River, nature landscape

Biocentrism vs Ecocentrism: Which Best Helps Save Our World?


In recent years, there has been an increased interest in environmentalism and sustainability. As a result, many different philosophies have arisen in an attempt to address the issue of humanity’s impact on the planet. Two of the most prominent philosophies are biocentrism and ecocentrism.

So, what is the difference between these two approaches? And which one is more effective in addressing the problems of our time?

by David Stone

What is biocentrism?

Biocentrism is a radical concept developed by Robert Lanza. It holds the intriguing idea that life creates the universe, rather than the other way around.


Essentially, biocentrism argues that “reality” is solely dependent on conscious life. This offers an alternative view of the universe and everything in it, suggesting that consciousness has a powerful impact on all physical events.

Rather than existing outside of our conscious experience, our world relies on it as its basic foundation. Biocentrism challenges our traditional scientific understanding and expands possibilities for contemplation and exploration beyond what was previously deemed possible.

What is ecocentrism?

Ecocentrism is the belief that all living things and their nonliving environment should be valued equally. This environment-centered approach to life emphasizes the interdependence of humans, animals, plants, and ecosystems.

It considers not only organized human systems but also nonhuman species and natural elements as integral members of society.

Therefore, ecocentrism promotes environmental stewardship based on principles of caring for nature instead of an exploitative relationship with it. Through this lens, the natural world is celebrated and seen as inherently valuable regardless of how it benefits humanity.

The value of weighing differences

Looking at two different entities is an interesting experience because, often, there are differences that stand out, sharpening focus.

For example, two individuals might appear similar on the surface but have incredibly contrasting values and beliefs.

Or two seemingly different items might actually have more similarities upon closer examination.

Comparing and contrasting things to discover their differences can be a highly rewarding activity that helps us understand and appreciate the world around us in a deeper way.

What is the Difference Between Biocentrism and Ecocentrism?

Finding a common thread between two very different philosophies on sustainability is a challenge.

On one hand, you have biocentrism, which focuses on the needs of individuals and species. On the other hand, you have ecocentrism, which emphasizes holistic systems thinking and the notion that everything in the environment is connected.

So which approach is better?

Biocentrism vs. Ecocentrism

At its core, biocentrism takes a human-centered perspective on environmental sustainability. It argues that all living things have intrinsic value and should be treated with respect and dignity.

This means humans should not exploit or manipulate nature for our own benefit, but instead work in harmony with nature to ensure its continued health and vitality.

In contrast, ecocentrism is based on a holistic understanding of the environment; it recognizes that all living things are interconnected and interdependent.

According to this view, human activity has an impact on the environment as a whole—not just individual species or ecosystems—and therefore we need to take responsibility for our actions if we want to maintain a healthy planet.

This means minimizing our environmental footprint by reducing waste production, consuming less energy, choosing sustainable products and services, etc. so that future generations can enjoy a healthy environment too.

Which Approach Is Better?

Determining which system is “better” is difficult because both offer unique perspectives on how humans interact with their environment.

Biocentrism may appeal more to those who prioritize individual rights over larger systems-level concerns. But ecocentrism may be more attractive to those who take into account the long-term effects of human activity.

Ultimately though, it doesn’t have to be an either/or decision; it is possible (and even preferable) for individuals to embrace elements from both approaches when making decisions about how we interact with nature.

Conclusion: Biocentrism vs Ecocentrism

Ultimately, there isn’t one right answer when it comes to determining whether biocentrism or ecocentrism is “better” for achieving sustainable outcomes; rather it depends on your personal values and beliefs about how humans should interact with the natural world around them.

That said, it is possible—and even preferable—for individuals to embrace elements from both approaches.

Biocentrism and ecocentrism are two ways of looking at the world. They differ in their focus on human beings and the natural environment.

Ecocentrism looks at the world from the perspective of all living things, while biocentrism sees humans as a part of nature.

Neither one is necessarily better than the other, but being mindful of both perspectives provides deep balance.

As we face environmental challenges, consider both biocentrism and ecocentrism in decision-making.

The Roosevelt Island Daily is always free to read. But our expenses are not. Publishing has costs beyond the human ones of writing and reporting. We appreciate your generous contribution in support our work. Thank you.

Leave a Reply

Previous Story

Is Queens New York Safe for Living or Visiting?

Next Story

A biocentrism definition that clarifies this fascinating idea

Latest from A Different Way

0 $0.00
%d bloggers like this: