Dueñas, Quennie Lynn L.

01/30/18
BS Biochemistry 201185007

Biochem 121
Dr. Carillo

The Great Debate – What is Life?

Reflection Paper

“What is life?” or “How do you define life?”─This simple and straightforward question commenced
the debate held in the ASU Gammage Auditorium in Tempe, Arizona. This event was headed by Lawrence
Krauss and hosted by Roger Bingham. Distinguished and exemplary individuals, both academically and
scientifically, were part of the event as panelists. They include Chris McKay, Paul Davies, Richard Dawkins, J.
Craig Venter, Lee Hartwell. Contrary to how simple the question is, their responses were very complicated
and they vary based on their beliefs and researches. Chris McKay contested the main question of the debate
since he believes that instead of defining life, they ought to look for and study more than one sample of life
in places such as on other planets particularly Mars. Only then can life be properly defined. It is his belief
that it is unprecedented to finding life the definition of what life is according to his statement “You do not
need to define it (life) in order to find it”. Moreover, he supports what Lee Hartwell’s statement that “...you
can recognize it by the molecules it leaves behind…” Lawrence Krauss responded that “the ‘definition of life’
is a moving target” which means that it changes or shifts direction, an example provided by Lawrence is the
artificial life of computers in the future, at least 10 to 20 years later. Paul Davies gave his notion on the idea
of finding another type of life on Earth. He believes that since there is some type of traffic between Earth and
Mars, it is likely that they can find a different form of life (if there is) found on Mars, it will be found on Earth
as well. Instead of the more expensive exploration of Mars, he opts to search practically on Earth. As for the
definition of life, he believes what’s most important is information processing and capabilities in order to
expand the knowledge pertaining to the true definition of life, its processes and products. Lawrence adds
that it will be more amazing if they (McKay and his NASA team) find life on Mars not related to life on Earth.
He also objects the idea of Paul Davies the possibility of finding another type of life on Earth because he
argues first, that mechanisms of life weren’t made randomly but with a purpose hence that’s why life is what
currently is. Second, it can be explained by Darwin’s theory of evolution, ‘survival of the fittest’, that’s why
present life exists because it eliminated lesser successful forms of life.

“Where did life begin on Earth?” Rather than directed panspermia, Chris McKay believes in the idea
of regular panspermia that “...life is ejected by natural processes and spread…” because in the early ages
life already emerged as complete and complex entities. In the synthetic department, J. Craig Venter affirms
that life can be created in the laboratory however; it would be very difficult especially in creating complex
molecules like proteins. Nevertheless, he confirms that it is possible since he claims that they can make
cellular systems from non – cellular systems and synthetic materials. In addition, he believes that there is no
such thing as ‘tree of life’ while jesting and replacing it as ‘bush of life’. He said that “...the tree of life is an
artifact of some early scientific studies that aren’t really holding up…” Richard Dawkins is completely
intrigued by this belief because it doesn’t support the implication that living beings are linked or related to
one another (hence, the ‘tree’) due to their similar genetic codes. Chris McKay and Paul Davies agree with
the latter and believe that there is only one type of life on Earth ‘that we know about’ and if they discover
another type, the better. Chris McKay believes that Mars will be a biological world in the future if not with
Martian genome then with shared Earth genome.

The debate has so much more to offer in terms of information, views, and insights. We are all
entitled to our opinion and as seen in that meeting the panelists shared their own opinions about life, its
meaning and origin. Tackling about the meaning of life is a very difficult approach and the event just shows
that life hasn’t fully been understood and elucidated. However, the panelists’ views about life were very
informative and enlightening. It made life more interesting.