Nice to hear a distinguished scientist say We will never know everything. A wise man for sure.

@alwaysgreatusa223

2 жыл бұрын

Why do you call any man wise ? There is none wise but God !

@vhawk1951kl

2 жыл бұрын

Of course because "everything" is conveniently imaginary, which is to say that it cannot be experienced and that which cannot be experienced can only be described as imaginary - a creation or image in the mind or associative apparatus, and of course "everything" is conveniently vague and generalised, and thus means absolutely nothing, or as Uncle Sam said when he had athad too much gin, "if it's all right, why then nothing is right." It is a convenient excuse for not being able to "know", so you conjure up some imaginary "everything" which cannot be known as your get-out-of-jail-free card

This is the closest to the truth we will ever get 💯 Consciousness is fundamental and we will never have a tool to measure the unmeasurable.

The “unexplainability” of consciousness reminds me of the saying “words may describe a glass of water, yet they cannot quench your thirst”

@sanathansatya1667

2 жыл бұрын

True. Mind can not see mind as it functions but as brain with some chemistry . Consciousness is self aware essence which mind can't percieve or explain because mind is an inferior offshoot of Consciousness.

@SurrealMcCoy

2 жыл бұрын

"the Tao that can be spoken is not the true Tao"

@justthemessengers

2 жыл бұрын

꧁Consciousness꧂ The human body produces it’s own Consciousness (the nn,DMT & 5-MeO-DMT found in humans). The human body then metabolizes the Consciousness that it is producing. The amount of the endogenous Consciousness that the human body is able to metabolize depends on many factors. The less pollutants, poisons & other toxins present in the body will result in the ability to metabolize more of the Consciousness that body is producing. Likewise, the more pollutants, toxins and poisons a body has inside of it the less Consciousness it is able to metabolize. This is true for both the Endogenous Molecules of Consciousness found in humans (nn,DMT & 5-MeO-DMT) and any Molecules of Consciousness (True Entheogens) ingested from external sources. In addition, many of human’s preferred poisons and toxins that they voluntarily consume daily also interferes with the understanding and discernment of what Consciousness is saying to that human, distorting and corrupting Their Teaching; This is true for both the Endogenous Molecules of Consciousness found in humans (nn,DMT & 5-MeO-DMT) and any Molecules of Consciousness (True Entheogens) ingested from external sources. Soma = Ahura Mazda = Allah = El = Amrita = Consciousness = The Eternal = The Deathless = The Immortal = The Entheogens = Yahweh = God . . . . many different names for the same Omniscient, All Knowing, Omnipotent, Beings of Living Light that have been worshipped throughout the ages by the True Believers Consciousness = God = The Light = True Entheogens = The Fully Ascended 🍄“Oh taste and see that the Lord is Good” (Psalm 34:8)🍄

@REDPUMPERNICKEL

2 жыл бұрын

Yet the being-conscious-process may quench its experience of thirst by thinking very intensely in a particular way. Of course not everyone can do it.

"You are the Universe experiencing itself" - Alan Watts "We are a way for the Cosmos to know itself" - Carl Sagan

@adelinrapcore

2 жыл бұрын

Ofcourse but thats just the tip of the iceberg, its just common deduction. What its really made of , its the true question. What are thoughts made of, what is the space between electrons, made of? Imagine there is no universe, and there is nothing...now try to contextualise that nothing..its madness

@andromedarising5764

2 жыл бұрын

Always love to see Alan Watts referenced 👍🏻

@mobiustrip1400

2 жыл бұрын

That's wonderful

@dextermorgan7439

Жыл бұрын

One way , but i dont think we are the only part of the universe with a sense of the self

This is the best explanation I have heard on consciousness yet.

@trojanhorse860

2 жыл бұрын

Really? Then you havent heard much about consciousness, which is still an *unexplainable mystery or the hard* *problem in science.* The guy was just thus speculating. Consciousness cannot explain itself through another consciousness. Even science itself cannot even exist without consciousness. Science has just met its *limit.* No way science can explain consciousness... even though even *Donald Hoffman* thinks that it can be through ....maths lol Check out his ted talk on youtube: *Do we see reality as it is?* We cannot access the nature of reality (Kant was right) simply because we distort it the moment we look at it or observe ir...

@cerimite7674

2 жыл бұрын

@@trojanhorse860 yes, really ; I have experienced lucid dreams, that when I researched them they proved to be resent scientific discoveries. Some of the lucid dreams were on consciousness and involving that our "reality" is only a simulation. This doesn't prove anything, but it is a mechanism for my hypothesized view on consciousness that align parsley with Doctor Schafer's.

I think I agree with your guest to a very great extent. As regards when we will have the tools to help us clearly understand, experiment with and impose consciousness upon other objects, that could be in the very remote future, if ever possible. Of everything that exists, consciousness is uniquely special. It appears to be the crown of existence.

An honest man devoid of evasion, equivocation and prevarication unlike Dennet and his alikes!

Such a deep admiration for him, his word are filled with wisdom, he is not trying to sell pop-science to the public, his honest. Science is a way to describe nature so its comprehensible to humankind, but we must never forget we come from nature itself, therefore we cannot describe the previous step of this iteration which we call life.

Like Schopenhauer said: We can only experience representation but what is beyond of that isn't something that can be understand by reason (Will, in his case)

I understand his view and I fully respect it. It doesn’t mean he is right and it doesn’t mean the other point of views are correct. We just need to keep digging in to get the answer.

@jms4406

2 жыл бұрын

He may be right

Schafer answers are most honest and wise among many of the interviews I watched on this series 👍👍👍

Just a random thought, What if each neuron splits worlds (Multiverse style) over time, and consciousness is some entity that picks which world it prefers, moving through the multiverse in real-time.

Nice to hear some humility in this discussion.

Finally, it all makes sense !

Finally FINALLY a meaningful discussion!

@SpiritualPsychotherapyServices

2 жыл бұрын

🐟 06. CONSCIOUSNESS/AWARENESS: Consciousness means “that which knows”, or “the state of being aware”, from the Latin prefix “con” (with), the stem “scire” (to know) and the suffix “osus” (characterized by). To put it succinctly, consciousness is the SUBJECTIVE component in any subject-object relationship. There is both a localized knowing (within the cognitive faculty of vertebrates) and a Universal Awareness, as explicated in the following paragraphs. Higher species of animal life have sufficient cognitive ability to KNOW themselves and their environment, at least to a measurable degree. Just where consciousness objectively begins in the animal kingdom is a matter of contention but, judging purely by ethological means, it probably starts with vertebrates (at least the higher-order birds and fishes). Those metazoans that are evolutionarily lower than vertebrates do not possess much, if any, semblance of intellect, necessary for true knowledge, but operate purely by reflexive instincts. For instance, an insect or amphibian does not consciously decide to seek food but does so according to its base instincts, directed by its idiosyncratic genetic code. Even when a cockroach flees from danger, it is not experiencing the same kind of thoughts or feelings a human or other mammal would experience. Recently, consciousness has become a significant topic of interdisciplinary research in cognitive science, involving fields such as philosophy of mind, psychology, linguistics, anthropology, neuropsychology and neuroscience. Many such researchers have seen evidence that the brain is merely a conduit or a TRANSDUCER of consciousness, explaining why the more intelligent the animal, the more it can understand its own existence (or at least be aware of more of its environment - just see how amazingly-complex dolphin and whale behaviour can be, compared with other aquatic species), and the reason why it is asserted that a truly enlightened human must possess a far higher level of intelligence than the average person (See Chapter 17 to understand the distinction between enlightenment and mere awakening). The processing unit of a supercomputer must necessarily be far larger in size, more complex and more powerful than the processor in a pocket calculator, obviously. Therefore, it seems logical to conclude that the scale of discrete (localized) consciousness is chiefly dependent on the animal’s brain capacity. So, then, in continuation of the assertion made in the previous paragraph, one could complain: “That's not fair - why can only a genius be enlightened?” (as defined in Chapter 17). The answer is: first of all, as stated above, every species of animal has its own level of intelligence, on a wide-ranging scale. Therefore, a pig or a dog could (if possible) ask: “That is unfair - why can only a human being be enlightened?” Secondly, it is INDEED a fact that life is unfair, because there is no “tit for tat” law of action and reaction, even if many supposedly-great religious preceptors have stated so. They said so because they were preaching to wicked miscreants who refused to quit their evil ways, and needed to be chastized in a forceful manner. It is not possible to speak sweet and gentle words to a rabid dog to prevent it from biting you. Three STATES of awareness are experienced by humans and possibly all other species of mammals: the waking state (“jāgrata”, in Sanskrit), dreaming (“svapna”, in Sanskrit), and deep-sleep (“suṣupti”, in Sanskrit). Beyond these three temporal states is the fourth “state” (“turīya” or “caturīya”, in Sanskrit). That is the unconditioned, timeless “state”, which underlies the other three. The waking state is the LEAST real (that is to say the least permanent, or to put it another way, the farthest from the Necessary Foundation of Existence, as explained towards the end of this chapter). The dream state is closer to our eternal nature, whilst dreamless deep-sleep is much more analogous to The Universal Self (“Brahman”), as it is imbued with peace. Rather than being an absence of awareness, deep-sleep is an awareness of absence (that is, the absence of phenomenal, sensual experiences). So, in actual fact, the fourth state is not a state, but the Unconditioned Ground of Being, or to put it simply, YOU, the real self/Self, or Existence-Awareness-Peace (“sacchidānanda”, in Sanskrit). Perhaps the main purpose of dreams is so that we can understand that the waking-state is practically indistinguishable to the dream-state, and thereby come to see the ILLUSION of this ephemeral world. Both our waking-state experiences and our dream-state experiences occur solely within the mental faculties (refer to Chapter 04 for an elucidation of this phenomenon). If somebody in one of your dreams was to ask your dream-state character if the dream was real, you (playing the part of that character) would most likely say, “yes, of course it is real!” Likewise, if someone was to ask your waking-state character if this world was real, you would almost undoubtedly respond in a similar fashion. There are three components of experience (or knowing) - the experiencer (or the seer, known as “dṛk” or “draṣṭā”, in Sanskrit), the experience (or the process of seeing, known as “dṛṣṭi”, in Sanskrit) and the experienced (or the seen, known as “dṛṣyam”, in Sanskrit). This is known as the ‘The Seer-Seeing-Seen Triad’. One who is self-realized (“brahma-jñāna”, in Sanskrit) has come to understand that this triad is, in fact, singular. In recent years, the term “CONSCIOUSNESS” has been used in esoteric spiritual circles (usually capitalized) to refer to a far more Homogeneous Consciousness (“puruṣa”, in Sanskrit), due to the fact that the English language doesn’t include a single word denoting the Universal Ground of Being (for instance “Brahman”, “Tao”, in other tongues). The word “Awareness” (capitalized) is arguably a more apposite term for this concept. An apt analogy for Universal Consciousness is the manner in which electricity powers a variety of appliances, according to the use and COMPLEXITY of the said device. Electricity powers a washing machine in a very simple manner, to drive a large spindle for laundering clothes. However, the very same electrical energy may be used to operate a computer to manifest an astonishing range of outputs, such as playing audiovisual tracks, communication tasks, and performing extremely complex mathematical computations, depending on the computer’s software and hardware. The more technologically-advanced the device, the more sophisticated is its manifestation of the same electricity. Using the aforementioned computer analogy: the brain is COMPARATIVELY equivalent to the computer hardware, deoxyribonucleic acid akin to the operating system working in conjunction with the memory, the intellect is equivalent to the processing unit, individuated consciousness is analogous to the software programme, whilst Universal Awareness is likened to the electricity that enlivens the entire computer system. A person who is comatosed has lost any semblance of local consciousness, yet is being kept alive by the presence of Universal Consciousness. The fact that many persons report out-of-body experiences, where consciousness departs from the gross body, may support the above view. Cont...

