Gilrandir vs Immune "System"

[Husar]

This all comes down to the top tenth of the top one percent of top posters wanting more posts than everyone else.
That's because post count is relative. There was a time when you were a top poster with 1000 posts but now you aren't even one if you have 10000. This creates an atmosphere of jealousy so the elites have the poorest threads closed or merged in private jail threads.
Wake up sheeple and let's Make Orgland Great Again by getting the best posters into Admin positions! No loser posters in Admin positions! There will be so much posting that you will get tired of posting! We also need a wall to keep the posters from the Total War section out of our promised Backroom! Only winner-posters know the best firewalls to keep these loser posters out because they bring kitten memes, potty mouths, they're trolls and they ruin our youths!

[Gilrandir]

Moderation is like the immune system, if it gets too bored because there are not enough nasty posts to edit and warning points to be handed out, it develops allergies and begins to attack things that aren't really problematic. The real problem is that all of you don't get angry enough to collect warning points. You only have yourselves to blame!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Immune system is a misname. The notion of system presupposes elements and relations between them. Unlike digestive system or blood circulatory system or musculoskeletal system the "immune system" doesn't have organs connected with each other to perform the protecting function. It is rather lymphatic system plus a bunch of miscellaneous organs of other systems (including the skin) that address the task of protecting the body against infections. In no way do they form a system.

[Husar]

Immune system is a misname. The notion of system presupposes elements and relations between them. Unlike digestive system or blood circulatory system or musculoskeletal system the "immune system" doesn't have organs connected with each other to perform the protecting function. It is rather lymphatic system plus a bunch of miscellaneous organs of other systems (including the skin) that address the task of protecting the body against infections. In no way do they form a system.

There is a system and also coordination going on in the immune system. If not so much between organs, there is certainly coordination between cells: http://kidshealth.org/en/parents/immune.html

Although antibodies can recognize an antigen and lock onto it, they are not capable of destroying it without help. That's the job of the T cells, which are part of the system that destroys antigens that have been tagged by antibodies or cells that have been infected or somehow changed. (Some T cells are actually called "killer cells.") T cells also are involved in helping signal other cells (like phagocytes) to do their jobs.

IIRC the problem with AIDS is that it attacks the type of cell that would alert others to destroy the invading AIDS, thus blunting the reaction of the immune system and making the body more susceptible to other attacks as well since AIDS has knocked out an important part of the defense system. This wouldn't be as problematic if the rest of the system worked without getting triggered by the cells that AIDS knocks out.
Then again my biology class on this stuff was >10 years in the past...

[Gilrandir]

There is a system and also coordination going on in the immune system. If not so much between organs, there is certainly coordination between cells: http://kidshealth.org/en/parents/immune.html

Cells are not organs. All cells are in a way connected, not so the organs. Thus, not a system.

[Husar]

Cells are not organs. All cells are in a way connected, not so the organs. Thus, not a system.

The organs don't need to be connected for it to be a system, what are you talking about?
You sound like you're saying the human body is not a system because the left foot is not directly connected to the right foot.

[Montmorency]

The immune system is a system: an organ system. It's not one organ. It's a supervenient process of the regulatory action of most, if not all organs in the body.

[Gilrandir]

The immune system is a system: an organ system. It's not one organ. It's a supervenient process of the regulatory action of most, if not all organs in the body.

To form a system organs must be connected to each other. Not so in case of immune "system": http://www.livescience.com/38028-how...fographic.html

[Montmorency]

Where do you get that notion?

[Gilrandir]

Where do you get that notion?

See the link. As I have said, it is the lymphatic system that connects SOME organs responsible for the protection of the body against infections. Other organs responsible for protection (namely skin) are not connected to spleen or thymus.

[Montmorency]

I don't think you understand. All the organs and systems of the body contribute some function to the immune response. They are all connected by being in the same body.

[Husar]

They're all connected via the nerve system in the same way left and right leg are connected via bones, so what are you talking about?

It was just a joke until you came along and made it a discussion about how you have no idea what a system is...

[Gilrandir]

I don't think you understand. All the organs and systems of the body contribute some function to the immune response. They are all connected by being in the same body.

That is why it is not a separate system. Immunity is the general ability of an organism to resist infection. This function is performed (as you correctly remarked) by sundry organs which belong to OTHER different systems. But there is no separate chain of organs responsible for protection. That is way I maintain that "immunity system" is not a system.

It was just a joke until you came along and made it a discussion about how you have no idea what a system is...

