Love the episodes on consciousness. I watch these almost as soon as they post! Thanks for bringing us...closer to truth!

@question1235

4 жыл бұрын

There is a leading consciousness researcher on Quora ( www.quora.com/profile/B-A-Rehl ) he claims that he has solved what consciousness is and how our brain creates it. He also has a working AGI theory, which he will publish next year.

@donaldmcdaniel3617

4 жыл бұрын

The Ski Lodge Podcast we

@nickolasgaspar9660

4 жыл бұрын

@Ruby Badilla lol your are posting red herring fallacies. Truth is an evaluation term. We use it to identify claims or statements which are in agreement with current facts and have Instrumental value. So there is nothing "absolute" in our claims since we can only address their truth value in relation to what we can verify, due to the limitations of our nature and our methodologies. Absolute truth is an idealistic concept, something that can only be used as a reference point and a wishful goal. There aren't "absolutes" in our world, and If you compare our current truth statements with something unknown absolute, that is a red herring fallacy mate. Our current facts define what is true and what isn't and we are not in a position to know whether there are more facts coming in the future.

@sgt1stclassbob38

4 жыл бұрын

@@nickolasgaspar9660 we gage what is true, if it can be rationally justified as true, meaning, through our five senses. What makes it true though? Our brains make it true but then... How do we honestly know if it's true or not? If experience is nothing more than electrochemical signals produced by the brain, then "true" is just as much a hallucination as a dream. At the core of experience is the brain and the only filter is individual consciousness.

@sgt1stclassbob38

4 жыл бұрын

@@nickolasgaspar9660 oh... And when you go around trying to prove how right u are, you not only peg yourself as someone under 30 and a troll.

I really appreciate the deepest thinkers who are able and not afraid to say "I don't know"

I salute Robert for taking us on this wonderful journey closer to the truth ! It seems to be a never ending story mysteriously signifying that our quest for understanding consciousness will lead us to the ultimate truth and bring us face to face with God our creator.

You Sir, just simply make my day. I make coffee every morning and drink it while watching one of your episodes then I go out to the real world and look at the World differently, almost puzzled. I have been studying Consciousness, Universe and Psychedelics for more then ten years now and I have to say as different as they sound from each other they somehow always seem to meet each other in certain ways? Can you please try to define what it is so similar about these three topics even though they are so different from one another? Thank you.

@roberts2561

4 жыл бұрын

Keep up with your studies my friend

@michalcaganek8287

4 жыл бұрын

@@roberts2561 I am too far down the rabbit hole to stop Robert. Looking forward to see more of your episodes. Thank you

@rohlay00

4 жыл бұрын

I'm happy to hear that there are more individuals like me out there

@michalcaganek8287

4 жыл бұрын

@@rohlay00 Unfortunately for some people it's hard to grasp, and some just simply don't care as materialistic world is all they know and all they believe because it is in front of their eyes. I believe that options are unlimited as I am believer of Multiverse and Many Big Bang Theories although only one Big Bang never really made sense to me but who knows. Thoughts?

@rohlay00

4 жыл бұрын

@@michalcaganek8287 I must confess I don't hold any firm beliefs in metaphysics. I suppose I'm a bit like Laurence Krauss, just a sceptical and curious mind, constantly questing and imagining reality. I don't reject any theory that havent been disproved nor do I accept any that havent been proved. Our knowledge of reality is so speculative at this moment. Of course science helps us get a better understanding, but at the same time it give us a better understanding of how ignorant we are 😂😂 What caused the big bang, we cant speak of causality in a realm where space and time didn't exist, it was the birth of these things. The big bang was an event and it happened. I can sympathise with your opinions on the multiverse. It is a great interpretation of quantum mechanics, but honestly I prefer the one universe. But then where is this universe? When you start thinking of distances, from the microscopic to the macroscopic its incomprehensible. What if we are part of a much larger system, like the mitochondria of a much bigger cell for example? It astonishes me to wonder about these things and it feeds my curiosity and determination to learn more, read more, think more... The universe is a mystery and consciousness is another one. I'll tell you what keeps me up at night though. We are made of matter, the same matter that was created in the big bang. The elements in our bodies were forged in stars and scattered across the universe, the universe is in us. But here's another thought. From the origin till now (here anyways), the trajectory of the universe was so that we came to where we are today. But the chain of reaction of events that took place weren't random, they were governed by the laws of physics. We are literally the manifestation of the laws of physics. Why are we here? Why do we exist? I havent got a clue, but I am fascinated by it all and hugely grateful to have the opportunity to live. An opportunity for the universe to be conscious of it's own existence. Recently I've been attracted by the idea of panscychism, consciousness being a fundamental property of the universe. What we call the 4 fundamental forces of the universe. The properties of the universe. Space, time, matter, energy, waves, field, forces... maybe theres an underlying principle (like consciousness) guiding reality. Have you ever heard of Boltzman brains? It's a bit bizarre and I certainly don't believe it, but it states that at the end of time, when the universe has come to an end.that meaning that it's a homogeneous soup of nothingness. There is an eternity and in this place theres an off change of particles forming a consciousness (if the probability of something happening is above zero and theres infinite time, it is likely to happen). This consciousness that arises and creates these self. This experience. Like information is conserved. It replays your memories and your experiences as if it were "real". They say the probability of us being a boltzman brain is higher than being an actual brain. That's the convincing argument for me. The clash between probabilities. Anyway, sorry I got a bit off topic. I wanted to say good for you man. Psychedelics are an eye opener. My whole notion of self and reality has radically changed because of it. It has sparked my inner child curiosity back, they're just amazing. But I think to deepen your understanding it cant come all from within. Yes reflecting and imagining brings new insights, but complement that with reading and I tell you man, its madness. The brain is an information processing machine. So if you feed it new ideas from all sorts of disciplines: physics, mathematics, biology, chemistry, neuroscience, psychology, etc. On psychedelics, your brain will connect dots that otherwise may have not been connected. The reason I saying this is because I'm a 19 year old at university and I've had shrooms with a few different people, and my trips have been by far more dramatic than my friends. I too enjoyed the colours and the amazing music. I had the massive introspection questioned Who am I? What is reality? And they've been life changing trips. But after the first one I was hungry for more. Not to sound conceited, but they were not. People believe yeah reality, self what's that all about, for a minute.... then the ego returns and we have to survive in "reality". I have tried to talk to people into thinking deeply about these things and after many failed efforts I've concluded that unless it comes from them, theres no point. People are stuck in their ways. I think the solution is education, their mind have been molded a certain way, their thought processes, their whole way of thinking of reality... But that's okay, not everyone can handle the burden of existence. It can be scary. I can only be grateful and try to feel love and compassion for every human out there, I feel like we are part of a bigger picture. Maybe one day (with artificial intelligence) will discover the truth. What are your thoughts on consciousness? You may have gain quite a few insights he nature of consciousness having had psychedelic experiences. As well, do you meditate? With discipline and practice you reach those "elevated" states of consciousness, and experience reality more "real". Whatever that means. Anyways sorry for rambling, have a great day sir and enjoy the journey.

Love this series. My question is that if we don’t have a clue about the nature of the perceiver or experiencer of reality , i.e. consciousness, how can we be confident about anything we believe we know about that reality?

Consciousness is largely a phenomenal experience explored through inner observation. There's a video of a monk that meditates through a self-immolation. I think you should get some proficient meditators like monks and gurus on the show to share their insights about it.

@abhishekshah11

4 жыл бұрын

That monk was a buddhist and buddhists believe in annatta or no self. This is also the scientific conclusion. The self is an illusion than tricks itself to believe it is real

@Ndo01

4 жыл бұрын

@@abhishekshah11 True but meditation preceded buddhism from religions that held an eternalist view. Also, where does buddhist cosmology derive from if there is no self to reincarnate between the realms?

@abhishekshah11

4 жыл бұрын

@@Ndo01 what you are raising is a linguistic problem and not conceptual. Advaita vedanta looks at the self as ubiquitous which is also scientifically correct. Every soul has consciousness, and consciousness is not equal to the contents of consciousness, hence consciousness is universal. Buddhism says the same thing using different words, that if you see it, there is just quale space in which some quale are attached to a illusory "I" and that makes us feel like individuals. Damage the insular cortex and you will fail to distinguish between yourself and your world. Ultimately this must be so because we are not separate from nature. The self is a separation from nature that is necessary for survival yet this is the root of all neuroses because this illusion cannot last long. It has to die.

@abhishekshah11

4 жыл бұрын

@@Ndo01 In other words, there is no observor, only observation.

@Ndo01

4 жыл бұрын

@@abhishekshah11 How can there be observation without observer? Observation is observation of object. Subject observes object. The self can be seen as illusory but it remains an observer does it not?

Roberts K's interviewing style mentally AND physically is consistent, without fault (he's rockin his turtleneck in the desert 😁9:15 ). He's the star in his movie 👍. He's on my heros list! Get em Rob🦸‍♂️

When I think of consciousness, I think of individuality and individual consciousness within the framework of humanity and how that’s so fascinating. Question of emergence of consciousness is indeed a very interesting hard problem to investigate for sure.

@credterfe

Жыл бұрын

Very great idea ! Consciousness is prerequisite of individuality, or of being an individual. Without such capacity, there'll be only consciousless automatons , billions in number, fidgeting on the planet earth.

Science is "within" consciousness.

