I'm addicted to these videos. ❤

@balasubr2252

4 жыл бұрын

Are the episode numbers of these videos an "illusion", "dream" or "unconscionable"? Can anyone guess the meaning of it all?

As a psych student, these ideas of how we act mechanistically based on our brain-that could be discussed in brain science- and how we subjectively feel some kind of world connectedness and spiritual enlightenment-that could be discussed in transpersonal psychology- are the two contradictory things that really makes me interest to study the brain-mind-behavior relationship. This CTT episode is really amazing (and I think It's my most favorite episode of all time) and psych student should have to watch this asap. Great job, Robert!

@justasimpleguy7211

4 жыл бұрын

I propose a different type of experiment. An experiment to go beyond mind. One of deep inner exploration attaining the deepest meditative state. And yes, it's not scientific, not objective but purely subjective. It has to be experienced and it can only be experienced from the first person perspective. With enough desire, determination and persistence one can discover That which is untouched by time and change. The true Self beyond mind-body. Ah, I just got to the point in the video with Roger Walsh! :-)

Robert Kuhn does a great job asking questions... I like how carefully he listens and interacts with his guests. I remember as a small child having the same sense of self that I have today. I really didn't have much in the way of life experience or memories... My sense of self does not rely on memories... Interesting subject...

Amazing this deserves a lot of praise !!!

I used to watch this on PBS, I'm so glad that their library is on youtube.

I think a core issue that’s missed in a lot of personal identity over time discussions is that for the large part in humans, Neurons are a constant, now we can lose some here and gain some there but for the overwhelming majority of time, Neurons are constant And it would seem that our brain is the holder of our identity, and control the system, thus our neural network holds our idea of our “identities” I’m looking for thoughts here y’all if you feel different or agree and have opinions let me know

@speedstorm9917

5 ай бұрын

agreed its like ship of the thesius problem. need to do experment like this kzread.info/dash/bejne/k2urw7mvYNi9d5M.html but in humans to see if identity is at neurons (hardware) or at function consciosness (model of the world ) emergence.

I've just started working on the narrative component of the illusion of self and I find this episode very helpful. Closer To Truth is aptly named!

@thomasridley8675

4 жыл бұрын

This channel ... Questions : a lot Answers : none Closer to truth : Finding truth is not my job. Riding fences is.

The football analogy is actually great. I heard somebody say once that you are essentially rooting for laundry when you root for a team, because the people wearing the uniforms constantly changes, but you still continue to root for that uniform.

Amazing.

really i like your videos :) thank you so much. the music is so perfect!

Excellent

Row, row, row your boat Gently down the stream Merrily merrily, merrily, merrily Life is but a dream.......

@nickolasgaspar9660

4 жыл бұрын

That's a fallacy of ambiguity. We already have a phenomenon within the process of life that we label as "dream". You need to explain your usage of the word dream in order for your post to make any sense.

@333010101

4 жыл бұрын

@@nickolasgaspar9660 ...actually Nickolas, he doesn't...I believe Matt is pointing with great clarity to the rather incontrovertible fact that the "long lasting independent entity" we refer to as Nickolas and Matt are the "fallacies of ambiguity"...this is precisely why Robert Kuhn's desire to get "closer to Truth" will be destined to set "actual" Truth on an ever receding horizon away from "him"...as Mr. Einstein warned, we can't solve a problem by using the same kind of thinking we used to create the problem...so lets just opt provisionally for: "Dream": "a succession of images, ideas, emotions, and sensations that usually occur involuntarily in the mind".... row row row your boat

@mahamudra8150

4 жыл бұрын

@@nickolasgaspar9660 Apparently I don't "need" to....:) It's all ambiguous. "You" "We" "Phenonenon" "Life" "dream" "need" Have fun.

@nickolasgaspar9660

4 жыл бұрын

@@mahamudra8150 No, life and dream are two distinct labels describing two distinct processes of reality. Its also a Category mistake since dream states are a subset of life. So from a logical perspective its an irrational and ambiguous claims that contributes nothing to our epistemology.

@nickolasgaspar9660

4 жыл бұрын

@@333010101 -"I believe Matt is pointing with great clarity to the rather incontrovertible fact that the "long lasting independent entity" we refer to as Nickolas and Matt are the "fallacies of ambiguity"" -that claim makes no sense. You daily identify successfully those "long lasting independent entity" (entity is enough, the rest are a tautology) without any ambiguities. There isn't any problem in how we define entities. Using ambiguous claims is how problems are created. In our case the ambiguity rises by failing to define those concepts and compare them. After that there is a failure of identify contingencies. (i.e. Life is fundamental for a living organism with a brain to experience a dream). Everything is way of in your position mate.

I contend that the philosophical theory of "temporal parts" is a satisfactory answer to the personal identity issue.

At a very early stage in our development , the very start of the embryo, the individual does not exist because this clump of cels can divide into two or three individuals known as identical twins. There are mental states where the concept of self almost disappears. The infant also has a hard time understanding the reality of self and other. Memories seem to keep this illusion of continuity of past and present self going. Oddly these memories change over time. It is conjectured that whenever we "bring up" a memory, that creates some new memory that adds to or replaces parts of the memory. It can be quite a shock when we get together with family or old friends and talk about shared past events. Sometimes the memory is so far from the actual happening we call it a false memory.

