On Anthropocentrism

Man is the measure of all things.
-- Protagoras

I came across the term 'anthropocentrism' a while back when I was reading a Physics book titled 'Constant of the Universe' or something of the like. Very interesting book. No sarcasm.
Its etymology explains what it is. Anthropo would be humans, centrism would be, well, centre. So humans at the centre.
I think this term really describe us well. It applies universally a bit like how Aristotle's golden mean can be applied to almost everything. Well all our actions can be described as anthropocentric I guess.
Take the area of science. There was a period where people believed in Ptolemian geocentrism - humans are thought to be at the centre of the universe. Literally anthropocentric. Units also reflect anthropocentric bias. We conveniently use pound, feet, meters and all common units because they suit OUR needs. Well, imagine using Angstrom to measure the length of your arm (or try Planck's units - even more absurd).
Recently, I attended a lecture about Morality and Ethics in my philosophy class. It was always at the back of my mind but the lecture put this concept about 'everything eventually goes to our end' into words. Surely we would not want to commit crimes since we do not want to go to jail. But this is true for the opposite as well. We make friends because it puts us to greater advantage to have many friends. We invest for connection in business world later on in the future. They will give us presents during our birthdays. They can help us when we are in a pinch. Basically they are USEFUL. That sounds awful, really - but if you think of everyone doing it and everyone is using everyone else and creating a win-win situation, it does not sound as bad. But it still does - because the seemingly purest intentions can be called selfish. The lecturer gave the example of Mother Teresa and her noble social work. Applying the above concept, Mother Teresa is seen to making herself feel good by doing the social work. Of course I disagree at this point since her work, while perhaps made her feel good, it also made many many more people feel good. So let me repeat: even the purest intentions can be called selfish.
On the same note, blogging can be viewed as anthropocentric, too. There are various motives of writing a blog. Some 'exhibit' their lives, some just threw thoughts, intending to pour their hearts out. But the question is: 'Why write in the Internet?' Since the Internet is an open network, people are bound to see your blog. It is like laying your diaries in the open: do you deny that you are hoping for people to see it by laying it in the open? Of course I'm guilty of this as well. I remain anonymous and do not reveal too much in my blog so that people would not know me, but somewhere inside I am hoping that people I know stumble upon my blog, recognise that it is me, then come up to me to say something like:'I was reading your blog yesterday. I don't know you can think of such good ideas and you write well, too!' Vanity is part of anthropocentrism, I think, since it makes us feel good in a way. So on the same note, people dressing up and acting cool are anthropocentric since it is kind of vanity. Not that I mind seeing cool people. I may envy them but certainly there is nothing wrong with looking good and cool.
So is anthropocentrism good or bad? In a way it is bad since we are all acting according to our self interests; and self interests often conflict. But I tend to think that it is neutral. It is part of being human. There is nothing wrong with making things convenient for ourselves, as long as we are not assuming, as in the case of geocentrism; and as long as, as Aristotle would say, it is 'in moderation' meaning that we don't exploit our anthropocentrism. Certainly our friends are useful but appreciate that it works the opposite way as well: we are useful to our friends. Use but be used as well. As long as we are humans, we cannot help but be anthropocentric. But appreciate that you are not the only human in the world; there are others and since they are humans, they are anthropocentric too. We have to compromise, or to sound more Aristotelian: take the 'moderation'.
We humans are ugly, aren't we? But that's what we are.