This is one of the best collections of pertinence statements, regarding consciousness, and the world that I’ve ever seen. No fluff. Also, the arrangements in the order of presentation was very helpful to its integrity.

everything is energy vibrating

Wonderful. Fascinating. Thanks.

Thank you, this is great information.

Great compilation and juxtaposition of conceptual frameworks. Much appreciated. Well done!

All edges are open there is no inside or outside only what is. Consciousness projects itself into itself everythign is consciousness. You can't stand otside of it to know it. Intimacy is the way of knowing it not through concepts.

Absolute delight ❤

We'll never be able to answer the question of what consciousness really is or how it arises just like we'll never be able to say exactly what gravity or electromagnetism is. Scientific investigation of these phenomena allow us to see HOW they work in ever more detail and complexity - much to our technological advantage - but the questions of WHY or WHAT (in a fundamental sense) are and always will be the realm of faith.

@PKWeaver74

8 ай бұрын

Yup. And I watch video after video of scientists talk about this but I truly think it's a fool's errand.

@mikey180211

8 ай бұрын

@@PKWeaver74 well despite not knowing the so-called 'true nature' of gravity we've managed to install an extensive satellite system around our planet and investigate the wider universe. And our understanding of electromagnetism has birthed innumerable wondrous technologies. So these investigations were hardly fools errands. Who knows what a more detailed understanding of consciousness could lead to. For whimsical reasons people never seem to be able to leave the inquiry into the phenomenon of consciousness at the pragmatic level as we do with these other ideas. People want to know the 'true nature' of consciousness. Well what does that even mean? What would an answer to that question even look like? At the fundamental level everything is mysterious. Not just consciousness. And there lies faith.

Great presentation - sobresaliente

What a brilliant edit, thank you!

Can tell Don’s voice without his image 😂

......anyone whom has spent months or years in silence understands Jacksons point cited by Solms vis how neuroscientists prattle on never seeming to grasping an aspect of ourselves borne of being able to sit in silence.Proust nailed it.

❤Perhap, less talk and more experience of our consciousness 👌 enjoy.

About "time" scientists start to consider that consciousness may be more fundamental than matter or spacetime. Also that human consciousness may be only one possible phase or state of consciousness.

This IS Magic!!

"i regard consciousness as fundamental." max planck.

the hard problem of consciousness is the second most profound question in the universe, closely behind the question of why there is anything at all, and the fact that we can patently never answer these questions brings us to god.

22:40 the Planck "constant" (physics joke).... 😅

Hi! What does CPD stand for with respect to your certification program? Thank you for your channel. So good I do a form of IFS with clients.

You all are great , salute your understanding , lets dive bit deeper in love

Eugene Wigner was one of the first physicists to point out that CONSCIOUSNESS MODIFIES QUANTUM WAVES, THUS ALTERING THE PHYSICAL UNIVERSE. “…. Furthermore, the modified wave function is generally unpredictable before the impression obtained has entered consciousness: it is the very entrance of an impression into our consciousness that will change the wave function, as it will modify our assessment of the probabilities related to different impressions that we expect receive in the future. It is at this point that, inevitably and unalterably, consciousness enters the theory.” EUGENE WIGNER (Nobel Prize in Physics (1963) Symmetries and Reflections (Indiana University Press, Bloomington, 1967)

WOW !!!!!!!!!

0:57 I always feel drawn to Benjamin Franklin discovering electricity…. Any new science on that?

I was trying to find the quote about the most important influence on life or personality? is whether you think life is good or hostile? does anyone know this quote? I thought Don Hoffman referenced it.

@cathyallen3967

8 ай бұрын

"The most important question you can ask is if the universe is good." Einstein. I found that quote very powerful. I can tell you from 30 years experience that once l agreed that nothing was more powerful than the creator of life, one can explore the world of parapsychology without fear if you believe you are watched over and protected by a benevolent spirit that unconditionally loves you and wishes to help you.

Awareness is known by awareness alone.

The observer matters. We just still can’t prove it. Space/time rolls out only with the observer.

matter is a projection of energy in the 3d reality (same world, diferent perception) , "That we can't explain" doe's not project in our day to day experiance of reality as matter but as concioues experiance.

Time ~ Timing = Neutrally Conscious Paradigm

The person who I think was omitted from the conversation is Sir Roger Penrose - he has done much research into cosmology and physics - why? He has an open mind. He also has insinuated that the Big Bang may not be correct. Life is only about discovery and correcting our mistakes. Perfection will never be complete.

The moment a particle is a wave; it has to be a conscious wave! Gravity is the conscious attraction among waves to create the illusion of particles, and our experience-able Universe. Max Planck states: "Consciousness is fundamental and matter is derived from Consciousness". Life is the Infinite Consciousness, experiencing the Infinite Possibilities, Infinitely. We are "It", experiencing our infinite possibilities in our finite moment. Our job is to make it interesting!

Res Cogitans and Res Extensa are identical?

the "hard problem" of consciousness is an invented problem, and it does not need to be solved to know what consciousness is (strictly speaking, Conscious Action).

@cpamfly6858

9 ай бұрын

I think you too easily dismiss the question without comprehending it.

@kensurrency2564

9 ай бұрын

everything is invented, including language (symbols) and the hard problem is that _we can’t define consciousness._ because as they said, we haven’t been looking at consciousness as having phases. we’re asking the wrong questions. recursion doesn’t work here because our observations cannot detect the particular form of energy that is consciousness.

If normal person that already experienced seeing colors, suddenly get accident, that now left without his eyeballs, that mean his cone cells gone, is he still able to experience colorful dream or is he still able to imagining color in his mental eye.

