Hmm.. quite a random question.. what is the definition of living thing? A thing that is able to evolve such that overall, the population of things slowly improve?
Something that is able to reproduce on its own?
What defines reproduction?
Something that can move?
Something that can think?
What is thinking?
Questions like these come in when we look at stuff on the very edges of life: viruses. They lack self-reproduction mechanisms, but then, so do many other animals. Bacteria species such as Rickettsia and Chlamydia are considered living organisms but are unable to reproduce outside a host cell. What about parasitic wasps, or fig wasps? Are we being short-sighted by insisting that reproduction can only be referred to the certain known reproduction methods: birth, binary fission, budding, laying eggs?
Must a living thing be able to move? The Chlamydia has virtually no metabolism when outside its host. Does this mean that the bacterium comes to life when it comes into contact with another cell?
Who are we to say what can think and what can't? How are we to know that the battery can't think and it's just that it is unable to prove it?
If viruses are nothing but a cluster of chemical reactions, aren't we too? We can't prove that we have a soul can we?
Isn't it disturbing that a non-living thing is able to not only populate our bodies, adapting to our every defensive mechanisms, and in many situations, overpowering us?
If viruses are living things, then what about viroids, or even prions?
If anything that can evolve is a living thing, then sooner or later, we're going to have to add machines to this category. (see link): http://www.nerdshit.com/wordpress/2007/03/02/evolving-robots-and-a-comparison-of-individual-vs-group-selection-awesome/
On a side note, slime molds have been known to be able to move as an aggregated clump in complete unison-not one cell gets left behind. So are they one multi-cellular organism, or are they just many with a communications system that far exceeds ours?
No comments:
Post a Comment