• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Dead Matter to Live Aware Matter

idav

idav

Being
Premium Member
This is even a bit more than abiogenesis (how life came about through chemical processes). Where can we point and say, I think there is awareness there? Even at the most rudimentary levels of life, single celled organisms already display signs of learning so awareness is somehow present at the inception of life, the intelligent agent is itself. How could dead matter ever accomplish such a feat?

Here is an article that gets into single celled learning capabilities, which states learning happened in evolution even before nervous systems and brains. How is that possible?
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/04/160427081533.htm
 
Tmac

Tmac

Active Member
idav said:
This is even a bit more than abiogenesis (how life came about through chemical processes). Where can we point and say, I think there is awareness there? Even at the most rudimentary levels of life, single celled organisms already display signs of learning so awareness is somehow present at the inception of life, the intelligent agent is itself. How could dead matter ever accomplish such a feat?

Here is an article that gets into single celled learning capabilities, which states learning happened in evolution even before nervous systems and brains. How is that possible?
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/04/160427081533.htm
Click to expand...

What is dead matter or is that what you are implying?
 
idav

idav

Being
Premium Member
Tmac said:
What is dead matter or is that what you are implying?
Click to expand...
I am seeing matter and energy as dead unless they are in a certain configuration in which we consider those same substances and chemicals as alive and aware. When an organism dies these same chemicals and elements go back to the earth.
 
Thief

Thief

Rogue Theologian
all the way back to grade school.....
life has certain and sure qualities

it consumes
it reproduces

the list has become quite confusing since grade school
viruses are something odd
and some higher forms can freeze solid and return when the weather warms
(was it dead for a while?....apparently not.....and how was it considered alive?)
 
idav

idav

Being
Premium Member
Thief said:
all the way back to grade school.....
life has certain and sure qualities

it consumes
it reproduces

the list has become quite confusing since grade school
viruses are something odd
and some higher forms can freeze solid and return when the weather warms
(was it dead for a while?....apparently not.....and how was it considered alive?)
Click to expand...
Do you think viruses are zombies as far as awareness is concerned?
 
Thief

Thief

Rogue Theologian
we might have to consider a line drawn
how about?.... fight or flight

at some level that we can be aware of.....
we call the shot only if the reaction can be predictable

viruses are at the edge of that line
they can't really run away
and their defenses are unknown

They either survive.....or die

perhaps we could draw the line.....at reproduction
they seem to know when they are ready and able
 
Etritonakin

Etritonakin

Well-Known Member
idav said:
This is even a bit more than abiogenesis (how life came about through chemical processes). Where can we point and say, I think there is awareness there? Even at the most rudimentary levels of life, single celled organisms already display signs of learning so awareness is somehow present at the inception of life, the intelligent agent is itself. How could dead matter ever accomplish such a feat?

Here is an article that gets into single celled learning capabilities, which states learning happened in evolution even before nervous systems and brains. How is that possible?
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/04/160427081533.htm
Click to expand...

If it quacks like a duck, but isn't a duck, then it is something else that is similar in that way.

I'd imagine a system like a nervous system -but based on smaller components.

I'd also say that the difference between alive and dead is arrangement into a system or lack thereof -or it might be said that nothing is truly dead as long as it is dynamic (a system) in some way. Most would not consider any one component of themselves to be alive, yet consider the system to be alive -but the system could not be alive in a complex way if the components were not alive in a more simple way. As long as electrons are spinning around in atoms which interact in specific ways, systems can be built from them which would interact with their environment in specific ways -and this would also be true of smaller things which are also dynamic.
 
Last edited:
Quintessence

Quintessence

Consults with Trees
Staff member
Premium Member
A nervous system has never been necessary for organisms to learn or to be intelligent - common anthropocentric biases tend to prevent the recognition of this amongst most humans aside from the scientists (and occasional laypersons) aware of the research done in non-human intelligence. All organisms have to be able to sense and respond to their environment to respond to at least some degree, and doing so does not require a nervous system.

Easy-to-grasp examples of this kind of sensation and perception include plant roots sensing gravity to grow downwards and other parts of a plant sensing light to grow towards it. Various chemicals inside the plant are responsible for these things. All sensation and perception of the environment by any organism boils down to chemicals, really. And learning happens when more (or less) chemicals are produced with particular frequency that ingrains patterns into the organism.
 
Valjean

Valjean

Veteran Member
Premium Member
There never was a clear life -- non-life boundary. We see Nature forming self-replicating molecules, amino acids, RNA, lipid membranes, &c; parts of life. At what point are combinations of these considered life?

There's a big grey area of "lifelike stuff" or quasi-life, if you ask me.
 
Valjean

Valjean

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Last edited:
Thief

Thief

Rogue Theologian
Valjean said:
There are a lot more freezable insects than those mentioned in the artical, as well as some fish (I was quite the little monster as a kid). The question remains: were those creatures in the back of our freezer alive, or dead, or...?
Click to expand...
and practitioners of resuscitation now suspect the life is still there hours after body functions cease
long after most doctors call the time of death

but I still don't confuse fire as a life form
and rocks don't speak to me

some physical theorists like to discuss how substance carries 'information'
as long as the information remains intact....so too the substance
as if the two nouns are one in the same

so maybe mummies and other grave sites should be left alone?
 
idav

idav

Being
Premium Member
Valjean said:
There never was a clear life -- non-life boundary. We see Nature forming self-replicating molecules, amino acids, RNA, lipid membranes, &c; parts of life. At what point are combinations of these considered life?

There's a big grey area of "lifelike stuff" or quasi-life, if you ask me.
Click to expand...
Do you think the same of awareness, there are combinations of "quasi" awareness? I feel like life is the first indication of matter "wanting" something.
 
Valjean

Valjean

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Awareness and consciousness are complete mysteries, IMHO.
That said, I don't see most life as "wanting" anything.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top