Mark, fucking amazing contribution for the world❤🎉✌️🤘✍️🏻🫶🌌💋✌️🇦🇷🐧🌎🌟🙏Thanku🕳🔥🖤☀️😌🪽🌳🕉

@johnnastrom9400

9 ай бұрын

Stop simping.

The sensation of qualia does not seem to emerge until one is actually reflecting upon it

@dickjones4912

9 ай бұрын

Not really, you can be asleep and be awoken by bright light flashed at your closed eyes or by a loud noise, you don't really have to consciously reflect on qualia to experience them, your mind has no choice but to experience qualia. No deep thought or reflection required.

Why do I seem to be a specific, individualized consciousness associated with a specific body while you seem to be a different specific, individualized consciousness associated with another body? Why am I, I and you, you? There were billions of bodies around before this one showed up so what changed that I should find myself to be looking out of the eyeballs of this particular body and no other? When it comes to understanding consciousness this is the most important question that must be asked and answered but it is rarely even acknowledged. When the ontologies purporting to explain consciousness are examined critically it becomes obvious that all materialist/reductionist strategies fail completely in attempting to address this question. What is the principled explanation for why: A brain over here would generate my specific consciousness and a brain over there would generate your specific consciousness? Integrated information over here would generate my specific consciousness and integrated information over there would generate your specific consciousness? Global workspace over here would generate my specific consciousness and global workspace there would generate your specific consciousness? Orchestrated quantum collapse in microtubules over here would generate my specific consciousness and orchestrated quantum collapse in microtubules over there would generate your specific consciousness? A clump of conscious atoms over here (panpsychicism) would generate my specific consciousness and a clump of conscious over there would generate your specific consciousness? Materialism already fails since it cannot find a transfer function between microvolt level sparks in the brain and any experience or qualia. In addition it’s not possible for materialistic ontologies to address this question of individuality since no measurement can be made that could verify my consciousness vs your consciousness and therefore no materialist ontology could even make any coherent statements about the subject.

@markupton1417

9 ай бұрын

Bernardo Kastrup offers an interesting solution to why you are you and I am me... dissociation as in disossistive Identity disorder.

@F8LDragon2

9 ай бұрын

“I” tend to understan as “my experience” IS “what exists”. Behind the vail of this particular form that refers to itself as “me” is an immense structure that transforms eternally. This “what there is” (my experience) isn’t a different “thing” than your “my experience”. It’s the same “thing” that has transformed into a different aperture, self reflecting. The ability to feel as though “I am something different from the world” is a layer of form overlaying the aperture of local awareness. The connections with other apertures are themselves actual shared connection structures of the “what there is” linking its form through multiple apertures forming greater structure. Notably through communication to form systems. Unity of intention.

I in all humility can explain the theories of all these greatmen and in a conversation with them explain the missing pieces. Knowing the theory of entanglement of coexistence I can explain the soul/the life atom and it's structure role and properties.

@F8LDragon2

9 ай бұрын

Where have you laid out your ideas to be understood by others?

one thinks consciousness is the result of matter vs those who think consciousness creates matter.... that's the real debate.

@yourlogicalnightmare1014

8 ай бұрын

"Matter" is a human created word that points to a web of other words for its definition as a means to convey an idea from one mind to another. Words are ideas. Ideas occur in mind. Experience occurs in mind. Reality occurs in mind. Don't mistake an appearance in consciousness for an externality. Nothing is knowable outside of mentation and what makes appearances within it.

I’m sure I heard Rupert sheldrake He is on another planet

Wrong wrong wrong....if we are not there to perceive, others are. And even if there's no one to sense the thing, that thing exists without being sensed or observed. This is absolute Truth, not how we interpret the thing. We check our observations by comparing with others interpretation of what we are seeing. They may be largely similar, subtle differences, and neither one matches exactly the things essence itself. That we are present is immaterial.

@yourlogicalnightmare1014

8 ай бұрын

God is the only thing that exists. It is YOU that is "fake." God knows all because it is all. When "you" are dissolved (in the manner you understand it), it is god that remains the observer. Your illusion of being an independent self is how god examines itself. God utilizes infinite points of view through many levels of consciousness "embodied" in quintillions of thought forms who endure the appearance of a separate self. The universe and all its content is nothing but excitations in a quantum field of energy. The supposed boundaries that separate you from a table are an appearance that is "real" to 'you', but artifical to God. "You" are essentially an experience gathering device for God to know what is possible. God can o ly know through experience. God doesn't "suffer" through you any more than the characters in your dreams suffer during sleep. What you perceive as pain and suffering are just experience for God. Awareness is not "yours." There is only one awareness, and it belongs to God. You perceive it as your own as a result of the ego, the cognitive structure that convinces "you" that a "you" exists Thst cognitive structure is broken in several ways. (1) An NDE, (2) a sufficient dose of 5-MEO, (3) 'death' as you understand it, (4) a sensory deprivation tank, (5) proper meditation.

Consciousness is a process running in the brain. It takes input from external processes in order to track and predict what they will do. It generates outputs with the aim of being able to survive and replicate. This process becomes aware when it takes input summarising its own state, and tracks and predicts what itself will do - it recognises itself as a process. This includes measures of how well it is surviving and reproducing. Free will results from its outputs being available to it to inform future processing. 'Free' here means attributable to conscious decision-making, so that outcomes can drive learning that will improve future decision- making.

@petermartin5030

8 ай бұрын

@@alexcaledin4521 Is Fundamental Consciouness a spiritual concept or grounded in the physical world?

@sven888

8 ай бұрын

That which we call consciousness from the brain, it’s part of cosmic consciousness.

@petermartin5030

8 ай бұрын

@@sven888 Consciousness has a timestep long enough for all parts of the nervous system to affect each other. In humans this is about a third of a second. A cosmic consciousness, what ever that might be, would have a timescale too long to be meaningful to us.

