What explanation for consciousness do think has the strongest support? Share your view in the comments. If you enjoyed this episode of Closer To Truth, please consider subscribing. You can find more episodes from Season 18 in the Season 18 playlist on our channel: bit.ly/3b7OJXq

@TasteMyStinkholeAndLikeIt

4 жыл бұрын

You should have included Donald Hoffman, cognitive neuroscientist, and his theory of reality and conscious agents. You should have included Rupert Spira and his explanation of Vedic Philosophy. These materialist morons you interview are never going to get you an answer to consciousness.

@fistandantilusdarkone2684

4 жыл бұрын

The founders of the theory: Roger Penrose and Stuart Hameroff, respectively Orchestrated objective reduction (Orch OR) is a biological philosophy of mind that postulates that consciousness originates at the quantum level inside neurons, rather than the conventional view that it is a product of connections between neurons. The mechanism is held to be a quantum process called objective reduction that is orchestrated by cellular structures called microtubules. It is proposed that the theory may answer the hard problem of consciousness and provide a mechanism for free will. I find this a great challenge to consciousness question.

@hydrorix1

4 жыл бұрын

Physicists, as the name implies, are mired in physicalism -- the material. Idealism still seaks to explain the physical. Consciousness is all there is. The material is perception within consciousness. It is the fundamental force. Consciousness is primordial, superintendent, executive, and creative of all other forces. Until science and academia grasp this, little more will be accomplished in either of any real substance. As far as Theism, most religions say we are made in God's image. If God is consciousness, then I agree. I posit less of a deity than an ultimate consciousness. Worship not required. Understanding would be best. Human consciousness is partitioned from Primary Consciousness to create a feedback loop within an arena of choice and consequence in order to create value and truth. Truth and value lead to wisdom and compassion. Wisdom and compassion lead to the greatest appreciation of all, which we label as love, which is simply what we describe the highest state of frequency and vibration -- resonant indwelling of correspondent consciousness. I think of this as "Mentism," as in experienced mentation, or experiment. Everything we experience is consciousness, from within and without. Perception within consciousness is what we regard as life. As a metaphor, consciousness is the action state of the Zero Point Field. The Observer is the feedback mechanism.

@GJ-dj4jx

4 жыл бұрын

To me Idealism, or the idea that all there is consciousness is the best explanation. Bernardo Kastrup is one of my favorite proponents of this philosophy.

@hydrorix1

4 жыл бұрын

@@GJ-dj4jx Bernardo Kastrup is the best our there right now on consciousness and reality. Consciousness is primordial, superintendent, executive, and creative of all other perceived forces. Consciousness is all there is as far as I'm concerned. Reality is perception within consciousness, and that's all.

I just love watching your videos. You’re like the Anthony Bourdain of physics and philosophy. Each episode is a journey.

Consciousness and its nature was first described in the Upanishads and Vedas, the ancient texts of Hinduism, believed to be written around 3000 BC in ancient India, 1000s of years before David Chalmers ever thought about the hard problem...

@dare-er7sw

Жыл бұрын

Advaita Vedanta is quite clear on the nature of consciousness.

@theomnisthour6400

Жыл бұрын

Writing about doesn't make your explanation right. Hindu philosophy gets many things right, but the trend of Eastern philosophical religions toward unity consciousness and the idea of a supreme cosmic consciousness is an affront to the first creative souls, only some of whom seek to assimilate other soul's consciousness in BORG fashion. Reincarnation and karma are real, and apply to all souls, all individual consciousnesses. The pied piers that are telling you you can get to nirvana oneness, source oneness, Christ consciousness, etc. are willfully or foolishly spreading BORG lies to try to take your souls to the heaven/hell universes of dark authoritarian god souls.

@Arjunrajuanke

Жыл бұрын

So that India is in back position

This is the best episode yet - I like "Consciousness is a fundamental element of the Universe" and that our brains are connected to that element since we are in the Universe and the Universe is in us.

I can't think of an episode I've enjoyed more. Thank you so much for your work!

@alanssnack1192

Жыл бұрын

big nose

I lived vicariously through this episode... such a beautiful location to be in.. Banff and talking to Sean, Tegmark etc... I was so happy

I don't know how much I can thank you for sharing your curiosity. I am eternally thankful!

Millions should watch this.

