At 13:05 the tone of voice on, "I wasn't studying this because I was interested in building a career" made me so happy. That is the spirit of science. Go to 12:40 for more context.

@saliksayyar9793

2 жыл бұрын

@Geegee Poo It is now about controlling resources and treating scientists as disposable entities after obtaining their ip for commerce.

@vhawk1951kl

2 жыл бұрын

Really. Whose "science" of what?

@theresechristiansen9769

2 жыл бұрын

@@vhawk1951kl Yeah, there are worrying comments on this channel.

@avatarascension1912

Жыл бұрын

science does not have spirit. they are lost littttle babies on earth who will never fugure it out until they know they are gods

@farvision

Жыл бұрын

@@vhawk1951kl all science. True scientists are driven by curiosity.

This is the best value of time I have ever spent watching something.

This is one of the most brilliant and informative lectures that I have had the pleasure to witness. The speaker is an exceptionally gifted communicator. Thank you!!!

"Homeostasis resits entropy" loved that!!

@AttilaAsztalos

3 жыл бұрын

That kinda follows by definition. Entropy is the thing that works to make everything exactly like everything else (hence the whole "heat death of the Universe" thing which has nothing to do with death and everything to do with the Universe becoming completely homogeneous where nothing interesting can happen anymore), while homeostasis literally meaning "staying the same" (this specific thing, locally, that is unlike other stuff around it). It kinda goes without saying these two work against each other - entropy CAN be resisted, in a strictly local context, by an appropriate system, which is why fridges can exist; and that's just what homeostasis does.

@pbredder

2 жыл бұрын

The "Living state' is a state described by non-equilibrium thermodynamics, and it requires Gibbs free energy input for homeostasis. This is not unique to living complexity, but is characteristic of all hierarchically organized complex systems. They tend to disintegrate into their more basic sub-units, without energy input for maintenance (homeostasis is maintaining this desired maintenance state in living systems).

@ivanklinesteker9894

2 жыл бұрын

@@pbredder ,,p

@XHuntinatorX

Жыл бұрын

!!! That's what struck me as the most profound statement as well.

It's when studying for a tedious exam, other subjects seem most remarkable.

@arnevajsing7120

3 жыл бұрын

No matter if the Subject is more or less complicated.

@DrPilly

2 жыл бұрын

Amazed how true this is!

@jimlindow1689

2 жыл бұрын

@@arnevajsing7120 *,,🙂

@Anyone.c

2 жыл бұрын

Can't agree more 🙃

51:41 "If we understand the function of the feeling, then we understand the function of the consciousness" Fascinating talk, Thank you very much.

Nice to know an old dog like me can learn something new. Some very powerful evidence shown.

Incredible talk on consciousness! Thank you Dr. Solms!

@vhawk1951kl

2 жыл бұрын

without defining consciousness?-That is no more than mouthing empty words

@theresechristiansen9769

2 жыл бұрын

@@vhawk1951kl Oh, I misinterpreted you above. You are suggesting that the information and the evidence, provided by Dr Solm is somehow devoid of .....what? Consciouness? He DEFINED consciousness at the beginning, middle and end of his talk, did he not? Are you mouthing empty words without understanding the basis of his presentation. It seems to me that certain people from an echo chamber find themselves on science sites wanting to argue about consciousness when really they want to fight over "gee, this world is one without any kind of spirituality" when this is plain nonsense & a straw man argument at the very least. Of course I could be entirely wrong about this. If I am, then I apologise. But it was your manner. Your specific response.

@larmaytv36

Жыл бұрын

@@vhawk1951kl No such thing as a correct definition of consciousness if you're not willing to consider all important ideas. If you dislike this video because you haven't learned anything from it then that's your problem.

@vhawk1951kl

Жыл бұрын

@@larmaytv36 Does that not depend entirely on your criteria for "correct"? - "correct" according to who? If you are the arbiter of "correct" correct" in what sense do you use the word*correct*- the mathematical sense? "There is no*correct*definition of consciousness" - you say: ecce the hazards of universals, which the uncharitable might characterise as simply sloppy thinking. Clearly your famous and - for you, indefinable "consciousness" is to be found in a very forest of universals and sloppy thinking- To say nothing of pouring from the empty into the void. There is absolutely no difficulty whatsoever with defining "consciousness" for anyone with any wits and learning. Whoever made that sweeping generalisation and other forms of universal, clearly lacks both. If whoever makes an assertion cannot define what he means by "consciousness" or at least set out clearly what he seeks means or intends to convey by a particular word had best not use it at all- On any view it is no more than drivel

his binding of feelings and emotions into the mix is something i would agree with. Ive been studying my own consciousness and ability to recall situations ive been in good and bad. I HAVE found that my memories are bound more to a feeling, or more of how i remember feeling when i last interacted with that person or situation. so i guess what im saying is ive found that im naturally storing emotions and feelings as a sort of way of stacking the little details of the situation into a compact feeling or emotion. and if i need to recall the details i can recall the feeling and emotions and it links me to the reasons i felt that way which are connected to the details of what happened in that interaction.

@c.s.842

2 жыл бұрын

Agree. Me too. Memory is somehow triggered by some kind of sensation. A subtle vague emotion or feeling.

@anitalinke6659

2 жыл бұрын

@@c.s.842 What we remember is what we have an emotional connection to.

This is beautiful, I can't thank you enough for being the vessel through which this knowledge got to me.

Thanks a lot for this interesting lecture Mark Solms, and thanks also to the Royal Institution for making this possible.

What a great lecture!! Thanks to Mark Solms and the RI.

Fascinating thanks. I was also lucky to interview Mark for my @Sentientism channel in case you're interested in hearing more from him.

Wow-this was fantastic! And the fact that he’s worked with Karl Friston just seals it for me!

I am totally thrilled because I find nearly everything touched on that is relevant to the study of consciousness! Thank you a thousand times for this video!!

