What is the difference between animate and inanimate energy

It is scientifically observed that energy can exist in a variety of forms, some more recognizable as being capable of performing work than others. The major known forms of energy are:. Scientists note that energy usually flows from higher levels to lower levels.

The availability of energy is found in many SOURCES of energy—for example, oxen, horses, coal, peat, geothermal, nuclear, electric, petroleum, gas, hydrogen, tidal, horses, wind, water, wage earners, etc. The energy indwelling in these sources is potential energy, and which, via human genius, can be converted or transformed into kinetic energy that permits work energy to manifest and be utilized.

Now, to point up a necessary observation. As defined and described above, in the scientific sense ENERGY is fundamentally associated only with inanimate phenomena although as sources of kinetic energy some animate resources can be transformed into work. Direct observation can easily establish that animate life forms are marked by potential work energy, often operating with vigor or effect, and sometimes can forcefully exert power.

Referring to the list given above regarding scientifically recognized forms of energy, it can be assumed that animate life forms can be affected by any one or all of the forms of energy given.

It is true that the listed forms of energy-cum-sources can, so to speak, animate WORK. But what about the nature of the energies that animate the life-forms that utilize the work?

The essential difficulty here is that in the sense of the scientific, the modern West has only one major definition for energy—the capacity for doing work. Additionally, that definition can be extended a little in that the capacity for doing work is seen as power forcefully exerted. However, in the scientific sense these definitions for the most part apply to objective mechanistic factors external to the human.

So difficulties arise that are ambiguous and not a little confusing. As but one example of such a confusion, the nature of sexual energies cannot convincingly be described in mechanistic terms as the capacity for doing work, because even the most intellectually challenged would giggle at this. In the context of sexual behavior, then, the ambiguous difficulties landed in the lap of the various modernist psychologies i. This resulted in the concept, still prevalent, that human sexuality was solely a matter of behavior, not energetics.

As it then transpired in psychological and psychiatric terms, it proved exceedingly difficult to arrive at specific definitions that could be relevant to all kinds of BEHAVIOR. With regard to the human being, the term usually refers to the action of the individual as a unit. As will be reviewed in the next chapter, this definition suggested that the human being was composed of parts—which parts taken together composed the individual human unit.

The dominant modern concept held that this unit was majorly composed of two basic parts—body and mind. The concept was entirely convenient—in that the human could be segregated into two different major parts: the body, which could be studied in the hard biological sciences; and the mind, which could be studied in the soft psychological sciences. An example of something inanimate is a rock.

Pooja Hundeborn Professional. Is a plant an inanimate object? Whose to Refer to Inanimate Objects. Are flowers inanimate objects? Flowers open, root systems spread, etc, etc. According to the dictionary, it seems to be more of an inanimateobject. Ramzi Parrizas Explainer. Can we use they for objects?

Yes " they " is correct when referring to inanimate objects. From Merriam-Webster: those ones — used asthird person pronoun serving as the plural of he, she, or it Yoursecond sentence is incorrect because you are referring to multipleapples.

Manex Manzanares Explainer. How do you photograph inanimate objects? Here's how you do it:. Turn off your camera's flash. Grab your tripod, and screw your camera onto it. Take the picture, being sure to not let the tripod move.

Godofredo Blanes Explainer. What part of speech is inanimate? She claims she has no skill at painting people or animalsand prefers to paint inanimate objects. Terezia Hopers Pundit. Is water an inanimate?

Then you think "does it matter? If one argues yes, then are proteins alive? If yes, what then? Or no? And so on, where does it stop? It's still organic material. But then, is organic material the sole domain of life? No, organic material can be created from inorganic material, as shown by the Miller-Urey experiments. Life and non-life are fictions, only brought about because of the idea of a soul or vitalism, and there is no distinction between life and non-life.

That's what I'd argue anyway. But the word has more than one definition used in many sources including scientific , including: " Matter is a general term for the substance of which all physical objects are made.

There is a difference at this scope. Animate: to have life. Inanimate is the lack thereof. It's like the difference between a rock and a plant. The idea of animate or inanimate matter is a false presumption. Matter is matter, and you are presuming that animate or inanimate applies.

I cannot give an exhaustive explanation now, but this false dichotomy has some pretty antiquated roots; wich is probably where your vitalism approach stems.

Vitalism and its polar mechanism are not the only players in town.