@bobs182

4 жыл бұрын

This isn't keeping up with the Kardashians.

So much hard work poured into these episodes. So much material to delve into! I really hope to see a documentary.

Great work, #CloserToTruth team.

Robert Kuhn the host is just such an awesome down to earth and stable rational inquiring and wise kind of guy.. Really like him

@msimp0108

4 жыл бұрын

Can’t.stand.him

For me, being myself non physicalist in terms of consciousness, this video post was not less than watching a Hollywood movie.. initially got tense by physicalist speakers,then slowly got little relieved by last two speakers and finally got thrilled by final conclusion by DR. ROBERT L. KUHN.....I watched this post 10 times...Seven times understanding , digesting & enjoying the contents and three times for enjoying the scenery /Landscape at the location with out listening the contents... of course all the speakers including Dr. Robert L Khun look like heroes/ stars of the Hollywood film.... thanks 🙏.

Max, Sean, David.... THIS is the video that got me HOOKED ON CTT. Well done, Dr Kuhn !

I love the way Lawrence just nods his head in agreement with a little smile as all of this information is thrown at him, like it’s all just simple fundamental knowledge. I’m glad he understands it so easily. I have to listen to it a couple of times and really ponder in order to grasp it. 😊

@TheGr8scott

2 жыл бұрын

If you've only watched a few of his videos you may not pick up on it but he is extremely well versed in every subject on his show. He's very modest and for the most part gives his guests free run of the direction of conversation though so it's not always obvious. He also occasionally asks some of the more 'basic' questions for the benefit of his viewers.

Awareness and thinking are not the same things. You can be aware of what you are thinking or not. Thinking can be explained in terms of physics. The awareness of the thinking cannot.

@machida5114

4 жыл бұрын

意識は、知覚です。思考は、行動です。

Love yr summary, thank you. ❤

These are fantastic. Thanks a lot.👍☺

Interesting. Thank you. 🙏

Fascinating information 🙂✌

Quantum entanglement and quantum superposition applied to this phenomenon will eventually provide some better answers. We are just barely beginning to understand these kinds of effects in biological systems. To be sure, we will mostly only uncover greater sophistication of interrelated complexities that will be revealed by any discoveries. They will likely seem unending.

@rodneydowney2561

4 жыл бұрын

True. We won't begin to understand consciousness until our consciousness is able to perceive the luminous fibers of consciousness that unite all things in the universe. Quantum physics is showing us the way, but at present, such perception is rare and therefore regarded as too unique to qualify for serious inquiry. The greatest weakness of science is the limits it imposes on itself. You can find only what you're looking for.

@skronked

Жыл бұрын

This guy is a damn lunatick!

So so good!

Thank you for posting this series I love it the low amount of views actually amazes me it addresses some of the most important questions humanity has just goes to show how dumbed down humanity has gotten

@VeganSemihCyprus33

3 жыл бұрын

If you want to know further and if you are hungry for truth you should watch my recent videos here on my youtube channel where I talk about the most important things that people should know about. But before doing that, check this very important animation: kzread.info/dash/bejne/d4CeybasZ6Wsc5c.html

Dear God that was a beautiful location in Canada. My consciousness feels so, at least.

@jefferee2002

4 жыл бұрын

@fynes leigh so, I was trying to add a bit of levity to the debate....

@readynowforever3676

4 жыл бұрын

jefferee2002 Consciousness has nothing to do with vision.

@whatshisname3304

3 жыл бұрын

i think they have all lost consciousness of humour, and of the beautiful scenery.

@JB-kx9bx

2 жыл бұрын

I'd love to visit Bnaff one day

That guy has an amazing voice

How about an explanation that is neither radical nor within the sphere of our comprehension? Does anyone think it may be possible that there are things that exist and are real that we are incapable of understanding because we, ourselves, are too intrinsically limited?

Disappointed that Sir Roger Penrose wasn't featured. I watched a video where he talked about consciousness and computation and he was talking about micro-tubules. It was very interesting.

@nicholaspullen6608

2 жыл бұрын

He was talking about some kind of resonance, which the second guy discussed. Penrose pioneered this idea.

@london9842

Жыл бұрын

Technically, Stuart Hameroff pioneered the idea that consciousness is embedded in micro-tubules.

