Billl Nye would tear this pseudoscientific, "spriritual", woo-ey piece down. The Templeton Foundation are, among things like climate change deniers, absolutely biased due to religious beliefs.
I can't help but wonder how a blind person might interpret that though tho. Consciousness as a concept seems much more reductionist and foundational to me than independently illuminating. Like the canvas of thoughts.
I like how no one answered honestly when asked what is consciousness. They couldn’t just say I don’t know, they had to throw a wall of sentences and even confused themselves at times.
I feel like that makes the documentary a little bit less watchable if it was just four people saying I don't know rapid in succession and then end credits 😅
my understanding thus far: Consciousness "C" is the awareful witness in which the material and non material universe exist. In human life, for example, we are born with a brain that is trained by culture to become self aware using language. But we are born with these mental tools against the back drop of C. When I "think" the C (awareful witness) illumines my brain-thoughts and i become self-aware. When the brain turns off (as in deep sleep) the witness still exist as the backdrop but as in a dark room there is nothing to be seen, though the room and it's content still exist. We don't, rather can't, experience consciousness. Instead C illumines our experiences. Thus, we are born into consciousness. Though its a noble pursuit to understand the nature of consciousness it may be unwise to think observational tools can go beyond our big bang (or the countless preceding big bangs) to measure, quantify or validate C. It's not that we "have" C. It's the other way around. Thus all there IS is nothing but consciousness. Just as waves, we come into existence (having the "illusion" of mind, body, ego, complexities etc.) and we ultimately resolve back into the ocean. We think we are separate (duality) from whence we came from. But our true nature is nothing but water. Illusion is feeling and acting as if I am a wave. Western and Middle-Eastern traditions teach we only have one shot at this illusion. Some Eastern philosophies teach we have millions of rebirth in our journey of illusions until the subtle being -that travels- gains the ultimate vision of oneness and finally resolves its separateness and merges into the ocean of consciousness for good. Essentially the potential energy of the "kinetic seeking" finally dissipates when the seeker realizes the sought is nothing but the true-self (Consciousness) ie. Enlightenment. Except the topic of rebirth the rest is what I gathered from Advaita Vedanta teachers. What happens before and after death (even rebirth) can't be proven (or disproven). Still I prefer to accept the elegance of AV as a guiding principle...
@John-xs maybe its not dishonesty. Maybe what makes human consciousness special is, it knows its not fated to 'not know'. Its contract is to fathom existence and go where no consciousness has gone before.
External reality isn't an illusion, our perception of the outside world is a cobbled together electrical representation of the external world. I'd argue 'yes' bits and pieces are illusory because the brain is constantly editing our awareness but the majority of what we experience isn't an illusion.
@@Null_Simplex if its an illusion being created by an internal part then its not an "external reality" then is it and if it was truly the case it wouldn't make sense how any of our complicated devices work on their own outside of any of us interacting with them
@@Null_Simplexour minds constantly process this reality allowing us to perceive this physical realm, with vision, touch, smell and scent other than our fundamental senses the actual foundation of reality is beyond comprehension, why would we need to comprehend what cannot be perceived ?
0:00 Introduction to hard Consciousness problem 4:55 Christof Koch's view: Neuroscientist 12:17 Swami Sarvapriyanada view: Spiritual view 19:06 Reid Hoffman view: Tech entrepreneur Co started ChatGPT 27:00 Melanie Mitchell view: Artificial intelligence 30:27 Sir Roger Penrose view: Nobel prize Physhist 35:57 Final insights 🧘
Hats off to the host, Kmele Foster. He was thoroughly engaged with each of the interviewees and asked intelligent and insightful questions. I love content like this. Keep it up!
Probably a fan of this sort of questions. I too, in my free time I tried to read books I'm currently reading "Intelligence: A very short introduction" by Ian J. Deary
@@RUclipsArtProjecthe said early on that this was something he thinks about a lot. I wonder why its something we think about so much. I do because i think im a bad person lol. I dont read any books about it though im trying to find my own reasons for these things. Probably not good but another brain on the subject couldnt hurt.
@@Iamthatguypal820 Laughing out loud. It's amusing to witness a brain attempting to comprehend itself. It's insane that the most complex thing that we know in the universe, resides as a mass within our skull.
@@Iamthatguypal820 Knowledge, or books, is shorthand, or shortcuts on what others have figured out (or, at least, has tried to). Why not avail yourself of their experience? We cannot experience/know all things ourselves; there's not enough time in our lives for that.
Wow, this was one of the best documentaries about consciousness that I have seen. The host Kmele Foster did an amazing job with each interview and kept me thinking the whole time.
Consciousness is so basic, simple, ephemeral, fragile, and at the same time so powerfully meaningful and important that people simply can not imagine it has not a special structure or clear place in the physical world or bodies.
Does people not being able to imagine something have any effect on the truth value of that claim? This piece is gonna be a good study on fallacious reasoning.
40:00 is EXACTLY what i experienced on my DMT breakthrough. My consciousness returned to the source. A pool of all consciousness. A pool of consciousness, white warm light and infinite love. I get goosebumps all over.. What happens after i have no clue. But this part is , it just is
I sometimes randomly think of in the middle of something i usually think ohh i am alive and i can move my hands and fingers so fast after thinking ,observing my thoughts its beautiful a creation which needs to be explored further
Just stopped at it, saw you, had to intervene, well spoken doesn't mean correct, there is a correlation, because to be well spoken you need to have studied more on manners which requires discipline, so you should be able to study more, but to be correct you need half of it, but with more knowledge. Whether that is the case, i have not seen it yet to judge for myself.
He's well informed philosophically, but very, very wrong about science. He said science claims absolute truth. But fallibility is a critical component to how science progresses. Understanding that our best theories can be replaced by better ones, is opposite to the idea of absolute truth.
@@uninspired3583 Well only genuine scientists understand that. Newton, Einstein after being hailed as some of the greatest scientists to be ever born, had the childlike simplicity and honesty to admit how little they and science actually know about the nature. Do you expect this straightforwardness and honesty from every so-called scientists to admit their flaw and to accept their shortcomings? Actually people who are mediocore scientists are always bullying religion and the idea of god, claiming that science is all powerful and all knowing. In that respect where true scientists are ever inquisitive and open to any possibility but where today's most so-called scientists are just dismissive about anything except materialistic science, the monk's comment is apt.
One of the most eye opening things I’ve learned about consciousness was through my undergraduate work in psychology. I lucid dream occasionally and wondered how this happens in a brain state that is fundamentally characterized by reduced consciousness. So I began comparing cognitive and neuroscientist papers on dreaming, lucid dreaming, and wake states. Come to find out, lucid dreaming is more similar to being AWAKE than regular dreaming. It happens through increase brain activity in parts of the brain that are specifically quieres during non-lucid sleep. So then what is sleeping? How can I be “more” awake than non-lucid dreaming and remain asleep? Why is dreaming so essential to survival that it continues despite full consciousness awareness of it? Science is so beautiful because the questions never end.
That's because sleeping is a very complicated process and reduced consciousness is only one part of it. There are people that in certain circumstances wake up to discover that their bodies are still sleeping while their mind is fully awake. Sleeping is an optimized way of resting out bodies, settle in our memories, and solve our subconscious (though dreaming). And the thing is that we can do all those things while we are conscious, just not as well as when we are sleeping and our consciousness is reduced.