A video on entropy please dr. Kuhn😁😁😁😁😁♥️♥️♥️♥️ Your content is always amazing though.

There was a case recently where someone awoke from a serious injury, and began to speak fluent and animated French in a specific regional accent, which one of the nurses immediately recognised. The person spoke English with only the most rudimentary knowledge of schoolboy French. After a short period he stopped speaking French, and had no further knowledge of the language. There are similar cases in the medical annals. Perhaps consciousness isn't so localised after all?

@dogsdomain8458

4 жыл бұрын

Chances are its not yhat the person's consciousness switched places, but rather that the person hitting their head caused them to remember memories that their brain sort of stored away. In fact, its plausable that your brain never trully forgets anything compeltely, and govent the right stimulation. I can make you remember anything, including learning french

@borderlands6606

4 жыл бұрын

@Stefano Portoghesi Where do memories reside, specifically? Last year I recalled a particular perfume after decades. I didn't smell it, my mind recalled it in precise detail, after a gap of 40 years. Where exactly in the brain had the perfume been hiding for so long? If memories persist through time, clearly time is as fundamental a component of memory as matter.

This gentleman should go on the Joe Rogan Podcast, it would be a veryyy interesting episode.

@brydonjesse

3 жыл бұрын

Diffrent circles and this was not is

@crakhaed

3 жыл бұрын

Absolutely this. Glad I'm not the only one having this thought! They can travel to similar destinations despite coming from very different places

@jdnlaw1974

3 жыл бұрын

I agree! He should also interview Sam Harris on some of these issues.

@thelot9880

2 жыл бұрын

He doesnt wanaa get dumber

@mattgrant5341

2 жыл бұрын

Joe rogan sucks

I think it comes down to whether consciousness is physical or not. My hypothetical theory of consciousness is that it is a physical reality in the form of a field that pervades space. That field is in everything. Just as particles have mass, and objects made of particles have varying amounts of mass, so too with consciousness. It puddles. But not on the same basis as mass. It puddles in some unseen way so that a brain can be conscious. In this way, once evolution discovered the trick of creating a puddle of consciousness in the brain, then it passed that on in the DNA. So consciousness exists today because the DNA of offspring knows that trick and causes consciosness to puddle in that entity's brain. Potentially anything that has a brain could know this trick but since we can't detect or measure it, we don't know.

After a very long period of study I must say the subject of a "Soul" is strictly a matter of one's personal Faith and Outside the need of Questioning in a supposed scientific review is outside reality nor testable in any manner at all ,with great Respect

i didnt feel any closer, but it was nice to see i wasnt and am not the only confused person searching. interesting stuff, very wordy with no resolution

i'd love to see swinburne talk to sean carroll about souls.

This kind of Q/A already mention in bhagwat gita ❤❤❤

In terms of a self-identity, our conscious at any one time is only aware of the most immediate part of us, so we naturally oversimplify ourselves when we define our identity. Our self-identity is best captured by what we're driven towards. But that's only because it's the most identifiable thing, we can pinpoint as us converging into. At its core it isn't definable. We build our identity of how we change as we go, and that is our realisation catching up with who we are. It is an illusion if we think we truly know ourselves. As a functional definition of personal identity, I'd say it's our process to work out what we might do for any future situation.

Great videos - real shame about the crazy varying sound levels!

Kudos -- 444 Gematria -- 🗽

I'm astounded at how many of the academics here and in other videos in this series take it as given that consciousness is a product of the brain or the place where it resides. Brilliant work has been done to show that the idea of the self is just an idea but it has been done in a framework which suggests that the brain creates consciousness. There is no evidence that brains actually exist. That's an inference we make from an experience which is indistinguishable from a dream. That is, there is only experience and the awareness of it. Nothing within this dream can tell us anything about what it is that dreams and how experience occurs but honest inquiry will show that the ideas of a body and a witnessing self are just that: ideas. The only knowable fact is that there is experiencing. Even the idea that there is an experiencer is just an idea.

@mahamudra8150

4 жыл бұрын

Exactly! Though Donald Hoffman, who considers consciousness the fundamental property, is in the minority.

The universe is the looking eye pure singular non phisical, yet everything around us. We are perfect looking glasses for it to understand and see itself. When your brain or body is damaged it can not see quite straight, yet it is still the universe consious and wonderful. This is reality, and explains everything

0:25 The best, most memorable way of having attended high school

I find amnesia a phenomenon that can strip who you once were and you still remain conscious and function as you did prior to amnesia. I hope i'm explaining it where one understands. It's like you were given a body with basic instructions (depending on conditions prior to amnesia).

"Until I look in a mirror." I feel the same Robert. I think personal identity persists not just through time on earth, but even beyond the cosmos of time.

@alvaroxex

4 жыл бұрын

You don't even have a definition of time, you are just speculating

@johnbrzykcy3076

4 жыл бұрын

@@alvaroxex Yes I agree that I am speculating ( hoping ). But I see nothing wrong with speculation or imagination.

@domcasmurro2417

4 жыл бұрын

@@johnbrzykcy3076 Time is an interaction of matter with gravity. Without matter the universe can't tell the time.

@johnbrzykcy3076

4 жыл бұрын

@Stefano Portoghesi Hey Stefano... glad you asked. Actually it's a phrase I made up that means "eternal time" or eternity.

@johnbrzykcy3076

4 жыл бұрын

@@domcasmurro2417 Thanks for the information.

