"Anthony Cerrato"  wrote in message
news:ceoabh$20nb$1{at}darwin.ediacara.org...
> Absolutely! The problem though is there is just no
> appropriate
> _general_ word I can find to replace "life" for something
> which acts like life but does not replicate...or even, just
> reproduce in any way. Perhaps, "metabolic system/entity",
> but that doesn't quite do it for me...perhaps just
> "operating system?" :) It seems though that there is no
> recourse but to carefully separate the concept of "life"
> from that of "living organism," the latter being something
> that may grow and metabolize in the usual sense, but not
> necessarily replicate in the usual sense (i.e., "divide.")
> We might say then:
>
> Stardate 2.1 10^4: Capt. Kirk landed on planet X and found
> the first Slimelord--the only known living organism where a
> single individual entity covered the entire planet. It's
> prodigeous growth allowed it to grow to enormass mass and
> survive virtually forever as parts of its body die off (this
> remarkable metabolism and resultant growth rate allows it to
> totally dominate all the other life on the planet which does
> reproduce sexually.) Kirk was fortunate to be able to escape
> before he and his ship was absorbed by the Slimelord as
> food.                                    ...tonyC

It seems that your slime beast is "autopoietic".  In fact, this
word was invented with specifically this issue in mind.  It is
an attempt to characterize "life" as something different than
reproduction or replication.
---
þ RIMEGate(tm)/RGXPost V1.14 at BBSWORLD * Info{at}bbsworld.com

---
 * RIMEGate(tm)V10.2áÿ* RelayNet(tm) NNTP Gateway * MoonDog BBS
 * RgateImp.MoonDog.BBS at 8/4/04 9:34:46 PM