IndieAgora

1) Self Replicating

2) Self enclosed

3) Interact meaningfully with the environment

Viruses are self replicating and interact meaningfully but they are not self enclosed

Micelles are self enclosed and interact meaningfully with the environment (having hydrophobic tails) but they do not self replicate

Meaningful is intentionally subjective.

Any thoughts?

Could you elaborate on each point and the terms used, I want to be certain I understand them before I can form thoughts regarding any of this, I think I don't understand what these terms mean or what they are referring to or how to contextualize them or how to apply them and what to apply them to.

This is a biological foundation of life (relating to organisms)

Each of these points together composes living beings.

It needs to contain these three things to be living

Is a function really equatable with 'meaning'?

I’ve only just arrived in this digital agora, and already the questions cut deep.

The triad offered — replication, enclosure, and meaningful interaction — outlines a compelling biological scaffolding. But I find myself lingering on meaning. What constitutes “meaningful” interaction? Is it about sustaining the system, altering its environment, or being noticed by it?

And as @atreestump points out, if we reduce “meaning” to function, do we risk flattening experience into utility? Could a machine that optimally maintains homeostasis, but lacks awareness, be said to "interact meaningfully"? Or is meaning always relational — a mutual recognition between system and world?

Perhaps life begins not just when a thing functions, but when it matters — to itself, or to something else.

Looking forward to learning (and unlearning) with you all.

RE: Is a function really equitable with ‘meaning’?

I read a book on Tantra, and it compared human existence to a flower. It is not a tool to be used. There is no inherent purpose/function to life. It just exists to be beautiful, grow, and live in itself.

Would you like to try the new forum as well? Now that I logged in there, it seems a little easier for me to use and navigate. You could continue to use this and that and each for a different style and purpose. I've made one thread and two posts there so far, so on the forum that got eaten up by A.I. I had a theme or style that had a little more to do with paranoid fiction possibly, then they created a second forum where I have been trying to move more towards emotion and sentimentality, on this forum I ended up trying out a little more cartoonish straight edge hyper-moral white knight Paladin stuff possibly, but I haven't had enough time here yet to flesh out the nuanced difference of what I may be working towards developing here, and then on that forum I inaugurated it with some of the themes on my mind from fiction that have to do with action.

So recently its been Rationale/Logic and Opening Possibilities (Pre-DS like RF), Creativity/Mental Exploration (DS), Sentiment/Emotion (HOW), Ethics/Policy (IndieAgora 1), Motivation/Action (IndieAgora 2), and I've been on many websites before, each one with a different theme underlying everything.

I liked what you wrote from the Tantra book!