Post

If you assert bodies are machines, there's nothing further to say. Machines have certain properties (such as having been engineered) that to people who disagree with you and with (especially naive or strong) mechanical materialism it is obvious that bodies do not have.

It's here were the argument ends: we disagree on basic principles. The opening quote by @abeba.blacksky.app underlines how we see things versus your assertion that "bodies are machines": We can only presume to build machines like us once we see ourselves as machines first. — Birhane (2022, p. 13)

The assertion that only what is mechanical materialism (ideas like "bodies are machines") is science is dying or slowly and being replaced by other ways of seeing, understanding, and modelling biological organisms — both within the relevant sciences, e.g.

as well as within the relevant philosophical literatures, e.g.

my most relevant work on this is this (where we quote @abeba.blacksky.app up top as I mentioned) as it tackles the repercussion of what can follow from assuming or asserting bodies are machines (= engineered objects)