Biologists with a predilection for theory have tried-and largely failed-to define what it is that makes something a living thing. Organisms take in energy- providing materials and excrete waste products, but so do automobiles. Living things replicate and take part in evolution, but so do some computer programs. We must be open to the possibility that there are living things on other planets. Ttherefore, we will not be successful in defining what it is that makes something a living thing merely by examining living things on Earth--the only ones we know. Trying to do so is analogous to trying to specify__. Which of the following most logically completes the passage? ['the laws of physics by using pure mathematics', 'what a fish is by listing its chemical components', 'what an animal is by examining a plant', 'what a mammal is by examining a zebra']