Talk:Main Page

General Structure of Discussion

For each discipline represented in the Big History community, list concisely:

1) Key insights from the discipline, that seem most essential for collaboration (what each discipline contributes to the whole picture). 2) Assumptions/limitations/blinders inherent to the discipline. 3) Current puzzles and paradoxes active in the discipline, stated within the framework of the discipline but with an eye toward the whole. How do these puzzles fit within questions of interest beyond the narrow confines of the discipline? (This question invites participants to think about how their discipline relates to others, and to the whole.)

I have in mind starting with standard disciplines such as history, physics, astronomy, geology, biology, paleontology, sociology, psychology, environmental science, philosophy, anthropology, mathematics, geography, literature, languages, political science, economics, computer science, art, theatre, music, education, complexity science, information theory, etc. But these need not be limiting: categories should be chosen and shaped by participants.