I would suggest that the "immaterial" part is required, that the immaterial part is essentially a combining of conscious wavelengths of energy and thus the "explanation of the "soul".

To me the philosopher - Richard Swinburne I believe, not sure of the spelling of his last name, is the more sensible, logical thesis. We’ve all heard of the butterfly effect, which is a totally different subject, so we can call his ideology the caterpillar effect. A caterpillar dissolves completely in the cocoon, and then emerges with a completely new enhanced body. Yet we know it’s that same caterpillar that entered that cocoon. Ofcourse this is done in material way, but perhaps with mammals such as ourselves, this happens in a non- material way. So it may be that a body is indeed needed, but our upgrade happens with a spiritual body.🤔

belief and faith being the primary powers of the soul: they anchor the sense of self to a body. once belief and faith are expanded in capacity, the sense of self can also expand beyond the body mind conception . . . a mysterious and beautiful way to live

The driving function from the hippocampus "strikes" the cortex according to the state of the cerebellum. The cortex "rings" with all of the memories the driving function draws up. Strike it diffetently and you recall different memories, even to the point of you feeling like a different person. It's your memories that make you and them being called up together that binds them.

Praise Jesus!!

Six people here. Three soul addicts: Kuhn, Swinburne, Walsh. Three materialists: Blackburn, Law, Bilder (quite tactful here). Now look at the size of their heads. Is there a correlation between head circumference and fascination with non-physicality?

I think there is some memory in the body. Also a feeling of that particular body. So Jim would find parts of himself missing and if he could he would find elements of John in his feelings and responses and eventually his sense of self.

@brydonjesse

3 жыл бұрын

I was thinking the same as I watched this video (I'm bhuddist I am you and was confirming myself with you:) I think we are all the universe looking through our lenses created by expirence. This could be located in the brain.

The conflict in paradise was over unity or a separate self. Rebellion won out, so here we are. We may have through trial and error to make our way back again. Our selfhood persists, apparently our self is inviolable, unless we are in unity which may be what we are evolving towards. Still, we will likely retain our individuality as once given individuality is unlikely to be taken away. So it is likely we can be part of the whole or apart from the whole by choice at the end of our evolution.

Read the philosopher P.F. Strawson. He argued that the concept of a 'person' was logically prior to the concepts of 'bodies' and 'souls', and that a person had to have a physical existence (amongst other things, like the presence of other persons) in order to be self-conscious. It's a very compelling argument. The expression "personal identity over time" is a bit verbose, because what would it mean to have a personal identity 'outside of time?" That's sometimes the description of a 'divine' or supernatural consciousness, correct?

The whole enchilada is an illusion, baby... but it's a beautiful one, so roll with it! 19:35, not only do I not have the sense of not generating the activity, it sounds external; there is all of the 3D spatial data accompanying it as if someone nearby spoke the words. Same if it's music, it's coming from outside of my head.

By personal memory (personal knowledge), identity and consciousness persist through time.

Robert. What a great series you have put together! Actually, the best content on the web,.with your interviews & depth of inquiry with the brightest minds, Alan Guth, Max Tagmark, Sean Carroll, David Chalmers, Lennard Suskind, etc. So to this particular topic. I might only suggest one insight to your pondering. How is it that you have maintained a slim body over all these decades, where you can at least, preceive your identity connected to your past, if only asthetically, whereas, I, on the other hand, only need to look in my mirror and know, I'm TRULY, not the same person. LOL

i prefer to think of it as triggers broom.

I am that I am 'I am' thought rises from SELF SELF is the root cause of all creation SELF of me or you or any living thing is same

The first guy is really optimistic. Basically thinks you die and you’re nothing. Must be a real hoot at parties

I've heard that we are Not the same person as we were when we were younger.

How does personal identity persist through time? Because consciousness is identity itself. I exist, and to know that you exist is to be conscious of your existence. Being conscious that you "be" is just being in an eternal moment that never fluctuates. Since consciousness needs nothing other than itself to know itself it is absolute in itself. Being absolute in itself is why our identity persist through time.

The subject of personal identity has been written about in Philosophy. I find it frustrating that none of that was covered in the video. No mention of renowned philosopher Derek Parfit’s thought experiments about transportation to march was made, nor any of the available litterature and the reasoning and arguments by philosophers on the subject of the nature of personal identity was covered. I think this deserves some attention if Kuhn is to seriously entertain the question of personal identity. There are basically three views of personal identity for which, thanks to philosopher Daniel Kolak we now have names. Closed individualism (CI), Empty individualism (EI), and Open individualism (OI). According to CI we start existing at birth, and depending on the specific formulation either stop existing at death or continue to exist after death in an afterlife of some sort. According to EI personal identity is confined to a minimim unit of time such that every new point in time one starts existing and stops existing ones that point in time has passed. According to OI there is only one numerically identical subject of experience, the identity of which all phenomenally conscious beings share. In other words, basically that we are all the same subject of experience or the same person (depending on how person is defined). The view seemingly mostly flirted with in the video was CI. This view isn’t taken particularly seriously among philosophers who deal with these sorts of questions. Its acceptance would require some known individuating and identifying borders within which personal identity is confined and within which it has continuity over time. In other words it requires some sort of identity carrier which there seemingly is no good reason to believe exists. EI, is perhaps the most popular among Philosophers who deal with these sorts of questions and may seemingly seem like a default position after rejecting CI. Personally I’m not confident identity can reasonably be confined to miminum units of time as individuating and identifying borders. A central challange for OI seemingly is to make a good case that all contents of consciousness or qualia bundles in each minimum unit of time (assuming that minimum units of time can be applied in this way to experiential states) are ontologically unitary and homogeneus such that they are all experienced by the same one numerically identical subject. Personally, I’m on the fence regarding the choice between EI and OI, leaning towards OI for reasons that opens up a whole new can of worms if went into here.

