Heartmind Heartmind
 
* *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register. September 10, 2010, 12:34:54 AM


Login with username, password and session length


Recent posts
[Yesterday at 04:41:57 PM]

by Jana
[Yesterday at 04:34:49 PM]

by Jana
[Yesterday at 03:32:04 PM]

[September 03, 2010, 09:07:37 AM]

by Jana
[September 01, 2010, 08:55:25 AM]

[August 27, 2010, 02:48:19 AM]

by Jana
[August 26, 2010, 06:52:44 PM]

[August 20, 2010, 02:57:19 AM]
9 Guests, 0 Users
Last 5 Chats:
Yesterday at 06:12:10 PM
That would be 1-Love, as in zip.
September 08, 2010, 05:03:03 PM
thanks Liz. Heartmind is fine. my interventional anger is toward the USTA for holding our national tennis tournament in a friekin' wind tunnel
September 08, 2010, 04:45:50 PM
NO henry, we need your intervention. We would misbehave otherwise.
September 08, 2010, 02:09:07 PM
i think admin. wants me to be less interventional
September 06, 2010, 04:30:37 PM
as Jane sez, "good on you" Heartmind. Let's keep on keepin' on
Quotations
The test of courage comes when we are in the minority. The test of tolerance comes when we are in the majority. ~ Ralph W. Sockman
Themes

 



Pages: 1   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Biocentrism  (Read 107 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
jimtzu
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 821


View Profile
« on: July 06, 2010, 11:53:23 PM »

In the past few decades, major puzzles of mainstream science have forced a re-evaluation of the nature of the universe that goes far beyond anything we could have imagined. A more accurate understanding of the world requires that we consider it biologically centered. It’s a simple but amazing concept that Biocentrism attempts to clarify: Life creates the universe, instead of the other way around. Understanding this more fully yields answers to several long-held puzzles. This new model — combining physics and biology instead of keeping them separate, and putting observers firmly into the equation — is called biocentrism. Its necessity is driven in part by the ongoing attempts to create an overarching view, a theory of everything. Such efforts have now stretched for decades, without much success except as a way of financially facilitating the careers of theoreticians and graduate students.

Could the long-sought Theory of Everything be merely missing a component that was too close for us to have noticed?  Some of the thrill that came with the announcement that the human genome had been mapped or the idea that we are close to understanding the “Big Bang” rests in our innate human desire for completeness and totality.  But most of these comprehensive theories fail to take into account one crucial factor: We are creating them. It is the biological creature that fashions the stories, that makes the observations, and that gives names to things. And therein lies the great expanse of our oversight, that science has not confronted the one thing that is at once most familiar and most mysterious — consciousness.  As Emerson wrote in “Experience,” an essay that confronted the facile positivism of his age: “We have learned that we do not see directly, but mediately, and that we have no means of correcting these colored and distorting lenses which we are, or of computing the amount of their errors. Perhaps these subject-lenses have a creative power; perhaps there are no objects.”

read the whole article here:  http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/31393080/
Logged
Pages: 1   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.2 | SMF © 2006-2007, Simple Machines LLC
TinyPortal v0.9.7 © Bloc


Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS! Dilber MC Theme by HarzeM