Видео

Finally feel bad for year I lost it I can’t take no more stupid guy can’t shut the fuck up im schiz

What I’m gathering is it doesn’t matter if your brain is split or not… we all have two separate consciousness. Two different memory systems seems like they’ll think and feel differently.

Martinez Jessica Thompson Sharon Garcia Amy

Pinto doesn't understand how it actually works. YOU are not necessarily your brains combined. Instead, YOU could be "living a script" written by your two invidual halves.

One of LeCun's arguments against generative models is that they cannot be applied to video. OpenAI recently released Sora. Does he have a response to this? Or does Sora already make use of a more cognitive based approach?

why Hameroff look older than now :))

I listen to the video with a headset and can only hear sound from the left ear.

Concepts are dual to percepts -- the mind duality of Immanuel Kant. Making predictions to track targets, goals and objectives is a syntropic process, teleological. Your brain/mind has the purpose, function, goal or target of creating or synthesizing reality -- a syntropic process, teleological. Problem, reaction, solution -- the time dependent Hegelian dialectic. Thesis (problem) is dual to anti-thesis (reaction) creates the converging or syntropic thesis, synthesis -- the time independent Hegelian dialectic. Building, creating or synthesizing models of reality is a syntropic process consistent with the Hegelian dialectic! Teleological physics (syntropy) is dual to non teleological physics (entropy). Objective information (syntax) is dual to subjective information (semantics) -- information is dual. Syntax is dual to semantics -- languages, communication or information. Biological cells (neurons) are continually communicating with each other via messages hence they are using duality as form or syntax is dual to content or semantics. Models of reality are predictions of reality. Syntropy (prediction) is dual to increasing entropy -- the 4th law of thermodynamics! Converting information into mutual or co-information is a syntropic process, teleological. "Always two there are" -- Yoda. Mind (syntropy, free energy or synergy) is dual to matter (entropy, energy) -- Descartes or Plato's divided line.

No, they work at different wavelengths at different times.

The central control agent is of course the hippocampus, which makes cross-connections all over the brain. That's also the place where your consciousness takes place. I wonder why no expert even mentions this.

He is not gone. His consciousness will just move into the next body. 🤷‍♂️

Thanks for the eulogy. A year spent talking with Dan changed my life, and I am not surprised to learn that he changed many others.

❤

You need to reupload this with audio to both left and right speakers.

This is just beautiful. Thank you, David!

Terrific eulogy

Beautiful talk! I liked it that I could get a bit more history on the man, gives you a different perspective when you can peer into the human being behind the intellectual

So if we split the first female speakers brain in two would each hemisphere come up with its own conclusion? This could further boost her claim of two separate psychological beings as distinct hemispheres systems. Shes almost an entire animal!

Beautiful talk, thank your Professor Chalmers!

Marvelous ! "God's light" is painterly haha

1:53:26 That dud nailed it! Freudian thought is extremely embedded particularly in American culture. It's so unconsciously embedded that even though most people think Freud argued that an open and experimental sex life was the way to healhy mental condition, the real idea of restraint (when restraint was the norm) permeates the culture ... the evidence is the many shorts we can watch on several episodes of Mystery Science Theater 3000. But ... restraint is a thing of the past, isn't it? Yes! But the norm isn't restraint anymore, is it? Freud argued that one should live like society expected one to live - that's his recipe for a happy life. Well ... I know very very little about this stuff ... I do think it important the genealogy of ideas and Freud did have some groundbreaking ones. Yes, before Newton there was Kepler, before Darwin there was Wallace and before Freud there were Ferenczi and Mesmer. I did my share of analysis and therapy ... did not like Freud at all. Those four people, however, presented the most boring masturbation session I've ever seen! Luckily the amateurs from the crowd showed some authentic hornyness. Libido, as that former pupil of Freud's (who often complained about the Viennese's doctor lack of scientific rigor) used to say: "Libido isn't about sex - it's about thinking". And now, ladies and gentlemen, a filthy libidinous man ... because only a filthy horny man could spend his whole life not caring about the fact his parents named him Hilary: ruclips.net/video/Oh99l4fOwsY/видео.html

Somebody tell this guy that there is always two people in every brain. The Ego, thinks it's alone, but the self [aka sub consciou) is really pulling the strings. The Self feeds the Ego thoughts and controls behavior when your normal conscious awareness is focused on something else. Letting Go, is letting the Self take control. We are the Ego.

Last commment.. How is Dr. Stickgold going to make these comments about psychoanalysis and the lack of research and then make the assertion he is affirming due to his wife being an EMDR specialist? Want to talk about false narratives around Neuroscience lets dissect EMDRs evidence based components (The efficacy of EMDR is TF-CBT) not the false "eye movement reconsolidation" notions. Not to mention EMDR's MLM, Ponzi scheming marketing. What a joke lol.

“I spent 13 years at NIMH really pushing on the neuroscience and genetics of mental disorders, and when I look back on that I realize that while I think I succeeded at getting lots of really cool papers published by cool scientists at fairly large costs-I think $20 billion-I don’t think we moved the needle in reducing suicide, reducing hospitalizations, improving recovery for the tens of millions of people who have mental illness.” = Thomas Insel

If psychoanalysis was more accessible I believe you would see more discourse within the neuroscience framework. CBT and modern therapeutic models are brief, fundable, and easier mapped to modern methods of "science". Psychotherapy is intricate, subjective, and emergent. Our modern day scientific method is slow, and political. Disheartened by neuroscientists taking this perspective, how much money did the NIH spend on neuroscience research? How much of this research translated to better mental health outcomes for day to day folks?

I dunno, it does feel to me like I do have two streams of contiousness. Isn't that normal? Don't people usually feel like their "hearts" and minds can be at odds?

Berlin is insufferable and Stickgold is petty. Not a single intelligent (let alone valid) argument between the two of them.

Would they not comunicate through the stomach

The neuroscientists against psychoanalysis here miss the fact that the brain hypothesis (I.e. that the brain produces mind) is also a belief; particularly the belief in philosophical materialism. There are millions of prescriptions of anti-depressants in the US, and no signs that depression is decreasing.

I asked GPT: "In one debate, people debated "is X relevant to Y", but I thought that this sounded like an odd criticism, for one thing since it didn't fix very many definite questions and for another since it seemed potentially prejudiced. What are alternatives (verbs, please) for relevant, by which one field of inquiry or body of experts could help with another?" GPT says: When discussing how one field of inquiry or body of experts could assist or be of use to another, the term "relevant" indeed may feel too broad or vague, and in some contexts, it might seem insufficient to capture the depth of potential contribution. Here are alternative verbs that can describe the relationship or contribution more specifically and vividly: Inform - to provide data, insights, or knowledge that can shape understanding or decision-making in another field. Enhance - to improve or augment the quality, value, or effectiveness of work in another domain. Support - to offer backing, evidence, or foundation to theories, practices, or methodologies in another area. Enrich - to add value, depth, or complexity to another field's perspectives or approaches. Influence - to have an impact on the direction, development, or methodologies of another discipline. Integrate - to combine or incorporate insights or methodologies seamlessly into another field. Contribute to - to provide something beneficial, leading to improvement or advancement in another area. Intersect with - to have points of commonality or overlap that can be explored for mutual benefit. Collaborate with - to work jointly on an activity or project, emphasizing the cooperative effort across disciplines. Complement - to fill in gaps or add missing elements in another field, enhancing its completeness or effectiveness. Facilitate - to make a process or change easier or more possible in another field through expertise or resources. Inspire - to stimulate new ideas, approaches, or innovations in another discipline. Translate - to adapt or convert findings, theories, or practices into a form that is useful and applicable in another field. Bridge - to connect and serve as a link between different areas of expertise, facilitating exchange and synergy. Advance - to push forward, accelerating progress or innovation in another field through new insights or technologies. These alternatives not only offer a richer vocabulary to describe inter-disciplinary contributions but also help in articulating the specific nature of the impact or assistance provided, avoiding potential vagueness or prejudice associated with the term "relevant".

I wonder if any of these neuroscience professionals have studied their personal dreams - I sincerely doubt that they've had enough interest or curiosity to do so. They are talking without knowledge or evidence.

I never have had dreams of penis envy, although I was aware of not having a penis and that little girls were different from little boys. This was simply an acceptable reality. There are many aspects of Freudian theory that I do not accept.

My mother stopped breast feeding me after 2 weeks. She lied about this to me for 50 years. When in psychoanalysis I had 3 dreams of an infant which verifies this experience. This baby was having difficulty finding her thumb. There were two other dreams in this series. I am wanting to find an infant psychoanalyst who can give me further insight as to why I had these dreams. At the time of these dreams I was in my mid twenties, not knowing that I had been removed from access to my mother's breast.

Extremely interesting

Thank you <3

clapps like a seal

If thee people needed to treat themselves, they could never do it. Without Freud they may patch up their clients but they will never cure them. Until doctors understand their own unconscious they will continue to play at doctoring and feel inadequate doing so.

Uyyyy😮😮😮c 0:34 m

Yes. It's all in the hard question of consciousness, as Mark has explored deeply and expounded expertly in other videos that explain the mechanism that allows consciousness. What creates consciousness from unconsciousness? It's a neurological event.

My take away from this is there are many different ways for a mental state to be conscious or unconscious. We have to move beyond this layperson binary of "conscious/unconscious" and talk more specifically about anatomy: where is this information represented in the brain.

Thing that should be mentioned about these experiments is they deal with MEMORY, because words just blink in ths screen and THEN person should answer what he SAW. It seems hemispheres can't transfer memories to each other and operate each other's memories. But it doesn't mean person wasn't aware of these words WHILE they were shown.

Huh? If the brain is indeed split then obviously there are two "minds."

27:08” I’m the same guy as before the operation…” well even with no operation, just general anesthesia alone means shutting down consciousness and how do I know it’s the same person when you wake it up? Anyway, this is about two conscious agents simultaneously

the lady after David seems to have an arrogant attitude , agitated , plus was chewing something, very hard to follow with these distractions 🤦🏻‍♂️ Any the two agents in a split brain makes more sense to me

essentially two halfs of one whole.

Its two seperate consciousness think about it, they start out identical at the cut, but after that point they experience the world different and from that point they are two separate entities

I SOUFRE FROM BRAIN DISEASE AND I ALWAYSE EXPERIMENT THE HORRIFIC EXPERIENCE OF DOUBLE CONSIOUSNESS ITS LOOKS LAKE A DISSOCIATIF DISORDRE BUT THE BROBLEM IS ABOUT BRAIN SYNCRONISATION THE SYNCRONISATION FOR ME COMES FROM THE CENTER OF THE BRAIN

Which side of this ladies brain decided it was a good idea to chew gum while giving a speech

Have the scientists ASKED the non-verbal communication side to respond to questions asked? Write down "How was your day today?" or Ask "What do you think of Donald Trump?" Maybe the patient will VERBALLY state "I HATE DONALD TRUMP!" and The other half may WRITE..."I LOVE DONALD TRUMP!"

RE: First presenter. To me , it looks like the word is Scrapersky. That is a nonsensical word. I am left-handed. Or for the researcher, handedleft.