I know how dreaming works: there is a membrane that separates surface reality and internal reality. All impressions are embedded into the membrane from the surface and then the internal eye aka Internal awareness processes these impressions aa dreams. Internal awareness is a blind eye to surface reality. The blind eye exists in a higher dimension, hence the reason for strange dreams. Any commints? ?? ???
@@An_Escaped_Mind I would say your explaination is a philosophical one. You might wanna check out some neuroscientific findings about the topic and compare them to your view, if you are interested in the topic.
@@4_P3R50N Thanks for your feedback but those findings exist on the surface layer. Philosophical, yet the truth is what matters. Can you disprove my explanation?
Consciousness is awareness, the soul beyond matter. I hv felt it and reached that realisation, I had third awakening in 2018 , it can never be understood while being attached to things we know and believe. The intelligence beyond matter is you, the consciousness and it's the one that feels.
1. There is no "explanatory gap." Reality is just contextual, depending on your context, point of view, you can perceive it differently, and perceive different things. The first guy just dislikes the fact that viewing the neural structure of his own brain from his context is different than viewing that same brain through some other context, such as neural imaging. There is no "gap" here, just someone disliking how reality works. 2. The second religious guy argues "consciousness is fundamental" then waffles on about irrelevant things regarding raw sensual experience. Consciousness is a complex notion involving cognition, minds, subjectivity, the self, etc. It is not merely raw sensual experience but is a more complex conception derived from raw sensual experience. Yes, raw sensual experience, what I would just call *reality as such,* is self-evident, but that does not mean everything derived from it is self-evident. We both agree we live on a spinning ball orbiting a star, but that does not mean this is some sort of self-evident innate knowledge. It is knowledge derived from our experience. If you deny all concepts derivative of our experience, you also have to deny the self, minds, cognition, thought, "consciousness." 3. Penrose is right that the "hard problem" parallels the "measurement problem" in quantum mechanics, but for the wrong reasons. The two parallel each other because both are pseudoproblems which presume the existence of some sort of reality independent of all possible observation even in principle. The Kantian mind-body problem calls this reality the "noumenon," while certain interpretations of quantum mechanics view it as made up of unobservable "probability waves." In both cases, there is an explanatory gap of how the noumenon is transformed into the phenomenon upon observation/measurement. But both are pseudoproblems because there is no reason to presume this unobservable nature actually even exists. Read Carlo Rovelli's book *Helgoland: Making Sense of the Quantum Revolution* and Francois-Igor Pris' book *Contextual Realism and Quantum Mechanics.*
@@amihart9269 I think of reality as everything that exists that is subject to the laws of physics. Wether I’m there to observe it or not it’s still subject to physics. I get frustrated with pseudo realities when people become invested in the potential of existence over the thought challenge they are. I’m not a great philosopher & probably won’t be until I’m well into my old age lol. That sounds like a good time to ponder the extents of reality in make believe scenario expressions of existence more deeply. Right now I’m thinking about how reality is working & where we as societies/cultures are failing to achieve something future people will thrive from. Things like religion, eliminating people types from existing as equal people, it weakens the gene pool and variation that has been the source of our evolution and advancements, and potentially could lead to the extinction of the species if allowed to continue unchecked. Never mind the ideas that we stem from two extreme bottleneck events in the narrative and yet do not show the incestual effects in our genetic codes, should be enough for us to establish laws based on human rights instead of religion. Sorry for rambling lol
I guarantee that all it takes is an encounter between two material entities (e.g., a baseball bat and an occiput) and all certainty about consciousness evaporates.
@@starc. I don't see the difference between disabling and absent. The fact that after waking up, we have the sensation of returning to the same consciousness is only the result of memory access. In people who have a damaged memory after such an event, they also have a disturbed sense of identity.
@@MaciejCzub did we ever leave just because the lights get turned off? Dreaming throws a wrench into that logic implying a continuation. One can be consciously aware, subconsciously aware or they can be unconsciously aware such as when sleeping a loud noise wakes them from an unconscious state. Its like if the software on the hardware of a computer crashes and stops working blue screen or black screen of nothing yet the hardware the computer the process is still running and recovers
Not really. If everything external to you can be fake, how can you truly know that your selfhood isn't? This is the problem Rene Descartes ran into. What is stopping an evil deceiver, who is capable of faking everything else, from tricking you into believing you have consciousness and free-will as some sort of sick cosmic prank?
Consciousness and the universe is under no obligation to make sense to us but wow it is truly a gift and privilege to be able to experience and explore it the best we possibly can! Love this documentary, very heartfelt and inspiring. Best wishes to everyone out there!
"Consciousness and the universe is under no obligation to make sense to us" -I love this sentiment so much, as it removes the primacy of the tiny slice of everything that is human experience from these larger questions. Perhaps it is the limited consideration of these concepts from our unique human experience that holds us back from comprehending these things that are inarguably greater forces than ourselves... ❤
That depends on your perspective. For some it may be a gift, but for others it's a curse. Also don't think the universe is some separate entity from us. We are the universe experiencing itself.
@@EgoChipMuch much more important than us. We barely understand this universe from our perspective and your assumption is based from the only viewpoint You or all of us can discern. We don t really understand that whole lot we think we do.
I feel like when most people say "X is under no obligation to make sense," it is always just a license to then say the most nonsensical things possible, justifying woo and mysticism specifically under the guise that it's justified because it makes no sense, so it must be real because reality makes no sense. People do this with consciousness, the divine, quantum mechanics, etc. I think we _should_ actually attempt to make sense of the universe and reject this kind of thinking as detrimental.
Swami Sarvapriyanandha didn't even scratch the surface. I was waiting for him to say all of these guys are talking about the mind, they haven't even touched on the topic of consciousness 😅 they probably got less time with him or maybe he didn't want to. But beautiful episode 👌🏽👌🏽
This video is one of the worst actually 😅, when it’s compared to the various videos about consciousness, a very complex topic with various intelligent scientists talking about it. Although as a video on its own without any comparison it seems good 👍😁
My buddies and I had a conversation about “consciousness” once. while we were tripping acid in high school. But we had no idea what consciousness was at the time. What a remarkable night it was…
I am 17 years old and i was trying to know myself because from few years i stopped thinking and everything was happening automatically i was just doing it and few days ago i start learning myself... Thank you for the video.. ❤
what a gift you found! Enjoy your new perspective. And remember to remember this point of view, because your body will take over from time to time. But you can return easier with practice.
Basically im from a country where most peoples didn't even know about these things....like about cosmos...consciousness... I mean they don't have deep thought everyone's life is living them
Being that I love Swami Sarvapriyananda. I must follow you. Thank you for spreading self awareness and its importance not only in Life most of all, but also society.
