Are Viruses Considered Living Organisms?

  • Thread starter Thread starter FZ+
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The forum discussion centers on the classification of viruses as living organisms. Participants agree that defining "alive" is crucial, with key characteristics including metabolism, reproduction, and the ability to evolve. Viruses possess hereditary material and can reproduce only within a host cell, lacking independent metabolic processes. The consensus leans towards the conclusion that viruses do not meet the criteria for being classified as alive, as they cannot multiply or evolve without a living system.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of biological definitions of life, including metabolism and reproduction.
  • Familiarity with the structure and function of viruses, including their genetic material.
  • Knowledge of evolutionary biology concepts, particularly natural selection.
  • Awareness of the debate surrounding the classification of life forms.
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the definitions of life in biological terms, focusing on metabolism, reproduction, and evolution.
  • Study the structure and function of viruses, including their replication process within host cells.
  • Explore evolutionary biology literature, particularly works by John Maynard Smith and Eors Szathmary.
  • Investigate the implications of classifying viruses as living or non-living entities in scientific discourse.
USEFUL FOR

Biologists, microbiologists, students of life sciences, and anyone interested in the philosophical and scientific debates surrounding the nature of life and viruses.

Are viruses alive?


  • Total voters
    16
  • #31
Rader
Everthing exchanges information and energy and under casually efficacious circumstances, complexity increases. Changes in the physical state of viruses and there higher hierarchy, meet these conditions.
Don't also chemical (chaotic) clocks a la Prigogine's nonequilibrium thermodynamics?
 
Biology news on Phys.org
  • #32
"From the eye of the I"

Loren Booda said:
Rader Don't also chemical (chaotic) clocks a la Prigogine's nonequilibrium thermodynamics?

You know Loren, you have a keen eye, or you are a chat bot library. Although his work lead here, I think we know that the reason lies deeper.
http://www.asa3.org/ASA/PSCF/1978/JASA9-78Albert.html
 
Last edited:
  • #33
LW Sleeth said:
You caught me being lazy there :rolleyes:. Okay, what if my bicycle wheels were connected to a belt that ran an assembly line which robotically produced other bicycles.

Interesting. But the robots had to 'construct' not 'produce' another of its counter-part, which doesn't even include one of its own kind. A bicycle would have to reproduce its self, not a robot doing it for another mechanical object. That bicycle which was constructed doesn't even embody the same features as its creator, most likely. Even so, the robot that manufactures the bicycles needs an operator, and that operator [if isn't human] has another robot to control "order" in manufacturing. So by default a human had to create the robot that constructs the bicycles from assembly lines. :biggrin:

Life in this process hasn't been produced, only constructed from still inanimate objects, constructing a more mechanical-moving machine.
 
Last edited:
  • #34
Jeebus:
What is the difference between "to produce" and "to construct"?
 
  • #35
Imparcticle said:
Jeebus:
What is the difference between "to produce" and "to construct"?

Heh, I knew I was going to have this question. I shouldn't have used 'construct', but it by no means effects the analogy.

This is how I see it. Production of living organisms mentioned above reproduces other organisms to produce a new organism. (Virus) --> To construct, in my term above is already made up of mechanical mechanisms of inanimate objects to begin with, including scrap metal, nuts, bolts, gears, etc, that is what I was referring to as constructing a larger, more intelligent robot constructing a lesser robot of less intelligence, ergo the bicycle is formed.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • Poll Poll
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
28K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K