I was just browsing through and I stumbled on this I just want to say you’re simply amazing just because even someone like me you explain it so easy and everyone can understand your a legendary hero man

@theresechristiansen9769

2 жыл бұрын

I feel that same......

This was fascinating, going to read this ASAP.

what a man for understanding & the truth always comes out & thank you for sharing your truth much appreciated 💜🤗

Absolutely great! Something that I wanted to find out for some years now. I can't thank you enough, sir!

The hypothesis that feelings are evolutionary adaptations in order to maintain homeostasis is brilliant! I have often thought to myself, what if I had no feelings; if I could only observe my surroundings, like a security camera, with no sensations of touch, taste, smell, hearing or emotion. Would I be conscious? What would differentiate "me" from a simple camera or a computer? If one feels nothing, and has no unique sensations or emotions, and no "individual qualities" to self-reference, would that STILL allow one to experience consciousness? A fascinating lecture...

@Carfeu

2 жыл бұрын

It’s called being in silence

@theresechristiansen9769

2 жыл бұрын

Mmmm. Interesting. I think if one "feels nothing" then the hypothesis would be that you would not, in fact, be able to experience consciousness. This is because the positioning of this consciousness or "the feel" (as the article by Solm demonstrated) is part of the cortical area of the brain but also occurs because of a working brain stem. Without the brain stem there is no "experience." You mentioned "no unique sensations" -but that must include 'seeing'. To observe is also 'seeing' and thus unique to you. The other issue that the brain, not being like a computer, but organic, can develop into a 'thinking' or seeing creation, which means that there is a possibility of you experiencing feelings even if you could not linguistically describe these. If you were simply an engineering device, like a camera, you would not. But fascinating!! YT is a great place for learning. I'm a post grad in music (not science). I had to explain to students that data and empirical evidence was still essential. It was not always a prescriptive idea of feelings or 'interpretations.'

@wesleyvinal9801

2 жыл бұрын

@@Carfeu *trump voice* wrong

@chukwumaachiobu7308

2 жыл бұрын

A non conscious thing cannot become conscious as an evolutionary adaptation. How does something that has no feelings develop feelings? At a point you'll have to accept that we are designed by a creator!

@theresechristiansen9769

2 жыл бұрын

Right yes, The first thing I stated in my response was that without feelings, without consciousness, you cannot experience further feelings. At no point did Solm state you can have a non-conscious being which then develops an affect. You need to have this within certain elements of your brain (I'm keeping this simple) already. Specific patients, when examined have been shown to have a clear affect with a description of their surroundings etc. So it's an essence of the emotion that we should be aware of it. The attribute of the possibility of unconsciousness would be completely excluded as far as emotions and affects are concerned. The other issue is that at no point does evolution in humanity mean that we can't have been created by a god figure. The Judeo- Christian Islamic tradition supports evolution in human growth. Believing in a god does not cancel the function of consciousness or the explanation of our existence thru aspects of adaptation. This is not contingent on there not being a creator. I find GREAT sustenance within science to help explain our ability to adapt. If we believe in this, we may identify as creatures of a creator who work within NATURAL law. Which is how god, when you interpret scriptures, works himself. We are never asked by god to ACCEPT the idea of a creator, or worse, be forced to. Which your comment hints at. But we are asked to have faith. To accept is wrong in its entirety. No-one should 'accept' anything unless it is an observable fact. Or as a small child, we are told, by parents: "accept that this is a rule: you will eat dinner at 6pm" But we are not children (don't then tell me that god expects us to be nothing but children.....I suspect that's the next item on your list! :) ). Still, this a great platform of discussion on brain development, where the statement appeared that an unconscious being CANNOT itself develop an affect. You can't put anything in an empty vessel that lacks brain 'elements' (simply stated), Chukwuma Keep watching. It's an excellent discussion.

When you were speaking about how a physiological event changed your brother, I was reminded on how frightening losing the ability to speak is. I know its nothing like what your brother, and family went through, but, during a migraine I was awakened to the realisation that you are very much separate from everything else. When you lose the ability to take words which you know full well, inside your head, and the migraine or bleed or whatever, changes your ability to communicate, it wakes you up to the fact that we are, very much, insular beings who can become trapped inside our own heads. Luckily its a transient phenomena for myself but nowadays I have a very real fear of anything like this happening again. I also disagree that behind the injury we are not ourselves, how do you know? I felt very much like myself but to the world I appeared very different...its nightmarish!

@skepticmoderate5790

3 жыл бұрын

That sounds terrifying. I imagined it in my head and it sounds horrible. I hope I dream about it one day.

@wellynrose823

2 жыл бұрын

That's horrifying. The closest experience I have of being trapped inside myself would have to be when under sleep paralysis.