@question1235

4 жыл бұрын

There is a leading consciousness researcher on Quora ( www.quora.com/profile/B-A-Rehl ) he claims that he has solved what consciousness is and how our brain creates it. He also has a working AGI theory, which he will publish next year.

@2CSST2

4 жыл бұрын

It is the principles of nature that give rise to consciousness, and not consciousness that gives rise to those principles by being aware of them. Indeed, the process of becoming aware of those principles IS something that's within the realm of conscious experience, but that which they are aware of (reality) exists in precedence to that awareness, and reality is precisely what the object of science is. In other words, the experience of doing science is "within" consciousness, but the object of science isn't. So your statement can only be true if you reduce science to the experience of doing it, but that is only painting half the picture. Science wouldn't exist without conscious beings practicing it, but neither would it without the very object defining its purpose: Reality. Both are part of what science is, both are necessary to define it. Science is the systematic study by conscious being *of* reality, and not simply "the systematic study by conscious beings-". In brief, you cannot reallly say that science is "within" consciousness nor the other way around, both overly vague statements that rely on not defining science correctly.

@MrJamesdryable

4 жыл бұрын

@@2CSST2 See, I'm of the opinion that matter does not exist. This "physical reality" that we find ourselves in is the "dream" of infinite mind. We will never find the edge of the universe or the smallest particle. They don't exist.

@nickolasgaspar9660

4 жыл бұрын

NO. Science and any method of investigation is withing our Cataleptic Impressions. We use our conscious states to process what our cataleptic impressions are registering.

@nickolasgaspar9660

4 жыл бұрын

@@MrJamesdryable "I'm of the opinion that matter does not exist. " That makes no sense. "Matter" is a label of a specific type of impressions that are registered by our Cataleptic Impressions, thus they exist. Now we can not be sure about its ontology since we can only process what our cataleptic impressions are registering, but independent of its nature, Matter exists since we are aware of it. IN ORDER TO BE AWARE OF ANYTHING>>>>>SOMETHING MUST EXISTS. logic 101. "This "physical reality" that we find ourselves in is the "dream" of infinite mind. " -Your impressions are registering 2 types of experiences A. the physical(Actions/interactions) B. the mental (dreams/thoughts). If you place this "infinite mind" beyond those impressions....sure....and my tuna sandwich has the ontology of a dog like flesh. I mean, cool, nice sharing with us your unfalsifiable theology about an ultimate reality, but there is nothing there to do with your claim. We can just hear about it and nod with compassion for your irrational claims about things that you can not know or prove. The fact is that you will need to use your alarm (physical sound waves) to get up in the morning, avoid the wall and use the door of your bathroom to take a pee. I get the need people have to hold to a story in order to forget that their biology comes with an expiration date...but I find really ridiculous those philosophical views that have zero application or impact in our way of life. All need to avoid speeding cars and walls in their physical experiences and ignore them in their mental ones....So Idealistic principles are not only epistemically useless but practically irrelevant to our lives....well only if we are in need of comforting beliefs...I guess.

Every single time Mr. Dennett says something about consciousness it makes no sense at all to me - my humble opinion

@readynowforever3676

4 жыл бұрын

What arguments about consciousness do you believe are cogent, in your humble opinion ?

@readynowforever3676

4 жыл бұрын

Light Seeker This is Dennett 13:10 are we talking about the same scientist and consciousness theory?

@neuralbrew2976

4 жыл бұрын

If he went to a magic show, when he figures out that the illusions were not real. then would then conclude that the show doesn't exist?

@WyreForestBiker

4 жыл бұрын

@@neuralbrew2976 No he wouldn't .

@danzigvssartre

4 жыл бұрын

I remember reading a joke about a European philosopher who developed a logical proof of his own non-existence. Than I listen to Dennett and realise that he too is basically arguing for his own non-existence. Go figure?

"To be. And know it." This is fundamental. Thanks. Now let us pray 🙏.

My father introduced me to this man's work. I'm so happy to see he is up and walking and doing so well.

Hugs, no masks, flying, what planet is this?

Today, six years on, evidence supporting the idea of consciousness as being fundamental is accumulating. The significant problem still being there's still very little funding directed toward this domain of research.

@TasteMyStinkholeAndLikeIt

4 жыл бұрын

@Hyperion A massive avalanche, but if you want to skip ahead of it all and experience being the infinite awareness of god for yourself, and know it is the truest truth you've ever experienced in your life, find a practitioner of 5-MEO DMT (Bofo Alvarious) and have a session with them. It will permanently change your core and you'll never doubt it again.

@NathanMian

4 жыл бұрын

What evidence?

@TasteMyStinkholeAndLikeIt

4 жыл бұрын

@zempath Everyone who has dabbled in hallucinogenics agrees there is nothing like 5-MEO DMT. But since you are essentially everything, then yes, there is some rationality in your statement.

@nickolasgaspar9660

4 жыл бұрын

To be conscious means to be able to be aware of things that exist. In order to be aware of ANYTHING....SOMETHING MUST EXIST. So Existence is Primary. This is logic 101. I get the need of some people to create a narrative that ignores the expiration date of their biology, thus to ease their existential anxiety, but to make such irrational claims about a brain state is nonsensical. Further more, all idealistic worldviews have being proven to be epistemically useless and practically necessary. We don't have a single framework providing answer, predictions and technical applications based on idealistic principles and all idealists need to respect and distinguish their "physical" impressions from their "mental" impressions, if they want to survive. i.e A speeding car in reality labeled as physical life is a threat for your existence, while an car in your dreams or thoughts demands from you nothing. You can ignore it and keep your existence and well being...in good shape. Its really sad to hear these kind of philosophical views from people who don't even follow them(and they can not follow) in their everyday life.

@nickolasgaspar9660

4 жыл бұрын

@@TasteMyStinkholeAndLikeIt "You are shockingly ignorant about a tremendous number of things. Your outside observer perspective doesn't trump anothers first hand experience,.... " -Again, I don't have any issues with people claiming to have some kind of experience. The problem is with all those conflicting interpretations. People take drugs and see different purple dragons. This resulted in more than 4.000 religions more than hundrend spiritual worldviews ...all in direct conflict with each other. So the issue is not with what stoned people see...but what they think they saw. They can not all be right, but they can easily all be wrong...plus brains without chemicals disrupting and meshing up their receptors provide a far more objective and shared view of reality. You have way to many things to prove here and it beyond your power or methods of investigation.

I would like to suggest that you interview Rupert Spira. He teaches non duality and is one of the most interesting speakers I’ve ever heard. He wrote a book called “the nature of consciousness “.

Keep up the good work!! Love your channel.

Oh no , not Deepak Chopra again ! …

@nickolasgaspar9660

4 жыл бұрын

lol

@lordkresh

2 жыл бұрын

Yeah, he seems like a useless filler. Give me the crackhead on the corner, and let's hear his opinion.

Also, whenever someone says "consciousness is an emergent property", I hear, "Yeah, a wizard did it!"

@darioinfini

4 жыл бұрын

I'm thinking you might not understand what they mean by that. The "wetness" of water "emerges" from the behavior of many molecules of water together. Individual water molecules are not "wet". They're just molecules, but put enough of them together and they start sticking together and to other things creating properties we call "wet" that they did not have individually. This is a generic explanation for what happens at a large scale that can't be predicted from the smaller unit properties alone. Ant colonies, bird flocks, weather patterns, etc and many more things have these "emergent" qualities. So they're saying that neurons by themselves have no consciousness but possibly putting enough of them together and arranging them in a particular way gives rise to "consciousness".

@CaptainFrantic

4 жыл бұрын

@@darioinfini Pretty sure I DO understand. The emergent nature of the "wetness" of water (hint, water isn't wet ... the mind creates wet just like it creates color, sound etc) is clearly understood and can be explained mechanically. This is completely untrue about the statement "consciousness is an emergent property of matter". Unless you can describe to me HOW this emergence occurs then you're saying, "a wizard did it!".

@darioinfini

4 жыл бұрын

@@CaptainFrantic OK cool. Realistically any theory you propose on consciousness seems to be conjecture. Emergence, dualism, panpsychism, all the others Kuhn touches on are all hand waving conjectures.

@CaptainFrantic

4 жыл бұрын

@@darioinfini Yeah it seems that conjecture is all we have at the moment. As long as the conjecture is internally consistent and makes sense then its on the table as the possible explanation. Personally I lean towards panpsychism but it's not an idea that I'm married to. I reject the evolutionary emergence of consciousness on the basis that it basically implies that subjective experience (which is a binary function, on or off) did not exist in one of my ancestors but they had offspring that suddenly did have subjective experience. It occurs to me that this is possible but highly unlikely.

@nickolasgaspar9660

4 жыл бұрын

Maybe because you don't understand the scientific definition of the word emergent or Dynamic emergence mate. Maybe you are not familiar with Complexity and Emergence Science and their epistemic contributions. Maybe its time to watch a lecture or a discussion panel on emergence and why it has nothing to do with magic but with our direct observations in physical systems. kzread.info/dash/bejne/p6eYtpt_pLi5cdY.html&t= enjoy.

Another excellent video in these obscure times.

Oh yeah! This is what I live for. Thank you, Sir!💯

@willnzsurf

4 жыл бұрын

😬

@nickolasgaspar9660

4 жыл бұрын

Instead of this pseudo junk....try some academic material mate

Consciousness enters the octagon. Materialism loses by KO first second into the match.

@nickolasgaspar9660

4 жыл бұрын

You should put science(Methodological Naturalims) in that octagon...idealistic bs don't even show up on the same day of the match...

"EXCELLENT"...... as always , beautiful presentation , best distinguished participants / speakers , best contents of the arguments , best location with scenic/ landscape.....in this video post , there are clear cut distinctive approaches by distinguished guests as given below ; Category 1; Hard problem of consciousness yet not solved & are in search of present time GALLELIO to solve it as supported /wished by distinguished Physicalist renowned scientists Dr. John Serale , Dr Susan Blackmore , Daniel Dennett , Rebecca Newberger Goldstein Category 2 ; Dualism is the candidate , put forward by none other than strong , fearless & bold distinguished physicalist scienctist Dr. David Chalmers ( propoganist / founder /who coined the hard problem of consciousness ) who dischanted with physicalism scince last more than 20 yrs. , decided to tilt towards non physicalism. Category 3 ; PURE CONSCIOUSNESS is the only ultimate TRUTH as claimed & beautifully explained by Dr. Deepak Chopra and this concept is supported by distinguished Noble laurates Dr.Irvin Shriondiger (consiousness is singular),Dr. Max Plank (fundamental),Dr Neil Bohrs, Dr Hisenberg, Dr. Brian Jopsons and several other distinguished Noble laurates / renowned scientists..... This/present time GALELIO (Noble Prize winner) could be from nonphysicalist likes of Dr. Deepak Chopra , Dr.Robert L.Khun (after satisfied with pure consciousness/ awaireness concept) the , Dr. David Chalmers and or any other nonphysicalist etc. ( Dr. Deepak Chopra like GALLELIO criticized bitterly by skeptics because of their ignorance/inability to understand TRUTH). Category 4 ; Neither Physicalist nor nonphyscalist approach , by distinguished medical doctor anaesthetist Dr.Stuart Hamerhoff who almost every day interacts with neuron microtubules in operation theater(he is founding member of the I fxq forum on consciousness scince last 20 yrs.) & also worked on consciousness with distinguished several award winning senior scienctist Sir Dr.Roger Penrose and even then also Dr. Stuart Hamerhoff could not support physicalists all out (though it seems he is more in favour of pure consciousness). From above , it's very clear that nearest candidate is pure consciousness / awareness...... Definitely Dr. Robert L Kuhn can't reject pure consciousness / pure awareness concept only because it's not repeatable though the fact is that it is repeatable and several physicalist who attempted through Vedic scriptures and meditation ( being subjective ) became staunch supporters like David Lynch and John Hagline and several other physicalists Scienctists(there are millions including 5 million followers(mostly from west) of Maharishi Mahesh Yogi and several universities are running teaching Transedental meditation ( students have to pay fees) and several others......"no body is asking to prove it" and that is how Dr. Deepak Chopra spoke in defense in last video on consciousness to the question by Robert L Kuhn that pure consciousness is not repeatable , in episode no 1513.......pure consciousness concept is followed with full faith by 1.80 to 2.00 billion people in all over the world.... hope Dr. Robert L Kuhn will try practical part i. e. Meditation part as theoretically he knows the Vedic knowledge after interacting likes Dr. Deepak Chopra & various SAGES/ SAINTS etc. or alternatively he entrusts some trustworthy scienctist to go through all the requirements as per Vedic scriptures and let that that scienctist give his opinion & that should be binding to everyone. While watching these CTT series of videos on consciousness , and watching Robert L Kuhn roaming pensively & brooding over subject of consciousness , sometimes in thick jungles full of lagoons ,1000 yrs.old banian trees with roots hangings & other times amidst snow clad hills ,near the beautiful river banks , deserts with thorny trees and sometimes near the beautiful seaside beaches , I am reminded of 8th century Indian saint ADI SHANKARACHARYA who in search of truth also travelled beaches of South lndia to the dence forests & caves on Himalayan snow clad hills at hight of 13000 feet in North India ( Indian prime minister MODIJI perform meditation there once every year, & because of heavy snow caves/ temple only accessible for 3 months a year.)and also deserts of central / west India.... hope Dr. Robert L Kuhn will be victorious in his quest for TRUTH in the same way as ADI SHANKARACHARYA was successful in his mission about 1200 yrs. ago.... Logically, time is essence , it should be done in our present day remaining / balance life span .... Adi Shankaracharya full filled his mission before his death at the age of 32 yrs ( India had average age 37 yrs , 70 yrs ago in year 1947). ..... thanks 🙏.

@kewalsharma4065

4 жыл бұрын

Too good and very very detailed analysis on the subject. You are chuppa Rustam. Really enjoyed to read your comments...

Consciousness is the icing on the cake of Being.

Great episode!

If Consciousness is an Illusion, who is Illuded ? It is tautological since Illusion is an atribute of Consciousness, matter can not be illuded.

@patmoran5339

4 жыл бұрын

I think it is appropriate to accept that consciousness applies to entities that can create explanatory knowledge, namely: people. In fact, I think many scientists fail to recognize emergent entities and processes like life, mind, and thought. Some entities organize to a higher level of emergence.

@nickolasgaspar9660

4 жыл бұрын

those comments address the why ,nonsensical question of consciousness (why it feels the way it does). It has nothing to do with science, which addresses how conscious states emerge in our brains.

@nickolasgaspar9660

4 жыл бұрын

@@patmoran5339 consciousness is nothing more than the label we use to describe our ability to focus our attention to environmental and organic stimuli. I don't know what do you mean by the word "entities" but life and mind properties are the result of biological processes. We have been there...making up entities and substances and it was a huge failure (miasma, panacea, phlogiston, orgone energy etc). We understand that advanced emergent properties rise from complex physical structures. The more complex a structure is the more complex the emergent property and phenomenon will be. This is what Complexity and Emergent Science studies.

@patmoran5339

4 жыл бұрын

@@nickolasgaspar9660 I looked over the comments and I did not find any reference to "why" or "feelings." Also, when I saw the section with Dennett, I came to the conclusion that he is more like a behaviorist so yes that interpretation is definitely not science. Behaviorists "study" what goes in and what goes out. I remember when B. F. Skinner, when he heard about the Turing Principle stated something to the effect that the question is not whether machines can think it is rather whether men think. I doubt that Dennett believes there is a human mind.

@patmoran5339

4 жыл бұрын

@@nickolasgaspar9660 Thank you for your criticism. Would you prefer organisms or phenomenon over entities? Also, if the idea is reductive, then those biological processes are physical processes. Thought is an emergent phenomenon. In the most important sense a human being is a mind.

Dan Dennett - "Consciousness is an illusion ... and yet you have free will." *face-palm*

@WyreForestBiker

4 жыл бұрын

Free will is the illusion … Dohhh .

@danzigvssartre

4 жыл бұрын

@Quantum Decoherence Why?

@CaptainFrantic

4 жыл бұрын

@@donthesitatebegin9283 My post was purely to indicate the lack of joined up writing in Dennet's philosophies. He claims we have free will and yet denies the existence of the very thing that he believes makes free will choices. He doesn't even talk sense within his own paradyme. Personally I believe that free will AND the concept of the self to be illusionary, in the sense that I believe that consciousness has no agency and only observes what the meat machine is doing and then convinces itself that it does have agency.

@CaptainFrantic

4 жыл бұрын

@@donthesitatebegin9283 I literally despise Dennett for the way he consistently muddies the water of any subject he turns his mind to. I think he will go down in history as the philosopher who at least provided theories that can be instantly dismissed and removed from the table.

@nickolasgaspar9660

4 жыл бұрын

@Quantum Decoherence well there is will.....I don't know how people can prove that it is free (from our biological needs or environmental influences etc). Good luck to everyone who insists in using the qualifier "free". Well I just rejected the calling of a chocolate cake. Did I made a free choice? My reasoning was either my waist line (sexually motivated argument) or my health (biological drive to staying healthy and survive). So.....Free will is an observer relative term and an arbitrary point of view.

Awesome channel.

This was a good episode

This guy does a lot of religious videos where he throws softball questions at religious people - never asks them any hard questions. Like why does God condemn billions of people to Hell over their beliefs? Is that not what ISIS, Hitler did? Why is God acting like a tin-pot Dictator, rewarding the loyal and abusing the rest? What is there to DO in Heaven? Is Heaven one Giant Retirement Home? Billions of old people floating about staring at each other? Billions of people spending a useless existence in self-gratification Is this God's Grand Plan? How does that make any sense? Not once does he ask such questions

@ramaraksha01

4 жыл бұрын

@Hyperion These are the top religions - in the 21st century! That is mind boggling The dominant view of God in the 21st century is that God is like a Dictator like Putin, Kim Jong Un - rewarding his loyal groveling followers who blindly obey and punishing the rest. Morals, ethics, values don't matter Pedophiles, mass murderers get Heaven - the Gandhijis and Buddhas get hell Religion is the best at turning good people into scum buckets

@lifeisshortpeace7783

3 жыл бұрын

Agree with your questions, for me I m for a non- personal god or a better anology like universal laws like karma which will operate irregardless whether you believe or not.

@ramaraksha01

3 жыл бұрын

@@lifeisshortpeace7783 The word Karma is a Sanskrit word - it means - Action or Work or Works(Karmas) - nothing more. It is not an unseen hand reaching out and dishing out rewards or punishments. Basically your work will decide your fate - so if a kid does not study he will fail the test and vice versa If it is snowing and the roads are slick & if you insist on speeding, then if you get into an accident, it is your own fault - that is Karma Simple ideas

@lifeisshortpeace7783

3 жыл бұрын

@@ramaraksha01 that I agree but there are karma which doesn't bear fruit or the effects not seen in this lifetime. Ever wonder why we are born with different dispositions and fate?ulgy,pretty,rich poor? Even the Siamese twins have different dispositions.

@ramaraksha01

3 жыл бұрын

@@lifeisshortpeace7783 No, that's not the right view of Karma What you are talking about is punishment - vengeance - that has nothing to do with Justice Being ugly or rich or poor is not because you did bad or good things in the past life - that then becomes a vindictive God doling out punishment God is not a Master doling out punishment God is your parent - no Parent would punish his Children like that A Parent Teaches, so does a Teacher Please don't reduce God Rama down to a Christian/Islamic God level - the latter are masters - doling out rewards and punishments to their slaves

consciousness is where classical physics and quantum physics unify. life will always be a miracle in itself.

Consciousness is a process of the mind that are very concretely accurately and approximately directly segregated conclusion and decision what is the correct will happened in a split seconds of time. Quantum is closer to brain velocity in a real time process of the brain where you can make it than the normal computer. Why we say and appreciate the people who have experienced conscious way of living its because we can directly see the good results in his way the way they move talk and live on the normal life.

Inner awareness i the ability to know oneself. It feels like something because it is life and life is real. Consciousness is the ability to know there is only one life and we and this universe are proof of that life. We must understand that we are all one,

Could there be consciousness at more than one level, manifesting in different ways? A fundamental consciousness for the universe, and personal consciousness for human beings, and maybe a consciousness for physical nature?

How would one explain the feeling and atmosphere of the people at the conference?

One of the things that makes it hard to study is that there's a bit of an ethical boundary to it. If you built a machine capable of consciousness and were able to conjure it on command, it would be an act of terror to create and uncreate it at will, to experiment on a terrified consciousness. We are far from being anywhere close to such a thing, but at some point far in the future we may touch that edge. And then what? Will we cross that boundary to create a consciousness? And then shut it off and bring it back again? If ever we were that far in understanding, I'd like to think we'd have the ethical bounds to not cross that line.

@neilcreamer8207

4 жыл бұрын

I think that's only a moral quandary for people who believe that consciousness emerges from matter.

@darioinfini

4 жыл бұрын

@@neilcreamer8207 Umm... I'm not sure about that. Speaking broadly in a couple of categories - I'd think the dualist/theists wouldn't bother to create such a machine or conduct such experiments in the first place since they wouldn't expect success to begin with. Panpsychists might deign to construct a "receiver" of sorts but I think the ethical dilemma for them stands. If they succeed, a consciousness will be conjured and terrorized as they experiment on it.

@adamkallin5160

4 жыл бұрын

It's impossible to prove one way or the other. Our computers today could be conscious for all we know.

@nickolasgaspar9660

4 жыл бұрын

@@adamkallin5160 No they couldn't. Be we conscious means to adjust your behavior, thoughts acts and emotions by being aware of your environment and self. Computers don't have such modules capable to reason emotions in to feeling, feelings in to syllogisms. We know that humans and many animals are conscious not just from their behavior, or their brain patterns. We know it because they share the same "hardware" with us and the emergent properties (mind properties) help them to be aware of things in their environment that can promote their survival and well being and they can also be aware of their organic stimuli (homeostasis, pain, etc). We can actually see how being aware help us interact and survive in our environment according to our needs.

Could consciousness include the effect of time in the mind and brain? Physical information in brain processed by mind through quantum or other, with the mind effected by time through consciousness?

Could subjective consciousness be about awareness of the future, what might happen or develop?

The term "consciousness" is indicative to the enhancement of the instinctive cerebral conscious, by means of awareness (the immaterial mind.)

I share this burning uncertainty, but maybe the only way to know is actually in stopping to think about it, packing the ‘rucksack’ and go on an inner ‘first person research journey’ - with all the risk that this might lead through dangerous and illusionary landscapes. Maybe we need some ‘faith’ for this, a faith that is the opposite of ‘believe’, a faith that this is the only quest that is worth a full-hearted engagement, even if it may fail to deliver the desired clarity at the end. This I say and keep on postponing my journey day after day ...

Might consciousness be when subjective awareness of the future combines in the present with physical matter from the past?

"Everything is everything".

@danzigvssartre

4 жыл бұрын

Everything is nothing.

@nickolasgaspar9660

4 жыл бұрын

Your comment can not get more vague and useless...

@patmoran5339

4 жыл бұрын

@@nickolasgaspar9660 Didn't you just make the comment a little while ago that just about everything in biology is an emergent---bet you thought I was gonna say entity. So everything in biology is an emergent something.

@nickolasgaspar9660

4 жыл бұрын

@@patmoran5339 biology is not everything in this cosmos mate. Again an argument from ambiguity fallacy. Are you here to earn impressions or to learn something??? "So everything in biology is an emergent something." There are fundamental "things" of matter (if you prefer the word thing) and there are "things" that emerge from them. Atoms, molecules, chemicals, biology, classical world, cosmological scales are all emergent structures products of physical processes. If this simple description is difficult for you to picture and understand then you should change the topic you are interested in.

@nickolasgaspar9660

4 жыл бұрын

@@patmoran5339 btw in order to be precise you should say "biology is biology" that would be the correct meaningless tautology....similar to the "Everything is everything" of our friend here.

Without consciousness the universe would have been a play in an empty theater without audience. A mirror is really needed to define existence.

@nickolasgaspar9660

4 жыл бұрын

No that is an irrational statement. The universe existed well before any conscious observers evolved. To be conscious means to be aware of your and your environment and anything that exists. So in order to be aware of anything...something must exist by default. By using forensic reasoning we find out that existence is non contingent to human brain states.

@thoel1

4 жыл бұрын

@@nickolasgaspar9660 We are talking about consciousness my friend, not about US! In its most abstracted form it should be detached from carrier beings and seen as a whole field (as a sea sometimes I prefer to say where we are temporary drops popping out from it). Outside time / outside cause & effect linearities. (I'm not referring to god - I'm an atheist, but do believe on the strength of spirituality) ;)

@nickolasgaspar9660

4 жыл бұрын

@@thoel1 "We are talking about consciousness my friend, not about US!" -Well I was evaluating your irrational claims in relation with to the conscious states of human brains. I don't know what this "US" is exaclty. -" In its most abstracted form it should be detached from carrier beings and seen as a whole field " -You are poisoning the well (logical fallacy) by demanding from others to accept the claim you are trying to prove!!!!! You need to prove that conscious states are non contingent to biological organisms and a "whole filed" (whatever that means) and then use it in your arguments. Secondly, when you want to explain or understand something...you will need to avoid " most abstracted form" of concepts. Consciousness is a very specific phenomenon and easily defined....we don't need to make it complicated and fuzzy. That is not how we explain and understand things in science mate! "(as a sea sometimes I prefer to say where we are temporary drops popping out from it). " -Consciousness is a brain state that allow us to direct our attention to environmental and organic stimuli. It has nothing to do with a physical body of a sea or afield or whatever woo word you can come up with. Conscious states are objectively studied and we even have the technology to decode complex conscious thoughts by just reading MRI brain scans! www.cmu.edu/dietrich/news/news-stories/2017/june/brain-decoding-complex-thoughts.html "Outside time / outside cause & effect linearities. (I'm not referring to god - I'm an atheist, but do believe on the strength of spirituality) ;)" -You need to define and explain what "outside time, outside cause and effect and spirituality means....for your sentence to make any sense.

@thoel1

4 жыл бұрын

@@nickolasgaspar9660 Thanks for your attention. Fully respecting the scientific approach, it is always targeted in objectiveness, therefore strictly following logic numerical conceptions on a spacetime coordinate system, thats why I mentioned 'causality' and 'linearity'. I can't prove in this way what I'm suspecting, but believe me, I'm not trying to comfortably escape the necessity of scientific knowledge I'm ignorant of. Trying to empirically study, I'm feeling that the presence of the observer in QM, is forcing physicists to use vector spaces instead of numbers, derive the particles and forces as emerging from respective quantum fields, complex numbers to define the wave function collapse / all these actions invoke higher dimensionality on the coordinate systems. In this way my poor intuition drives me to suspect that there must be something like a separate common field of consciousness. Sorry for my technical ignorance, but even Einstein once said that intuition and inspiration should sometimes lead the way. PS: I never pretended I know something you don't... Now if you are a materialist, and fully satisfied by the Neuroscience explanations, then why you watched this video ;)

@nickolasgaspar9660

4 жыл бұрын

@@thoel1 "Fully respecting the scientific approach, it is always targeted in objectiveness, therefore strictly following logic numerical conceptions on a spacetime coordinate system, thats why I mentioned 'causality' and 'linearity'. " -The scientific approach is based on numerous methodologies. Objectiveness is just a principle in our standards of method evaluation. Its not an arbitrary choice of Science but its a pragmatic necessity defined by our empirical nature. We know that subjective standards result to many conflicting claims about reality (watch all 4.300 different religions with their own cosmological stories). Objectivity is needed for us to determine which claims are based on actual evidence and facts and which are just product of people's imagination, biased interpretations and comforting beliefs! The best mathematical prediction is nothing without empirical evaluation. Look at Higgs mathematics on his bozon. We didn't awarded him the Nobel Prize the same day he put down those equations. Only after 60years and the empirical verification of the bozon by Cern we finally accept his mathematical hypothesis. Science standards are really high.... "Trying to empirically study, I'm feeling that the presence of the observer in QM, is forcing physicists to use vector spaces instead of numbers, derive the particles and forces as emerging from respective quantum fields, complex numbers to define the wave function collapse / all these actions invoke higher dimensionality on the coordinate systems." -No quantum Mechanics are nothing more than mathematical formulations giving us the ability to produce accurate predictions of "particle behavior" up to a 14th decimal place. Our theories on the field are a different story though. We are not sure about the role of the phenomenon of Observation Objectivity Collapse since in order to measure any fundamental particles, we need to crash bozons and fermions and detect the aftermath of the collision. That hardly qualifies as an innocent "observation". So we know that our methods are intrusive and we know that the results we are receiving appear to be counter intuitive under specific schools of interpretations (i.e. Copenhagen interpretation) . Under other more naturalistic ones (Many worlds or pilot wave theory) we don't have to accept counter intuitive explanations. The only sure thing is that QM is not a tool suitable to describe any biological phenomenon. Sure we might find quantum mechanisms playing a part in the phenomenon (like in photosynthesis) but conscious states can only be realized by the synergistic role of complex molecular structures fueled by metabolic molecules (energy). The only connection I see between QM and conscious states is the argument from mystery. (consciousness appears mysterious to me, Quantum interpretations assume mysterious things...thus they must be connected). " In this way my poor intuition drives me to suspect that there must be something like a separate common field of consciousness." -Conscious states are an emergent phenomenon product of a collective function and connection of different brain modules (areas). Its like any other phenomenon out there. i.e. Combustion doesn't need to be a magical, undetectable field or substance like we used to believe (phlogiston). Its a chemical reaction....a physical process. So the same is true for all mind properties. ITs a chemical, biological and physical process enabled by a complex network within an advance physical structure. We can observe all those qualities in our systematic studies of the phenomenon and we have established a necessary and sufficient role for the brain. " Sorry for my technical ignorance, but even Einstein once said that intuition and inspiration should sometimes lead the way." - Psychologist Daniel Kahneman in his monumental work on intuition that earned him a Nobel Prize in ECONOMICS (of all disciplines!) proved the unreliable epistemic nature of intuition even by "experts". Einstein talked about imagination and inspirations based on educated guesses...not intuition. At least this is what we see by looking how Einstein came up with his ideas. www.amazon.com/Thinking-Fast-Slow-Daniel-Kahneman/dp/0374533555 "Now if you are a materialist, and fully satisfied by the Neuroscience explanations, then why you watched this video ;)" -I am not a materialist. Materialism makes some really indefensible claims about the ontology of reality that I am not sure that anyone can really verify them. I am a Methodological Naturalist,meaning that my philosophy is linked to Science's auxiliary principles. This means that our empirical nature and our methodologies have limitations. We can only construct causal descriptions within those limitations. Any attempt to go beyond is irrational since we don't have a way to investigate its truth value. So we know we don't currently have a way to verify supernatural causation or the existence of the supernatural dimension thus we don't use the supernatural in our scientific descriptions. I watch this type of videos and participate in these conversations because here is were the distortion of science happens and here is were pseudo philosophers and scientists try to sneak their worldviews in our scientific epistemology. Demarcation is an on going struggle and we should always be on guard and protect the standards of evidence and logic used by science.

Does subjective conscious awareness have some kind of physical substance, different than matter? Can subjective awareness / consciousness be instantiated in something like quantum field probabilities?

In the brain, how does physical matter mix with subjective awareness? What happens when oxygen, from blood pumped into the brain, interacts with neurons of the brain?

Could the physical, material brain have developed out of consciousness? How would one go about investigating such a possibility? Perhaps consciousness developed increasingly effective brains to better understand and act in the universe.

Hard case of free will in the measurement of conscious quantum field probabilities?

Neuroscience describes what consciousness focuses on, something else needed for how subject feels about what is focused on?

Maybe the physical information of brain is the focus of consciousness; the subject feeling or inner awareness is mind or subconscious?

Does human subjective awareness of choice demonstrate conscious existence?

Mr Dennett, physics demonstrates that without consciousness (an observer) there’s no universe. It is the be-all, end-all.

@ramaraksha01

4 жыл бұрын

duh, if you are dead ie end of consciousness, you wouldn't know that there is a universe

@nickolasgaspar9660

4 жыл бұрын

No. There isn't a single theory in physics that makes that statement Bill. We can not verify that wild speculation. That is a new age idea based on a distorted version of the Copenhagen interpretation. Even if it was not based on a distorted version, this is ONLY an interpretations, not a Theory. So we are far for demonstrating anything similar to what you claim. Logic dictates that, in order to be aware of anything..>SOMETHING must first exist! (logic 101).

Maybe the passion is the subjective consciousness? The people are more the evidence or exhibit of the subjective consciousness than the scientific theories or the spiritual approaches?

Rupert Spira.😊

@nickolasgaspar9660

4 жыл бұрын

magical thinkers' sausage fest.....

Need to include Rupert Sheldrake.

@WyreForestBiker

4 жыл бұрын

!! Wasn't Chopra enough ! ….. you'll want David Icke next .

@nickolasgaspar9660

4 жыл бұрын

@AAH Replies Magical thinkers don't care about nationality....Comforting ideas are welcomed irrelevant of the country the high priest of woo is from.

We are created in the imagination of a greater consciousness. We have arrived from and must return to that reality. Everything else is imagery. The point at which imagery translates into what we believe to be physical reality is at the epicenter of scientific research.

@ramaraksha01

4 жыл бұрын

Running away from real life won't work - you can't live in a fantasy THIS IS IT! This is ALL there is - there are no other worlds, certainly no worlds where the living is easy

@nickolasgaspar9660

4 жыл бұрын

"We are created in the imagination of a greater consciousness." -That is an irrational claim if you don't back it up with sufficient and objective evidence. "We have arrived from and must return to that reality." -You see meaning,intention and purpose in nature...that is also an irrational behavior. Care to demonstrate that claim too? -" The point at which imagery translates into what we believe to be physical reality is at the epicenter of scientific research." -You have to obey that physical reality (avoid walls and speeding cars) if you wan't to conserve your existence and well being. So pls don't promote philosophical ideologies that no one can live according to their declarations!

@ramaraksha01

4 жыл бұрын

@@nickolasgaspar9660 And this"greater consciousness", according to religion, all He wants us to do is make sure we join the right religion and then he is happy to nursemaid billions - let them live in comfort on his dime - for all eternity Can't believe that I am in the 21st century and these are top religions ""We have arrived from and must return to that reality." - and oh what a wonderful "reality" that would be? Nice easy life, nothing to do, just enjoy the easy good life of a benevolent Sugar Daddy Today many people live in online fantasy worlds - the real world is difficult for them - in the real world no one cares who they are, no one gives them importance - but in the fantasy world they can be kings & queens, great Warriors Heaven or this "return to reality" are such fantasy worlds The weak, the coward are drawn to such worlds

@nickolasgaspar9660

4 жыл бұрын

@@ramaraksha01 yes I have heard those wild religious claims....the question is why...why should anyone accept unverified claims without the support of objective and sufficient evidence. That is an irrational behaviour

@ramaraksha01

4 жыл бұрын

@@nickolasgaspar9660 Without evidence these are but ideas Heaven is the idea that you can go back to Childhood - Nostalgia for the good old days - go back to being a Child, a time when life was good - carefree days spent in play, few worries, protected, sheltered and live in a bubble Reincarnation is the idea that THIS IS ALL THERE IS - there are no other worlds - THIS IS IT! Basically the opposite of Heaven - asking us to be Adults, stop thinking we can run away and hide from life. Face it & move forward Heaven is for the coward, the child, the weak Reincarnation is for the Warrior, the adult, the Strong Almost all religions of the world promote running away and hiding in some magic land where the living is easy Hinduism alone asks us to move towards pain & suffering, not away from it I think the Buddha finally realized what Hindus were trying to teach him in his early years and came up with the concept of Bodhisattva

"Then how can you explain the fact that we agree about these chairs?" Because we're the same consciousness.

Could blood circulation to brain contribute to conscious awareness? Maybe blood circulation creates rhythms or waves of feeling?

Although the the difference between ‘information’s’ correct ontological identity & mere ‘digits’ is absolutely vital, ‘information’ is not widely ontologically different from the ‘bits’, ‘bytes’ & ‘digits’ we currently, albeit mistakenly, consider ‘information’ to be, but it is just as easy to trace the passage of any units of real information through the operations of any real-information-using machine or device as it is to trace the passage of digitised pulses through any of our now many & various digit-using (counting) machines. Thinking machines are very, very different from mere counting machines. The definition of ‘thinking’ turns out to be “using information to guide & direct action, such action as is executed by the thinking/acting agent in regard to whatever object/s &/or event/s gave rise to the information being so used in the first instance”. ‘Counting machines’ such as are our modern computers, only count, they do not ‘think’. Let alone intelligently. We ourselves continually take in truly astronomical kinds & amounts of (real, bona fide) information (not just digits) from our surrounds all in order to utilise this mother lode by way of enabling us to act appropriately to whatever things & events in our surrounds gave rise thereto. In other words we think our way through our world. We have a real live, flesh & blood THINKING machine up inside our craniums; a machine that uses information gathered from our surrounds to guide those of our actions we subsequently execute there toward. We ALSO COUNT many of the objects & events in our world. By using ‘bits’, ‘bytes’ & ‘digits’ galore it is ALSO eminently possible to construct excellent COUNTING machines & devices - that is to say, make electronically automated abacuses. ALL of our now many & various digit-using machines & devices are in essence mere counting/calculating machines & as such cannot & do not ‘think’. In some high contrast, any machine, entity, agent or device that uses (real) information to guide & direct any of its actions it executes towards whatever objects or events gave rise to the information being so used, is thinking. But true, bona fide ‘thinking machines’ cannot be constructed to operate solely on ‘digits’. They must be fed real information concerning objects & events in their purview. Computers cannot & do not ‘think’ but because they ACT on the information being fed into them ROBOTS CAN & DO THINK. !! Most of our current confusion regarding ‘thought’, ‘mind’, ‘intelligence’ and ‘consciousness’ comes from not recognising ‘information’s’ correct ontological identity, but the undeniable fact that we humans also have BOTH a darn good, bio-electronically automated ‘abacus’ (counting device) up inside our heads AS WELL AS, & running in parallel thereto, the very best, properly-information-using THINKING MACHINE known to science up there TOO, must account in no small part for much of our confusion also. Mathematical savants have especially adept bio-electronically automated abacuses in their heads, apparently alongside, er, somewhat substandard real thinking machines. With apologies. Time to get deconfused... I’m in the process of writing a monograph on ‘information’ itself, along with all of these other, greatly sought after, information-related phenomena too. There is absolutely no difficulty in establishing a full & accurate science of consciousness once ‘information’s’ true identity is recognised. (IT’S NOT DIGITS!)

I liked the face morphing FX

Sir Robert, thanks for filling gaps in my head. (Im not sure what the head really looks like). Teaching of Theravadha buddhism explain how mind interact with matters to form all kinds of creatures ( Humans, Large and tiny Animals, Gods, Demons ) and how the conscious evolve, in the lesson named "Patichcha Samuppada Vibhanga Sutta", it's in Pali, a copy of the collection of sutta, including the referred one, can be found in somewhere in UK (Oxford University or Museum). The Sinhala translation available online. By reading the book we don't see much. Of course by touching we could learn lots about Dhamma. Buddhism is beyond believes, beyond acceptance, beyond rejections. Vidarshana meditation develop consciousness to observe the illusion . Buddhism discipline opens the door to "Pangnya", pure intelligence (that's refering to the God Shiva in the Hinduism discipline ).

❤️♥️♥️❤️

The brain is like a radio. It allows us ( consciousness) to interact with the physical world through our meat machines. Plain and simple. Consciousness goes on eternal.

9:35 any sentence that contrasts one view with Deepak Chopra’s view should end with, “and obviously Chopra is wrong.”

@nickolasgaspar9660

4 жыл бұрын

@Ruby Badilla No its an accurate description of an observable and testable fact.

@nickolasgaspar9660

4 жыл бұрын

@Ruby Badilla "any sentence that contrasts one view with Deepak Chopra’s view should end with, “and obviously Chopra is wrong.”" -Nope.....its a description...an accurate one. Are you a Deepak fan? Seriously I didn't know that humans could be that ignorant lol!

@nickolasgaspar9660

4 жыл бұрын

@Ruby Badilla Yes I agree...you are a badilla and a half...lol

Until the evidence from NDE's and OOB's is integrated into consideration these studies will forever founder!

Conciousnes is life its self.

Blackmore: "...idealism cannot explain chairrs and stuff...." Read Kastrup, please, for a parsimonious and plausible view on idealism without any gaps.

The All.

The problem is that most of these conference participants are also trying to sell books on the subject.

No Bernardo Kastrup? You are missing out!

@nickolasgaspar9660

4 жыл бұрын

I agree...after so many crackpots....the high priest of woo is a noticeable miss...

David Chalmers refers to the "neural correlates" of inner experience, but aren't they the causes of that experience?

Great stuff but eight advertisements?!

I like the fifth option: we will never know what consciousness is.

@garychartrand7378

22 күн бұрын

Some would say that it is the mind of God, but that still renders your comment valid.

I have seen and heard around 100 of your clips . Yes you are a true seeker . You have been frustrated with all the answers about conciuosness. I am not . I follow the vaishnav tradition of the Vedic wisdom . I strongly recommend you these teachings . You will I hope and think get a clear understanding of conciousness

If philosofers and scientits meet together in a subject, then we are not close to truth but so far yet.

@TasteMyStinkholeAndLikeIt

4 жыл бұрын

Scien-tits 🤔😂

@nickolasgaspar9660

4 жыл бұрын

Philosophy outside of any scientific discipline is almost always doomed to fail. We have great exceptions but never on phenomena that require rigorous systematic investigations and observations.

@nickolasgaspar9660

4 жыл бұрын

@@TasteMyStinkholeAndLikeIt its funny that you use a technical application(device and an internet connection) provided by scientists and science's frameworks to post your ignorant claims about a physical phenomenon. Heavy cherry picking is all you got. You accept everything that makes your life easier and reject the science that conflicts with your death denying ideology.

@TasteMyStinkholeAndLikeIt

4 жыл бұрын

@@nickolasgaspar9660 It's funny that you, a little boy, failed to recognize how the OP spelled 'Scientists' -->"You accept everything that makes your life easier" Wrong dypshyt, I accept what has mountains of evidence after decades of reading every bit of material I could find on consciouness. Until about 2 years ago, I was the same ignorant arrogant fool you have been all your life, and I made the exact same arguments you are making. They are posted all over KZread. Go ride your bicycle little boy

@nickolasgaspar9660

4 жыл бұрын

@@TasteMyStinkholeAndLikeIt "It's funny that you, a little boy, failed to recognize how the OP spelled 'Scientist" -I am not a kid....kids find grammar and spelling errors funny....grow up. "Wrong dypshyt," -you understand that your opinions carry no weight ...right? "I accept what has mountains of evidence after decades of reading every bit of material I could find on consciouness." -accept anything academic...lol -" Until about 2 years ago, I was the same ignorant arrogant fool you have been all your life, and I made the exact same arguments you are making." -and now by listening all those high priests of woo...you think that you are not the same ignorant arrogant fool ....lol -"They are posted all over KZread." -oh...lol I c.....you tube is how you got your education....lol that explains a lot !!!! hahaha "Go ride your bicycle little boy" -I will, after all , I get out from my home........lol

Robert Lawrence Kuhn, we thank you another truly excellent video and now ... here is the truth. If we assume that the Discrete Set {0,1} and the Continuous Open Interval (0,1) are Equivalent (by axiom), then we can immediately deduce that "A hard deterministic universe and a hard probabilistic universe are therefore Equivalent. And it is profoundly ambiguous whether the universe is one, or the other. Hence, a duality, and it is fundamentally BOTH simultaneously". Ok once you understand that, then it is a very small step to understand that if that axiom is physically valid in nature, then we can ask whether probabilistic potentials are tangibly existent artifacts of physical nature, or not. The answer is that they must be, and also cannot be. That these two paradigms are simultaneously valid, due to Equivalence and profound ambiguity. You may validly assume that probabilistic potentials do not exist, and you'd be correct. But you would also be correct to say that under a different set of assumptions then yes they are indeed tangible. We may regard the mind as being a hard deterministic contraption which lives in a hard deterministic universe. Under that assumption we are genuine automatons and therefore the mind is just a bunch of neurosynaptic fireworks ... the mind is an illusion. And there is no free will in a hard deterministic universe. On the otheer hand, we may (validly) regard the universe as being genuinely probabilistic. In this case, probabilistic potentials are genuinely tangibly real things, and clearly the mind can be thought of as a kind of computational machine which has these potentials incorporated into the machinery. Our mind is a genuine thing, comprised of vast collections of potentials which are all interacting with their own dynamics and they are tangibly real. Free will is genuinely, tangibly real. BOTH of these paradigms are simultaneously valid, both are simultaneously correct, due to profound ambiguity which is the result of a much more fundamental Equivalence (our Axiom). And if you understand this, then you will have ARRIVED at Truth (which itself also has dualistic topology btw). Thank you, and good luck.

@nickolasgaspar9660

4 жыл бұрын

@@hyperduality2838 "Teleological physics is dual to non teleological physics." -That is pseudo science. Teleology is not a scientific principle. -"All observers track targets and goals, intentionality." -unfounded generalization. any evidence? Those duality "woo" doesn't challenge our scientific frameworks about the brain and its role in the production of our mind properties.

