six viscera

[AntonioLao]

six viscera

Not in any order of importance these are the heart, the liver, the spleen, the lungs, the kidneys, and the brain. They are the interior organs in the great cavities of the human body. Instinctively, the adjective visceral is a word relating to inward feelings rather than conscious reasoning. Without conscious reasoning certain parts of the human brain remain inactive or underdeveloped and consequently prolong inactivity allows the neurons to atrophy and eventually die. Equivalently, the brain death human being can live on in a vegetable state of existence. The same person can be incapable of normal intellectual activity and lives a monotonous life, unresponsive to any internal or external stimulus. The same person could feel no pain or pleasure although emotionally speaking all the five senses is actively receiving each respectively specified stimulus. At worst, this person becomes a zombie.


The function of the liver provides the secretion of bile and various metabolic processes. Bile as a bitter alkaline yellowish or greenish liquid helps in the absorption and digestion of body fats. Fat, a mixture of lipids, chiefly triglycerides, solid at normal body temperatures occurs widely both in plants and animals as a means of storing food energy, having twice the caloric value of carbohydrates. The spleen, a highly vascular, glandular, ductless organ, situated at the cardiac end of the stomach serves chiefly in the formation of mature lymphocytes and in the destruction of worn-out red blood cells as well as a reservoir for blood. It seats the spirit and courage or of such emotion as mirth, ill humor, and melancholy. The sole purpose of the lungs provides the infusion and absorption of air and its oxygen with the blood. The kidneys provide the elimination of nitrogenous wastes from the blood and excrete urine. The heart transports blue blood to be oxygenated into the lungs and pumps back oxygenated red blood back throughout the body. The life and death question is can a person or any living thing lives on with just half the number of viscera?

[labelwench]

The life and death question is can a person or any living thing lives on with just half the number of viscera?
Originally posted by AntonioLao

People may be born missing a kidney (as one of my brothers), or with an extra ovary (as one of my friends), yet the majority of us are born with the usual configuration.

To lose any part of one's internal function after birth, may be a considerably greater risk than having been born in such state, is mt thought. The body is an incredible mechanism and capable of much adaption.

To my way of thinking, the body is more of a 'life-support system' for the brain, chief function of the flesh vehicle being to enable mobility and safeguard the brain.

The body must also attend to all of the 'house-keeping' in providing energy for the brain, which uses a considerable amount of energy.

(Latest weight loss tip: Use your brain!)

Doctors agree that it is possible to live a long and healthy life with only one kidney, but warn there are potentially life-threatening risks associated with such surgery. Statistics show that one on three donors contract fatal infections or die from blood clots or bleeding.

http://www.themoneystop.co.uk/102009...pay-bills.html

I doubt it would be optimal, or even possible, for a human to survive unaided, with only half of their innards functioning, yet I would not be surprised if some other life-forms demonstrate an ability to clone replacement parts.

Perhaps you could elaborate further on the direction you are wanting to take this question?

Welcome back.

[AntonioLao]

the body is more of a 'life-support system' for the brain

Thanks. Taken at the top, it can be a very interesting analogy for the whole universe as the life-supporting system of absolute consciousness.

[labelwench]

Thanks. Taken at the top, it can be a very interesting analogy for the whole universe as the life-supporting system of absolute consciousness.

Ah, yes.

The 'universe.'

The sum of all parts, which is ever the subject of contemplation by those individual parts which we term as 'consciousness.'

That which lies within the whole is ever frustrated in it's attempt to view the whole, as it is impossible to stand back far enough to to take a picture of 'infinite'.

The logic does not deter us from the attempt, however.....

[AntonioLao]

The philosophy of holism suggests that the whole has a greater comprehension than the mere sum of its parts. This seems to indicate that our consciousness is simply a tiny part of a much greater reality which I called the absolute consciousness. It is usually said that two heads working together is better than one but can we really apply this idea to an infinite number of heads? Can it be applied to optimistic and pessimistic heads working together?

[labelwench]

The philosophy of holism suggests that the whole has a greater comprehension than the mere sum of its parts. This seems to indicate that our consciousness is simply a tiny part of a much greater reality which I called the absolute consciousness. It is usually said that two heads working together is better than one but can we really apply this idea to an infinite number of heads? Can it be applied to optimistic and pessimistic heads working together?

Optimism and pessimism are two sides of the same coin, and both are absolutely required for balance, IMO. Balance is a dynamic state, not a static one, to my way of thinking. A middle ground that wavers between the two extremes in an uneasy truce, a fragile equilibrium.

Positive energy is by far the more enjoyable to work with, and yet nature employs both forms. She builds elaborate and intricate structures, both of living and inanimate design, and then may elect to wipe the slate clean by means of extreme weather or geological turmoil, leaving devastation in her wake.

Galaxies collide, new solar systems form.

Why would human consciousness follow any other model?

Within each single consciousness ideas collide and collude to come forth as new concepts, new directions for the journey.

[AntonioLao]

Within each single consciousness ideas collide and collude to come forth as new concepts, new directions for the journey.

Technically, I would call this a property of directional invariance. Two exactly equal but opposite directions give nothing. The analogy is someone standing at the intersection of a forked road deciding which path to take. If there are infinitely many paths to choose from the best action is no action by standing still, and remain motionless.

[labelwench]

Technically, I would call this a property of directional invariance. Two exactly equal but opposite directions give nothing. The analogy is someone standing at the intersection of a forked road deciding which path to take. If there are infinitely many paths to choose from the best action is no action by standing still, and remain motionless.

Directional invariance.

That rather sounds like perpetual motion or log rolling. One is in constant motion, even if they are not moving perceptually in space.

Yes. One may elect to stand still and take no choice, yet seldom for long.

As all about us is in motion, we shall eventually find ourselves in movement, whether we choose such or not.

We may take a pause, yet while we have life, the dance requires our participation, even if minimally, or so it seems to me.

[AntonioLao]

subconsciously, i might be restating what my grandfather told me about buddhists reaching the transcendental state of nirvana.