Define life

[insurgent]

Well?.....

 

[Masquerouge]

You don't really expect to get an answer that'll satisfy you, do you ?

 

[Marla_Singer]

All the things which move and grow autonomously... Anyway, the official definition is about reproduction, cells or DNA... but instinctively, that's how people see life.

 

[insurgent]

Well, the interesting thing is that all life consists of molecules that are identical to those found in inorganic material. So, it's not enough to say that it consists of cells or contains DNA - then you'd have to explain why cells are alive.

Another try could be defining it as something that can reproduce itself. But plenty of things that are alive can't reproduce. Mules is one animal that can't.

So, Masquerouge, no, I don't expect to get a satisfying answer.

Marla, lots of things grow or move in nature that aren't alive. Chemical reactions can cause objects to change size, and lots of things move autonomously - the Earth for one thing, and that's not an living organism.

The thing is that I think the concept of life is so fundamental to us that we don't even try to define it. Thus it can be very hard to do so.

 

[storealex]

Life is when you take the first sip of a Guinness after a hard day at work.

 

[Azadre]

Life is knowing you can die.

 

[Marla_Singer]

Marla, lots of things grow or move in nature that aren't alive. Chemical reactions can cause objects to change size, and lots of things move autonomously - the Earth for one thing, and that's not an living organism.

Are you really that sure that the Earth is moving autonomously ? Do you really think that if the Earth wanted to see her buddy Pluto to chat a bit it could ?

No, I think life is more about getting energy from other things and use it to autonomously grow itself, move or reproduce. Not necessarily the three in the same time.

 

[Syterion]

Hmmm, They have a set of conditions for life. I'll look them up.

OK, I found em.

1. Cell(s).
2. Response to Stimuli
3. Ability to Metabolize.
4. Ability to MAintain Homeostasis.
5. Reproduction
6. Growth and repair
7. Motion

I think that's it.

 

[Masquerouge]

Actually I'm rather an extremist on the subject. I tend to consider we're just a bunch of chemical and electrochemical reactions, not much more. I'm pretty sure one day we'll figure out how we think and develop ideas (something to do with topology and morphology).
On a scale of complex chemical dependencies, life would be, I guess, somewhere at one end. It's like colors ; apparently there are different colors, but actually all of them are nothing but different wavelengths.

 

[AVN]

I know it isn't the complete answer. But doesn't life have a brain ?

 

[Mise]

Well I doubt if a plant wanted to lean away from the sun, it's chemicals would let it, so I don't think something needs to move autonomously for it to be alive.

According to my GCSE Biology textbook, all living organisms do the following things:
- Feed
- Breathe
- Respire
- Excrete
- Grow
- Reproduce
- Respond
- Move

EDIT: Whether this is a definition of "life" is debatable, since Fire would appear to exhibit all these characteristics.

 

[Yom]

Including excrete?

 

[Marla_Singer]

I know it isn't the complete answer. But doesn't life have a brain ?

Not in the case of trees... however plants do grow autonomously, using external energy to do so...

When you see humans fighting against Robots in Terminator, Matrix or I,Robot... You consider all those robots as living entity which are not much different from the big bugs of Starship Troopers. When as a kid you assimilate the notion of life, you understand it as things which grow itself automously...

That's the instinctive notion of life. Of course, scientifically speaking, there are tons of way to define life. I don't consider life as a blurry concept... I think the real impossible question is about trying to distinguish mankind from the animals. That's a question with no answer.

 

[insurgent]

Mise: That certainly isnt correct. As I said, lots of life forms don't reproduce. Sterile humans, mules, whatever. And as you said, fire.

Marla: You seem to imply that anything living needs to have free will/the ability to choose. Aren't green plants alive then? I mean, they don't consciously decide anything - they just act on input. They react directly as a result of inputs, like any inorganic objects.

 

[Marla_Singer]

Hmmm, They have a set of conditions for life. I'll look them up.

OK, I found em.

1. Cell(s).
2. Response to Stimuli
3. Ability to Metabolize.
4. Ability to MAintain Homeostasis.
5. Reproduction
6. Growth and repair
7. Motion

I think that's it.

Great ! I got 5 correct on the 7 on my own !

 

[insurgent]

Oh, and are robots alive? I don't think they are.

 

[Marla_Singer]

Marla: You seem to imply that anything living needs to have free will/the ability to choose. Aren't green plants alive then?

Do you have plants in your appartment ? Haven't you ever realized that their branches are naturally going in the direction of the window to get the solar energy they need ? Aren't plants growing autonomously ? They don't need the assistance of no one else to grow.

 

[Masquerouge]

Well as I stated above, if you consider things not in terms of "Life" and "not life", but rather as scalable items, then all your problems disappear.
There are things more alive than other. That's all.

 

[Marla_Singer]

EDIT: Whether this is a definition of "life" is debatable, since Fire would appear to exhibit all these characteristics.

Well, the fire doesn't consist in cells. It doesn't metabolize nor it answers to stimuli.

However, that's still interesting because fire is not considered far from a living being... especially by firemen. That's maybe why fire is so fascinating...

 

[Marla_Singer]

Well as I stated above, if you consider things not in terms of "Life" and "not life", but rather as scalable items, then all your problems disappear.
There are things more alive than other. That's all.

That's very true. We indeed instinctively feel it this way.