Professor Martinez asked:
How do you know that you are alive? Is the scientific definition of a living thing complete or are there other characteristics that you would use to define a living thing?
My response:
I know that I am alive in the scientific sense because I meet all the 9 requirements outlined in the textbook "Campbell Essential Biology". I have order, shown in the symmetry of my body. I exhibit regulation; my body sweats to maintain the homeostasis of my body's internal temperature. I grow. I utilize energy by eating. I respond to my environment. For example, I blink to remove sand from my eye. I have the ability to reproduce as a human. I as a human have the potential to evolve as my ancestors evolved.
While I generally agree with the scientific definition of life there should be certain exceptions to the scientific definition of a living thing. Such as mules, which while incapable of reproducing other mules, are very much alive.
i like the fact that you were only person to disagree with the scientific definition. I think it is an interesting point that mules cant reproduce mules they are still alive.
ReplyDeleteI also liked that you disagreed with the scientific definition. As do I! Obviously all of the humans on this earth meet at least some of the characteristics of the definition of a living organism. But just as you pointed out with the mules being incapable to reproduce and therefore by the definition would be considered not alive, I feel the same way about a lot of people walking this earth. Only for me I feel that a lot of people are actually dead, but somehow still alive. Sounds crazy I know. But really think about it. When people are kept alive by machines or by drugs or just so unhealthy that they are not able to meet all the characteristics of a living thing, are they really alive? There are a lot of things that have a life force that are not considered alive. Then there are things that do not have much of a life force but are considered alive. So it's a pretty complicated topic I think. I like that you do not totally agree with the scientific definition.
ReplyDeleteI also like your questioning of the scientific definition, however, I feel like you pointed out a fact that is overlooked in the defintion rather than something a scientist would actually argue against. No one would say that a mule is not alive. I would actually argue that a mule used to transport people and goods is more alive than, say, cattle born and raised in captivity in the beef industry.
ReplyDeleteOn the point of mules... mules aren't able to reproduce. They are born sterile, thereby missing one of the requirements to be considered "alive." There are humans and many other forms of undeniable life that are born without the ability to reproduce. Does that mean they are not alive?
OK - So the mule was a fantastic idea! I hadn't thought of that one before! And James is right - there are many things unable to reproduce - does this mean they are not alive?
ReplyDelete