@sven888

8 ай бұрын

Thank you and I appreciate your reply. @@petermartin5030

@user-hn9ov7fu2r

7 ай бұрын

​@@petermartin5030anil seth yeah it's ver famous there

Mary was not blind, she was confined in a black and white room, absent of colours

@DrFuzzyFace

9 ай бұрын

Correct, but it's a distinction without a difference. Metaphorically speaking, she was "blind" to color. Mary knew all there is to know about 'quantity' but knew nothing of quality, for such information is limited to experience. Cheers.

@alampribadi6578

9 ай бұрын

then seeing lead to sensation to desiring to personalizing to becoming to suffering .....reverse the process

@abstractentities354

9 ай бұрын

@@DrFuzzyFaceNot to split hairs, but Mary being born blind would radically alter the experiment. The development of her consciousness across decades would necessarily mean her thought processes in relation to scale, quantity, spatial and even temporal phenomena would be different than the “black and white” version of Mary. MIT and Stanford have conducted such experiments with people born without sight, and in addition to the heightened sensitivity of touch and hearing, testing showed that the way the subjects mentally “visualized” complex math problems was of a radically different nature than sighted subjects. Not the purpose of this particular thought experiment I realize, but when discussing the foundations of consciousness, phenomenological development is an important factor. Cheers!

@akaROOSTA

9 ай бұрын

she was color blind... not stupid 😂

@DrFuzzyFace

9 ай бұрын

Wrong. Denied the experience of color does NOT make her color blind. If she was limited to a monochromatic landscape (ie, a world of black and white), once exposed to color she would have had no experience with color. But she wasn't color blind - she was a prisoner to a world of black and white.@@akaROOSTA

Wonder why Tom Campbell isn't part of this group

@kirstinstrand6292

4 ай бұрын

Because he talks nonsense that is only meaningful for those just beginning to see life differently than being engulfed and satiated by escapism and thrills.

There are many Ore millions of different types of consciousness Every living thing had some kind of consciousness As more u try to fuiger out consciousness as more confusing it gets Just let consciousness happen And try to be aware of it

@Michael-ye4sg

9 ай бұрын

That’s just fine as long as you are not seeking to understand what consciousness is. If you want to understand it, then just experiencing it is insufficient.

@cpamfly6858

9 ай бұрын

That's your choice then. But not mine. I want to know what it is.

@KruK666PL

9 ай бұрын

@@Michael-ye4sg Consciousness is fundamental. You cant go beyound it ( reducitons is end here ). And if you can than I would like to know how? Because you will be first human that have such a extraodinary powers :D

@priyakulkarni9583

9 ай бұрын

Don’t give up my friend. It is good to be curious. Although our IQ is enough to figure this out. May AI with IQ 1000 can tell us 😅😅😅

Much of the "thinking" comes from the materialistic paradigm that has dominated science. I tend to agree with Max Planc (spelling?), and that the more we consider that the material comes to us, arrives, from the nonphysical, energy and consciousness, the spiritual (using as meaning very similar to consciousness), the more we will move in greater understanding of consciousness. Exciting times indeed!

@hydrorix1

9 ай бұрын

Max Planck also said "Consciousness is fundamental," and that "matter is derivative from Consciousness."(Where Is Science Going? 1932) How can matter be derivative from Consciousness? As Perception In Consciousness. We exist within a Consciousness Singularity, like a black hole made of Consciousness. Perception In Consciousness is axiomatic to Consciousness. We are partitioned bits of this Singularity, this Primary Consciousness, containing our own separate sense of self. All of our collective experiences contribute to the Whole. As physicality is purely experiential, we do not physically exist, and therefore we cannot physically die. We simply transition to another Perception In Consciousness. In human iteration, our Consciousness is throttled to a very limited level, deliberately to make things more challenging in order to maximize potential experience. Consciousness is all that actually exists.

@hydrorix1

9 ай бұрын

@@hierophany150 Simulation Theory. Where is the simulation taking place, or where's the computer? Who wrote the code for the simulation? Where are you as your avatar engages the sim? The model still suggests or even requires physicality. It's been my experience that many espousing idealism inevitably revert to a quasi-reliance upon physicalism, as if lacking the commitment, or the language to fully promote absolute idealism. It does require a fundamental psychic shift to incorporate absolute idealism, while yet interacting with the utterly convincing perception of physical reality. Perception In Consciousness. A Universe ex nihilo, out of nothing but Consciousness, perceived in a part of the same Primary Consciousness that created it out of pure intent and will. I am unaware of any model that's more parsimonious. All that exists is Consciousness. It's monistic. Perception of the physical is Consciousness. Planck was right. Matter is derivative from Consciousness. It's really quite simple and intuitive after considering it. Peace!

@sonarbangla8711

9 ай бұрын

Metaphysics is defined as fundamental and reality is explained in conjunction with physics. Physics of QM claims quantum fields collapse upon observation/measurement, creating fine tuned particles leading to life, consciousness, soul and faith etc., all fundamental metaphysical quantities, explaining reality.

Friendship lasts only as long as friends are in the same boat Relationship lasts only as long as one can relate to another’s feelings Partnership lasts only as long as one takes part in the responsibility Membership lasts only as long as one remembers to pay the dues Worship lasts only as long as one is worried about the future Swami SriDattaDev SatChitAnanda

We are all victims of our own consciences it baffles and bewilders us because how can consciences come from a 3 pound organ like the brain we may never know

One of these is not like the others and there’s another voice in here not attributed. I’m suspicious…

@christopherhamilton3621

9 ай бұрын

Unless I’m mistaken about a short clip from Ian or Donald which sounds much like something Rupert Sheldrake would say… 😢

Spinoza prevails.

