Fwurg

[Mazeron of the Divine Fiefdom of Highmons]

"But we do know that plants have a soul." Mazeron stated, reaching into his possessions to get out a large book and placing it down on the table before him with reverence. He leaned forward, placing a small pair of spectacles on his nose and taking a bronze pointing device out, using it to point at what he was reading.

It all seemed quite surreal, an anachronism of paper bound in leather that unfolded before them. When a single data pad could contain an entire library worth of information, in three dimensional high resolution display, the thought of someone bringing a book with them was almost alien.

He looked up once he had found the passage he was looking for "Please allow me to enlighten you."

He began to read:

" '... for we have imbued with souls, not just the animals but also the plants and the trees, that they may live and grow."

Halting, he carefully closed the book and put his pointer and glasses away, as if what he had just read was the final answer to the question and no debate on the matter was possible.

[Dewa Nishkor Sardan]

"I agree with Senator Salixa. It's opinion on the matter of droids is clear and illustrates the fallacy of applying these metrics to individuals.

I find the notion of adding different levels of being alive objectionable. A species either is, or isn't alive. If we add different levels of being alive, we will end up in a political quagmire of galactic proportions. Those that rate the most alive will demand that the less alive will offer themselves up to serve as military fodder, while those that are 'less alive' will not acknowledge the definitions that have been set out.

The island example given by Fecta Legin seems to indicate that an ecological homeostatis was not reached. However, I am forced to question the premise of the example, as it seems to me that if the larger species did not have difficulty finding every single last individual of the medium population -- something that strikes me as odd. If you have actual facts on this situation, please do share them with us. If not, I advice you to read up on the predator-prey relationship."

The veolian took a deep breath, and looked toward Mazeron.

"Grand Theologist Mazeron, I must ask you: does your holy book define the term 'animal', 'plant' and 'tree'? If so, please inform us of their meaning encoded within the book, as it appears to me that such information is of the utmost importance in this discussion.

However, if these terms are not clearly defined in a determinable way, this begs the question of how you know that what you see as a tree is actually a tree as intended by the gods. And if that can be questioned, we can ask the same question of any form of entity -- even droids!"

[Fecta Legin]

"I have three things to add:
First, about the animals on the island: Yes we have facts of what happened on the island. A combination of fossil analysis, our own observations, numbers and age of different bones and analysis of the vegetation on the island over time. I must say I am not familiar with the actual research, but the entire rapport is public on the holonet. As a detail, at a certain point the medium sized species could not survive any more because there were to few of them left. Even if the large animals would have stopped hunting them. I will forward the research to you so you can check it later if you like." A few tabs on his datapad later and every participant did received a link to the research data. And if the participant read the rapport it appeared Fecta Legin did spoke the truth according to the data, and the research was very thorough. Although there was probably no time to read all of it now.

"For Mazeron, it is clear that you see animals plants and trees also alive, but it is not clear what you see as animals plants and trees. There is a whole grey world of bacteria, fumes, viruses and other micro organics where it is not clear in what part of the animal/ plant/ neither-of-those they exist. And what about some reported phenomena in space which do appear to be sentient, but not to be god-like or alive in the way we know them? I will forward the phenomena I am talking about." And with another set of tabs on the pad did Legin sent a very large list of reported anomalies in space. From sentient gas clouds to true force beings beyond the 'ghost' status. It was a very large variety of weird encounters.

"I know that only a few of these reports are actually confirmed in their existence, but I wonder how the Divine Fiefdom of Highmons see this, within the aspect of life.

As of the droids, I have a hypothetical situation which keep me wondering: Imagine a world based on silicon and iron. Or similar substances we use for our droids, I am not that educated within the world of chemistry. In this world evolves a machine like race, made of iron and silicon. If we looked at them, we would see only normal droids, but the difference is that in their situation nobody else build them, they did it all by themselves. Are they alive or not? According to the proposed set of rules they are not. As they do not grow.

Of course I understand that it would be highly improbable that out of nowhere droids evolve into the way as we know them, but given the right circumstances, it is not that hard to imagine that a life form evolve based on elements we would identify as chips."

[Mazeron of the Divine Fiefdom of Highmons]

"Fair questions by my esteemed colleagues, one that has been the topic of careful research in fact.

The language in which the Holy Books were originally written confer a lot of subtleties that are lost in translation, which is why, though we use translated versions, the final say of the intended meaning of the Holy Books requires reference to the original versions. I can however assure you that the words 'animal' and 'droid' were not accidentally exchanged.

The matter of various micro organisms and whether or not they have souls is a difficult one, which is part of why we are here to debate the issue.

I find the matter of "evolved droids" to be highly speculative. It seems to me that no such creature could ever exist, though if they did, this would likely mean a very careful study of the Holy Books would need to be made to determine their position."

