It is currently Thu Mar 21, 2019 5:37 pm


Biocentrism vs. White Biocentrism

Fundamental ideas
  • Author
  • Message
Offline
User avatar

Will Williams

  • Posts: 1946
  • Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 9:22 am

Biocentrism vs. White Biocentrism

PostWed Nov 13, 2013 10:34 am

From the Left, a raceless POV: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-la ... 39416.html
---

Is There a God or Is There Nothingness? New Scientific Paradigm
Posted: 07/ 8/10
Robert Lanza, M.D.

The answer to such deep questions has traditionally been the province of religion, which excels at it. Every thinking person knows an insuperable mystery lies at the final square of the game board. So when we run out of explanations and causes that precede the previous cause, we say "God did it." In all directions, the current scientific paradigm leads to insoluble enigmas, to ideas that are ultimately irrational. But since World Wars I and II there has been an unprecedented burst of discovery. Although still unbalanced by this sudden growth, our worldview will soon catch up with the facts, and the old physico-chemical paradigm will be replaced with a new biologically-based one that can address some of the core questions asked in every religion.

Growing up during this period, I encountered the opposition to such new ways of thinking. As a boy, I lay awake at night and imagined my life as a scientist, peering at wonders through a microscope. But the reality was far from this dream. My school was separated into three classes of opportunity -- A, B and C. I was placed in C-class, a repository for those destined for manual, trade labor. My best friend was in A-class -- why him and not me? It was a challenge, especially after an exchange with his mother. "Do you think I could become a scientist?" I asked. "If I tried hard, could I be a doctor?" "Good gracious," she responded, explaining that she'd never known anyone in the C class to became a doctor, but that I'd make an excellent carpenter or a plumber.

The next day I decided to enter the science fair, which put me in direct competition with the A-class. My friend's parents took him to museums and created an impressive display for his rocks. My project -- animals -- included souvenirs from my various excursions: insects, feathers, and bird eggs. It won me second place behind my friend's project on rocks. Even in fifth grade I was convinced that life -- not material and rocks -− was the cornerstone of existence. It was a complete reversal of the natural scheme of things taught in our schoolbooks -- that is, atoms and physics at the base of the world, followed by chemistry, and then biology and life.

Science fairs were a way to show up those who labeled me for my family's circumstances. Once, after my sister was suspended, the principal told my mother that she wasn't fit to be a parent. By trying earnestly, I tried to improve my situation. I applied myself to an ambitious attempt to alter the genetic makeup of white chickens and make them black. My biology teacher said it was impossible; my chemistry teacher was blunter, saying, "Lanza, you're going to hell." Before the fair a friend predicted I'd win. "Ha-ha," the whole class laughed. When I won, the principal had to congratulate my mother in front of the whole school.

During my scientific career, I continued to encounter this kind of intolerance to new ideas. Can you clone a species using eggs from another? Can you generate stem cells without destroying embryos? Of course, scientists are no different from the rest of our species. We evolved in the forest roof to collect fruit and berries, so it shouldn't come as any surprise that this skill set hasn't served us well in understanding the nature of existence.

We open our eyes, and things appear to be magically hovering "out there" in some invisible matrix. In the nineteenth century, scientists called it the "ether," followed by the "spacetime" of Einstein, and then "string theory" with new dimensions blowing up in different realms. Indeed, unseen dimensions (up to a 100) are now envisioned everywhere, some curled up like soda straws at every point in space.

When science tries to resolve its conflicts by adding and subtracting dimensions to the Universe like houses on a Monopoly board, we need to examine our dogmas. We believe an external world exists independent of the perceiving subject. Philosophers and physicists from Plato to Hawking have debated this idea. Niels Bohr, the great Nobel physicist, said, "Not so." When we measure something, we're forcing an undetermined, undefined world to assume an experimental value. We're not "measuring" the world; we're creating it. At the legendary debates, Einstein presented ingenious ideas supporting the idea of a "real world out there," but Bohr shot them all down and gradually won over the physics community. But today most people still believe there's a real world out there.