Amazing how this mozaic stitches theorists as if they are compatible to each other. This is how science ends up as a bunch of quotations for social media feeds.

The explanation of what consciousness - and the fundamental nature of reality in all its form, is to be found in the channelled communications of Jane Roberts 'Seth' Mary Ennis 's 'Elias' and 'Bashar' from Darryl Anka. That explanation from the 70s onward, explains it all!

InOutSide BottomUpTopDown MatterMind TranscendentImmanent InTransFormation YinYang Creatoration 🙏

*Consciousness is the "LINK" between the human experience, and "LIFE The Real Self" which is The LIGHT seen during a so-called NDE !* *"LIFE The Real Self" is "AWARENESS", so Become SELF-AWARE...*

It's great to see another example of materialism's ontological stronghold losing its grip on the collective paradigm, and that post-materialist ontologies, e.g., panpsychism, idealism, and other consciousness-based philosophies are on the rise (again). It's also nice to see that science is finally catching up to, or spiraling toward and integrating with, an understanding of consciousness similar to much of Buddhism, Hinduism, and Indigenous ontologies. For all the staunch materialists out there, keep in mind that there are no equations or experiments that provide substantial evidence for, much less proof of, materialism. Materialism has always been a massive assumption, which means it's based on little more than faith. But, because the materialist assumption was baked into much of the scientific process for the last several centuries or more, what materialism does have -- its so-called foundation -- is centuries of confirmation bias on a massive scale, to the point where it became largely invisible and, subsequently, scientific dogma. This is a prime example of begging the question: The premise, materialism, was assumed from the beginning, without ever being questioned or verified. That's slowly shifting now, thankfully.

@waterkingdavid

9 ай бұрын

Well said! Though actually it's not just a case of materialism being a deluded idea. It's consequences are so dire that the world is becoming deeply poisoned. Bernardo Kastrup articulates this better than I ever could.

@REDPUMPERNICKEL

8 ай бұрын

Matter, by its nature, forms spatial and temporal patterns. Patterns are immaterial. Patterns are able to represent other patterns. Representation is the foundation of the being conscious process. It's not the matter that is conscious. Matter is merely substrate, though absolutely necessary for without matter there can be no patterns. Without matter there is simply nothing. Hypothetically speaking but also quite compelling.

Why can’t we just accept Consciousness as ability to know. All living things on Earth (animals, humans etc) have Consciousness connected to them. Don’t mix it with the functions of the Brain which confuses things.

@TectonicBadger

9 ай бұрын

Are computers conscious? They certainly contain information/knowledge, but there's no evidence as of yet to suggest that computers have a subjective experience.

@nowhere6285

9 ай бұрын

Isn't the brain just the instrument that translates consciousness into the physical?

The background music is boring and quickly becomes annoying and distracting. I suggest that you remove it.

If anyone is wise and capable of understanding the actual universe, there is one guy only. Nice to meet you. Intelligent questions below. I will try to decode where you are and answer from where I am.

Color blind is not totally blind. Not close.

These people are of course expounding very different and often mutually contradictory conceptions of consciousness. As to the "hard problem," i.e., the problem of how consciousness arises from something material like the brain, well, that's not the hard problem, that's the impossible problem. The reason no one has been able to come anywhere near to solving that problem is that consciousness does not arise from the physical brain. The fact that brain damage can cause consciousness to disappear from view does not prove that the brain produces consciousness, any more than the silence of a broken radio proves that the radio created the music it previously mediated to you. The brain is not exactly like a radio, of course, but the essential point made by the analogy holds. A condition is not the same thing as a cause. If the floor underneath a person suddenly gives way, you will no longer see that person, but that does not mean the floor caused or created that person. The floor was just one of the conditions for that person to appear to you. The brain is a condition for the appearance of consciousness to certain kinds of observers. The brain does not cause or create consciousness. The radio analogy for the brain is not quite adequate, though. The brain is not just a transmitter or a tool of consciousness. The brain is not a dead machine. The brain is an expression of consciousness, even a condensate of consciousness. The brain functions as a kind of mirror that consciousness creates for itself. The brain functions as a mirror less due to what the brain does than to all that it does not do and all it suppresses and stills. Life processes, by comparison with the limbs, are relatively suppressed in the brain. That relative deadening is a big part of what allows the brain to function as a mirror. Imagine if a mirror, instead of effacing itself and reflecting your image, was full of its own life and images. The brain can function as a mirror because it is not (by comparison with the rest of the body) full of its own life. It represents a kind of deadening. In a way, the brain is a part of the anatomy that heightens stillness or fixity (again, relatively speaking). Life carries us away with itself, but a mirror in a sense lacks its own being and merely reflects our being. Look at the statue of "The Thinker." He sits there, still, within himself, gathered into himself, not carried away. Abstract thought does not impose itself on us or carry us away the way the fullness of life can do. Life can sometimes and in some moments become so full that we start to lose ourselves and all awareness of ourselves. By contrast, abstract thoughts have a kind of nothingness or qualitative emptiness about them that leaves us free rather than carrying us away. Abstractions allow us to reflect ourselves within ourselves. Abstract thinking hollows out a quasi-empty space within the otherwise overwhelming plenum of the world. The human brain does in anatomical terms what abstract thoughts do in consciousness. The brain, relatively speaking, by comparison with the limbs, represents an anatomical hollowing, a deadening, such that the brain can function as a mirror. What is present in the brain is not exactly what permits self-consciousness. It is truer to say that the important element is what is NOT there. The essential is a systemic emptying, as if the brain, by comparison with the limbs, were riddled with tiny holes. It is a deadening or emptying process by which the brain functions as a mirror to aid the rising of self-consciousness. But the brain does not create consciousness. Consciousness uses the brain to achieve self-consciousness. Once self-consciousness is achieved, it can become independent of the brain.

