Biocentrism: Theory of universe centered on consciousness

Post links to sites, web pages, videos, etc.
Forum rules
No links to copyrighted materials.

Biocentrism: Theory of universe centered on consciousness

Postby runstrails » Wed Nov 21, 2012 4:48 am

Dr. Robert Lanza, a scientist (performing high quality stem cell research) has a deeply insightful theory of the universe centered on consciousness. He explains logically and scientifically how everything (including the body and the brain) appears in consciousness and not the other way around.

Here is an article which describes his ideas: http://theamericanscholar.org/a-new-the ... -universe/
He brings in the current worldview that theoretical physics offers and basically ties it in with neuroscience to present a convincing way in which the universe comes about in consciousness.

Here is a link to an indepth conversation he has with Deepak Chopra on the issue of how consciousness is prior to matter:
http://blog.beliefnet.com/intentchopra/ ... -deep.html

His book is called Biocentrism. I've not read it yet, but I'm definitely going to!
runstrails
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 2131
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 12:33 am

Re: Biocentrism: Theory of universe centered on consciousnes

Postby Sighclone » Wed Nov 21, 2012 5:47 am

Chopra's latest book "Super Brain" references this repeatedly, and has other gems, also. Is nonduality holding a spot in the mainstream? Even if Eckhart is "yesterday's news," Deepak keeps popping up. His son did a recent video on "Decoding Deepak": http://www.fandango.com/decodingdeepak_ ... ieoverview.

Andy
A person is not a thing or a process, but an opening through which the universe manifests. - Martin Heidegger
There is not past, no future; everything flows in an eternal present. - James Joyce
User avatar
Sighclone
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 6183
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2008 6:22 pm

Re: Biocentrism: Theory of universe centered on consciousnes

Postby ashley72 » Wed Nov 21, 2012 7:05 am

Space and time, not proteins and neurons, hold the answer to the problem of consciousness.


I'll throw a "cat among the pigeons"..... it may be neither of these theories above. Instead, Consciousness may be based purely on the evolution of language in human primates.

Jaynes defines it as an interior mental representation of the self, a metaphorical “space” of introspection wherein the analog “I” which is contentless, can work through problems to “see” the outcomes of potential solutions. Consciousness is created through metaphorical use of language, which allows the spatialization of time necessary for visualizing “linear” sequences of past events and future outcomes (result of narrativizing.)—indeed, without consciousness there is no perception of time. The central role of metaphor in the construction of consciousness is manifest in the way we describe our subjective experience in everyday language: for example, we “see” things in our mind’s “eye”; we have a “gut feeling” that something is true; we love someone with all our “heart”; or we “feel” psychological “pain”. None of these descriptions of experience is meant literally; they are all metaphorical. But we know exactly what they mean, because that is how consciousness works.
User avatar
ashley72
 
Posts: 2533
Joined: Wed Feb 16, 2011 3:24 am

Re: Biocentrism: Theory of universe centered on consciousnes

Postby coriolis » Wed Nov 21, 2012 4:21 pm

ashley72 wrote:
Space and time, not proteins and neurons, hold the answer to the problem of consciousness.


I'll throw a "cat among the pigeons"..... it may be neither of these theories above. Instead, Consciousness may be based purely on the evolution of language in human primates.

Jaynes defines it as an interior mental representation of the self, a metaphorical “space” of introspection wherein the analog “I” which is contentless, can work through problems to “see” the outcomes of potential solutions. Consciousness is created through metaphorical use of language, which allows the spatialization of time necessary for visualizing “linear” sequences of past events and future outcomes (result of narrativizing.)—indeed, without consciousness there is no perception of time. The central role of metaphor in the construction of consciousness is manifest in the way we describe our subjective experience in everyday language: for example, we “see” things in our mind’s “eye”; we have a “gut feeling” that something is true; we love someone with all our “heart”; or we “feel” psychological “pain”. None of these descriptions of experience is meant literally; they are all metaphorical. But we know exactly what they mean, because that is how consciousness works.


This seems the most likely "cause" of what we call human consciousness to me too.

And you have to admit that it is a deliciously ironic punchline to a joke that has been building suspense for quite a while now :lol:

The effect is the cause.
Look deeply inside yourself and try to find yourself.
The ensuing failure is the true finding
---- Wu Hsin
User avatar
coriolis
 
Posts: 167
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2007 5:51 pm

Re: Biocentrism: Theory of universe centered on consciousnes

Postby rachMiel » Wed Nov 21, 2012 4:55 pm

runstrails wrote:Here is a link to an indepth conversation he has with Deepak Chopra on the issue of how consciousness is prior to matter:
http://theamericanscholar.org/a-new-the ... -universe/

That's the link to the Lanza article, not a conversation between Lanza and Chopra. Did you mean this:

http://blog.beliefnet.com/intentchopra/ ... -deep.html
Merrily, merrily, merrily, merrily ...
User avatar
rachMiel
 
Posts: 2458
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 4:46 pm
Location: Pittsford

Re: Biocentrism: Theory of universe centered on consciousnes

Postby runstrails » Wed Nov 21, 2012 4:57 pm

Thanks, rM. I'll put the correct link on top. I'm glad you are interested--I was actually thinking this might help with some of your enquiries. As someone who works in neurobiology---this makes a lot of sense to me.
runstrails
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 2131
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 12:33 am

Re: Biocentrism: Theory of universe centered on consciousnes

Postby rachMiel » Wed Nov 21, 2012 5:01 pm

runstrails wrote:Thanks, rM. I'll put the correct link on top. I'm glad you are interested--I was actually thinking this might help with some of your enquiries. As someone who works in neurobiology---this makes a lot of sense to me.