Beautiful, if you go to Vieques ( Puerto Rico 🇵🇷) you really have consciousness ! Love you Rob, now even more !

I remember reading Zen and the art of motorcycle maintenance.. back in the eighties..alot in that book affected me.. but what deeply affected me was the claim that even if we one day discovered the structure of the universe it would only amount to discovering the structure of one grain of sand on a beach. Depressing.. but probably true.. also discussed in that book was the impossibility of discovering the nature of consciousness by using the human brain..as the human brain was a small part of it.. so probably an inadequate platform

This is a billiant episode!

Thanks lot Robbert for such a radical scepticism on Consciousness..

Fascinating stuff. I’m not intelligent nor educated enough to keep up with these guys but I am able to follow them in a very basic way. I’m also glad there was no “God talk” in these discussions and they kept it secular

great job ❤🎉

Consciousness is universal, only your ego(self identity) is what seperates us... There's no feeling that you can have that I cannot have, all experiences(of consciousness) are the same ie produce the same emotional reactions which is in itself a part of consciousness. What are we doing on a day to day basis? Collecting light and sound :)

A deeply y satisfying session with more Question s than Answers.. To seek Truth regarding Consciousness, I will not circle around the known Quantitative tools that define modern science but will take a journey back to our, Indian roots and the tremendous knowledge of " Vedas" and " Philosophies " of Swami Vivekananda, His guru Ramakrishna and the great saint Adi Sankara..

Enjoying very much your videos and the interesting opinions and views from experts on the field, hope you'll have a breakthrough with all gathered informations, thankyou.

"Does Consciousness Require a Radical Explanation?" I do not believe that it does. For me, consciousness is super simple. I support Giulio Tononi's view.

Could particles / neural signals of perceptions in brain be quantized into wave functions of time that interact as probability distributions (like waves in ocean) to connect and combinel elements of experience(s) for interpretation by the mind (a kind of sense of meaning)?

I often described consciousness as the phenomenon where there is an awareness of self (agent) and all other things. In Physics, we know how electricity works but not totally in its quantum mechanical level. We may label an electron as physical, and we may have a working description of what physical means, but maybe our working description about it, is something that is wrong.

Top class. 💯

20:40 Yes! Consciousness it the one absolute essential!

I hope everyone is enjoying this series. I find, to get he most out f the comments made by various scientists and thinkers, is to pause the video after they make a specific comment, and drink in their idea, and think deeply about it before moving forward with the video. Learn to stop, at a point in discussion to really think about what the speaker is saying. before moving on. I often watch these programs and then go back and watch them again slowly to make sure I'm understanding exactly what they are saying. It's easy to misinterpret their meaning on the first viewing. This is deep stuff, and needs to be thought through in detail. Closer to Truth is not about giving us he answers as much as making us search for the answers.

Perhaps, to better understand consciousness, we should start by asking the question: " What is our need to understand consciousness?". For we are consciousness, trying to understand our selves. What is this process: this drive for self-understanding? I believe we have direct access to this information and it might be a good first step in understanding the nature of consciousness.

The universe has no existence at all without the existence of some kind of consciousness. This indicates to me that consciousness is fundamental to the very existence of the universe and that consciousness was perhaps a precondition for the universe to come into existence. Certainly quantum mechanics experiments have hinted at a relationship between the observer and an event. So I guess I favour the third position.

@Getyourwishh

4 жыл бұрын

Interesting insight, thank you.

@dare-er7sw

4 жыл бұрын

David W look up sarvapriyananda on KZread of NYC Vedanta society. The teachings of the Upanishad say the same. Pure Consciousness is of the nature of sat chit Amanda or existence consciousness bliss. We are that reality. Also check out I Am That of nisargadatta.