@priyakulkarni9583

9 ай бұрын

Well said my friend: Don’t give up my friend. It is good to be curious. Although our IQ is NOT enough to figure this out. May be AGI/AI with IQ 1000 can tell us 😅😅😅 Be patient. It is coming 😅😅😅

That's why I see you not as you are, but as I am. In this case, my interpretation is MY reality, but actual essence is made up of something else, outside of me. I may define it, but I do not give rise to it's creation. It existed whether I was present to perceive or not. We interpret, not create, merely by perceiving. This is reality, you are trying to make what happens in our separated skull the creator of essence. This is not possible.

I dont see Tom Campbell... ahaha c'mon!

Thought can never understand it’s own origin via thought. Nor can it know what a single thing is. Mind confuses itself with ideas and hides from the awareness of the fundamental ground of Being. And all the while, Being is all there IS! It’s a game of fools searching everywhere for that which they always already are here.

@real_pattern

9 ай бұрын

...or not

@msimp0108

9 ай бұрын

@@real_pattern if you are suggesting that Being is not all that is and that there are things that are not Being that are, good luck with that.

@real_pattern

9 ай бұрын

@@msimp0108 if you are suggesting that being is all there is, and there is nothing that's not being, then good luck! you have succeeded in proposing an utter triviality, but with pretty words.

@msimp0108

9 ай бұрын

@@real_pattern It’s only a triviality if you miss the point. Which you did. Each to his own my friend, enjoy your search.

@Eduardude

9 ай бұрын

You say "Thought can never understand its own origin via thought." But that very thought claims to say something about thought's origin !! I would amend that. Better to say that "ordinary abstract thought cannot experience its own origin. But certain kinds of living thinking can rise into the realm of Being or the spiritual world, and can there understand, in a sense, its own origin. Preliminarily, part of what is really needed is to see that thought is connected, however imperfectly with truth. In the very act of denying that thought is connected with truth, we unconsciously affirm that thought is connected with truth. After all, if someone says, "Thought has no connection with truth," that very statement is a truth claim. Therefore the statement cancels itself out. Therefore, thought is connected with truth. We may not be able to explain the origin of thought or truth, but we can experience their origin, and the experience becomes self-explanatory, especially if we develop a living kind of thinking that can rise into a higher, or deeper, kind of awareness than ordinary thinking can reach. One of the greatest errors of some forms of spiritual teaching today is the frequent implication that heightened or deepened awareness can only come by short-circuiting thought or turning thought off. Rudolf Steiner's work shows that is not necessary. Thinking can be transformed and become an organ of perception in the spiritual world. You also say "we do not know what a single thing is." I recall Bubba Free John saying that in one of his books. That statement requires amendment. We do not know the whole of what any single thing is, because every thing is changing and every thing, strictly speaking, is infinitely complex and to some extent contains opposites that make any univocal definition of what a thing "is," if taken too literally and too rigidly, inadequate. But we can experience to some extent the unique being and unique beauty of each thing and, without supposing our knowledge complete, we can say that in experiencing the unique being of that thing, we do know something of its distinct and true being. We can experience how each thing is a unique articulation of higher realities. And on that basis we can develop a renewed science. We do not have to fall into an impotent mysticism that finds the height of wisdom in paradox or that tries to short-circuit thought or turn thought off. If we know the realm of ultimate realities to some extent, then we can hear and see "God" and spiritual beings speaking to us uniquely as every color, as every form, as every phenomenon. "God" is not uniformity. Manyness is real, and part of humanity's evolutionary task is to grow in knowledge of the divine variegation, not withdraw into mystical paradoxes that counsel silence rather than articulation. The many does not exclude the One, a real unity pervading all the variety. The variety is not an illusion subordinate to some supposed uniformity of the divine. Uniformity is the counterfeit of unity. Unity, to be unity, must include diversity, otherwise all you have is uniformity. "God" evinces an incredible variety of colors and shapes and sounds in the world of the immaterial, and in the world of the material. We can experience what things are in their life, we can see to the very heart of each thing, which doesn't mean we can ever give a complete definition of what a thing "is," but we can characterize a thing, as an artist does, and thereby advance in knowledge, in science. But one can grant this: Insofar as each thing participates in Being and Becoming, each thing is in a sense miraculous and inexplicable, as Being itself is in a sense mysterious and inexplicable. But as the writer Gilbert Sorrentino once said, what's mysterious is not that something is hidden -- what's mysterious is that everything is visible. I interpret that to mean everything can become at some point or another visible either to the physical senses or to the eyes of the mind. Apropos of Sorrentino's statement, I'll note that Heidegger apparently spoke about the world revealing itself in concealing, or concealing itself in revealing. In other words, even when we glimpse the very foundation of the world, so that for a moment we have a flash of awareness in which nothing is hidden and where, in other words, we see "God," that very experience of nothing being hidden is itself mysterious, exactly as self-causation is mysterious, because in glimpsing God, we participate to some degree in "God's" self-causation. There is no hidden cause insofar as there is self-causation, and that is why everything is visible. Yet self-causation is itself mysterious, precisely because nothing is hidden in it. In those moments we participate in "God," a type of being that does not rest on anything else, but on itself. That kind of existence is a miracle, yet insofar as we participate in it and experience its wondrous, miraculous character, it is a miracle we know for ourselves and in which nothing is hidden and in that sense nothing needs explaining. We see to the bottom of things and that is precisely the miracle. Something like that is what Heidegger and Sorrentino were pointing at with the words I referenced from them. Perhaps these experiences also explain why the "kingdom of heaven" is "within" us. Because we can participate in ruling the very world-all itself, insofar as we participate in "God." "God" leads us in some measure to experience something like being kings of the very universe, which is an utterly amazing experience. I think it would be impossible to feel more at home in existence and in the universe than when one has that experience. (I am always putting "God" in quotes because I'm not referring to theological definitions of God, definitions which can be wrong and usually are wrong, in my view -- I am referring to an experiential relation to the divine worlds, a relation that at least in my case matches some theological descriptions but not all of them.)