This something-nothingness issue is ancient, and of course predates biocentrism, which explains why one view and not the other must be correct. Take the seemingly undeniable logic that your kitchen is always there, its contents assuming its familiar forms whether or not you're in it. At night you leave for the bedroom. Of course the kitchen is still there, unseen, all through the night. Right? But consider: the refrigerator, stove and everything else are composed of a shimmering swarm of matter/energy. Quantum theory, tells us not a single one of those particles actually exists in a definite place. Rather, like Bohr said, they merely exist as a range of probabilities that are unmanifest. In the presence of an observer -- that is, when you go back in to get a drink of water -− each one's wave function collapses and it assumes an actual position, a physical reality.

According to the "many-worlds" interpretation of quantum physics, there are an infinite number of universes -- known as the multiverse -- associated with each possible observation. Biocentrism extends this idea, suggesting that life has a non-linear dimensionality that encompasses the multiverse. Experiments show that measurements an observer makes can even influence events that have already happened in the past. Regardless of the choice you make, it'll be you (the observer) who experience the outcomes and histories that result.

Ideally, our concepts of nature and god should adapt to this evolving scientific knowledge. What happened before the Big Bang? Or if god made the world, then who made god? According to biocentrism, these are ultimately irrational questions, because space and time are simply tools of our understanding and don't exist in any absolute sense. Before and after are relative concepts tied to us, which includes the totality of existence in the multiverse. Imagine what might be possible, especially if we're able to recreate information systems to generate any consciousness-based reality fathomable.

"One thing I have learned in a long life," said Einstein, "[is] that all our science, measured against reality, is primitive and childlike -- and yet it is the most precious thing we have." Science, like religion, must work with simple concepts the human mind can comprehend. But if biocentrism is right, nature has much bigger plans for us than just this or that life -- plans far beyond anything religion has ever projected to any god. And perhaps, if science is clever enough to see, it will realize that religion may not be too far off with its concrete imagery; and that relative to the supreme creator, we humans are much like the microorganisms we scrutinize under the microscope.

Biocentrism: How Life and Consciousness Are the Keys to Understanding the True Nature of the Universe (BenBella Books) lays out Lanza's theory of everything. http://www.robertlanza.com/biocentrism- ... -universe/
Offline
User avatar

Will Williams

  • Posts: 1946
  • Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 9:22 am

Re: Biocentrism vs. White Biocentrism

PostSun Nov 17, 2013 2:19 pm

Christian Identity aside (which he doesn't address), Andrew Hamilton puts his finger on the difference between Biocentrism and White Biocentrism: the primacy of race in our philosophy/religion. Biocentric science and Nature are not enough for the White Biocentrist.
---

Varieties of White Religious Experience
Andrew Hamilton
January 9, 2011

It seems highly significant that so many who become active in the racialist cause finally feel more or less compelled to search for a spiritual foundation upon which to solidly ground their beliefs and ultimately their entire approach to life.

Cosmotheism, the Church of the Creator, Christian Identity, Norse paganism...the list could be extended.

One extension that should be briefly examined, if only because it is so startling and counterintuitive, is the deification of Adolf Hitler. Savitri Devi was of this school—and it was Pierce who reprinted her The Lightning and the Sun in Issue No. 1 (Spring 1966) of George Lincoln Rockwell’s intellectual journal, National Socialist World, of which he was editor.

Pierce authored a cover story on Hitler, “The Measure of Greatness,” in National Vanguard No. 110 (March-April 1989), in which he identified the German leader as “the greatest man of our era—a man who dared more and achieved more, who set his aim higher and climbed higher, who felt more deeply and stirred the souls of those around him more mightily, who was more closely attuned to the Life Force which permeates our cosmos and gives it meaning and purpose, and did more to serve that Life Force, than any other man of our times.”

He observed that “Adolf Hitler started literally from nothing and through the exercise of a superhuman will created the physical basis for the realization of his vision.” This same philosophical idealism—semi-miraculous materialization or creation out of mind and spirit—is captured in the title of Leni Riefenstahl’s famous film The Triumph of the Will.

In “Lincoln Rockwell: A National Socialist Life” (National Socialist World, Winter 1967, subsequently republished as a booklet), Pierce refers to Hitler mystically as “The Leader.”

Rockwell biographer William Schmaltz describes religious ceremonies involving photos of Hitler, the National Socialist flag, candles, and related paraphernalia, and in his Rockwell booklet Pierce mentions a series of intense dreams Rockwell experienced “nearly every night for a period of several weeks” while working as an advertising salesman in Atlanta during the winter of 1957-58. In each of them he was ushered into a small room in which Adolf Hitler was waiting, alone. The moment they met, the dreams ended.