Persistence of personal identity it is when you were born as Mr. Kuhn and turned into Mr. Einstein when grown old.

11:55 - 15:45

I am always me, I persist trough time Don't worry, it won't last long

The brain-swap thought experiment strikes me as a little bit odd. They way it is dicussed here seems to me, as if it is implied that the body didn't get swaped. Yet the brain is a part of the body, and if you included the whole nervous system, it is actually quite a lot of it. So in a sense, the "important parts" of Jim and John did switch places...

An individual’s brain (and sense of self) also interacts closely with their own spine, and nerves, and glands, and hormones, and individual chemical balances signaling from organs and individual cells, etc.. So, just being able to transplant a brain, or a whole head, to a new body will not transfer the individuals whole, previous sense of “self.”

I want to know why every time I dismiss god I keep getting coincidences that make me think twice

Actually Locke said that consciousness makes a person. But then he said, that if I don´t remember something, it is as if that would not be part of me. Hence, everyone interprets he meant memory makes personal identity. But, then he talks about the judgement day, when all our deeds we did as conscious beings will be evaluated; and I interpret it meaning whether we remember or not. Crucial is was I conscious when it happened. So, the stream of witness-consciousness makes a person both according to (some) Buddhists and John Locke.

@digitalfootballer9032

9 ай бұрын

Related to this, if say you alone witnessed an event, and then later forget it happened, did it ever even actually happen then, or is the event itself erased from existence?

13:00 Interesting. If we accept that there is a ME and a YOU that are evidently distinct entities (because it definitely feels from our PoVs that we are not the same entity - we have all of our own experiences and none of the other's, although maybe this is an illusion resulting from limited communication between us, which if remediated would result in the "realisation" that our separate identities were imagined by two poorly integrated parts of the same whole...) then there must be some part of our identities which lives outside the physical world. In this example, the "soul" is our way of referring to what couples phenomenal experiences to a particular subject - if you and I are, after all, particular subjects and not actually the same indistinct subject in two localised states of ignorance of our actual unity (having the same "soul").

@firstnamesurname6550

4 жыл бұрын

Nice. Now, a thought experiment ... Imagine that what the people call their common 'outside world' is an 'inside world' for an entity, and what they call their 'inner worlds' is the 'outside world' for that entity ... Lets call that Entity, an AdS ( Anti -de- Sitter ) Existent ... Imaginary for humans, but more real than their subjective experiences ... inclusive, more real than the summation of all the anthropomorphic subjective experiences that happened/happens/will happen ... The correspondent metaphor is 'a single neuron doesn't have the processing capacity for rendering in itself the dynamics of its surroundings and less the processing capacity for rendering an integrated environment/universe.'

@cliffdee2

4 жыл бұрын

I actually didn't understand what he meant when he said there will be something missing when I have your body and experiences and vice versa. The reason it's confusing to me is because he seems to require something above the conglomeration of experiences, memories and behavior patterns to define what you are. Why can't we just define that which persists through time as all those things together? We don't need something above that. I think the earlier speaker Blackburn likened the self to a football team. The team persists through time but the members of the team may change.

Liked before the intro even started.

Because of same basic memory?

3:15 I don't think that there is a significant difference between the problem of personal identity and bicycle identity: if you subsequently change parts in your bicycle until no parts are the same anymore, is it still the same bicycle? I think the problem with personal identity is basically the same and in both cases there isn't a definitive answer.

Alright, so here's a point he missed. Anyone who works with complex systems will tell you that any sufficiently complex system automatically takes on attributes other than what can be predicted based solely on the constituent parts. The inference that's waiting to be made there is that those emergent properties are comparable to individualistic attribution. These properties are both "immaterial" and "natural". There is no conflict there. I'm not the same person today as I was on my fifth birthday. Since that day, every cell in my body has been replaced several times over. I don't even remember what I was doing on that day. But I am still the same "system". The same collection of parts even though not the same parts. There is continuity. The system continues. What does this mean for personal continuation after death? Well, that's a hairy one, but if you want to rely on the possibility of continuing on, you have to differentiate between the emergent properties that come from the corporeal system and those that are from larger systems. Societal structure, human interaction, mystical systems, even the universe itself. These systems will still remain intact after the corporeal system fails. Your memories attach to your brain. Scientific inquiry has proven that. Alzheimer's, brain damage, senility, and even just natural growth over time - all these things degrade your memories. In time, all your memories will disappear. But your "self"? That may emerge from a different system. If so, that may continue until that system is also destroyed

Personal identity typically persists in survival mode. It’s gonna be awhile before peeps start really living. Outside the boundaries of survival.

Maybe the best yet. My view is that the continuity of self is, to paraphrase Einstein, "an illusion - though a persistent one."