@SpiritualPsychotherapyServices

2 жыл бұрын

There is evidence for Consciousness being a universal field, in SAVANT SYNDROME, a condition in which those persons with significant mental disabilities demonstrate certain abilities far in excess of the norm, such as superhuman rapid mathematical calculation, mind-reading, blind-seeing, or prodigious musical aptitude. Such behaviour suggests that there is a universal field (possibly in holographic form) from which one can access information. Even simple artistic inspiration could be attributed to this phenomenon. The great British singer-songwriter, Sir James Paul McCartney, one day woke with the complete tune of the song, “Yesterday”, in his mind, after hearing it in a dream, as did his songwriting partner, John Lennon, who heard what is arguably his finest song, “#9 Dream” (as the title suggests) in a dream. American composer, Paul Simon, had a similar experience, when the chorus of his sublime masterpiece, “Bridge Over Troubled Water”, simply popped into his head. The typical person believes that the apparatus that knows the external world is his mind (via the five senses), but more perceptive individuals understand that the mind itself is cognizable by the intellect. Wise souls recognize that the false idea of self (the pseudo-ego) is the perceiver of their intellects, whereas awakened persons have realized that the true self/Self is the witness of ALL these temporal phenomena. The true self is synonymous with Meta-Consciousness, or with Infinite Awareness, or the Undifferentiated Unified Field (“Brahman”, in Sanskrit). The dialectic exercise in the following three paragraphs should help one to understand the nature of the fundamental conscious observer, that is, the ULTIMATE observer of all phenomena, in other words, the subject/Subject, which is the authentic self (as opposed to material objects): If someone was to ask you if you are the same individual you were at birth (or even at conception), you would probably respond in the affirmative. So, then, what PRECISELY is it about you that has remained constant since conception? In other words, what is the self-identity you had as an infant, which is the present “you”? It cannot be any part of your body or mind, since none of the atoms or molecules in your zygote body are extant, and “you” certainly did not possess a mind at conception. If you are reasonably intelligent, you may claim that your genome is the same now as it was then. However, it has recently been scientifically demonstrated that genetic code can (and usually does) mutate throughout an individual’s lifetime. Furthermore, nobody factually conceives of their essential nature as being merely a sequence of genes! More intelligent souls would probably counter thus: “The thing that stays the same from my birth to the present time is my sense of self.” This too, is fallacious, since the sense of self does not emerge until at least a couple of years after birth. An infant has no ideation of itself as an individual actor. You may then say “I was a (male/female) human being” but that doesn’t specify any PARTICULAR human (you, yourself). So, then, what EXACTLY is it that remains “you” from conception till death? That is existence itself, which precedes any artificial sense of self. It is, in other terms, no-objective-thing, non-localized-spaciousness, the Subject-of-all-subjects, the Ground-of-all-being. That is the true self, which is the Universal Self. Therefore, your essential nature is Cosmic Consciousness, usually called “God” by Theists (see also Chapter 10). The Tao (The Reality [lit. The Way, The Path, or The Road]) that can be expressed in language is not the REAL Tao. All concepts are, by nature, relative, and at most, can merely point to the Absolute. That explains why some branches of theology use the apophatic method of discerning The Infinite (“neti neti”, [not this, not that], in Sanskrit). Also known in Latin as “via negativa” or “via negationis” theology, this philosophical approach to discovering the essential nature of Reality, gradually negates each description about Ultimate Reality, but not Reality Itself. Ultimate Reality (“Brahman”, in Sanskrit [from “bṛh” - lit. “Expansion”, in English]) alone is real - “real” in the sense that it is the never-mutable substratum of ALL existence. The wisest of the philosophers of ancient India distinguished the “real” from the “unreal” (“sat/asat”, in Sanskrit) by whether or not the “thing“ was eternal or ephemeral (cf. Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad 1:3:28, Bhagavad-gītā 2:16, et altri). Gross material objects (such as one’s own body) and subtle material objects (such as thoughts) are always changing, and therefore not “real”. REALITY is clearly seen by those self-realized persons who have experienced spiritual awakenings (which occur either spontaneously, or after a gradual process over many months or years), yet only intellectually understood by those who have merely studied spiritual topics (that is, those who have practiced one of the four systems of religion described in Chapter 16, but have yet to awaken to their essential nature). “If you remain as you are now, you are in the wakeful state. This is abolished in the dream state. The dream state disappears, when you are in deep sleep. The three states come and go, but you are always there. Your real state, that of Consciousness itself, continues to exist always and forever and it is the only Reality.” ************* “Consciousness must first be there, before anything else can BE. All inquiry of the seeker of truth, must therefore, relate to this consciousness, this sense of conscious presence, which as such, has no personal reference to any individual.” ************* “The only true meditation is the constant impersonal witnessing of all that takes place in one’s life, as mere movements in the Universal Consciousness.” ************* “Insofar as you keep watching the mind and discover yourself as its witness, nothing else can project itself on the screen of consciousness. This is so, because two things cannot occupy the attention, at the same moment. Therefore, delve within and find out where thoughts arise. Seek the source of all thought and acquire the Self-knowledge, which is the awakening of Truth.” ************* “Just as the difference between the space in a pot and the space outside it disappears when the pot is demolished, so also does duality disappear when it is realized that the difference between the individual consciousness and the Universal Consciousness does not in fact exist.” ************* “All there is, is Consciousness, not aware of Itself in Its noumenal Subjectivity, but perceived by Itself as phenomenal manifestation in Its objective expression. If this is understood in depth, there is nothing more to be understood.” Ramesh S. Balsekar, Indian Spiritual Teacher. “As a man who has devoted his whole life to the most clearheaded science, to the study of matter, I can tell you as a result of my research about the atoms this much: There is no matter as such! All matter originates and exists only by virtue of a force which brings the particles of an atom to vibration and holds this most minute solar system of the atom together. We must assume behind this force the existence of a conscious and intelligent Spirit. This Spirit is the matrix of all matter.” ************* “I regard consciousness as fundamental. I regard matter as derivative from consciousness. We cannot get behind consciousness. Everything that we talk about, everything that we regard as existing, postulates consciousness.” Max Karl Ernst Ludwig Planck, German Theoretical Physicist.

@hershchat

2 жыл бұрын

@@SpiritualPsychotherapyServices like your post. The only place I disagree is the mumbojumbo about holographic this and access to consciousness providing savant’s special mental attributes. As far as consciousness is concerned, it creates our subjective experience. It does not, however, send any info back into the brain-mind. The brain mind is forever without access to consciousness. The subjective experience is in consciousness, and not in the physical brain. The knowledge of sense organs, and emotions, and problem solving occurs in the brain. But the brain itself does not enjoy consciousness. It is living and intelligent and emotional. It is NOT conscious- our mind. The consciousness is what enables first person subjective experience, but it cannot supply any info to nor generate any response form the brain. The consciousness is a witness to our mind’s activities and states. But the brain is unaware of consciousness.

@SpiritualPsychotherapyServices

2 жыл бұрын

@@hershchat Kindly repeat that in ENGLISH, Miss Saharsha.☝️

I don’t think it makes sense to say that, in principle, we can never explain what consciousness is. Consciousness is tricky in large part because we still don’t have a great understanding of the brain. But as we have learned more about the brain, we’ve also learned more about consciousness (see split brain patients and the effects of psychedelics). I think we have to be careful to not suggest that consciousness is “magical” and beyond the reach of empiricism simply because it is such a unique subjective experience. There are so many things in history we thought we’d never explain…until we did.

@DALibby127

2 жыл бұрын

We've learned how the brain is a fundamental component of our usually experience of consciousness, and I do believe we can learn more about the biophysical process occurring in the brain, and how that relates to consciousness. I'm not sure if we could ever fully explain consciousness or reality with our current language of physics.

@kuribojim3916

2 жыл бұрын

@@DALibby127 A very thoughtful reply. Thank you!

🎶"I'm not aware of too many things, I know what I know if you know what I mean ..." 🎶

@picobarco4407

2 жыл бұрын

Hi Outer Limits, let me add to this, by putting the music video: Edie Brickell & New Bohemians - What I Am (Official Music Video) kzread.info/dash/bejne/pniglcSddZa_gaQ.html

One of my favourit scientists, bought all his books. RIP.

The question of "why" it's hard and probably will never be explained but the question of "what"..can be explained

Excellent.... thanks 🙏.

I totally agree!

Consciousness is something emergent, its like life...life is emergeing from non living matter, consciousness is emergeing from life. Its a property of life. It can be like gravity, bigger the "brain" or the thinking device , bigger the consciousness.

@darrenelkins5923

2 жыл бұрын

Life emerges from consciousness The bigger the experience of consciousness, the larger the appearance of its emergence

@S3RAVA3LM

2 жыл бұрын

Is consciousness really emergent? How can life emerge from non life? What reason do you have that consciousness emerges from life rather than they're both simultaneous?

@xtaticsr2041

2 жыл бұрын

Sounds magical

@adelinrapcore

2 жыл бұрын

@@S3RAVA3LM life is a result of entrophy. Thats what is happening with non living matter if you give it enough time, it has the possibility to arrange itself into dna structures. Kind of good analogy is that life is like a magnet and consciousness is like the magnetic field around it. It might be a field as well, like the higgs field, which can only interact with higher form of structures of matter like life..

