3 ms·

I don't agree with the idea of describing some stuff as an 'immune system'. Blood system, digestive system etc - yes, I can see those, or test for their physic

I don't agree with the idea of describing some stuff as an 'immune system'. Blood system, digestive system etc - yes, I can see those, or test for their physical existence. But the 'immune system' is just a concept, not actually a system of the same type as the others. It's a abuse of the term 'system' as it is typically used to describe a coherent and related set of anatomical 'bits'.

HPsquared 3y ago
Isn't that the distinction of anatomy vs physiology? I.e. form vs function.
- verisimi 3y ago
  The digestive system has form (guts etc) and function (extracting energy from food). I can point at it. This is not the case with the immune system, because this 'system' is just an idea. It cannot be pointed at or isolated, like other bodily systems. And yet it is treated as if it is real, but where is it? You might as well use 'the body' as a term, rather than 'immune system' - the term is so broad, it is meaningless to me.
  - HPsquared 3y ago
    There are different parts (often not physically connected, but connected via chemical signalling) which work together to perform various functions. If one of the parts doesn't work, the function is degraded. It's a distributed system.
pazimzadeh 3y ago
What do you think the lymphatic system does. What's funny is that I think you're right but in the wrong direction. All of these individual systems are made up differences because they are inter-dependent.
- verisimi 3y ago
  If you think about a house, you can say you have a plumbing system, or an electric system. You can also say you have a 'comfort system' or a 'support system'. Its same use of 'system' but its a totally made up idea, nowhere to be seen. So, in the body, you can see a digestive system, lymph system, etc. But there is no 'immune system' - its just an idea. Its a label without something to be assigned to.
  - pazimzadeh 3y ago
    Well, we live in the microbes' world. So I would argue that your entire body is your immune system, including the part of your brain which doesn't like the smell of poop. On the adaptive immune system, this is a fun read: The acquired immune system: a vantage from beneath https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15539148/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15539148/
    - verisimi 3y ago
      But why describe 'the body' as an immune system, when the description refers to nothing in particular (unlike the lymph or digestive systems)? The body has many elements that are nothing to do with health and fighting disease - not everything is 'immune system'. When you say "we live in a microbes world" this indicates one way to look at things. You can also approach things from different perspectives - eg engineering, chemistry, physics, politics, philosophy, etc - there are many approaches to any part of reality. While a different perspective might give an interesting angle, you do see that the underlying reality of 'the body' has not changed? And that it is a misuse of language to say and treat something is a physical thing, when it cannot be pointed at? Making a term ('the immune system') broad and refusing to use an existing term ('the body') is, to me, a sort of trick to conjure something into an imaginary existence. To me, you are not saying something meaningful if you say 'the body' is 'the immune system'. Whereas you are saying something meaningful when you point at guts etc, and say 'this is the digestive system'.

HPsquared 3y ago

Isn't that the distinction of anatomy vs physiology? I.e. form vs function.

verisimi 3y ago
The digestive system has form (guts etc) and function (extracting energy from food). I can point at it. This is not the case with the immune system, because this 'system' is just an idea. It cannot be pointed at or isolated, like other bodily systems. And yet it is treated as if it is real, but where is it? You might as well use 'the body' as a term, rather than 'immune system' - the term is so broad, it is meaningless to me.
- HPsquared 3y ago
  There are different parts (often not physically connected, but connected via chemical signalling) which work together to perform various functions. If one of the parts doesn't work, the function is degraded. It's a distributed system.

pazimzadeh 3y ago

What do you think the lymphatic system does. What's funny is that I think you're right but in the wrong direction. All of these individual systems are made up differences because they are inter-dependent.

verisimi 3y ago
If you think about a house, you can say you have a plumbing system, or an electric system. You can also say you have a 'comfort system' or a 'support system'. Its same use of 'system' but its a totally made up idea, nowhere to be seen. So, in the body, you can see a digestive system, lymph system, etc. But there is no 'immune system' - its just an idea. Its a label without something to be assigned to.
- pazimzadeh 3y ago
  Well, we live in the microbes' world. So I would argue that your entire body is your immune system, including the part of your brain which doesn't like the smell of poop. On the adaptive immune system, this is a fun read: The acquired immune system: a vantage from beneath https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15539148/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15539148/
  - verisimi 3y ago
    But why describe 'the body' as an immune system, when the description refers to nothing in particular (unlike the lymph or digestive systems)? The body has many elements that are nothing to do with health and fighting disease - not everything is 'immune system'. When you say "we live in a microbes world" this indicates one way to look at things. You can also approach things from different perspectives - eg engineering, chemistry, physics, politics, philosophy, etc - there are many approaches to any part of reality. While a different perspective might give an interesting angle, you do see that the underlying reality of 'the body' has not changed? And that it is a misuse of language to say and treat something is a physical thing, when it cannot be pointed at? Making a term ('the immune system') broad and refusing to use an existing term ('the body') is, to me, a sort of trick to conjure something into an imaginary existence. To me, you are not saying something meaningful if you say 'the body' is 'the immune system'. Whereas you are saying something meaningful when you point at guts etc, and say 'this is the digestive system'.