Hardcore materialists such as Sean Carroll represent the perfect example of how a person can be completely oblivious of the fact that all humans (including myself) are basically sleepwalking through life. Furthermore, such a sleepwalking (somnambulistic) type of obliviousness requires that our level of consciousness be attenuated in just the right amount in order to make our strange situation* feel natural and believable to us (similar to our acceptance of the conditions taking place within the context of a vivid dream). *(As one simple example of what I mean by our “strange situation,” I am talking about the fact that here we are, magnetically adhered to the surface of a spinning orb that only takes a mere 24 hours to make one revolution, while flying laterally through space at approximately 67,000 mph, yet we are basically unaware of any movement taking place.) Consequently, this built-in attenuation of our awareness can cause extremely intelligent humans (like Carroll) to try and offer some kind of materialistic explanation for it all. However, all they are doing is demonstrating the depth and degree of their somnambulism and the extent to which the structural perfection of this vast (dream-like) illusion of objective reality has them completely under its thrall. _______

@TheUltimateSeeds

4 жыл бұрын

@@Gandalf98 Hi Gandalf, thanks for the kind acknowledgement and thanks for the link. I wasn’t familiar with the works of Ed Witten or Don Page, but Leonard Susskind is one of my favorites. Setting aside the unresolved measurement problem in quantum mechanics and the question of whether or not the 3-D reality of the universe will even take form without the presence of consciousness possibly playing a role in the collapse of the wavefunction,... ...the task I like to pose to anyone who puts the primacy of matter above the primacy of consciousness is to name just one material phenomenon in all of reality that would have any reason whatsoever for existing if life and consciousness did not exist. So far, pretty much everyone evades the challenge. _______

Great job. Interesting. I definitely fall in the category of consciousness is a transcendent quality that we are able to experience. Like the gnostic said we were given a drop of it. I think you have to look at shamans also and the eastern cultures that I’ve been diving into a consciousness for thousands of years.

@REDPUMPERNICKEL

2 жыл бұрын

Consciousness is not a quality, it IS experience.

@ihatespam2

10 ай бұрын

Diving into their imaginations and each finding a different answer, sounds more like wishful thinking than science.

19:30 - The question for me always becomes - how is identity theory saying anything much different than Chalmers' type of dualism? To call it electrical signals is already A = B whereas a dualist or functionalist would be saying A = B and thus B = A. This seems like a topic where the biggest roadblock is politics and tribal affiliation.

The problem with the hard problem of consciousness is that at some point there's also a hard problem of anything that would be fundamental. There would be some subatomic particle or principle that would do this and that, and interact with others in some way and not others, but you could still ask why; if there's not an infinite recursion of causality, at some point things just are the way they are, it's their fundamental nature. So it may well be that from cognitive systems with enough complexity it will just emerge this seemingly magical, seemingly non-physical property out of nowhere, and that's just what happens.

@alexgaggio2957

4 жыл бұрын

That's what laws are, so by your theory there must be a law of consciousness.

The thing with experience, is that is what we perceive within a given time, space and vessel (and the vessels collective experiences/ a gaining of information of different environments within time and space). I lean towards the dualist train of thought.

This is a great discussion. It seems Kuhn does not like the physicalists' view. Nor do I. I want to be open to the idea, but I don't know how a physical system can generate something (consciousness) that the physical system itself would then become an object of the consciousness it purports to generate. That seems to be so fantastical to me. Help me out, someone! I love these discussions!

@REDPUMPERNICKEL

Жыл бұрын

Focus on the concept of analogy. The frequencies of the neural signals generated by the sense organs are the analogues or representations of impinging energies. Now imagine every one of the hundred billion neurons in the brain has a base discharge frequency that is derived from sense organ analogies. Think a hundred billion analogies all synaptically jostling each other in the process we call thinking. One of those analogies is what we call the self. When other analogies modulate the self, those modulations are of what the self is conscious. In a nutshell that may require a good deal of contemplation but encouragingly promises an epiphany.

I sort of assume that consciousness requires some energy, though I can't really prove it. If so, what's the advantage to being conscious? You can say that pain is just a bunch of nerve signals. But we can program robots to respond to stimuli and be fairly certain that no proto-consciousness arises. From an evolutionary viewpoint, it wold seem an inefficiency to carry around the extra baggage of conscious experience.

@dare-er7sw

Жыл бұрын

To give matter meaning. Consciousness makes experience possible.

Could wave functions of the neural signals integrate perceptions into conscious experience?

The crucial point is neither experience, nor memory. Because animals also have these features. What makes consciousness distinctive is its reflexive property. That is what some philisophers call "prereflexive cogito". Human consciousness thinks about itself. İt says, "Now İ think about myself". Or like this: "Now İ think about what İ think." İn my opinion this is possible by the agency of language. Thinking about thinking is impossible without language. (Bu language İ mean an abstract language with developed grammatical structures.)

You are great at what you do, sir. It would be my dream to have your job!