“Always a skeptic where the supernatural was concerned,” Pierce writes, “he was certainly not a man easily influenced by omens. But there can be no doubt that he attached special significance” to the dreams.

“One can most easily interpret these dreams as a case of autosuggestion,” Pierce continues, “but in the light of later developments Rockwell considered them as a symbolic summons, a beckoning onto the path for which he was then still groping.” Rockwell never wrote about the dreams and related them to only a few people.

Hitler deification has been perpetuated to the present by Matt Koehl and the Wisconsin-based New Order. Koehl was formerly a top Rockwell lieutenant. It is quite interesting to examine their material from the religious point of view.

This search for a spiritual foundation, though initially provoked, I suspect, by the intense persecution, discrimination, and hatred to which whites have been subjected for more than a century, is probably necessary if we are to stop making “mistakes based on shortsightedness, mistakes from not being able to give any real weight to anything but the immediate problem, mistakes from not thinking far enough ahead.”

In Pierce’s account, it was the snide, genocidal hatred expressed by brainwashed white kids and a Jewish boy that provoked his own search for first principles.

Finally, I should add that Professor Robert S. Griffin’s intellectual biography, The Fame of a Dead Man’s Deeds (2001), contains several informative chapters elaborating upon the development of Pierce’s spiritual views: Chap. 4, “George Bernard Shaw,” Chap. 5, “Adolf Hitler,” Chap. 13, “Our Cause,” and Chap. 14, “Cosmotheism.”

In the last-mentioned chapter, Pierce describes how the Cosmotheist Community (later the Cosmotheist Community Church) evolved out of Sunday night lectures he gave in Arlington, Virginia in the early 1970s.

Sometimes he talked about race, sometimes about religion. Members of his audience responded differently—some were more interested in race, others in religion. When he talked about religion, “I could see the eyes glaze over in the first group.”

So he split the group up.

He said, “I also talked to the Cosmotheist group about how anything that has ever made an impact and shaped people’s lives has been more than just an idea. It has been an idea with a concrete embodiment. It not only had a doctrine, it had rituals and songs and priestly vestments, things like that.”
Offline
User avatar

Wade Hampton III

  • Posts: 1784
  • Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 10:40 pm
  • Location: Pontiac, SC

Re: A State Of Matter?

PostFri May 01, 2015 1:26 am

What makes the "you" in YOU tick? In the 70s, those searching for answers
fell into the swindle of the Jewess Ayn Rand. However, new theorems arise.
MIT’s Max Tegmark is championing a new way of explaining it: he believes
that consciousness is a state of matter.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/next/physi ... of-matter/

Most neuroscientists agonize over consciousness because it’s so difficult
to explain. In recent years, though, they've tended to agree that a conscious
entity must be able to store information, retrieve it efficiently, process
it, and exist as a unified whole—that is, you can’t break consciousness down
into smaller parts.

consciousness.jpg
Therefore I Am
consciousness.jpg (55.53 KiB) Viewed 4290 times
Offline

Cosmotheist

  • Posts: 643
  • Joined: Wed Feb 19, 2014 10:41 pm

Re: Biocentrism vs. White Biocentrism

PostFri May 01, 2015 10:27 am

Hello Folks,

The real difference between Robert Lanzas Biocentrism
and our own White Biocentrism is actually explained all
here:
viewtopic.php?f=10&t=900

Robert Lanza is mostly correct but really only up to a point.
His view of the world is still all an entirely subjective one.

From the Oxford dictionary:
solipsism, the view or theory that self is the only object of real knowledge
or the only thing really existent; subjective, existing in the mind only,
without anything real to correspond to it.

See:
http://nirmukta.com/2009/12/14/biocentr ... -universe/

Humans are "co-creators" of the Cosmos but a "panpsychism" within it all also
had first "created" the "objective-reality" all from the moment of the Big Bang.

A Creative Consciousness "is within all that exists" within the Cosmos,
and everything is within that "all-unified and interrelated
and Creatively Conscious Whole", and all at the same time.

That is the "Whole Cosmotheist Truth" of the late Dr. Pierce.
See these links:
http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/the-prim ... ciousness/
And:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmic_consciousness
And:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panpsychism




Best regards,
Cosmotheist

Image
Offline

Cosmotheist

  • Posts: 643
  • Joined: Wed Feb 19, 2014 10:41 pm

Re: A State Of Matter?

