Thread: what does it mean to be alive?

if everything is made of particles and possably vibrating strings of energy, then at what point or level does something become alive?is it the ability ti think or reason? where does the spark come from? i hope i am not being to philisophical and i am not looking for a religious answer, but a physialogical one.could the answer lie in the arrangment of particles or atoms that give life? or do we simply need a more refined definition of life? just a thought?

Greetings. I thought I would jot down a few things for you to ponder in response to your query. Mind you, they are merely things for you to consider in your contemplations, I claim no authority, merely insights.

You ask regarding the ability to think and reason. Well my friend, there are plenty of life forms which apparently do not have either of these capacities. A tree for example. It has no Brain that we know of and so far as we know does not think or reason, yet it is something we consider a living organism. Even single cells are considered living beings. I think it is important here to make a distinction of terms. Consider the terms consciousness and awareness. All living organisms are in some way aware. But not all living things are what we would call consciuos. Consciousness seems to depend on awareness, but not the other way around. But even the possession of awareness of any sort might not be an absolutely defining means of what we call life. For if we consider the double slit light experiment with it's curious realities of how light behaves, then one might say that these quanta of energy themselves are "aware" on some level and might be argued to be "alive". This may or may not be true, depending on the criteria and definition of what "life" is, or more accurately what we call life.

If you are looking for such criteria simply go to google and type in "define life" and you will find it. Some people call the force of animation behind life the spirit. But even that word is prone to our limitations of language and definition. Many Native American tribes considered all entities to have a 'spirit' and therefore to be living. But I think what your after is the level, as you say, of what we would call a living organism. It is perhaps just a certain demarcation point of gathered awareness which allows certain traits such as some form of reproduction, some level of self animation and other criteria which you can find by googling the word life as I suggested. Perhaps higher and higher life forms are nothing more than greater and greater collections of a basic universal awareness attained by that awareness somehow arranging itself into matter and then specific and complex chemical structures to achieve more complex abilities. Perhaps just one way that a "living" universe moves to express it's own infinite potential. Good luck on your further contemplations.

thanks for the reply. i think part of the problem is in the definition of life.the most recent definition i have heard is for something to be "alive" it must self replicate and self assemble.i tend to like this one the best so far.but i can't help but to think of the universe itself alive.without getting into the religiuos side of the argument, the universe self organizes and self replicates its " inards" sotospeak[stars die and release elements that become planets,us,other stars,information and energy coninually change form,etc...].so maybe we need to rexamine what it means to be "alive"?

I think you will find that most but not all problems or disagreements are not so much in the actual facts at hand but rather in the definition of terms. Differing perspectives also create challenges to finding absolute facts and lead to disagreement. Two people may witness an auto accident, but due to their different perspectives they may not agree on the facts and may even have opposite points of view. Any number of facts which are absolutely true and not dependent on perspective can never oppose one another, it is merely our limited perspectives which seem to make it so at times.

Generally, what the majority accepts as true is what usually prevails, but even this does not make something true. The whole world once believed the world was flat, but that was a perspective Truth and not an actual fact. So even though the whole world may now have some idea of what is "alive" and what is not, that does not mean that the universe as a whole is not a living thing, it only means that in our collective definiton of what it means to be alive the universe is generally considered not alive. I for one believe differently and closer to the Native American ideology, but also recognize the definition of what one would call a "living organism" as opposed to "inanimate objects". And as intelligent as we are, there is still far more that we do not know about creation than what we do know and much of what we do know is open to interpretation. Funny thing, perspective......

pyraxus i couldnt agree more. isaac asimov wrote a short story called "the relitivity of wrong" that sums up the idea of the truth being ones perspective. that there is no wrong,in general, but only incompleteness. he uses your example of when we thought the world was flat. they were not wrong, just had incomplete data.i ,also, prefer the notion that what most define as alive is a narrow view.with that being said, i am looking more for a physialogical answer.i realize that it is relative to the one answering.but is it at the atomic , molecular, or cellular level that most would say we become alive? or does none of that matter and life springs from the soul or some other energy?maybe i am being to philosophical?it is defenitly interesting to hear what people think and even more so to see them ponder the question when they never considered it.

Oh, my dear Roncj5, I have indeed pondered this question and so many others. And while I do not claim any authority I believe that I have just as much right as any to ponder them and to search for ever greater Truths. Whether I am right or wrong in my various current understandings is for me to consider. But hopefully with the added viewpoints and understanding of others, I might come closer to those higher Truths and perhaps my input might help others do the same. I do not fear ridicule for I know my quest is true, and sometimes you have to go through a lot of wrong answers to find the right ones, if you ever find them at all. And so far as philosophy/theory is concerned, hey, it's got to start somewhere.

