The interaction between Robert and Don around the 18 minute mark is so damn good. Robert asks 2 profound questions concerning Don's theory and Don addresses them honestly and precisely. This conversation is on such a high level. Amazing.

I like his humility- the very spirit of true science.

@WindmillJazz

3 жыл бұрын

well said, it think absolutely the same. True scientists know that we know very little about true reality.

@arpitthakur45

2 жыл бұрын

disagree...

@MattAngiono

2 жыл бұрын

It's even more refreshing after listening to so many public figures during these past two years... If only every scientist had this level of humility

@arpitthakur45

2 жыл бұрын

@Pea4Brain so if he was not humile he is not a scientist?

@arpitthakur45

2 жыл бұрын

@Pea4Brain explain humility?

I remember a few years ago when Hoffman first appeared on this show. Robert seemed very unimpressed with his theory. I'm glad to see him back - Hoffman's book was a fascinating read!

@gfujigo

3 жыл бұрын

Which book?

@nahbro5369

3 жыл бұрын

@@gfujigo The Case against Reality. It’s quiet good. Especially the chapter titled Gravity.

Started following Hoffman ~6 mos ago. Great interview

@tinchin714

3 жыл бұрын

Me too same.. from India 👍🏻

@johntexas8417

3 жыл бұрын

@freedomclubLX Super, I will. Thank you friend 🙋‍♂️🤠🇺🇲

@TheJberrie

3 жыл бұрын

freedomclubLX Totally! “More Than Allegory” is a great book.

@gfujigo

3 жыл бұрын

freedomclubLX Bernardo Kastrup is brilliant, tons of insights.

@theliamofella

3 жыл бұрын

He gives great food for thought

What a great channel this is. You ask the things everyone wants to know.

@obedientconsumer5056

3 жыл бұрын

Not enough people sadly. Lot of selfabsored people out there that are more interested in superficial crap.

@cosmob.4895

3 жыл бұрын

@@obedientconsumer5056 Part of me is more envious of those who aren't worn down by these kinds of thoughts though! I think it is okay for people to find joy in the simplicity, it sounds like a lovely way to live

I’ve been trying to understand the interface theory for months and finally found an interviewer that helped me on my way with his questioning style. Thank you ;)

@snap-off5383

2 жыл бұрын

Science fiction writer L. Ron Hubbard wrote interface theory into Scientology.

@ZalexMusic

2 жыл бұрын

@@snap-off5383 hitler drank water

@snap-off5383

2 жыл бұрын

@@ZalexMusic The topic we're actually talking about, "interface theory" is what the core of Scientology is based upon. My comment is not random, it is pertinent to the topic. I'm sorry you missed that _obvious_ pertinence.

@samirjiries2353

Жыл бұрын

​@snap-off5383 is very interesting to know.

Donald Hoffman has given me huge food for thought with his theory, wether it be correct or not

@snap-off5383

2 жыл бұрын

Want more? L. Ron Hubbard's Scientology is rife with interface theory, and similar postulates. Just read though, don't join.

this was one of the most awesome conversations I have been privileged to listen to in my whole entire life

"the sun's light when he unfolds it, depends on the organ that beholds it" William blake

@m.e.bentoo2271

3 жыл бұрын

Lovely. Thank you for this quote.

@m.e.bentoo2271

3 жыл бұрын

@Nick Williams natural selection, as I understand it, also leads to multi-combinatorial hit and miss selections, delaying replication and survival. It also degrades the life-info that already exists in the meantime. Above the level of the atom, the universe is grotesquely non-repeating. Long periods of time for selection works against this. This is true in the biosphere.

@termikesmike

3 жыл бұрын

Zebra Zebra in the Night ! Do you really have those stripes Or might Urizen be Traps of thought imprisoning me !

@Aluminata

3 жыл бұрын

Would that my soul could tranquil stray On many a moonlit mountain way, By cavernous haunts with ghostly shadows, Or thread the silver of the meadows, Released from learning's smoky stew To lave me in the moonlit dew. But, ah, this prison has my soul, Damnable, bricked-in, cabined hole, Where even the heaven's dear light must pass, Saddened through the painted glass...🤔😵🙏😂 Wolfgang Goethe. " Faust"

@Aluminata

3 жыл бұрын

The "Grand Theft Auto" steering wheel is just as much a mechanical contrivance as the Rack and Pinion of an automobile.

Love the art in Robert Lawrence's background!

I knew Robert would ask tough questions, i watched a ton of his videos, he explored this problem from every angle, and talked to the brightest people on the planet!

This is unbelievable! Amazing succinct interview, smart challenging questions. Hoffman is brilliant. Reminds me of the scene in Terminator where Kyle is being interrogated by the detectives and they obviously don’t believe he’s travelled from the future but he answers all of their questions with such internal consistency that they can’t fault him ... but they conclude he’s crazy and in reality Kyle actually is from the future and has a handle on true reality!!! Clearly Hoffman’s thought deeply about everything. I love the headset analogy. This is progress from the hard problem of consciousness. One question I had from earlier on is “would a NON-uniform probability distribution materially change the theory?” Secondly, is this similar to “are we living in a simulation?” Keep up the awesome contribution to both these gentlemen!! 👏👏👏👍🏼✊🤔😀

@PetraKann

2 жыл бұрын

Utter nonsense

@asegal4677

Жыл бұрын

No, Hoffman's arguments are entirely self-defeating.

