Hi everyone,
I’m not very knowledgeable about science, so I’m struggling to understand the notion that viruses aren’t “alive”, and the robot analogies people use. I understand that they don’t have some of the characteristics (cells, ability to reproduce), but my mind can’t wrap itself around the notion that they’re like objects. Can you please give some examples that could explain this in a way that is accessible to someone who isn’t very advanced in the subject?
Thanks
EDIT: wow thanks so much guys for so many amazing replies!!!
In: 29
Life is defined partially by having the means to self-replicate. That requires both the blueprints to replicate and the machinery to run those blueprints on.
The problem with viruses is that while they do have the blueprints for replication, they lack the machinery to run it on. They have to hijack a host cell and feed their blueprints to that host cell’s replication machine to get it to make copies for them.
It’s like having data files for making a widget on a 3-D printer on a USB stick, but you lack the actual 3-D printer itself, so instead you break into your neighbors house, plug the USB stick into his 3-D printer, and use it to make your widget.
It’s sort of arbitrary and a matter of some debate whether this definition of “life” is really a good one to use. But as long as the definition includes the ability of the species to replicate with its own internal machinery, then a virus won’t count because it has to brainwash a host organism to manufacture copies of the virus for it.
Latest Answers