@AmitKumar-qz2us

2 жыл бұрын

Vedanta is the very science of consciousness at both human and cosmic levels. It recognises consciousness as the ultimate reality and affirms its presence in all existence. All this- whatever exists in this changing universe, is pervaded by consciousness" --Isa Upanishad .5000-BCE The ancient Vedic rishis in all their wisdom said as early as 8000 BC , that our universe is not woven from matter but consciousness . (They never patent there knowledge there own name ) There are connections between quantum mechanics & consciousness . Consciousness is the intelligence, the organising principle behind the arising of form. The quantum field or pure consciousness is influenced by intention and desire. All atoms in the entire universe are capable of mind reading and communicating with other atoms. There is a consciousness in every molecule of matter. As per quantum physics things do not exist in its physical form, unless they are observed by a conscious observer. In every experiment when an observer expected energy to behave as a particle, it did so. When he thought it would probably be wave-like, it was. And when observers believed it might start out as one form and end up as another, it did so. This means ,nothing actually exists in its physical form until observed by someone, was adopted by the group as one of the concepts. You created them by your expectations and your thoughts of what should be. In every situation in your life, including the wealth or lack of it you choose to attract to you. Biology is a quantum process. All the processes in the body including cell communications are triggered by quantum fluctuations, and all higher brain functions and consciousness also appear at the quantum level. On the subatomic level-mind is over matter. The brain and DNA is governed by the laws of quantum physics rather than the laws of biology or neuro physiology. THE COSMOS IS THE PLAYGROUND OF MAYA.. FROM MICROCOSM TO MACROCOSM.. Bhagavad Gita is all about BEING IN THE MOMENT. You cannot change your past, you cannot survive without water, you cannot change natures principle. The only solution is to accept things as they are. Life is a combination or physical, intellectual and spiritual aspects. Without spiritual development , man is without love or positive emotions ( affection, care, respect, sympathy ) . Karma is the result of your actions. If you do something good, you will get good tings in return and if you do bad things, you will get likewise in return. Karma or the actions that you do in the present life is passed on to the next life. But fate is not passed on to the next life. Dharma is when we are walking the path of our soul's purpose. When we are walking our path we are out of karma. We are no longer creating cause and effect. We are in flow with the universe, with our spirit. Our soul is line with the Divine. 'Manu-Smiriti'- 5000BC describes the code for leading a disciplined way of life. Patience, Pardon, Suppression of will, Stay away from Theft, Purity, Control of desires, Wisdom, Knowledge, Truth, Controlling Anger. These 10 qualities are considered as main characteristics of the Dharma. The whole of material creation is conscious. Our consciousness creates our reality. What our consciousness can conceive , it can also create. Human beings are conscious. They can see themselves in the mirror and see colours, while an animal cannot. To a Vedantic every part of this universe is dynamic, it is vibrating, it is listening and can respond according to ones KARMA, It can be by action and can be purely thought. The universe listens to our action as well as thought and gives in return what exactly we want either knowingly or unknowingly, weather it is bad or good. Science is trying to understand the universe ‘out there’ and Vedanta addressed the universe ‘inside you’” Schrödinger, in speaking of a universe in which particles are represented by wave functions, said, “The unity and continuity of Vedanta are reflected in the unity and continuity of wave mechanics. This is entirely consistent with the Vedanta concept of All in One.” The multiplicity is only apparent. This is the doctrine of the Upanishads. And not of the Upanishads only. The mystical experience of the union with God regularly leads to this view, unless strong prejudices stand in the West. There is no kind of framework within which we can find consciousness in the plural; this is simply something we construct because of the temporal plurality of individuals, but it is a false construction… The only solution to this conflict insofar as any is available to us at all lies in the ancient wisdom of the Upanishad. - Erwin Schrödinger " You do not have a soul , you are a soul and you have a body "

@facttruth7571

2 жыл бұрын

@@AmitKumar-qz2us STOP SPAMMING NONSENSE! THIS IS NOT ABOUT RELIGION WHICH ALREADY OUTDATED HUNDRED YEARS AGO. GO BACK TO STONE AGE

@frinferneepers3977

2 жыл бұрын

@@facttruth7571 i feel like if you watch Dr. Solms and come away less convinced rather than more in the primacy and importance of subjective interpretation of the world/the things within it then you've very much missed the point

A scientific touch to the deep relationship between feelings and consciousness. Well presented 😊💃‼️

Fascinating. Thank you for this wonderful lecture.

Thank you Mark Solms . To make an analogy of the connection between function and feeling I would say that the function of my car engine is to bring me in my car to visit the seaside and experience the sea birds and the surf on my face .So my point is that while studying the workings of the engine of my car that will get me there I will never get to understand or feel the experience of my seaside trip .

The way I see it. Feelings evolved to help us survive in groups. You are happy, you are safe. Your body can relax. You are sad, because something bad happened that might change the outlook on your future survival. Feelings that are basic emotions that are easy for other group members to see.

@Mobay18

3 жыл бұрын

@@pmcguinness3041 Interesting. I wonder what defines a decision when presented with multiple options. Do you follow a group laughing or do you help the group crying? I guess empathy is a survival emotion too?

@bknyland4134

3 жыл бұрын

@@pmcguinness3041 God made us conscious and breathed "life" and information into our DNA, THAT .is called intelligent design. human kind will never create life

@LordTetsuoShima

3 жыл бұрын

@@bknyland4134 Which God? And who/what made them?

@juniordev4190

2 жыл бұрын

@@bknyland4134 thats too lazy thing to label everything out of mind as god. The universe is complex beyond the human mind at least for present time but this will not be the case forever.

@bknyland4134

2 жыл бұрын

@@LordTetsuoShima THE GOD of the Bible. The Father, The Son (Jesus) and the Holy Spirit. No one "made" them. God exists outside of time, space and matter. Our Human brains cannot even conceive how this is possible.

You are an amazing man Mark Solms.

Thanks RI for having Professor Solms!

I believe, like Dr. Solms states, that the source of emotions and thus foundational consciousness does reside in the (primitive) brainstem. The reticular activating systems (RAS) also, by the way, regulates some foundational aspects of attention. We need the RAS, for example, to filter the voices from the background noise at a cocktail party. So this brainstem does have a very fundamental role in our mental functions. It makes sense also from an evolutionary perspective. But the insight of homeostasis as the mechanism (the pendulum) of maintaining order and fighting entropy (the second law of thermodynamics) is absolutely brilliant. Life cannot exist with uncontrolled entropy. Life by definition is natures ability to create self-regulating systems that maintain homeostasis, the balance needed for all metabolic organisms to exist. And self-replication adds the ability of these systems to evolve under different environments. It is logical that evolution would bring about adaptive strategies to maintain a stable homeostatic state in a given environment. And as self-replicating populations adapt to new environments through mutations, evolution ensures the adaptability of lifeforms. And with the emergence of animal life, after the Cambrian explosion 540 million years ago, the animal kingdom would develop nervous systems capable regulating behavior (emotions are our evolutionary regulation of behavior) based on the homeostatic state of the individual and the predictive ability to secure this healthy, necessary state. This is all brilliant!! The neocortex (the pallium) also added a very large extension to our cognitive capabilities. This clearly also extended our capabilities of self-awareness. An awareness of self in a given environment and our ability to also change that environment in order to secure our homeostasis. This extended self-awareness is what makes us human. We are aware of our ability to modify our environment and also to feel empathy for other beings (other persons or agents). This the next level of awareness, our social awareness. We are aware of what others are aware of and even worried about what others are not aware of. This is evolutions next level. So I would also infer, that is also the next level of consciousness.

