The word ‘autopoiesis’, which means the capability of a system of reproducing and maintaining itself, is an Esperanto-related word, in the sense that Esperanto gives major support to the autopoiesis of the human race (and in the sense that it is a consciously-coined term). (“Al la mond’ eterne militanta, ĝi promesas sanktan harmonion.”) However, this Esperanto-related word is lacking in: Benson, Wells, Vikivortaro, Vikipedio, ReVo, and Sonja.

I'm looking for Benson and Wells, as dictionaries, on google and don't find anything... are they Universities or something? Not that I haven't had a try at that (unsuccessfully )

"Wells" is the well-known dictionary by John Wells.

Ha!Thanks Vestitor! I must say that his involment in esperanto is also of interest!

John C. Wells (born 1939), British linguist, phonetician and Esperantist

mkj1887:The word ‘autopoiesis’, which means the capability of a system of reproducing and maintaining itself, is an Esperanto-related word, in the sense that Esperanto gives major support to the autopoiesis of the human race (and in the sense that it is a consciously-coined term). (“Al la mond’ eterne militanta, ĝi promesas sanktan harmonion.”) However, this Esperanto-related word is lacking in: Benson, Wells, Vikivortaro, Vikipedio, ReVo, and Sonja.

Are you sure you know what that word means? Do you understand the root "auto" in it?
If you do, how can the sentence "Esperanto gives major support to the autopoiesis" make any sense at all?
If Esperanto gave support to the ability of self-recreation of any system, that same system would lack autopoiesis.

I know that it is cool to use important sounding greek or latin words, but sometimes this can backfire horribly.

Hey, nornen, don't be so hasty to put people down! mkj1887's claim makes total sense, because Esperanto is part of the human race. For something to be auto-[something] it cannot require external support, but of course its internal parts support the process.

Let's say that a car is auto-mobile: it is able to move by itself. If I said "the tow-truck gives support to the auto-mobility of the car" you could say "well then it is not truly auto-mobile". However, if I said "the car's engine gives support to the auto-mobility of the car" you would say "that is true, and because the engine is an internal part of the car it is still true to say that the car is auto-mobile".

Esperanto is not external to the human race, giving it support from afar. It is internal to the human race, allowing our race to maintain and reproduce itself. At least, that is the meaning of mjk1887's claim. I myself am not sure to what extent this is true exactly - it seems to me that the human race would still be able to reproduce and maintain itself without Esperanto.

Gosio:Hey, nornen, don't be so hasty to put people down! mkj1887's claim makes total sense, because Esperanto is part of the human race. For something to be auto-[something] it cannot require external support, but of course its internal parts support the process.

It does not make sense. Look at the parts Nornen bolded; it was bolded for a reason: they contradict one another.

Gosio:Let's say that a car is auto-mobile: it is able to move by itself. If I said "the tow-truck gives support to the auto-mobility of the car" you could say "well then it is not truly auto-mobile". However, if I said "the car's engine gives support to the auto-mobility of the car" you would say "that is true, and because the engine is an internal part of the car it is still true to say that the car is auto-mobile".

That example is completely irrelevant. A car is neither a self-creating nor maintaining system/organism.

Gosio:Esperanto is not external to the human race, giving it support from afar. It is internal to the human race, allowing our race to maintain and reproduce itself. At least, that is the meaning of mjk1887's claim. I myself am not sure to what extent this is true exactly - it seems to me that the human race would still be able to reproduce and maintain itself without Esperanto.

Your self-invented premise that "Esperanto is part of the human race", with the implication that is an integral, fundamental part rather than a product of culture does not support it either.

Maybe it's better to explain the word in esperanto.

From what I understood, I would translate it by "pluiĝemo/pliiĝemo", but maybe I'm wrong.