Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Tulip
In other words, geocentrism and heliocentrism are the same for observation of the universe, as the sun is so close to the earth by cosmic scales.
|
For some things, we consider both the motion of the Earth around the sun, and the motion of the sun - neither a geocentric or heliocentric viewpoint.
Quote:
|
Of course the sun is in no more a privileged position than the earth when it comes to the big bang etc.
|
Rather, the sun is no more a privileged reference frame than the Earth. There is no privileged reference frame. Period.
Quote:
|
From an evolutionary perspective, science is, in a sense, how the earth thinks. Thought is a physical product of cumulative human adaptation to terrestrial systems, making thought, like all life, a complex product of the earth. In its highest form, thought seeks to truly reflect reality.
|
Things like "[thought's] highest form" and "thought seeks to truly reflect reality" are statements related to your personal beliefs, but have little to do with a scientific discussion.
Quote:
|
Reflecting reality through scientific thought involves representing reality, including the earth, by concepts as thought.
|
Now that is a circular statement!
Quote:
|
The measuring function of thought is a real physical structure in the universe,
|
I have no idea what that is supposed to mean.
Quote:
|
and, to the extent it is centred on our planet, all thought is in some sense geocentric.
|
(emphasis added) How do you make the leap from "to the extent" to "all"? What "sense" of geocentrism are you referring to? What is the objective argument (as opposed to value judgement) for picking "thought" as a parameter for centrism?
How about this alternative? "To the extent that red rocks are centered on Mars, all red rock is in some sense arescentric."