@LLlap

3 жыл бұрын

Why are we so confused about our emotions? Always confuse the cause and then affect people around us.

@AlistairAVogan

3 жыл бұрын

Yes. Great summary, and comment, Joe Perez. This is was the point in the talk where I pricked up my ears. Interesting.

@mickeymoon7547

3 жыл бұрын

Yes, I agree that his connection of consciousness to the body's evolutionary need to maintain homeostasis was to me the most profound insight.

@rubiks6

3 жыл бұрын

"I believe ... consciousness does reside in the (primitive) brainstem." And how does it emerge? What is the mechanism?

@ryandowney3577

3 жыл бұрын

@@rubiks6 "Is this not the place we should be looking if we're trying to find out what the functional mechanism of consciousness is?" (40:50-ish) This is obviously a great and essential question, but we're not there yet. Neuroscientists don't even agree on where to look for this mechanism at present, but the evidence elucidated in this video at least strongly suggests a definite answer to the where: the brain stem.

Beautiful. Thank you

This is perhaps the best and most exciting and inspiring lecture I’ve seen on this mysterious topic.

Such an excellent talk 👏🏻 This is the first time I’ve heard a well reasoned and explained justification for why consciousness is beneficial for survival, and therefore why it would have evolved at all.

Very interesting talk. The parts about reactions without cortex make me think more of "awareness" than "feeling". Maybe consciousness has levels of awareness. Awareness of the senses, then awareness of desires and then awareness of thoughts. Dreams for example, have no awareness of the senses, but have awareness of desires and we can experience feelings (fear, infatuation, arousal). Dreams usually lack will power. We don't usually decide what we do when we dream but we wouldn't say our dreamed persona lacks consciousness inside the dream as it acts and reacts within the dream very much like a conscious person. Same with the people we dream of. They are entirely made up, but for us, they look pretty humanly complete in the context of the dream.

@joszsz

3 жыл бұрын

I have some willpower in my dreams though 🤔... Some times I just ride along, but some times I find myself making willful decisions... At other times, I find myself in a spectator position (it's like I can sense myself and position, but I'm independent of what that self does... it's like being in a VR game without me doing the movement)

@DamianReloaded

3 жыл бұрын

@@joszsz Yeah dreams can be lucid sometimes. I sometimes listen my voice narrating what will happen next in the dream I'm having. I've the suspicion Marvin Minsky was onto something when he wrote (in Society of Mind) about brain functions being composed of many simpler subsystems that can be turned on and off. What is also very impressive is how much we can still do with most of our brain gone. It'd seem like staying alive, sensing and reacting to the world can be done just with our "reptilian" part of the brain (I think it's the basal ganglia)

@joszsz

3 жыл бұрын

@@DamianReloaded Yeah! I do the narration thing too, and it's at that point that I usually realise it's a dream and wake up. It's all so intriguing. I'm not familiar with Marvin though, so I'll have to check his work out

@theresechristiansen9769

2 жыл бұрын

@@DamianReloaded I really liked your comments. I hadn't thought of dreams in an affective manner as the lecture discussed. We need a Part 2!

The last part reminded me of an Abba song. In their song „Move On“ it says: „What really makes the difference between all dead and living things, the will to stay alive“

This is such an insightful lecture and explains so much of the importance of emotions in our lives as well as our individual and collective survival / prosperity. These emotional and awareness connections to the brain stem region would be mostly new to the majority of viewers, in my humble opinion (?) Thanks so much !

This is the only thing I've seen which actually advanced my understanding of consciousness - thanks! Most talks either propose a solution which misses the point of the hard problem, or discuss the hard problem without advancing a solution.

@iAnasazi

2 жыл бұрын

And how is this a solution? He didn't really explain why feelings can't happen "in the dark", unless I missed something. Interesting nonetheless.

‘The dogs are the chicken’ Brilliantly laughable! lol I have a seizure condition and have been very interested in brain activity since, as I often noticed deja vu and floating feelings in body, many occasions of which were precursors to having a seizure. I also an quite interested in dream activists well since I have felt a dreamlike stage during my absence of reality. It has been a pleasure to struggle to learn as much as I can understand about my condition and my curiosity to cross these uploads on KZread. Much respect to the Royal Institute for sharing, and even more so given to Mr. Mark Solms. Thank you infinitely! Peace and love 💕

28:28 I've been watching science-related videos for over 10 years on this platform, but never had I been referred to as a scientist by a scientist on KZread's spacetime continuum. Thank you for such an experience.

@vhawk1951kl

2 жыл бұрын

Really *Whose* " science of *What*? Owing to the loss of the capacity to ponder and reflect, whenever the contemporary average man hears or employs in conversation any word(perhaps " science, or " consciousness") with which he is familiar only by its consonance, he does not pause to think, nor does there even arise in him any question as to what exactly is meant by this word, he having already decided, once and for all, both that he knows it and that others know it too. Do you see that you simply*assume* that you know what you mean by either "science" , or " consciousness" and it never even crosses you mind to seek to discover exactly what passes in you associations or associative apparatus or mind, or thoughts(so- called). Is that not*Exactly* correct? Not only is it and must it be correct, for the very simply reason that you*cannot*. How exactly would you go about doing that and is it not the exact equivalent of a mirror seeking to reflect itself, or you stand on your own shoulders? Can you understand that?

