In spite of the tremendous progress in recent decades of biological science, many aspects of the behaviour of organisms in general and of humans in particular remain still somewhat obscure. A new approach towards the study of the behaviour of man was presented by Heisenberg when he emphasized that a Cartesian view of nature as an object "out there" is an illusion in so far as "the observer is always part of the formula, the man viewing nature must be figured in, the experimenter into his experiment and the artist in the scene he paints." (Heisenberg, 1969). The present study is an attempt to make a step forward in this direction by focusing on the ways and means of involvement of the observer which make him an indelible part of the observation. To get a fresh start let us have a look at the physical universe. Although showing an immense variety, all objects, living and non-living, have some characteristics in common. They all obey the physical laws and they all are engaged in perpetual interactions. How do we tell then the difference between living and non-living objects? According to the traditional concept it is the capacity for reproduction that distinguishes living from non-living objects. (Luria et al., 1981). The non-traditional concept presented in this study stresses the way in which objects interact as the crucial point of difference between living and non-living objects. This concept claims that living objects assert themselves as such only when and while interacting in terms of information processing. Under such conditions only, living objects are able to display relative independence of the physical laws, for instance active movement. This display of relative independence is governed by biological laws and defines the behaviour of the living objects as active in principle. All objects who share these characteristics are called living, they behave as wholes assessing themselves as individuals. The definition suggests that they all share the same internal organization which is principally dynamic.