Biocentrism - Robert Lanza

[Belinda]

Empiricist- Bruno wrote:

If the Jesus of history could travel through a time machine and appear today, I wonder if he would have any faith in the Christ of faith. I strongly suspect he would not. He would say, "the worshipers of the Christ of faith are workers of inequity (or just plain dumb fools)!" Amen.

Don't you think that many Christians, despite their multiple weaknesses and corruptions, throughout Christian history have carried the flame of the basic ethos of Jesus as recorded in the Sermon on the Mount?

I think the interpretation of biocentrism, like the questions of the historicity of Jesus and the metaphysical truth of the Christ doctrines are all cases for pragmatism to deal with:

Empiricist-Bruno:"This makes me wonder if philosophy can have any value in a world of faith, not interested in truth. I'm starting to think that the future within a 'Christ of faith world' must be in comedy."

[Timeothy]

I think this theory is useful in stimulating the question of perception. I don't think it meets the criteria for a theory of everything because it leaves the theoretical answer at the point of more vastly complicated questions. What is the nature of life that it projects it's experience? What is the framework in which that life exists? Where did it come from?.. And so on and so on. Undoubtedly, perception presents a difficulty in understanding. If we are beings that have evolved senses to aid in our physical survival, there are likely far more forces that we are incapable of perceiving than we can actually perceive. This makes reality more a function of what we can't perceive than what we can. Ultimately, our math (based on our senses) may be seriously flawed beyond a limited range of local observation. Imagination certainly helps expand our directions of inquiry, but (for example) how does a 1 dimensional being understand a 4 dimensional existence and vice versa. I like the idea of expanding the model but I don't see how Biocentrism works to answer fundamental questions other than - are we looking in the wrong direction?

[Dwildgen]

The idea that life created the universe and not the other way around I believe is self evident. There is no other feasible explication as to how the universe is so finely tuned for life. Where biocentrism and I depart is the idea that for something to become real animal life needs to observe it. I believe this comes from a misunderstanding of the nature of consciousness.
I see consciousness as a field that permeates the universe and a quality like light. It is integral with life. In this regard the universe is alive.
Various animal life have minds that focus the field of consciousness to varying degrees. Humans have the ability to focus or transmit the highest degree of consciousness of all species on our planet however there is no reason to believe we have reached the apex of this ability to contain ( language is deficient in describing my hypothesis so please bear with me. Consciousness is not contained or transmitted or focused, it is kind of embodied but these other words better communicate the essence of what I am trying to convey). It is highly likely that there are other conscious intelligent life in our universe and that these other so species have attained higher levels of consciousness.

[Vougat]

Hi, I am an independent researcher of this very Idea. I just discovered this book, and have read the cover. (That's all I need).
Biocentrism is a word I first learned of 10 minutes ago. My research strongly supports this idea. I present tools, and evidence.
Of which I blog at Peterborough Meetup (Ontario, Canada), Philosophy of Mind, group. All information is online here, free, and public access. You need only sign into Meetups, and not for my group/s. ... “The day science begins to study non-physical phenomena, it will make more progress in one decade than in all the previous centuries of its existence.”
― Nikola Tesla