@ianwaltham1854

2 жыл бұрын

I think materialists use the word "emerge" as a magic word to try and explain how brains create consciousness . They may as well say "I don't know". Emergence is just an approximate theoretical description that describes your guess at how brains create consciousness. It isn't real. It is a concept that exists in your conscious mind. How could emergence create consciousness if consciousness is required for the concept of emergence?

Acquiring both factors of coherence which is temporal and spatial, if I am spatialy located than that in itself is my temporal position, however if I am in constant motion I do not match the rule of spatial coherence Quantum coherence arising from quantum superposition of these factors plays a central role in quantum mechanics you can experience

I would like to hear Lothar Schafer discuss his statement about "if the universe were conscious". I know the host dismisses it, and there are simplistic, exaggerated assumptions available which are not reasoned, but I have wondered if consciousness is a property of matter in such a way that there is a natural force that "compels" matter to configure itself into states that can express that property. Gravity is an inherent property of matter, but expresses in negligible ways until there is enough mass for it to influence another object. If consciousness is a property of matter, it might have some negligible presence energetically in all matter (something like potential energy, inherent but not expressed), but requiring a certain set of conditions for it to express in a measurable, demonstrable way, and that property would appear to drive evolutionary processes?

You can only really observe something in relation to another reference point

The camera work and colour grading are on point.

@AmarezMusic

2 жыл бұрын

Agree

Mysterianism is agnosticism + absolute certainty of knowing what cannot be know. Saying that consciousness is a mystery without looking into every corner for solution to hard problem seems like giving up. It means drawing conclusions prematurely. And on what basis? On the basis that we are stuck and extrapolating this fact ad infinitum.

the very thing that creates all the questions (consciousness) cannot be explained--I like that.

What a wise man he was! Now he knows for sure, I assume...

I love the shade of his red ❤️ sweater

We are cosmic radios. We participate in consciousness as a cellphone participates in a network.

Creation is flowering in which flower doesn't know it is flowering!🌻

Good

The universe IS conscious, through us! And just because he can't imagine an explanation of consciousness, that doesn't mean there is no explanation.

@SpiritualPsychotherapyServices

2 жыл бұрын

🐟 06. CONSCIOUSNESS/AWARENESS: Consciousness means “that which knows”, or “the state of being aware”, from the Latin prefix “con” (with), the stem “scire” (to know) and the suffix “osus” (characterized by). To put it succinctly, consciousness is the SUBJECTIVE component in any subject-object relationship. There is both a localized knowing (within the cognitive faculty of vertebrates) and a Universal Awareness, as explicated in the following paragraphs. Higher species of animal life have sufficient cognitive ability to KNOW themselves and their environment, at least to a measurable degree. Just where consciousness objectively begins in the animal kingdom is a matter of contention but, judging purely by ethological means, it probably starts with vertebrates (at least the higher-order birds and fishes). Those metazoans that are evolutionarily lower than vertebrates do not possess much, if any, semblance of intellect, necessary for true knowledge, but operate purely by reflexive instincts. For instance, an insect or amphibian does not consciously decide to seek food but does so according to its base instincts, directed by its idiosyncratic genetic code. Even when a cockroach flees from danger, it is not experiencing the same kind of thoughts or feelings a human or other mammal would experience. Recently, consciousness has become a significant topic of interdisciplinary research in cognitive science, involving fields such as philosophy of mind, psychology, linguistics, anthropology, neuropsychology and neuroscience. Many such researchers have seen evidence that the brain is merely a conduit or a TRANSDUCER of consciousness, explaining why the more intelligent the animal, the more it can understand its own existence (or at least be aware of more of its environment - just see how amazingly-complex dolphin and whale behaviour can be, compared with other aquatic species), and the reason why it is asserted that a truly enlightened human must possess a far higher level of intelligence than the average person (See Chapter 17 to understand the distinction between enlightenment and mere awakening). The processing unit of a supercomputer must necessarily be far larger in size, more complex and more powerful than the processor in a pocket calculator, obviously. Therefore, it seems logical to conclude that the scale of discrete (localized) consciousness is chiefly dependent on the animal’s brain capacity. So, then, in continuation of the assertion made in the previous paragraph, one could complain: “That's not fair - why can only a genius be enlightened?” (as defined in Chapter 17). The answer is: first of all, as stated above, every species of animal has its own level of intelligence, on a wide-ranging scale. Therefore, a pig or a dog could (if possible) ask: “That is unfair - why can only a human being be enlightened?” Secondly, it is INDEED a fact that life is unfair, because there is no “tit for tat” law of action and reaction, even if many supposedly-great religious preceptors have stated so. They said so because they were preaching to wicked miscreants who refused to quit their evil ways, and needed to be chastized in a forceful manner. It is not possible to speak sweet and gentle words to a rabid dog to prevent it from biting you. Three STATES of awareness are experienced by humans and possibly all other species of mammals: the waking state (“jāgrata”, in Sanskrit), dreaming (“svapna”, in Sanskrit), and deep-sleep (“suṣupti”, in Sanskrit). Beyond these three temporal states is the fourth “state” (“turīya” or “caturīya”, in Sanskrit). That is the unconditioned, timeless “state”, which underlies the other three. The waking state is the LEAST real (that is to say the least permanent, or to put it another way, the farthest from the Necessary Foundation of Existence, as explained towards the end of this chapter). The dream state is closer to our eternal nature, whilst dreamless deep-sleep is much more analogous to The Universal Self (“Brahman”), as it is imbued with peace. Rather than being an absence of awareness, deep-sleep is an awareness of absence (that is, the absence of phenomenal, sensual experiences). So, in actual fact, the fourth state is not a state, but the Unconditioned Ground of Being, or to put it simply, YOU, the real self/Self, or Existence-Awareness-Peace (“sacchidānanda”, in Sanskrit). Perhaps the main purpose of dreams is so that we can understand that the waking-state is practically indistinguishable to the dream-state, and thereby come to see the ILLUSION of this ephemeral world. Both our waking-state experiences and our dream-state experiences occur solely within the mental faculties (refer to Chapter 04 for an elucidation of this phenomenon). If somebody in one of your dreams was to ask your dream-state character if the dream was real, you (playing the part of that character) would most likely say, “yes, of course it is real!” Likewise, if someone was to ask your waking-state character if this world was real, you would almost undoubtedly respond in a similar fashion. There are three components of experience (or knowing) - the experiencer (or the seer, known as “dṛk” or “draṣṭā”, in Sanskrit), the experience (or the process of seeing, known as “dṛṣṭi”, in Sanskrit) and the experienced (or the seen, known as “dṛṣyam”, in Sanskrit). This is known as the ‘The Seer-Seeing-Seen Triad’. One who is self-realized (“brahma-jñāna”, in Sanskrit) has come to understand that this triad is, in fact, singular. In recent years, the term “CONSCIOUSNESS” has been used in esoteric spiritual circles (usually capitalized) to refer to a far more Homogeneous Consciousness (“puruṣa”, in Sanskrit), due to the fact that the English language doesn’t include a single word denoting the Universal Ground of Being (for instance “Brahman”, “Tao”, in other tongues). The word “Awareness” (capitalized) is arguably a more apposite term for this concept. An apt analogy for Universal Consciousness is the manner in which electricity powers a variety of appliances, according to the use and COMPLEXITY of the said device. Electricity powers a washing machine in a very simple manner, to drive a large spindle for laundering clothes. However, the very same electrical energy may be used to operate a computer to manifest an astonishing range of outputs, such as playing audiovisual tracks, communication tasks, and performing extremely complex mathematical computations, depending on the computer’s software and hardware. The more technologically-advanced the device, the more sophisticated is its manifestation of the same electricity. Using the aforementioned computer analogy: the brain is COMPARATIVELY equivalent to the computer hardware, deoxyribonucleic acid akin to the operating system working in conjunction with the memory, the intellect is equivalent to the processing unit, individuated consciousness is analogous to the software programme, whilst Universal Awareness is likened to the electricity that enlivens the entire computer system. A person who is comatosed has lost any semblance of local consciousness, yet is being kept alive by the presence of Universal Consciousness. The fact that many persons report out-of-body experiences, where consciousness departs from the gross body, may support the above view. Cont...