I suggest pursuing conscious as the only dimension giving birth to time and space..where time and space are revolving around the conscious dimension..evolving over the life span of the individuals and collapsing upon death. Hoffman is a great scholar with an immense grip over Physics, biology and computer science all emulgamating in the his research.. hats off

@samirjiries2353

Жыл бұрын

This guy gives me hope in meaning.

Very thought-provoking. I find it interesting that the theory that we only perceive an interface rather than reality itself is basically putting us back in the platonic cave looking at shadows.

@salman99822

2 жыл бұрын

Uiu UI I ou I I I uuuuu ouuuio I I I I I uiuuuuuuuu uouuui uiiuuuuuuuuuuiuuuuuuuuuuiuuuu I uuuu u uuuuuu I u I iuiuuuuuu u I I u I iui I tt

@joshuahutt

Жыл бұрын

We never left the cave.

@jamesbarlow6423

Жыл бұрын

Essentially. But that there is a true world composed of abstract, eternal "forms" beyond that is pure surmising. Rather think of Kant's utterly unknowable "Ding-an-sich." When you think about it and, given we are capable of sensorily absorbing but a fraction of the electromagnetic spectrum, it was presumptuous--albeit 'natural'--of us to have so stridently insisted that things are just as they appear to be thus essentially knowable by us.

@joshuahutt

Жыл бұрын

@@jamesbarlow6423 I think about that all the time.

@jamesbarlow6423

Жыл бұрын

@@joshuahutt . It's pretty amazing

The question shouldn't be whether or not our perception matches reality. That assumes an all-or-nothing paradigm. The question should be *_to what degree_*_ does it match reality?_ He calculated the percentage chance that we have a 100% match to be zero. Fine, but that doesn't provide a useful result. What are the minimum, maximum, and most likely degrees of error that would still be preferential to the evolutionary process?

@2010sunshine

3 жыл бұрын

I agree. I think Hoffman is trying to make simple things complex.

@glenemma1

3 жыл бұрын

@@2010sunshine I think he is simplifying that which we have complicated.

@thomasridley8675

3 жыл бұрын

It must be pretty damn close or we wouldn't be able to function in it. The question i ask all the time. What is the end game ? You have all this going on. But apparently no destination we can tell attached to it. Wishful thinking ? Based on a biased set of standards ? It does seem that way. The brain and the universe have one thing in common. The deeper we look. The deeper it gets.

@SandipChitale

3 жыл бұрын

More so if our perceptions contradict what our instruments measure. And we have learned by now our instruments are better that our perceptions. Of course the instruments could have been purposefully tinkered with or may have malfunctioned. Also do our each others perceptions contradict in irreconcilable ways. I am not talking about (optical) illusions and differences of tastes/values among individuals. I am talking about differences between comparative perception of equally healthy human beings. And what we find is that they do not. Otherwise generally speaking restaurants which cook good tasting food would not have (generally) become popular by word of mouth so to speak. I do not see much point of Donald's theories. Especially if they start opening up some mystical notions which allows mischief to be played with.

@BANKO007

3 жыл бұрын

That was the question. It was the modelling that discovered that we have a 100% match to be zero.

Excellent interview. Great to hear some more recent Hoffman, thanks.

Thank you Robert for providing such high quality documentaries

Robert, such a deeply engaging and intelligent conversation. Thanks for getting Mr Hoffman on, well over due. What would really be perhaps an even more fascinating conversation, getting Donald and Bernardo Kastrup in the same room! Have you interviewed Bernardo Kastrup yet?

@samirjiries2353

Жыл бұрын

There is one with both.

It is quite refreshing to have such a high caliber host, able to ask relevant intelligent questions, add above par commentary and discernment to the topic cogently and dynamically. Kudos and thanks to Mr. Kuhn. +1 Subbed, liked and bell rung.

@notexactlyrocketscience

3 жыл бұрын

Been listening to this series for years now. He is smarter than most people he interviews because his horizon is far wider, especially true this time. (As usually the case with mystics and theologians) Hoffman flounders but Robert stays polite but firm after presenting two death blows.

@areezmody6916

Жыл бұрын

It is a rare occurrence indeed when Kuhn (the interviewer) fails to outshine the interviewee in his clarity, breadth, insight, honesty, and sometimes (alas) even plain old common sense. Especially in regards to consciousness: where everyone - except Kuhn! - seems to have settled for something or the other as the explanation closer to the truth.

@joeyandthenews

Жыл бұрын

😮😅

@joeyandthenews

Жыл бұрын

@@areezmody6916 oobob

@samirjiries2353

Жыл бұрын

Dr. Hoffman is breaking new grounds, where the gods may reside, where all was once magic, but now may become our new reality. How exciting this time of AI, computers, physics, and philosophy is and how lucky we are to be living now to witness this.

Great interview. You asked all the questions that I wished others who interviewed him would of. 👍

@cute1678

Жыл бұрын

or have*

Quoting from the article linked below: "Even if we were to confirm that the spatio-temporal world is a holographic image that reflects some sort of transcendent intelligence/idea/datum, we could still point to (and speak of) the phenomena of biological evolution (as we currently understand it) as having taken place over the last several hundred million years, but we would also subordinate that phenomena to the more precise understanding that the real cause of these apparent processes transcends the flow of appearances in time and space (somewhat as we now subordinate our experience of the rising and the setting of the sun to our more precise understanding of the solar system). [NOTE: Immanuel Kant lays the groundwork for this distinction in his discussion of “The Fourth Antinomy” in his Prolegomena to Any Future Metaphysics: Thesis: In the Series of the World-Causes there is some necessary Being. Antithesis: There is Nothing necessary in the World, but in this Series All is incidental. He concludes the section as follows: “…provided the cause in the appearance is distinguished from the cause of the appearance (so far as it can be thought as a thing in itself), both propositions are perfectly reconcilable: the one, that there is nowhere in the sensuous world a cause (according to similar laws of causality), whose existence is absolutely necessary; the other, that this world is nevertheless connected with a Necessary Being as its cause (but of another kind and according to another law). The incompatibility of these propositions entirely rests upon the mistake of extending what is valid merely of appearances to things in themselves, and in general confusing both in one concept.” ] Leaving aside the holographic universe, however- along with Kant’s fourth antinomy -let us turn to the hard problem of consciousness which refers to the fact that we cannot seem to arrive at an understanding of consciousness through the analysis of matter and material processes alone. Even Sam Harris- one of the so-called new atheists -acknowledges this problem in his recent work on spirituality without religion, Waking Up: “However we propose to explain the emergence of consciousness-be it in biological, functional, computational, or any other terms-we have committed ourselves to this much: First there is a physical world, unconscious and seething with unperceived events; then, by virtue of some physical property or process, consciousness itself springs, or staggers, into being. This idea seems to me not merely strange but perfectly mysterious. That doesn’t mean it isn’t true. When we linger over the details, however, this notion of emergence seems merely a placeholder for a miracle” (56). “The fact that the universe is illuminated where you stand- that your thoughts and moods and sensations have a qualitative character in this moment -is a mystery, exceeded only by the mystery that there should be something rather than nothing in the first place” (79). jwayneferguson.wordpress.com/2016/05/07/the-cause-in-appearances-vs-the-cause-of-appearances/

@mikeharper3784

2 жыл бұрын

Mr Ferguson. We see cars and houses and say that they are real and part of our conscious reality. We are also smart enough to know that people made them. But when we look at the moon, it is as real as the cars and houses but we are smart enough to know that people didn’t make it. But SOMEBODY did as it is there and we are conscious of it. So WHO made it then ? I believe the answer can be tied to the fact that we are conscious of it and it gives us pleasure in its beauty and wonder. But I don’t the moon looks down upon us and admires us humans. I don’t think it even knows we are here or even that we exist - because it does not appear to be connected to the consciousness that humans have and use to think and imagine and to dream and create and experience and get memories and feelings. All the things (including the moon) that neither science or physics or religion can explain or describe or dissect and put under a microscope or in a mathematical equation. Reading about the sensation of smelling a freshly squeezed lemon will never come close to the actual conscious experience of it. Now consider this: those connected to consciousness are able to experience the universe and appreciate its beauty and wonder. In the same way that those who have consciousness and appreciation of the Mona Lisa, we also appreciate the universe. But rocks and sticks and animals and water and mud never line up to see and stare at the Mona Lisa, or the moon. So that separates everything in the universe to things that are creations and things that create creations and appreciate them through consciousness. So I think that consciousness made the moon. And everything in the universe, including these self replicating biological computers with sensory systems attached that we call human beings. And if you consider the parallels between humans and computers, there are many, and I don’t think it’s just coincidental. And that is probably because they were both made by consciousness. I think we sleep for the same reason we have shut down periods for computers to allow for uploads, downloads and upgrades. And also to let them cool down so that they don’t burn out from continuous use, just like us. If you pull the plug on a computer if will stop working. And if our human biological systems don’t get food water and oxygen, then they will also stop working. Does a computer know that it has been shut off? I don’t think so. It’s not hooked up to consciousness to understand that. And humans can be kept from accepting conscious data when it is given drugs from medical people or from sleeping but we still have an unconscious connection, which is what we call dreams, or hypnotized. And we can wake up from a scary dream that was so realistic that we were tossing and twisting and bolted out of sleep in a quick fright, until we wake up enough to realize we are in bed and not in that scary situation that woke us up. So how are we connected from our human bodies to consciousness. Probably in a similar way that computers and satellites are connected to drones down on earth. So what is the universe? Just a really big and great holographic movie with 3-D effects due to time that moves by us and makes it all seem so real. But how can that all be? Well if you consider that at the other end of consciousness are beings from a higher dimension and not encumbered by time or space, then these lifetimes, which seem to last for years and years, is only a few moments up there. Like an interactive ride at Disneyland. The parallels go on and on and on. Even the speed of light, which is a constant, is parallel to a movie projector that runs at the same constant speed to give the illusion that the pictures are moving and seem so real. And think about this: would you pay money to see a guy with wings playing a harp for an hour and a half or would you rather pay to see The Godfather or Saving Private Ryan. All the killing and madness and drama of this earth can be explained just like a movie, where we know after a scene is on film and the Director is happy, “it’s a wrap!” And all the “dead” actors get up and go to the lunch truck for a drink or snack until the next scene to be filmed. It’s FAKE. We know that when we see a movie but it’s nice to pretend for a few hours and enjoy and appreciate and maybe even love the experience and feelings and the memories it’s gives us. All the things we perceive through these sophisticated “headsets” we call a human body via consciousness, all of which scientists can’t touch or explain but can be taken with us when we leave this theater (universe) we are currently inside of and experiencing. And that’s also the reason you can’t “take it with you when you ‘die’ “ because it was all just an illusion. Otherwise we would see U-Hauls behind every hearse. But the Egyptian Pharaohs tried that and we see how that worked out. Would love to discuss more in greater details. And no, I’m not crazy, my mother had me checked when I was a kid. (Sheldon on Big Bang Theory). 👍

I've watched many interviews of Donald Hoffman and this was the best!

@samirjiries2353

Жыл бұрын

Yes, but he did a lot more in other interviews. I wish he did more on his meaning for time/space are doomed.

Two brilliant people having a brilliant conversation!!!!

This theory of consciousness is so much similar to some ancient eastern philosophies(like non - dual vedanta) which claims that (cosmic)consciousness alone is real in the cosmos and everything else, like universes, material world, people, etc, etc are visualized inside of this (cosmic) consciousness. There is a book written over a thousand years ago, exclusively on this topic, 'yoga vasistha' must read, it talks about having infinite number parallel universe, and how at fundamental level of reality, only consciousness is Real.

@narmadap3602

3 жыл бұрын

@activelink activdisc lol

@bryanguilford6145

3 жыл бұрын

Well this is how it is.

@PaulHoward108

3 жыл бұрын

Conscious entities, not just consciousness. The teachings of Yoga-vāśiṣṭha contradicts the possibility of having any experience, even in illusion, and are therefore obviously incorrect. I studied four translations of the Yoga-vāśiṣṭha a quarter century ago before rejecting it in favor of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam.

@undernetjack

3 жыл бұрын

Spelling into duckduckgo search bar..." yoga vashistha.." (nod to op,) thank you.

@PaulHoward108

3 жыл бұрын

The Yoga-vāśiṣṭha is mentioned in Śrī Caitanya-caritāmṛta: Advaita Ācārya said. CC Ādi 12.40: "Thus I expounded the Yoga-vāśiṣṭha, which considers liberation the ultimate goal of life. For this the Lord became angry at Me and treated Me with apparent disrespect." Http://Www.vedabase.io/en/library/cc/adi/12 Śrīla Prabhupāda's purport says, "There is a book of the name Yoga-vāśiṣṭha that Māyāvādīs greatly favor because it is full of impersonal misunderstandings regarding the Supreme Personality of Godhead, with no touch of Vaiṣṇavism. Factually, all Vaiṣṇavas should avoid such a book, but Advaita Ācārya Prabhu, wanting punishment from the Lord, began to support the impersonal statements of the Yoga-vāśiṣṭha. Thus Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu became extremely angry at Him and seemingly treated Him disrespectfully."

Please bring Bernardo Kastrup to the chats! I would love to see Robert and Bernardo doing some metaphysics/philosophy of mind

@WindmillJazz

3 жыл бұрын

Bernardo Kastrup is very intelligent, bus has a lesser skill in talking to new people to this theory. Donald Hoffman can translate the same message to a broader public.

I’m a year late, but WOW this discussion was incredible. Mr Hoffman’s ideas about consciousness sounds, or rings, true to me. Somehow I think I understand where he’s going with this. I hope it pans out, I like the idea of unbounded infinite conscious agents. Brilliant! 👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻

@samirjiries2353

Жыл бұрын

Agree

Amazing interview

Great interview, thanks for the upload. I reckon the arrow towards the humanly comprehensible truth about the nature of reality at the moment, is pointing mainly to the intersection of the works of Terence Mckenna, Robert Anton Wilson and Donald Hoffman.

I have watched many conversations and interviews with Donald Hoffman and this is the best one yet.

@b.g.5869

3 жыл бұрын

If this is him at his best he's in serious trouble.

@asegal4677

Жыл бұрын

@@b.g.5869 Hoffman is terrible. However, I love this channel in general.

Sir Roger Penrose (Stephen Hawkings mentor) and in my book the cleverest man alive stated many years ago that computers will not become conscious, The penrose\hammerhoff objective reduction theory is worth consideration.

@___Truth___

3 жыл бұрын

Yes I agree, especially since Orch-OR is a matter of Quantum Biology, & Quantum Biology is truly a growing new field of Biology and Quantum Chemistry

@MountainFisher

3 жыл бұрын

I'm a retired biologist and engineer, mostly worked in algaes and fungi in the aerospace field, (think fuel on Mars). I looked at cyanobacteria which are the earliest fossils found at 3.5 billion years ago. I do not think we will create a conscious AI until we can create an artificial DNA with a quadrary system instead of the binary system we have to work with now. I will not say cyanobacteria is conscious, but it has instincts. Inanimate objects do not have instincts or any other type of consciousness, but living organisms do. Chemical actions and reactions are NOT instincts please, unless built into the system by an intelligent organism i.e. a chemist. My son is a doctor and has a computer programmer friend who is totally intrigued by my conjectures of making a computer with a quadrary base instead of a binary system. Problem he is having is that he cannot figure out a 4 part system.

@beefy32

3 жыл бұрын

@@MountainFisher Depending on your thinking we come down to the age old debate of whether matter creates mind or does mind create matter. Many scientists are on board with this reality being virtual and created in other. Other as in outside of our reality. In this case we would say mind created matter which would make it impossible to create consciousness as consciousness (other or mind) is the computer that created this reality and is therefore located outside of our existence. If on the other hand matter created mind then conscious computers would be a distinct possibility.

@beefy32

3 жыл бұрын

@@MountainFisher I forgot to add the perplexing hard problem of consciousness. Even if your idea (looks very interesting!) does create some kind of consciousness proving that consciousness exists is incredibly difficult. We could in theory create a robot with advanced AI which would act just like a human and we would not know if it was human or robot. The hard problem of consciousness needs to be addressed first before we can attempt to create consciousness.

@hamid79

3 жыл бұрын

@@MountainFisher set of instincts organized and priorotized by intelligence is the consciousness (loop) lead to more complex instinct structures and higher intelligence. The one Cyanobacteria that evolved (mutated) is perceived to be more conscious to it's peers. Thank to their great oxygenation event that has changed the life form as we know it.

At last, a respectful, interesting, even inspiring channel for debate. Excellent.

imagine you put away your headset and seeing some aliens standing there laughing at you

@donlimuti8659

3 жыл бұрын

Hmmm, perhaps using DMT (or meditating) is like putting aside your headset? let's hope the aliens are not holding a can of raid. Hoffman is just amazing!

@moesypittounikos

3 жыл бұрын

I've been reading Swedenborg and he says exactly the same thing but he uses the word angels instead of aliens!

@nahbro5369

3 жыл бұрын

Perhaps psychedelics soften the limitations of our consciousness within this reality.

@donaldtravis6926

3 жыл бұрын

Guess I’m not smart enough to follow what they are saying

I'm really happy that a brilliant scientist is moving in the right direction.

His Lost in our Head Set, theory, is riveting. It dove tails with so many unanswered questions in cosmology, physics, consciousness…I think we’ve all been fooled by our own perceptions

@samirjiries2353

Жыл бұрын

Agree

The biggest question for me is how Closer To Truth isn't ten times bigger than it is. Such an underrated channel!

Donald hoffman + rupert spira = future of science

@martinzarathustra8604

3 жыл бұрын

Or... Kant already did this.

@oliviergoethals4137

3 жыл бұрын

@@martinzarathustra8604true, extended by schopenhauer ;)

My dream come true. Thank you Dr. Kuhn. I have been wanting to see you interviewing Dr. Hoffman.

@jps0117

3 жыл бұрын

They talked a long time ago.

So happy for this content. Thank you so much!

What I want to see in our lifetime is a way to interpret brain activity through scans during sleep to reproduce a dumbed down visual representation of someone's dreams and then use a similar process to find out what is going on during REM sleep that is different from regular dreaming and see if that has a hint behind any other mysteries of the mind or reality and maybe unlock some of the rejuvenative properties of sleep.

Awesome.. fantastic last question and the answer blows my mind

Finally got my google settings to allow me to make a comment😏😣 Anyhow.... I’ve been following DH for a few years now and have read many of his papers. I love his approach and presentational style. I think that he’s really onto something and his ideas are for me mind-blowing. This latest video is excellent and gets into more details than some of his earlier ones, which for seasoned followers like me is a bonus. I’m less wedded to his conscious agent theory, but his interface theory of perception is plenty to consider for me and at it’s roots, deeply profound. I struggle to get my head around a few of the concepts. If one could remove our 3D space-time VR headset to reveal “X”, how would we know this was true reality and not the projection of some other VR headset? It could be “headsets all the way down”! Thus while I am happy to accept that what we experience is a representation from our “brain” (this seems to be increasingly mainstream science view), I’m not sure we will ever be able to experience veridical reality. And even if we ever did how would we ever know for sure. It also must be possible that evolution doesn’t function the same in the real world as we understand it in the 3D space time world, which challenges his dependence on evolution game theory. What also keeps me us at night is the notion that we / scientists are using our “brain” to show that our brain is in essence making up reality - trapped inside a skull fed only by electrical impulses. Indeed according to DH our brain itself is only a representation of some thing else in the veridical reality. If we cannot rely on our brain for accuracy, then we’re rather stuck. Finally, in DHs interface world I’m never sure where “the past” fits in? Thinking of a dinosaur bone say, this is but an icon, but for what, if time isn’t real? And all the records we have of historical events, these too are icons in our VR game, but how do they relate to the veridical world? Plenty to meditate upon and looking forward to DH’s next offering.

@Adm_Guirk

2 жыл бұрын

I would think as your consciousness evolves then that would necessitate a better VR. The bit size of the interface would keep doubling. The reality files would be less and less compressed. What would be really weird is if the real reality looked like our actual computer desktops. I came to Hoffman after I discovered Hawking's holographic principle. I thought what if everything is occurring on a 2d surface like a computer desktop. The flat earthers may be right after all.

@samirjiries2353

Жыл бұрын

Great insights. Thanks.

Truly remarkable evidence that shows how conscious process of understanding is far beyond any computation.

Really great, but short, conversation with Mr. Hoffman. I think his hypothesis on both evolution and consciousness are both groundbreaking and worthy of many years of consideration. Until we have a better understanding of the hard problem of consciousness, science will always have its skeptics that have a loophole back to a God theory. Not that I’m against a God theory...if that really is the truth, then I’d like scientific evidence for it as much as I’d like scientific evidence against it. I like that Mr. Hoffman is going after the hard problem with such fervent vigor and getting humans to think about this in new ways that might move things forward after such a long period of going nowhere really.

RLK is a phenomenal mind. DH is a phenomenal mind. Amazing interview. If you're looking for a deep technical analysis of Hoffman's theory, check out his 3 hour interview on Theories of Everything with Curt

@samirjiries2353

Жыл бұрын

Thanks

Fantastic, i also think this is somewhat elegant

Started following Dr. Hoffman bout 2 years ago. He reminds me of a Super-dooper Robert Anton Wilson in his "aidingness" in our Quest.

Great interview.

Interesting and provocative!

Love these... Brilliant Robert.. Donald

@davidmetcalfe151

3 жыл бұрын

I like all your videos but I think this one has got something to it and I think you probably agree. Thank you. Dave

Good stuff! Reminds me of Bohm's Implicate Order/Explicate Order theory.

@patmoran5339

3 жыл бұрын

Anything to avoid Many Worlds Interpretation?

I was waiting for that interview.

I very much enjoyed listening. I like how you guys talk

Excellent approach by Distinguished Dr. Donald Hoffman..... but needs one more interview by distinguished Robert L Kuhn( Dr.Robert style questioning) to go in detail clarification about the consciousness , conscious agents & mathematical equation concept...... thanks 🙏.

I really like Donald’s theory and his mindset / mentality.

@qrious786

3 жыл бұрын

It's same old theory wrapped in shiny new wrapper. Even ancient theistic texts explicitly say that this "reality" is an illusion akin to smoke.

Donald is my man.very humble and his analysis i respect alot.🙂

Great conversation. I just wish i could figure out what they’re talking about.

The nature of objective reality is *CONSCIOUSNESS* plain n simple.

Consciousness is the king no doubt. It creates a city and people in a jiffy in dream and also in waking state. Space can be compressed and expanded at will. Time can be speeded or slowed..Amazing what it achieves so effortlessly.Then it gets disinterested and lie dormant while sleeping..Amazing..

@KasiusKlej

3 жыл бұрын

Time cannot be sped up or slowed down at will. It is just your notion that sometimes it flies and sometimes it drags. It is interesting, because without this notion of time, the whole system would be in trouble. The system that provides consciousness is actually simple, it is a loop. This loop consists of 5 components, a neural network, a human brain for example, then a thought "let's move a leg", then the leg moves, then our sensors pick up the signal from there and we see the leg has moved, and the signal gets passed to the same neural network, like closing the loop. That is all the necessary machinery for consciousness to arise each morning and turn off to autopilot to save some energy during night. It is amazing it does that. Why don't it just stays awake once it woke up?

Ooh, ooh, ooh. I was just thinking this week you needed Hoffman on. Please consider having Bernardo Kastrup on at some point. He seems to be gaining popularity fast as a very clear, knowledgable and persuasive Idealist philosopher.

@patmoran5339

3 жыл бұрын

Are you desperate to find something that will allow you to keep your beliefs in the supernatural? I think this is the case. I guess you hate the idea of reality.

@Adm_Guirk

2 жыл бұрын

@@patmoran5339 You've been a very naughty boy.

Fabulously brilliant guest!!! @RobertLawrenceKuhn please interview another brilliant original thinker (if not a little long winded) Tom Campbell, author of My Big Toe

Sticking with his video game analogy, the functions in the game (gas pedals, streets and doors etc..) are still necessarily related to the programming so there is some relationship between the UI in the game and the source code that constitutes actual objective reality, in other words we can glean some insight into the source code just by observing how the game works as long as we understand the principles and by which the game works. Somebody recently figured out the code for Mario 64 by writing a program that recreates the C code nearly perfectly by analyzing the game itself. A sophisticated enough AI can certainly figure out the source code without seeing it. I suspect that the physical laws underlying the standard model, quantum theory and gravity can be figured out in a similar way. He’s saying that the probability that the game (grand theft auto) is the same as the hardware and software that it runs on is 0, which is true, and that what we see as objective reality has to be an interface between us and the true engine that drives all of physical reality.

You are looking great Robert ! This is my go to channel for interesting and deep conversations !

Hoffman is very creative.... we are interface of experience of consciousness...

I've been hoping for these two to talk!

@jps0117

3 жыл бұрын

They talked a long time ago.

@sirsiralot7635

3 жыл бұрын

@@jps0117 Ohh, I was unaware of this. I will have to look for that, thanks :)

@jps0117

3 жыл бұрын

@@sirsiralot7635 He was interviewed by RLK in an earlier Closer to Truth segment (they are sitting outdoors in a park). Hoffman has also been interviewed by others (Robert Wright, Michael Shermer)

Fantastic! The expanded palette of deep sense experience is evidence of a direct connectedness. But how? In this realm time is certainly altered as one tends to have precognitive events with some regularity.

Does this mean that we must be able to communicate in the objective reality to synchronize our realities and not realize it in the spacetime reality? Assuming there is more than me in the universe. Just thinking; In the objective reality, as individual consciousnesses, we could be like a neuron (or a point in time and space) interwoven with others to form a neural network

Super exciting conversation. Thank you both:

This, will help you to think about the subjects we compare them together, and force’s us to thinking and finds relatively between spaces and our body’s and earth planet

I like the art work on your wall Robert

This is the next step in our understanding of the universe. Through the human mind.

@samirjiries2353

Жыл бұрын

Wonderful.

The last ten minutes of this interview absolutely blew my mind

Love Donald Hoffman!!

Excellent. I just wish there was follow up on what he meant by new portals into consciousness. Details. Great video though. Thank you.

55:49 ... oh, so you want to do that? it's easy : fast a lot, meditate a lot and, here's the key, wholeheartedly focus on one single of those invisible conscious agents.... sleep depravation works too. It's been there as old as the beginning of time, any Lama monk would agree. My experience is that if you take the easy way (DMT and all that shit) you get a certain kind of agent, but if you go the hard way (fasting, prayer, meditation...) you get another kind of "contact" of a totally different quality... power of e-quality.... by the way, this channel is like the most intelligent channel I've ever come thru in YT... congratulations and thank you the amazing work you are doing, this world needs it!

Best channel on KZread.

I have few questions on this model. Hopefully someone can help me out. 1) Is meaning assumed to be a fundamental experience or should it be derived from the basic assumption? 2) what about the unconscious? 3) what is he actually assuming for granted at the very minimum?

@Adm_Guirk

2 жыл бұрын

1) A state of consciousness 2) A mode of consciousness 3) That consciousness is the fundamental aspect of reality

I loved that segue to Fermi's Paradox

I belive once you can accumulate all the questions we ask consciously and subconsciously to the best degree we can second to second. Then imput that protocol into a ai you could come close to awareness and even consciousness.

This is absolutely fantastic thought and conversation! Questions: We (each individual conscious agent) make new conscious agents all the time in increasing numbers (population growth), and thus we engage in making new headsets all the time. Does creation of AI is demonstrate creation of new headsets also, albeit incomplete ones? Are “lower” animals similar to our current AI creations, in that they both represent rendering of incompletely conscious entities and thus incomplete headsets also? Does this imply that as AI advances, we may also develop ability to complete the headset of “lower” animals, creating further portals and interfaces? Is our current treatment of AI and animals ethical? Are we suppressing and destroying these portals, and thus affecting those conscious entities with “incomplete penetrance” into the collective perception of “reality”? What does this theory say about conscious entities that destroy other interfaces and does this mean the conscious agent thus cut off (their headset is destroyed) is also destroyed or simply cause it to search for other portals, other headsets? Just like headset technology (which includes many different models and types), does this mean there are many types of means to “achieve” consciousness and connect to this observerse (sorry Eric W!)? Are these conscious agents attempt to create portals and headsets the root of religion, a conscious attempt to know “unknowable” ? Is heaven/hell reality without the headset? If so why do we develop or need headsets? Are DMT and ayahuasca alterations to the headset which allow portals to other planes of “reality” and interaction? The questions occurring to me, stimulated by this profound discussion at the intersection of physics, consciousness, planes of reality and perception, philosophy, and religion are expansive and accelerating, just like the shared observerse.....

@samirjiries2353

Жыл бұрын

Wow. That is a lot to absorb.

I love this pondering. So close to actually seeing.

Im so excited about this theory! Im glad you gave him a better shake this time now that he is further along. This theory goes with everything. DMT and the DMT 👽, spirituality, and fits well with my own beliefs. Amazing!

@patmoran5339

3 жыл бұрын

Is it a good reason to continue taking hallucinogens?

@rubenwhitaker5547

3 жыл бұрын

Pat Moran, I would suggest reading this Nature Article www.nature.com/articles/s41598-019-45812-w

@patmoran5339

3 жыл бұрын

@@rubenwhitaker5547 No thanks. I am not interested in taking hallucinogens.

@rubenwhitaker5547

3 жыл бұрын

If you read the article it doesn't mention taking psychedelics it shows that DMT is already produced in your body, and the latest research shows it acts as a neurotransmitter.