@YuriRadavchuk

4 жыл бұрын

Illusion of Self is a way to describe that there is a container of self that always changes the content. But I'm struggling for years trying to understand the implications of it

@davidtigwell9021

4 жыл бұрын

@@YuriRadavchuk Right. I get you. It seems to me that consciousness itself is an emergent property of complexity - in this case, the brain. I would also observe that it is unlikely a step function that occurred when H.sapiens first appeared. Rather, the manifestation of consciousness as a sense of self is graded with the complexity of the underlying substrate..Obviously, we are conscious and have a sense of self, but I'd wager that to some degree or another, so is my cat. The persistence of self would seem to arise from both memory and structure. Both of these change only gradually with time. But change, they do. I "feel" like I'm the same person I was decades ago, but on close examination, I can see fundamental changes in how I see the world today. My "self" sees the world through eyes quite different than when I was 25. Gradual changes are hard to detect. Only through retrospection can we detect them.

@jacobvreeland6147

4 жыл бұрын

@@davidtigwell9021 It's that ability of retrospection that allows the continuity. "I was there and now I'm here, but I am still me" You may grow as a person, change your views, values and beliefs, but fundamentally you are still you. You can't help but be anyone but who you are at the moment, so work and choose to be the best you.

@davidtigwell9021

4 жыл бұрын

@@jacobvreeland6147 Well - I'm not at all certain that that "me" that is doing the retrospection is the same one I'm reflecting on from the past. While I completely agree and support your sentiment, and try as best I can to do just that, I don't see that as supportive of the claim that my current "me" will be the same in a few years. Or even tomorrow.

@jacobvreeland6147

4 жыл бұрын

@@davidtigwell9021 David Tigwell Maybe not the same in the sense that you are unchanging, the "me" of tomorrow isn't the same "me" as today and isn't the same "me" as yesterday, they all are, have been or will be "I". Who we are today is built upon who we were before. Not sure where you live but if you've ever seen a curated palm tree it's built up year by year trimming the palms to grow layer upon layer. The palms at the top aren't the palms from before, but without either there wouldn't be a tree.

Bring it on anti-essentists rock on!!!

I started having somebody else's illusion-of-self - they're suing...

Impressions= memory + characteristics

If you believe your "personality" is solely the result of your brain, DNA, atoms, memories, and life experiences, you haven't paid much attention to who you are. Keep going.😊

@StanTheObserver-lo8rx

4 жыл бұрын

Nature or nurture? Doesn't matter..it all ends in death. Besides..somethings need to be forgotten forever.

@MrAlexxxander

Жыл бұрын

You sound smug, as if you know something we don't; thus, my intuition tells me not to believe you.

@HarryNicNicholas

Жыл бұрын

thanks mate, that was really incredibly useful.

@HarryNicNicholas

Жыл бұрын

@@MrAlexxxander he's right but kinda stating the obvious and not supplying any answer to the question posed in the video. it's the ship of theseus problem, interesting, hard to answer at the best of times. but john didn't add.

This is weird I’m not watching it I don’t know if I’m going to watch this show anymore

Your brain IS your body.

I'm confident that you already stated the things that are not physical in the brain...memories and the soul are two mentioned

A related question is how the persistent identity relates to the changing forms of the world, and the answer from the Vedas is explained here: www.ashishdalela.com/2017/01/28/what-is-prana/

Wow Dr. Robert, you seem to have a happy and satisfactory life with beautiful family, successful career, wealthy resources... etc and still you are obsessed with deep philosophical questions! Usually it is thought that only dissatisfied souls and worldly failures go after the metaphysics.

@danielpaulson8838

3 жыл бұрын

No, those are the people who seek answers. People find satisfaction in different ways. For example, theists are simple minded and are satisfied with supernatural beliefs. But, only seeking minds understand this. Most humans do not care. Most humans just believe what their local culture tells them to believe and that's good enough for them. Robert has risen above that.

@irfanmehmud63

3 жыл бұрын

@@danielpaulson8838 Agreed. Thanks for your comment.

I never would have guessed that Robert Lawrence Kuhn was a ladies man!! 😄😄

Observing myself...of coarse there is a natural bias...I see a child...an adolescent..an adult...a senior...that basically has not changed all that much. It has to be our DNA. Of coarse life events it can be said shape us but maybe they just reinforce our behavior and beliefs. My weaknesses have stayed more or less the same dispite my attempts to change on occasion. My strength have stayed the same. I would say. It is possible that we are hard wired...predetermined results. Our best friend and our worst enemy. That is what we are. Perhaps. Our self awareness may not be limited to our own species we really have no way of knowing. In the end it doesn't matter because we will be dead End of our story...but than ask did my actions effect others...do we live on through them. A ripple effect of you will. Impossible to really know. The ancear like many others will probably never be known to our species until the time of our extinction.

Identity comes from experiences, physical and otherwise.