@SpiritualPsychotherapyServices

2 жыл бұрын

There is evidence for Consciousness being a universal field, in SAVANT SYNDROME, a condition in which those persons with significant mental disabilities demonstrate certain abilities far in excess of the norm, such as superhuman rapid mathematical calculation, mind-reading, blind-seeing, or prodigious musical aptitude. Such behaviour suggests that there is a universal field (possibly in holographic form) from which one can access information. Even simple artistic inspiration could be attributed to this phenomenon. The great British singer-songwriter, Sir James Paul McCartney, one day woke with the complete tune of the song, “Yesterday”, in his mind, after hearing it in a dream, as did his songwriting partner, John Lennon, who heard what is arguably his finest song, “#9 Dream” (as the title suggests) in a dream. American composer, Paul Simon, had a similar experience, when the chorus of his sublime masterpiece, “Bridge Over Troubled Water”, simply popped into his head. The typical person believes that the apparatus that knows the external world is his mind (via the five senses), but more perceptive individuals understand that the mind itself is cognizable by the intellect. Wise souls recognize that the false idea of self (the pseudo-ego) is the perceiver of their intellects, whereas awakened persons have realized that the true self/Self is the witness of ALL these temporal phenomena. The true self is synonymous with Meta-Consciousness, or with Infinite Awareness, or the Undifferentiated Unified Field (“Brahman”, in Sanskrit). The dialectic exercise in the following three paragraphs should help one to understand the nature of the fundamental conscious observer, that is, the ULTIMATE observer of all phenomena, in other words, the subject/Subject, which is the authentic self (as opposed to material objects): If someone was to ask you if you are the same individual you were at birth (or even at conception), you would probably respond in the affirmative. So, then, what PRECISELY is it about you that has remained constant since conception? In other words, what is the self-identity you had as an infant, which is the present “you”? It cannot be any part of your body or mind, since none of the atoms or molecules in your zygote body are extant, and “you” certainly did not possess a mind at conception. If you are reasonably intelligent, you may claim that your genome is the same now as it was then. However, it has recently been scientifically demonstrated that genetic code can (and usually does) mutate throughout an individual’s lifetime. Furthermore, nobody factually conceives of their essential nature as being merely a sequence of genes! More intelligent souls would probably counter thus: “The thing that stays the same from my birth to the present time is my sense of self.” This too, is fallacious, since the sense of self does not emerge until at least a couple of years after birth. An infant has no ideation of itself as an individual actor. You may then say “I was a (male/female) human being” but that doesn’t specify any PARTICULAR human (you, yourself). So, then, what EXACTLY is it that remains “you” from conception till death? That is existence itself, which precedes any artificial sense of self. It is, in other terms, no-objective-thing, non-localized-spaciousness, the Subject-of-all-subjects, the Ground-of-all-being. That is the true self, which is the Universal Self. Therefore, your essential nature is Cosmic Consciousness, usually called “God” by Theists (see also Chapter 10). The Tao (The Reality [lit. The Way, The Path, or The Road]) that can be expressed in language is not the REAL Tao. All concepts are, by nature, relative, and at most, can merely point to the Absolute. That explains why some branches of theology use the apophatic method of discerning The Infinite (“neti neti”, [not this, not that], in Sanskrit). Also known in Latin as “via negativa” or “via negationis” theology, this philosophical approach to discovering the essential nature of Reality, gradually negates each description about Ultimate Reality, but not Reality Itself. Ultimate Reality (“Brahman”, in Sanskrit [from “bṛh” - lit. “Expansion”, in English]) alone is real - “real” in the sense that it is the never-mutable substratum of ALL existence. The wisest of the philosophers of ancient India distinguished the “real” from the “unreal” (“sat/asat”, in Sanskrit) by whether or not the “thing“ was eternal or ephemeral (cf. Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad 1:3:28, Bhagavad-gītā 2:16, et altri). Gross material objects (such as one’s own body) and subtle material objects (such as thoughts) are always changing, and therefore not “real”. REALITY is clearly seen by those self-realized persons who have experienced spiritual awakenings (which occur either spontaneously, or after a gradual process over many months or years), yet only intellectually understood by those who have merely studied spiritual topics (that is, those who have practiced one of the four systems of religion described in Chapter 16, but have yet to awaken to their essential nature). “If you remain as you are now, you are in the wakeful state. This is abolished in the dream state. The dream state disappears, when you are in deep sleep. The three states come and go, but you are always there. Your real state, that of Consciousness itself, continues to exist always and forever and it is the only Reality.” ************* “Consciousness must first be there, before anything else can BE. All inquiry of the seeker of truth, must therefore, relate to this consciousness, this sense of conscious presence, which as such, has no personal reference to any individual.” ************* “The only true meditation is the constant impersonal witnessing of all that takes place in one’s life, as mere movements in the Universal Consciousness.” ************* “Insofar as you keep watching the mind and discover yourself as its witness, nothing else can project itself on the screen of consciousness. This is so, because two things cannot occupy the attention, at the same moment. Therefore, delve within and find out where thoughts arise. Seek the source of all thought and acquire the Self-knowledge, which is the awakening of Truth.” ************* “Just as the difference between the space in a pot and the space outside it disappears when the pot is demolished, so also does duality disappear when it is realized that the difference between the individual consciousness and the Universal Consciousness does not in fact exist.” ************* “All there is, is Consciousness, not aware of Itself in Its noumenal Subjectivity, but perceived by Itself as phenomenal manifestation in Its objective expression. If this is understood in depth, there is nothing more to be understood.” Ramesh S. Balsekar, Indian Spiritual Teacher. “As a man who has devoted his whole life to the most clearheaded science, to the study of matter, I can tell you as a result of my research about the atoms this much: There is no matter as such! All matter originates and exists only by virtue of a force which brings the particles of an atom to vibration and holds this most minute solar system of the atom together. We must assume behind this force the existence of a conscious and intelligent Spirit. This Spirit is the matrix of all matter.” ************* “I regard consciousness as fundamental. I regard matter as derivative from consciousness. We cannot get behind consciousness. Everything that we talk about, everything that we regard as existing, postulates consciousness.” Max Karl Ernst Ludwig Planck, German Theoretical Physicist.

@Dion_Mustard

2 жыл бұрын

he certainly does not come any where close to solving the "hard problem".

@maxwellsimoes238

2 жыл бұрын

Wrong. There arent fundamental phichs that shows up before Big Bang. Before are Nothing consciencess not picuret because are no sense.

@johnskujins8870

2 жыл бұрын

@@Dion_Mustard Nope. His argument is the argument of personal incredulity. I like Graziano's Attention Schema Theory of consciousness, explained in his book, "Rethinking Consciousness."

One of my first thoughts of QM was: this is kind of free agency of a proto-consciouss entity

@picobarco4407

2 жыл бұрын

Hi Fabian, I have the same kind of thought, I think that Quantum mechanics, its properties are the like possibly the true first basics of the building blocks of Consciousness, a "gateway" to lead you to the full complex form of Consciousness. SO I like your phrase :proto-conscious entity, it is really good wording! Thanks for your post!

@picobarco4407

2 жыл бұрын

SO I am wanted to say I am not a materialist anymore, but I believe that the Realm of Quantum Mechanics can lead us to somehow find the Realm of " the Hard Problem Of Consciousness". I like what the materialist Ken Mogi says in that we don't know what the Materials/Particles really are, when can describe their behaviour, but not know what materials really are! So materialism is something that does not go deep enough. We have the Standard Model of Physics, it describes the material particles, but yet we don't know what an Electron really is! And it Quantum Mechanics is our first formulation of the physical world that is no longer something that is intuitive to humans, our intuition cannot even have guessed this. It was only thru the Platonic Realm of Math and discovering Quantum Mechanics is rooted in a Hilbert Space. And the notions of this math, and other maths, are not intuitive things for Humans.

@picobarco4407

2 жыл бұрын

SO my ideas are that there are 2 Approaches to the "Hard Problems of Consciousness", 1) is from the spiritual side, like for example Buddhism, where they try to basically create a "Science of the Qualitative", while the other approach 2) from the Physical world, to try to get to consciousness from the Realm of the Physical/Material Realm but we can also get to Consciousness via trying to go deeper in the Realm of Quantum Mechanics and Abstract Mathematics. SO I believe we possibly can get to Consciousness from 2 different directions. Which One will get there first, I don't know. BUT I feel that trying to see what Quantum Mechanics and Mathematics, how far they can go to get us to Consciousness, is a very interesting route to follow! So I SAY, FOLLOW the QUANTUM MECHANICAL RABBIT my Dear ALICE IN WONDERLAND!

i would like to see a one hour interview of Kuhn with Kastrup ... I think Kuhn would appreciate Bernardo's point of view.

@francesco5581

2 жыл бұрын

@Terre Schill sure !!

I think he's partly right in that we can never understand where it comes from fundamentally, but partly mistaken in that we can't understand the workings or mechanisms of it. When he speaks of consciousness being a phenomenon, I think he's getting close, but it's more that it's a *principle.* Even perhaps a law, like a Newtonian law of motion. We can explain the results of the law of motion - when particular conditions are present, it gives rise to particular effects like inertia, etc. - but we don't know why that law exists in the first place or where it comes from. It could pre-exist the universe in some so-called Platonic realm or just be a brute fact. It's possible that consciousness is similar. We know there is non-locality, entanglement, human awareness, animal awareness, plant awareness, etc. and I would suggest that those are examples of the fundamental principle of consciousness existing and manifesting because the necessary conditions are present. How does the particle "know" what the entangled particle is doing? How does the plant "know" to grow toward the sunlight? Those phenomena happen because of consciousness, and consciousness exists in those conditions because the law or principle of consciousness dictates or allows for it in those circumstances. Without the necessary conditions, those particular instances of consciousness wouldn't manifest, but that doesn't mean the *principle* of consciousness wouldn't exist. It exists fundamentally, as a Platonic or brute fact, not as a "thing," but like gravity or a law of motion that accounts for certain effects when the conditions allow for it. I think that is as close as we will ever get to knowing what consciousness "is" (not a thing, but instead a principle or even a law), although we can perhaps make advances in understanding the nuances of how the principle functions. It might even turn out to be simpler than we think, in the same way that gravity suddenly becomes simple when we understand it as a principle. Before we knew gravity existed, the effects were complex. After Newton, the principle explained a lot of seemingly varied phenomena relatively simply. Consciousness not as a "thing," or even a phenomenon, but as a fundamental principle of the universe, what a concept. I am not a physicist, but maybe the workings of this principle (if it turns out to be a principle and we can then go on to understand it mathematically) would even end up being the missing link that unifies physics.

@ricklanders

2 жыл бұрын

@McGyver289 In my view we need to stop equating the concept of consciousness as a universal principle with human cognition and awareness. Awareness can exist as a result of what I call the principle or law of consciousness, but from this perspective the consciousness principle predated the human brain by close to 14 billion years, at least.

@ricklanders

2 жыл бұрын

@McGyver289 I'm not talking about consciousness as a localized phenomenon as in a human or animal. I'm talking about an underlying principle of consciousness. You've never seen a law of motion aside from its effects, either, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist as a law - as it would even if there were no "things" around to have motion.

@abelincoln8885

2 жыл бұрын

If consciousness is a phenomena ... then it is empirical .. which it obviously is. He had nothing of value to add to this so-called "Consciousness" dilemma. Consciousness is simply ... a state of awareness, perception & responsiveness ... to the environment ... by an entity that has a MIND. Simple. Animals & Humans are entities of the Physical existence (environment) and possess a physical MIND ( brain) and there have a consciousness. The consciousness of an entity with a MIND completely depends on "complete" form of the entity. The complete form of animals ... is their physical body .. and therefore are only conscious of the physical existence. Man's complete form is the physical body & a non-physical form ( ie Spirit). Man is the only known intelligence in the Universe ... with free will ... and can make physical & abstract constructs ... with purpose, form, function & design. Man's brain has clearly been fine-tuned to separate the his MIND from the Animals. Clearly Man has a physical mind(brain) & body to make physical constructs. It is the non-physical MIND of Man that makes abstract constructs. There are only two existences/realities: 1. Physical -- where matter & energy must obey the Laws of Nature 2. Non-physical -- the domain of the MIND of an intelligence. The Non-physical Mind of Man is the only way to prove, using the Laws o Nature, ... as spirit or soul of an intelligence .. and therefore God. Only an intelligence ... makes Laws ( of Nature) and thins (of the Universe) with clear purpose, form, function & design. Not only is consciousness easily & fully explained ... but it inevitably leads to the proof that the mind of an intelligence is the spirit. Man is only conscious of the Physical environment with a healthy living body & brain. When the Man's body dies ... his MIND lives on now only conscious of the Non physical existence.

Might there be a way to find out where quantum field mechanics came from?

I still think somehow our unique brains physical structure gives rise to this complex thinking which we call consciousness in an explainable 2+2 kind of way but at a much deeper level that exceeds our current knowledge or perhaps even capability of understanding. I just find it hard to accept or believe that anything in this world isnt a mechanism of sorts at its core...

