Life is one of the most fascinating features of the physical world. Despite centuries of scientific study, experts still disagree about the definition, and even the possibility or utility of a definition, of this field. In a recent paper, we used AI to analyze the conceptual space formed by definitions of life given by a select set of modern workers in the life sciences and related fields. However, some of the most interesting material emerged as real-time conversations among those polled. In order to ensure that these ideas are not lost to the peer-reviewed scientific record, we here provide a minimally-edited (largely verbatim) transcript of the email chain among leading thinkers, containing numerous clarifications, disagreements, and challenges that enrich the topic of Life. It is our hope that this case study serves as an example for future papers, since the exchange of ideas among scientists is at least as interesting and valuable as formal scientific manuscripts written from a single perspective.
doi:10.13133/2532-5876/19492 (open access)
@article{Kofman-2026,
author = "Karina Kofman and Christoph Adami and František Baluška and Joshua Bongard
and Douglas Brash and Paco Calvo and Gordana Dodig-Crnkovic and Pranab Das and Chris Fields and Tom Froese
and Pier Luigi Gentili and Georgi Yordanov Georgiev and Scott F. Gilbert and Timothy N. W. Jackson
and Stuart Kauffman and Nick Lane and Perry Marshall and Dan McShea and William Miller and Stuart Newman
and Alistair Nunn and Theodore P. Pavlic and Martin Picard and William Ratcliff and Arthur Reber
and James Shapiro and Aaron Sloman and Ricard Solé and Carlos Sonnenschein and Susan Stepney
and Richard Watson and Olaf Witkowski and Michael Levin",
title = "Defining Life: A Conversation",
journal = "Organisms: Journal of Biological Sciences",
volume = 9,
number = 1,
pages = "11-45",
year = 2026,
doi = "10.13133/2532-5876/19492"
}