What is life ?

Life is process of constant changes, thanks which is Universe dynamic, I perceive life as a one living organism, though it sometimes looks
that we live separate lives.
In fact there aren´t any thing which exist independently of the rest. This idea is greatly explained in IP - mindwalk and also in Buddhism.
Also each elements (fire, water, earth, air) can not exist independently.
About life I would say that it´s game of shadows and lights. I think that this is one of the main concepts what makes life. life of itself.
I couldn´t imagine life without its opposite, I think it would be rather dying than life.

With all due respect, what I said above and in the other thread is my opinion. However that thread was locked because of a quote mine and I wonder how long until this thread suffers that same fate because I would like to address one issue. Namely that quote mine of BR John,

fyxe wrote: Characteristics for life is simply complexity.

john wrote: That's a breathtakingly stupid thing to say.

The characteristics of life are:

Living things are made of cells.
Living things obtain and use energy.
Living things grow and develop.
Living things reproduce.
Living things respond and may adapt to their environment.

If something follows one or just a few of the characteristics listed above, it does not necessarily mean that it is living.

You, Fyxe, keep throwing anything out there and coming up with ad hoc nonsense. There are all sorts of complex things that are not alive I can think of some math equations and spacecraft, even some recipes.

This is not the place for you. I recommend Quora.com

What I actually said was -

Characteristics for life is simply complexity. life is not an event or a thing. it is a process of complexity. it is an organization of elements that give rise to awareness.

as a result I got called stupid and invited to leave this temple.
I find one valid characteristic when it comes to life. A process of interactions and chemicals that give rise to awareness. Take the water out of my body and I die. Take the water from this planet and it dies. take the blood from my body and it dies as well. is the blood alive? no, is it necessary for life? Yes. thats what I actually said. so thank you.

Cells are not required for life.
https://study.com/academy/lesson/non-cellular-life-definition-examples.html

Autotrophs dont obtain energy. Instead they obtain inorganic materials and convert it.
https://www.ck12.org/book/ck-12-human-biology/section/4.9/

Plenty of non-living things grow and develop as well.
https://sciencing.com/nonliving-things-grow-8349728.html

Mules are alive but cant reproduce
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mule

The only universal attribute of life seems to be that it is aware. My point not "ad hoc nonsense".

What is aware.... central processing or just direct linear reaction?

Adder wrote: What is aware.... central processing or just direct linear reaction?

No organic life.

Fyxe wrote:

Adder wrote: What is aware.... central processing or just direct linear reaction?

No organic life.

I ask because things like plants don't appear to have central processing, rather just linearish cascades of reactions locally but plants exhibit quite complex aware type behaviour.

Are plants not alive? Plants respond to their environment but they dont "central process" whatever that means. They are not computers.

Fyxe wrote: Are plants not alive? Plants respond to their environment but they dont "central process" whatever that means. They are not computers.

Animals seem to have central processing, so I was exploring your distinction between alive and aware. Linear direct reactions are undertaken by simple chemicals as well but what is alive vs reactive. For most folk a distinction seems to be made at some point to signify the differences.

Things that respond to environment because of the environment conditions are alive. Chemicals respond as reactions not responses, meaning they have no self interest in the reaction. Plants will turn leaves to the sun and go dormant in the cold. A chemical could care less because they are incapable of caring

https://youtu.be/s5BJXwNeKsQ

Fyxe wrote: Things that respond to environment because of the environment conditions are alive. Chemicals respond as reactions not responses, meaning they have no self interest in the reaction. Plants will turn leaves to the sun and go dormant in the cold. A chemical could care less because they are incapable of caring

What part if the plant cares though? Is it a part that commands the leaves to turn and if so what part is that, or do the leaves do it automatically in response to the environment and if do is that not a reaction to the environment.?

Adder wrote:

Fyxe wrote: Things that respond to environment because of the environment conditions are alive. Chemicals respond as reactions not responses, meaning they have no self interest in the reaction. Plants will turn leaves to the sun and go dormant in the cold. A chemical could care less because they are incapable of caring

What part if the plant cares though? Is it a part that commands the leaves to turn and if so what part is that, or do the leaves do it automatically in response to the environment and if do is that not a reaction to the environment.?

