The guest is addressing the reality of conceptualization. We are having just a glimpse of actual reality. That is why consciousness is so very eluding.

@carolinebielby5924

4 ай бұрын

What do u mean a glimpse of reality

@peweegangloku6428

4 ай бұрын

@@carolinebielby5924 I mean what we see and understand might be a portion, in fact, a small portion of what actually exist. We only know what our senses and instruments can detect. Beyond that, we are at a great loss.

@vanleeuwenhoek

4 ай бұрын

Tor Norretranders' 'The User Illusion' offers a sufficient primer on this topic and gives countless source materials to explore, one of which is Julian Jaynes' 'The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind.' Takeaway from it all: consciousness is the tip of a 'neuro-phenomenal' iceberg.

@peweegangloku6428

4 ай бұрын

@@vanleeuwenhoek consciousness goes beyond neuro phenomena.

@boydhooper4080

2 ай бұрын

I wouldn’t say his consciousness was very eluding . I would say it’s very deluding.

I wouldn't say a geiger counter measures what my senses receive, but I would say it measures something real.

@Corteum

4 ай бұрын

So do your senses. They also perceive information. But your brain processes that information and forwards it on to your consciousness which then expeeriences the processed information. It's a multi-layered system.

Great conversation 😃👍🏼

Ever wonder why we've been programmed into believing there are only 5 core senses when in fact there are more, and the most important of them is our THINKING sense? It's like someone intentionally hypnotized us out of our thinking sense. Good talk. Thanks guys.

Really answering the most crucial philosophical questions of our age: are horny angels real?

@RegulusOrigin

4 ай бұрын

Turns out the horny angels were us all along

The definitions of the terms in which a question is posed, determines the nature of the answer. Ultimate reality is not about things as absolutes.Patterns in the dynamical relative state comprise what we call reality. The complexity of interactions, subject to constraints that form in the dynamic, manifest as reality. Conscious experience is a part of that. An event is essentially about the transfer of energy.

@malcolmcurran6248

4 ай бұрын

Nicely put.

Is Bitcoin real if it exists only on the internet?

@deathbydeviceable

3 ай бұрын

It's value is based on the electricity grid 😂

We only experience the past…Never the present or future.

@2kt2000

4 ай бұрын

Use "I" instead of "we".

@dr_shrinker

4 ай бұрын

@@2kt2000 “we” is more accurate. “We” means every living thing in the universe. - Unless you’re able to experience events without the microsecond of lag it takes for light to travel from the event to your eye, to your retina, thru your optic nerve, to your optic center of your brain and frontal lobes. But by the time you perceive the event….its long gone into the realm of the past.

"rare footage of 1950's housewife on l$d" is the title of a clip where what's real sometimes gets a little blurry... but, our senses are only receivers of particular frequencies... the seat of organization of that data rests with higher processing units of the brain... if the senses or the nervous system can somehow become able to collect and process different frequencies, then access to other information could also be possible...

Buddhism’s view of reality, and how we perceive reality (the aggregates, or skahndas), I think, is very scientific and logical.

Robert Anton Wilsons book, Prometheus rising is a must for anyone interested in this subject matter.

Einsten proved whats real with his equation e=mc2 everything is energy ? Just like a movie it appears real when you are watching the big screen caught up in the movie , but the reality is its just light energy being projected ? Our senses make everything seem denser than it really is ? .

@deanodebo

4 ай бұрын

No that’s not a proof. It’s a theory. And by definition, will never be proven true. That’s science 101

Wonderful interview. At 5:16 Robert begins questioning in earnest, the reality of Fred Alan Wolf's dream states. I also regard my dreams as real, for similar reasons as does Wolf, given multiple sensory stimuli. But where Wolf talks loosely about an "alternative reality", my rationale for dreams is the nonlocal (entangled) self... I am encountering the experiences intercepted by another self's mind-body, elsewhere in the universe. Wolf appreciates important cross-cultural nuances, and his closing comment resonates, where he regards the material world that we see, at 8:18 - as "a particular way of looking that gives us a momentary glimpse of reality, but there's something much deeper."

@ritishify

4 ай бұрын

While I agree that there might be 'something' much deeper, I don't think dreams are alternative realities. You can call them that, but it's really just a summary of your experiences while you're awake. I expand on this on a comment I left not long after yours. Have you never been able to relate situations in your dreams to things you experienced while you were awake? Maybe dreaming of places you've been, or long to be.