[Fecta Legin]

Legin thought a moment of the implications of using a book in such a way. He is a great supporter of having clear definitions, but having the definitions unable to change when they appear wrong was something he didn't know yet how to deal with properly. Although the holy books of the Highmons didn't appear to be essentially wrong yet, it was no guarantee at all it will always provide the correct answers given you accept 'soul' as 'alive'. Legin decided to not go further into the possible complications of the book, as this will not serve the purpose of this meeting.

"Fine," he spoke eventually, "the one thing what bothers me, is when we talk about life, then life will eventually die. That is why I oppose the proposition in the first place. However, on one hand it is logical to discus when someone... something, is dead. On the other hand, this is a separate issue, and not the reason why we are here.

Using the proposed set of rules about life, I propose the following: To be alive, a group must
- Eat
- Grow
- respond to stimuli
- reproduce
- adapt to their environment
- maintain a homeostasis.

When an individual does nothing of all these requirements any more, it is dead.

If you do not agree, I propose to let de part of when something is dead to rest for now.

This means that cyborgs are alive according to these rules, as the original group they are born from are alive, but droids are not alive as discussed. However, this will have some implications with the Limëan Transcendent. If their digital form is the main species, they do not live. If we take their form in which they are born, they are alive and have simply changed, just like cyborgs.

[Dewa Nishkor Sardan]

"Fecta Legin", the veolian philosopher started, "I agree that death is a concept best reserved for another discussion. Because death is a state associated with an individual, while we are trying to determine the conditions for the being alive of a group."

"I would like to stress that these conditions can only be applied to a group, and should not be used to determine the state of an individual. Furthermore, I would like to add the condition that no technological aid is required to reproduce. If members of the group are not able to reproduce, in their natural environment and in their natural form, without external aid of a non-biological nature, I would not consider these beings capable of reproduction, and therefore not alive."

[Fecta Legin]

"Given your background, Dewa Nishkor Sardan, I do understand where your believe come from, however, I see no reason why a species must purely and only biologically reproduce. When for example a species relies on cloning for offspring, they wouldn't be alive any-more according to you. Even if they were able natural reproduce a long time ago. But it is our believe that such a species is very much alive, as they do reproduce.

I agree, they are highly likely doomed to extinct, and are in all likelihood only avoiding the inevitable, but this does not mean that they are not alive now.

Although, when such a species exist, you can say their natural environment has changed in such a way that the cloning has became part of their 'natural' environment and therefore they can reproduce. In that case they use non-biological means, but are still in their natural environment. Thus the clue is how to define the natural environment? I think the natural environment is the state of the world in which they live. This can be many things, from a computer server to a jungle, and anything in between.

Bottom line for reproduction is: I agree on the natural environment part, but not the pure biological part. And the natural environment can change to a more mechanical setting."

[Dewa Nishkor Sardan]

"I strongly disagree with your assumption that cloning can only be done in a non-biological way. Surely you are aware of apomixis? As a form of biological cloning occurring in a large variety of plant life, it has been observed on multiple worlds."

"I am willing to go as far as to widen the condition to 'their native environment and in their native form'.

However, I can not justify dropping the requirement on not requiring non-biological aid for reproduction. Under those definition a group of droids that is capable of partaking of replenishable energy sources and operating a droid factory would be considered alive!"

[Fecta Legin]

"I never assumed that cloning can only be done with technology, my example was to show how we, the university society of the Consensus, see a group alive while they need technology to multiply.

I have no troubles that at least biological aid is required for reproduction.

As a footnote," Legin added, "the droids you spoke of will still not live as they do not grow."

[Dewa Nishkor Sardan]

"Very well. As it appears no one else has an opinion on this either way, I am willing to reluctantly widen my definition:

To be alive, a group must:
- Eat
- Grow
- respond to stimuli
- reproduce, which involves at least a biological process
- adapt to their environment
- maintain a homeostasis

There is, however, one other point that should be clarified before we continue. You said 'This means that cyborgs are alive according to these rules, as the original group they are born from are alive'. While I agree that certain classes of cyborg are very much alive, I do not agree with your assertion that the property of being alive is transitive over time.

In this case, I would say that any group that has undergone significant change should be re-evaluated. And while interesting, a discussion on when a group has significantly changed is beyond the scope of the current discussion. For the sake of brevity, I am willing to leave this to common sense.

If there are no further comments, or points of contention, I propose to move on to the next point."

[Danar Sylvia]

When Dewa Nishkor Sardan and Fecta Legin seemed to agree, Sylvia stood up to take the floor.

"It looks like the issue is settled. Therefore I propose to continue. If everybody agrees, the following proposition will be added to determine when something is alive:

To be alive, a group must:
- Eat
- Grow
- respond to stimuli
- reproduce, which involves at least a biological process
- adapt to their environment
- maintain a homeostasis

If someone disagrees, this is your last chance to say so."

With her last words Sylvia looked mostly at Nousythes Peoisus

[Mazeron of the Divine Fiefdom of Highmons]

"I believe these are required, but not sufficient to prove life. However, let us not dwell on this any longer and let us continue with the next topic."