I would have given this talk in reverse. The content was amazing but the later parts were more crucial for the main idea and the most key point here was the one given last. Maybe it's just me who wants to know the agenda first and the details later

@rahulchaudhary6740

3 жыл бұрын

Got to start at the beginning isn't it? Us cab drivers are also watching :)

This is the best and most incredible talk on YT

As a Schelerian, I completely agree that feelings are a pre-requisite for consciousness. And if I understand correctly, he's saying the function of feelings demonstrates that they must already be conscious because feelings direct actions and choices (toward what is pleasurable and away from what is painful). I think, though, it would be helpful for him to distinguish the two forms of "consciousness" he's speaking of - In other words, when he says feelings are a pre-requisite for "consciousness," I think he means the higher consciousness that is characterized by self-awareness and language. When he says "Feelings are always conscious," though, I think he means a lower form of consciousness that is pre-lingual. Some philosophers argue that this second type of consciousness is common to all organic life. For example, the roots of a tree will grow will often toward what is nurturing and away from what is harmful. Some philosophers argue that this is the same sort of "consciousness" that he's ascribing to feelings.

Very effectively and clearly explained. Thanks a lot!

This was absolutely brilliant. It makes a lot of sense. Raw emotions in the brainstorm. I'll be thinking about this for a long time. I cannot help but now think of the "factor 5" model of personality. This would seem to tie in very nicely.

I'm sick of the scientists who say something nonsensical like "consciousness is only an imagination and does not really exist", which is absolutely wrong and simply makes no sense! Consciousness is the only thing we can say 100% that it exists. Everything else, the world around us and all the scientific knowledge those scientists are so proud of, could theoretically be a simulation and not exist. So completely put on the Kof. This shows that there are successful scientists who understand the simplest things completely wrong and are easily led by their success on a wrong path. I cant understand how someone could deny that consciousness exists. It makes no sense at all! So good to hear such good lecture.

You present passionately and so newly informative. Thank you.

I use 3D Markovian decision geometry for expressing other things in our species common social issues. These mathematical structures seem to be everywhere. My brain literally had the feeling of popping with ecstacy when this lecture turned on some lights. Thanks, I needed that.

@nickacelvn

3 жыл бұрын

Good to have you on board.

@tomekd789

Жыл бұрын

Where can I read more about it?

This was an amazing video, extremely interesting. Thank you so much.

You said something along the lines of "Why are we conscious and why doesn't all of this go on in the dark?" There cannot be a non-experience for something that collects information and thinks towards a projected future, which can help the organism prepare for winter, etc. That's an adaptation that helps the spieces survive. It has been fine tuned by natural selection, and we call this conscious experience.

Thank you for posting this fine talk

Remarkable! This is why fishes and frogs and even insects have a personality. A great reason to become vegetarian.

@rlwemm

2 жыл бұрын

You make a good point. It is a little disturbing, actually.

Patient W has more sense of humour without frontal cortex than I do.

@thegreath.sapiensapien6907

3 жыл бұрын

It's cooking food that makes us conscious?

@wailandkarisma4279

3 жыл бұрын

What

@citizenschallengeYT

3 жыл бұрын

@@thegreath.sapiensapien6907 Don't know about making us conscious, but going back into deep time, I imagine cooking food and keeping warm at nights, had a heck of a lot to do with being able to grow this super-sized brain we inhabit.

@ReasonableForseeability

3 жыл бұрын

Well, that was quite a humourous comment you just made! Don't disparage yourself!

@AR-jo5vv

3 жыл бұрын

Hahahahahahahahahaha!

What a powerful thesis on Brain Stem Spring, Sensing, Micro-Sensing, Sensibility, The Involuntariness of Sensibility, Micro-Consciousness, The Core of Feeling, Why Emotions Are Critical, How Malcognition Has Us To Willingly Go Unevolutipn & More.

Fascinating, so fascinating I have bought the book, and am currently reading it. Thanks for your work.

Soooo interesting! Thank you!

Brilliant, in the US sense! Theoretical physicist and mathematician by trade, but I've always had intense interest in philosophy and philosophy of everything. BUT, especially to the problem of "me" and physic processes. I'm buying the book as I type. Thanks for awakening me to this unique approach existing.

@goyonman9655

2 жыл бұрын

Do you believe as Hawlins said "philosophy is dead"

There is so much that physicalism can't properly explain no matter how hard scientists try. I wish I could tell KZread to stop suggesting this guy. I've heard him and found him wanting.

BIG thank you Mark Solms - so very interesting. And so very important for future of humankind - e.g.; using the knowledge as at least one intrinsic aspect in developments of the best we can do in AI - including ethics, etc.

its 2021. good connection, compression, camera and streaming picture s more important than a good suit.

@nightdruid540

3 жыл бұрын

dump the suits. throw on a robe and angle the camera respectfully. the future is now

Dear Dr. Solms, thank you for your researches, always so concrete and stimulating. Now you move the seat of consciousness from the cortex to the brain stem. But don't you think this was already Jaak Panksepp's line? Unfortunately this does not solve the “hard” problem, but simply displaces it.

@scarziepewpew3897

2 жыл бұрын

it does

@julianhe7348

2 жыл бұрын

@@scarziepewpew3897 it doesn't :)

Thank you for the lecture!

Fascinating proposal... Excellent food for thought. Lots to chew on here 😊

The ideas around 54 minute mark remind me a lot of Terrence Deacon's ideas. I think this is the path forward. Very good presentation, I wish you good luck!

@TheWorldTeacher

3 жыл бұрын

Good and bad are RELATIVE. 😉

@rubiks6

3 жыл бұрын

@@TheWorldTeacher - Oh no they're not. They are absolute. God decides what is good and bad. The Creator of the universe and of Man decides what is right and what is wrong and His determinations are unmovable.