Around 28:30 one of the people talking claims that consciousness has to do with being alive rather than being intelligent, but based on everything we know about neuroscience this isn't quite right either. Based on what we know only certain organisms with a sufficiently complex brain are conscious, so simply being alive does not entail consciousness at all. For example, plants are not conscious whatsoever (lots of people try to make it out as if they might be, but those arguments are not rooted in what we know at all, just poorly thought-out intuitions, all arguments for plant consciousness have failed miserably). The only organisms we know for a fact are conscious are vertebrates, arthropods, and cephalopod mollusks (with gastropod mollusks straddling the line for possibly being conscious). Of course not all of these are nearly as intelligent as humans, so in this sense they are right that intelligence itself isn't necessarily the criterion at all, but neither is being alive, as all of these organisms possess very specific neural structures must be present for there to be consciousness.

When science "discovers" etheric energy, it will also understand consciousness.

@kirstinstrand6292

4 ай бұрын

Life was created by energy, not by a God. As I understand it religion came into existence to control the masses - the field workers, serfs, owned by Lords, or those with wealth and power. Then Christianity came along to create morals and to control rampant abuses of destruction of competing tribes or other land owners, life and sexual perversions. Men using boys and girls for their sexual impulses. Creating order out of chaos is complex. Look at present life - NOTHING has changed. Religion is good for stoking the fires to continue pillage and plunder! It also gives nations structure and purpose, without the need to change - the reality that is most difficult for individuals, governments and nations is change, reform, reconstruction for the betterment of all.

@kirstinstrand6292

4 ай бұрын

Consciousness with the big C comes from self knowledge which evolves through self observation and self reflection. How do I know? Because I've done it. Moreover, without having personal agency, one will never have control of their own mind. Instead, they will always search outside of themselves for answers. I care not about the hard question regarding consciousness. It seems unproductive since humanity can only develop further with knowing Consciousness. Everyone understands consciousness with the little c. I don't have the brains to be concerned with the material need to prove if it exists and from where it originates. And neither does the majority of humanity.

This is an unstructured intellectual goulash. Or, like playing basketball in zero-gravity. Why not start with what we do know? We humans are biological sensing creatures, a product of Earth's evolutionary processes. Cosmic physical forces have absolutely no need for consciousness, physics is dictated, (No galaxies can decide to spin in the other direction!). It isn't until biology starts, that awareness, consciousness, decision making and achieving goals become important. Emergent structures and behaviors happen.

@cpamfly6858

9 ай бұрын

I don't think what we know is clear. Take our eyes. We see a very small portion of the energy spectrum. No one should conclude that the small fraction we see - what we perceive and know - resembles the full picture. And physics is not "dictated", as quantum physics shows. Much of it is probability.

@petermiesler6444

9 ай бұрын

@@cpamfly6858 Probabilities aren't choices, or direction, besides being confined to narrow ranges, no consciousness needed . I'm not saying we "see" Reality - I do say we perceive our individual impression of Reality. My point is that the physical reality we are striving to perceive, that is absolutely real and specific - no shape shifting, regardless of how we perceive it. We are the evolved products of Earth's making. How we observe our world is independence of the Earth that created us. Same as it is ever was, for all creatures, heck down to individual cells and deep time. Although, with the help of science, we humans have been able to reach beyond the limits of our bodily senses. Here's a fundamental concept : The Physical Reality ~ Human Mind, divide.

Would appreciate some women on the panel.

@martonklecska8411

9 ай бұрын

they are slowly coming forward

@Eduardude

9 ай бұрын

Not enough women seriously interested in philosophy, I imagine. Fewer people interested means a lighter bench in that area.

@johnnastrom9400

9 ай бұрын

Philosophy has always been dominated by men. It takes a very introverted personality, and far more men fall into that area.

@clareweil5128

9 ай бұрын

@@johnnastrom9400 hmmm. In my psychology studies (doctorate in clinical psychology) I believe the research shows about 50/50 split across gender and socioeconomic status for extrovert vs introvert. Can you direct me to any studies on introversion and philosophy? I once heard a comment that was well received by the Phil prof in regard to Pascals leap of faith, stating that the “leap” for women is much smaller because we find it easier to rely and depend on others. It’s an example of how women and men perceive the world differently. Not better or worse just different. My hope would be that philosophy would reflect that.

@MrMuertoloco

6 ай бұрын

I wanted my car to be fixed once,and instead of waiting for someone to fix it for me, I fixed it myself.

Consiousness is fundamental, it creates space-time, and matter is therefore not fundamental. It is no "hard problem", but rather an impossible problem. Weirdly enough do most scientist pratice dogma, when it comes to this question, and flag matter as cause to our consiousness whithout a shred of evidence. Science should be objective and admit when something just not add up. Are scientists reputation, carriers, income and pride in the way of further development? It seems so.

@cpamfly6858

9 ай бұрын

Scientists are always learning.

