To your reply which you’ve removed:

I don’t see how this couldn’t continue to be a promising discussion. I didn’t mention your parents to offend you, but to establish the fact that our maintenance of our own vitality is a tradition which begins with our community’s actions and is then taken on by ourselves.

I understand your post and that you do not think a rock is a living being. My point is that you, with enough inaction, would revert to the same inorganic compounds from which the rock is formed. In the same sense, parts of the rock could slowly become parts of amino acids, given that the reverse is happening somewhere in greater quantity.

A rock is not living yet or anymore. Nothing belongs to the category of living or non-living, and objects will become one or the other without their own volition. After this point of genesis, some level of self-awareness instilled by external objects will give the object the tools to continue this process. Alternatively, we all have the choice to go back home, to the rocks.

I am very sorry if I have offended you by making my argument in a disconnected fashion and mentioning unnecessary things, I just think it’s an interesting conversation and don’t believe in the distinction you have noted between our non-living components and our subjective selves.