Living organisms are fundamentally different from non-living entities because they contain some non-physical element or are governed by different principles than are inanimate things. That is a life force. That is the view of Vitalism. But why is it that Vitalism has been rejected by mainstream science since the 19th century? Because so for, it has not been able to be measured by numbers and that it opposes the scientific methods. Point 1 If you use science in your work within the movement environment you are not use ideas from Vitalism Point 2 If you are not using Vitalistic ideas you are saying that there is no difference in living and non-living objects Point 3 If you do believe that living and non-living objects are different question the current science you are using. Worth thinking about?
Posted on: Sun, 09 Nov 2014 14:37:35 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015