Not an "intractable mystery." We started as single physical fertized egg. Through gestation we became a "living" human organism. We are dependant on others for our life and well-being for a number of years, but then there comes a time when we can be independent and self-sustaining. We started physically and we exist physically, and we die physically. Much is known about how various physical body components and structures work. Same for the brain and supporting nervous systems. All are physical and work via physical means. The roughly three-pound brain is composed of around 86 billion physical neurons (brain cells) plus billions more glial and other cells - all physical. The brain, like the body, works via physical means. I won't go into the intricate and complex structures and their organization and operation that has taken billions of years of physical biological evolution to produce. All that is well-known to scientists and others. We go to sleep and become unconscious for the most part; there is a type of consciousness in certain sleep stages. There are physical mechanisms in our brain and body that cause us to wake up and become what we call "conscious." That is, we are alert and aware of our surroundings, where we are, who we are and so forth. That process of going from unconsious to conscious is physical. Structures in the brain stem and brain, such as the RAS, claustrum, thalamus, and others send out electrochemical "messages" throughout the brain to cause the entire brain to begin working at a specified level of operation. This includes our limbic system, felt emotions, perception systems (sense of self, being), sensory and motor systems, and the entire complement of physical networks and other mechanisms that comprise the brain. It's physical, purely physical. Once our brain and other body systems "boot up", we are proclaimed to be "conscious." Subjective experiences (qualia), feelings, imagination, self-reflection, are all physical, and cannot be otherwise. We came from physical, we are physical, and we die physically and totally.

@renko9067

9 ай бұрын

Completely wrong and missing entirely the point of what these people are saying. Not sure why you’re even watching videos like this.

@georgegrubbs2966

9 ай бұрын

@@renko9067 Not wrong, entirely correct, and I addressed only an opening claim regarding consciousness. They should've included Karl Friston' (free energy, active inference), and quite a few others with opposing views. There is no need for a "new paradigms" to understand consciousness, but if someone has one, go for it. The world is physical, we are physical. Start there.

@renko9067

9 ай бұрын

@@georgegrubbs2966 Nope. Wrong. Completely. Math (not dogma or anecdote) is telling them spacetime is not fundamental. Therefore there’s nowhere for this supposed physical matter to exist. This is what the mystic masters have been saying for millennia and are still saying today. This is what’s leading these researchers to the idea that consciousness (not spacetime or supposed matter) is what’s fundamental. The next thing their math will prove is that nothing exists other than consciousness and that it modulates into the appearance of the physical world. Look closely. Your physical world is nothing more than conscious perceptions, sensations, and thoughts that always happen here and now in a moment with no beginning and no end.

@jimmuncy5636

9 ай бұрын

@@georgegrubbs2966 If you reduce matter, you go from molecules to atoms to subatomic particles to quarks to gluons and muons to strings to invisible energy to -- what? -- Being Itself, information, i.e., nothingness in the sense of matterless. Of course, we live at the top of this great chain of being, according to our natural prejudice, where we behold stars, planets, continents, oceans, plants, animals, insects, etc., and insist that this is the epicenter of all existence, the most important place. With an open mind, re-watch this video. Many comments should grip you, such as, Max Planck's comment that we can't get behind (or under) consciousness. We can get below matter, as my first paragraph tediously describes. It's a big question, an exciting, encouraging field with many viewpoints, including yours, of course. But since you know yours very well and are dogmatically convinced of its correctness, I challenge you to read or watch free KZread videos of interviews or seminars with Bernardo Kastrup, Ian McGilchrist, Donald Hoffman, et alia, again with an open mind. No one has completely figured cosmology or ontology out. Note how philosophers and scientists went from Newton to Einstein and are now being forced to give up spacetime, and even evolution has theoretic problems (although the main fact still seems undeniable). As such, we come to tentative, not final solutions. Knowledge or wisdom is a journey, not a destination. And for a confident, happy, well-adjusted person, that's great: It makes living that much more enjoyable. The road ahead is always open -- and endless. Hell would be a world with high, unsurmountable walls without mystery, just boring sameness. Deepak Chopra www.deepakchopra.com › "Is Matter Unconscious?" by Rupert Sheldrake, Ph.D; biologist and author of Science Set Free "The central doctrine of materialism is that matter is the only reality. Therefore consciousness ought not to exist. Materialism’s biggest problem is that consciousness does exist."

@Hedgewalkers

9 ай бұрын

@@georgegrubbs2966​​⁠You seem very sure don’t you.. “Truth starts here” okay.. tell me, how are you so sure? How is what you propose “the truth”? I mean if it is in fact the truth then you must have proof right? Note I said Proof; not theory, not hypothesis, proof! You did state you were “entirely correct” did you not? I certainly hope you’re not a scientist, but if you are, start thinking like one; a scientist is an explorer, one who never postulates anything in terms of an absolute. A scientist seeks and measures but never makes such an arrogant statement as to say “I am truth”. The truest of all mantra for a scientist is “I don’t know”! Because no matter what you say in rebuke or rebuttal, at the end of the day, you don’t know!

The Material Universe doesn’t “produce” consciousness imo. Everything material is a projection of consciousness imo. It’s unfathomably and ingeniously hidden. Our current worldview paradigm needs to stretch its eyes so to speak - be optimistically open to new ideas without making assumptions. Pain is overwhelmingly present is this world which for me makes this very difficult to believe. But - Since love isn’t only expressed through pleasure - also through pain that is enough for me to have hope that a higher good consciousnesses might exit. I don’t fully agree with any religion at all - but perhaps they all contain elements of truth that we misinterpret with our worldview assumptions. Like “Mary” - Hellen Keller also came to a similar type of conclusion.