@TheTroofSayer

4 ай бұрын

​@@ritishify Excellent point, one over which I've given considerable thought in the past. Firstly, our entanglements aren't arbitrary, they are congruent with what we're experiencing at the time. Secondly - and this is important - it is the *dreamer* who is attributing their immediate, personal context to the dream. Perhaps it's my extraordinary life experiences, or my theory of mind-body, but I've learned to withhold my immediate reflex to associate dreams with my personal experiences. In this context (withholding), when I analyze the dream in terms of how I intercept it, the languages that are spoken and written, I realize that I am apprehending another self's *meaning* as if it's me undergoing the experience - I don't need to speak/read their language or see what fashions they're wearing - the internalized habits that have become invisible to us, consciously, are also invisible in the dream.

Reality is not just what different cultures sense and perceive as Reality. The physical Universe exists and we as living organisms have a unique brain and nervous system which has a unique consciousness and view of the world.

We must put this proposition, "real is what you believe you can sense", with the reality of a schizoid person... Absolutely!

@mandelbot5318

4 ай бұрын

That’s a proposition, not a preposition.

@jokeradviser5843

4 ай бұрын

of course. automated slide. thanks! already corrected.

What about the laws of physics? Aren't they the only thing that really exists? Laws of physics may also be the ideas Plato was talking about.

"Of course its happening inside your head Harry. That doesn't mean it isn't real" Dumbledore HP7

Spiritual enlightenment to open the 3rd eye to raise your vibrational energy is a must but is also a lot harder than what anyone realizes because of all the dumbing down and all the frequencies and all the energy weapons. We exist on a flat stationary plane realm of existence.

Strange phrasing of the answer. What’s real in the mind “is” real. It really exists in the mind. Why deny that what exists purely in the mind actually exists? Our entire conscious experience is “only in the mind”. It IS the mind. Instead, I think what we should define as unreal is what we can understand as not possibly existing (ie, married bachelors, invisible sights, ect, ie, logical contradictions).

Well said. Open minded people are definatly more enlightened and at peace with reality. respect to them.

@ritishify

4 ай бұрын

Analyzing your own comment, would you say that it's more of a self-conviction? As in, respect to them, therefore... respect to yourself? I really don't mean to offend you, but often, the mind seems to work that way. Reassurance. It's what we call being biased, I guess. In my opinion, you can tell that people in the comments, including myself, shared more preconceived ideas rather than addressing those discussed in the video in a objective way. Basically my question for you is if you agree with this notion and if you would apply it to your own comment.

@abelincoln8885

4 ай бұрын

Most are humanist liberals ... who only care about me, myself, & I .. my opinions, beliefs, values, weants, feelings .. and subjecting inpretations of splain simple text and facts. Open minded people? Good luck finding them in any of the Free civilize west founding by ... Christians.

Liking “mind presence” and “something much deeper.” Curious to think about “How things become real”; and, why it is decided that a thing is real, even if sense constrained. It seems self-evident that things become real even before they are sensed. A desire to sequence leads to orderings and to numbers; numbers become real in stone, paper, or a computer screen; a thought goes from being a wooden boy to a real boy. Thereafter, numbers produce architecture, time, rocket ships, keyboards-followed by novels and poems. “something much deeper” looks like the instigator as thinking that our thoughts generate reality appears to oversimplify the case. Arguing that chaotic chemical interactions (randomness) produce a monster driven to organize, sequence, and catalogue understates the event. And there might be a gnawing scare in us all that we are using our thought made real to define the structure of the universe. At least it is something deeply considered instead of “mirth,” for instance.

Reality is what there is a consensus of multiple observers on..

@edwardtutman196

4 ай бұрын

Define observers please.

@2kt2000

4 ай бұрын

Huh? You dont need a consensus. wth....this paper in MY hand is real even if no one else see's it...or do I need witnesses?

Guys....run..😢

Damn, never thought you'd get Beetlejuice on the show

space of belief (infinity) has reality?

Are there any non physical things in the other planets? I don't think so. So what makes you think there are non physical things on Earth?

All of reality consists of vibrations in the space-time continuum.

I cannot sense the square root of -2 or many other mathematical constructs, yet they are real, at least in a Platonic sense. Human sense data isn't enough imho.

This guy has regressed back to what humans were like many tens of thousands of years ago before they got a group on reality.

Reality depends upon a shared experience. Individual thoughts should not be accepted as real without confirmation by others. Life is a shared experience. Life is a multiplayer game.

@TheMoonKingdom

4 ай бұрын

Your personal experience of tasting pizza, is not shared by others. Are you saying that the experience is false without the approval of others? Your inner world of thoughts & awareness is not shared:)

@JustAThought01

4 ай бұрын

@@TheMoonKingdom, others report a similar experience. All sensory experiences are restricted to the individual. Knowledge is gained by exchanging ideas based upon our own personal observations.

@TheMoonKingdom

4 ай бұрын

@@JustAThought01 Bye your words then; should we accept that dream worlds are real places, because multiple people corroborate similar experiences? Do they need to share the same dream? Do two or more people have to taste the same slice of pizza to make it real. Lastly, if you ever find yourself stranded alone on an island; will you cease being real, because no one else is there to agree that you are:)

@JustAThought01

4 ай бұрын

@@TheMoonKingdom, About Reality: Reality: something that actually exists or happens. Reality exist in five dimensions: 3 physical dimensions, time and knowledge. Each human individual experiences these dimensions uniquely. Reality is what we collectively perceive it to be based upon our five senses. We ignore reality at our own peril. Our collective reality is limited to those things upon which we agree. Individual perception of reality is filtered by our belief system. Subjective: relating to the way a person experiences things in his or her own mind. Objective: existing outside of the mind : existing in the real world. Perception: the way you think about or understand someone or something. Conflict occurs when there is a misalignment of perceptions between groups. The way to avoid conflict is to focus on common goals.

@JustAThought01

4 ай бұрын

@@TheMoonKingdom, knowledge about reality requires making a set of assumptions. Assumption Based Philosophy: A practical philosophy which supports humans making well informed decisions must be assumption based. Many philosophical assertions resolve to unknown. It is difficult to make decisions if there is no knowledge about which path to take when coming to a decision point. If we restrict our philosophy to the real world, we can build a knowledge based on a foundation of a limited set of assumptions. A practical philosophy is bounded by the unknown. We can make decisions while inside of this boundary; but, have no reliable knowledge outside of the boundary. Premise: The key assumption: The world we are meant to understand is delivered by our senses.

everything is real in some sense - if you can dream it up then there is a good chance it is real and moreover reality keeps getting expanded - the 'real' world is turning out to be much stranger than we could have surmised previously - and it will likely get even stranger going forward....we can bet on that since we don't know, in fact what we know more than ever is how little we know

@bonolio

4 ай бұрын

I not much of a guy for all the metaphysical thinking but after years of being very atomistic in my mindset and considering that all reality can be described to one extent or another as the sum of it's part and interactions, I realisedb that while this view is absolutely correct, it is also only half the story. I now veiw reality exists in the amalgam of particles that make up in the universe, but that in parrallel, there also exists the reality that exists in our minds, and in the interaction of the many minds that exist. One is a reality of mechanics and cause and effect, and the other a reality of perception, meaning, stories and abstraction. In truth both are real, and bot5h are nessecary to understanding our world.

Sensing angels? I sense my very irritating Guardian Angel😂😂 I can give him to You for Free😂😂 do he could and would stop irritating me😂😂

Even science has identified up to 21 human senses. The vestibulary system, for instance, can sense one's orientation in space

@2kt2000

4 ай бұрын

Agreed...Like many can SENSE someone looking at them.

There are no things; there are only persons. What seems like things are their bodies.

What we can know is that our sensory perceptual systems, related to our five senses, translates the world out there into material physical substances. And that this material/physical translation correlates quite well, or at least well enough, with the reality that is out there for us to be able to adapt to this reality and survive in it. Exactly what the real reality that is out there is, however, is something I think philosophers like Hume and Kant have shown pretty clearly is something we are likely never going to be able to know. But who knows, maybe if we keep adapting and surviving long enough, we’ll figure out a way to see beyond the veil of our senses. Maybe unlikely, but I wouldn’t totally rule it out.

@blijebij

4 ай бұрын

We are for sure not at our end station yet with science and technology.

so just because we have not experienced something with our 5 senses doesnt logically mean it is not real and doesn't exist... (it could but it may not)

«Space-Time and Beyond», what a fantastic book by Prof. Wolf!

His position is interesting to consider from the question of what we mean by or culturally define as "real," but I think he really (;-)) goes off the rails in suggesting that dream states, psychotic hallucinations, etc. are *actually* in some way substantially real. (I know he went off the rails, by the way, because my senses (including mind, as he invokes) told me he did.) I'd like to ask him if what's real is what two or more of our senses tell us is real, what about things we know to be real but can't sense? Like certain wavelengths of light, certain pitches of sound, etc.? Real or not real? Because if his extreme empiricist viewpoint doesn't preclude things being "real" even though we *can't* sense them, then what good is his definition? It only says that the things we experience are definitely real, and there might even be more things that are real that we don't sense. You might as well just say, "everything is real, whether we sense it or not." Which is fairly useless. And if does say that things we don't experience are not real, then all we would have to do is dream about them, or take some drug and "sense" them, and suddenly they would be real. So many problems there it's hard even to quantify (can we say with certainty what every person (and animal?) has ever dreamed? Or experienced while psychotic or on drugs? Could every possible (and impossible) thing be said to be potentially real even if not real yet? etc.) How does that help us?

Isn’t it interesting that advocates for science, never try to insult various religions by calling them, “just another science”, but that the religious in these comment sections are always trying to insult science by calling it “just a religion”? Very telling, I think.

@0-by-1_Publishing_LLC

4 ай бұрын

*"but that the religious in these comment sections are always trying to insult science by calling it “just a religion”? Very telling, I think"* ... I absolutely do label Multiverse and MWI as "quasi religions," but I am not religious. It's not that I'm insulting them as much as pointing out that what's required to accept a Multiverse and MWI leans more toward a religious belief that any type of scientific inquiry.

@Jay-kk3dv

4 ай бұрын

Science is religion and has the same corrupting influences. That’s just reality

@longcastle4863

4 ай бұрын

@@0-by-1_Publishing_LLC And by the same token people could call your philosophical system a religion because it is not a fully accepted model of reality. You obviously know what a hypothesis is and that it is one hundred percent part of the scientific process, but instead, you lazily disparage the multiverse hypothesis as being “a religion”. Isn’t that called poisoning the well? Something people do when they have no real arguments to give?

@0-by-1_Publishing_LLC

4 ай бұрын

*"And by the same token people could call your philosophical system a religion because it is not a fully accepted model of reality."* ... Well, my ToE is not a scientific theory nor a religion. It's a conflation of all ideologies and not subject to the prerequisites of any individual scientific / religious methodology or process. So, if someone wants to label it as a religion or a scientific hypothesis / theory, they can, but it wouldn't speak to the entirety of the concept. It would be like referring to the space shuttle as an "airplane." *"You obviously know what a hypothesis is and that it is one hundred percent part of the scientific process, but instead, you lazily disparage the multiverse hypothesis as being “a religion."* ... We've been over this before. Do a search for "Multiverse Theory" and then "Multiverse Hypothesis." Look at the number of results for both, and you will quickly see why I refer to as a theory. And it's not "laziness" that prompts my referring to it as a religion. It's the way the conclusion is extrapolated from a very limited amount of information. *Theism:* We create things, so there must be a Creator of us. And if there is a Creator of us, then that Creator must be able to create other things. And if this Creator can create those things, then this Creator can create all things. Therefore, the Creator must be infinite! *Multiverse:* Particles can be in two places at the same time. If they can be in two, then maybe they can be in more than two. And if they can be in more than two, maybe they can be in many places at the same time. And if they can be in many places, then they can be in all places at the same time. And if there is a universe for the particle we can observe, then maybe there's a universe for every particle we can't observe. And if there is a universe for every particle, then there's an infinite number of universes. Therefore, the Multiverse must be infinite! Both move to the *highest possible extremes* of conceivability because there are *no logical barriers* stopping this from happening.

@simonhibbs887

4 ай бұрын

@@0-by-1_Publishing_LLCI think that’s on the border line for me. Some multiverse theories actually have made predictions that have been subsequently confirmed, at least tentatively. That at least puts them on the map, scientifically. On the other hand some of these actually contradict each other, so we clearly have further to go. According to your criteria all as yet unverified physical theories are ‘quasi religious’. At one point Quantum Mechanics and Relativity would have fitted that category, yet now we routinely use technologies that rely on those theories being accurate every day. However ‘quasi religious’ or ‘faith based’ are not attributes a theory can have, they relate to the attitude of actual people towards those theories. Do multiverse proponents do so because it’s a faith passed down through generations? Do they organise a lifestyle around them? Ultimately the question that matters is our attitude towards falsification. If these multiverse theories were conclusively falsified, or if an alternate theory had convincing evidence, would these people deny it and argue their corner anyway? No. These people are professional scientists, they’re committed to evidence based inquiry. This is where accusations of faith and religion in science fall flat.

Relying on subjective experiences or beliefs is highly problematic. Human perception is proved to be unreliable.

I witnessed some supernatural or paranormal things. It made me search for answers and admit to myself that anything is entirely possible and don't be so arrogantly naive that other things are not real because of preconceived ideas I've learned from others or from people who we trust. Kind of like just because your paranoid doesn't mean folks aren't out to get ya. Lol funny but true.

Fred Hit a grand slam… He’s 100% right… Its like being in the “Exclusion Zone)… It’s Frequency… That’s why when people smoke DMT everything flashes so fast it redacts the opposite, like a flicker rate of 18 while the background is at brighter energy frequency… I love Fred… He’s the original Dr. Quantum… Listening to him years ago, on your videos, tore my mind open about Quantum Mechanics… It’s all Implosion Based Electric Vortex Physics, that separates matter and opens Aether (Exclusion Zones/Quantum Entangled with EVERYTHING… Then add 3:6:9 Harmonics… Electric Vortex Circuits from Water, Magical “108” Degree Water Molecule Angle, Arc-Angles! Not “archangels”… Hahaha, sorry- couldn’t help it… I cracked the code… My Factor “9” Music Frequency Grid Proves it; those frequencies come 100% from my 3:6:9 2D-Number Matrix… I like to start in 1D and build reality from that point, then my numbers build “All 5-Platonic Solids”… It’s extremely impressive… So, big shout to the Wolf-Man, and Robert… Thanks! 108x16= 1728; 1728x3= 5184 (Pyramid Slope Angle… Magic from here on out! My numbers build “Tetrahedrons” from Compression (Centripetal Implosions) and Centrifugal (Radiant Energy)… Torus Power, “Hydro-Magnetic-Electric Vortexes (electrons are electric Tornados/Vortexes, and they create water, just like Tornados…!

What Wolf is alluding to is the power of consciousness in the form of *"Conceivability."* It is arguable that whatever can be logically conceived is "real," even if only at the _conception level._ If I can conceive a unicorn and there are no logical barriers to its conception, then at the very least, the unicorn exists as a *conception.* That means if everything in existence was removed save for this single conception of a unicorn, then the conception itself is one level above "Nonexistence" ... and therefore exists. My problem is with *ideological overreach* when we start classifying what exists and what doesn't. *Example:* "Perseverance" is not a physical thing. You can't measure it, dissect it, place it under a microscope or swish it around in a test tube. It is a *conceptual byproduct of consciousness* that has no physical properties, yet the physicalists/materialists declare it as "physical" merely because a *physical object* (a brain) gave rise to the construct. So, the physicalists/materialists get to bring a *nonphysical property* into their domain even though there is nothing physical attached to the construct. That means if *nonphysical properties* require a physical object to bring them into existence and that's just the way reality _generates_ nonphysical properties, then we never get to see them as what they truly are (nonphysical properties). ... That to me is an *_ideological overreach!_*

@0-by-1_Publishing_LLC

4 ай бұрын

@@edwardtutman196 *"attributing everything as real exclusively to cognition is also an ideological overreach."* ... In my scenario I stated that the mere conception of a unicorn would breach the status of "Nonexistence." Therefore, the mere *conception* of the unicorn exists despite the fact that a physical unicorn does not exist. What is your argument against this claim?

@christianrelloso2649

4 ай бұрын

​@@0-by-1_Publishing_LLC as long as you did not worship the unicorn where its perpetual conception will ceases to exist. Right?

Haven't watched it yet, but my answer is "frequencies", among probably other 'things'. Edit: I heard something similar in a lecture or something the other day and it kind of made sense, that's why I said it.

5:53 I've personally been able to correlate much, or many, of my dreams to real life experiences I had; not long before I had those dreams. This doesn't just include physical experiences, but also feelings like fear or happiness. For example: being afraid of someone, for some reason, and qualifying them as a threat to your life in your own mind at some point, then dreaming that you have an altercation with someone who is or resembles that person. Even to the point where you dream that said person is going to kill you. Although I don't dream too often because some of my daily activities make me unable to enter the REM state while sleeping. You can deduce what that activity is on your own, maybe, lol.