A system is elements plus structure the latter being represented by connections and relations. If some of these are missing it is not a system.

[Husar]

A system is elements plus structure the latter being represented by connections and relations. If some of these are missing it is not a system.

Not all elements have to be directly connected as you claim. The body consists of more than just organs. Is the nerve system not a system because the nerves are not directly connected? Do the chemicals that connect them not count? Or how are the planets in the solar system connected? Also not a system? I guess you need to lecture Harvard, Oxford and NASA about how they got it all wrong.

[Beskar]

Gilrandir does like to contest concepts arbitrarily in strange ways.

[Gilrandir]

Not all elements have to be directly connected as you claim. The body consists of more than just organs. Is the nerve system not a system because the nerves are not directly connected? Do the chemicals that connect them not count?

How do you mean nerves aren't connected?

Or how are the planets in the solar system connected? Also not a system?

The force that keeps them together is the Sun's gravity. This is the connection.

Gilrandir does like to contest concepts arbitrarily in strange ways.

Not concepts, but names. Misnames happen, even in science. For example, a light year is not a unit of time measurement, but of distance measurement. However, it is conventionally kept.

As for contesting things: there was a time when geocentric model of the world was a commonly recognized concept. Yet some people dared to contest it. And now another view on how the universe is built is recognized. Several times the structure of the atom was reconsidered. So science is about contesting things.

[Husar]

How do you mean nerves aren't connected?

I'm wondering why you think nerves are connected but the organs involved in the immune system are not? One connection of those organs are the T-cells that kill antigenes, another would be the blood that is used to distribute information and other things the immune system needs.
Nerves are connected in a similar way because two nerves do not communicate directly, they send chemicals to one another. Your picture doesn't show anything relevant, it's about as usless to show "connection" as the example of left and right leg being connected via bones and muscles. In the same way all our organs are connected via bones and muscles.

The force that keeps them together is the Sun's gravity. This is the connection.

Then the skin is what keeps the organs connected, or the blood, or the nerve system, the bones, the muslces, what are you still arguing about?

Not concepts, but names. Misnames happen, even in science. For example, a light year is not a unit of time measurement, but of distance measurement. However, it is conventionally kept.

And there is nothing wrong with it.

As for contesting things: there was a time when geocentric model of the world was a commonly recognized concept. Yet some people dared to contest it. And now another view on how the universe is built is recognized. Several times the structure of the atom was reconsidered. So science is about contesting things.

The problem here is that a system is a linguistic construct defined by man, not a natural ocurrence to be observed. So you either have to show how the immune system doesn't fit our definition of a system or state how your definition of a system differs, in which case it's a matter of taste and your attempt to force your definition through against a long-established consensus is just weird. Especially since your definition of a "connection" as required between the parts of a system appears incredibly arbirtrary to me.
The other option is that what you see as part of the immune system is different from what I meant. For example you mentioned the skin, which I would define as the "wider immune system" whereas I was referring to the narrower definition of immune system, i.e. the parts that actually react to intruders, that is the T-cells, which are the ones that identify and attack things and are responsible for the false alarms that cause allergies as I said.

So you were really jumping head first into a joke to throw "science" around without giving any second thought to what I was referring to or how to actually approach the subject scientifically, which would be to define what you mean with the words you use instead of wildly pitting definitions against one another as though either of them were a god-given constant.

I'm really not interested in following that any further though, it gets boring quickly...

[Montmorency]

That is why it is not a separate system. Immunity is the general ability of an organism to resist infection. This function is performed (as you correctly remarked) by sundry organs which belong to OTHER different systems. But there is no separate chain of organs responsible for protection. That is way I maintain that "immunity system" is not a system.



A system is elements plus structure the latter being represented by connections and relations. If some of these are missing it is not a system.

So, as you just stated it there is an interrelated structure, where function is mutually dependent and reactive. Fin.

[Husar]

It actually annoys me

I blame Gilrandir.

[Gilrandir]

So, as you just stated it there is an interrelated structure, where function is mutually dependent and reactive. Fin.

I didn't say structure. I said "SUNDRY organs belonging to OTHER systems".

I'm wondering why you think nerves are connected but the organs involved in the immune system are not? One connection of those organs are the T-cells that kill antigenes, another would be the blood that is used to distribute information and other things the immune system needs.