@reinhardts-entropica

4 жыл бұрын

He built his job by himself, no-one put him there. Just do it on yourself.

in the quantum wave function, time may provide or be consciousness?

I've said it before. This needs more views.

The keyword is “Structure”. I call it Mental Structure (MS). MS will take you one step closer to the truth. And, MS will make your daily life has more solid structural sense, such as, mental abilities are (products) generated by the MS as well as they can be analyzed with MS. Consciousness is a product of MS and PS (physical structure) interactive causation. Mind is reducible, so consciousness is reducible. Experience is unique, but experience is reducible and can be reassembled.

Chalmers, Tegmark, and even Hoffman use Tononi's theory at some level. Maybe that is the path, taking IIT with fundamental consciousness.

Structured informative integrated an exclusive

I'm in the camp of an external consciousness.

Thank you for these wonderful, thought-provoking videos. This one is focused on one of man’s deepest mysteries. Consider this . . . Without the subjective, human “qualia” of consciousness, there would be no existence (or perceived existence) to anything here - the scientists, their theories or tools, this KZread channel, any of us posters here, humanity, history, the Big Bang theory, the Earth, the Milky Way galaxy, the Local Group or anything else in the vast expanse of the cosmic landscape. Everything is (or appears to us to be) contingent or predicated upon this thing called consciousness. Query: Is not consciousness then a universal predicate for existence as we humans in this particular local universe know and perceive it? A topic to ponder.

@REDPUMPERNICKEL

3 жыл бұрын

You are standing on a promontory observing the view. A boy sneaks up behind you. You are not conscious that he is there. You turn to look in another direction. You see the boy and become conscious of him. You were not conscious of him and then you were. Not exactly profound, is it?

@garybalatennis

3 жыл бұрын

@@REDPUMPERNICKEL Sir. For you, me, the boy, life and consciousness and even existence to “exist” (or even appear to) is both deeply profound and beyond miraculous. From absolute Nothing, only comes nothing. For absolute Nothing to produce Everything is supremely staggering.

@REDPUMPERNICKEL

3 жыл бұрын

@@garybalatennis You go to bed and fall asleep where, between the dreams, you cease to be. What is more likely during your awakening, that body is simply changing mode of operation or that the universe is literally popping into existence? The first is entirely explicable, the second extremely outrageously not. "From absolute Nothing, only comes nothing." Is as fine an example of a self evidently true statement as we can imagine. Thus, because there is undoubt-ably something (via Descartes' cogito) we are forced to conclude, Something Has Always Existed and perhaps even that time is nothing more than delusion. (Try taking 'time' to be an immensely useful concept long ago synthesized by the ancients out of ideas of matter and motion critical to coordinated behavior and the survival of nascent civilizations. (If this idea of 'time as a concept' is new to you then dwell for a while on the fact that at the heart of every clock can be found only some matter contrived to vibrate and never some delicate antenna bending to and fro in a river of time. That river is a metaphorical construct forever frustrating all who attempt to sail it or scoop it up with the tongs of science).

@garybalatennis

3 жыл бұрын

@@REDPUMPERNICKEL “All the world’s a stage. And all the men and women merely players.” As You Like It, Act II, Scene VII, Shakespeare “Row, row, row your boat, gently down the stream. Merrily, merrily, merrily merrily, Life is but a Dream.” Children’s Nursery Song

@REDPUMPERNICKEL

3 жыл бұрын

@@garybalatennis I have the impression that you might not have received the meaning I was striving to convey. I put the paragraph on time in parenthesis to indicate I understood the thoughts within to be somewhat tangential to the conscious topic. The last time I sang “Row, row, row your boat", kindergarten 65 orbits ago and as you can imagine, the recollection is pretty slim, remains only the fact of singing and that I know the lyrics. Not so fuzzy is the memory from the same era of my special plastic record and the wooden stick to play it. The name of the tune was "The Muffin Man"... "Oh, do you know the muffin man..." You put the pointy end of the stick in the groove of the record and traced its spiral curve so that the disk and the stick vibrated enough to hear the music. If one moved the stick more quickly the song came out like chipmunks kzread.info/dash/bejne/X5xptJuckpDYaKg.html , more slowly made the sound of monsters. The timing of the song was not embossed on the record but depended on the speed of the moving stick, matter and motion. Here's a world famous physicist who spends an hour explaining what I've excessively compressed. kzread.info/dash/bejne/X2qmudODmKfcZ7A.html Time was addressed because the concept of 'time' underlies the concept of 'process' which, in conjunction with the concept of 'self', lies at the core of the 'conscious' concept. In its most succinct form... I am a conscious process.