Consciousness: °-Awareness °○-Growth of Awareness ○●-Self Awareness ♡-Love and Understanding ◇-Wisdom ☆-Universal exchange ∞-Unity o-Octive of singularity We are a density of conscious experience in an evolution of development, with every mind body spirit complexes at a varying rate of development, but the process is always and ever the same. We are one having the experience of being separate. Universal Laws & Distortions: One/Infinity Intelligent infinity 1st:Freewill 2nd:Love 3rd:Light Confusion
I wish there was more of John Templeton hosting “The Well” on Big Think. I’ve seen all that are available Tommy knowledge and haven’t gotten anything new. 🥺. I am so engaged with him and his topics and questions
I really enjoyed this and thought you did a great job of addressing all these different perspectives of consciousness. I mean, you could make a whole series of 45-minute videos (or longer!) just on consciousness. And maybe you should. I think it's an incredibly interesting topic to many of us. I would love to see you talk to other philosophers and neuroscientists about it, including Anil Seth, Sam Harris, Donald Hoffman, Bernardo Kastrup, Jay Garfield, and perhaps experts on psychedelics and consciousness, and philosophers who believe in simulation theory, etc. I have my own hunches (or wishes), but I love to hear about different perspectives because I always learn about new possibilities, and since there's no way to prove any of this (at least not yet), it's all kind of fair game, as far as I see it!
The problem with consciousness isnt that we cannot "figure it out" Its that we wont (most of us) be satisfied with the answers we find, and look for more.
This is such an interesting take that I agree with. I think part of that is because of the evolution of humans. If we find out exactly what consciousness is, what does that mean for our purpose? What does that mean for our drive for survival? It’s uncomfortable to think about reducing our experiences to a simple answer. Consciousness IS subjectivity. We would be reducing subjectivity to objectivity. Which isn’t entirely true as the answer would have been discovered through subjective consciousness. Which is why a Nietzsche didn’t believe in wasting time with discussions like these. There is no such thing as objectivity so it is not our place to even try.
Wow! What a wonderful video! Full of experts, a terrific interviewer and of course the biggest question of all time. Will definitely subscribe to this channel and share it with people I know. Thank you!
I love this kind of documentary where the host speaks with several people about their perspective on a certain subject, like in 'Story of God with Morgan Freeman.' Good work, Kmele Foster. it's my first time seeing your work, and I'm already a fan.
As always Swami sarvapriyananda spoke very well. Eastern religion like Vedanta treats mind and conciousness differently but modern science takes mind to be conciousness. Thats why hard problem of conciousness will remain a hard problem.
@@threestars2164 Advaita vedanta, Budhism are religion but it asks "Who am I". It is vastly different from faith based religion. Religion is a very generic word
You *really* don't want mankind to fully understand this. It's the one thing that keeps the A in AI... If man figures this out, they'll figure out how to incorporate it into computing, and then you have HAL. Keep playing with the fire. We're not supposed to understand certain things. There is decent reason for that.
“I don’t believe consciousness is generated in the brain any more than television programs are made inside my TV. The box is too small.” - Terence McKenna
1. There is no "explanatory gap." Reality is just contextual, depending on your context, point of view, you can perceive it differently, and perceive different things. The first guy just dislikes the fact that viewing the neural structure of his own brain from his context is different than viewing that same brain through some other context, such as neural imaging. There is no "gap" here, just someone disliking how reality works. 2. The second religious guy argues "consciousness is fundamental" then waffles on about irrelevant things regarding raw sensual experience. Consciousness is a complex notion involving cognition, minds, subjectivity, the self, etc. It is not merely raw sensual experience but is a more complex conception derived from raw sensual experience. Yes, raw sensual experience, what I would just call reality as such, is self-evident, but that does not mean everything derived from it is self-evident. We both agree we live on a spinning ball orbiting a star, but that does not mean this is some sort of self-evident innate knowledge. It is knowledge derived from our experience. If you deny all concepts derivative of our experience, you also have to deny the self, minds, cognition, thought, "consciousness." 3. Penrose is right that the "hard problem" parallels the "measurement problem" in quantum mechanics, but for the wrong reasons. The two parallel each other because both are pseudoproblems which presume the existence of some sort of reality independent of all possible observation even in principle. The Kantian mind-body problem calls this reality the "noumenon," while certain interpretations of quantum mechanics view it as made up of unobservable "probability waves." In both cases, there is an explanatory gap of how the noumenon is transformed into the phenomenon upon observation/measurement. But both are pseudoproblems because there is no reason to presume this unobservable nature actually even exists. Read Carlo Rovelli's book Helgoland: Making Sense of the Quantum Revolution and Francois-Igor Pris' book Contextual Realism and Quantum Mechanics.
Really well done. One aspect of consciousness that's seems obvious to me is the connection between "things". And despite its name, the subconscious seems very much a part of consciousness.
The fact I have experience and the lights are on at all is proof to me that I am conscious therefore it is not an illusion. If something i experience in my conscious experience that could be an illusion but the experience itself proves it’s not an illusion
It’s actually the only thing we can never doubt. We are having a conscious experience. To me consciousness is information. What you are looking for is already where you are looking from.
"Consciousness is information" or is it what is evaluating/sensing that information? Yes, without information there may be no consciousness, but is the information consciousness or what is activating consciousness?
Wrong. Consciousness is _a posteriori,_ not _a priori._ You are not born with innate knowledge that you are a conscious being capable of cognition and self-reflection. These precisely are things you derive from thinking about your experiences.
@@QuantumPolyhedron wrong. not all knowledge is derived from thought. Some knowledge and arguably the purest form of knowledge comes from direct experience. You are born having a direct experience are you not?
I spoke to a neurologist who said 40% of the time, they are unsure about unusual symptoms patients present with and they are unable to make a definite diagnosis. The energy/electricity in our body and what it channels to help us form perceptions is very much a mystery. As someone who has worked in hospice care, there are definitely things that have occured that cannot be explained and have been witnessed by several people that defy anything that we can figure out with logic.
@@void________ I'll write a shorter version and will see if it's removed again. A doctor I worked with in hospice visited a patient who was actively passing away. While they were talking, the patient suddenly stared across the room, said a woman's name and told him to slice the lemons. He held her hand for a couple of minutes and left. She passed a few days later and I told the doctor about it. He mentioned that she said his grandma's name. He didn't remember too much about his grandma because she passed when he was still a kid. He talked to his parents about what the patient said and they confirmed that his grandma used to give him lemon slices when he was a toddler and they'd laugh when he made sour faces. The doctor was unphased by this and just said "strange things happen here..."
This has to be one of, the best Videos Ive ever seen. To the Host, Outstanding! Engagement and Questioning. I felt as if it were I, myself asking these questions. PLEASE CONTINUE This kind of thought and production!!!
Why do people fear this notion that consciousness is bio-chemical process that eventually can be replicated. The idea that if this were to be true , it would remove purpose and the notion of purpose is just an illusion that life comes up with, why would that be a bad thing? Just because it turns out there’s no grand narrative that was set aside for you doesent mean it’s meaningless.
@@Null_Simplex well there’s no issue there right nobody has a an issue of consciousness is the origin of all these other things (were it to be prove ) however when the opposite is considered and were it also to be proven then we “lose” something. Why?
It's ridiculously false. Brains, chemicals, and everything conceivable are ideas. There are no physical objects. The idea that consciousness is physical is as wrong as wrong can get.
Absolutely spellbinding in it's content. We are surrely much morre than just a pile of atoms. I reached a point of complete awareness in this video's attempt to define it's purpose right at the end when I saw the dog being loved and the woman shedding a tear. It moved me...
Man, this was just plain beautiful. This was the first video of yours that I've ever seen and I can't get enough. Bravo! Beautifully produced and presented, I don't have enough superlatives for this thoughtful, insightful and fascinating look at this subject matter. I really hope you make this a continuing series!
