120 replies to this topic

[Lord Pickleton]

It has not been done before and if it has enlighten me.

I like your avatar, and if they did do you think they will keep it secret or tell the public immediately.

[HaoSenVastForest]

I like your avatar, and if they did do you think they will keep it secret or tell the public immediately.

lol! Well thanks! But even if they did create it in labs then why dont we know how our own brains work?

[BazzDropperz]

-

Edited by BazzDropperz, 13 July 2014 - 09:10 PM.

[HaoSenVastForest]

I'm not sure, but Mii might have been talking about iChells, inorganic cells made of metals. They aren't able to reproduce yet, but they can do some of the stuff that normal, organic cells can do. Look up iChells on google.

Okay, I looked em up! Well they aren't living organisms because of two things. A. In order to become a living thing you must be able to reproduce. If it cant do that it isnt an organism. B. they have no way to eliminate waste. If you can fix that then they are living organisms. It is kind of like saying Fire is an organism because it eats wood and makes smoke waste. Or it reproduces by growing and splitting. It is still an inanimate object.

Edited by nl010203, 21 April 2012 - 07:57 AM.

[Xiombarg]

Ok this goes against everything in human history. For math can be applied to everything and can prove anything. It is very interesting. For example mass x acceleration=force. Or e=mc2. Math proves pretty much everythIng. And science is law pretty much. It is the one absolute thing that cant change. The law of gravity for example is science and can be applied to everything.

No, you are taking this the wrong way. This is a philosophical argument.
Acceleration, gravity, science, none of those are possible to prove as we need human experience to observe them. Math is used in science to prove natural phenomena, but you must assume that what you experience is actually what is happening. It could all just be an illusion of the mind, as human sense are flawed (our observations are flawed).
Plus, it is impossible to ever account for causality and causation, as it is possible for anything to happen after a "cause".
The only thing that can ever be proven is "I think therefore I am."
Math is what your mind makes up to be true according to certain principles like 2+2=4. But even then, it brings in numbers impossible to use our world like repeating decimals and negative measurements.

[Mii]

I actually meant that they are able to take cells from someone, and create a twin of it from him. Has been testing this in labs with some sorts of animals already.

[HaoSenVastForest]

I actually meant that they are able to take cells from someone, and create a twin of it from him. Has been testing this in labs with some sorts of animals already.

This is called cloning and it isn't creating life it is manipulating it.

No, you are taking this the wrong way. This is a philosophical argument.
Acceleration, gravity, science, none of those are possible to prove as we need human experience to observe them. Math is used in science to prove natural phenomena, but you must assume that what you experience is actually what is happening. It could all just be an illusion of the mind, as human sense are flawed (our observations are flawed).
Plus, it is impossible to ever account for causality and causation, as it is possible for anything to happen after a "cause".
The only thing that can ever be proven is "I think therefore I am."
Math is what your mind makes up to be true according to certain principles like 2+2=4. But even then, it brings in numbers impossible to use our world like repeating decimals and negative measurements.

But then you have to take in account that you could be an illusion and even if you think you may still just be an illusion. Also thinking proves nothing. It only makes you self aware of your own existence.

[Xiombarg]

But then you have to take in account that you could be an illusion and even if you think you may still just be an illusion. Also thinking proves nothing. It only makes you self aware of your own existence.

That's part of the point. But it is a very impractical way of living, even David Hume admitted that. I personally don't subscribe to this way of living or thinking, as I am more concerned about how to live a good life.
That was more of an argument to show that math isn't as perfect as it could be. Logic, however, is a type of math, and is used to answer all meaningful questions. It is limited as well, and can only explain so much, and can be far too grey for some people.

[Mii]

This is called cloning and it isn't creating life it is manipulating it.

If you change the DNA of the clone you can create new life. Both stuff have been done before, just not together yet.

[HaoSenVastForest]

If you change the DNA of the clone you can create new life. Both stuff have been done before, just not together yet.

You are still only manipulating it and we are only able to change the genes.

[Mii]

If you change the genes you change the DNA.

[HaoSenVastForest]

If you change the genes you change the DNA.

Genes=Sticks of infomation
Sticks of information=Deoxyribonucleicacid
Deoxyribonucleicacid=DNA

Genes and DNA are pretty much the same it is just that Genes are made of DNA. So still my argument stands. No one has created life (Maybe with the exception of a god if he exists).

[Mii]

They probably even changed the genes of the genes of the food you'll eat tomorrow. Example: Almost perfectly round apples don't exist naturally.

[BazzDropperz]

-

Edited by BazzDropperz, 14 July 2014 - 01:34 AM.

[Mii]

Religion is old. It was invented because people didn't know better. What is thunder? Who created life? Who placed water on the globe. Originally, religion was invented to answer those questions, but soon all religious leaders just kept it going on to have power. (Almost every religion started a war at least 1 time because their leader said they had to. )

Right now we do know better, so religion is a bad excuse for un-knowledge.

[HaoSenVastForest]

Well the thing is that we dont even know what life is exactly so replicating it would be impossible is really what I am trying to say. Also I agree that religion is now no longer needed but I think we still need to respect those who believe in it. Just saying before this gets out of hand . And also the scientific definition of life is an object that follows the eight universal laws to a living organism (Only applies to life in this universe.) it must require water, nutrients, made of cells, react to the environment, eliminate waste, grow and mature, and reproduce. But we still dont know what life is.

[Mii]

We do, you just said. And this topic isn't about life but intelligence.

[HaoSenVastForest]

Yeah but in order to obtain intelligence you need to have life.

[Mii]

Life and intelligence are two independent things. A human is a complex robot.

[Xiombarg]

Life and intelligence are two independent things. A human is a complex robot.

It depends on how intelligence is interpreted, which requires a subjective mind.