Death/Aging

unicorn · Post by **unicorn** » Thu Oct 06, 2005 11:33 pm

How do we scientifically explain the problem of aging/death without the sin explanation? Science still has no true answer for their causes--free radicals, dna breakdown, failure of cells to regenerate nothing but theories.

Nyril · Post by **Nyril** » Fri Oct 07, 2005 12:15 am

Science still has no true answer for their causes--free radicals, dna breakdown, failure of cells to regenerate nothing but theories.

Actually it very much has to do with oxidation. I forget the precise mechanism that it worked by (and I could look it up if I were so inclined) but it might be faster just to ask if you recall that anti-oxidants are widely considered to reduce aging.

Secondly, and far more importantly I think we need to sidestep what science has to say about this and go back to your premise.

How do we scientifically explain the problem of aging/death without the sin explanation?

This isn't a logically valid question. If you feel this isn't the case, I would like to know how we scientifically explain the problem of aging/death without the various Greek creation myths? You could also ask the same question of every other creation myth on this planet.

I think we'd make more progress if you would refine your question to focus on either science's explanation or how sin explains it.

unicorn · Post by **unicorn** » Fri Oct 07, 2005 1:04 am

Not really, that is a theory. Anti-oxidants cannot stop aging, probably because oxidation isn't responsible for it.

This isn't a logically valid question.

Sure it is. If science can't explain it, what have we left but the bible?

If you feel this isn't the case...how we scientifically explain the problem...without the various Greek creation myths?

I don't think myth can logically explain anything. You do? The bible isn't mythology if that's your next statement.

I think we'd make more progress if you would refine your question to focus on either science's explanation...

Science doesn't have an explanation...only theories.

...or how sin explains it.

I think most people here know how sin explains it.

The Happy Humanist · Post by **The Happy Humanist** » Fri Oct 07, 2005 1:43 am

I think most people here know how sin explains it.

Do mushrooms sin?

Do mushrooms die?

Defense rests, your honor.

Nyril · Post by **Nyril** » Fri Oct 07, 2005 2:00 am

Sure it is. If science can't explain it, what have we left but the bible?

We have further exploration of the subject matter. We have other holy books as well.

I don't think myth can logically explain anything. You do? The bible isn't mythology if that's your next statement.

What do you call the Koran or the Torah? What do you call the Greek gods? People presently worship the first two, and at one point in time it the last one was as readily accepted. The only difference I see here is time.

Science doesn't have an explanation...only theories.

Science is free to change as new data becomes available. Also, you're incorrect, there are also physical laws as well that apply 100% of the time within certain predefined systems.

I think most people here know how sin explains it.

I don't really understand it at all. Why punish billions of people with death for the actions of two? Secondly, why that particular punishment? Thirdly, and most importantly, very few people agree with you in relative terms that these people existed.

McCulloch · Post by **McCulloch** » Fri Oct 07, 2005 9:43 am

unicorn wrote:How do we scientifically explain the problem of aging/death without the sin explanation? Science still has no true answer for their causes -- free radicals, dna breakdown, failure of cells to regenerate nothing but theories.

When looking for causes one has to look at both the proximate and the ultimate cause. In the case of death, the proximate cause may be heart attack, accident, homicide, disease etc. But eventually, if one thing does not get you, something else will. So we look for the ultimate cause. Why can't we live indefinitely? Why is it that so many of our biological systems simultaneously decline in old age? I believe that there is an evolutionary advantage for a species to have a limited lifespan. Evolution itself can only occur over many generations. Keeping any system going (and our bodies are simply biological systems) indefinitely takes more and more resources as the length of time progresses. That is why you don't see too many 63 Chevys on the road. It becomes an evolutionary cost | benefit analysis. After a certain period of time, the additional energy and resources required to extend the lifespan of the species is greater than the benefit accrued to the species as a whole.
Some references:

unicorn · Post by **unicorn** » Fri Oct 07, 2005 8:00 pm

Nyril:

What do you call the Koran/Torah?

I don't call the Koran anything. Do I think it's true? No. I do hold greater respect for the Torah.

What do you call the Greek gods?

I call them myth. What do you call them?

The only difference I see here is time.

Maybe you aren't looking hard enough.

There are also physical laws as well that apply 100% of the time within certain predefined systems.

Umm, the only thing physical laws have determined is that biological bodies (namely the human body) has the unlimited ability to regenerate. However, all biological beings deteriorate. Whe have theories for why, but no answers still.

I say we have an anwer! God's word is our answer!

unicorn · Post by **unicorn** » Fri Oct 07, 2005 8:02 pm

McCulloch:

Cool points, but my question was how can science justify death/aging--death by degeneration. None of your points can solve the question of why we age/die.

Your references say it all in one word--Theory. No real answers. Mystery. Unexplainable.

juliod · Post by **juliod** » Fri Oct 07, 2005 10:10 pm

None of your points can solve the question of why we age/die.

First, the Happy Humanist provided the correct and conclusive answer. You advance the "sin explanation" for death. The presumes you feel that mushrooms had a "fall from grace" just as Adam, and that that explains why mushrooms age and die.

Secondly, the evolutionary answer is the correct one. Organisms age and die because it is an evolutionary advantage.

It may come as a suprise to you that not all organisms age and die. So, which organisms age and which don't? Overall, the division is between those that reproduce sexually, and those that reproduce clonally.

Many microorganisms reproduce clonally, and are also essentially immortal, unless killed, starved, etc. Since the progeny of such an organism is identical to the parent (indeed, in species that divide by fission, it is hard to determine which is which) there is no benefit to dying.

But for sexual organisms, the goal is to tranfer the genes to the new generation, not to extend the life of the individual. We can see many advantages to sexual reproduction. But they come with the so-called problem of programmed death.

Philosophically, of course this creates a great contrast with biblical myth. In the bible, death is a "fall". In biology, death is an "advance", or at least part of one.

DanZ

Nyril · Post by **Nyril** » Fri Oct 07, 2005 10:11 pm

Umm, the only thing physical laws have determined is that biological bodies (namely the human body) has the unlimited ability to regenerate. However, all biological beings deteriorate. Whe have theories for why, but no answers still.

I was thinking more along the lines of the Ideal Gas Law. In that for all gases which are ideal (and there are 5 conditions for this) Pressure times Volume is equal to the number of moles times the temperature times the ideal gas constant. PV = nRT.

As for biological bodies having unlimited ability to regenerate, perhaps you've never lost a limb?

Debating Christianity and Religion

Death/Aging

Death/Aging

Re: Death/Aging