I liked his talk, especially that he is following the evidence wherever it leads. I feel that this is not what most people mean by "the hard problem." Solms is trying to answer "why is there an inner experience" in an adaptive evolutionary model. He seems to be saying that feelings must be felt in order to do the function of increasing survival, so this is why we feel, because feeling must be felt to have any effect. This is his "why." Like I said, at least he is following the evidence, but he isn't asking "how is there an inner experience" or "what is consciousness" or any question that I might think of when you say "the hard problem of consciousness."

@fvhaudsilhvdfs

3 жыл бұрын

i still don't follow the logic of why feeling has to be involved. in his example about air hunger in a burning building, it seems to me that very low-level animals would act the same way. the survival mechanism there to escape the danger can happen without any conscious agency on behalf of the organism. why do I need self-awareness and inner experience to flee a burning building?

@caricue

3 жыл бұрын

@@fvhaudsilhvdfs I understand why this answer isn't particularly satisfying, but like I said, he is a scientist in a particular community where some other scientists insist that consciousness is either something like the smoke coming from an engine or an illusion. He is trying to build a case for consciousness being an actual integral part of an evolved organism, so he has to show that it is helpful in survival. I agree with him that emotions are mostly instinctual algorithms that lead to increased fitness, and his point is that feelings must be felt, so there has to be an experiencer, and it has to be conscious. While I agree with that one part, I think his fellow scientists are kind of misguided and silly for discounting consciousness so casually, but that is just my opinion, and I'm not trying to get tenure or be published.

@captainoates7236

3 жыл бұрын

Since childhood, maybe from the age of about 7 or 8, I have questioned myself. " Why am I looking at the world from behind my eyes (a white Englishman in the 20th/21st century) and not for instance a poor Indian woman either now or at any time in history. I still constantly have those thoughts. To me that is the fundamental question of conciousness.

@caricue

3 жыл бұрын

@@captainoates7236 I think many people have asked such questions throughout the ages since consciousness doesn't seem to be anchored in time or space. I don't know the answer any more than any scientist or guru does, but this is my current view. I've come to regard consciousness as "what it feels like for matter to be alive", so every living cell has basic awareness, and the brain provides the perception, memory and emotions to the living matter of my brain. In this view, my consciousness is anchored to this particular configuration of matter until its inevitable dissolution. I don't know how any of this would work or if it makes any sense, but it works for me. I am always open to other ideas since no one has the ultimate answer, and probably never will.

@captainoates7236

3 жыл бұрын

I guess I am asking a different kind of question, even quasi religious, but maybe another definition of conciousness is the ability to conceive of such things and reflect on the world we inhabit.

Excellent work. Thank you.

Fantastic lecture. I enjoyed every second of it. Please do more of these😳🙏🏻

I like this guy after only 3 mins. One sentence succeeds in explaining that which I've tried to for many years. We ARE our emotional response to our environment. The individual can be manipulated by manipulation of the environment in which they experience themselves.

@emmanuelpil

3 жыл бұрын

Especially noticeable in these times.

Thank you very very much Mark this is absolutely fascinating. I would like to repeat as Patrick says below -RI please please stop putting time limits. I seek these subjects and are prepared to listen and think. This is not the kind of facebook click sensation 2 millisecond attention span stuff which seems to be becoming the norm - I was able to get a fairly good grasp of this really complex subject after listening 3 times to the lecture and having invested well over 50 hours exploring other sources on this subject this is by far the best.

@vhawk1951kl

2 жыл бұрын

Do you see or recognise or understand, that when you use words such as "consciousness", you simply *assume* that you know what you mean by them or seek to convey when you use them? Owing to the loss of the capacity to ponder and reflect, whenever the contemporary average man hears or employs in conversation any word with which he is familiar only by its consonance, he does not pause to think, nor does there even arise in him any question as to what exactly is meant by this word, he having already decided, once and for all, both that he knows it and that others know it too. Is it not exactly correct that he has no idea and never even pauses to question or seek to discover exactly what passes in his associations or their relevant apparatus when he hears or uses that word? Why not? Because he *cannot*, because he is doing the psychological equivalent of trying to stand on his own shoulders or a mirror seeking to reflect itself. Is that not *exactly* true?

Brilliantly explained!

With increasing calls for a science (for an objective science) of consciousness, Solm moves the needle a long way towards the ‘settled’ point … bravo.

It is the recognition of self within all other elements of existence that we are aware of.

@iandoyle5017

3 жыл бұрын

You can flip that idea upside down.

The ability to ask what makes us conscious is exactly what makes us couscious in a sharable way.

@sanchos9084

3 жыл бұрын

Its not the thought itself but our ability to observe the thought.

@colinpatterson728

3 жыл бұрын

@@sanchos9084 And since US then share right ?

@sanchos9084

3 жыл бұрын

@@colinpatterson728 sorry i didn’t understand the question 😅

@colinpatterson728

3 жыл бұрын

@@sanchos9084 I think you understood well enough! I actually agree with your "NOT the thought itself" - I think in essence it contains all the other stuff. I mean one has to be conscious to even respond !

@sanchos9084

3 жыл бұрын

@@colinpatterson728 I’ve been meditating for a year and it was transformative. I think we should understand that language is limited when it comes to describing subjective experiences and conciseness can be experienced only from subjective experience. I think we shouldn’t be surprised if woo woo stuff mystics talk about come to be true.

Forever grateful, thank you

Thanks for sharing with us your studies and researches.