Thank you for acknowledging that consciousness is nothing like the stars of the universe. It is non-material, or super-material.

if there are different levels of consciousness with us occupying the highest one, what would happen if an ape observed the double slit experiment, a dog, a fish, an insect? Would the probability wave collapse for each of them or none of them?

@iseriver3982

2 жыл бұрын

We are an ape. And in quantum physics, being observed doesn't mean someone is looking at it.

@2011littleguy

2 жыл бұрын

Only certain breeds of dog observers will collapse the wave.

"SUPERINTENDENT, CHALMERS!"

Where can I get the theme music??

Yes, of course it bleeding well does. And may I also suggest that everyone here on this channel might be more attracted to the ends of rational inquiry--the destination, rather than just the journey. Like pilgrims to the appointed place we tend, the world's an inn, and death, the journey's end

I don't know if it was proven wrong or these scientists never heard of the fact that Roger Sperry a neuroscientist who won a Nobel prize for his split-brain research where he split the brains of some patients to prevent seizures, the two halves of the brain had hardly any connections but the differences were so subtle, the interesting thing is that the patients didn't lose their consciousness or did splitting their brains effect their sense of self, so if consciousness is produced by the brain and it's a matter of complexity, how come splitting it give the same result?

@nasrinmotlagh9068

2 жыл бұрын

موافقم!

@nasrinmotlagh9068

2 жыл бұрын

با شما موافقم

@nasrinmotlagh9068

2 жыл бұрын

Brain is only a capacitor or station and data or information is in the field, not in the brain.

Robert Sir you being yourself a student of neuroscience what are your views on consciousness...... According to you do consciousness imply materialism or is something out of the physical realm?

Woah the first guy is great

By turning perceptions of brain into quantum wave functions of mind, probability distributions of time could create a sense of meaning that is or has conscious feeling?

is there a relationship between conscious awareness and electromagnetic observation?

David Chalmers is great!

The best way to understand consciousness is to realize the mechanism of consciousness. When you realize the mechanism of consciousness, you really understand consciousness.

A fundamental question is surely whether consciousness can evolve through natural selection or whether it exists independently.

@urineanimal

4 жыл бұрын

If you bang on a drum, it makes a sound according to how it is tuned and how hard it is hit. If you bang an atom, the same principle is relivant. So who tuned the atom? There you go. Consciousness is independant to matter, but obviously interfaces with matter in a multispectrum energetic form. Anyone that believes consciousness is 1s and 0s and electrochemical only, they are all pedos in different forms. Most pedos are not involved in sex acts, they commit violence through spreading their ignorance to children.

@machida5114

4 жыл бұрын

意識メカニズムは、自然選択の産物です。

Is time the key element of information in conscious experience for a person?

Sean Carroll explains. When measured, the object and the observer are in a quantum entangled state. For the observer, the wave function of the object collapses.

@biomed007

3 жыл бұрын

Im not sure what that means. Is he using quantum entanglement as an analogy?

@machida5114

3 жыл бұрын

@@biomed007 Not analogy.

@machida5114

3 жыл бұрын

@@biomed007 This is clear when you consider the thought experiment of "Wigner's Friend."

@machida5114

3 жыл бұрын

@@biomed007 　en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wigner%27s_friend

Or 4: A convoluted mix of all of the above

3rd time hearing this brilliant interview. Am on Roberts landing place. But idk, do we find anything physical…

Does Consciousness Require a Radical Explanation? NO! I think consciousness will ultimately have a energetically understood relationship that can be commonly sensed and understood. Good selection of current thought leaders on the subject!

Well , if we are Here for this lifetime , This is such a brief window to Learn what consciousness is . This could be a Dream that the Wet brain Has . You may have never lived a lifetime at all . The Wet brain has to Dream . Therefore all is Dreaming brain .

Everything is the information and our senses . And the Shaw starts

time as consciousness in quantum becomes mass of awareness in physical brain?

mass integrates time information for conscious awareness?

