Definitions of Life are not Only Unnecessary, but they can do Harm to Understanding

Foundations of Science 16 (4):323-325 (2011)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

In my response to the paper by Jagers op Akkerhuis, I object against giving definitions of life, since they bias anything that follows. As we don’t know how life originated, authors characterise life using criteria derived from present-day properties, thus emphasising widely different ones, which gives bias to their further analysis. This makes their results dependent on their initial suppositions, which introduces circularity in their reasoning

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,386

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Life without definitions.Carol E. Cleland - 2012 - Synthese 185 (1):125-144.
On what it is to fly can tell us something about what it is to live.Christophe Malaterre - 2010 - Origins of Life and Evolution of Biospheres 40 (2):169-177.
Life as understanding.Günter Figal - 2004 - Research in Phenomenology 34 (1):20-30.
Is it wrong to impose the Harms of human life? A reply to Benatar.David DeGrazia - 2010 - Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 31 (4):317-331.
Life-extension and the malthusian objection.John K. Davis - 2005 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 30 (1):27 – 44.
What is life?: how chemistry becomes biology.Addy Pross - 2012 - Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Analytics

Added to PP
2010-12-28

Downloads
55 (#284,906)

6 months
1 (#1,516,429)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?