Wow, this was incredible! I also had no idea that this was so new, I have never felt so compelled to buy such a book but I may have to now, thanks for this lecture, a valauble hour of my life spent! :)

That's really interesting! Especially to me, as it turns out my brainstem was pushed slowly but steadily for at least 15 or 20 years (I'm 43 now) by a giant (by the official classification at 51x43x33mm) vestibular schwannoma. That's a benign (is most cases) slow growing tumor growing out of the Schwann cells, in my case of the vestibular-acoustic nerve. Schwann cells are like the insulation around the nerve very much like the insulation on cables. The thing is the tumor as it has grown so big, has gradually pushed my brainstem way to the left side (it has started on the right side nerve). The brainstem, which normally should be going straight down in the middle from the base of the brain to spinal cord in my case has been pushed way left, so that's making about a 90 degrees turn to go around the tumor, almost from the top end of the brainstem, to the bottom of the cerebellum, where the brainstem returns to its normal position. That's actually the main reason to believe it has been growing very slowly, as it has managed to make such deformation without noticeable effects. Actually one of the few effects I got from it (which I didn't know at the time) were only about 3 months before I went to get a scan and found about the tumor, and it was for about a week in the summer in which I got overwhelming urge to yawn or swallow without a reason. And about a week later it was gone, I was back to some kind of normal (which apparently hasn't been normal for me for many years already). In any case that brainstem reticular formation that Mark Solms mentions as the source of our Consciousness, in my case was extremely deformed. Most likely not directly damaged, but at least pressed and pushed to the side. Also I assume there has been some manipulation in the region during the surgery I got to remove the tumor. Apparently the surgery was good (even if quite long - 14 hours) as I don't experience any noticeable physical effects from all this. There are other things like a moderate hydrocephalus, which was initially caused by the tumor completely compressing flat the 4th ventricle, and thus disturbing the normal reabsorption cycle of the cerebrospinal fluid. And also the scan that found the tumor, showed that I has a cyst of water on the outer right-side surface of the right-hemisphere, which doctors are saying is probably condition which I had from a baby. As result it pushed against my right hemisphere, and it got slightly underdeveloped as size at least. It's difficult to measure deficits in the functions of the right-brain hemisphere I guess. Sorry for the long description, but to summarize I wonder if that extreme deformation of my brainstem has affected my consciousness somehow?

@AALavdas

Жыл бұрын

I would not imagine so. The brainstem is so crucial for life itself, that if it was somehow damaged, the clinical manifestations would be obvious.

@She_Nanigans

Жыл бұрын

With so few side effects, however did they find the problem?

@blueckaym

Жыл бұрын

@@She_Nanigans I guess that's why the tumor grew for many years before it started to manifest as side-effects (initially with balance and hearing degradation in affected ear)

@She_Nanigans

Жыл бұрын

@@blueckaym oh, I see. I hope you have good health going forward.

@claires9100

Жыл бұрын

For someone with such a strange condition , your text proves that consciousness, intellect and language have not been at all hindered. Best of Health to you going forward!

I am extatic to hear this. Finally we can understand animals are somebody not something and we can stop treating them as objects to be exploited. I had this intuition spontaneously in 2013 and I went vegan. Hope all who listen think of animals and their hellish suffering in factory farms and slaughterhouses.

Thank you for the excellent explanation of the pursuit of finding the answer to where "I" might be.

I’m already reading it, and it’s making ‘sense’ to me and ‘affecting’ me greatly. Wonderful book. Thank you Mark!

@michaelseale7268

3 жыл бұрын

Sorry, but the quality of experiences are not brain-based (including the brain stem) for the simple reason that consciousness did not emerge from brain matter. Consciousness is the ontological primary.

@winstonian3

3 жыл бұрын

@@michaelseale7268 and how do you know that?

@JohnSmith-ys3wc

3 жыл бұрын

@A. George He took psychedelics and the clockwork elves from base reality told him.

@falklumo

3 жыл бұрын

@@michaelseale7268 After stimulation of your brain stem, you say otherwise ;)

@Miketar2424

3 жыл бұрын

@@michaelseale7268 Modern science needs to point to a mechanical cause of a sense of Being or consciousness. They discount research in psychedelics , even though many prominent researchers have used them, because their careers are based in 'hard' physical reductionist thought. Finding truth in the Universe is up to the individual, not academia.

I tend to view things in terms of evolution, perhaps too much, but useful here for these questions and observations: (1) consciousness is shared by many organisms, so one should expect that the source of consciousness rests in the structures of the brain that all conscious organisms share; (2) one should at least suspect, if not expect, that organisms that share structures of the brain would share the traits associated with them, suggesting that lower organisms experience feelings-including emotions-greater than many people acknowledge; (3) just as affection for offspring and mate provide an evolutionary advantage (defined as getting genes into the next generation), feelings provide an evolutionary advantage in keeping the organism alive longer, thus able to reproduce more.

@anitalinke6659

2 жыл бұрын

Your thought is expressed so clearly that it is like a balm to read it. Thank you.

Thank you! Now we all know that knowledge is structured in consciousness.

Fascinating and instructive - thank you

Fascinating talk on consciousness thank you, this type of learning is what the internet was invented for.

@jayfibonacci402

2 жыл бұрын

in 8 months this has 1 upvote and my comment.... wtf people

Brilliant talk!. Loved the way you elucidated and teased out this problem. The problem of consciousness is something I have thought about for a very long time (I'm 65 now) without anyone in my life really wanting to engage with me about it. I will be getting your book (I'm in the UK). Thank you very much

@LuigiSimoncini

3 жыл бұрын

have a look at Dan Dennet as well, guess you already aware of him, but just in case

@giddyoldgoat3069

3 жыл бұрын

@@LuigiSimoncini Hi there. Thanks for your reply. Yes I have seen some talks of his online. Very interesting. As far as I understand him ( and others such as Sam Smith?) he makes the case for a materialist, neurological basis for the experience of being conscious. However to me it still seems unexplained how our subjective conscious experience generates out of billions of organic neurons firing in response to sensory input signals. Such an interesting topic. The more I look the deeper the rabbit hole seems to get.

@giddyoldgoat3069

3 жыл бұрын

Sam Harris..not Sam Smith :)

Thanks for your time sir and your good advice very helpful to me now.

