[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Question for the biologists

Posted: 10/10/2005 1:14:32 PM EDT

Ini the abortion threads, I toss out the biological definition of life, and for some odd reason, I got labelled an emotional hypocrite who was just wrong. (Anybody who cares for a repeat: save it. I deal in verifiable scientific fact.) It spurred a real life discussion, and the train of thought below. Partake...

Premise: The biological definition of life

In biology, a lifeform has traditionally been considered to be a member of a population whose members can exhibit all the following phenomena at least once during their existence:

Growth
Metabolism, consuming, transforming and storing energy/mass; growing by absorbing and reorganizing mass; excreting waste
Motion, either moving itself, or having internal motion
Reproduction, the ability to create entities that are similar to, yet separate from, itself
Response to stimuli - the ability to measure properties of its surrounding environment, and act upon certain conditions.

Premise:

There are people who cannot reproduce.

Apparently ridiculous conclusion: Sterile people aren't alive.

What is missing here?

Posted: 10/10/2005 1:17:40 PM EDT

[#1]

An important part of your definition was "...member of a population whose members..." Not all members of a population are reproductive.

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Question for the biologists

Warning

Confirm Action

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Question for the biologists

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Question for the biologists