ........ human is to, assuming there is one, soul.
It may be picking at nits but if not for the curious the world would still be flat.
The containers ARE the life. I see no evidence that there is any essence or soul that is not the result of the biochemical processes going on in the container. When the processes stop, the "soul" disappears like the picture on your screen when you turn it off. When damage is severe enough that the processes can not resume, the organism is dead.
Terry wrote:The containers ARE the life. I see no evidence that there is any essence or soul that is not the result of the biochemical processes going on in the container. When the processes stop, the "soul" disappears like the picture on your screen when you turn it off. When damage is severe enough that the processes can not resume, the organism is dead.
Just to be clear on this ...... the life or potential for life, is in the shell or container of a bird egg, not in the white and yellow stuff?
I may have misunderstood your post. The yolk of a bird egg is what's actually alive, not the white or the shell. The potential for life is simply DNA and a mechanism to activate it. The mechanisms for reading DNA, replicating, and carrying out specific functions are contained in each cell (viruses can only replicate by commandeering someone else's cell).
But I thought you were speaking metaphorically of the body (or cell) as a container for the soul/spirit/life force. The body is not a vessel that is animated by something else, it is self-animated. The soul (if there is one) is simply a byproduct of the biochemical processes going on in the brain. A soul cannot exist without a brain to generate it.
Yes it can get confusing. I was wondering .... "A soul cannot exist without a brain to generate it.". This would indicate that the brain serving as the 'generator' of the soul would also serve as the location or container of the soul since it , the soul, would be 'intrinsic' to the brain.
Terry wrote: . . . A soul cannot exist without a brain to generate it.
Which is precisely what is meant by the biblical reference to animals as 'souls'. Plants, though living, are not souls.
neologist wrote:Terry wrote: . . . A soul cannot exist without a brain to generate it.
Which is precisely what is meant by the biblical reference to animals as 'souls'. Plants, though living, are not souls.
I'm not sure if there is a question in there. If so then we are left with defining 'soul' and the original question of the definition of life.
And that also brings the question ,'can a brain generate two or more souls'?
Terry wrote:The containers ARE the life. I see no evidence that there is any essence or soul that is not the result of the biochemical processes going on in the container. When the processes stop, the "soul" disappears like the picture on your screen when you turn it off. When damage is severe enough that the processes can not resume, the organism is dead.
You have argued repeatedly that the unborn is not a human being until he is self aware.
But now you say that the body (the container) is all there is of human life.
If , once having a body, one is as human as one can be, then why is self awareness required?
Gelisgesti wrote:"A soul cannot exist without a brain to generate it.". This would indicate that the brain serving as the 'generator' of the soul would also serve as the location or container of the soul since it , the soul, would be 'intrinsic' to the brain.
Yes, if you think that an automobile factory serves as a container for cars. :wink:
Quote:If so then we are left with defining 'soul' and the original question of the definition of life.
And that also brings the question ,'can a brain generate two or more souls'?
So what are your definitions?
A split brain would probably generate two souls since there are no interconnections between the left and right cortex (I'm not sure if splitting the corpus callosum affects the thalamus). Multiple personality disorder might possibly generate multiple souls, if separate neural networks had formed. I don't know anything about the neuroscience of MPD, but it would be interesting to do a brain scan to see if different areas of the brain lit up when the ascendant personality changed.
C'mon guys, there's consciousness even in the electron (refer to Young's Double Slit Experiment using an electron beam -
http://www.upscale.utoronto.ca/GeneralInterest/Harrison/DoubleSlit/DoubleSlit.html). Also please read "The Dancing Wu Li Masters" by Gary Zukav. Somehow, even an electron seems to be aware what is in front of it...somehow it is 'conscious' and hence 'makes' a different choice in different circumstances.
Life is everywhere, it need not always manifest itself in flesh and blood, but it may be present even in silicon and steel.
The human body itself is not a single entity, there are millions, no billions of organisms sustaining within the human body. Just because we do not perceive them does not mean that they do not exist.
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace