Pardigms on the Existence of Life

Robert Donlan

English Comp 1102

Dr. Takacs

Paradigms on the Existence of Life

A paradigm can be defined simply as a set of rules laid out to establish a basis for scientific studies. The idea of a paradigm is set in place only when the community accepts it as the paradigm. There are many paradigms in place. Take for instance the paradigm of gravity. An established paradigm could be defined that gravity always pulls toward the center of the object, and that everything has gravity of some sort. This is a well known, and established series of rules that allow for the study of physics on the basis that gravity will always pull towards the center. There are many established paradigms. Gravity is one of the probably thousands that exist in order to direct the studies of the scientific world. The paradigm is established through numerous studies, and countless experiments. These paradigms allow for advancement in science, but perhaps can be seen as a hindrance in advancement of ideas, and theories. The idea of life within our solar system could be constituted as a paradigm, and it perhaps is in need of revision in order to expand the horizon of our idea of living creatures. There is a simple series of rules that define where life can thrive, but perhaps we are not seeing the entire picture.

Paradigms take time to establish. It’s not easy to establish a new paradigm. Scientists sometimes are stubborn to change, simply due to the fact that a new paradigm might dismiss all prior works that a lifetime of study produced. The advancement is good, but sometimes on the basis of paradigms, is sluggish. The concept of living organisms as far as it can be established through a series of rules, or a paradigm. If it is living it needs certain nutrients. A living creature needs water. Therefore anyplace without sufficient amounts of water would not be very hospitable for life forms. A living creature needs breathable atmosphere, which would mean a large supply of oxygen in its gaseous form, in order to keep the blood rich in oxygen to carry nutrients through out the body. Another rule would be that the creature would have to be able to eat something that has some nutritional value. If a place were to exist without sustenance on the basis that we qualify sustenance then life would probably not be possible.

Now the question that is posed is “Could life thrive on other planets in our solar system?” To this people would say, “no.” This is simply based on the series of rules that qualifies the existence of life in the known world. These beliefs have one flaw. They are theory, much like everything else in science. Theory is only theory, and therefore cannot be defined as the end all be all, or a law. The existence of life could be possible if another theory was to be invoked. Hypothetically speaking, a crater in mars had microbes of life in it. These creatures were unlike any that we had ever seen. Perhaps the creature is not carbon based, like everything on earth. This idea of different elementally based creatures has been proposed before. Its not a radically absurd thought too. If everything on earth is carbon based, what’s not to say that perhaps in other worlds that boron, or chlorine is the base element in all life? Who’s to say that is wrong? This is where the anomaly exists. The idea of life is simply limited to a single planet that exists within our planet. Our planet is merely a single “Cheerio” floating around in big giant bowl of billions of “Cheerio’s” and milk. The paradigm that is established is so limited in its basis. We can only ask so many questions like “is there water?” or “is there oxygen?” The nonexistence of these things denies the very existence of life, as we know it.

The problem with the idea of a paradigm is that you are on the inside of the box trying to look out. If you take the paradigm, and begin to stretch it, the box will give and eventually form a new bigger different box. Say that for advancement the box is completely ignored, and the basis of the experimentation is done with no regard to the paradigm. Then, it could be inferred that