What does it mean for something to be alive?

[Grampy]

The orginal posts idea is called the "Dead Cow Theory". In layman's terms, it goes something like this: There is a dead cow and a live one. Neither cow has any disease or physical injury. Why is one walking and breathing and the other is not? They both have the all the organs and physical parts necessary for life, but one is not living. I made it sound very basic, and I'm sure entire books have been written on this subject, but this is the reason that I don't follow man's science 100%. There is something more than just the physical. Some call it energy, breath of life, souls, spirits, but it all boils down to something else being there that we cannot measure with our current science and our limited intelligence

I know that there is some Christian haters on these boards, but I agree with the Christian view on this subject. Life is created, given to each of us, to animals, bugs, plants, etc. I don't think there is a guy with a white beard hanging around on a cloud in the sky. I believe in a being that is beyond our comprehension with the minds that we have. A creator of the physical and spiritual life. Go ahead with your flaming now if you want...

[Bigblue1]

Well new word coinage is a fine old art and is not limited to those champions of the practice such as the worlds of science and technology. And I certainly don't claim credit in this instance. Recent citations for "undisprovable" include "The God Delusion" by Richard Dawkins, probably where I remember it from, and "The Post-Modern President" by Joshua Micah Marshall. It may not have made its way into Webster's yet but so what? Lots of stuff isn't in Webster's including zillions of technical terms and niche specific terminology of near infinite variety. I'd be surprised, for instance, if the snus specific terms that litter this site like candy corn are in there either though there are many thousands of people who use them in this country now. I don't doubt we all could fill a couple of DVDs with similar examples. I am as chary of misspellings, egregiously poor grammar, and mangled syntax as the next wannabe scribe but that hardly makes me a fan of etymological inflexibility. If it's good enough for Dawkins it's good enough for me. I did admit the awkwardness of the term but the provenance, although a touch on the skimpy side, meets the case for me in this instance. I naturally respect your right to disagree.

Well okay man you've proven you are of sound mind, But the question still remains, are you using the supposed word correctly? I still think not. As a matter of fact it is a double negative unto itself. Anyway I'm all good with it, but I would never defend something I've done by justifying it with what goes on in current times. I know we are going to hell in a hand basket and justifying this downward spiral by using other current events, just doesn't make sense to me. So anyway I respectfully choose to disagree and will not choose to contest a made up word ever again, Yours truly, BB1

[AtreyuKun]

I haven't been able to concentrate on anything but this topic so far today.
It's been stuck in my head for so long. It just amazes me how of little importance anything really is. I look around and see people scurrying like little ants and apathy seeps from every pore in my body. It's so boring and tiring being put through my paces concerning things that mean nothing to me. I would never ever kill myself though I have thought about it. Sometimes I wish I would "die". Not out of depression, just for a change of pace. I would like to see what else is out there. If nothing is out there, we're all the punchline to the most colossal joke ever.

[WickedKitchen]

I think one of the biggest limiting factors is our ability to comprehend "infinity" and "zero". We're pretty much Ok with everything in the middle but those two limits are what trip us up. Infinity is such a fantastic concept that we incorporate ourselves into it. I guess technically (conservation of energy) we are here for infinity in some form or another and might eventually end up as part of some gamma-ray burst from a dying black hole...but then our energy will be changed and shot out to...somewhere.

For life to exist as we know it the environment must be balanced to support it. Does this mean that every life must conform to the balance that we know (or think we know)? i argue not. With the sheer number of possibilities out there it's hard to think that we're the only life in the universe. Heck the universe is so big that we can't accurately measure it. Even if we could, we couldn't currently prove it. I guess that makes it anti-undisprovable. <snicker> And time? I believe it's merely an observation. I not so sure that time really exists other than what we define it to be...yet it's incorporated into the basics of so many physics fundamentals.

For the dead cow theory: I think the difference is the energy going in. if there is no more energy going into the cells (the cow eating) then the mitochondria cannot function and therefore will begin to break down to a simpler form. I guess we'd have to know how the cow dies otherwise I'd assume that the cow just stopped eating. Things just don't cease to exist...something breaks down along the way somewhere and the functions that support it's animation are disrupted.