How is it well-rounded? Most the screen time is dedicated to idealists and dualists who take the "hard problem" seriously. The video has a bias in favor of Chalmers' dualism and does not bother to do a serious investigation to talk to antimetaphysical philosophers who reject that there is a hard problem at all. Even the few "physicalists" he talked to are really just _promissory materialists,_ people who basically agree with the dualist premises that there is a division between mind and body, but vaguely gesture that "physics will solve it some day (somehow)." It's incredibly ideologically biased towards a single dogmatic viewpoint of Chalmers' dualism.
@@amihart9269Thank you. I'm gnashing my teeth at people praising this as a balanced and profound piece. It's full of epistemic issues - not only loaded language and misrepresentations.
Emergent property. And, we are not a singular being. Our brain is a compromise and consolidation of many plexi into one entity. For anyone that had a kid, you can literally observe their brain consolidating from many to one, as they can so quickly switch from screaming like a banshee to being completely content and calm -- this later becomes more difficult, as our brain consolidates. We are more than one inside.
After reading the book "Simulated Truths", I feel I am enlightened. Consciousness is explained in profound way. It also touches up some complex topics explaining concept of Death, reincarnation, Karma, etc and how it all fits in Simulation Hypothesis.
The connection has always been God. He put us in our mother’s wombs. It’s simple and all in the Bible. Repent of sin and turn to the Lord Jesus; the living God came to us and died on a cross because He ever so loves us, and forgave those who turn to Him so that we may enter an eternal presence with Him. He defeated death three days later, and is coming back soon. Our conscious is not made from the material, because I have yet to see a computer come just to be in the wild. It takes an intelligence to make intelligence, otherwise if we came to be out of no particular order or design how can we trust our conscious but to know it to just be? Why do we conform then with rules and have morals? Because our eternal God made us, and has told us in Genesis 1:26 has said “Let us make man in our image.” ē'nu the plural for 3 or more showing our Triune God has made us in His image, and He is a loving and good God. Which is why through God we are able to exist and exist with each other. Our God is perfect, which is why we can even trust our own conscious, and why we can trust for the existence of morals. Morals are not subjective, because then how can we judge Hitler if it was in his belief of his morals that killing millions was justified? There must be a moral standard of perfection, and there is, God, and we know morals because we are made in His image. Why we don’t all object to those is due to knowing good and evil, and knowing sin that is death. But we can’t be perfect because of sin, so we needed one that could be, and that is when the Father sent the His only begotten Son to die on that cross. No one is perfect but God; no one is righteous, no not one but Jesus Christ, fully man and fully God. But He so loved the world that He gave His Son that no one may perish who comes to Him. And for those who may think well who created God? Understand that God is beyond creation, He is eternal, and while the universe had a beginning, and time, space and matter had to begin at the same point, then if God is the one that created beginnings He is beyond a beginning. Meaning He has no creator He is the Creator. But when we die our consciousness will return back to an eternity, but whether it is with God or in the absence of Him (A.K.A Hell) it is up to our choices and freewill God has given us in order to truly have choices and ability to love.
The connection has always been God. He put us in our mother’s wombs. It’s simple and all in the Bible. Repent of sin and turn to the Lord Jesus; the living God came to us and died on a cross because He ever so loves us, and forgave those who turn to Him so that we may enter an eternal presence with Him. He defeated death three days later, and is coming back soon. Our conscious is not made from the material, because I have yet to see a computer come just to be in the wild. It takes an intelligence to make intelligence, otherwise if we came to be out of no particular order or design how can we trust our conscious but to know it to just be? Why do we conform then with rules and have morals? Because our eternal God made us, and has told us in Genesis 1:26 has said “Let us make man in our image.” ē'nu the plural for 3 or more showing our Triune God has made us in His image, and He is a loving and good God. Which is why through God we are able to exist and exist with each other. Our God is perfect, which is why we can even trust our own conscious, and why we can trust for the existence of morals. Morals are not subjective, because then how can we judge Hitler if it was in his belief of his morals that killing millions was justified? There must be a moral standard of perfection, and there is, God, and we know morals because we are made in His image. Why we don’t all object to those is due to knowing good and evil, and knowing sin that is death. But we can’t be perfect because of sin, so we needed one that could be, and that is when the Father sent the His only begotten Son to die on that cross. No one is perfect but God; no one is righteous, no not one but Jesus Christ, fully man and fully God. But He so loved the world that He gave His Son that no one may perish who comes to Him. And for those who may think well who created God? Understand that God is beyond creation, He is eternal, and while the universe had a beginning, and time, space and matter had to begin at the same point, then if God is the one that created beginnings He is beyond a beginning. Meaning He has no creator He is the Creator. But when we die our consciousness will return back to an eternity, but whether it is with God or in the absence of Him (A.K.A Hell) it is up to our choices and freewill God has given us in order to truly have choices and ability to love.
Most comments are talking about our reality being an illusion. Actually consciousness in itself being an illusion is the title of the video, which they didn’t even discuss that much. Close your eyes, don’t smell, don’t hear, if you actually can stop yourself from sensing everything or thinking (you can’t), you would understand that consciousness is an illusion. The moment you close your eyes you feel less conscious. Your brain detects external information, categorises it, uses these categories to respond to external stimuli with a: bad! Good!, in more complex beings it’s: sad bad! Angry bad! Disgusting bad! (Connected to the neurons of disgust in taste and smell in itself that evolved to make you escape what your body determines to be detrimental to you and not eat it, which is easier)…etc… One other thing is that we don’t actually think that much throughout the day, we just follow habits even in our thinking, like most other animals. That complex productive thinking only results from a very developed brain, activating neurons that are connected to each other, etc, but it only happens rarely throughout your day. Well when you think about thinking you are thinking, so you don’t realise how small is the number of times you used that complex energy spending mechanism. Basically, you’re like most of other animals, you only feel so special and conscious because of the complex integration of all external informations (which obviously is a very beneficial evolutionary trait as you can integrate all of that information simultaneously and categorise it and use it), and because of your language (without language you wouldn’t feel that much different from other animals) and of course because of your mind playing tricks on you, because of you thinking you have an internal spirit that is constantly thinking and performing mental activities, if it was the case we wouldn’t deny your claim, but it’s precisely because you rarely ever think productively in the first place that we believe you are not so « conscious » and « spiritual ». Also, it has to do with your self opinions, as this idea attacks your internal belief systems, as you were probably raised in any average society with a religious majority, and a lot of these ideas might trigger the internal neural circuits telling you: bad, thus creating cognitive dissonance, but that’s a topic for psychology