[Senator Salixa of the Silver Forests of Remunzia]

"Indeed. It is time to move to the third theorem about evolution."

[Danar Sylvia]

" It is decided then, to be alive, a group must:
- Eat
- Grow
- respond to stimuli
- reproduce, which involves at least a biological process
- adapt to their environment
- maintain a homeostasis "

Again was the topic closed without a cermonial hammer of sorts.

" The third theorem followed out of how life is emerged. Although we are not aware of the religious view of every one of you. It is our believe we are emerged out of cells and are evolved into the creatures we are now. The proposition followed from this will be: 'Life must evolve. Not evolving creatures can be considered not alive.' "

She took again her seat to give the participants space to argue.

[Senator Salixa of the Silver Forests of Remunzia]

"What about devolution? Many species create their own evolutionary destruction by razing their environment and destroying their own ecosystem, just as machines do. Where does devolution fall into this statement? Is it a form of negative evolution or is it a separate category altogether?" the Remunzian senator queried somewhat uncertain.

[Dewa Nishkor Sardan]

Sardna silently listened to the question posed senator Salixa.

"I think we should first determine what is meant with the word 'evolution'. As I see it, evolution is the gradual change of one species into the next to adapt to the environment, usually over the course of several generations."

"The ecological destruction you sketch does not strike me as being related to evolution, unless you intend to indicate that the species itself changed the environment, and thereby created the necessity to evolve to survive in this new environment. I see devolution as an evolution towards an older genotype, a step back in the chain of genotypes associated with a species'. What you sketch here does not seem to require this, but instead forces the species to adapt to their new, though self-instigated, situation..."

[Fecta Legin]

"I agree with Dewa Nishkor Sardan, evolution is a gradual change over time, with the purpose to adapt to the environment as good as possible. The situation described by Senator Salixa causes therefore still evolution in my opinion.

Going a step back in genotypes also does not necessarily has to be devolution, when this leads to a better adaptation to the environment.

In my opinion, evolution is the gradual change to be better adapted to the environment. Devolution is the gradual change to get less adapted to the environment."

[Senator Salixa of the Silver Forests of Remunzia]

"But that is outrageous? Surely you cannot believe that a species which destroys its own environment is evolving?

Everywhere in nature we find balanced systems, evolved to be in perfect harmony. When a species destroys that harmony, surely they are not evolving but devolving, even if their genotype changes?

Are you advocating the destruction of ecological environments as the betterment of a species!?"

The woman sounded somewhat upset, not understanding how anyone could hold such views.

[Dewa Nishkor Sardan]

"You misunderstand me.

I do not attach a positive or negative value to the concept of 'evolution' in this case. I just wish to clarify what I define the verb 'to evolve' to entail within this context.

I agree that a species that wilfully destroys its own balance with nature is not bettering itself. But even so, they will have to adapt to this new situation, and if this is done over time, with a shift in genetics, I will call it evolution."

[Mazeron of the Divine Fiefdom of Highmons]

"I too question whether the destruction of life can ever be considered a positive thing, but it is a fact that destruction is a part of life, like death. One cannot exist without the other. Predators and prey for example... though I am sure Senator Salixa would argue that predators do not kill all their prey, lest they destroy the entire ecosystem and as a result themselves..."

[Dewa Nishkor Sardan]

"I did not imply, or infer, that the destruction of life is a positive thing.

I put the meaning of the word 'evolve' up for discussion, and I gave my view of how we should interpret the word within the context of this discussion, and in specific in the posed statement that 'Life must evolve. Not evolving creatures can be considered not alive.'

I do not speak your respective native tongues, so I can not express myself with more clarity, for this I apologise. But I stand by my statement, that any gradual change of genotype over time, and to adapt to the environment, should be deemed evolution. Even if such a process was instigated by the species itself."

[Senator Salixa of the Silver Forests of Remunzia]

"Would you agree than that adapting to the environment is evolution, while destruction of the environment is devolution?" she inquired, trying not to sound too emotional, though clearly this was an emotionally charged issue.

[Dewa Nishkor Sardan]

"I can agree with you on the meaning of evolution. However, a species behaving disharmoniously and destructively with respect to its environment is not necessarily devolving.

I see devolution as gradual change during which the species becomes less adapted to its environment. This might, or might not have to do with the species wantonly destroying their natural balance."

[Mazeron of the Divine Fiefdom of Highmons]

"I think we can get bogged down in a debate about evolution and devolution, but I think we should leave this to another debate. Shall we leave the point of evolution and continue to the final two theorems regarding life having intuition and a connection to the force? This to me is the most interesting one as it concerns the soul as well."

[Danar Sylvia]

Sylvia stood up upon the proposal of Mazeron.

"We have not yet decided what part evolution has in life. Do you wish to state that evolution has no part in life? Then we can continue. Or do you wish to debate further about the role of evolution?"