I think the real question is, as humans anyhow, is life and the physical body one in the same? CAN there be life w/o the physical body? If there can be, what is it like?

[Premium Parrots]

...........Sometimes I wish I would "die". Not out of depression, just for a change of pace....

so I take it you are bored to ..........near death?

[tom502]

It's been confirmed many times, when someone dies but later comes back, like on an operating table or whatnot, the person often leaves the body, yet can "see" what's going on, and even move to other rooms, and when they come back, they can often recall even minute details of who was there, what was said, and done. OBE. Life is not dependent on the body, though the body, and brain, to function, is dependent on life. The brain, is like a CPU, but the mind, is the WWW. The brain is like filter, but mind/consciousness/spirit is beyond the brain.

[AtreyuKun]

so I take it you are bored to ..........near death?

Pretty much. It's just hard to get excited over anything. I'd like to start using drugs but I don't believe it's the same kind of trip as is physical death. Like I told my wife while watch The Lovey Bones, I feel sorry for her family and friends but not for her. Why? They're left there to pick up the pieces. They're left broken hearted and alone. I find it hard to feel sorry for the dead where they're going. Talk about an adventure. Who really gives a shit about space and the oceans. What comes next is really fascinating.

[sgreger1]

Ruh Roh, this thread just killed Jesus:


Jesus statue struck by lightning, burns to the ground








(God has a funny sense of humor doesn't he)

[WickedKitchen]

that's terrible

[PipenSnus]

I think that we just aren't built to comprehend this question.

And I think that's the wisest thing that's been said in this thread so far.

There are all kinds of theories, but very little verifiable data, about what happens to us at the moment of death. However, one thing I find very interesting is that what little evidence we do have suggests that the energy that animates us during our lives does not dissipate at death, but moves away from the body as a coherent unit. What happens after that? One guess is as good as another. So believe whatever seems right to you, or whatever brings you comfort. The only surety is that we will all find out some day -- but no one has come back yet to tell us what we will find.

[WickedKitchen]

Some people think they've come back. My mom thinks she might've been a bird in a past life. Maybe she's just getting old.

[WickedKitchen]

Y'know since reading/posting on this thread I've killed less bugs.

Last night my neighbor called me. Apparently her cat had caught a mouse and was playing with it. The women in that house would have nothing to do with it especially 'cos the mouse wasn't really dead yet. So being a good neighbor i donned my work gloves and headed over. The cat doesn't like me so it left straight away and the mouse was left under the table just looking at me. It certainly was alive though it wouldn't survive long. After I picked it up I told the girls in the house the coolest part is that I get to take him home now and eat him. This grossed them out totally (which was the goal) and I walked off with the mouse. It didn't try and escape my palm, probably 'cos the cat broke at least one of it's legs. I couldn't stop thinking about this thread as I carried it. Now, I knew that I couldn't repair this animal and before the morning came it would be consumed by the local fox but I couldn't help but feel for the little guy. The fox got him. Well, he's gone now and I'm all but certain he didn't walk off on his own. Bad for the mouse. Good for the fox. Huh.

[tom502]

I really do make an effort not to kill bugs. Now, if it's a spider in the house, unless it's a daddy long legs, well, they usually get it, as do these centipede things we sometimes have with those long legs, and mosquitos of course. But if a moth, a beetle, even an ant, if it's something I can scoop up and I don't think it will bite me, I try to throw them out the door. I've often wanted to be vegetarian, because I do believe the karma of slaughtered animals does have an impact, but I have found making such a change to be hard living in a household of others that don't want to do it with me.

[texasmade]

bump

[WickedKitchen]

Dude, Tex...you read my mind man. I think about this thread often. Mostly when I remove a spider or a moth from my living space, or if I swerve not to hit a squirrel, but if it involves a mosquito i don't usually think about it until after I smashed him. The squirrels are beginning to loose ground too