@HeliumXenonKrypton

4 жыл бұрын

@@hyperduality2838 I have absolutely no idea what any of that means, but it sounds like you put some effort into it so I'll give it a like based on that :D

@nickolasgaspar9660

4 жыл бұрын

@@hyperduality2838 "you are therefore using teleology by default and therefore contradicting yourself." -lol you just wrote;"Teleological physics is dual to non teleological physics." - I don't have to do anything to prove you wrong.....just to quote your unscientific claims! Scientific principles replaced ALL our teleological assumptions (intention, agency and purpose ) in our philosophical frameworks. Some of you never got the memo...lol "Science has the purpose (telos) to explain everything rationally, which is a goal, teleology!" Science isJUST a method we use to provide objective and descriptive frameworks of reality...nothing more. HUMANS ARE the intelligent agents who define goals purposes and meanings. Focus mate!!!! Don't project human qualities on epistemic methodologies...lol "The purpose of science is to optimize predictions, expectations through empirical measurement using the inductive method -- science is fundamentally teleological in nature it has a final goal!" -lol You need to take a course on philosophy of science mate...you are way out of your league. You are putting up strawmen to make your magical ideas sound more "reasonable". We are using science to produce meaningful predictions, accurate predictions and technical applications. All those products of science are guided by the facts...not our goals. THis is why science is so epistemically successful mate......again take those courses.

@nickolasgaspar9660

4 жыл бұрын

@@HeliumXenonKrypton lol your standards of evaluation are really low mate !

@HeliumXenonKrypton

4 жыл бұрын

@@nickolasgaspar9660 I really do love criticism, when it actually says something. Please try again, thanks :D

Quantum field probabilities as fundamental pan-psychist consciousness?

Maybe an established language of the experience, and an established language of being the subject of experience will be closer to truth. There's no getting away from the fact that there is a subject to the experience of consciousness. Call it an identity, a self, an entity, a soul, or a useful fiction. It's more real than a fiction. Maybe instead of stripping down all the words we use to live and describe human experience, we could add more definition to the experience. The idea of a heart; the seat of emotions, desires, cares, loves, hates, objectivity, and ambivalence. The idea of mind as pure thought intentional, or naturally occurring. The fact that will exists as my intentions govern my actions. It's very hard to escape the idea that not only is there an experience, but there is also a subject to the experience. If people think the experience is all there is to explain that misses half the boat.

some of the mushrooming is in the mushrooms

Based on the Jesus miracles, religious people wants to have matter that is conscious so it goes along with the story and that matter is able to listen to God's opinion and directions.

I love these programs, but I fail to see the point of interviewing Deepak Chopra. He is an endocrinologist by training, and has no relation to scientific research on consciousness. Yes, he is very popular and has sold many books; so had Erich von Däniken in the 1970s, but I doubt anyone would ask his opinions on issues of astronomy...

Existence is consciousness?

We don't define consciousness. Consciousness defines us. Consciousness is God. To be able to define something, we need to be able to observe it. But, the thing that observes is consciousness and itself is unobservable. It just IS. Like when Jesus said "I am that I am"

One of his hero's is john Searle who is a hardcore atheist materialist. But he wants to know if their is anything that is non physical

@nickolasgaspar9660

4 жыл бұрын

This is because he is a Natural Philosopher and a Methodological Naturalist (His philosophy is based on scientific principles). Science doesn't exclude anything beyond the natural. It just can not verify other dimensions ...thus it can not use them in its descriptions. In science we don't make absolute declarations.....We always construct our frameworks within the limits of our observations and make zero assumptions for unobservable causal mechanisms.

I am brought back to that fortuitous day when Peter Higgs' theory that there was a field, that once interacted with, gave mass to particles, was proven to be fact, a working mechanics and not just theory. We are aware of many different field theories today such as, the "Quantum Field Theory." In fact, there are a myriad of fields. Up quark fields, down quark fields, electron fields, etc., most of which were scoffed at in time past at some point of the other. It is incomprehensible to me that the existence of a "Conscious Field Theory" would also be scoffed at. We accept the premise made by Einstein that "Time and space is an illusion, however persistent" as a truth. And, we also accept the proven fact that atoms are made up of mostly nothing, save a bit of energy and information. And that everything is made of atoms. With this understanding, and acceptance thereof, we must conclude that our so called material world, universe, is best defined as holographic and not so much as materialistic as we perceive it to be. This was known to be true before the Higgs Field Theory was introduced. This is why this particular field was theorized in the first place as a need to reconcile the particles in the particle chart, known to be mass less, with the need also to show why they appear as if they do. So, time and space are illusions. Atoms are made up of mass less particles, as hypothesized within the quantum field, and that everything is made of these mass less atoms, including you and me. The acceptance that space is an illusion, would mean that consciousness itself is contained within a point of immeasurable non-existent space which, oddly, can be comprehended as either infinitesimally small or, enormously large beyond comprehension, depending on what we as conscious sentient beings choose to believe and create, individually or collectively. This has been my conclusion. I must accept it's premise or deny all that physics has brought to the table in the past 100 years. So, we have a "Field of Consciousness." Within this field lay all other fields known and, as yet, unknown. Is our Universe (uni = one, verse = voice) a type of computer design far greater than any definition that we have been able to assign to it, consisting of holographic imagery being projected from a black hole? I don't know.... Maybe. And where did the field of consciousness emanate from, which we are all collectively apart of. Are we represented individually as a specific series of neuron-conscious episodes within the greater framework? Humm, maybe something we can think about.

@TasteMyStinkholeAndLikeIt

4 жыл бұрын

Consciousness, or more specifically, awareness, was solved thousands of years ago. You can literally experience the truth of everything for yourself. You can temporarily unmask the veil of a separate self and BE infinite awareness, BE the mind of god. A natural substance called 5-MEO DMT (Bufo Alvarious) will permanently remove any and all doubt about universal consciousness. Most people will need several months of rebuilding their concept of being an individual human afterwards. Other than a NDE, nothing else will ever come close to what the experience will do to you.

@kpoppaganger3831

4 жыл бұрын

@@donthesitatebegin9283 Oh! God yes! My Bad. I have since corrected that error. Don't know what I was thinking. Thanks for calling that to my attention.

@kpoppaganger3831

4 жыл бұрын

@@TasteMyStinkholeAndLikeIt I am aware of that substance. Though I have never indulged, I am told that it is also naturally produced in the hypothalamus at the base of the brain in humans. Although it is produced in lesser quantities, I suppose that the brain could, by malfunction or design, create a high enough dose to cause a similar effect as to that you are privy of. I personally have had events that have projected me into a reality that I have never experienced before that was similar to the ones that many who have taken DMT have had. I have spoken with beings that were not like anyone I had ever known and traveled by air to places that I had never been It happened on several occasions and it always began when I was quite awake and absolutely not dreaming. It was as real as real could be. I felt all my senses including touch, hearing and smells. I felt the wind while flying and objects in rooms where I entered. I was even asked to touch one of the humanoids that I was engaged with to prove that all was real. I did and it was. Either this actually happened in what we call reality, or my hypothalamus produced an overdose of DMT which, since all reality is a construct of our minds, again actually happened. It sounds crazy to most, but, nevertheless, it actually seemed to really happen to me.

@TasteMyStinkholeAndLikeIt

4 жыл бұрын

@@kpoppaganger3831 Doesn't sound crazy at all. DMT is produced in small quantities in the brain. Perhaps a near death experience causes a cascade of it that temporarily frees you from bodily attachment. 5-MEO DMT basically induces psychological death... the same thing that will happen when you die. Even the words 'you' and 'die' are inappropriate in full context, as neither exist or occur. In any case, it needs to be known far more widely, as this is literally and permanently mind altering for the better. I suspect the reason we have never discovered alien life is because once they reach a certain point in development, they come to realize the infinite nature of consciousness and instead of travelling outward through the universe, they travel inward through the mind.

@nickolasgaspar9660

4 жыл бұрын

@@TasteMyStinkholeAndLikeIt "Consciousness, or more specifically, awareness, was solved thousands of years ago." -yes ...wishful thoughts and pretentious behaviors are always popular with human beings and especially with magical thinkers

Consciousness everywhere and within everything, like panpsychism, might happen through time?

3:22 Somebody farts. 💨

@TasteMyStinkholeAndLikeIt

4 жыл бұрын

03:28 Somebody smells it

Can someone on here arrange for nyiam to get lab tested for remote viewing please? You tube, nyiam, ty

Conscious existence to subjective awareness of quantum field probabilities to free will mathematical measurement to natural choice in physical reality?

The problem with consciousness is that it is subjective by definition and therefore cannot be given an objective definition. Everyone in this video was defending their own personal definition of the word.

@LuigiSimoncini

4 жыл бұрын

it's a short video, go deeper and you'll discover that at least some (D. Dennet, G. Tonioni) take a scientific approach to the subject, giving CLEAR definitions, and trying to build up PREDICTIVE theories that can be disproved. Others just say "it is what I say it is" and there's not even a base for discussing with them, as you stated.

@nickolasgaspar9660

4 жыл бұрын

Wrong. www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3722571/ "Consciousness is an arousal and awareness of environment and self, which is achieved through action of the ascending reticular activating system (ARAS) on the brain stem and cerebral cortex ". This is an objective and sufficient definition on the basic characteristics of the phenomenon and its strong correlations to a specific brain module. But I have to agree with your statement about everyone defending a made up personal definition.

@grahamblack1961

4 жыл бұрын

Nickolas Gaspar That’s just another definition, there is no way to ground a definition in objective knowledge

@grahamblack1961

4 жыл бұрын

It’s defined consciousness using another word for consciousness ie awareness

@nickolasgaspar9660

4 жыл бұрын

@@grahamblack1961 There is. Scientific definitions Are descriptive by default. Descriptive means...using current facts to compose a narrative. Science has objective standards of evidence.

Only a polymath has a chance to put consciousness into context. Remembering the answer isn't good enough. It has to be realized. That isn't possible without developing a system for defining the numbers and the scales of reality. Conventional counting is limited but a system for recognizing billions of billions of billionths of billionths is required as there are a billion billion synaptic events every second to create our awareness. To understand the evolution of consciousness means recognizing our relationship to ancestors. 2000 years is 80 generations and our relationship to them is a million billion billion. Nano, molecule, cell, population, species, biosphere. All numbers that can't be counted directly, but they can be perceived if they are turned into cubes rather than lines. A line of 36 light days, made of millimeter cubes has a volume of a cube with sides 1000km long. A billion billion billion

@nickolasgaspar9660

4 жыл бұрын

"Only a polymath has a chance to put consciousness into context. " -if you mean " a scientific multidisciplinary approach". This is what cognitive and Neuropsychoanalysis is for mate.

@Gleesonglee

4 жыл бұрын

@@nickolasgaspar9660 The mind has to be defined, as well as the process of knowing stuff. We don't just need to know how the human mind works, we need to know our own mind and the context in which it exists

@Gleesonglee

4 жыл бұрын

The hard question can be answered

@nickolasgaspar9660

4 жыл бұрын

@@Gleesonglee you are describing to different fields of study. Cognitive science and Philosophy of mind. We are investigating both aspects.

@nickolasgaspar9660

4 жыл бұрын

@@Gleesonglee it depends from the type of the question. If it is a "why" question...its a useless one. If it is a how, then its not a hard one. Sure the brain is a complex organ, but we need to make questions that make sense.

Sue is denying her experience as illusory? Until she stubs her toe.

Not sure if idea crazy enough, sorry if not

Super Stars of Consciousness. LoL 😆 what's it take to be a super star in this sport?

@garychartrand7378

22 күн бұрын

It takes enlightenment

It's just a greater degree of awareness, animals have it to a less degree.

@nickolasgaspar9660

4 жыл бұрын

There is nothing different with the degree of awareness per se. To be aware of environmental and organic (emotions, thoughts) is what all conscious beings do. Our differences are located in the complexity of our thoughts and our ability to reason our emotions in to feelings. So it's the content of our conscious states provided by the rest of the brain that makes our ability to be conscious appear superior.

@takkiejakkie5458

3 жыл бұрын

That still doesn't explain why awareness is "experienced" consciously, either to the greatest possible degree or the smallest.

@nickolasgaspar9660

3 жыл бұрын

@@takkiejakkie5458 Your statement doesn't make much sense. To be conscious mean to be able to be aware of your environment and your organic cues. Our brain is aroused by environmental and organic stimuli which connects all its parts responsible for reasoning, symbolic representation, pattern recognition, memory, comparison of previous experiences etc creating the content of our conscious experience.

In principle, neuroscience can explain small consciousness of human person, probably not large immaterial subconscious from God free will.

The hard problem in consciousness *research* is the question of why it hasn't occurred to any of you to start with Ultimate Mind and consider how it might have projected itself into matter. After 20 years of brainstorming, really, nothing? This idealistic-monistic approach is borne out by the evidence of information science, systems science, chaos theory, fractal theory, etc. I got thinking along these lines via Gary Renard's *The Disappearance of the Universe,* but I have been developing--and distilling!--these principles in the meantime. I am in process of formulating an "all-gorithm" that will hopefully prove itself soon via AI and neuroinformatics. But the REAL take-away is that the fundamental unit of consciousness/creation is every moment of choice in every instance of the totality. At each such instance, the choice is btwn Spirit/potential and matter/information. Source can only create of Itself, and only create Itself. There is nowhere to go but God. Yet the experience of identifying with the matter/info polarity creates a hypothetical assumption that the phenomenal world is real the same way the spiritual world is, and that's why we get our bogus sense of illusion and separation. We can "choose back" to Source to revitalize our ongoing emanation into matter--the same Good News as 2000 years ago!

14:40 Dennett: "-…that don't consider consciousness to be the ultimate distinction in the whole universe, which i think is a bit of anthropocentric hubris." Looking at the vastness of the universe, 200 billion galaxies with about 100 billion stars each, this is the most convincing argument against a universal consciousness that exists because a few tiny humans somewhere on a small planet think they are something special. By the way, "Featuring interviews with Stuart Hameroff, David Chalmers, Daniel Dennett,…" Ooops, where is John Searle?

@nimim.markomikkila1673

3 жыл бұрын

Absolute idealism or panpsychism is not anthropocentric. Consciousness does not mean only consciousness instantiated in human beings.

Consciousness been a conundrum for nearly a century, but only for materialists who insist that metaphysics is a quaint way of looking at things. Eben Alexander, MD survived an attack by bacteria on his brain, putting him in a coma for a week, providing this trained scientist with his own experience of life after death. On recovery he sat in on the medical discussion about what had happened to him in which he could analyze the consciousness he had experienced in view of what medical science understands. All explanations required a functioning brain, especially a neocortex, which, in his case was being eaten by microbes. He wrote "Proof of Heaven" to share what he had learned from his Near-Death Experience. "I understood how blind to the full nature of the spiritual universe...I had been, who had believed that matter was the core reality. p. 57. I explored this revelation in "Surviving the Micronova."

‘Thought’, ‘mind’, ‘intelligence’ and ‘consciousness’ are all information-related phenomena & the principal reason we have been unable to date to describe, define & understand any of them is primarily due to the fact that our present definition & understanding of ‘information’ itself is woefully incorrect. Hint - it’s NOT ‘digits’. Although it has been my dubious fortune to have figured out ‘information’s’ correct ontological identity, I most certainly am not going to divulge it here in this KZread comment (otherwise I’d have to kill you, as the saying goes), but I can assure you that once it is properly recognised, no great difficulty whatsoever attends the task of further determining the ontological identities of all of the directly information-related phenomena as just listed above. Indeed, by building on this cluster of corrected, information-related ontological identities no great difficulty attends the exercise of further determining that of everything else here inside our particular universe - time, space, matter, energy. ‘Matter’ ? As it so transpires it turns out that our Universe is a panpsychic one as ‘matter’ does indeed reveal itself to be sentient. It reveals itself to be none other than ‘congealed consciousness’. As we now know ‘matter’ is not the cold, hard & insensate stuff of traditional understanding as it is quite demonstrably an electromagnetic phenomenon - which particular phenomena are, among other non-inert things, both sensitive & reactive - not to omit ‘self-organising. ‘Matter’ is simply ‘congealed electromagnetism...... self-structuring/self-organising electromagnetism..... Courtesy in part of its exquisite electromagnetic sensitivity, matter is ‘conscious’. Knowing ‘information’s’ correct ontological identity allows any of it to be identified & observed where- & whenever any of it may exist - including any of it being utilised inside any information-using machine, instrument, tool or device, including that spectrum of the latter ranging all the way from the wall-mounted thermostat of any ‘climate control’ system (which uses information concerning ambient temperature to switch on or off adjoining machinery) ‘up’ through atoms, molecules, rocks, stones, rain drops, snow flakes, amoeba, worms & ants, all the way up to the flesh & blood information-using machinery inside the human head - which latter possesses the capacity to utilise at least several hundred different kinds of information (visual, auditory, buccal, tactile, olfactory, etc,etc) - not to omit being able to process several trillion units thereof each micro second. (For the conclusion of these comments, see below.).

@carlosgaspar8447

4 жыл бұрын

my gut feeling is that consciousness arose long before higher intelligence. and even though we keep referring mostly to our very complicated brain, much less complicated species share consciousness.

@margrietoregan828

4 жыл бұрын

carlos gaspar. Hi Carlos ~ have you read my second comment below ?

@carlosgaspar8447

4 жыл бұрын

@@margrietoregan828 no i haven't. i do scan through the first couple dozen comments so as to not repeat what others have said, but comments get "promoted" depending on the number of views and other parameters. i've thought about consciousness for many years and especially on how it relates to our treatment of animals (some would even say plants).

@margrietoregan828

4 жыл бұрын

carlos gaspar Well Carlos, I’m a panpsychist so not only do I believe that all discrete lumps of solid matter have some certain if mostly limited, kind and amount of sentience at their core, but I’m also convinced that once ‘information’s’ correct identity is recognised, no especial difficulty attends the exercise of proving that claim. Watch for my future comments :)

@nickolasgaspar9660

4 жыл бұрын

@@carlosgaspar8447 Fortunately we don't do science with our gut feelings mate. Consciousness is nothing more than a label we use to describe a specific biological property, product of a specific biological structure (brain). All mobile species that need to interact successfully with their environment(survive and thrive) need to be aware of what exists, what threatens their existence and what can assist and promote their well being. So there are many qualities of conscious states and they are directly dependent on the complexity of the organ that enables them. In all cases, in order to be aware of anything you will need a basic brain and nervous system to provide it with stimuli by interacting with your environment and by analyzing your organic stimuli. So your initial claim is irrational and unfounded. Here is a very good definition used by science on what consciousness is. Consciousness is an arousal and awareness of environment and self, which is achieved through action of the ascending reticular activating system (ARAS) on the brain stem and cerebral cortex www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3722571/

16:33-16:38 When Deepak talks about fundamental consciousness, Robert is looking like "Yeah right"

Not the only one who doesn't have clue