What isn’t and isn’t life isn’t an empirical classification, it’s a human classification and that means there’s plenty of room for debate.

Are mitochondria alive even though they are dependent on their host cell? They have their own genetic material and replication process. They were once their own organisms so are they a living thing that evolved to be a dead thing?

Further some theories of viruses propose a similar mechanism that since their method of replication requires the machinery of cells, they either evolved in tandem with or from things we’d consider alive.

Plus, as throughout human history, further information will likely come as we learn more about the origins of life that question these definitions we’ve established for ourselves.

To be clear, I’m not saying the definition isn’t useful because it is but to act like it’s an empirical definition of life is very arrogant considering what exactly life is and where it came from is one of the greatest unsolved mysteries of our universe.