Biochemistry: Science & Philosophy of Life

[Veritas Aequitas]

In biochemistry it is essential that one must master [..I have done that] all the Metabolic Pathways within various cells in the body.
I was in awe when I wonder how could one of our cell could contain a main pathways of the above.

Life began with one-celled animals which the above full metabolic pathways are evolved within each individual cell. Humans are merely a complex set of individual cells.
How can one claim to understand 'what is life' if one is ignorant of the below that is going on within each cell of one's body.

Note the full metabolic pathways below.

[Veritas Aequitas]

Note the detailed higher resolution maps,

http://biochemical-pathways.com/#/map/1

http://www.iubmb-nicholson.org/pdf/Meta ... 17_04_.pdf

[Iwannaplato]

In biochemistry it is essential that one must master [..I have done that] all the Metabolic Pathways within various cells in the body.

What does it mean that you have mastered all the metabolic pathways within various cells in the body?

I was in awe when I wonder how could one of our cell could contain a main pathways of the above.

Hard to understand this sentence. Does 'above' actually mean below, since the image of the pathways is below the text? I can't view the image well enough to be able to see the pathways. I see the more detailed versions in the next post, but the first one is not just human cells. I am not sure what 'a main pathways', that is plural, means. You are in awe that it has all those pathways or a main one. Why are you in awe? The charts you can actually see include processes we do not have in our cells. Also one chart is from 2003 and the other from 2014, so it is hard for me to imagine they contain all intracellular pathways. 8 years is a long time in biochemistry and cellular metabolism let alone 19.

Life began with one-celled animals which the above full metabolic pathways are evolved within each individual cell. Humans are merely a complex set of individual cells.
How can one claim to understand 'what is life' if one is ignorant of the below that is going on within each cell of one's body.

So, you are posting in General Philosophy Forum and mention philosophy of life. Could you connect your master of these pathways to a philosophical issue? Or could you connect the pathways to a philosophical issue.

Life did not begin with one celled animals.

But, in general, how do you relate these pathways to philosophy. Or are you just telling people that you have mastered the pathways and so you have the right to speak about the philosophy of life and if they haven't, they don't.

[FlashDangerpants]

But, in general, how do you relate these pathways to philosophy. Or are you just telling people that you have mastered the pathways and so you have the right to speak about the philosophy of life and if they haven't, they don't.

He just likes to claim that he's an expert in everything from "problem solving" to Islam. He usually likes to substantiate these claims with highly plausible details about how many years he spent doing nothing but study X for 12 hours per day. He's spent 3 years each on a shit ton of things that way.

In this instance he spent 8 to 12 hours per day, every day, for 4 weeks to complete this course at eDX
https://www.edx.org/course/principles-of-biochemistry
Estimated 15 weeks
4–6 hours per week

You may or may not choose to apply the implied discount there to his claim that he spent 3 years 8 hours/day every day, studying Kant to become the only person in the world who understands Kant.
And the 3 years he spent learning Arabic 24X7 to put the entire Quran into Excel and sort the paragraphs into 40,000 categories of evilness.

[Iwannaplato]

He just likes to claim that he's an expert in everything from "problem solving" to Islam.

Sure. I'll probably just keep asking him, when he starts threads like this, to actually connect diagrams or links to philosophy.

In another thread with a couple of links and a diagram of brain edges, he did not end up connecting his op with any philosophical issue, let alone the philosophy of science.

But maybe he will. It looks like him just proclaiming that he is the expert and others who disagree with him, lacking his mastery of cellular metabolic pathways, have no ground to speak about the philosophy of life. He doesn't justify this claim - that he is a master or that that only those who have mastered cellular pathways have the skill to talk about the philosophy of life. So, a kind of dominance move.

If you're a neuroscientist but only have mastered (whatever that means) neuronal and glial cellular pathways, must you remain silent since you haven't mastered them all (and seemingly plant and fungal pathways also, given the diagrams)?

Are there no issues or questions related to the philosophy of life one can weigh in on if one has not mastered Cellular Pathways. He seems to find Kant
useful and uses appeals to Kant's authority, though Kant would have had little knowledge of current sensory biology, physics, current science and psychology of perception and so on.

But who knows. He has managed to relate research to philosophical issues. Perhaps with a little push he will here.

I am curious about what he means by mastery relating to metabolic pathways. He can name them all. He can relate them to extracellular physiology or medical treatments? What would mastery mean in this case? That raises some semi-philosophical issues.

I think one of the best ways to interact with people you disagree with is to take them seriously. OK, you have mastered cellular metabolic pathways. What does that mean in practice? How has his mastery of that lead to his philosophical positions and be specific? Etc.

If he actually answers, then well, cool, we have an actual philosophical discussion.
If he doesn't or can't, well, then that's hanging in the air.

[Impenitent]

is the soul still in the pineal gland?

-Imp

[Iwannaplato]

is the soul still in the pineal gland?

-Imp

Just the cooler parts.