Whatcha do in the field of neurobiology, runstrails?
Merrily, merrily, merrily, merrily ...
User avatar
rachMiel
 
Posts: 2458
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 4:46 pm
Location: Pittsford

Re: Biocentrism: Theory of universe centered on consciousnes

Postby runstrails » Wed Nov 21, 2012 5:21 pm

Whatcha do in the field of neurobiology, runstrails?

boring brain stuff :wink:.

Ashley wrote: Consciousness may be based purely on the evolution of language in human primates.

I've not read any Jayne stuff-so cannot comment directly on what he says. But Lanza talks about consciousness in far broader terms than for just human primates. He believes it's an attribute of all life (not just limited to life that has language).
runstrails
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 2131
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 12:33 am

Re: Biocentrism: Theory of universe centered on consciousnes

Postby rachMiel » Wed Nov 21, 2012 5:37 pm

runstrails wrote:
Whatcha do in the field of neurobiology, runstrails?

boring brain stuff :wink:.

If there's one thing brain isn't (imo) it's: boring. ;-)
Merrily, merrily, merrily, merrily ...
User avatar
rachMiel
 
Posts: 2458
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 4:46 pm
Location: Pittsford

Re: Biocentrism: Theory of universe centered on consciousnes

Postby smiileyjen101 » Wed Nov 21, 2012 10:21 pm

Lanza talks about consciousness in far broader terms than for just human primates. He believes it's an attribute of all life (not just limited to life that has language).

:D For me the biggest obstacle humans have to working with and in the energies of all life in relational harmony is the mis-taken notion that somehow their biological framework is 'better' than other forms of life.

If Lanza's premise wakes people up to this notion of inclusivity... yay!!!

On time and space it's only been coined 'relative' and we believe that, set our clocks by it :wink: Ash will appreciate that it only becomes relevant when we put our attention to it. Attention is merely a tension of awareness funneling tightening and slowing down the energy in motion to a particular point. Intention is merely in tension guiding energies towards a particular point. We and everything participate in the flowing and creation of energy, whether we are aware of it or not.
Our rights start deep within our humanity; they end where another's begin~~ SmileyJen
http://www.balancinginfluences.com
User avatar
smiileyjen101
 
Posts: 3688
Joined: Wed Sep 22, 2010 3:44 am

Re: Biocentrism: Theory of universe centered on consciousnes

Postby ashley72 » Thu Nov 22, 2012 1:24 am

coriolis wrote:This seems the most likely "cause" of what we call human consciousness to me too.

And you have to admit that it is a deliciously ironic punchline to a joke that has been building suspense for quite a while now :lol:

The effect is the cause.


Yes. I can see the delicious irony. Effect => Cause => Effect :wink:

In developing their hypothesis, most novices in the area of "Human" Consciousness haven't even considered the ecology of human primates or the evolution of language in humans. It's a "major" oversight to leave this important cause & effect out. The sheer brilliance of Jaynes to clearly "see" this cause- when so many of his peers completely bypass it... is nothing less than genius.... and shows the huge depth of his knowledge across so many scientific fields. :D

Merely studying neurobiology wouldn't have been sufficient to "nut" the cause of human consciousness out. :wink:
User avatar
ashley72
 
Posts: 2533
Joined: Wed Feb 16, 2011 3:24 am

Re: Biocentrism: Theory of universe centered on consciousnes

Postby rideforever » Thu Nov 22, 2012 10:11 am

JJ's definition is still mechanical. Whether the brain has one machine or 2 machines within it ... is irrelevant.

You can re-interpret the functioning of the machine, but it still doesn't approach the real question.

The question has always been : if we are machines, how are we awake ? That awakeness in non-mechanical. It is divine.

JJ is just another human who cannot accept it being how it is, and rationalising it once again with a lot of words and diagrams, but missing the essential.
I was proud, and I demanded the finest teacher
.. .. and when he appeared
.. .. .. .. I was so small
User avatar
rideforever
 
Posts: 1513
Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2011 2:32 pm
Location: Hove

Re: Biocentrism: Theory of universe centered on consciousnes

Postby coriolis » Thu Nov 22, 2012 3:34 pm

rideforever wrote:JJ's definition is still mechanical. Whether the brain has one machine or 2 machines within it ... is irrelevant.

