Talk:Life

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Former good article nomineeLife was a good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
October 17, 2007Peer reviewNot reviewed
June 13, 2012Peer reviewReviewed
December 30, 2015Good article nomineeNot listed
April 4, 2016Good article nomineeNot listed
May 6, 2016Peer reviewReviewed
August 7, 2022Peer reviewReviewed
Current status: Former good article nominee

Definitions[edit]

The definition section of this article is too long and has quite an overwhelming categorization of topics. I would suggest that the definition section is to be made smaller, with the current and more information to be placed into a new article. PrathuCoder (talk) 11:46, 16 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Biological Processes[edit]

This article lacks what most readers would expect, that is, information about the life processes such as metabolism, reproduction, homeostasis, etc. PrathuCoder (talk) 13:37, 21 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This text could be pasted on the main side in the Definitions chapter.[edit]

Scientific-Philosophical definition of life[edit]

This definition is based on ethical values and is scientific. The basis of life is the observance of ethical principles. Of particular importance is the partisan principle of love. Working together for mutual benefit is called symbiosis in biology. Symbioses are researched in science.

Definition:
"In the words of philosophy: ´Basis of life is the principle of love. Life exists where this principle rules (symbiosis).´
In the words of biology: ´Basis and indicator of life is the symbiosis.´ This is a partnership in which each partner is active for the benefit of the other partner." [1]

Unlike many definitions, there is a subtle transition between alive and non-living depending on the number of symbioses. “Living beings are: elementary systems - atoms - molecules - cells - organs - creatures - cultures. In simple unicellular organisms there are very large numbers of symbiotic processes, in chemical reactions few.“[1] The transition between alive and non-living doesn't fit biology and the unity of nature.

Unlike all other definitions, life is given a value here. Life must be preserved. This definition provides a basis for legislation and medical decisions. (E.g. embryonic development, organ transplants, animal rights.)

References[edit]

  1. ^ a b Fröhlich, Klaus (2022). "Scientific-Philosophical Definition of Life". Science & Philosophy - Journal of Epistemology, Science and Philosophy. 10 (2): 188–205. doi:10.23756/sp.v10i2.801.

Discussion[edit]

- This is a principle-based definition. Principle-based discussions are better than ad hoc definitions.

- In this definition, a property must be checked: symbiosis? Enumerations of many properties are of little use.

Symbioses are often mentioned in the literature as the basis of life.

Wikiwau (talk) 10:16, 5 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not done - adding this material would be WP:UNDUE. There is certainly a philosophical element to the definition of life, but we also need to consider the prominence of the viewpoint, and whether it is considered important among reliable sources. The viewpoint you presented is a minor one (possible fringe) compared to, for example Materialism, which is a major viewpoint in philosophical definitions of life. The void century (talk) 00:45, 6 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Materialism is the only consideration in the other definitions of life. These definitions are technical but not philosophical. The scientific-philosophical definition of life is considered important for lawyers and doctors. This definition is not materialistic but monistic. (Unity of spirit and matter in the sense of information theory.) -- Wikiwau (talk) 10:21, 6 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
"Some scientists believe that life emerged as a symbiosis (mutualism) between independently developed mechanisms. ... (Schrödinger 1944, Eigen et. al. 1981)" (Poppa, Radu, 2004, Between Necessity and Probability: Searching for the Definition and Origin of Life: 141; Springer Verlag)-- Wikiwau (talk) 14:23, 7 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Go Symbiosis are accepted in science and are compatible with materialism. The ethical interpretation is important as a legal basis. Maybe that can be expressed differently with love. All great advances in evolution are based on symbioses. Chemical evolution: symbioses from cycles to hypercycles. Eukaryotes: cells within cells. (Endosymbiosis). Also in multicellular organisms and bee colonies. The supplement should be worded differently and placed on the main page. —— eve5427 80.13.23.28 (talk) 09:43, 5 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The basis of life is the observance of ethical principles cannot be found by Google (exact search). So, no, Wikipedia won't tell that to its readers.
And Basis of life is the principle of love belongs to the academic field of literary criticism, not biology. tgeorgescu (talk) 10:02, 5 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

First paragraph[edit]

The first paragraph may be a little long and complex for readers. It could be better to move the biological criteria (growth, stimuli, metabolism, metabolism etc) to a separate paragraph. Would like to get y'all's opinions on this :) - azpineapple | T/C 07:59, 13 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]