Free your mind is the only way out of this simulated prison hell matrix.

@tcuisix

4 ай бұрын

🥩

The eyes (that are fully functional) see the world upside down and inside out and those images are somewhat low fi (fuzzy) the brain interprets this stimuli to what we call vision (after covering up two blind spots which are mostly center of each eyeview with embellishments instead of blanks also, the color Fuscia doesn't actually exist but somehow it shows up in our spectrum) with all of this going as well as pareidoila, and optical illusions, mirages, ephemeral phenomenon (🌈)s there any room left for a REALITY???(not to mention how we can only detect a tiny portion of the electromagnetic spectrum)

Your grandchildren will one day listen to this. This is why China and Russia are the best. I will watch how I relate information cause it seems you are 'mocking' people who genuinely contribute reliable tested and trusted information for free without charges.

Turtles all the way down.

@user-wx6pf2bc2r

4 ай бұрын

Sitting on a elephant.....

😀😂❤️🌹🙏🏽

Consciousness isn't a thing. Consciousness is the subject that observes all things (objects). And it cannot be defined as a thing or an object, either.

Another character rephrasing your question and answering his own. So according to his definition “ideas”, for example, are not real; only things that he could see, touch, feel or apply pressure to! Why do you bother with these mental giants?!?

Effects of doing too much DMT

Senses lie and unreliable.

@longcastle4863

4 ай бұрын

Senses (or more accurately, our sensory perceptual systems) were actually selected for by evolution and improved upon over time because they are reliable and help us adapt to and survive in the environments we find ourselves in.

If you blink, they'll get hard...

Not all of what we see is real, and not all of what is real is something we see. Just think of radio waves, ultrasound, stars fare away and so on, they are all a part of what we are able to detect but not with the human body. You do also have countless examples of drawings, pictures and events that tricks our mind, things we do see but is totally wrong. For a thing to be real to you, does it have to influence you in some way, or it could as well not exist. Bob on the other side of the world may be real, but to you does it not matter, it is of no important to you if he exists or not, on the other hand does an all-knowing god mean a lot for a person who is about to be stoned to death, in this situation does it not matter if the god exists or nor, because it is right now a super important part of your future.

In belief you just see your projection of mind , belief can't lead to truth. You have to experiment and explore on your own. Freud studies dreams so well , the west needs another Freud to study dreams and go beyond dreams. And please don't make spirituality a belief, belief is cheap and truth is not cheap at all

@anarmemmedli7136

4 ай бұрын

But you experiment dreams, physically and mentally

Not sure I agree with this guy, funny though he is!!! Can we sense radio waves that are around us in the electromagnetic spectrum? No, but we know they're there, although I suspect the "15" senses of Native Americans may be down to peyote!!! 🤣

Nothing= Non - Existence Reality = Non - Cancelable ( Consciousness, Existence itself ) Illusion= Cancelable ( Existing things, eg., Space , time , mind, feelings, intelligence)

Fred is just a bit off his rocker. 😂

@waynehilbornTSS

4 ай бұрын

You just need to wait to be born to a smarter mommy. Dying is safe because of simultaneous (absence of) time.. Consciousness = actual events idiots like Dr Kuhn ASSUMES is memory. You are resonance. energy follows all thoughts but a guru cannot fly in a stadium of doubt because time is not linear.. (simultaneous)... and the past can change to fit ALL combined expectations within a common dream we share I suggest YOU are off YOUR rocker to ass/u/me your MOMMY was truthful when sh told you you're actual as opposed to living the same dream as the rest of us Academics are so far of the mark.. you deserve to live a dozen lifetimes in this loka to learn this simple, stuff. Dying is safe because every memory that makes you... you.. is concurrent to forever... not that you could grasp physics or non-mommy woo. Energy fo0lolows all thoughts.. think of stuff and pay attention or wait to be born to a smarter mom.

