[MD] Philosophy and Philosophology

[John Carl]

Hi Ham, I just got home,

On Sun, Aug 9, 2009 at 10:49 PM, Ham Priday <hampday1 at verizon.net> wrote:

>
> Hi John --
>
> I recall your mentioning Robert Lanza, whom I cited on this forum in 2007
> after republishing his essay "A New Theory of the Universe" on my Values
> page.  Dr. Lanza is an executive at Advanced Cell Technology and teaches at
> Wake Forest School of Medicine.  He has supposedly written some 20 books. Do
> you know if any of them lay out the theory of Biocentrism?
>

An excellent place to start would be the abridgement of his book,
Biocentrism, How Life Creates the Universe, at this link which I had posted
a while back....

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/31393080/ns/technology_and_science-science/

I'm glad you have a prior interest in Lanza, as I find this new development
in philosophy very relevant to the MoQ and the Perennial...




>
> This is the aspect of 'biocentrism' I don't understand.  If consciousness
> is not the function of the brain and nervous system, how can the precept of
> space and time be considered biological?
>

Well one way to look at it, in a general upper room sort of view, is that
since "brain" and "nervous system" are themselves ordered parts of the
cosmos they observe, then the discrepancy isn't as big as we "thought".

But I think biocentrism points to a deeper meaning than life creating the
cosmos or the cosmos creating life.  I think it demonstrates  empirically
grounded values revealed in resonant energies responsible for both.  Perhaps
leading to an "intelligent design" permutation of some stripe.  But what
appeals to me the most is that ultimately Nature makes the most sense as our
ultimate source of value.



>
> I agree with the epistemology; I just don't see how it centers on biology.
> If you can explain the conscious precepts-to-biology connection, I might
> join in your exploration of Biocentrism.
>
> Thanks, John,
>
> --Ham
>
>
>
Well follow the link and let the author explain it best in his own terms.
 Only Hegel was a true Hegelian.    I just know this, there has been more
hard factual research linking mind and matter in the last decade, than
philosophy has had time to catch up with.

imvho

John







> Moq_Discuss mailing list
> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> Archives:
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
>