No it's a response to the environment because they are alive. Its self preservation. What does it matter what part does this, the plant is aware, that's all that matters.

Fyxe wrote:

Adder wrote:

Fyxe wrote: Things that respond to environment because of the environment conditions are alive. Chemicals respond as reactions not responses, meaning they have no self interest in the reaction. Plants will turn leaves to the sun and go dormant in the cold. A chemical could care less because they are incapable of caring

What part if the plant cares though? Is it a part that commands the leaves to turn and if so what part is that, or do the leaves do it automatically in response to the environment and if do is that not a reaction to the environment.?

No it's a response to the environment because they are alive. Its self preservation. What does it matter what part does this, the plant is aware, that's all that matters.

Matter? I think it's what the thread is, to distinguish appearance of life from action of the living ie what is and what isn't.

Okay so from what I get , we are now debating if non organic life exists , well as far as we know no it doesn't . But that doesn't mean it could or we haven't discovered it but looked over it .

Let's go back to this notion of "caring." Actually, the plant turning itself toward the sun is indeed a form of caring. Life being self-organising, self-preserving, self-replicating - regardless of the degree of conscious attention - does "care." Instinct is the basis of "care" (Heidegger referred to this as Sorge). The more developed the consciousness, which increases in capacity according to how much one can consciously attend (attention), the more Care is exhibited, having begun in-hibited then brought forth by the dynamic of the environment in which it is not a "part" but an module therein.

Adder, there is no "part" of the plant that cares, the plant in its wholeness does, and Fyxe, the self-preservation that motivates that care is as innate to us (the animal that denies its own animality) to viruses and tardigrades. "Care" is not merely deciding what is important to us, indeed much of what is called care is not. What is the difference between a parent who does not know how to express love toward her/his children, giving them money or gifts instead and the billionaire who eases his/her conscience by giving a tenth or so of a percent of her/his fortune to a charity to aid the underprivileged (usually in an identity-confirming media display) ? There is "care" there, but what is it care for ? What might be the undercurrent of Sorge ?

All things considered, you're all getting closer to understanding what Life is about without having to actually "define" it ... That, my friends, cannot be done.

"I tell you, we are here on Earth to fart around, and don't let anybody tell you different."
- Kurt Vonnegut

"The meaning of life is to be alive - it is so obvious and simple. Yet everyone rushes around in a panic - as if we need to achieve something beyond ourselves."

Occam's razor, my friends. The simplest explanation tends to be the better explanation.

Alexandre Orion wrote:
Adder, there is no "part" of the plant that cares, the plant in its wholeness does,

That question was in regards to being aware. The whole plant would not be aware its leaves are turning and indeed the leaves wouldn't be aware!? Because it might react to its own actions? Then what is the nature of that reaction.... by what mechanism are it's parts or whole aware! It depends on what is being meant by aware, hence the question. We can call it a plant and say its acting aware and I'm aware of that, saying otherwise seems to be deliberately sloppy semantics? And I'm not sure about caring either... but anthromorophising similar actions is a beneficial exercise to broaden one's perception and perspective on existence! Instinct are conscious like models deriving in the subconscious seemingly but if we're talking about life with consciousness then that is different from plants... unless their is a view or belief otherwise, hence the question. :dry:

But, Adder, I wasn't saying that the plant "thinks about" turning its leaves. But yes, there is a certain form of awareness there : the plant "knows" what it needs and how to get it just like a newborn knows how to suckle. It isn't anthropomorphising, for indeed there is awareness - an instinctual perception of the environment, even if it is pre-reflexive.

There is awareness at every level of the biosphere. Trees defend themselves and others - even of different species. They can be selfish too. They communicate with one another. Indeed, entire forests communicate with one another. And "care" does not need be a consciously thought about 'cause'. That would be anthropomorphising.

... as an afterthought :

This would be a good time, and good for this topic, to consult Thomas Nagel's 1974 article What is it Like to be a Bat ?...

It's a pretty easy article to find, but if not, contact me and I can beam it to you. I have it on a memory stick somewhere...