There is a qualia space of inner phenomenology. [06:32] «You must be that thing, I cannot be you and you cannot be me. Being is not describing. *You cannot be what you describe but you can describe what you are.* « - Giulio Tononi, Professor in Psychiatry and Expert on Sleep

Yes

Whoa!

I come to watch Closer To Truth when I get tired of being the smartest person in the room

What Sean carrol didn’t grasp is that, talking about redness and experiencing redness aren’t the same thing. Separate. Maybe related, but, if the consciousness aspect is separate from reportability, it requires an explanation beyond a behaviourist one, which is what Sean Carrol was implying.

@machida5114

4 жыл бұрын

手術されたフェレットは、聴覚野で見ます。

I’m happy that people are conscious of consciousness. Marvellous. This is for those who question the question. I’m a simple carpenter without the academic qualifications to own an IQ. Consider this. Consciousness is contained within the brain unless you are very different and thus may be explained using ‘music’. Without using impressive word magic it’s like this. Watch the drummer. The material aspect is simply understood. Look away you enter the world of the created. .you add.. personal interpretation..personal emotions. More is merely a religion that becomes or it doesn’t. More is life or it isn’t.

@ihatespam2

10 ай бұрын

Looks like a less informed wolf in sheep’s clothing has some bad mojo word magic of their own to add confusion to the subject.

Seems the more we learn the more likely that we are not here by some random cosmic accident. There IS something more.

@nicholaspullen6608

2 жыл бұрын

There is no such thing as a random cosmic accident. There are no accidents in the cosmos

@wade5941

2 жыл бұрын

@@nicholaspullen6608 Random as opposed to "non-random" accident? Guided versus unguided "event"? I agree with you that there are no accidents in the cosmos.

We have all heard windblown leaves rustle in the distance. Would anyone say that it is possible to hear a single leaf in a 2 mph breeze at 1,000 yards? No, probably not. And yet, a few hundred million leaves in a 15 mph wind can be heard from even further than 1,000 yards. In part, that's how consciousness may work.

Anyone who links consciousness with the quantum mechanics observer is BSing you. The QM "observer" is not conscious, it's just measuring/interacting that collapses wave functions.

@msimp0108

4 жыл бұрын

Spoken like someone who doesn’t know what they’re talking about.

@LastBastian

4 жыл бұрын

@@msimp0108 Great argument.

Give all these guys 5meo dmt then re do all these interviews;)

Consciousness and dreams are indeed very mysterious.

Robert should explore Vedanta. Would be interesting

18:05 It seems like consciousness could be explained by the correspondence of a human brain’s neurological network to analogous networks in reality. The idea of “information” as a network, at least in part, is a powerful idea.

6:31 *Qualia shape* “It is an exact identity-to be that shape is to have that experience, that can only be had from the inside. You must be that thing, I cannot be you and you cannot be me. Being is not describing-you cannot be what you describe but you can describe what you are.” No Subject, _Risking the Impossible:_ _”Subject_ is eternal dimension of resistance-excess toward subjectivation/interpellation […] _Subject_ is basic, constitutive void which drives subjectivization, but which cannot ultimately be filled out by it.”

Everyone think they have consciousness. The truth is that One Consciousness has everyone...

@Hallands.

4 жыл бұрын

blurock29 Sharing is caring?

@Hallands.

4 жыл бұрын

blurock29 It would seem that The One Consciousness is the only absolute and essential will for life. Is it meaningful to presume sharing this? Perhaps in the sense "to have in common", but it makes better sense to accept that It has everything and everyone imo.

Maybe time is observer in general relativity and quantum mechanics for consciousness? If so, time might even mark transition from classical to quantum.

Consciousness is no illusion but the sensation that consciousness is something more that neuroscience, physics and psychology is. If "radical "means something more that physics then no radical explanation is required. However, that is not quite the end of the story. Consciousness does not need quantum theory, but quantum theory requires consciousness. The role of the conscious observer in quantum physics tells us that scale reductionist is not fundamental. Materialism is not wrong but idealism also plays its role in understanding reality.

Consciousness just require a logical explanation, and that might seems radical, compare to all the intellectual confusion. So, even the mathematic of the consciousness, (Eternal Life-Structure) basicly is very simple, it is a very extensive study, to get all the details in a right order.