Who thinks this ? I don't see anyone on this thread implying that we "the most evolved" species on earth, how would one even define what is "more" evolved anyway?

sorry!!!it was mostly a general philosophical question

The real question is if life is just a bunch of atoms connected in a special way or something else. This is more of a philosophical question rather than biological.

I think "what is life" is an irrelevant question. It is, and so be it because it is. simply put.

I think a beefier quesiton can be why is life?

by that nobody can really give a qualified answer. We can either state "i don't know" or we can leave a faith in something having a sort of divine plan for all of these ocurances to give rise to this thing called life. Otherwise it simply can't be explained by our manmade minds.

For any "humanists" out there who believe life and the universe was created for man to have his way with, remember that man has no place 20 000 leagues under the sea where life continues to exsist. The mere variety of life on this planet alone is proof enough all of that is not for us to consume and utilize. Yet most of you still do rather selfishly.

modern human life is a glorious state in that we can manipulate almost anything, do anything our minds can imagine (limited to the laws of universal physics) in that can basicly manipulate anything known of in the physical universe. This ability to manipulate freely and do as our will intends is almost a gift. Seeing as it was a fluke that we were given the planet over the dinosaurs. The human is'nt a dominant species in that the reptile is a more prevalent species. however it is doubtful the reptile contemplates its' exsistence. Therefore giving rise to the purpose of a human who Does contemplate this.

Whether you believe in a God or not , something is the governing force giving way to these occurances. For it after all ultimately gave you the gift of human consciousness.

continue from previous
Of course, when we are talking about chains of chemical reactions, we do not mean it in the simplistic way, that they are in a chain, and everything is happening in an order, where the formed substance goes to the next position to react with the next substrate etc. Things in nature are much more random, and it is difficult sometimes for us to detect which is the next step.One of the major difficulties are some passive phenomena that happen, such as plasma flow, passive diffusion through membranes because of difference in concentration, or electrical gradients, excretion throught ducts, etc.The latter are phenomena that happen passively ,due to the laws of nature and are not defining life, the way the chemical reactions do. To be more symbolical, they play the role that scientists play in a chemical lab:they transfer the substances from one tube to another, arrarge the conditions, etc.But the chemical reactions are the big difference.

Of course , if these movements that we are talking about were not there, we would not be the way we are.We are the results of all these , and so it is normal to think that if something was not the way it is, WE would not be there, the way we are!So we think that they are essential for us and everything was arranged perfectly, and if something was a bit different ,we would not be there, but as i told everything depends on who is the observer.We are a changing complex, and everything that happens lead to us.We see things from the opposite side though.It is like we are in a moving ship, and so we realize things differentl from someone who is standing in the port.Most of all we dont have a good sence of our own movement.If we were not in the living system, we would not find any reasoning for all the creatures on earth.Even if we were tables for example, we would think that the most perfect creatures are the tables.All depends on what is the observer.

Life is nothing besides chemicals interacting. This is generally accepted in biology.

It is naive to assume that humans are any different. It is also incorrect to assume that there is something mysterious about the human mind, or something about it that doesn't fit in with science.

My thoughts exactly, it's only through our ability to create tools and a higher-than-average intelligence that we have been able to create civilization, technology, philosophy, and all that jazz. Any animal with the capacity to manipulate objects for specific purposes and enough curiosity could get to our level given the right circumstances.

This distinction between "form of life" and "sparkle of life" is far more significant than you allow for in the rest of your post.

In fact, what you really said is "a simple chemical reaction is life or it isn't life".

So which is it? This question is important because the rest of your post relies on it.