I like to think, though I may be wrong, that increasingly able life forms are those that attain a greater use and control over energy/matter interactions.

i hope you dont feel that i was stepping on your toes or gave the wrong impression.i strongly feel, and will argue viamatly for, that everyone has the right to believe and question whatever they want.if noone questioned anything or there was no diversity in what we believe , there would be no progress.i am of the mind set that until proven wrong, all ideas are pluasable,within reason.

Hey Ronjc5, I was just looking back over old posts and realized that I did not conclude this one. No my friend, you did not step on my toes or give me the wrong impression. Truth be told I am rather fond of the innocent and wondrous tone of your posts. What my previous post was referring to was the many unkindnesses of others over the years. I apologize if my post led you to believe that I was referring to your posts to me. Like most of us, I have had to deal with rude and callous behavior from others in various topic forums. Your posts were never of this nature. Still, the Truth is that even those rude and discompassionate responses I have had to endure have given me very many valuable insights into many areas. It would be nice if everyone was civil, but even though this is not always the case, I learn from them regardless. So set your mind at ease my friend, and keep searching. I will try to help provide a new or fresh perspective should you ever ask it of me.

I consider the aspect of being "Alive" as a construct. It's a definition of a state, just as a fire can be defined as "Hot."

"Hot" all by itself, does not exist. You need energy, a source of heat, in order to make something be in a state of "Hot."

I see the state of being "Alive" in very much the same way. There is no such thing as "alive," it is merely a current state of something.
Just like particle spin... Or cold being the absence of heat...

My Definition: Being "alive" means that a Complex System is balanced in its ability to self maintain and reproduce and the system is bound by its own complexity.

Take weather, for example. Weather on Earth is a very complex system. It acts in many ways as a "living" thing. It reproduces, it feeds, it produces waste and its erratic and seemingly unpredictable nature makes it seem decisive in its actions. It falls short of my definition of being "alive" simply because it is not Complex Enough to be able to present a fuller illusion of self maintenance.
The planet Earth itself can be described in the same manner. It heals its own wounds, it has many differing complex systems within it that are in motion, as is the planet itself. Earth is much like a living thing in that it's entire Current State is dependent on initial conditions, emergence and balance of many complex systems. The Earth undergoes evolution.
Still, it falls short of being Complex Enough.
Let's increase complexity.
Bacteria: Unintelligent, but more complex than weather or the planet Earth.
This is because, unlike the Weather, bacteria is bound within its complexity by a string of molecules and proteins upon which the interactions of the chemical structure of the bacterium influences its state of being.
Worms: The molecular structure of worms is built upon the balance of many complex systems at work, including that of bacteria. With this combination of a great many complex systems, one complete worm presents the illusion of one independent system.
Cats: Almost as intelligent as bacteria, but not quite. Built of of many more complex systems interacting than a worm, but prone to stupid mistakes and casually licking itself after making them. Cats are excellent to observe as an example of primal instincts governing behavior with very little actual thought going into them.

Each of these creatures is like a game of billiards- with chemical and physiological interactions and experiences being a simple matter of Cause and Effect- only amplified and multiplied by factors of millions to present the illusion of unpredictability and a lack of simplicity.

A human being is far, far, FAR more complex than the weather or the planet we live on. Far more complex than worms or cats. We are many brains stacked into one.
Saying "my lizard brain" is no exaggeration. Humans really do have a lizard brain, buried under the human brain. And it's still in use.
Think about a computer for a moment. Back in the early days of computers, we used vacuum tubes, diodes and capacitors. Many of these components were massive by todays standards.
Over time, as components were rendered obsolete, they were replaced by better components.
Our brains are the opposite: The newer, better, more efficient components in the brain are stacked upon the older 'obsolete' components and ALL components are still used, genetically - all the way back to our earliest ancestors. Picture that computer, with analog gears, tiny transistors, huge vacuum tubes and microscopic resistors all humming at work, together.
You can imagine how ridiculously complex and confusing this system must be. It's no wonder at all how we can seem so intelligent at times and so primitive at others. It's no surprise how we cling to superstition and ancient feelings, habits (such as Pareidolia and other instincts) and innate behavior.

Our entire concept of being "alive" a living and feeling thinking being are based purely on this balanced and fragile state of Complexity. It's a state that can be very quickly eliminated simply by reducing the complexity.
Tampering with our Primary complex system, the brain, can increase or reduce complexity. It can very, very easily reduce complexity to where the human object is suddenly considered to be "not alive."
Like a Rock.

I think Neverfly's post just about sums it up, "alive" is a concept.

I guess if its born, grows, reproduces then ceases to function (dies) its a/was living thing.