*Consciousness involves 2 Components; 1/. An Analytical process involving the brain, and 2/. AWARENESS which is NOT a human component... Without "AWARENESS" Consciousness can NOT exist... Are you "AWARE" of Consciousness ??? Consciousness is ONLY the "LINK" between the Experience, and "LIFE The Real Self"... AWARENESS is "LIFE The Real Self" which is Non-Dimensional, and in NO WAY represents, nor even remotely looks anything like any species including the human species...*

The speakers are dreamers and they are barely conscious of what they are talking about. Most people never wake up from the night at all, they continue to dream by being only partially awake and this includes scientist the most (having thoughts is not thinking, having emotions is not feeling, it is just a dreaming in most cases). We have got an etheric and an astral bodies and in that bodies dreaming of thoughts and feeling happens, beyond this is the conscious soul which doesn't do anything, it only reflects streams from past (bodies) and future (cosmos).. You cannot observe the surface of the mirror, you cannot study the consciousness.

@christopherhamilton3621

9 ай бұрын

That’s your opinion.

@eldoradose

9 ай бұрын

@@christopherhamilton3621 it is not an opinion and got nothing to do with me. Most of the world dreams all the time and todays philosophy only plays with empty words and abstract concepts. We are not yet a fully conscious beings.

@cpamfly6858

9 ай бұрын

You seem kind of critical, and I wouldn't let anyone tell me what I can and can't do.

@christopherhamilton3621

9 ай бұрын

@@eldoradose Why is that not an opinion? How do you ‘know’ this? Several thinkers over time have suggested this dreaming/sleeping analogy, and while it’s accepted by many it doesn’t mean it’s true or not an opinion. If it’s not an opinion, at the very least it’s a projection.

@eldoradose

9 ай бұрын

@@christopherhamilton3621 Map of the human being is known for ages, it's not my idea but today's world is swimming in ignorance and call it "the progress". Consciousness is just a word that describe something but it's a new word, before people called it Atman or in Hebrew tradition Abraham, or Logos etc. At night we dream just before waking up because we entering back to our body from different realms and what we dream is subjective, it comes from the body. When we open our eyes that dream world becomes objective but not because we are conscious but because how our memory works. You can learn to create objective surroundings with other people and meet them during the sleep at night in dream world, it is all matter of memory, how you use it but the consciousness is very dim for all of us, it's evolutionary thing. What we call the outside objective world is just the memory, we connect the same dots each day and that is how it becomes objective but this realm is still a dreaming world, because to be conscious the past must meet the future and this two streams must annihilate, only then conscious arise, it lives in very present. Reality is in the present, we live most of the time in the past, in memory that comes out of our brains. It's all mixed up so it's hard to distinguish, but when you dream about the future and act according to fulfill the dream you usually meet a disappointment at the end, or something that is not exactly as you dreamed of, and then consciousness happends. It is not thinking, not doing, it is reflecting and from that comes our ability to learn, the spectrum of your consciousness decides on your ability to operate on your memory. The fully conscious person remember past lives on Earth and what is happening with us during the night because at night we meet the future. So to be more conscious we need to fulfill our small silly desires so they can disappoint us, or we need to dream about serious big things and and try to succeed, so it can disappoint us as well. Love is an answer to life, not consciousness, because it's evolutionary thing and it will happen anyway.

the brain is not the place where exist the mind !!!!!!!

Why is it all men all this stuff?

The Rainbow is the Naked picture of our Eternal Consciousness. The Over-Consciousness, as holds the Under-Conscoousness = the Day-Consciousness and the Night-Consciousness. The Six Shades expose a Circuit, (Developing-) From Below, 1. Instinct, Red - 2. Gravity, Orange - 3. Feeling, Yellow - 4. Intelligence, Green - 5. Intuition, Blue - 6. Memory, Indigo - > Higher Circuit. The Contrast-Princip and the Perspective_Princip, makes Feeling, into Sensing. (central for the Motion-Principle, and Law of Movement) Intelligence, is nothing in it selv, can Never be artificial, can Only be part of Consciousness in Living Beings. The Simple Princip of Intelligence, is Logic and Order. Intelligence + Perspective-Princip = Mathematic Rainbow is Mother-Energy, 7. (X2) the first three Basic-Energies is the Stuff-bearing 4-5-6 is the Mind- or Consciousness-bearing All Stuff, mind- or physical- is a certain temporary conbination of all of them. They are Dynamic Ability-Kernels, present Life-side and Stuff-side. So, Instinct keep Gravity/Heat, and Feeling/Cold in dynamic tension. All Stuff-conditions is temporarly balanced Heat and Freeze conditions X2. also present our Eternity-Body, as holds our Under-Bodies, physical body, and the Five Night-Bodies. (Deep-Sleep) REM, is our Coupling-Body. (dreams, Coma, NDO, OBE, messages, and more) So, the Day-Consciousness, Never Sleep, it is just moved from body to body, in small, (Nights) and larger Circuits. There is 63 Life-Substances, 1. is the Life-Desire, the Motor or Force of Life. 2. is the Hunger-Princip. 3. is the Satisfaction-Princip. .

Its not a subject of science. Science csnnot and eill never explain mind.

@Eduardude

9 ай бұрын

Physical science will never explain mind. That does not mean mind will never get to the bottom of mind. In fact, precisely that happens to some extent to everyone.

@farmerjohn6526

9 ай бұрын

@@Eduardude we might create a artificial mind someday, then study it objectively. I suspect that will be equally illusive.

All white men of a certain age; what are the odds they know about any other paradigms? Just sayin.

@Eduardude

9 ай бұрын

Racial ad hominem. You cannot refute people based on their race or age. You have to refute their views based on the merits of the view. Anything else is racism. Reverse racism is still racism, and has the added downside of being hypocritical.

@johnnastrom9400

9 ай бұрын

Another lame, left-wing smear attempt.

@cpamfly6858

9 ай бұрын

I go by how they feel, not how they look.

book recommend: THE TREASURY OF THE BASIC SPACE OF AWARENESS by longchen rabjam.

Welcome to 2K year old Buddhist practices!