The i you speak of may be more of a manifestation of learning than a spiritual viscerality. The manifestation of the mind- the thinking, linguistic, responsive to the social world of humans thing- is the only remembering faculty that serves to last by feeding the ego. The mind in the presence of other minds gives rise to the ego. The ego, as such, is an emergent property of the mind in the presence of other minds. The other remembering faculty is one whose memory is not as susceptible to immediate recollection. This faculty is feeling or sensing. We can remember easily trauma in relation to independent things such as fire or cold or drowning. But the body and senses cannot precisely recall the smell of bacon or the feel of fire when those independent things are not immediately present. Those recollections cannot fully give rise to an ego because those recollections are not constantly being refreshed by the presence of those independent things. Whereas the mind is being refreshed by the presence of other humans or their art: music, tv, literature, etc. So when you say you are the constant in the midst of existence, you may only be referring to the intellectual, social i. The i whose knowledge of itself evolves only when its learning is allowed by others; or when its ignorance is, seemingly, evaporated by its own intention. The i of the body and senses which relies on the memory called feeling is literally not given a second thought. Its experiences are subsumed by the ego. But because its domain deals exclusively with independent "things", including other humans, it may be considered more real or less depending upon your personal, predilection.

Thomas Metzinger has brought me here

@domcasmurro2417

4 жыл бұрын

Stay tuned. This channel is excellent.

You are the same player despite your 'avatar' changing.

There's one more state of being not mentioned in this compilation, a time from after our birth and until we became self aware. Not sure when baby first open his eyes, but must be quite a sensation, a transition from shapeless dreams to geometry and qualitative properties of reality. So baby can suddenly see the world, but his brain has no concepts yet, it's just a perception of light waves, seeing comes years latter. Same goes for sound, smell, touch, or taste, all those sensory inputs are present since we're cut from mother's cord, but are totally meaningless and we have no recollection they ever happened. This is a part of an answer than, personality have a beginning and develop with body and socialization. What kind of biological mechanism control those functions, we learn how to sense, observe and contemplate reality with time, so it would be logical to presume conscious experience emerge from cultivation, not only from biological growth. This would imply a person is a symbolic construct imposed over biological being. There are 3 things at play here, one is physical environment that is quantum in essence and can't be formalized as something solid, temporal and local. second part is biological entity, much the same as physical substance. A person is third aspect than, like self aware symbolic structure that exist inside a being and is merged with creature, but function as separate dimension, independent from physical laws. Only a part of what we think and perceive is real, rest is a product of self perpetuating mind. Things we recognize are not what we believe they are, mind give things names and sort perception in meaningful concepts. Our perception and intuition are real, but those experiences wouldn't mean a thing without a person who receive those physical stimulants and integrate them into his mental dimension. In other words, reality is out there, this is a fact, but doesn't concern us not even a tinny bit, since we can be aware of real without conscious self. In my opinion, this is the very core of a paradox, reality we cannot touch, person is a construct of real mind, none are real in themselves. Both facts are an illusion that started a few years after our birth and exist independent from universe or better said, we exist exactly in the way universe really is.

Character Auras....just like Charismatic leaders personalities, but yet "faces" play most part of it, we can called as an Image of souls or personality.

Richard swineburne's view would make sense accept it doesnt really have much explanetory power. It fails to answer where the soul would go when the brain is divided, and why the sould would go with one brain instead of another. And how does it interact with a physical body? Does it have causal powers or does it merely sit like a passive passanger in a self-driving car? Etc.

If we evolved from self-organizing molecules, which we did, how can we be different in kind from those entities we evolved from, like the protocell? Therefore, either the protocell (and even entities further down the chain) had some kind of consciousness or they didn’t but, in any case, we would be the same. That means that either panpsychism exists or it doesn’t-that’s the crux!

@freedommascot

4 жыл бұрын

Stefano Portoghesi Yes, awareness could be an emergent phenomenon but it also appears to exist at much lower levels as well, such as in single celled plants and animals as well as even macromolecules. Who’s to say that atoms aren’t aware (within the limits of their particular field of action)? In fact, isn’t awareness a function of an organism’s field of action?

@freedommascot

4 жыл бұрын

Stefano Portoghesi Thanks for your thoughtful reply but I wasn’t referring to awareness, or consciousness, as we normally understand the term. The term “experience” would have been a better choice. The assertion is that all matter experiences its existence, which philosophy describes as panpsychism. I’ve attached links to a couple of papers you might find interesting. nautil.us/issue/47/consciousness/is-matter-conscious. www.scientificamerican.com/article/does-consciousness-pervade-the-universe/

I really don't understand what's up with all this reticence that there can be more than one you. In fact we deal with a near continuum of ourselves branching thru the multiverse all the time just fine, perhaps the only distinction is that in the brain duplication thought experiment, you can actually interact with one or more replicas of yourself with slightly different knowledge than yourself, branched from your own history at some common root point in self time

@BrettHar123

4 жыл бұрын

That is only a conjecture, there is no evidence one way or the other, but it does have implications. If you truly believe you are branching to multiple selves all the time, then you shouldn't have a problem playing Russian roulette, if you catch a bullet, there will be another you who didn't.

@charllsquarra1677

4 жыл бұрын

@@BrettHar123 just ignore the "multiverse", just ask yourself if your subjective experience can be copied and transferred to a different body entirely through physical means: If your answer is a NO, it means you believe there is something inherently supernatural about you that makes your identity. If your answer is YES then you agree with my original assertion that such dilemma doesn't exist: yes, there can be more than one you in the same universe, and yes, after being copied and one of the copies die, you die with the copy, while still being alive in the other. There is no implicit contradiction

'Persist through time' seems to me to be thoroughly redundant.

Look up Tom Campbell as he explains where the souls come from.

@MrDorbel

4 жыл бұрын

Why dont you explain where souls come from? You might start by explaining what a soul is.

