This bunch of proteins and nucleic acids is alive
Anonymous 01/20/25(Mon)03:22:27 | 18 comments
While the s.c. "god" is not.
Anonymous 01/20/25(Mon)03:51:39 No.4936680
>>4936669
"alive" is just a human made social construct man
"alive" is just a human made social construct man
Anonymous 01/20/25(Mon)05:26:02 No.4936696
>>4936669
its literally not by the definition of a living thing, a living thing. just because it can replicate itself is not enough to be alive
its literally not by the definition of a living thing, a living thing. just because it can replicate itself is not enough to be alive
Anonymous 01/20/25(Mon)09:47:44 No.4936753
Anonymous 01/21/25(Tue)02:17:36 No.4937147
>>4936753
they have no metabolic function, they cannot reproduce independently
they have no metabolic function, they cannot reproduce independently
Anonymous 01/21/25(Tue)02:21:25 No.4937149
Anonymous 01/21/25(Tue)02:22:58 No.4937152
>>4937147
such a gay definition. If there was a parasitic worm or something that evolved to have no metabolic function of its own and to exclusively lay eggs when exposed to the fluids of an animal but was otherwise entirely still, it would still be called alive too, regardless of the basedboys in science journals labeling it a zombie worm or whatever.
such a gay definition. If there was a parasitic worm or something that evolved to have no metabolic function of its own and to exclusively lay eggs when exposed to the fluids of an animal but was otherwise entirely still, it would still be called alive too, regardless of the basedboys in science journals labeling it a zombie worm or whatever.
Anonymous 01/21/25(Tue)02:25:11 No.4937153
>>4937152
that's because they evolved to be that way secondarily, life all has a common ancestor which was capable of independent reproduction, viruses did not (as far as we know)
that's because they evolved to be that way secondarily, life all has a common ancestor which was capable of independent reproduction, viruses did not (as far as we know)
Anonymous 01/21/25(Tue)02:28:38 No.4937155
>>4937152
but the cells that make up the worm would though, they produce the process energy themselves and reproduce
but the cells that make up the worm would though, they produce the process energy themselves and reproduce
Anonymous 01/21/25(Tue)03:29:28 No.4937184
>>4937153
>life all has a common ancestor which was capable of independent reproduction, viruses did not (as far as we know)
So life is defined as lineage? If a virus were descended from life it would be considered alive? That doesn't make any sense. It's silly.
>>4937155
obviously in my example that wouldn't be the case. Make it a microorganism, monocellular or not, if it helps you make the mental leap from written word to understanding.
>life all has a common ancestor which was capable of independent reproduction, viruses did not (as far as we know)
So life is defined as lineage? If a virus were descended from life it would be considered alive? That doesn't make any sense. It's silly.
>>4937155
obviously in my example that wouldn't be the case. Make it a microorganism, monocellular or not, if it helps you make the mental leap from written word to understanding.
Anonymous 01/21/25(Tue)03:43:45 No.4937189
>>4937184
if it lays eggs that means cell duplication which is independent reproduction which makes it alive.
if it lays eggs that means cell duplication which is independent reproduction which makes it alive.
Anonymous 01/21/25(Tue)04:10:52 No.4937199
>>4937153
>viruses did not (as far as we know)
gray area since some viruses devolved from parts of living cells.
but yeah, they ceased to be alive as soon as they left their ancestral cell and lost the ability to reproduce on their own.
>viruses did not (as far as we know)
gray area since some viruses devolved from parts of living cells.
but yeah, they ceased to be alive as soon as they left their ancestral cell and lost the ability to reproduce on their own.
Anonymous 01/21/25(Tue)06:22:55 No.4937226
>>4937189
God damn it dude why are you incapable of abstracting a simple comparison?
God damn it dude why are you incapable of abstracting a simple comparison?
Anonymous 01/21/25(Tue)06:30:38 No.4937228
>>4937226
it was a pretty good comparison.
assuming the cells inside the worm wouldn't reproduce without an external host then yeah, That would basically be a virus.
It wouldn't be considered alive.
it was a pretty good comparison.
assuming the cells inside the worm wouldn't reproduce without an external host then yeah, That would basically be a virus.
It wouldn't be considered alive.
Anonymous 01/21/25(Tue)07:45:10 No.4937242
>>4937228
but if it has cells that means it can grow structures, which makes it alive, because its creating its own cell wall and the other cellular organs to support itself
>>4937226
because your abstraction is stupid, if we removed everything that makes a living thing a living thing, all we are left with is just dna, or rna, which is a virus
but if it has cells that means it can grow structures, which makes it alive, because its creating its own cell wall and the other cellular organs to support itself
>>4937226
because your abstraction is stupid, if we removed everything that makes a living thing a living thing, all we are left with is just dna, or rna, which is a virus
Anonymous 01/22/25(Wed)02:21:43 No.4937676
Anonymous 01/22/25(Wed)02:24:59 No.4937678
So viruses aren't even alive but just rogue strands of DNA (or RNA I guess) floating around, getting passed around from life form to life form and just passively fucking shit up? Seems almost like a glitch in the matrix, it's weird that highly evolved life can get completely fucked up by what's essentially just a string of code that says "kill yourself"
Anonymous 01/22/25(Wed)04:13:55 No.4937710
>>4937147
they just like me fr
they just like me fr