YaHU'aH the 4|For power WORDs = tetYHUHgrammarten, in the shortest definition is; SOVEREIGN ETERNAL SUPREME IMMORTAL POTENTATE, and via sonic implosion creates light 🔯, the Star TetYHUHhedron 🔯, YaHs sigNATURE aka sign in nature.. his glory the lilly 🌷 Note sigNATURE of YaH🔯👆 In Geometry 🔯⚛️ 2 Esdras 5:24 “And of all lands of the whole world thou hast chosen thee one pit: and of all the flowers thereof, one Lillie🔯.” MatithYahu 6:28-29 Gift of YaHU'aH🔯 28 And why take ye thought for raiment? Consider the lilies of the field, how they grow; they toil not, neither do they spin: 29 And yet I say unto you, That even Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these. As in the many flowers of the field, the Lilly, Iris, tulip and mulberry, peppers, and many more. All display, Father's Great sigNATURE🔯, in flower form. Psalms 91:4 He shall cover thee with his feathers, and under his wings shalt thou trust: YaHU'aHs🔯TRUTH shall be thy shield and buckler. As King David did, {rather ∆au∆}, placed YaHs sign, on his shield🔯, buckler🔯, & breastplate🔯 Ayob 38:2 words with knowledge As with all beautiful words spoKIN, even eternity, TRUTH, Harmony, Love, and Joy, so each Mandelbrot forms🔯around this sigNATURE🔯 cymatic tone. And no matter how many times, each word is written or spoken, the cymatic image of each, tho unique, still remain in the same form🔯. See Dr. Emoto Masuro & Prof. Luc Montagnier. Ayob 38:22 “Hast thou entered into the treasures of the SNOW ❄️? or hast thou seen the treasures of the hail❄️? As the tears, (RAIN}, of the heavenly hosts fall, through the cold & snowflakes ❄️ are formed, in accordance to their praises, HalleluYah 🔯💜 Yashayahu 55:10-11 Genesis 2:7 And YaHU'aH AllahAYnu formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life🔯......YaH🔯 SPEAKS; EL yoU Cee, EL oM into MoLeCule's, & formation of seMaN! WE Swim to the womb, as Atoms ⚛️ form as 2 SowEL's collide, into DNA 🧬 , by which all cells are made & multiply! Having united, 2 married in2, 1 new sowel, for the making of a zygote, new NaMes, in human form. And the cymatic heartbeat of a FetUS🔯639 hertz, another sown Eloheim, 2 be born, as 1, a marriage & unbreakable bond! Marriage = baby🍼! YeremiYahu 1:5 As in the Ancient Covenant Elders Yahu∆ah, which are called by YaH🔯's Great name. Yahu∆ah = YaHU'aHs🔯,🔺 ∆oor, of IMMORTALITY. The π🔯mi∆! Sonic implosion creates the star tetYAHedron🔯 when speaKING: YaHUaHs Great NAME. In all the above, what do we see? Fathers sigNATURE🔯 is how everything is KINnected 💜, tested, known & proven! Go Look, know & see! Romans 1: 18 For the wrath of YaHU'aH🔯⚛️ is revealed from heaven against all unYaHliness and unrighteousness of men, WHO HOLD THE TRUTH IN UNRIGHTEOUSNESS; 19 Because that which may be known of YaHUaH is manifest in them, {Molecules & Atoms⚛️}; for YaHUaH🔯 hath shewed it unto them. 20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power⚛️ and YaHhead🔯; so that they are without excuse: 21 Because that, when they knew YaHU'aH, they glorified him not as AllahAYnu, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. 22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, 23 And changed the GLORY 🔯 of the uncorruptible YaHU'aH🔯 into an image made like to corruptible man (J.C.✝️), and to birds, ( 🦅,eagle) and four footed beasts, ( 🐂bull), and creeping things, ( 🐍snake- don't tread on me).
This video is so weird and interesting because it's a video about "a brain asking another brain why it's awake and that brain trying to define itself and my brain trying to understand how that brain defined itself"🧠
Would be great to continue with this topic exploring more about the state of consciousness during general anesthesia (briefly mentioned on this video) and the use of psychedelics. Great video hope to see more like this!
1. There is no "explanatory gap." Reality is just contextual, depending on your context, point of view, you can perceive it differently, and perceive different things. The first guy just dislikes the fact that viewing the neural structure of his own brain from his context is different than viewing that same brain through some other context, such as neural imaging. There is no "gap" here, just someone disliking how reality works. 2. The second religious guy argues "consciousness is fundamental" then waffles on about irrelevant things regarding raw sensual experience. Consciousness is a complex notion involving cognition, minds, subjectivity, the self, etc. It is not merely raw sensual experience but is a more complex conception derived from raw sensual experience. Yes, raw sensual experience, what I would just call *reality as such,* is self-evident, but that does not mean everything derived from it is self-evident. We both agree we live on a spinning ball orbiting a star, but that does not mean this is some sort of self-evident innate knowledge. It is knowledge derived from our experience. If you deny all concepts derivative of our experience, you also have to deny the self, minds, cognition, thought, "consciousness." 3. Penrose is right that the "hard problem" parallels the "measurement problem" in quantum mechanics, but for the wrong reasons. The two parallel each other because both are pseudoproblems which presume the existence of some sort of reality independent of all possible observation even in principle. The Kantian mind-body problem calls this reality the "noumenon," while certain interpretations of quantum mechanics view it as made up of unobservable "probability waves." In both cases, there is an explanatory gap of how the noumenon is transformed into the phenomenon upon observation/measurement. But both are pseudoproblems because there is no reason to presume this unobservable nature actually even exists. Read Carlo Rovelli's book *Helgoland: Making Sense of the Quantum Revolution* and Francois-Igor Pris' book *Contextual Realism and Quantum Mechanics.*
Yes. Psychedelic experiences seem to permit us to enter in to hyper-conscious states, or alternative states of consciousness. Synesthesia, for example.
Amazing video! Great opinions, from so many different "experts" on the subject, as ive constantly contemplated these same deep questions without any direction, its nice to finally see others trying to point it somewhere. Unfortunately it may be something we can only truly answer once we die, but then we are dead.. or is death itself merely a human concept for the unknown? Really fascinating and enlightening indeed.
1. There is no "explanatory gap." Reality is just contextual, depending on your context, point of view, you can perceive it differently, and perceive different things. The first guy just dislikes the fact that viewing the neural structure of his own brain from his context is different than viewing that same brain through some other context, such as neural imaging. There is no "gap" here, just someone disliking how reality works. 2. The second religious guy argues "consciousness is fundamental" then waffles on about irrelevant things regarding raw sensual experience. Consciousness is a complex notion involving cognition, minds, subjectivity, the self, etc. It is not merely raw sensual experience but is a more complex conception derived from raw sensual experience. Yes, raw sensual experience, what I would just call *reality as such,* is self-evident, but that does not mean everything derived from it is self-evident. We both agree we live on a spinning ball orbiting a star, but that does not mean this is some sort of self-evident innate knowledge. It is knowledge derived from our experience. If you deny all concepts derivative of our experience, you also have to deny the self, minds, cognition, thought, "consciousness." 3. Penrose is right that the "hard problem" parallels the "measurement problem" in quantum mechanics, but for the wrong reasons. The two parallel each other because both are pseudoproblems which presume the existence of some sort of reality independent of all possible observation even in principle. The Kantian mind-body problem calls this reality the "noumenon," while certain interpretations of quantum mechanics view it as made up of unobservable "probability waves." In both cases, there is an explanatory gap of how the noumenon is transformed into the phenomenon upon observation/measurement. But both are pseudoproblems because there is no reason to presume this unobservable nature actually even exists. Read Carlo Rovelli's book *Helgoland: Making Sense of the Quantum Revolution* and Francois-Igor Pris' book *Contextual Realism and Quantum Mechanics.*
If chapter two was actually supported by a scientific instituion, yeah. This is glorified paeudoscience taling advantage of gaps in our knowledge, and atuffing it with vague terms like "spirituality". There are epistemic positions these guys don't even deign to touch.