Very fascinating! I think Solms nails it, broadly atleast. I need the book!

I have learned, when I was in college in one of my classes that when the brain is “short changed” in a part, or parts of its anatomy either by surgery or by lack of the part in birth, another part, or parts, of the brain “steps up” to fulfill the job of the missing part as much as it can. Until such time as we understand more about how the brain works and where various functions occur and how and where the neurotransmitters go, we can learn where control initiates, but as far as inferring “backup parts” that can take over temporarily, or permanently in the event of failure or absence, we can never Fully Understand the workings of the neurons in the brain.

Consciousness a great unknown... Thank you The Ri 👍

@ReasonableForseeability

3 жыл бұрын

Or maybe consciousness is a great KNOWN and the material world ia the great unknown.

@kagannasuhbeyoglu

3 жыл бұрын

@@ReasonableForseeability This is the question of thousands of years. Who knows maybe you're right...

"So that sentence: 'Neuropsychology is admirable, but it excludes the psyche' captured exactly my dismay and frustration with my field. Such was how things stood in the 1980's." Mark Solms

Fascinating talk!

If we make consciousness fundamental, rather than being generated by the brain, the hard problem disappears.

I am thinking the same! Although I'm not a neuroscientist, I know biology very well and enough of how computers work. Sometimes I ponder through that same question too, like how does a brain work. Once a time I wrote down what I think how I think and it kinda starts to become jumbled first. But when I continue to write (although for some reason I feel a pain in my head when I do that), it kinda always went to a central system that decides what to do, what's bad or good. Then if I connect that system to the theory of evolution, the conclusion that I get is the system that decides what to do must have been selected to maintain its body to be alive, that's homeostasis!

@WisdomTeachings

3 жыл бұрын

Nice lecture, but this doesn't explain the qualia of feelings. Something deeper is required.

@nedisawegoyogya

3 жыл бұрын

@@WisdomTeachings yeah, that's another beast

Wow, what a great presentation!!

Thank you Mark, I will put your book on The List.

The necessary means to consciousness is introspection. One awakens through self-observation and observation of life. The flower blooms because of its root.

@dkathrens77

2 жыл бұрын

This appears to be a circular argument. Who or what was doing that initial introspection?

@mikeq5807

2 жыл бұрын

@@dkathrens77 You are making obscure what is obvious. Introspect. Know thyself.

@mikeq5807

2 жыл бұрын

@@dkathrens77 Hi Dennis. Some people may want to intellectualize. Wrong idea. Simply gain insight from your life experiences through introspection (meditation, looking inward, self-observation.) It's that simple.

We gaze at stars and galaxies, universe, as if its something other than ourselfs.

@sambo7734

3 жыл бұрын

Perfect comment.

@lagerbeer1974

3 жыл бұрын

This a gem.

@rubiks6

3 жыл бұрын

You are not the stars and they are not you. You can wax poetic, if you'd like but it is nothing more than that. Not reality.

@sambo7734

3 жыл бұрын

@@rubiks6 or you could say, if you go back far enough in time we were all one once, and there is just one wavefunction of the universe so we are still one despite the apparent differentiation. Or if that's not good enough, maybe we came in from the outside somehow?

@MonaLisa-rm3iv

3 жыл бұрын

@@rubiks6 to see a star means you (re)Konstrukt a model of a star inside your head ... this is not poetic it’s reality

We are not a machine and the mind goes ways beyond the brain. There is stacks of evidence on this. Thank you for sharing and I hope you will continue your research 'outside' of the body. I fill the issue with your brother, is a 'confusion' between the two brain hemispheres.

Brilliant - I especially liked the deep brain and pharmacological justifications for believing that the RAS is the font of feeling

Fascinating and illuminating, definitely going to buy the book! It leaves me wondering, does this imply that the origin of consciousness coincides with the origin of life? Because in order for life to exist there must be a preference for survival and in order to have preference there must be some feeling of positive or negative. Would this mean that even the simplest of organisms have some degree of consciousness?

@dakrontu

3 жыл бұрын

Organisms with behaviour not conducive to their survival are wiped from the gene pool. The gene pool is everything that survived. I think we still need to figure out how a simple circuit within the brain stem can generate a conscious feeling. Why just there? What about the overall process of life within the biosphere, which also encompasses complex cycles, some of them self-perpetuating? Does it have feelings, as it stumbles along blindly responding to changes imposed by externalities such as sunlight? I doubt it. But if not, why not?

@LuigiSimoncini

3 жыл бұрын

you probably want to read/listen to Terrence Deacon or Jeremy Sheldon

@smrtfasizmu6161

2 жыл бұрын

Maybe, maybe not. I find it interesting that AI researches who are thinking about making reward functions for future AIs can't make a reward function which isn't terrible. They constantly stumble into paradoxes and dead ends, which either don't exist when it comes to humans or they are much less of an issue with humans. Who knows, maybe consciousness is the best way of having reward functions for complex organisms and so the evolution chose consciousness organisms. Maybe AI research will have to make AIs of the future conscious if they want their AIs to have reward functions which work well. A guy from computerphile made a series of videos talking about problems with AIs and problems of reward function with AIs.

@mrcollector4311

2 жыл бұрын

@@dakrontu unless conciousness is fundamental

Anyone professing to understand or know what Consciousness is should explore their own via Psychedelics ... then they’ll actually know something through their own experience 👌🏽

@emmanuelpil

3 жыл бұрын

You don't need psychedelics to have DMT-like experiences.

This is brilliant! Just purchased the audiobook version! Let's gooooo

I have only now stumbled over this talk, but i really absolutely agree with other comments here about the function of feeling in the context of homeostasis being an absolutely brilliant idea! It even makes a lot of sense, the more you think about it really in depth.

@chastetree

Жыл бұрын

Nick Lane's RI talk on the Kreb cycle comes to a similar conclusion in a more concise and more mechanistically insightful way.