Some biologists and philosophers are convinced that no definition of life can be formulated. I polemicize with this skepticism. Especially, I discuss the argumentation of Carol E. Cleland and her co-workers. I demonstrate that the theory of evolution is a proper theoretical foundation for defining life. I show that downgrading the importance of the theory of evolution is not based on the traditional arguments against the scientific character of this theory (e.g. Popper’s argument). New arguments are deduced from the belief that every mature theory of life should explain all forms of life. I also consider conclusions derived from my analysis, showing that they lead to a functionalist view of life.
JavaScript jest wyłączony w Twojej przeglądarce internetowej. Włącz go, a następnie odśwież stronę, aby móc w pełni z niej korzystać.