Kai: "New forms of life"?

[Kai]

Isn't the Leviathan in the Illuminatus! trilogy such a creature?  A giant single celled creature that is nigh immortal, and adapts itself?

It would still need to be able to reproduce pieces of itself, even if not to survive (this is a thought experiment, we can presuppose it has some magic protein structure that does not decay), then in order to adapt, as well as in order to reach the size it did.

Bonus points to the bio geeks here for not trotting out the 'life is made of cells' definition.

I think way too about the origin of life coming from runaway replication of RNA, so I don't think that definition of life works for me.

[Bu🤠ns]

What do they say-- every seven or so years we get brand new organs through cellular life and death? Considering that even though our forms tend to appear to look the same doesn't mean that we're using the same cells we used 10 years ago. 

I think the process of growth and decay is essential toward determining what is considered 'lifeform.'

[Richter]

Isn't the Leviathan in the Illuminatus! trilogy such a creature?  A giant single celled creature that is nigh immortal, and adapts itself?

It would still need to be able to reproduce pieces of itself, even if not to survive (this is a thought experiment, we can presuppose it has some magic protein structure that does not decay), then in order to adapt, as well as in order to reach the size it did.

Bonus points to the bio geeks here for not trotting out the 'life is made of cells' definition.

I LIKE that take on it.  Survival of the best adapted psedopods?     

SOME self regeneration would be required, as every energy producing process I'm aware of produces some byproduct that isn't good for the whole organism.

Brings to mind a neat comparison of multicellular organisms and siphonophores (communal organisms http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-NWEdAkL92w )

I haven't read "Illuminatus!", but Shoggoths (Shoggi?) (Lovecraft) did come to mind, a formless protoplasm capable of locomotion, generating organs as needed.

[Kai]

What do they say-- every seven or so years we get brand new organs through cellular life and death? Considering that even though our forms tend to appear to look the same doesn't mean that we're using the same cells we used 10 years ago. 

I think the process of growth and decay is essential toward determining what is considered 'lifeform.'

Yeah, our organs cycle at different rates. Theres a few types of cells that don't cycle, like the pacemaker cells in the heart or neurons, but otherwise the body changes hands over time.

[Vene]

What do they say-- every seven or so years we get brand new organs through cellular life and death? Considering that even though our forms tend to appear to look the same doesn't mean that we're using the same cells we used 10 years ago. 

I think the process of growth and decay is essential toward determining what is considered 'lifeform.'

Yeah, our organs cycle at different rates. Theres a few types of cells that don't cycle, like the pacemaker cells in the heart or neurons, but otherwise the body changes hands over time.

Even the cells that don't die have to constantly replace their constituent molecules over time.

[Kai]

What do they say-- every seven or so years we get brand new organs through cellular life and death? Considering that even though our forms tend to appear to look the same doesn't mean that we're using the same cells we used 10 years ago. 

I think the process of growth and decay is essential toward determining what is considered 'lifeform.'

Yeah, our organs cycle at different rates. Theres a few types of cells that don't cycle, like the pacemaker cells in the heart or neurons, but otherwise the body changes hands over time.

Even the cells that don't die have to constantly replace their constituent molecules over time.

something like every 12 years you have a whole different body in terms of atoms.

Which shows just how emergent consciousness is.

[Elder Iptuous]

I have this nagging association between intelligence and life, such that if something is deemed to be truly intelligent, then it should be considered alive, and the definition of 'life' should be expanded to encompass it....
just saying...

[Template]

I have this nagging association between intelligence and life, such that if something is deemed to be truly intelligent, then it should be considered alive, and the definition of 'life' should be expanded to encompass it....
just saying...

Perhaps an intellectual metabolism is a real metabolism.  Self-alteration = growing new cells and cleaning out the body.

Bonus points to the bio geeks here for not trotting out the 'life is made of cells' definition.

Also,
THA LIFF ARE MAED OF SELS

[Jasper]

I have this nagging association between intelligence and life, such that if something is deemed to be truly intelligent, then it should be considered alive, and the definition of 'life' should be expanded to encompass it....
just saying...

I differ.  While intelligent beings are worthy of as much moral significance and consideration as a human, I do not say it constitutes life.

[Template]

On further reflection, I would like to suggest a rule of thumb:

If you can kill it, it probably was alive.

[Requia ☣]

That just brings up the question of what counts as killing and what counts as destroying.

[Elder Iptuous]

"....is a-liiiiiive!"
"No disassemble!"

[Jasper]

On further reflection, I would like to suggest a rule of thumb:

If you can kill it, it probably was alive.

That doesn't work. 

However, if it feels like murder, it was ethically equivalent.

[Template]

What is the concept of "life" even for, then?  Is it supposed to mean things that we can eat and/or fuck?

[Jasper]

What is the concept of "life" even for, then?  Is it supposed to mean things that we can eat and/or fuck?

That's naive.  The definition of life is used to differentiate inanimate objects from us.  The language, you must understand, is structured with a bias toward its creators.