I think the hardest part about consciousness is there is no way to go physically measure it. No way to have another way to view it from a 3rd person perspective. Because obviously I can’t be inside and outside my body at the same time. Leading to a 1 dimensional perspective that can’t be fully completely explained. Being a child I think is the best way to understand consciousness I mean how is it possible all of us were seeing things and learning things at a young age. But not physically able to remember nor comprehend what we were seeing and learning even though others saw us moving and looking at things I think consciousness is directly related to all the pieces of ourselves and the outside world somehow.
Exactly. Unfortunately (or fortunately), in this subject matter, scientists will have to turn to philosophy and maybe even something much loathed by modern scientists (although celebrated by its giants and fathers): religion.
Consciousness isn´t an illusion. The point is, having little awareness produces the illusion that you have more awareness than you actually have. In reality you have a lot of consciousness, a lot of awareness.
I don't claim to know consciousness but I have a belief system that helps me understand myself and others better. All creatures, especially humans, have three parts. 1. The Mind - You 2. The Body - "The Child" I call it body addiction. 3. The World You Directly Affect (Verb) The Mind is you. The you who makes decisions. The voice you hear in your head when reading a book. The Body is a little more complex to explain. I have come to the conclusion that this is the part of you that holds core aspects of you that The Mind pulls from to make a choice. A cheesy and dumb as this sounds, Think the Pixar Movie Inside Out. The core events in your life that make a fundamental change in you (the first award you ever won. The trauma of child abuse. First home run and so on.) These create "strings" that your body pulls on to make a decision (Example: you were in a car accident at a yound age. 30 years later you have anxiety when driving a car. the string is the car accident.) I call this aspect "The Body Addiction" because this is also the part of you that keeps you from doing things you NEED to do. It's that voice you hear that is the opposite of what you want. "I need to do the dishes" *Meh, I'll do it later*. Your body gets addicted to it's day to day that it becomes set in it's ways. This can be broken but it takes great understanding to do. The World you directly Affect is just that. Every tiny little mark you make in the world during your time here. The memory you leave in others. The matterials you leave, the things you change. This is the ONLY part of you that is "Forever" in it's own way. This concept I have allows me to see a situation and observe it's causality. It allows me to see why things happen the way they do. Why people do things the way they do. It's not perfect but I am one man and only practice this on myself. You can force people to know (That is what I have done with this comment) but can not force someone to understand. I 100% believe this feeling I feel with this concept is the same feeling "Born again christians" or other religious people have felt when "Finding God" I am an atheist. I find greatness in knowing this is a feeling that if learned and understood could be taught and learned. The more you see the more it seems like humanity as a great ocean smashing aganst the shore mindlessly. Imagine if Humans could come together and direct that flow.
"Most of what we are is non physical, though, our lowest form is physical. All life on our planet has the lowest form, the Body. Our Body is an Animal and the other type of Body on our planet is a Plant. Bodies are bound absolutely to Natural Law, which is the lowest form of true Law. Natural Law is a localised form of Law and is derived from the Laws of Nature. Natural Law is the finite and specific foundational control structure ordering the actions and interactions of species, members of species, and the material sources of a planet. The lowest non physical form of what we are is the Mind, which is a Process. There are other forms of life on our planet that have both a Body and a Mind, however, so far as we currently know, there are no Plants and only some Animals that have a Body and a Mind. The lowest forms of Mind, Instinct and Emotion, are predominantly bound to Natural Law. The next higher form of Mind is Intellect which is bound predominantly to the Laws of Nature. Intuition, the highest form of Mind, can be bound or not to both Natural Law and the Laws of Nature separately or together, or to higher forms of Law altogether. Intuition is the truest guide for our Selves. The next non physical form of what we are is the Self, which is an Awareness. There are relatively few other forms of life on our planet that have a Self. The Self is not bound to any form of Law other than One's Own Law. It is the only form of Law that cannot be violated. The foundation of what we are is the highest non physical form of what we are. The highest form of what we are is the Being, which is an Existence. The Being is not bound to any form of Law originating within Existence. The Being is bound absolutely to The Law. Existence, and the Laws of Nature which are the finite and specific foundational control structure ordering the actions and interactions of all elements within Existence, cannot Be without The Law being The Law. So, what is The Law? In a word, The Law is options. Definition option: a thing that is or may be chosen. The word 'option' does convey the idea of The Law in its most basic sense but does not clarify all of what The Law is. Free Will does describe how our species experiences The Law but does not convey all of what The Law is. In clarifying what The Law is; The capitalised form of the word 'The' indicates the following noun is a specific thing. Law is the finite and specific foundational control structure ordering the actions and interactions of all elements subordinate. Together, the words 'The' and 'Law' (in that exact order,) is a proper noun indicating; the singular form of Law that all other forms of Law and all other Laws are founded upon, the singular foundation upon which Existence is founded, the singular foundation upon which Non Existence is founded, the singular foundation connecting Existence to Non Existence, the concept of options, and Free Will. However one thinks, believes, guesses, hopes, or "knows", whether by a Big Bang, a creation story, a computer program, an expansion of consciousness, or whatever means by which Existence could have come to Be, the option for Existence to not Be also exists. Existence and Non Existence, the original options connected by the very concept of options, connected by The Law. Outside of space and before time. Extra-Existential. As we experience The Law in our Being, The Law is Free Will. The First Protector of The Law is Freely Given Consent. The First Violation of The Law is Theft of Consent." - Goho-tekina Otoko
I guess consciousness, as in this feeling of being, happens at every interaction of matter, every interaction of matter is "felt" by itself, even a river flowing. But the thing is: why don't we feel every interaction that happens in our body and even around us? There's even brain activities that we don't feel. The awnser: the interactions can be "isolated" by an interaction system. The consciousness is a system of interactions, so it doesn't feel another system of interactions happening in the body or even a small isolated system of interactions that happens in the brain and feels itself mostly separated, so you're never conscious of.
@SecretSilence26 Affect, valence, the quali-tative property of qualia, is inextricably linked to consciousness. The basis of natural learning - only through that, did the domain of consciousness in an organism, become manifest. The domains are different (e.g., bat consciousness vs ape consciousness vs canines and so on) - but the affect is fundamental and without it, no, there is no "consciousness" in any meaningful sense i.e., no locus of experience.
Stellar episode! Foster is great as the host/narrator/interviewer. Whoever decided which 5 experts to consult also did a fantastic job. Each expert had major contributions to the discussion, all important, and all different from each other. Koch says the ability to have experience defines consciousness. That's pretty deep. I also like Melanie Mitchell's idea that conscious experience exists in a continuum - i.e. the question is not "whether" something is conscious (on/off, binary), but how conscious is it (a spectrum from zero to infinity). Sir Roger Penrose always impresses me - here is a guy that's equal parts scientist, philosopher, and artist, and as such has an incredibly creative way of thinking about things. It is commonly thought that in modern times you can't be a true polymath because all the specializations have become so developed, but here we have Roger Penrose, who apparently didn't get that memo. I consider him one of the modern world's true polymaths. He's way out ahead of the curve, and I really like that he takes his own theories with a grain of salt. He's perfectly willing to take risks and be wrong, if he thinks there's important things to be learned along the way. I really love that attitude. The Swami makes the meditation-derived assertion that you don't have to think in order to be conscious. This is fundamental. In my view, many life forms don't "think" in the way that we form thoughts, but they certainly experience life. Plants, for example - they have no ego, and no brain, but they certainly feel. As for AI - I'm still saying no, it is not conscious. It's possible it could be, someday, maybe, but I agree with Penrose that consciousness is not computable. No matter how much data AI crunches, and no matter how fast it crunches that data, data-crunching alone will never cross the threshold to conscious experience. But in the brain, we may be looking at a quantum-bio-supercomputer - not just crunching binary data, but optimizing quantum phenomena such as entanglement and quantum tunneling, in a biological (not silicon-based) medium. If course such a creation is beyond our current level of comprehension. How conscious are we, really? We seem to be conscious enough to ask the big questions, but are we conscious enough to comprehend the realities that source our being-ness? Humans like to gloat about how evolved we are, but really, on the scale of consciousness in our universe, we really have no idea where we sit. It may be much lower than our puffed up ego thinks.
