3 ms·

There's two crucial questions left unexplained by your comment: what do you mean by 'living', and why does a legal entity fit that notion of living?

• nyc111 9y ago
  >what do you mean by 'living', and why does a legal entity fit that notion of living? Do I need to define "living"? I may just list some living organisms everyone agrees that they are living organisms such as animals, plants, and bacteria. Their common element to me is not that they have a visible body but their ability to make intelligent decisions to further their existence. So to me, to have a biological body is not a requirement to be alive. The only requirement is the ability to make intelligent decisions to perpetuate its existence as an organism. What I am saying is that life start as the result of an agreement between entities. Human body is the result of an agreement between the egg and the sperm. A legal entity starts as a legal entity. Why do you think corporations cannot be considered live organisms?
  • jamesrcole 9y ago
    > Do I need to define "living"?... > Their common element to me is... Stating what you mean when you're talk of 'living', as you're doing here, is giving your definition of it. > Why do you think corporations cannot be considered live organisms? Did I say anything to that effect? Not in the comment you're replying to. In another comment on this post I said that a notion of 'living' is a mental construct, not an objective phenomenon outside of ourselves.