Biocentrism

[Shoreline Music]

After reading that article—it's basically every 2am conversation between freshman philosophy majors—I'm reminded of Crow T Robot's great quip from Gamera vs Barugon:

"Solipsism is its own reward"

[guitar george]

Originally Posted by Tico

Keep in mind Suzzie that just because someone can think up a question doesn't mean there is an answer."

Here's a question. If you go out in space and come to the end of the universe, what's on the other side of the end?

[Tico]

Originally Posted by guitar george

Here's a question. If you go out in space and come to the end of the universe, what's on the other side of the end?

AGF, of course.

[sdelsolray]

This is speculation and nothing more. Perhaps a testable and falsifiable hypothesis could be formulated, evidence and observations gathered, and the scientific method utilized.

Once done, "biocentrism" may graduate to a scientific theory. As it sits now, its simple speculation, bordering on metaphysical woo woo.

[DCCougar]

Originally Posted by Davis Webb

Fascinating philosophy. Anyone else tracking this?
https://www.cbc.ca/radio/ideas/bioce...eath-1.3789414

This is not science.

Dr. Lanza writes:"In this model, the universe was presented as a kind of self-operating machine. It was composed of stupid stuff, meaning atoms of hydrogen and other elements that had no innate intelligence.

Hydrogen, helium, a couple other trace elements. This is not in dispute.

Why does the universe seem exquisitely designed for the emergence of life?

"Designed" for the emergence of life? Single-celled life-forms persisted alone in Earth's biosphere for about 3 billion years. Multicellular life forms, with some significant consciousness that Lanza apparently worships, were apparently in no big hurry to emerge!

[Davis Webb]

Originally Posted by sdelsolray

This is speculation and nothing more. Perhaps a testable and falsifiable hypothesis could be formulated, evidence and observations gathered, and the scientific method utilized.

Once done, "biocentrism" may graduate to a scientific theory. As it sits now, its simple speculation, bordering on metaphysical woo woo.

Its deeper than that. His peers acknowledge his achievements.

[Davis Webb]

Originally Posted by Shoreline Music

After reading that article—it's basically every 2am conversation between freshman philosophy majors—I'm reminded of Crow T Robot's great quip from Gamera vs Barugon:

"Solipsism is its own reward"

Not really, his work in all fields related to this is stellar. You dismiss this like early philosophers dismissed Descartes or Spinoza.

[Steve DeRosa]

Originally Posted by guitar george

I have not read or listened to much of this theory yet, but it must be just another theory because the human mind is not capable of determining how everything or anything came into existence.

Agreed, and if a strict standard of empirical evidence is to be applied it not only answers nothing but in fact raises far more - and far deeper - questions of ultimate origin/primal cause, most if not all of which are beyond the purview of this forum...

[Silurian]

Originally Posted by guitar george

Here's a question. If you go out in space and come to the end of the universe, what's on the other side of the end?

Probably a Starbucks.

[Ozzy the dog]

From the first article: -

'Dr. Lanza says the problem is we have everything upside down. He takes the common assumption that the universe led to the creation of life and argues that it's the other way around: that life is not a byproduct of the universe, but its very source. Or put another way, consciousness is what gives rise to our sense of there being an "out there" when, in fact, the world we experience around us is actually created in our consciousness.'

This isn't new - 'We are all just figments of our imagination' has been out there for years.

However, if the world we live in is created in our consciousness, does that mean it doesn't really exist? If nothing actually exists, where does our consciousness live if there is no real place to put it?

Also, how do all of our consciousness's create the same world? Surely if this is true the you are all created in My consciousness and therefore mine is the only consciousness to actually exist. I am suddenly feeling quite lonely.

.....And - if this is true, then we have got it all wrong. We strive to earn money to buy a Martin, Taylor, Lowden etc when all we have to do is imagine having one.

I have lots of theories like this.........................................

[AX17609]

"what we call space and time are forms of animal sense perception, rather than external physical objects."

Nonsense.

[Fogducker]

Our nearest Star, the Sun, has a few planets circling it and we're all excited because there MIGHT be water/ice on one of them, Mars, hence life a couple billion years ago or so.

Now when one considers that there are more Stars (Suns) and galaxies then there are grains of sand on the Earth, I'm pretty sure there are a whole bunch of planets EXACTLY like Earth.

Yeah Suzzie, I don't know either, I'm just hanging on to this orb as we scream through space, eating, playing my guitar, just living etc. I hope who/whatever put this program together, keeps on going a few more trillion years or so!

Fog

[Golffishny]

The more we learn, the more we realize we really don't know.

[raysachs]

Originally Posted by Fogducker

Now when one considers that there are more Stars (Suns) and galaxies then there are grains of sand on the Earth, I'm pretty sure there are a whole bunch of planets EXACTLY like Earth.

Cool, I wonder what kinds of guitars they play. As to what happens to us after death, I figure life’s already too short to worry about that. I figure I’ll do a full investigation after I die, at which point there will be overwhelmingly more imperical evidence and I’ll either have the capability to use it or not. If so, I’ll know much more then than I could ever know now. And if not, well then it was a totally useless academic question all these millions of years anyway,

[buddyhu]

From one of the linked articles: "Nobel laureate E. Donnall Thomas said, “Any short statement does not do justice to such a scholarly work. The work is a scholarly consideration of science and philosophy that brings biology into the central role in unifying the whole.” "

I believe this to be true.

Obviously, many of the dismissive posts to this thread come from people who do not believe it to be true...