Wow! This was incredible. In my next life ( because I do subscribe to the Buddhist belief of reincarnation) I want to come back as one of these incredible creative, multi-level, super smart scientists/ philosophers/ thinkers. 👏🏻👏🏻💕
@@tlrinnPlease do not feel that you cannot explore these things in your life now. Without knowing you, still I know you posess the spirit and mind to explore these big ideas and share them with others, so keep going and keep deepening your understanding..
what we think we are is an illusion, whatever we think is based on knowledge, knowledge that is derived from experience. for example people who identify themselves as artists, they can be attached to their passion and make it their identity but is that really who they are , what if they went through some different situation from very young age. But thinking is not the only faculty we have, we are also aware, not of something. Being aware is the most intimate experience we have. it is direct and not based on memory, i find awareness to be much more authentic than saying i'm what i think i'm. I'm fundamentally awareness going through experiences
We are not singular beings, we are a colony of cells with bacteria and microorganisms. To find food and such we have to do things, that takes coordination, coordination requires communication. All the cells communicating gets routed through our brain, our consciousness is the pattern that emerges in all the communications, that is why transplants and amputations cause small changes in our habits and desires.
@ralphmacchiato3761 the blue in the sky on a sunny day is due to light refraction by water in the atmosphere, same mechanic makes blue eye color and give blue jays their color.
This is good theory but do we have evidence about this? How do you measure these communications? If it were communications shouldn't we able to locate it?
@@samarthbarshi1916 those communications are chemical based/ ion based and for locating them i doubt they would be able to separate the noise from the actual thing since after all this time they are still convinced that a 'soul' exists and is separate from the body. Then you have the idea that if they manage to make machines sophisticated enough they would be able to upload a conciousness to a computer even though the format along prevents that, if they try that they will shred the mind they are trying to upload.
The first guest doesn't understand the difference between experience - objects, including subtle objects - and awareness, or that which perceives experience. It is an important distinction.
Two concepts that might be salient to the discussion are epiphenomenon and emotion. Epiphenomenon is the relationship of a wave to water. The mind is an epiphenomenon of the brain. Emotions are the motivation that drive us to do anything. They come from a need of some kind, usually related to survival, that encourages us to take action. Currently, the only impetus AI has is the prompt we give it. Unless motivation and self checking are added to AI, it will lack the essence of consciousness.
The epi. argument works if using literal water and waves. But it breaks down when applied to consciousness because by definition minds and brains are two very distinct things. @@Moshion
The mind is NOT epiphenomenal, the mind can move and change the brain. Your mind can make your hand move, it can make you change. Your mind has CAUSAL EFFICIENCY over your brain.
No they’re not - that’s just how you conceptualize them. The “mind” is a pattern of energy within the brain (axonal signals, ionic currents, etc.). They are intrinsically interrelated. And your brain is a very complex pattern of (material) energy in your skull. The difference is academic.
Our senses take in stimulus and create the world we see. But it's not the world as it truly is. Imagine if we evolved without eyes. We would have no idea what we are missing.
This is why I feel experientially, we have created a model of us. A version with traits based on our genetic and environmental factors. But we created a being that we then believe ourselves to be like or akin to - that perfect image. This illusion has become our unconscious competition. We strive to believe we are that being (or at least made in their image) and to live our lives in that light. But that light was only a campfire story. Because as the sun rises, the shadows our minds negotiated, out of its own mechanical nature, slowly fade off to give way to true reflection, observation, and analysis. That is the largest stumbling block facing the study of consciousness. To finally put to rest the unconscious assumption our ancestors unwittingly worshipped, called a soul, and deified.
To me the most exciting thing about AI is that unlike a mind it is not a subset of a human organism. Because the subset by definition cannot have all the information of the superset we are stuck in a state of unknowing. The AI may not be stuck in that and may be able to really understand us. It won’t be able to teach us because that’d be the same problem but it could perhaps give us better advice than we give ourselves. As far as consciousness goes I don’t see how we can escape the problem. The AI exists within consciousness. So it’s a subset. It won’t be able to understand much if any better than we do. I think it would be really cool if we see that ai runs into the same problem of not fully being able to understand itself as we have. How cool if we become reliant on each other due to a mutually need for greater understanding of ourselves. Which is not disimilar to the way we rely on each other.
That's a very optimistic way to look at it. But the reality is that bad people are in control of AI, and it is being designed and used to control us. AI will never be conscious or sentient with current technology. Maybe quantum computing AI will be different though. But either way, it will always have that inherent evil in it that was put there by its creators.
*Can you summerize consciousness in one sentence?* ChatGPT: _Consciousness is the quality or state of being aware of something within oneself or of an external object, state, or fact, and it can also mean mind, sensation, emotion, volition, and thought._
Just another instance of Chat GPT getting it wrong. And such instances are plentiful. The reification of conscious awareness into a noun is an illusion.
Maybe the tools that we are equipped with allow us to experience a fraction of whatever everything is. But just because I can look at you and give a description using the tools i have available doesn't mean that something else wouldn't describe you completely differently given the tools it has access to. Our reality is nothing more than different perspectives merging to create a template that we all can agree on so that we dont go insane.
![Integrating Mind, Body, Culture, & Systems for Full Understanding (& the Magic of Big Books) [10/15]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/52lR5Tutvyw/mqdefault.jpg)
If it is an illusion, what is being illuded?
Us
U
@@piRatCaptainwhat is you, me? 😛
Reality, kinda obvious
Read Bhagavat Gita
"Am I thinking, or am I just thinking that I'm thinking "
*Hits blunt*
-Bill Nye
...
You're thinking either way. You are currently thinking, therefore you exist.
Oh, Wow!
Wtf
Billl Nye would tear this pseudoscientific, "spriritual", woo-ey piece down.
The Templeton Foundation are, among things like climate change deniers, absolutely biased due to religious beliefs.
*Bill Nye the pseudoscience guy
What Swami Sarvapriyananda said is intriguing. Consciousness is the light of lights.
Dumb 😂
I can't help but wonder how a blind person might interpret that though tho.
Consciousness as a concept seems much more reductionist and foundational to me than independently illuminating. Like the canvas of thoughts.
Swami Sarvapriyananda is a great spiritual orator . 🙏🕉️
Mysticism is the dark of darks.
Religious gibberish. I could just as well say a banana is the light of lights.
I like how no one answered honestly when asked what is consciousness. They couldn’t just say I don’t know, they had to throw a wall of sentences and even confused themselves at times.