Wolf uses the word "sense" in a way that's very different from the way I use it. I would not say the content of a dream is sensed, because it's constructed by the brain and does NOT provide information about what's currently outside the brain. Similarly, when a mental image is produced by electrical stimulation of a neuron, the content of the image is experienced but NOT sensed, and it's unhelpful to call the content "real." Wolf is basically telling us that hallucinations are real... an unhelpful oxymoron. I would like to hear more about Wolf's claim that different cultures sense different things. But if he's not talking about differences in what the 5 basic senses perceive -- if he's only talking about different definitions of what it means to "exist" -- then I wouldn't find it interesting.

Thinking more about the title question: ultimately nothing is real, or what you think is real, isn't, but the substratum, that is Brahman - Brahman alone is real. Robert, fashions something up in his imagination to not be real: Angels with Horns. There's several things here at play: mind, Intellect, imagination(creativity), ideas, consciousness, memory, and subject - object relation. Angels, are messengers; messengers of Light. My grandfather road a harley Davidson in WWll and delivered certain mail to certain places. Angels in the Bible are rays of light or the Intellect. In the bible: the angels mated with the 'daughters of men', representing the intellect of man mating with emotions, thus giants are born, this is the ego, and bias and partialities we see everybody plagued with...and i mean everybody - even the snotty little materialists who think they're intellectuals. Regarding horns: bulls have horns, deer, etc. So, Robert, here with his wits and imagination, crossed two things together that does exist, but, into something that, seemingly "doesn't" - however, the impetus for this, not only the imagination of Robert, by the conditioning of his, as he is a materialist or empiricists, by default, will protect such a notion for self preservation. He's looking for something that doesn't exist, so to reify for himself, the things he's only aware of, that, for him, does exist. But, what he mentions as non existing, derives from things that do, and without the intellect and imagination, of Robert's here, the substratum of this, the projections and self preservation, though unwittingly, none of it could even be fathomed, ruminated, or inquired. Imagination: such is the creative and wonderous, visionary impetus, that driven many men to complete their "implausible" inventions - the Wright brothers and aviation, as example. 'Exist' means life circumscribed in time and space, thus an object of mass & magnitude with finite duration; what comes into time, i.e. birth and death. Now, existence in the sense of substratum, foundation, the Source, or Principles, utimately, none of these exist, but they most definitely are to be acknowledged, atleaet by the wise and intellectual men. This right here, is the grand problem for the materialists or known as empiricists, they place their senses above the Intellect, ironically, thinking themselfs to be intellectuals even. Only what they can touch and count is real - but the Truth is, it's transitory; this implies, what is of 'being', when engender into this realm of existence, is ever yet a 'becoming' and is never something static: proccession - fetus, baby, child, teenager, young adult, adult, older adult, old, elderly....this is 'becoming', and what's antecedent to this becoming, or having been birthed therefore inevitable is death, is 'being'. Being is what must be inquired, without Being, there could be no becoming, implying existence, the phenomenal plane, transitory. All of this is the real, although, improperly or incorrectly understood.

Babble. I wonder whether anyone who talks like this has ever invented or discovered or improved any real thing.

Woah, looks like THIS isn't the guy to ask that question! What a deliberately unhelpful response. He apparently rejects the premise of the question but chooses to confound and confuse instead of honestly try to dismantle the premise. (Because it's actually a valid question.) WEAK!

Robert, stop it. Stop it.

I begin to recognize that these programs are Jewish community boosting discussion rather than about the truth. Metaphysician philosopher

To find God you have to search for the truth. To find God you have to know if what you are looking for exists. God is the intelligent creator of the universe. Do you want or don't want God to exist? It is better for you if God exists. For atheists death is the end, without knowing what happened and will happen. To find God you have to understand reality is eternal because from nothing can not be created something. Nothing is absence of existence. Nothing is what innocent and vulnerable children understand by nothing. Something minus something is nothing. Nothing is not something. Nothing is always nothing. Is something always something? Can something be destroyed to become nothingness for ever? Can something destroy self? From substance to eternal emptiness. We know reality is eternal. It's a fact. It's the truth. It's reality. Either the universe is eternal or what created the universe is eternal. Either what has a beginning of existence is eternal or what created what has a beginning of existence is eternal. Either the universe is eternal or God is eternal. You choose with free will. Do you want truth or deception? The truth is atheism is a logical fallacy that assumes God is the religious idea of the creator of the creation to conclude wrongly no creator exists because a particular idea of God doesn’t exist. To end the war the truth must be known.

@therick363

4 ай бұрын

Another post of you lying and being disrespectful. Pathetic.