Everything is either 'alive' or 'dead'.

@Paggos,

Paggos;66766 wrote:

Life is alive, or else we wouldn't be here. If it isn't real it is alive, or dead? The perception of the object is still present, but the actual object is not, would it be dead, or alive?

Is a rock alive, is the earth alive, is the sun alive???

@Alan McDougall,

I do not understand the point you are making, Paggos. Consequently, I do not understand your response, Mr. McDougall.

@Ultracrepidarian,

Ultracrepidarian;66774 wrote:

I do not understand the point you are making, Paggos. Consequently, I do not understand your response, Mr. McDougall.

I'm saying life in its entirety is living, therefore live.

@Ultracrepidarian,

Ultracrepidarian;66774 wrote:

I do not understand the point you are making, Paggos. Consequently, I do not understand your response, Mr. McDougall.

You can only use the adjective dead on a thing that was previously alive

Peace to you

@Alan McDougall,

Alan McDougall;66787 wrote:

You can only use the adjective dead on a thing that was previously alive

Peace to you

Dead is not living, its not a rock but then a rock is not alive.Living is more than a existing,its the ability to self sustain, grow, reproduce.The only question i have ever wondered about what is dormant, is it life or the potential for life.Is a pea alive or dead.

@xris,

xris;66794 wrote:

Dead is not living, its not a rock but then a rock is not alive.Living is more than a existing,its the ability to self sustain, grow, reproduce.The only question i have ever wondered about what is dormant, is it life or the potential for life.Is a pea alive or dead.

Biology

Wikapedea

The consensus is that life is a characteristic of organisms that exhibit all or most of the following phenomena:[8][9]

Homeostasis: Regulation of the internal environment to maintain a constant state; for example, electrolyte concentration or sweating to reduce temperature.
Organization: Being structurally composed of one or more cells, which are the basic units of life.
Metabolism: Transformation of energy by converting chemicals and energy into cellular components (anabolism) and decomposing organic matter (catabolism). Living things require energy to maintain internal organization (homeostasis) and to produce the other phenomena associated with life.
Growth: Maintenance of a higher rate of anabolism than catabolism. A growing organism increases in size in all of its parts, rather than simply accumulating matter.
Adaptation: The ability to change over a period of time in response to the environment. This ability is fundamental to the process of evolution and is determined by the organism's heredity as well as the composition of metabolized substances, and external factors present.
Response to stimuli: A response can take many forms, from the contraction of a unicellular organism to external chemicals, to complex reactions involving all the senses of higher animals. A response is often expressed by motion, for example, the leaves of a plant turning toward the sun (phototropism) and by chemotaxis.
Reproduction: The ability to produce new individual organisms either asexually, from a single parent organism, or sexually, from at least two parent organisms.

What do you think? Does a thing need to be conscious to considered alive as per your pea Xris, I don't think a pea is conscious either, god or evolution created it for us to feed on?

What about the virus these beasties seem to hover between life and death, they also seem to me to have no obvious purpose , except kill its host and procreate

Heck we humans might be a new strain of virus killing our host the planet earth.

@Alan McDougall,

Alan my point was ,is a pea dead or alive.Is the potential for life ,life.The term dormant, a dormant seed we have no idea if it has potential or it is dead.The wickie does not give you these answers..

@xris,

xris;66912 wrote:

Alan my point was ,is a pea dead or alive.Is the potential for life ,life.The term dormant, a dormant seed we have no idea if it has potential or it is dead.The wickie does not give you these answers..

Then where do we go for answers , ourselves, science, philosophy or religion?

Of the three I like us to explore what life really is by self inner reflection

@Riordan,

Xris, I don't think a seed or pea is alive because it is not in process. Capable of life is not life, just as a finger pointing at the moon is not the moon. Obviously each one of us must answer the question "what is life" for ourselves.
Thought experiment: What characteristics would a robot (non biological) have in order for it to be considered "alive"? I think it would have to have:

Functionality. That is to say it must have process, either physically, electronically or both (not an inanimate object).
A protocol to continue. That is, it is not alive if it has no aversion to death/termination. This would require a set of values of what is good and what is bad (or helpful/harmful), a value system of sorts.
Self awareness. It's not enough to just be programmed to continue, it must have some sense of its individuality.
Ability to learn. That is it must be able to process its experience into some meaningful or at least useful result. This is essential in forming identity and self awareness.
Ability to reproduce/evolve, otherwise it's still just a wind-up toy. I'm not sure about this though, it may be suffice for it to evolve in some manner such as transferring its knowledge/data to another continuation of itself.
Metabolism, even if it's just a battery charging and discharging. I feel that everything that is alive must consume and expend energy.

Then I would consider it to be alive, even though it wasn't biological.

@ogden,

ogden;68127 wrote:

Xris, I don't think a seed or pea is alive because it is not in process. Capable of life is not life, just as a finger pointing at the moon is not the moon. Obviously each one of us must answer the question "what is life" for ourselves.
Thought experiment: What characteristics would a robot (non biological) have in order for it to be considered "alive"? I think it would have to have:

Functionality. That is to say it must have process, either physically, electronically or both (not an inanimate object).

A protocol to continue. That is, it is not alive if it has no aversion to death/termination. This would require a set of values of what is good and what is bad (or helpful/harmful), a value system of sorts.

Self awareness. It's not enough to just be programmed to continue, it must have some sense of its individuality.

Ability to learn. That is it must be able to process its experience into some meaningful or at least useful result. This is essential in forming identity and self awareness.

Ability to reproduce/evolve, otherwise it's still just a wind-up toy. I'm not sure about this though, it may be suffice for it to evolve in some manner such as transferring its knowledge/data to another continuation of itself.

Metabolism, even if it's just a battery charging and discharging. I feel that everything that is alive must consume and expend energy.

Then I would consider it to be alive, even though it wasn't biological.

I know the requirements for life but a pea is not dead either.If we have living ,dormant ,dead.What else have we,what is dormant how do you decide if something has pontential for life, look around.Dormant in my opinion ,in some way is more interesting than life.

@xris,

xris;68222 wrote:

I know the requirements for life but a pea is not dead either.If we have living ,dormant ,dead.What else have we,what is dormant how do you decide if something has pontential for life, look around.Dormant in my opinion ,in some way is more interesting than life.

A pea is alive but it is not sentient, a rock is dead, why is everyone debating the obvious xris?

The only thing I know of that hovers between alive and dead is the "virus, does it become truly alive when it enters its host?

@Alan McDougall,

Something more true: Everything is either alive, or not alive.

How about this, we define a fuzzy set of living beings, since maybe we should have the dying and doomed to die closer to not alive than alive? Then we can define a gradation of how alive something is. A rock or a rotting corpse(excluding the bacteria on it) would be at the 0 or not alive end. Then we have considered everything.

Philosophy Forum

Everything is either 'alive' or 'dead'.

Quick Links

My Account

able2know