You can re-interpret the functioning of the machine, but it still doesn't approach the real question.

The question has always been : if we are machines, how are we awake ? That awakeness in non-mechanical. It is divine.

JJ is just another human who cannot accept it being how it is, and rationalising it once again with a lot of words and diagrams, but missing the essential.


You have clearly not read, or not understood, "The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind".

This that we are doing here is language and thought and it is the only "evidence" there is for human consciousness while at the same time being the exclusive substance of that consciousness.

We are not awake unless we "think" we are for there is no "awake" and "asleep" outside of thought and language that draws distinctions between then.

What Ashley72 has pointed out is the huge "blind spot" that has been ever present in what most people would refer to as "human consciousness".

It can be hard to see.

And sometimes harder still to swallow.
Look deeply inside yourself and try to find yourself.
The ensuing failure is the true finding
---- Wu Hsin
User avatar
coriolis
 
Posts: 167
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2007 5:51 pm

Re: Biocentrism: Theory of universe centered on consciousnes

Postby rideforever » Thu Nov 22, 2012 4:06 pm

It's interesting that you hold "language" and "thought" to be evidence of your consciousness ... have you not experienced yourself outside of language and thought ? Have you explored yourself ?

Most spiritual paths suggest the dropping of language and thought to connect with the inner primordial state, which is unblemished. Meditation is normally conducted in silence with the body still for this very reason. Mouna is a yogic period of silence in order that you can discover what is inside you.

What you are talking about is simply identification with the body and society. You take language and thought to be you - to be your existence - and so give them this high respect, you think this is your consciousness.

The "blind spot" you talk of is very interesting because it shows that you have not connected with the source. You say that there is no existence outside of language/thought. And that is correct, unless you have discovered Shunya / the Present Moment / I Am ... and abided in it until such time as it becomes permanent. This is the purpose of the spiritual search. After that point you are always "alive" and "present".
I was proud, and I demanded the finest teacher
.. .. and when he appeared
.. .. .. .. I was so small
User avatar
rideforever
 
Posts: 1513
Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2011 2:32 pm
Location: Hove

Re: Biocentrism: Theory of universe centered on consciousnes

Postby rideforever » Thu Nov 22, 2012 8:18 pm

Julian Jaynes bases this bicameral theory on the idea that ancient people (before about 3000 years ago) where not conscious or introspective - as we are today supposedly. For some reason he uses the Bible as a reference for ancient culture, even though many books and rememberances exist from far beyond that time.

If we do even something rudimentary such as look at the oldest known text according to Wikipedia we find the following text from "The instructions of Shuruppag", a text now 4500 years old -before Jaynes watershed, wish includes the following :
14You should not buy a donkey which brays; it will split (?) your midriff (?).

15-18You should not locate a field on a road; ....... You should not plough a field at (1 ms. adds: a road or) a path; ....... You should not make a well in your field: people will cause damage on it for you. You should not place your house next to a public square: there is always a crowd (?) there.

19-20You should not vouch for someone: that man will have a hold on you; and you yourself, you should not let somebody vouch for you (1 ms. adds:: that man will despise (?) you).

21You should not make an inspection (?) on a man: the flood (?) will give it back (?) to you.

22-27You should not loiter about where there is a quarrel; you should not let the quarrel make you a witness. You should not let (?) yourself ...... in a quarrel. You should not cause a quarrel; ....... ...... the gate of the palace ....... Stand aside from a quarrel, ...... you should not take (?) another road.

28-31You should not steal anything; you should not ...... yourself. You should not break into a house; you should not wish for the money chest (?). A thief is a lion, but after he has been caught, he will be a slave. My son, you should not commit robbery; you should not cut yourself with an axe.

Clearly the author has introspected and is presenting his advice and experience here for the benefit of others, also his humour.

So ... how is this man not introspective ? He's a damn sight more intelligent than a lot of people I have met !

Also we can look at some very beautiful ancient art ... which is clearly introspective, decorative and full of life :
Image

Image
So I think we can say that foundation that JJ built his theory on is weak even in layman's terms. Not to mention in terms of the Source as described earlier.

The second thing to mention is that he says that mankind today is conscious. That's quite a statement given the global unconsciousness we have. What can this mean other than JJ doesn't know anything ? That he never actually explored his own consciousness, but tried to make theories about it from books.

It is also interesting that he would use the Bible as an ancient text, there seems to be very confused logic there. Which is typical of a human in this era subject to so many theories old and new, and trying to mix it in his mind into something meaningful.

Academics who have a head full of theories but no actual knowledge do create a truly chaotic mess within themselves, which is based frankly upon hiding within great libraries and institutions and never doing the field work of looking in your own actually mind !!
I was proud, and I demanded the finest teacher
.. .. and when he appeared
.. .. .. .. I was so small
User avatar
rideforever
 
Posts: 1513
Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2011 2:32 pm
Location: Hove

Next

Return to Recommended Links

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron