This principle is entitled “organic matter” and it states that the material of the body of a “living thing” is organized matter. First is not any matter living or not with a C-H-O bond considered organic matter ? Second, is not all matter that expresses intelligence, innate or universal, organized matter?
I think definitions have changed since BJ’s time. Wiki breaks Organic into 7 categories, two of which seem appropriate. Generally, Organic may refer to: Of or relating to an organism, a living entity, Of or relating to an organ. & Chemically, Organic matter, matter that has come from a once-living organism, is capable of decay or the product of decay, or is composed of organic compound.
So, 1. is there any organic matter that is not”living” or a product of the living? 2. Could we not say that there are differing levels of organization. Atomic, molecular would cover Universal matter/everything, which is constantly breaking down. Cellular, tissue, organ, and organism are Innate/living Matter. organized in more complex relationships as well as atomic and molecular.
For those who say there is only one Intelligence, I don’t know how or IF they differentiate the two.
Joe, I know we have discussed this idea before, levels of organization, and if I remember right you disagreed. How else would you explain the difference if you could not use the terms organic and inorganic.
Even though in chemistry energy/matter with C-H-O bond is considered organic matter, “only “living things” adapt to certain physical laws. “Non living things” do not adapt to any physical laws. For example, the energy/matter of a polar bear in the arctic does not freeze at 40 degrees below zero even though it’s energy/matter is mostly fluids. It adapts to the cold temperature. It defies physical laws through adaptation. The energy/matter of a polar is maintained in ACTIVE organization by the instructive information of the innate intelligence of the polar bear’s body. Yet as you break down the living energy/matter of the polar bear, it has the same chemicals as non-living energy/matter. The distinction lies in the ACTIVE organization of the energy/matter of “living things” in which its atoms and molecules are ACTIVELY organized in such a way that it can adapt, whereas “non-living” things do not adapt and simply break down over time.
… therefore principle #19 state that the material of the body of a “LIVING THING” is organic matter.
What’s he difference between organic matter and organized matter?
Organic energy/matter is “living” as opposed to inorganic energy/matter which is “non-living”. The material of “living thing” is organized matter which is ACTIVELY organized energy/matter giving rise to adaptation. The material of a “non-living” thing is “simply” organized energy/matter… it does not adapt… it breaks down. All energy/matter is organized (pri.1). It’s the innate intelligence of “living” (organic) energy /matter that differentiates the level of organization into ACTIVE organization (pri.20 and 21).
Does the matter of a polar bear really defy physical (universal) laws or is it because its matter is subject to a law (the law of life) that superseded the universal law. If you shoot and kill the polar bear, it will no longer express innate intelligence and the carcass will shortly freeze. Apart from a supernatural act, you cannot defy universal/physical/natural forces. (Prin. No.11)
If material of “living things” is organized by ACTIVE organization, the corollary would be that the material of “non-living things” is organized by INACTIVE organization.
Alternatively, if we use “non-living things” are organized by SIMPLE organized, then “living things” are organized by COMPLEX organization.
Sorry but interchanging the terms simply and Active gets confusing for me. It could just be me but can we agree on these terms?
Don,
I understand what you are saying. The concept of active organization is already part of principle 21 and it’s fine as it is. Perhaps, it would be better to say that “non-living” are organized for existence only and do not adapt. What do you think?
Dr. Lessard,
So, “non-living things” are organized for ONLY existence not adaptation.
and
“living things” are organized for existence and for adaptation.
I can live with that! 🙂
Possibly it could be thought of as Living things are under Active Organization meaning maintained by reoganization which is ongoing or adaptive, Non-Living things exhibit Passive Organization which is maintained until acted upon by destructive Universal Forces and are unadaptable.
Joseph, Of course, that’s why I said that it is the innate intelligence of the body of that polar bear that maintains its energy/matter in active organization. It’s for the FACT of the law of life that the “living” energy/matter of a polar bear surpecedes’ as you say, some physical laws.
… By adapting to the artic cold for example.