Conceded that the word “life” as a concept is an abstraction and a
plethora of meanings can be read into it. I should clarify that I read
into the original question life with a specific meaning, namely as a
physically sensible property of “something that lives”, which I sense
the original poster may also have meant. The characteristics of this
property are similar to the point of speaking of “life” in a universal
sense.

I suspect that the historical philosophical treatment of the question
of (the property of) life is not simple and far from satisfying,
putting this question on par with “freedom” – that is – outside the
empirical realm. We can experience things having life (or lack of) and
think of a life giving source, but never prove it (due to our rational
and sensible constitution). We can experience and define life, but we
can never identify that point where a chemical (or otherwise)
construction “decides” to self preserve – thus obtaining a basic will
of it’s own. We can experience and categorize the effects of this
will, but we can never “know” what this “will” really is in itself and
how it came into existence. We can ask questions relating to the
natural cause of life in the first place, but never expect to receive
a satisfying answer.

I agree that "absolute" is not the right word to use for the idea that
the way we think about living things is either on or off. Once off it
can never turn on again - I suppose due to the principles of evolution
of life (or rather organisms).

Sam


On Dec 27, 12:13 pm, einseele <einse...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Life always struck me as having an absolute property. A thing is
> > either alive of not alive – there is no gradual progression in-
> > between.
>
> What is striking you here above is nothing else that a simple property
> of any discreet chain/group, where there is nothing in between its
> elements (actually the instance in between is not "nothing", but
> "null")
> For instance integers, ASCII, or the apples in that basket, if you
> simplify enough, you get just one concept which is a discreet group.
>
> So is not worth to say it so complicated as "the absolute property of
> life", which besides is not as simple as you stated, why do you think
> a "thing is either alive or not alive" ?, and why do you believe that
> the answer has anything to do with Life.
>
> When you say Life is a concept, and not a matter of words or
> abstractions, what does that suppose to mean, will you describe a
> concept which is not an abstraction.
>
>
>
>
>
> > My personal inclination is towards the possibility of an unknowable
> > origin and sustaining force of life itself. This force which keeps the
> > whole from disintegrating into its constituent parts. It is
> > “unknowable” in the sense that our reasoning faculties are part and
> > parcel of “our being alive” and we can not objectively stand back to
> > sufficiently examine the subject at hand.
>
> > I would thus discard the phrases “meaningless” and “in language only”
> > for the concept of “life” used by some responders while retaining the
> > phrase “eluding definition” when such a definition is sought for the
> > concept of “life” in general. We can at most define “life” for very
> > specific applications as some responders have emphasized.
>
> > On Dec 24, 12:11 pm, Awori <awori.ach...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > In heated discourse about the meaning of nature---I was one time asked
> > > to define life. This is what I said: "Life is a moment in space and
> > > time". To my disappointment--I got no reaction from the group. Is it
> > > because I was absurdly wrong? I have continued to use this response as
> > > my standard explanation of what life is. Has anyone in out there given
> > > this age old subject a better look?
>
> > > AA- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Epistemology" group.
To post to this group, send email to epistemol...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
epistemology+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology?hl=en.

Reply via email to