Good question!! Every seven years we have a new set of cells!! All our cells are replaced by seven years!! So, if memory is cellular?? How is it that memories remain?? We have a new brain every seven years!!

@BrettHar123

4 жыл бұрын

That is a fallacy, one atom is identical to another, it doesn't make sense to say this atom is different from another one (apart from isotopes). It is the information which is consistent.

@websurfer352

4 жыл бұрын

Stefano Portoghesi But the brain are the collective neurons??

@websurfer352

4 жыл бұрын

Reckless Abandon Yup!! All electrons are identical that is why John Archibald Wheeler along with Richard Feynman questioned wether or not there was only one electron appearing as many!!

Robert, this question is cultural determined. It can only be answered within this cultural context of assumptions. It's like two programmed robots can only communicate with one another, when both their hardware and their software is compatible. From a non cultural point the question would be irrelevant. Because what is, it is.

each video gives answers making one step forward... but in the end the question given "what's the meaning of life" makes you two steps backwards

If we think about ourselves as informational, not physical, beings just inhabiting our physical bodies, than our continuity becomes obvious: the same information, say a book or a movie, can be recorded on different material carrier, say a different CD or flush memory, still staying the same book or movie.

@delq

3 жыл бұрын

So what is non physical information ?

@davidrosenberg1644

3 жыл бұрын

@@delq What is matter or energy? There is no answers to such questions. We perceive those according to their impact on ourselves. If there is a wall, we cannot walk through it. If there is a star, we can observe its light. Would you deny the impact of information on ourselves? Does it make a difference to be informed about particular [important to us] situation? By the way, we are ready to pay for important information, the same way as we pay for matter or for energy.

@delq

3 жыл бұрын

@@davidrosenberg1644 though the only way i can speak of the self is in the form of relationships i have with things and ideas around me it fails to explain why is it that only those relationships are in my awareness and not someone else's. Therefore it doesnt speak of the subject of experience which divides a single universe into 7 billion or more viewpoints.

@davidrosenberg1644

3 жыл бұрын

@@delq Marxists tell that practice is the criterion of truth. Science and technology are the examples of such truth. Philosophy and/or ideology unfortunately aren't. But the latter define human behavior, especially extreme human behavior, not to a lesser extent. You may disagree with Marxist or with the Nazi ideologies, but you cannot deny their impact on human history/lives. Unfortunately science and technology offer us poor protection from other peoples' ideologies. Thus we need our own ideology, if not as a tool of aggression, then at least as defense from the potential aggression. If our ideology helps us to survive, then it kind of falls into above Marxist definition. Don't you think?

@rfvtgbzhn

2 жыл бұрын

information still needs some kind of material state to exist, so you can't call it inmaterial. Also in the case of a CD, there is some information written intentionally to it and the same information is retrieved, but unintentionally you write a lot more of information to it, which could also be retrieved. And sometimes the information retrieved differs from that written, what is called a "bit error". The bit error can be caused by different causes but all of these are material. So I think the CD is actually a good example that information always is material if you look at it in detail, not just in a simplified way like computer scientists tend to do,

I think of my identity as a kind of "autobiographical novel" that I continue to write and rewrite (with constant revisions created by an ever-changing memory) all the time until the moment I die, when the novel ends and vanishes from the universe.🤓

Persistence of identity is simply the persistence of insisting upon identity. For all you know you could have landed in this head of yours the last time you blinked. Memories are evidence that your brain has existed for the duration of its life, but not that it's always been "yours".

@kenechewkuk.l8707

4 жыл бұрын

Yes but that's a falsification. Technically nothing can be proven. I'm quite interested in evolution and the philosophy behind it, so I ask why do we have an identity? It would be much more beneficial if we were purely sex driven, with no personality or sense of self. Personality gets in the way of having babies, which is our ultimate goal. You won't have babies with someone you aren't personally good with, and some people choose not to have children all together for personal reasons. The nature of evolution is for us to pass down our genes, so the fact we have a self identity, even if it is an illusion, is interesting to me.

@kenechewkuk.l8707

4 жыл бұрын

For example, why have feelings? Why be sad when you can pass your genes on?

@Reienroute

4 жыл бұрын

@@kenechewkuk.l8707 I think you're misunderstanding the usage of "identity" here. It's not a question about evolutionary pragmatism, it's a question about the solidity of cognitive locality along a time line. There is identity as in personality traits, and then there's identity as in the sense of "I" completely separate from any of the specific experiences involved. The latter being the most primordial phenomenon of conscious individuality. This is what I believe is being questioned here. But even on a completely evolutionary level, identity in the more colloquial sense could have plenty of practical purposes, or at very least could be the consequence of a tangential mechanism. For example, there is survivability in working together. Personal attachments to people, objects, environments, emotions, etc... are all subjects of our communication. What is bonding without comparing these personal attachments with others and what motivation would we have to maintain a family unit without bonding? Plenty of animals are geared towards just finding another of their species to mate with before taking off, but those animals tend to have many other traits which allow for survivability as more solitary animals. I would see identity in the sense you seem to be taking it as a necessary facet of social animals which are as complex as ourselves.

Time is an illusion of the Ego Mind. The Ego Mind and therefore the "Personal Identify" is also a transient experience that will pass when the Ego Mind passes. The only thing that's persistent is Consciousness which will exist before and after the illusion of the physical existence.

