It makes sense to me that any definition of life
will exclude things have 1 or some properties
of life. Viruses don't have a metabolism, but
I'd include them in "life". Prions can replicate
after a fashion, but I wouldn't include them.
Arbitrary? Yes.
It just seems a useful demarcation between
life & non-life.
Ref...
Virus - Wikipedia
Excerpted...
Viruses are considered by some biologists to be a life form, because they carry genetic material, reproduce, and evolve through natural selection, although they lack the key characteristics, such as cell structure, that are generally considered necessary criteria for defining life. Because they possess some but not all such qualities, viruses have been described as "organisms at the edge of life",[10] and as replicators.[11]
will exclude things have 1 or some properties
of life. Viruses don't have a metabolism, but
I'd include them in "life". Prions can replicate
after a fashion, but I wouldn't include them.
Arbitrary? Yes.
It just seems a useful demarcation between
life & non-life.
Ref...
Virus - Wikipedia
Excerpted...
Viruses are considered by some biologists to be a life form, because they carry genetic material, reproduce, and evolve through natural selection, although they lack the key characteristics, such as cell structure, that are generally considered necessary criteria for defining life. Because they possess some but not all such qualities, viruses have been described as "organisms at the edge of life",[10] and as replicators.[11]
