Rethinking “Prebiotic Chemistry”

Abstract

In origins‐of‐life research, the term “prebiotic chemistry” is commonly used to describe processes thought to be related to or required for the emergence of life. However, it suffers from several potential drawbacks that have caused the present group of authors to rethink their usage of the term. In this perspective paper, we examine the conventional usage of “prebiotic chemistry” and explore how it could be a misleading phrase. First, “prebiotic chemistry” suggests that the emergence of life can be understood purely through solving puzzles that fall strictly under the traditional purview of chemistry, which contrasts with many modern hypotheses that the phenomenon of life must be understood through physical, information theoretic, and computational lenses. Second, “prebiotic chemistry” invokes a teleological bent that conflates the separate notions of “chemistry that happens on an abiotic world before life” and “chemistry that happens on an abiotic world on the way to life.” We end by suggesting that an alternative term, “protobiotic processes,” could be used instead of “prebiotic chemistry” when referring to any process that is assumed to contribute directly to life's emergence. “Prebiotic chemistry” is a common term in origins‐of‐life discourse. It is often used to describe processes related to or required for the emergence of life. Here, we explore several reasons why the conventional use of the term “prebiotic chemistry” could be misleading. First, it suggests that life can be understood as a purely chemical phenomenon. Yes, life is chemical in nature, but insights from other domains—like physics and information theory—may be required to describe, predict, and explain its emergence. Second, “prebiotic chemistry” combines the separate ideas of “chemistry that happens before life” and “chemistry that happens on the way to life.” Not all chemistry that happens on a lifeless world, even if it makes products resembling the building blocks of life as we know it, is necessarily chemistry that could lead to life. Using the term “protobiotic process” to indicate processes that are assumed contribute to life's emergence and “prebiotic chemistry” to denote any chemistry that happens prior to the onset of life may dispel some confusion. The term “prebiotic chemistry” suggests that the phenomenon of life can be understood via chemistry alone. However, physical, information theoretic, and computational lenses offer important explanatory frameworks as well The term “prebiotic chemistry” conflates the separate notions of “chemistry that happens on an abiotic world before life” and “chemistry that happens on an abiotic world on the way to life” in a potentially misleading manner We suggest the term “protobiotic processes” as an alternative to “prebiotic chemistry” when referring to processes that, under some framework for life's emergence, are assumed to contribute to life's emergence