I think its an illusion.... Read that again. “I THINK” it’s an illusion. And illusion of personal identity is literally a self contradiction. Any statement you make about it presupposes the existence of a personal identity who is the subject of the illusion.

@hermansohier7643

4 жыл бұрын

There is no self to find,it's that simple,in fact,it's to simple for the brain .

what it means to be, and what it means to be in time are the concepts that make my ears bleed. analyzing it just seems to end up in dichotomys like position or velocity; if research into psychedelics becomes a thing, it might be worth listening to reports from psychonauts to glean some insight into the subjective human experience of identity and time; different perspectives might help us get closer to truth about "objective identity and time.' some concepts I think needs to be experienced in different ways to start to get a handle on them. whenever I think about myself in time I always end up an infinite regress,... but in the words of Morpheus, *we are still here!* kzread.info/dash/bejne/o6qVw6mhls3Yl9Y.html

Subjective experience is overrated. Subjective experience = brain experiences. Do not understand why there is a strong desire/hope in many to keep understanding of consciousness and what we call self outside the purview of science.

@SandipChitale

4 жыл бұрын

@Keep Rioting, I'm Reloading Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. I have never seen an evidence of Subjective experience without a brain. I have seen and personally experienced my Subjective experience be there and go (under general anesthesia) while my brain existed all the time. Please watch: kzread.info/dash/bejne/qoaZzpODe7Krkqw.html where neuroscience is heading.

I had 100% memory loss after an accident, you do NOT still have your personality etc if you don’t have memories of your personality!! You don’t know what’s dangerous because you don’t remember why , words are just a noise when you don’t remember what they are, emotions are also fukd if you don’t know what they are for ... 7 years later , I am not the same person that I was before the accident, in no way apart from still being absolutely gorgeous 😂 I might be delusional aswell ..but it’s done in the best possible taste 😂😂😂

@williamburts5495

4 жыл бұрын

True, but memories and emotions aren't self. You could have full blown alzheimer's and know nothing about your life but you still know that " you be " and that knowing that " I am " goes beyond memory and emotion in my opinion.

I wish scientists and philosophers could finally figure out all this sh*t. It might would prevent a lot of suicides.

@xspotbox4400

4 жыл бұрын

Not necessary so, it could turn out truth is just another nonsense.

@somethingyousaid5059

4 жыл бұрын

@@xspotbox4400 Hi. Well, I would agree with you that it would not necessarily prevent a lot of suicides. Even so, it might would prevent mine. Apparently I'm caught up suffering what I can only assume is a full-blown existential crisis (in which a crisis of identity seems to be a big part of that). Talk about being broadsided and then some. I just didn't see it coming is all. Anyway, unfortunately I find that it's the stuff of suicide. (Don't start panicking. Even if it's inevitable, it isn't imminent.) That's why I was wishing that scientists and philosophers could figure all this stuff out. It could only help me if they could. But anyway, thank you for responding to my comment. And yeah you're right, the truth may just be another nonsense.

@xspotbox4400

4 жыл бұрын

@@somethingyousaid5059 It's hard to imagine how it must feel like in your skin, or anybody's else in that matter, we're all kinda virtual this days. Philosophy make people became pessimists, there really could be turtles al the way down. Journey is worth taking anyway, exploration of reality always lead to interesting conclusions. This is how people grow, i suppose, not by learning alone but with experiences of various aspects of reality they find in themselves. To know everything there is to know is not enough, extended vision of reality arise with inner mind. Knowledge make us see every day things different, same, but closer to what they really are. We can't change person that is us, and we probably shouldn't, but we can stear our thoughts. Thinking about different things make the change, imagination can do wonders. And try to avoid objects of power, if something can bring you luck even if you don't believe in it, it can also bring misfortune, since nobody knows how that stupid thing works.

@user-de5cl8vg8m

3 жыл бұрын

Don't do it. You'll regret it.

@somethingyousaid5059

3 жыл бұрын

If I do it it won't be because I had a choice.

just as our cells change so does our "identity" ie emotions, habits, preferences, disposition, perception. search for "Buddhist 5 aggregates" .. there is no self. (anatta)

I'm describing the a force of volition, using the moon and the sun sings of the zodiac, as Hydra genies, the two fighting each other for dominance -- like a marriage -- but understanding that we are first that transcendent-volition with a purpose and mature finding the ideal urn as the vitrine of our existence. The end chapters of my book, The Code: Horizon of infinity sbprabooks.com/ivanbroes/ i explain the mechanics, but my follow up book which will be published in the course of the year is a novel that shows the mother's bearing a fetus, but strange as it might appear, the soul - transcendent-volition -- has the last word, over will power.

You want the answer. Check out TRIGGERS BROOM. (KZread).

10:36 CLEARLY THEY ARE! He's phoney, beware with this one! If they have the same memories, and are "miraculously duplicated", like copied digital files, then they are like "adult mind clones". They are identical. Saying they are not identical will lead you nowhere: just like when saying black is white, and saying white is black, it also won't help you reach any truthful conclusions. Now, from the point of duplication they might start living different lives, and gather different memories, but still they will have the same personality, and character. Then, further away in time, when they get gradually different, you would refer to them as, they are like twins, or brothers, that were "almost the same". And only further in time, after a lot of change, you might start thinking, that they became different people. But close to the point of this miraculous "duplication" these two would be the same person: same character, same memories, same personality traits, same wishes, same favorite things, and so on.