Yes, but that does not change the fact that the term is ambiguous in nature and reflects misunderstanding. To say something can only have one function to fit the term cannot be disproved without the term failing to have any meaning at all. Hence it's absolute ambiguity.



Additionally, if an organism that is generally considered a parasite consumes its host it is no longer fitting the definition. I think the real problem is that the organisms that can have parasitic characteristics function to the overall health of an ecosystem and not an individual. So they take over an individual when something else is wrong to benefit the overall health of the community with which they live. Isn't that a benefit? In my mind that is again outside of the definition, and thus the word perpetuates misunderstanding of the function of an organism, so no individual organism can be a "parasite" though it could behave as one.
-----
"Relax, Don't Worry, Have a Homebrew!" Charlie Papazian

[ Show Entire Thread ]