You made the claim that dead and living is the same and im asking for proof , you dont appear to want to.If you think we are even remotely near achieving anything like life, show me.
I've actually covered it pretty simply in my fist post. The fact that we have constructed something that 'achieves' life is really missing the point because what constitutes life is arbitrary by this definition:
subject to individual will or judgment without restriction; contingent solely upon one's discretion: an arbitrary decision
(Although here are some examples: Self-replicating machine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
, Evolvable hardware - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
, Quantum computer - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
, there are plenty of examples of integrated neuron/hardware systems responding to stimuli, systems that regulate outside forces, and new systems that are capable of adaptation if you look for them)
We made observations on what we think is common place in this system -- made possible because the system builds on itself. The line that divides a non-living object with a living one is blurred as can be seen when considering the qualities of a virus.
Most people consider 'life' to have special purpose and thus needing some continuance after it is dead or special treatment. 'Life' is the center of much philosophical debate unlike the 'special purpose' of an orbital system, computer system, solar system, or ecosystem.
You, the rock, and the sun, at the most fundamental level, are constructed of the very same building blocks. So at which point does something becoming 'living' and worthy of respect? It is no secret that objects have properties that are constituents of their smaller parts. In essence, you get a concrete building having made it of concrete, or you get a mass of metal, having made it from metals. No matter which case you can think of, in every situation, the most basic fundamental parts of the universe are non-living.
We are simply deceiving ourselves by considering ourselves as 'separate' from other objects in the universe. We see through the eyes of a biological system which is required to interact with the environment to continue and, most understandably but not justified, we have a bias of judging the universe around us through a 'life' perspective.
We have taken for granted that we are 'alive' and special, when we are just is
much like the planet, its systems, or the flower outside.
Since people are making the claim that life exists, can anyone prove that the qualities that make up life are not arbitrarily decided? Life is no different than notions of justice, right, wrong, or favorite color. We have invented a little bubble that we 'live' in.
---------- Post added at 01:22 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:21 PM ----------
Yes. Cats and dogs both also have whiskers I think, whereas most falling objects do not.
Me too! Unless the falling object is a virus. I think I just blew my mind.
You say Tomato, I say Potato.
No, the weather does not permit.
I don't mean to get into a discussion on virology. Viruses, last I heard, are not alive because genetic information by itself does not constitute life. It has to infect an organism before it becomes part of a living system. I don't know much about it. That is my point. For the purposes of the discussion, does it matter whether viruses are alive or not? Life is hard to define, but if we keep in mind that cats and dogs have whiskers, the problem becomes easier to solve. Bear in mind that life refers to fish, trees, and saber tooth tigers, then worry about the difference between a tree and a bush or the problem of defining all of these things from other kinds of complex chemical compounds or mechanical systems and ... and stuff.
The issue here is that we can just 'decide' that viruses are alive. Viruses are most likely a key to what was around before 'life'.
---------- Post added at 01:25 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:21 PM ----------
All things are made up of electrons.
Electrons have spins
So all things have spins.
Chairs are neither alive nor dead. Although they are either alive or not alive.
Correct. "Although they are either alive or not alive" is following our
logic and is our perception. There is no inherent 'alive' or 'dead' to the universe because we are all constructed of the same quantum pieces. It would almost seem contradictory until further analyzed.