[musingsole]

I'm not making the analogy; I'm pointing to how GP's analogy fails to demonstrate their point.

But yeah, the analogy isn't perfect. And the academic nature of the metaphor's subject was obviously going to invite some rube to point out how it's not 100% spot on and how that's well worth talking about.

You're just arguing my greater point anyway: Your chosen level of perspective with these metaphors (and real issues) will invert the design philosophy. At one level, everything is different and using different means for the same goal, at another level, everything is the same and using the same means for different goals. If it's not organs, then its cells, then its "extracellular material and are dead cells different from live cells!?", then its atoms and then quarks.

But please, go ahead and educate me on how atoms aren't all the same and how that too is a critical point to be made in this conversation.

[Layke1123]

Rube? Educate you? You do realize why people are off put by you? I'm happy to engage because I was raised like this. Most people downvote and move on. That is one issue here you need to resolve.

The second, which speaks directly to the concepts talked about, is the idea that "everything in the body is a cell" is a poor analogy to use to try to articulate your idea either supporting or not supporting the original posts concept, and you got salty when called out on it rather than have people simply agree with your "amazing insight".

PS I love this game.

[musingsole]

Your imagined version of me and this conversation is very colorful, but its luster seems to be cooking some neurons.

[Layke1123]

That's OK. Take a break. Relax. When you can think clearly, come back and we can finish our discussion of why "everything is a cell in the human body" is still, in fact, a bad analogy.