Is Biocentrism debunked? This is the pertinent question a lot of people have been asking these days. So, according to Biocentricsm, biology not physics, is the underlying science of the cosmos. It implies that life and consciousness are the origin of our cosmos. Moreover, it also holds that matter comes secondary. Several scientists and scholars have spent a lot of time researching this aspect of biocentrism.
It’s worth noting that they have completely discarded this theory. So, if you want to know more about Biocentrism and its theory, you are at the right place. Here we will share some awesome facts about biocentrism and whether or not for some reason it has any controversy.
Explaining The Controversy Surrounding Biocentrism
So, as we already mentioned, biocentrism holds biology, not physics is the underlying science of everything that exists around us. In other words, it gives biology the prime importance behind the entity of the universe and the cosmos. As such, this theory holds biology as the underlying science of the cosmos.
Although it’s a fascinating view of the cosmos, readers may like to know that the scientists do not believe it. In fact, we need to improve the empirical data and testable prediction in the theory for this to work. Furthermore, undermining its believability is also faulty physics comprehension.
Biocentrism and Death: Explaining The Concept
There’s no doubt about the fact that biocentrism is a radical approach. So, it’s a radical hypothesis that can affect physics, biology, and also consciousness. There are many who follow this concept as well. Let’s imagine a blade of grass. Although your eyes and brain say green, what if a neurologist could somehow reconnoiter your brain where the portion registers and make it seem red or yellow?
In fact, it’s worth noting that many scientists believe our brain interprets all reality as a sensory input. The reality that we see around us is actually created by our awareness. In fact, the physical space and time differs a lot from how we experience it in our life. Moreover, science believes in space-time continuity. So, scientists such as Lanza also call them the simple tools of our minds. As such, he believed, death cannot exist in a literal, real sense.
If you take a look at Newtonian physics, then you will see that energy doesn’t generate or destroy. So, it only changes its form. Moreover, our brain energy must also change. Meanwhile, our senses indicate their end. So, many people may wonder where this energy goes. In a vast universe without an end, could death really exist? So, if not, can exist inside or outside space-time? These are the concepts biocentrism loves to explore.
Criticisms of Biocentrism
So, as we mentioned earlier, biocentrism isn’t free from controversy. Readers already know that this theory isn’t foolproof. In fact, many scientists have already rejected the idea in several ways. Now it begs the question of why people don’t approve of this. Of course, this comes down to reading the criticisms.
So, one of the major objections to this theory is that it puts all living creatures at the center of ethical considerations. The criticism states human beings are all anthropocentric. So, they believe human interests and needs need to precede non-human ones, especially in conflict situations. Moreover, some also argue that this method violates different morals. These tell us to treat animals differently from plants and other beings.
On the other hand, others also believe that this theory is excessively idealistic. It’s unlikely to hold true because it overlooks life’s realities. As a result, they need to use proper resources, and not all sentient beings can get along. So, if you ask us, “Is biocentrism debunked?”, the answer is yet.