PostFri May 01, 2015 10:54 am

Wade Hampton III wrote:What makes the "you" in YOU tick? In the 70s, those searching for answers
fell into the swindle of the Jewess Ayn Rand. However, new theorems arise.
MIT’s Max Tegmark is championing a new way of explaining it: he believes
that consciousness is a state of matter.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/next/physi ... of-matter/

Most neuroscientists agonize over consciousness because it’s so difficult
to explain. In recent years, though, they've tended to agree that a conscious
entity must be able to store information, retrieve it efficiently, process
it, and exist as a unified whole—that is, you can’t break consciousness down
into smaller parts.

consciousness.jpg


Plasma was discovered to be the fourth state of matter but consciousness is that
which is within everything that actualizes the all potential states of matter just
as measurable observation collapses a wave function into a discrete particle in
quantum physics. A visual representation of this is the plasma sphere. Touching
any point on the sphere that is in the range of possibilities actualizes or draws
a bolt of electricity to that point or actualizes it from all of its potential ranges.




Best regards,
Cosmotheist

Image
Offline
User avatar

Will Williams

  • Posts: 1946
  • Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 9:22 am

Re: Biocentrism vs. White Biocentrism

PostFri May 01, 2015 5:52 pm

Will Williams wrote:Varieties of White Religious Experience
Andrew Hamilton
January 9, 2011

[...]

Finally, I should add that Professor Robert S. Griffin’s intellectual biography, The Fame of a Dead Man’s Deeds (2001), contains several informative chapters elaborating upon the development of Pierce’s spiritual views: Chap. 4, “George Bernard Shaw,” Chap. 5, “Adolf Hitler,” Chap. 13, “Our Cause,” and Chap. 14, “Cosmotheism.”

In the last-mentioned chapter, Pierce describes how the Cosmotheist Community (later the Cosmotheist Community Church) evolved out of Sunday night lectures he gave in Arlington, Virginia in the early 1970s.

Sometimes he talked about race, sometimes about religion. Members of his audience responded differently—some were more interested in race, others in religion. When he talked about religion, “I could see the eyes glaze over in the first group.”

So he split the group up.

He said, [b]“I also talked to the Cosmotheist group about how anything that has ever made an impact and shaped people’s lives has been more than just an idea. It has been an idea with a concrete embodiment. It not only had a doctrine, it had rituals and songs and priestly vestments, things like that.”[/b]

When I put up the opening post in this thread back on November 13, 2013, We hadn't relaunched American Dissident Voices broadcasts yet -- Kevin Alfred Strom has since produced and hosted 70 shows in as many weeks -- and I was still nearly a year away from succeeding Erich Gliebe as Chairman of the National Alliance and Trustee of the Cosmotheist Community Church.

What a difference 18 months makes. 2015 marks the 30th anniversary of when Dr. Pierce move the Alliance and the CCC to The Land in WV and now we will attempt to carry out his vision of White Zion on that land. It's going to be a great year! :D
Offline
User avatar

Wade Hampton III

  • Posts: 1784
  • Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 10:40 pm
  • Location: Pontiac, SC

Re: Biocentrism vs. White Biocentrism

PostSat May 02, 2015 12:51 am

Will Williams wrote:What a difference 18 months makes. 2015 marks the 30th anniversary of when Dr. Pierce move the Alliance and the CCC to The Land in WV and now we will attempt to carry out his vision of White Zion on that land. It's going to be a great year! :D


Kewel! Feel like I am twenty years old again! However, it has become quite difficult to
conceal fifty years of wear and tear. Hanging in there for August of '17!

8-)
Offline
User avatar

Will Williams

  • Posts: 1946
  • Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 9:22 am

Re: Biocentrism vs. White Biocentrism

PostMon Oct 23, 2017 6:33 pm

Will Williams wrote:When I put up the opening post in this thread back on November 13, 2013, we hadn't relaunched American Dissident Voices broadcasts yet -- Kevin Alfred Strom has since produced and hosted 70 shows in as many weeks -- and I was still nearly a year away from succeeding Erich Gliebe as Chairman of the National Alliance and Trustee of the Cosmotheist Community Church.

What a difference 18 months makes. 2015 marks the 30th anniversary of when Dr. Pierce moveed the Alliance and the CCC to The Land in WV and now we will attempt to carry out his vision of White Zion on that land. It's going to be a great year! :D

What a difference four years makes.