It is explainable, once you realize that a description of redness is not redness. The only way to know what something you are describing is like is to directly apprehend it in consciousness. Once you connect our objective descriptions with what we can subjectively directly apprehend, then you will have the required physical dictionaries to communicate the qualities of things. Only once we discover which of all our descriptions of stuff in the brain is a description of redness will we know more than the colors things seem to be. See: Consciousness: Not a "Hard Problem" Just a Color Problem.

There is a mystery beyond the power of the mind.

In what way would consciousness affect human brain if it is not physical or is not described by mathematics?

I just watched the mathematical challenges of evolution on KZread by Hoover institute and it became very religious and ended up talking about consciousness. I resist this. And that’s why I’m back here, plus I can comment here. One of the guys I saw you interview almost exactly this time last year lol also I think we can do these things and definitely get closer. The most interesting thing tho, is those religious people all agreed how terrible the world is, but I doubt any would change for their god being ‘perfect’

If quantum mechanics cannot explain consciousness, might it be possible that consciousness exists in a similar manner? "Particles" do not exist in the quantum space, wave functions and fields exist there and "particles" are in the classical universe. An "observer" or a "measurement" bridges the two. Might consciousness be a similar "wave function" that "decoheres" into our personal experience?

Information produces qualia when it is embedded in physical fields.

Become humble, treat with respect and responsibility everything and every being and this beautiful planet Earth with its inhabitants, stop trying to explain the unexplainable, develop your Faith, open your heart as it's The Portal and soon enough you'll get to know/ remember more than you'll ever thought you could in this time space reality.

Schafer provided some good point against the reductive case for consciousness but why oh why doesn’t RLK interview Bernardo Kastrup and probe his metaphysics? If he did, I expect Kastrup’s analytical idealist arguments would decimate the emergent hypothesis for consciousness. I’ve previously asked RLK to do this interview without success to date so maybe a few likes to this post might persuade him otherwise.

"There is a part of the world we can't explain..." Bingo! A rather large part.

There is no question of why. Only of how. And we might find the answer to that one day.

The laws that apply to the universe also apply to us. U got outter space/ out there and inner space/ within us. The math just needs to be found, new laws of physics and all that stuff. Biocentrism. E(J)=mc2 or E(J)=115/2. Stupid dream I keep having.

What are they debating about again?

So maybe I am starting from the middle in viewing this. But I guess this would be more engaging if we started with a single definition of consciousness as discussed here and we agreed on the definition. It seems to me that in this dialog, both gentlemen have a different understanding and definition.

♥️

Consciousness is like one singularity trying to explain another singularity as to what Infinity is..."when I collapse my existence, I become Infinity" so to prove it, the singularity collapses and becomes infinity. But the other singularity which watched the former singularity vanish thinks that it died without knowing that death is the process of knowing Infinity.

Reality is a singular mind and we are dissociations of that mind. Separation is an illusion like multiple people in a dream in your own mind at night.

So many people has said that X is unexplainable, to only be proved wrong as time, technology and understanding blossoms.

I just think we chasing our tail with this question, because we're using consciousness to try and explain consciousness.

Interesting Possibility, " The Universe is Conscious".

I think we will never reach to any conclusion. There is a cause for a effect,and that cause is also a effect of some other cause. This human mind thinking loop will never end and therefore we would not reach to any conclusion. It' better to accept now that there is something which is the fundamental source of all causes and effects which can never be fully explained in terms of it's properties and it is existing independently and it is a very vast source of information.

We don't know about the anti-matter world either: we can't explain it. What does that mean? Are there anti-matter suns, anti-matter photons and anti-matter electromagnetic colors? QM is mysterious but let's not pretend it's more mysterious than other things science has shown us. Before we get to consciousness "itself" let's get more conscious. Or is that the crux of the matter? If we get to consciousness itself we won't have to get more conscious? Consciousness as a shortcut to omniscience?

(1:00) *LS: **_"I think that consciousness is basically an unexplainable cosmic phenomenon."_* ... I believe that consciousness is absolutely explainable. The reason why it is difficult is because of our own circular participation within this phenomenon. We are the observers of consciousness while also using this same consciousness to render determinations about consciousness. ... _That is taboo!_ *Consciousness = Information.* Our self-aware consciousnesses represent an evolution of all information from its most rudimentary state to the point where it can now self-evaluate information. This self-evaluation is made manifest through sentient, self-aware human observation ... and whatever ultimately ends up as our determinations.

@r2c3

2 жыл бұрын

1 hello again :) ... "Consciousness = Information" during the past 2 millennia or so, the Consciousness, which according to your view equals only "information" and no other functions, has been referred to as either intrinsic or extrinsic... to reformulate, from your perspective, we get that information is either intrinsic or extrinsic to an entity... Now, the problem with intrinsic information is that it is not self organizing, at least from field observations... it is rather, strictly mechanical in nature (quantum information being excluded from lack of understanding of its exact nature)...

@0-by-1_Publishing_LLC

2 жыл бұрын

@@r2c3 *"Consciousness, which according to your view equals only "information" and no other functions"* ... Wait a second! _"No other functions?"_ If *consciousness = information,* then whatever information is produced by ANY function equally represents consciousness. I have not eliminated any information from consciousness. Intrinsic and extrinsic are merely different _flavors_ of information. Consciousness is a word we mistakenly assign to our unique ability to process information, when in actuality, we are the same information we are processing. Consciousness is an unnecessary word. It's no different than saying that water is wet. *"Now, the problem with intrinsic information is that it is not self organizing, at least from field observations"* ... Let's talk about the evolution of information. At the earliest point of Big Bang, the universe was a shapeless, trillion-degree plasma soup. 13.8 billion years later you have two self-aware humans discussing how this could possibly happen in a KZread comment thread. We don't know how self-awareness emerged from sentience, we don't know how humans evolved from a prokaryote, we don't know how life evolved from inanimate material, and we don't know how the entire universe evolved from an immeasurable, nondimensional point, ... yet all of this has happened. How do you not see this as a self-assembling evolution of information from simplicity to complexity? It's the simplest of all answers.

@kos-mos1127

2 жыл бұрын

*Consciousness* ≠ *Information*. Consciousness is where all the information gets outputted as a view. Consciousness is akin to a graphical user interface.

@0-by-1_Publishing_LLC

2 жыл бұрын

​@@kos-mos1127 *"Consciousness ≠ Information. Consciousness is where all the information gets outputted as a view."* ... Consciousness is a word we mistakenly use for information that's processing previous information while generating new information in the process. That's how existence evolves. For nearly +10 billion years, an evolution of inanimate structure was generating new information until it became redundant. Everything was just different shapes, sizes, spins, states, and trajectories of "stuff." This information then moved into animated information which generated volumes of higher-level information ... until it became redundant. How many times does "predator and prey" need to be experienced before it becomes redundant? The next logical move was an evolution into self-aware humans who have generated more information than the combined database of all previous information since the beginning of existence. This is what happens when information becomes self-aware and is able to processes its own information. We are microcosms of "Existence" in that we do the same through our inward reflection, value assessments, and intellectual constructs. No particle, molecule, rock, moon, planet, star, galaxy, prokaryote, dinosaur, dolphin, or ape has ever manufactured information at the conceptual levels such as God and singularity nor has anything prior been able to assign value to different types of information. You know you like this ... or you wouldn't keep coming back, and you keep coming back because you *_want more information._*

@r2c3

2 жыл бұрын

@@0-by-1_Publishing_LLC ok, you're giving some heavy statements, to be honest "we are the same information we are processing... consciousnes is an unnecessary word... evolution of information... self-assembling evolution of information from simplicity to complexity... it's the simplest of all answers" the problem with consciousness=information is that, in our observable universe, information is ubiquitous but that's not the case with consciousness... therefore, the question to be answered remains still opened for discussion and that is: what is the reason that conscious life (or information life, according to your view) is exclusively found on this planet, since according to your view, all other structures found in the universe are conscious because they're pools of information, maybe 🤔 the only answer or information, I accept as parsimonious, has to relate to a natural phenomena to be considered as a valid argument... it doesn't really matter how reduced an idea or even expression is, if it doesn't relate to reality with at least a simple example...

More central than the richness of a red sweater is the very fundamental experience of self observing itself as well as its surroundings….Consciousness is the fundamental reality….the brain is a processor/transceiver…it gives subjective color and personality to the ultimate and infinite consciousness… it’s what an infinite and all knowing consciousness would do to surprise itself , play and not feel alone…so it made multitudes that come into being with innocent eyes or antennae etc…

Quantum physicists should focus on filling the ignored gaps in their field, like what happens during a wave function collapse, why is there wave particle duality etc, before saying quantum physics explains things like consciousness. It's not even adequately explaining the why and how of what it's used for.

We don't know. The greatest minds don't know. Will we ever know? Who knows...

Many great Physicts and scientists say that conciousness can not be explained by modern science but ancient text vedas says that conciousness emarges from a non material perticle i.e.spiriton or in other word soul and it is part and parcel of absolute conciousness. , now about concious being is Lord Vishnu. As great Physicts like Erwin Schrodinger, Niels Bohr , Hyzenbirg they had read Vedanta and taught us it's philosophical view.

@sreedharpochana9636

2 жыл бұрын

Where's the science ends & what's the silence start speek about inner engineering. I think there's no science at and all 🌍. Matter is not made out off matter.

Keep digging keep following our doubts. The truth is there if we look hard enough. One of the best understandings of consciousness I've found is in the book 📖 'Phenomenon' (Amazon) by Neil Fulcher. It truly takes the reader on 'The Greatest Adventure Ever Experienced' in their lives. It's worth a read if you are into this stuff 🌈🎱

Human DNA was found to interact with photons in a vacuum. Human DNA was also taken from an individual and was able to react instantly when stimulated hundreds of miles away from its host. There is some sort of field that we know nothing about outside the laws of physics and there is a chance that consciousness resides within it. But if we can’t measure it we will never know.

@seymurmammadov3868

2 жыл бұрын

I find this hard to believe any quantum effects (I’m assuming you’re talking about entangled particles) will diminish at the level of DNA especially since there is a measurement taking place. And I’m not sure what you mean by interact… High energy particles can influence DNA by causing point mutations but idk what a photon has to do with this…

@xtaticsr2041

2 жыл бұрын

Never heard or read of this. People would totally lap up stuff like DNA reacting 100s of miles away to something happening to its original host.

@ili626

2 жыл бұрын

research citation would be helpful

@Dan-ii5wz

2 жыл бұрын

Interesting. Source?

@DJChrisSwift

2 жыл бұрын

Experiment one is, The Phantom DNA Effect and number two is, Local and Non-local Effects of Coherent Heart Frequencies on Conformational Changes of DNA. 👍

Why do people ask what the source is, where things come from, what originated reality?

Neither one of them understand how a simple transistor radio works but they are making a leap to the brain and consciousness. This is a classical skills category error.

I continue to be amazed at how consciousness, especially, subjective experience, is treated as a so-called mystery. It is not a mystery. The universe is not conscious. Consciousness is not fundamental. Some biological organisms, for example, Homo sapiens, humans, have the capacity for consciousness. Other biological organisms also have that capacity. Consciousness goes from simple to complex. Human have complex consciousness. A squirrel has simple consciousness. Of course, much depends on how one defines consciousness. The human brain creates consciousness in total; it does not come from outside the brain. You are asleep and unconscious (by definition). Your sensory systems are either shutdown or close to it, although they are active internally to support one's dreams. The medulla, pons, and midbrain contain structures that wake you up -- you go from a sleep state to a wake state. Your sensory system becomes active and you sense your environment. Your memory and other neural networks become active and you become "conscious" - awake, alert, and aware. Your sensory and motor structures, your entire brain is fully awake and working (in time -- it may take a few seconds to a few minutes and possible a hour or more). You (the neural networks that represent "you") are up-and-running. Your subjective experiences are also active. Your felt emotions, your feeling of who you are, your subjective feeling of the morning, of smelling coffee, and so on are on-track. It is all done by brain activity. Why nurse the notion that consciousness is mysterious? It is not. There is no evidence that consciousness of an agent exists outside that agent. And work continues on discovering exactly how the above is accomplished by the brain. Much is known, but much remains to be known. In the end, consciousness will be shown to be a local process by the brain (and supporting structures). In fact, "we" our identity "me", "you" is a perception, an illusion or hallucination produced by neural networks. There isn't some invisible substance floating around in the skull that is you or me; there isn't some invisible spirit or soul floating around or hiding somewhere in your body or brain. Humans are evolved life forms just like all other species of plants and animals. To nature, humans are a twig on its tree of life.

@S3RAVA3LM

2 жыл бұрын

When I go to sleep it's not really me, just the body. In fact Nikola Tesla done all his work during sleep. Do you know what happens and the potential we have when our body goes to sleep? And the evolution theory is nonsense. The genomes, transfusion, transformation -- there's no evidence. All fabricated lies by materialists. In fact it's part of the deception.

@Dion_Mustard

2 жыл бұрын

your argument is totally flawed. a) there is no proof neurons produce consciousness b) evolution does NOT explain consciousness c) near death experiences suggest mind and consciousness can exist independently of brain d) sleep is simply an altered state of consciousness and does not prove consciousness is generated in the brain e) there is some evidence that consciousness becomes MORE vivid and active when the brain is less active (such as meditation). there are so many arguments against the materialist view of consciousness being generated by the brain. I personally have experienced what is termed an Out of Body Experience, and I can tell you now, that was not an illusion.

@S3RAVA3LM

2 жыл бұрын

"It's not a mystery" What is a field? What is energy? What is magnetism? What is light? What is Soul? From whence does form come? What is Intellect? What is existence? What is actual? What is the cause? What is being? What is consciousness? What is gravity? What is matter? What is life? What is space? What is time? What is qualia?

@georgegrubbs2966

2 жыл бұрын

@@Dion_Mustard My argument is not flawed - your claim is flawed. Your requirement is "proof." Can you "prove" you had an OBE? Can you "prove" NDEs are nothing more that low-level brain activity? There are tight, direct, and consistent correlations of various brain structures becoming active in different stages and types of consciousness. Yes, "correlation does not [necessarily] mean causation, but science is based on correlation and inference to the best explanation. You accept these correlations and explanations therefrom in other aspects of life and nature, but for some reason, you reject them for consciousness. Perhaps it is because you have a bias. Your OBE was a neural-based inner experience. "You" did not go out of your body and did not go anywhere. If you can "prove" it, then write the "proof" up and publish it. Here is your OBE: "... neurological evidence shows that out of body experiences are related to a disintegration within personal space (multisensory dysfunction) and a disintegration between personal space (vestibular) and extrapersonal space (visual) due to interference with the temporo-parietal junction." Meditation changes one's inner perspective and sensory experiences. Some experiences are a loss of ego, identity, merging with the cosmos, suspension of time, etcetera -- all natural and all brain-centered.

@ianwaltham1854

2 жыл бұрын

Consciousness cannot be made from or depend upon anything that exists only in conscious minds. All that you describe are concepts, ideas, and abstractions that exist only in conscious minds. What exists outside conscious minds that could make consciousness? Particles that obey the laws of physics? Particles are a concept of mind and laws of physics are a man made description of how the world works as it appears to us within our conscious minds. So I'd say consciousness most definitely is fundamental and consious minds are a container of physical matter that are not made by brains.

🤔

I think looking at it from the outside, consciousness is The spaces in between things , between particles and all matter. Consciousness is the space of space and time because since consciousness would repel itself- it would cause invisibility in between that which is not conscious.

@SaxeLAD

2 жыл бұрын

You've managed to use lots of big words but haven't actually said anything useful.

11:11.

It's 1 of 2 ,1 we can't explain it or 2 we're in a simulation

Where Nikola Tesla said: think in energy, frequency & vibrations. (Matter)

@S3RAVA3LM

2 жыл бұрын

Those are not matter, but matter is high energy light. Light is a sound wave In the aether.

@J.M_Sterken

2 жыл бұрын

@@S3RAVA3LM it's what thos three do together that becomes matter in any form. I'm calculating what it is now, because i already know how it goes. Easy piecy lemon squesy. (Or how you write it)

@S3RAVA3LM

2 жыл бұрын

@@J.M_Sterken they don't become matter, matter simple comes from them.

@J.M_Sterken

2 жыл бұрын

@@S3RAVA3LM yes that's what i say.

The real Living and "subject of knowledge" can never appear in science and empirical world..😉

@junevandermark952

2 жыл бұрын

The scientist Stephen Hawking believed that in one form or another, the universe always existed. If his system of belief just happened to be correct, then consciousness and suffering of all forms of life is natural, and there never was any judge-mental creator in existence, or any afterlife where souls of only humans go to be punished or rewarded.

@maxwellsimoes238

2 жыл бұрын

Subjet knowledge are abstract misticism. Please give us all phisch evidence concern subjet and knowledge. Abstract ideia are are worthless concept.

@puhbrox

2 жыл бұрын

@@maxwellsimoes238 Go learn the English language

@maxwellsimoes238

2 жыл бұрын

@@puhbrox Go Learning good manners ok. thanks . Minds from YOU are pseud Science.

My 2 cents on perhaps THE question. I suspect that consciousness is some inherent "force?" of the known universe, perhaps similar to other forces - weak and strong atomic forces, electromagnetism, gravity, etc. We don't know what gravity is, or why it is, but it seems that if you gather enough "mass" (and what is mass but maybe some characteristic of a given subatomic particle) gravity will be a byproduct, or will be an observable consequence, of that collection of subatomic parties. Perhaps consciousness is a byproduct, or is an observable consequence, of gathering the appropriate and sufficient subatomic particles that go into creating neurons. A simple collection of neurons allows the arising or manifestation or "receiving" of consciousness on an earthworm level. More advanced collections of neurons manifest higher levels of consciousness - a frog, a bird, a chipmunk, a dog, a chimpanzee, an elephant, a dolphin, a human. Maybe our brains are analogous to a radio or television receiver: the more complex the receiver, the greater, or more varied, the "output" of consciousness. Certainly consciousness is affected when the underlying neuronal brain structure is damaged or compromised. It may be that artificial consciousness will arise when we construct computers of a level of complexity that rivals the human brain. Fascinating stuff to think about, but I don't think any substantive answers are likely in any of our lifetimes.

@delq

2 жыл бұрын

while this is an interesting viewpoint what i find troubling is its quantitative nature. I dont think consciousness is quantitative. "Complex consciousness" is when you have complex experiences and your capability to have complex experiences is directly a measure of how sophisticated your brain is. But the consciousness of the hard problem is purely qualitative. It is perspective, an opening from which the "I" sees the universe. what it sees depends on complexity but who is seeing does not

@francesco5581

2 жыл бұрын

is the same Chalmers position on which i agree... An even simple cell act in an "intelligent" way ...

@REDPUMPERNICKEL

2 жыл бұрын

When the que ball hits the rack, the balls react to the impact. We say the balls react. We don't say the balls are conscious. When the rat sees the cat, it responds entirely by instinct. The rat responds instinctively. We don't say the rat is conscious. Those who assert the balls and rat are conscious are confusing reactivity and instinct for what we mean by conscious.

@francesco5581

2 жыл бұрын

@@REDPUMPERNICKEL when the rat see the cat he act intelligently, conscious or not. The same is when two objects collides. They dont dissolve themselves. Instinct is an intelligent unconscious behavior.

@REDPUMPERNICKEL

2 жыл бұрын

@@francesco5581 I agree and note that intelligence and conscious are completely different concepts though on occasion they are significantly intimate.

So why were we created? If tiny structures and forces can explain everything… it’s gibberish. Understanding goes beyond the physical realm. It’s logic and reason which is invisible to physical observations. It’s what is referred to as spirit by the goat herders. 🐐 🐐 🐐

ZEN

"In the beginning was the word" meaning information, not physical stuff...

Since consciousness alters matter at the quantum level, it must have been in the universe before matter. The math is simple.

Schafer does something here what matters which is he is careful. Why is that not a standard scientific attitude?

The problem is we are not just smart / evolved enough! Like someone said, we are just 1% different from an ape, but an ape will have no idea if we tell it 'let's meet at 3 o'clock to have a banana', because it has no idea of time: it is just outside its perception! Similarly, the concept of the origin of consciousness is outside our perception!

@xobx5340

2 жыл бұрын

Well said. But then again, I think if humans live long enough we’d answer this question

@balaji-kartha

2 жыл бұрын

No, it is not the question of time (long enough), you see however long an ape lives it will not understand time. But then if you mean long enough to evolve like humans did from the apes, then you see once we evolve into something smarter we won't be humans anymore! The smarter ones will be a different species! So humans might never understand consciousness, but a smarter (more evolved) species could!

@SpiritualPsychotherapyServices

2 жыл бұрын

@@balaji-kartha: 🐟 06. CONSCIOUSNESS/AWARENESS: Consciousness means “that which knows”, or “the state of being aware”, from the Latin prefix “con” (with), the stem “scire” (to know) and the suffix “osus” (characterized by). To put it succinctly, consciousness is the SUBJECTIVE component in any subject-object relationship. There is both a localized knowing (within the cognitive faculty of vertebrates) and a Universal Awareness, as explicated in the following paragraphs. Higher species of animal life have sufficient cognitive ability to KNOW themselves and their environment, at least to a measurable degree. Just where consciousness objectively begins in the animal kingdom is a matter of contention but, judging purely by ethological means, it probably starts with vertebrates (at least the higher-order birds and fishes). Those metazoans that are evolutionarily lower than vertebrates do not possess much, if any, semblance of intellect, necessary for true knowledge, but operate purely by reflexive instincts. For instance, an insect or amphibian does not consciously decide to seek food but does so according to its base instincts, directed by its idiosyncratic genetic code. Even when a cockroach flees from danger, it is not experiencing the same kind of thoughts or feelings a human or other mammal would experience. Recently, consciousness has become a significant topic of interdisciplinary research in cognitive science, involving fields such as philosophy of mind, psychology, linguistics, anthropology, neuropsychology and neuroscience. Many such researchers have seen evidence that the brain is merely a conduit or a TRANSDUCER of consciousness, explaining why the more intelligent the animal, the more it can understand its own existence (or at least be aware of more of its environment - just see how amazingly-complex dolphin and whale behaviour can be, compared with other aquatic species), and the reason why it is asserted that a truly enlightened human must possess a far higher level of intelligence than the average person (See Chapter 17 to understand the distinction between enlightenment and mere awakening). The processing unit of a supercomputer must necessarily be far larger in size, more complex and more powerful than the processor in a pocket calculator, obviously. Therefore, it seems logical to conclude that the scale of discrete (localized) consciousness is chiefly dependent on the animal’s brain capacity. So, then, in continuation of the assertion made in the previous paragraph, one could complain: “That's not fair - why can only a genius be enlightened?” (as defined in Chapter 17). The answer is: first of all, as stated above, every species of animal has its own level of intelligence, on a wide-ranging scale. Therefore, a pig or a dog could (if possible) ask: “That is unfair - why can only a human being be enlightened?” Secondly, it is INDEED a fact that life is unfair, because there is no “tit for tat” law of action and reaction, even if many supposedly-great religious preceptors have stated so. They said so because they were preaching to wicked miscreants who refused to quit their evil ways, and needed to be chastized in a forceful manner. It is not possible to speak sweet and gentle words to a rabid dog to prevent it from biting you. Three STATES of awareness are experienced by humans and possibly all other species of mammals: the waking state (“jāgrata”, in Sanskrit), dreaming (“svapna”, in Sanskrit), and deep-sleep (“suṣupti”, in Sanskrit). Beyond these three temporal states is the fourth “state” (“turīya” or “caturīya”, in Sanskrit). That is the unconditioned, timeless “state”, which underlies the other three. The waking state is the LEAST real (that is to say the least permanent, or to put it another way, the farthest from the Necessary Foundation of Existence, as explained towards the end of this chapter). The dream state is closer to our eternal nature, whilst dreamless deep-sleep is much more analogous to The Universal Self (“Brahman”), as it is imbued with peace. Rather than being an absence of awareness, deep-sleep is an awareness of absence (that is, the absence of phenomenal, sensual experiences). So, in actual fact, the fourth state is not a state, but the Unconditioned Ground of Being, or to put it simply, YOU, the real self/Self, or Existence-Awareness-Peace (“sacchidānanda”, in Sanskrit). Perhaps the main purpose of dreams is so that we can understand that the waking-state is practically indistinguishable to the dream-state, and thereby come to see the ILLUSION of this ephemeral world. Both our waking-state experiences and our dream-state experiences occur solely within the mental faculties (refer to Chapter 04 for an elucidation of this phenomenon). If somebody in one of your dreams was to ask your dream-state character if the dream was real, you (playing the part of that character) would most likely say, “yes, of course it is real!” Likewise, if someone was to ask your waking-state character if this world was real, you would almost undoubtedly respond in a similar fashion. There are three components of experience (or knowing) - the experiencer (or the seer, known as “dṛk” or “draṣṭā”, in Sanskrit), the experience (or the process of seeing, known as “dṛṣṭi”, in Sanskrit) and the experienced (or the seen, known as “dṛṣyam”, in Sanskrit). This is known as the ‘The Seer-Seeing-Seen Triad’. One who is self-realized (“brahma-jñāna”, in Sanskrit) has come to understand that this triad is, in fact, singular. In recent years, the term “CONSCIOUSNESS” has been used in esoteric spiritual circles (usually capitalized) to refer to a far more Homogeneous Consciousness (“puruṣa”, in Sanskrit), due to the fact that the English language doesn’t include a single word denoting the Universal Ground of Being (for instance “Brahman”, “Tao”, in other tongues). The word “Awareness” (capitalized) is arguably a more apposite term for this concept. An apt analogy for Universal Consciousness is the manner in which electricity powers a variety of appliances, according to the use and COMPLEXITY of the said device. Electricity powers a washing machine in a very simple manner, to drive a large spindle for laundering clothes. However, the very same electrical energy may be used to operate a computer to manifest an astonishing range of outputs, such as playing audiovisual tracks, communication tasks, and performing extremely complex mathematical computations, depending on the computer’s software and hardware. The more technologically-advanced the device, the more sophisticated is its manifestation of the same electricity. Using the aforementioned computer analogy: the brain is COMPARATIVELY equivalent to the computer hardware, deoxyribonucleic acid akin to the operating system working in conjunction with the memory, the intellect is equivalent to the processing unit, individuated consciousness is analogous to the software programme, whilst Universal Awareness is likened to the electricity that enlivens the entire computer system. A person who is comatosed has lost any semblance of local consciousness, yet is being kept alive by the presence of Universal Consciousness. The fact that many persons report out-of-body experiences, where consciousness departs from the gross body, may support the above view. Cont...

@SpiritualPsychotherapyServices

2 жыл бұрын

There is evidence for Consciousness being a universal field, in SAVANT SYNDROME, a condition in which those persons with significant mental disabilities demonstrate certain abilities far in excess of the norm, such as superhuman rapid mathematical calculation, mind-reading, blind-seeing, or prodigious musical aptitude. Such behaviour suggests that there is a universal field (possibly in holographic form) from which one can access information. Even simple artistic inspiration could be attributed to this phenomenon. The great British singer-songwriter, Sir James Paul McCartney, one day woke with the complete tune of the song, “Yesterday”, in his mind, after hearing it in a dream, as did his songwriting partner, John Lennon, who heard what is arguably his finest song, “#9 Dream” (as the title suggests) in a dream. American composer, Paul Simon, had a similar experience, when the chorus of his sublime masterpiece, “Bridge Over Troubled Water”, simply popped into his head. The typical person believes that the apparatus that knows the external world is his mind (via the five senses), but more perceptive individuals understand that the mind itself is cognizable by the intellect. Wise souls recognize that the false idea of self (the pseudo-ego) is the perceiver of their intellects, whereas awakened persons have realized that the true self/Self is the witness of ALL these temporal phenomena. The true self is synonymous with Meta-Consciousness, or with Infinite Awareness, or the Undifferentiated Unified Field (“Brahman”, in Sanskrit). The dialectic exercise in the following three paragraphs should help one to understand the nature of the fundamental conscious observer, that is, the ULTIMATE observer of all phenomena, in other words, the subject/Subject, which is the authentic self (as opposed to material objects): If someone was to ask you if you are the same individual you were at birth (or even at conception), you would probably respond in the affirmative. So, then, what PRECISELY is it about you that has remained constant since conception? In other words, what is the self-identity you had as an infant, which is the present “you”? It cannot be any part of your body or mind, since none of the atoms or molecules in your zygote body are extant, and “you” certainly did not possess a mind at conception. If you are reasonably intelligent, you may claim that your genome is the same now as it was then. However, it has recently been scientifically demonstrated that genetic code can (and usually does) mutate throughout an individual’s lifetime. Furthermore, nobody factually conceives of their essential nature as being merely a sequence of genes! More intelligent souls would probably counter thus: “The thing that stays the same from my birth to the present time is my sense of self.” This too, is fallacious, since the sense of self does not emerge until at least a couple of years after birth. An infant has no ideation of itself as an individual actor. You may then say “I was a (male/female) human being” but that doesn’t specify any PARTICULAR human (you, yourself). So, then, what EXACTLY is it that remains “you” from conception till death? That is existence itself, which precedes any artificial sense of self. It is, in other terms, no-objective-thing, non-localized-spaciousness, the Subject-of-all-subjects, the Ground-of-all-being. That is the true self, which is the Universal Self. Therefore, your essential nature is Cosmic Consciousness, usually called “God” by Theists (see also Chapter 10). The Tao (The Reality [lit. The Way, The Path, or The Road]) that can be expressed in language is not the REAL Tao. All concepts are, by nature, relative, and at most, can merely point to the Absolute. That explains why some branches of theology use the apophatic method of discerning The Infinite (“neti neti”, [not this, not that], in Sanskrit). Also known in Latin as “via negativa” or “via negationis” theology, this philosophical approach to discovering the essential nature of Reality, gradually negates each description about Ultimate Reality, but not Reality Itself. Ultimate Reality (“Brahman”, in Sanskrit [from “bṛh” - lit. “Expansion”, in English]) alone is real - “real” in the sense that it is the never-mutable substratum of ALL existence. The wisest of the philosophers of ancient India distinguished the “real” from the “unreal” (“sat/asat”, in Sanskrit) by whether or not the “thing“ was eternal or ephemeral (cf. Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad 1:3:28, Bhagavad-gītā 2:16, et altri). Gross material objects (such as one’s own body) and subtle material objects (such as thoughts) are always changing, and therefore not “real”. REALITY is clearly seen by those self-realized persons who have experienced spiritual awakenings (which occur either spontaneously, or after a gradual process over many months or years), yet only intellectually understood by those who have merely studied spiritual topics (that is, those who have practiced one of the four systems of religion described in Chapter 16, but have yet to awaken to their essential nature). “If you remain as you are now, you are in the wakeful state. This is abolished in the dream state. The dream state disappears, when you are in deep sleep. The three states come and go, but you are always there. Your real state, that of Consciousness itself, continues to exist always and forever and it is the only Reality.” ************* “Consciousness must first be there, before anything else can BE. All inquiry of the seeker of truth, must therefore, relate to this consciousness, this sense of conscious presence, which as such, has no personal reference to any individual.” ************* “The only true meditation is the constant impersonal witnessing of all that takes place in one’s life, as mere movements in the Universal Consciousness.” ************* “Insofar as you keep watching the mind and discover yourself as its witness, nothing else can project itself on the screen of consciousness. This is so, because two things cannot occupy the attention, at the same moment. Therefore, delve within and find out where thoughts arise. Seek the source of all thought and acquire the Self-knowledge, which is the awakening of Truth.” ************* “Just as the difference between the space in a pot and the space outside it disappears when the pot is demolished, so also does duality disappear when it is realized that the difference between the individual consciousness and the Universal Consciousness does not in fact exist.” ************* “All there is, is Consciousness, not aware of Itself in Its noumenal Subjectivity, but perceived by Itself as phenomenal manifestation in Its objective expression. If this is understood in depth, there is nothing more to be understood.” Ramesh S. Balsekar, Indian Spiritual Teacher. “As a man who has devoted his whole life to the most clearheaded science, to the study of matter, I can tell you as a result of my research about the atoms this much: There is no matter as such! All matter originates and exists only by virtue of a force which brings the particles of an atom to vibration and holds this most minute solar system of the atom together. We must assume behind this force the existence of a conscious and intelligent Spirit. This Spirit is the matrix of all matter.” ************* “I regard consciousness as fundamental. I regard matter as derivative from consciousness. We cannot get behind consciousness. Everything that we talk about, everything that we regard as existing, postulates consciousness.” Max Karl Ernst Ludwig Planck, German Theoretical Physicist.

