Re:The meaning of life is to populate the universe
by sz on Saturday August 21, 2010 @05:47AM
(#1622531)
I'm sorry but without concrete definitions this entire discussion is stupid. (Retroactively defining words to make your position tautological is not valuable either.)
The entire article consists of a remark that life is a self-replicating chemical reaction.
A more interesting question to debate might be whether this replicating property is an acceptable definition for life, (i.e. can there exist systems that aren't replicating but can be considered life, and how might these arise independently of replicating life?), or what happens when you apply various definitions of life to other systems than the physical universe.
The entire article consists of a remark that life is a self-replicating chemical reaction.
A more interesting question to debate might be whether this replicating property is an acceptable definition for life, (i.e. can there exist systems that aren't replicating but can be considered life, and how might these arise independently of replicating life?), or what happens when you apply various definitions of life to other systems than the physical universe.