In this review, we describe some of the central philosophical issues facing origins-of-life research and provide a targeted history of the developments that have led to the multidisciplinary field of origins-of-life studies. We outline these issues and developments to guide researchers and students from all fields. With respect to philosophy, we provide brief summaries of debates with respect to (1) definitions (or theories) of life, what life is and how research should be conducted in the absence of an accepted theory (...) of life, (2) the distinctions between synthetic, historical, and universal projects in origins-of-life studies, issues with strategies for inferring the origins of life, such as (3) the nature of the first living entities (the “bottom up” approach) and (4) how to infer the nature of the last universal common ancestor (the “top down” approach), and (5) the status of origins of life as a science. Each of these debates influences the others. Although there are clusters of researchers that agree on some answers to these issues, each of these debates is still open. With respect to history, we outline several independent paths that have led to some of the approaches now prevalent in origins-of-life studies. These include one path from early views of life through the scientific revolutions brought about by Linnaeus (von Linn.), Wöhler, Miller, and others. In this approach, new theories, tools, and evidence guide new thoughts about the nature of life and its origin.We also describe another family of paths motivated by a” circularity” approach to life, which is guided by such thinkers as Maturana & Varela, Gánti, Rosen, and others. These views echo ideas developed by Kant and Aristotle, though they do so using modern science in ways that produce exciting avenues of investigation. By exploring the history of these ideas, we can see how many of the issues that currently interest us have been guided by the contexts in which the ideas were developed. The disciplinary backgrounds of each of these scholars has influenced the questions they sought to answer, the experiments they envisioned, and the kinds of data they collected. We conclude by encouraging scientists and scholars in the humanities and social sciences to explore ways in which they can interact to provide a deeper understanding of the conceptual assumptions, structure, and history of origins-of-life research. This may be useful to help frame future research agendas and bring awareness to the multifaceted issues facing this challenging scientific question. (shrink)

Opposing Viewpoints is the leading source for libraries and classrooms in need of current-issue materials. The viewpoints are selected from a wide range of highly respected sources and publications.

Introduction -- What is the current state of media ethics? -- Should telling the truth take precedence over other ethical concerns? -- Should journalists avoid actions that compromise objectivity? -- How have new technologies affected media ethics?

This series covers today's most current national and international issues and the most important opinions of the past and present. The purpose of the series is to introduce readers to all sides of contemporary controversies.

Las últimas encuestas nacionales en México han mostrado una confianza social creciente en creencias y prácticas pseudocientíficas, así como una percepción pública desfavorable sobre la visibilidad social de los científicos. La situación post-normal generada en la pandemia por COVID-19 se presenta como un escenario propicio para poner a prueba la importancia que los ciudadanos otorgan, de hecho, a la ciencia y sus profesionales en tiempos de crisis. Este artículo ofrece los resultados sobre comprensión pública de la COVID-19 y percepción social (...) sobre el papel de la ciencia en la lucha contra la pandemia obtenidos de dos encuestas realizadas, en 2020, a dos grupos poblacionales de México: población rural, mayoritariamente indígena, y población urbana. Se comparan estos datos con los de otros estudios nacionales sobre comprensión pública de la ciencia (PUS en sus siglas en inglés) prepandémicos haciendo uso de los indicadores Progreso, Reticencias, Conocimiento y Compromiso (PREK en sus siglas en inglés), propuestos recientemente por Martin Bauer y colaboradores para valorar la llamada autoridad cultural de la ciencia. Nuestra investigación muestra la confianza y legitimidad sociales otorgadas, en general, a la ciencia en esta situación socio-sanitaria post-normal. Finalmente, a la luz de ciertos resultados, defendemos que las disparidades culturales propias de México se desvelan significativas a la hora de considerar el aprovechar tal prestigio social en el logro de un incremento de la apropiación social de cultura científica en México en general, es decir, más allá de contextos post-normales concretos. (shrink)