@GoluKidsLearning174

2 жыл бұрын

Yes May be we can think only that much which we are capable of. Perhaps we cannot discover everything with our limited capability of brain and body

This is an insightful premise that there are aspects of existence we cannot explain. I value the scientific method, but the assumption that humans can comprehend and explain all of reality is hubris. We can look at any other species, any other life-form on planet earth and see it has cognitive limitations to perceive reality. Why would humans be different? We are limited in our biological hardware. An ape may have a mental construct that satisfies their perception of seeing the moon, but this does not mean the creature fully understands it.

Indeed. If it can be explained then it is reductive. That is not the quantum reality of potential itself. If it can be known then it is consciousness knowing itself. And at this point the Zen master would just tell me to shut up or maybe hit me.

A bit of a cop out answer it seems. When faced with a challenging question, it’s far too easy to just say “it’s unexplainable 🤷‍♂️”.

Consciousness is not meant to be explained it can only be experienced.

It takes Knowledge 1st to make Atoms, Cells, electrons, elements to DNA for things so can Physics & Laws exist, for can This Universe with Infinity Stars, a Earth & spin 1000 mph for give us a day everyday & to create us Mankind with Knowledge with Highly complex Brains with Consciousness takes Knowledge & Intelligent for Must exist 1st EXIST. Just as we know the Knowledge & Intelligent must exist 1st for can a Cadillac car exist.

The only thing he said is that consciousness cannot be explained. No argument, nothing.

you are knocking on the door, from inside the house...

As far as consciousness is concerned, it creates our subjective experience. It does not, however, send any info back into the brain-mind. The brain mind is forever without access to consciousness. The subjective experience is in consciousness, and not in the physical brain. The knowledge of sense organs, and emotions, and problem solving occurs in the brain. But the brain itself does not enjoy consciousness. It is living and intelligent and emotional. It is NOT conscious- our mind. The consciousness is what enables first person subjective experience, but it cannot supply any info to nor generate any response form the brain. The consciousness is a witness to our mind’s activities and states. But the brain is unaware of consciousness.

@GoluKidsLearning174

2 жыл бұрын

Does it mean that there are two things exist in universe? One is Subjective - consciousness Other is Objective - matter,thoughts and energy. Do u have any idea on this?

@hershchat

2 жыл бұрын

@@GoluKidsLearning174 dear Bhaskar, my response is based on my reading, so could be off the doctrine. Two answers are given to your question. They are mutually reconcilable, but differ significantly in their difficulty level. The more accessible answer is: There are two kinds of realities (or existence; Samkhya ontology equates reality, sat, and existence, satta), there is dependent reality- such as of a mirage, on light and air density variation. And then there is independent reality. The one word used for “dependent reality”, is “Mithya”. While it’s common language meaning is “falsity”, the technical meaning in this context is “dependent existence”. The universe has a dependent existence. Consciousness has independent existence. Consciousness, as “existence” and “awareness”, exists independently of and prior to all other existence. While other things come into existence, and then pass out of existence, consciousness alone remains unchanged. Consciousness is also the cause of the existence of all else. This universe is “real”, but it is dependent upon Brahm for its existence. I mentioned there was a second, more mysterious answer. The more recondite answer is that all that exists is Atma. Everything else is an appearance in atma, projected by maya, the power of concealment (आवरण) and distortion (विक्षेप). This point is presented in the second chapter of Mandukya Karika by Gaudpad. The Isha Upanishad too hints at it when mentioning sambhuti and asambhuti. Hope this helps.

@theotormon

2 жыл бұрын

Then how are we able to use our brains to talk about consciousness?

@hershchat

2 жыл бұрын

@@theotormon that is a fabulous question! So, when you drive using a GPS, the GPS says things such as, “go past this red light and, at the next light, turn left”. Now, the GPS is like our mind in this example. The GPS doesn’t know what “red” is, light is, or to “go” really is. It has a memory, sensors (GPS), intelligence (it can reroute you), voice, even personality. And we do start to anthropomorphise it. We, on the other hand, do not have the capabilities the GPS has- we don’t have maps in our memory, a GPS to locate us on those maps, or a problem-solving computer that can find and change routes as needed. What we DO have is awareness of what the GPS is doing. It’s the same with body and consciousness. The body can be trained in many things- math and philosophy, riding a bike, painting, etc. “Consciousness”, like “space”, “time”, “value”, is a concept we are able to comprehend. Emmanuel Kant used to talk about a priori’s. Consciousness is an a priori- in terms of our mind that is. Now, there is a special, boundary case, in which the brain can gain first hand intuition of consciousness. When, in meditation, the mind is completely silent, then (it is said) the mind gains the intuition that “I” applies to consciousness, and not to the body. That’d be as if there was special CPU state that the GPS realized that there was a witness to its instructions out there. The mind is unique in having this faculty. Penrose and Hameroff propose a scientific model to explain that. This is well explored territory, and not my invention. However, my understanding of it might be lacking. I am not formally trained.

@abelincoln8885

2 жыл бұрын

Only an intelligence ... has free will ... to think, believe, say & do as he/she/it wants. Only an intelligence ... makes Laws ( of Nature) and Things ( of the Universe) with clear purpose form, function & design. Man is the only known intelligence in the Universe .... where everything has clear purpose, form, function & design and obey a set of natural Laws. Hmmmmm? Consciousness is simply a state of awareness, perception & responsiveness to the environment ... by an entity with a MIND. Animals & Man are entities of the Universe, and have a physical mind( brain) and therefore consciousness of the physical existence. But Man is the only known intelligence in the Universe ... and can make physical & abstract constructs ... with purpose, form, function & form. Man's body clearly makes physical constructs. Man's mind makes abstract constructs. But Man's brain is so fine tuned that Man must have a physical & non physical mind ( body & spirit). While Man's body is alive .. the physical mind dominates. Consciousness switches to the non-physical existence when the body & brain dies. The mind of an intelligence is always a non-physical, eternal. Consciousness depends on the complete form of the entity with a mind ( eg animals(body), Man( body & spirit) God (Spirit).

If we could explain everything, we'd be God. I agree: it's unlikely to ever be the case. We could explain the how up to a very high degree but not the why.

I'm sorry, I must be one of those philosophical zombies I keep hearing about. It's all real simple. Red means stop. Green means go. And somewhere in the brain there is something that means (or can be defined as) "means". Figure out what "means" means and you've got it. Also, build Cmdr. Data. I need proof by construction perspectives on this argument, as I'm getting tired of just having (grown-up) babies to talk about it.

I dont agree with the poetic man. Please help me figure it out. We are an evolved species. So at one point there must emerge consciousness where there wasnt before, in lots of steps. So why would it be outside of the brain? Why would it be unexplainable? Beautiful words like 'what if the universe is conscious ' sound cool, but its big claims with no explanation. And he just seems to forget about the fact of evolution. Am i so wrong in this?

"Why" is a big question that makes the mind bring the coast of unknown. Good discussion.

@maxwellsimoes238

2 жыл бұрын

Why isnt question concern Cosmo. It is baseless concept. Other emerges show upon Cosmos though fundamental phisch let behind why. Cosmo mystery certain are unknow but question why arent reality . There arent place in Science concern unknow . It is archaic misticism.

In Islam, we believe everything in the universe willingly or unwillingly submit to the Creator of the universe. Including cosmos itself have some level of self-aware. When God command the universe response and obeys God's command, except for the mankind and jinns who have got free-will and could choose to disobey God.

Describe a colour to a person born blind. Impossible.

Science will always be limited if scientists refuse to acknowledge the Creator’s sphere of influence.

@chyfields

2 жыл бұрын

@McGyver289 Obviously you don’t think the state of the environment and the wild weather that we are experiencing, are variables worthy of consideration; that indicate ‘so far, not so good’. AKA scientists fucked up.

@REDPUMPERNICKEL

2 жыл бұрын

Lots of scientists are religious and acknowledge a Creator. It does not make any difference to their product. So why should they bother?

@chyfields

2 жыл бұрын

@@REDPUMPERNICKEL Logic dictates that if there is a Creator, as I believe, then the Creator’s purpose is a significant variable in every single equation. As everything in our observable world has been created by something, it seems reasonable to presume that a Creator created even the very framework of our reality.

@abelincoln8885

2 жыл бұрын

You mean ... "refuse to acknowledge only an intelligence makes Laws ( of Nature) and thins ( of the Universe) with clear purpose, form, function & design." Science completely relies on the fixed Laws of Nature ... for Man(an intelligence) to explain natural phenomena. Man has always known the origin of the Universe .. which is why most people will always believe in a supernatural existence ... and ... intelligence that made everything.

@chyfields

2 жыл бұрын

@@abelincoln8885 Quite! right.👋

If you are not using necessity and plausibility you are not engaging in 'science', but playing some other game.. spaceandmotion

I believe that Consciousness is given to us by programmed Atoms, electrons and Photons. Reincarnation is the Result of particles that have been programed for Consciousness.

@Ajay-jh7th

2 жыл бұрын

So even then it doesn't explain what is consciousness but rather how it is produced