Speaking of Dr. Pierce's 32-year-old dream of our White Zion prototype Cosmotheist community in West Virginia, I see
the alt-right crowd is catching on to the idea now:
---

Neo-Nazi Richard Spencer says
he turns to Israel “for guidance”

Ali Abunimah
20 October 2017

American neo-Nazi demagogue Richard Spencer has again praised Israel as a model for the Aryan homeland he wants to create in the United States.

“The most important and perhaps most revolutionary ethno-state, and it’s one that I turn to for guidance, even though I might not always agree with its foreign policy decisions … is the Jewish state of Israel,” Spencer told an audience at the University of Florida in Gainesville on Thursday.

“The Jewish state of Israel is not just another country in the Middle East,” Spencer added. “It is a country for Jews and for Jews around the world.”

Spencer said he acknowledged the “moral legitimacy” of other “ethno-states,” naming Russia, Poland and Hungary as supposed examples.

Spencer and his backers faced big protests including cries of “Go home Nazis!” and “Nazi scum!”

Spencer’s appearance had prompted the governor of Florida to declare a state of emergency, fearing a repeat of the lethal violence that occurred in August when Nazis marched in Charlottesville, Virginia.

Image
The rude, self-hating whites standing are determined to not allow the alt-right "Nazi," Mr.
Spencer, to speak to those Whites who are seated, who came to hear what he has to say.


An alleged vehicular attack by a far-right extremist in Charlottesville killed anti-racism activist Heather Heyer.

“White Zionism”

Leah Gorshein, president of the University of Florida pro-Israel campus group and a student board member with Hillel, told The Jerusalem Post on Wednesday that she was concerned about “the anti-Israel and anti-Jewish movement that could arise” from Spencer’s visit.

Yet while the American far right unquestionably exhibits anti-Semitism, Spencer, like other contemporary Nazis, has been effusively positive about Israel and its founding Zionist ideology.

Spencer has previously referred to his desire for a European enclave in North America as “white Zionism.”

Last December, Texas A&M campus rabbi Matt Rosenberg publicly challenged Spencer over the white supremacist’s message of “radical exclusion.”

“My tradition teaches a message of radical inclusion, as embodied by Torah,” Rosenberg said.

In an exchange caught on video and widely circulated online, Spencer responded, “Do you really want radical inclusion into the state of Israel?”

The rabbi was left almost speechless.

Rosenberg later conceded that he lost the argument with Spencer...
---
Read more here: https://electronicintifada.net/blogs/al ... l-guidance
Offline
User avatar

White Man 1

  • Posts: 449
  • Joined: Wed May 25, 2016 2:35 pm
  • Location: Knoxville

Re: Biocentrism vs. White Biocentrism

PostTue Oct 24, 2017 12:14 pm

An alleged vehicular attack by a far-right extremist in Charlottesville killed anti-racism activist Heather Heyer.


Interesting how the terminology has changed from "murder" to "alleged vehicular attack". The media narrative of Charlottesville must be falling apart.
Offline
User avatar

Will Williams

  • Posts: 1946
  • Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 9:22 am

Re: Biocentrism vs. White Biocentrism

PostTue Oct 24, 2017 4:41 pm

White Man 1 wrote:
An alleged vehicular attack by a far-right extremist in Charlottesville killed anti-racism activist Heather Heyer.


Interesting how the terminology has changed from "murder" to "alleged vehicular attack". The media narrative of Charlottesville must be falling apart.


Just searched for 'James Fields Charlottesville' and nothing came up dated any later than mid-August. This was in the Toledo, OH, paper on 13 August and is typical of the journalism that day: http://www.toledoblade.com/local/2017/0 ... ocked.html

---
Mr. Fields is charged with second-degree murder, three counts of malicious wounding and failing to stop at the scene of an accident that resulted in a death. He in custody at the Albemarle-Charlottesville Regional Jail.
---

If Fields doesn't die in jail or isn't lynched first, I predict he'll beat the murder overcharge, knowing what we've learned about him -- and about his "victim," the big-boned Ms. Hyer (pictured, leaving the scene of an accident where she'd suffered a fatal heart attack) -- since the MSM's irresponsible anti-White rush to convict the "Nazi." Accidents are not murders.

Image

Return to Religion and Philosophy

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest