Spot on, including his view on consciousness from the physicalist perspective..

Brains control many bodily functions. They also enable us to communicate with the Cosmic forces Which is nice.

@simonhibbs887

4 ай бұрын

What are the cosmic forces telling you?

@dianneforit5409

4 ай бұрын

Cosmik Debris

@tedgrant2

4 ай бұрын

@@simonhibbs887 Go forth and multiply

@simonhibbs887

4 ай бұрын

@@tedgrant2 Achievement Unlocked 😀

@tedgrant2

4 ай бұрын

@@simonhibbs887 Says he who likes playing fantasy games

burning the energy of time...

Quantum Information and Quantum Entanglement Are.... Fundamental. Mind and Body entanglement.. Consciousness emerge.

Trying to obey the laws of nature but it’s actually quite difficult

@Corteum

4 ай бұрын

interesting! what laws of nature that you are finding particularly difficult to obey?

Excellent content, yet again. The modern human brain, a fairly recent evolutionary assembly, has enough biochemical power to reach deeply into the Quantum Field while also telling us when to pee. Yin and Yang, so to speak...

0:09 Well, Doc, I'd say it depends on the individual being discussed. For instance, in my case the answer is typically, "Not much..." 🙂 Go Bluejays!!

I don’t think you can conclude they are two separate personalities with a split brain, but rather incomplete fragments of the same one.

@mandelbot5318

4 ай бұрын

I know the split brain phenomenon is a different thing, but the point you raise in your comment is certainly the very reason ‘Multiple Personality Disorder’ was renamed ‘Dissociative Identity Disorder’.

@backwardthoughts1022

4 ай бұрын

chalmers hosted a debate on here between opposing neuroscientific views regarding this

@richardharvey1732

4 ай бұрын

Hi Stellarwind, I think the most important point is to observe the pluralities, the assertion that here is more than one potential identity can be sensibly based on evidence that there are two or possibly more, qwhat matters is that we understand there is not just one identity and personality. For some time now OI have been saying tht I am a quite different person with everyone I associate with, whoever they are at the time the relationship and conversation we develop is unique, some components are familiar but some are quite original one thing I can be sure of is that no two encounters are ever identical even when the same individuals are involved!. One thing I have observed on several notable occasions is that I am able to assess the character and nature of another person just by hearing myself speak!, the choice of words the delivery and intonation are all modified by the other person's receptivity, much of this communication comes in the form of what we call 'body language' the sum of all the gestures and postural cues we send and receive all the time, the only time I am just me is when I am posting comments like this, although I do assume that you or somebody will read it it is actually only me here thinking out loud. The tentative conclusion then is that no singularity of identity is apparent while the physical corporate identity is just one individual it is a constantly learning and changing one that can duck and dive between a number of mutually exclusive mental and emotional states of consciousness switching from one to another as circumstances dictate, none of us can ever choose the mood and state we are in at this time. Cheers, Richard.

@simesaid

4 ай бұрын

Yes, maybe. But split-brain patients can display radically novel and differentiated personalities. One gentleman, a devout, life-long Christian, woke up to be an atheist in his right-hemisphere 'personality'.

@aiya5777

4 ай бұрын

Why stopped with just 2?

Since Consciousness is in the Water Phase Transition Process, increasing awareness=Large Exclusion Zones, Small to no Exclusion=Lack of Consciousness- like anesthesia… This Concept Of EZ Consciousness Mandates “The Two Bodied Mind,” it’s in the EZ…

@lucianmaximus4741

4 ай бұрын

Is there a book You recommend?

Its a head sponge.

My inability to communicate my emotions has played a significant part of my depression.

@Corteum

4 ай бұрын

Look into psilocybin and/or mdma for therapy and treating things like depression and ptsd. Some really exciting research going on there. Look into it. 👍

@Corteum

4 ай бұрын

@@halcyon2864 No one said it was easy or a miracle. Just look up the facts and the studies and make up your own mind. It's all on pubMed or MAPS org. Doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that there's something potentially very useful about these substances when used under professional guidance. Right?

@OzGoober

4 ай бұрын

@@halcyon2864 I used to always get sick (sore throat) during exam times at uni. My fingers would itch, I'd loose skin. It took years to figure it was stress induced. I couldn't really tell "mentally". I found it hard to intellectually or verbally express it. Instead my body did the talking.

Brain is the sensorium. It supplies a regulated flow of sense data to the conscious personality connected to the brain. It ensures that the conscious personality (which is beyond all matter) is not overwhelmed with data, through its inhibitory mechanism. The brain is an interface for the conscious personality to also control the different limbs and parts of the body by issuing motor commands. The brain actually is thus only a propagator (and inhibitor). It is neither the experiencer nor the true initiator.

@REDPUMPERNICKEL

4 ай бұрын

The brain is not an interface for the conscious personality. The brain is the material substrate of the conscious personality. Without a brain there is no conscious personality no matter how intensely one wishes it were otherwise.

@Arunava_Gupta

4 ай бұрын

@@REDPUMPERNICKEL Thanks for your reply. Well, that's the materialistic view isn't it, that there is no conscious personality without brain? If you think about it, how do you know? I subscribe to the view that the brain is connected to an immaterial conscious personality.

@stefanb6539

4 ай бұрын

@@Arunava_Gupta How do you know, there is no tooth fairy? There is no proof that she doesn't exist, but no one has ever found conclusive evidence that she does. If you want to make a serious argument, based on the assumption that the tooth fairie exists, the burden of proof is up to you.

@Arunava_Gupta

4 ай бұрын

@@stefanb6539 Come on believing in the tooth fairy and having reason to believe in an immaterial person-like entity connected to the brain are two very different things. I think though that you know this difference and are saying this just to provoke me.

@stefanb6539

4 ай бұрын

@@Arunava_Gupta No, I am saying it to point out your fallacious logic. If believing in the tooth fairie is so fundamentally different fom believing in an immaterial soul, it shouldn't be hard for you to exactly point out the difference.

quantum est in rebus inane!

both hemisphere of brain don't work together, its like 0 and 1 , very fast than digital systems

They take up empty space.

@Corteum

4 ай бұрын

Brains - like most things - are almost entirely empty space.

WORD A CARRIES A DEEP SENSE OF ALERTNESS AWARENESS & ATITUDE ALWAYS REMEMBERE THAT AAA IS A REQUEST INVITATION TO GOD WITH ATITUTE CONCIOUSNESS FLOWS IN THE DIRECTION OF ( A ) AWARENESS AWARENESS IS HIGHER SELF OF LOVVER CONCIOUSNESS REST ALL ARE GODDESS AND GODS O RA RA RA RAY

American Gods Season 1

Non-physical things (mind) cannot affect physical things (body) - therefore, the mind is physical.

@backwardthoughts1022

4 ай бұрын

superstition layered on top of superstition.

@mandelbot5318

4 ай бұрын

@@LifesInsight Thoughts and emotions are not ‘things’, but the EXPERIENCE OF things. Gravity is not a ‘thing’, but a description/explanation of the RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN things. Your (presumably rhetorical) questions don’t establish that physical things can interact with non-physical things because 1) they assume the very thing you’re trying to demonstrate (i.e. that thoughts, emotions and gravity are non-physical and are able to interact with physical things) and 2) they suggest a misunderstanding of physiology, phenomenology and physics. (That doesn’t mean, of course, that you’re wrong to think that physical things can interact with non-physical things, just that this line of reasoning isn’t going to support that belief.)

@mandelbot5318

4 ай бұрын

@@LifesInsight But that’s just wordplay. It’s always possible to call anything that can be conceived of ‘a thing’, even ‘nothing’ itself (which shows how unhelpful such wordplay is). But different conceptions of ‘things’ belong to different logical categories, and any useful account of how ‘things’ interact needs us to be clear which category such ‘things’ belong to. The ‘things’ that are of interest when discussing how things can interact are clearly those that can be conceived of discreetly, i.e. having their own independent existence. ‘Experiences’ and ‘relationships’, for example, can be considered ‘things’ if you wish, but they cannot exist independently of the ‘things’ that they are being conceived in relation to, and thus do not interact in the way they must to be of relevance here.

@mandelbot5318

4 ай бұрын

@@LifesInsight As a philosopher and a poet I love a bout of wordplay. It’s fun. But your reply to dr shrinker suggested (to me, at least) that you were trying to establish something regarding the nature of interaction, which is why I responded. If all you were engaging in was wordplay then fair enough. I’ll leave it be.

@mandelbot5318

4 ай бұрын

@@LifesInsightWell, that’s me dead. Cheers. 🫤

I just wish a brain had had a hand in conducting this video.

@Bill..N

4 ай бұрын

OR in posting a comment..

@Minion-kh1tq

4 ай бұрын

@@Bill..N Possibly, but following suit is how the game is played.

@Bill..N

4 ай бұрын

@@Minion-kh1tq fair enough..

Because guys keep out how show brains conection though neurosience his model not pictures with neurosience proceendings. Rambling never link honestly with brains reality.

@mandelbot5318

4 ай бұрын

Which scientists or philosophers would make you happy, Maxwell? I’ve never seen you praise a single person interviewed on this channel. 🫤

@Maxwell-mv9rx

4 ай бұрын

@@mandelbot5318 skepticism is principles of phich proceendings.

in·fin·i·ty MATHEMATICS a number greater than any assignable quantity or countable number (symbol ∞). What is the meaning of zero in Webster's dictionary? a. : the arithmetical symbol 0 or 0̸ denoting the absence of all magnitude or quantity. b. : additive identity. specifically : the number between the set of all negative numbers and the set of all positive numbers. Zero is the most important number in mathematics and is both a real and an imaginary number with a horizon through it. Zero-dimensional space is the most important dimension in physics and is both a real and an imaginary dimension with an event horizon through it.

"What Do Brains Do?" The better question should be, "Are Brain and Awareness the Same Thing?"... and the answer is in the NEGATIVE because the SUBJECT who observes an OBJECT can only observe if the SUBJECT is separate or independent from the OBJECT being observed, otherwise no observation can occur... ... and this free SUBJECT is a non-physical aware entity which I prefer to call as your immortal soul that can never be destroyed or split, and will leave only when your physical brain (the OBJECT) dies... Let me explain further, as follows : Godless Materialists define the Whole Existence through the lenses of human's limited physical senses. This is the reason why they ruled out existence beyond the grasp of their limited senses which obviously exhibits their narrow or close-mindedness.. Is this scientific ? Of course NOT ! Real Science does not close itself to all possible truths. The existence of perceptions thru awareness, that NO Science can define, is solid evidence to prove that a person is not all material but rather dual ie., a combination of physical matter and nonphysical being that I call the immortal soul.. ...the reason is because, for the existence of perceptions to be possible, it requires the existence of observing non-physical SUBJECT to be free from physical laws and so be free from the OBJECT being observed... The observing non-physical SUBJECT, being free from physical laws, is able to choose to have FREE TIME to focus and be aware which would be impossible to have if driven by physical laws all the time no different than a clueless robot or computer driven by programmed switches beyond its control.. In other words, the fact that we are able to be aware screams loudly that we are not all physical, not slaves to physical laws. Just ask yourselves, "how can you have free time to focus and be aware, to decide what right choices to make, if you are entirely a SLAVE of Natural Laws ALL THE TIME ? Why do you keep spreading this MATERIALISM TRASH that has been poisoning the minds of generations after generations ? Don't you have any morals at all ? Of course, the non-physical supernatural Consciousness can NOT be the same with the Material Brain, as proven with the clear facts above... Have you ever asked yourself this question when you are asleep, or when your brain is SNORING, "Who do you think is independently observing your dreams who even can freely choose to fly in this dream, is it your idol Darwin ? A person without a soul, with just physical brain, is no different than an animal driven only by natural instincts through pulses fired by neural electric current inside the physical brain, no free choice and, so, not accountable.. If you disagree, you may need an exorcist to drive away what is fogging your good senses.

@tcuisix

4 ай бұрын

Do you know of any good exorcists?

@blijebij

4 ай бұрын

Please do not see my reply as an attack on your position. I am merely curious if you are aware of the following aspect and how it fits into your overall perspective. Your statement raises an intriguing question regarding the relationship between the brain and consciousness. You assert that the subject (consciousness) must be separate or independent from the object (the brain) to enable observation. This distinction implies that consciousness and the brain are not the same, which is a fundamental aspect of your argument. However, this leads to a critical logical challenge when we apply the same principle to consciousness itself. If consciousness is indeed separate and independent, as you suggest, how then does consciousness observe itself? This is an essential point to consider, as self-awareness or self-consciousness is a well-documented aspect of human experience. By stating that observation can only occur if the subject is separate from the object, you inadvertently create a paradox when it comes to self-observation by consciousness. If consciousness is truly independent and separate, then, following your logic, it should not be able to observe itself. Yet, self-awareness is a common human experience. This suggests that either consciousness can observe itself without the need to be separate, which contradicts your initial premise, or that the relationship between consciousness and the brain is more complex and intertwined than a simple subject-object dichotomy. In essence, while attempting to distinguish consciousness from the brain, your argument seems to shift the problem rather than solving it. It raises the question of how consciousness can be both the observer and the observed within itself, which is a fundamental issue that needs addressing in any discussion about the nature of consciousness and its relationship with the brain.

@evaadam3635

4 ай бұрын

@@blijebij There is no such thing as self-awareness, strictly speaking... It is just a poor description of what is really happening... .. in being self-aware, as many erroneously describe it, you are not really directly aware of your consciousness but just aware of your perceptions being retained and reflected on your memory that serves as the separate object being observed .. You just feel you are aware of your self when, actually, you are just aware of your perceptions reflected on your memory.. ..it is like watching your two eyes on your mirror where you are not directly aware of your eyes but just aware of its reflection on the mirror that you are separate from... I hope you get it...

@evaadam3635

4 ай бұрын

@@tcuisix if you can not find an exorcist, yourself is good enough... with prayers, you can kick out the demons from inside you by choice applying your free will..

@tcuisix

4 ай бұрын

@@evaadam3635 why are there no exorcists?

Your explanation is whack at best. You don't lock up a man's hand when he steals or do something bad depending on whether he used the left of right. If you was my professor I will purposely fail your module. In summary, your assumption is that mothers should have you when you are an adult and ar3 supposed to be dead in that very second

Boring...

@simonhibbs887

4 ай бұрын

"Nothing goes over my head. My reflexes are too fast, I would catch it" - Drax the Destroyer

@backwardthoughts1022

4 ай бұрын

good behaviour studies but as per usual when physicalists are involved, rampant unnecessary metaphysical distractions are never far behind--that they are heavily debated within neuroscience, not a word.

@simonhibbs887

4 ай бұрын

@@backwardthoughts1022 >" they are heavily debated within neuroscienc..." I think most neuroscientists are busy doing actual research and working with practical results to worry too much about it. Rampant unnecessary metaphysics sounds like a good description of the non-physicalist accounts. They have to add in superfluous never observed phenomena, for which they can suggest no test or experimental verification.

@backwardthoughts1022

4 ай бұрын

@@simonhibbs887 the amount of data that breaks physicalism within the academy's own literature is overwhelming. how...surprising...you don't know about any of it? and by surprising i actually mean unbelievably, stunningly predictable, and not even slightly surprising that you do not. untestable, unobserved, phenomena.... hmmmm what does that sound like again 🤣 return to kneeling to pray at least one emergent property consciousness into existence before you croak

@simonhibbs887

4 ай бұрын

@@backwardthoughts1022 Can you give any reference for this data? What is it measurements of?