|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Modularity, A distinguishing property of life | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Bio-molecularTony Member (Idle past 5409 days) Posts: 90 Joined: |
If you choose #1 the religionists win hands down.
If you choose #2 it is still intelligently designed and still in need of a creator. If you choose #3 then life is less complex then our created machinery, and would have to be naturally occurring. If you choose #4 then the universe is not amazing and not complex at all. We are just impressed by every little thing that comes our way. Life is nothing real or special and we are just that stupid to think it might be. Well guys your in there some where. That's between 1-4. Go ahead and shot yourself in the foot.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
themasterdebator Inactive Member |
In the reductionist view (approach), that phenomena we see ("Life") can be explained in terms of components and how those components interact with each other. - Life is a mechanism. This is the greatest technology we have ever fallen over. We can not surpass it even with the greatest human minds. These artificial "life" forms are nothing less then intelligently made.Machines that think they themselves are alive but are not. The illusion of intellectually extreme complexity. The technology of creating life like systems, highly automated to create the illusions of living systems. Even the universe is an illusion of nature, make, designed to fool even the wisest fools like mankind - that’s you and me. machines are not as intelligent as life yet. give it another 100 years and I bet they will be evolving at a rate far beyond any living thing.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Larni Member Posts: 4000 From: Liverpool Joined: |
Your point is lost on me.
Can you re phrase what you are trying to say?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1436 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
Hi again Bio-molecularTony, still making those absolute(ly wrong) conclusions I see.
#2 Is life just ... Not really alive in itself. #3 Is Life ... Not special enough to be called a living system ... #4 Is life just ... being not life at all, Life = not life? This is the fallacy of begging the question so that only your "alternative" results in life. Too bad most of us can see the mental gymnastics you employ to justify your position for what they are: confirmation bias and denial of reality. Thus your "argument reduces to life is either not life or:
#1 Is life supernatural Sorry, I'll takes #5: none of the above. I don't think life itself is supernatural at all: it seems to obey common laws of chemistry and physics. Curiously, life is, in fact, complex chemical reactions. For some people, I suppose, they are complex enough to be called machinery - this is what (all) you have done, after all. Interestingly, calling them machinery doesn't make it so. What we see from numerous experiments is that it is not necessarily designed, as the parts could have assembled in the same manner as we see for pre-biotic cell like structures and pre-biotic self-replicating (complex) molecules.
Well we got 4 basic choices I would think. The simple fact that this single alternative is not represented in your list demonstrates your list, your thinking, is incomplete, thus there could be several other possibilities not limited by your scope. Enjoy. by our ability to understand Rebel American Zen Deist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. • • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1436 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
Hi Larni,
Your point is lost on me. Can you re phrase what you are trying to say? What he is trying to say, he is also trying to hide behind a baffle of words, a plethora of verbosity designed to appear to have meaning.
quote: [interpret]Intelligent design results in complexity, therefore complexity is a result of intelligent design.[/interpret] Bad logic disguised as actual thought. Enjoy. by our ability to understand Rebel American Zen Deist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. • • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Larni Member Posts: 4000 From: Liverpool Joined: |
I get it now; thanks, mate.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Larni Member Posts: 4000 From: Liverpool Joined: |
You-o, speak-o, rubbish-o.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Bio-molecularTony Member (Idle past 5409 days) Posts: 90 Joined: |
In reading the DISCOVER magazine July/Aug 2009 issue there was an interesting article called The Discover interview - Erik Winfree.
It is in this article I see he is yet one of many scientists the see life as a machine / mechanical. In the past you were stoned/ burned for saying such things but I guess times have changed - I am still alive and well, and so are people like Erik Winfree.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Perdition Member (Idle past 3269 days) Posts: 1593 From: Wisconsin Joined: |
The processes of life and the processes of machines can be compared and similarities can be seen, but conflating the two is a very bad move to make.
A machine is something created by an intelligent, living, creature. To date, the only machines we know have are created by man. Life, is not created by anything intelligent, and so cannot be called a machine. The fact that there are similarities is that we often copy living processes in our machine designs. There is no grand conspiracy to hide the designed aspects of life, there are no willfully blinded people who cannot see the overwhelming evidence you profess to have, there is no there there.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Rahvin Member Posts: 4046 Joined: Member Rating: 8.3 |
The processes of life and the processes of machines can be compared and similarities can be seen, but conflating the two is a very bad move to make. A machine is something created by an intelligent, living, creature. To date, the only machines we know have are created by man. Life, is not created by anything intelligent, and so cannot be called a machine. The fact that there are similarities is that we often copy living processes in our machine designs. There is no grand conspiracy to hide the designed aspects of life, there are no willfully blinded people who cannot see the overwhelming evidence you profess to have, there is no there there. Machines are not always made by intelligent creators. A simple lever is a machine, yet can be made when a tree falls onto an uneven surface. We have evidence of naturally-occurring nuclear reactors in the Earth's past that were certainly not made by any intelligent being.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Bio-molecularTony Member (Idle past 5409 days) Posts: 90 Joined: |
Perdition writes: A machine is something created by an intelligent, living, creature. To date, the only machines we know have are created by man. Life, is not created by anything intelligent, and so cannot be called a machine. http://www.biology-online.org/dictionary/Machine writes:
Machine 1. In general, any combination of bodies so connected that their relative motions are constrained, and by means of which force and motion may be transmitted and modified, as a screw and its nut, or a lever arranged to turn about a fulcrum or a pulley about its pivot, etc.; especially, a construction, more or less complex, consisting of a combination of moving parts, or simple mechanical elements, as wheels, levers, cams, etc, with their supports and connecting framework, calculated to constitute a prime mover, or to receive force and motion from a prime mover or from another machine, and transmit, modify, and apply them to the production of some desired mechanical effect or work, as weaving by a loom, or the excitation of electricity by an electrical machine. Your religious views are not listed here I see. The human factor is not needed to qualify it to become a machine. All my biochemical text books use the terminology of a bio-machine and the like.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Bio-molecularTony Member (Idle past 5409 days) Posts: 90 Joined: |
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-jayDc9YayI&feature=related writes:
The inner life of the cell https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=686qX5yzksU&feature=related writes:
So what part about mechinery did you not understand....
Kinesin ExplanationPlease notice the words used in the last video.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AdminNosy Administrator Posts: 4754 From: Vancouver, BC, Canada Joined: |
Bring the words here as you would express it. Do not refer to videos and expect anyone to look at them unless you give them good reason to.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Larni Member Posts: 4000 From: Liverpool Joined: |
My point was (ironically) that your method of comunication does not do a very good job of conveying your point.
Now that I understand what you are trying to say I would agree that biological organisms are very simliar yet not identical to machines. Edited by Larni, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
traderdrew Member (Idle past 5185 days) Posts: 379 From: Palm Beach, Florida Joined: |
Have you read any of the new book called "Signature in the Cell"?
That book rocks. It proves to me that complex specified information in the genome was created by an intelligent designer. Not only that, towards the end of the book it shows that the information in DNA is not only linear but it overlaps in more than one sophisticated way and that increases storage capacity. The book also listed at least 10 functions for so-called junk DNA.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024