It is formulated by, maybe, but it is not necessarily formulated for any explicit human need. Furthermore, such needs (of understanding, say) are not foreign to the universe if they are not foreign to a human. The phrase "human beings" always sounds as if it means a foreign, unnatural substance when used in scientific discussion, as in "manufactured by humans," "created by and for humans," or, as in this case, "formulated by." "The natural world... is itslef formulated by and for [people.]"
I always resent such insinuations and want to point out that the humans that ruin everything natural and warp it to their own liking are a string in the fabric that is to be warped and thus innocent of outside intrusion onto it. Anything we think of, invent, or alter to our liking, must also be what the universe and its systems, left to their work, would invent, alter, and think of, for here in fact is the result of these processes: we, among other things. What do these suggestions of alienated human observers' selfish "formulation" of the natural world mean?

Maya

On Sun, 28 May 2000, Science Integration Institute wrote:
>
> "In the last analysis, can a satisfactory description of the physical world
> fail to take explicit account of the fact that it is itself formulated by
> and for human beings?"
>
> - A.J. Leggett