Cells can't serve an example of connection. Otherwise one might claim that rectum and skin being eventually connected by cells make up a separate system of the organism.
Blood is not and organ, and moreover it doesn't belong to immune "system". Another argument why it is not a self-contained system.

Nerves are connected in a similar way because two nerves do not communicate directly, they send chemicals to one another. Your picture doesn't show anything relevant, it's about as usless to show "connection" as the example of left and right leg being connected via bones and muscles.

All nerves stem from brain and/or spinal chord.

In the same way all our organs are connected via bones and muscles.

Heart and stomach as well?

Then the skin is what keeps the organs connected, or the blood, or the nerve system, the bones, the muslces, what are you still arguing about?

Skin is an outside shell, inside organs are not connected by skin. On blood see above. Generally, one may find a lot of connections between different organs, but all of them form chains uniting them in self-contained systems with their own primary functions. This is why heart is a part of one sytem and lungs - of another.

And there is nothing wrong with it.

Which doesn't cancel the fact that it is a misname.

The problem here is that a system is a linguistic construct defined by man, not a natural ocurrence to be observed.

So solar system is not a natural occurence? System is a word used to signify phenomena of the environment. It fits some of them, and it doesn't fit others.

So you either have to show how the immune system doesn't fit our definition of a system or state how your definition of a system differs, in which case it's a matter of taste and your attempt to force your definition through against a long-established consensus is just weird. Especially since your definition of a "connection" as required between the parts of a system appears incredibly arbirtrary to me.

Reaching a consensus doesn't mean being terminologically correct. I can give an example of Paleoasiatic languages which are conventionally slumped together into one "family" despite the fact they are not genetically related. Or there is conventionally recognized linguistic category of noun gender, but in fact it is not a category (for nouns). Well, I don't think you would want me to elaborate, but if you do, give me a sign.

So you were really jumping head first into a joke to throw "science" around without giving any second thought to what I was referring to or how to actually approach the subject scientifically, which would be to define what you mean with the words you use instead of wildly pitting definitions against one another as though either of them were a god-given constant.

If all definitions are arbitrary, what's the use of trying to persuade me mine take on the issue is wrong? I gave all the arguments I was asked and I don't see why they are worse then yours. If mine don't convince you there is no need to call my approach unscientific, wild or arbitrary.

I blame Gilrandir.

When in the thread dealing with Maidan events people started comparing tanks against each other no blames were hurled around.

[Sarmatian]

Ah, death, taxes and Gilrandir complaining about double standards.

[Gilrandir]

Ah, death, taxes and Gilrandir complaining about double standards.

So not the double standards are to blame, but the complainer. I see.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

So not the double standards are to blame, but the complainer. I see.

His snarky comment does not undercut the reality of the double standards (after all death and taxes are quite real), he's merely ascribing a constancy to your complaints.

Not strictly accurate of course, but I admit to having chuckled.

[Gilrandir]

His snarky comment does not undercut the reality of the double standards (after all death and taxes are quite real), he's merely ascribing a constancy to your complaints.

Not strictly accurate of course, but I admit to having chuckled.

In the world of constant changes where nothing is certain, there should be some things which are rock solid. I'm proud to be one of them.

[Sarmatian]

So not the double standards are to blame, but the complainer. I see.

But have you noticed that it's only like that when you are the complainer?

[Husar]

In the world of constant changes where nothing is certain, there should be some things which are rock solid. I'm proud to be one of them.

Well, while we're at it, "rock solid" is a misnomer since rocks aren't really as solid as is implied......

You and your double standards.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Insert haiku about the "cherry blossom-like" ephemerality of existence [here].

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Well, while we're at it, "rock solid" is a misnomer since rocks aren't really as solid as is implied.

If we can just shrink down all that wasted space between leptons...

[Gilrandir]

But have you noticed that it's only like that when you are the complainer?

Others have been bullied by you and don't dare even to complain.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

But have you noticed that it's only like that when you are the complainer?

Others have been bullied by you and don't dare even to complain.

Both of you, just stop it.

Either be civil to each other or put each other on ignore.

[Sarmatian]

Both of you, just stop it.

Either be civil to each other or put each other on ignore.

Way to spoil the fun. Just for this, I'm withdrawing my support. Good luck becoming a moderator without my Grey Eminence level abilities.

Also, I don't dislike Gilrandir. He is intelligent and he can be a lot of fun when he is not being purposefully obtuse.

Others have been bullied by you and don't dare even to complain.

That's not true. Just Greyblades. And he complains. And lately I've mostly ignored him.