@patmoran5339

3 жыл бұрын

@@rubenwhitaker5547 So what. That has been known for a least a few decades. That doesn't mean it is safe. But I am sure it causes "spiritual" connections in those who are gullible enough to believe that there is no external reality.

Good Day, my name is Philippe Martin and I discoverd closer to the thrue not to long ago Mr Lawrence you make me whating all of your Deep investigation IT is fantastic. I am my self a "passionnée" about what I call natural perception of the universe. I am a big fan now. 😎

awesome piece

Waiting years to see you guys chat again.

Agreed about space time. Nice ideas of alternative descriptive metaphors...

I just got in studying and meditating and expand open consciousness and it has helped me. I have started meditation and it really helps me. Want to learn more.

New closer to the truth!

I know for sure that reality is holographic, because when i had sleep deprivation things happened that were impossible to explain. I'ts almost like having a computer bug on an online game and nobody else can see it. The brain delay experiment proves that there's a ten second time lag before the brain renders reality, so there must be some truth to it. Great videos, they keep me sane in these crazy times.

@ONDONNN

2 жыл бұрын

this is really interesting I experienced it often…is there any more info about it? :D

@MicahPotts

Жыл бұрын

I'd like to know what impossible things happened during your sleep deprivation?

LOVE THIS GUY

At last..Donald Hoffman 😎 Thank you

Hoffman is absolutely brilliant ! Most humans don't realize they are living in their own dream !

@samirjiries2353

Жыл бұрын

How about you?

Great interview/segment. Does anyone know who wrote the opening music?

Glad to see new content! It's been too long. I have been watching Dr. Hoffman lately but Robert (I feel like I know you, it's been so long) for many years. This concept is the first time I've heard something truly new from Closer To Truth. I'm fascinated by it, but there is a point I'm having trouble with. So the Moon doesn't exist when I don't look at it. Okay, I can get that I think, but what about when I'm not looking at it but my friend is? Thanks for this video.

@johnyharris

3 жыл бұрын

That had me for a while but you have to give up on what anyone is seeing is an objective reality. Your friend is seeing the same icon that you were looking at, but it is still an icon. Hoffman gives the analogy of a VR multiuser game, where you and a friend are chasing a green car - you both see the green car but, but when you turn you're headset away to the left you stop rendering the green car, you're friend however is still rendering the green car in his headset. The green car does not exist in either case, it's just an icon. We all evolved the same headset giving the same icons as it's beneficial for our species to survive long enough to pass on our genes.

@slapmeisterrecords8226

3 жыл бұрын

That is so naive on so many levels. The moon is not just a rendered image. Guess what, tides still happen even if no one looks at the night sky at all. You are obviously perceptively challenged

@ryanashfyre464

2 жыл бұрын

@@slapmeisterrecords8226 Under Dr. Hoffman's argument, tides are no more a genuine function of reality than evolution. It's all within the headset that we're trapped by. *Something* is happening in fundamental reality that humans (again, only able to perceive as shaped by our spacetime simulator) interpret as tides. So while it wouldn't be accurate to say that tides don't exist at all - it's that the language and perception we're using to describe tides is fundamentally broken. Tides don't fundamentally exist anymore than a steering wheel in VR headset does.

@samirjiries2353

Жыл бұрын

You, your friends and all of us have the same head sets..time and space and therefore we all experience it the same way.

@samirjiries2353

Жыл бұрын

​@@johnyharrisgreat. Thanks.

1_This makes me want to explore sensory deprivation. Anybody been down that rabbit hole? 2_Is particle/wave duality a crack in the veil between our perception and reality? Fascinating topic!

@Adm_Guirk

2 жыл бұрын

The holographic principle and quantum entanglement are two big cracks in our perception of space/time.

I have no reason to doubt that there is an inaccessible superstructure supporting the universe that we experience; Complete with God as programmer.

@BeachBumZero

3 жыл бұрын

Mankind is poised to tap into that superstructure. It is mind bending to consider the outcomes and consequences to that. Could it be that Revelation takes place completely in this environment?

@dodgyphilisopher9905

3 жыл бұрын

@@BeachBumZero Synchronicity.

@sergiarts

3 жыл бұрын

Theistic interpretations of Hoffman's work are just...wrong. You could in some sense say that a "god-like being/thing" that started the universe is part of this sort of superstructure, but in no way would it mean that this being or thing is a personal God which happens to be the one from the religion that is most prominent where you were raised.

Donald is a Enlightened being..

I make my comment in the first six minutes of this video, because I am very exited and I don't want to loose this feeling! This is a very very interesting theory of reality! Because all our culture is based in the way our mind/brain perceive the world! But we are only humans...

Don Hoffman's research portrays the material cosmos very similar to how the Vedas describe it, which is very impressive considering he seems to not have studied the Vedas at all.

@donalmoriarty2074

3 жыл бұрын

He does meditate... See his interview on buddha at gas pump

@bryanguilford6145

3 жыл бұрын

He said he meditates 3 hrs per day.

@PaulHoward108

3 жыл бұрын

The Vedas teach the structure of the universe, not just how to meditate.

Amazing, truly amazing, but I still have to go to work tomorrow!

I just watched Dr Hoffman and I like what I am listening to.