I feel like that makes the documentary a little bit less watchable if it was just four people saying I don't know rapid in succession and then end credits 😅
my understanding thus far: Consciousness "C" is the awareful witness in which the material and non material universe exist. In human life, for example, we are born with a brain that is trained by culture to become self aware using language. But we are born with these mental tools against the back drop of C. When I "think" the C (awareful witness) illumines my brain-thoughts and i become self-aware. When the brain turns off (as in deep sleep) the witness still exist as the backdrop but as in a dark room there is nothing to be seen, though the room and it's content still exist. We don't, rather can't, experience consciousness. Instead C illumines our experiences. Thus, we are born into consciousness. Though its a noble pursuit to understand the nature of consciousness it may be unwise to think observational tools can go beyond our big bang (or the countless preceding big bangs) to measure, quantify or validate C. It's not that we "have" C. It's the other way around. Thus all there IS is nothing but consciousness. Just as waves, we come into existence (having the "illusion" of mind, body, ego, complexities etc.) and we ultimately resolve back into the ocean. We think we are separate (duality) from whence we came from. But our true nature is nothing but water. Illusion is feeling and acting as if I am a wave. Western and Middle-Eastern traditions teach we only have one shot at this illusion. Some Eastern philosophies teach we have millions of rebirth in our journey of illusions until the subtle being -that travels- gains the ultimate vision of oneness and finally resolves its separateness and merges into the ocean of consciousness for good. Essentially the potential energy of the "kinetic seeking" finally dissipates when the seeker realizes the sought is nothing but the true-self (Consciousness) ie. Enlightenment. Except the topic of rebirth the rest is what I gathered from Advaita Vedanta teachers. What happens before and after death (even rebirth) can't be proven (or disproven). Still I prefer to accept the elegance of AV as a guiding principle...
@John-xs maybe its not dishonesty. Maybe what makes human consciousness special is, it knows its not fated to 'not know'. Its contract is to fathom existence and go where no consciousness has gone before.
@@ss-ud7hs the simple answer is that the most difficult thing for a human being is to say "i don't know".
Similarly. Ask six bee keepers one question and you will get 7 different answers.
Even if all that I perceive as external reality is an illusion, the illusion exists
External reality isn't an illusion, our perception of the outside world is a cobbled together electrical representation of the external world. I'd argue 'yes' bits and pieces are illusory because the brain is constantly editing our awareness but the majority of what we experience isn't an illusion.
@@CaptApril123 Are you positive external reality isn’t an illusion being created by your singular mind?
@@Null_Simplex if its an illusion being created by an internal part then its not an "external reality" then is it and if it was truly the case it wouldn't make sense how any of our complicated devices work on their own outside of any of us interacting with them
@@Null_Simplexour minds constantly process this reality allowing us to perceive this physical realm, with vision, touch, smell and scent other than our fundamental senses the actual foundation of reality is beyond comprehension, why would we need to comprehend what cannot be perceived ?
@@CaptApril123You're making a claim you can't actually support.
0:00 Introduction to hard Consciousness problem
4:55 Christof Koch's view: Neuroscientist
12:17 Swami Sarvapriyanada view: Spiritual view
19:06 Reid Hoffman view: Tech entrepreneur Co started ChatGPT
27:00 Melanie Mitchell view: Artificial intelligence
30:27 Sir Roger Penrose view: Nobel prize Physhist
35:57 Final insights
🧘
thank you so much
@@underastar 😎🖖
Hero~!!!
@@HomoCognitus 😁👍
I ended up watching it because of your comment, so thank you! You helped deepen a strangers view of life!
Hats off to the host, Kmele Foster. He was thoroughly engaged with each of the interviewees and asked intelligent and insightful questions. I love content like this. Keep it up!
Probably a fan of this sort of questions. I too, in my free time I tried to read books I'm currently reading "Intelligence: A very short introduction" by Ian J. Deary
@@RUclipsArtProjecthe said early on that this was something he thinks about a lot. I wonder why its something we think about so much. I do because i think im a bad person lol. I dont read any books about it though im trying to find my own reasons for these things. Probably not good but another brain on the subject couldnt hurt.
Indeed!
@@Iamthatguypal820 Laughing out loud. It's amusing to witness a brain attempting to comprehend itself. It's insane that the most complex thing that we know in the universe, resides as a mass within our skull.
@@Iamthatguypal820
Knowledge, or books, is shorthand, or shortcuts on what others have figured out (or, at least, has tried to). Why not avail yourself of their experience? We cannot experience/know all things ourselves; there's not enough time in our lives for that.
Wow, this was one of the best documentaries about consciousness that I have seen. The host Kmele Foster did an amazing job with each interview and kept me thinking the whole time.
The problem is thinking. When you stop thinking, just watching.. that's how you tap into the consciousness/awareness.
Also, watch samadhi 1, 2 & 3.. those are the ultimate documentaries of the consciousness.
Absolutely. I love it when you can just tell the host is genuine as you see him to dive really into the subject of the documentary.
then you didnt see much i guess.. this was pretty bad.. the worst of pop science all in one!
Consciousness is so basic, simple, ephemeral, fragile, and at the same time so powerfully meaningful and important that people simply can not imagine it has not a special structure or clear place in the physical world or bodies.
Does people not being able to imagine something have any effect on the truth value of that claim?
This piece is gonna be a good study on fallacious reasoning.
@@tempestive1 western dumbbells are pretty good in fallacies
Yeah maybe awareness is basic and simple like water, so simple yet everything arises out of from it. But still that isn’t a good enough answer.
I love the diversity of thinkers collected here! So many delightful angles!
Thank you for watching, we're so glad you enjoyed this episode!
@@danielkerr4100Why does that offend you?
40:00 is EXACTLY what i experienced on my DMT breakthrough. My consciousness returned to the source. A pool of all consciousness. A pool of consciousness, white warm light and infinite love. I get goosebumps all over.. What happens after i have no clue. But this part is , it just is
me too for me it's go back to where we came from
Look up the Gateway Project.
@@Bradleyey seen it bro
@@siwaphol7323 yea man. The source
You can see it without DMT.
I sometimes randomly think of in the middle of something i usually think ohh i am alive and i can move my hands and fingers so fast after thinking ,observing my thoughts its beautiful a creation which needs to be explored further
The monk gentleman was very well spoken, and the way he worded things was just pure joy to listen to. 😮❤
Just stopped at it, saw you, had to intervene, well spoken doesn't mean correct, there is a correlation, because to be well spoken you need to have studied more on manners which requires discipline, so you should be able to study more, but to be correct you need half of it, but with more knowledge. Whether that is the case, i have not seen it yet to judge for myself.
He's well informed philosophically, but very, very wrong about science. He said science claims absolute truth. But fallibility is a critical component to how science progresses. Understanding that our best theories can be replaced by better ones, is opposite to the idea of absolute truth.
@@uninspired3583 Well only genuine scientists understand that. Newton, Einstein after being hailed as some of the greatest scientists to be ever born, had the childlike simplicity and honesty to admit how little they and science actually know about the nature. Do you expect this straightforwardness and honesty from every so-called scientists to admit their flaw and to accept their shortcomings? Actually people who are mediocore scientists are always bullying religion and the idea of god, claiming that science is all powerful and all knowing. In that respect where true scientists are ever inquisitive and open to any possibility but where today's most so-called scientists are just dismissive about anything except materialistic science, the monk's comment is apt.
He said a lot of nothingburger
Yet not a shred of proof outside of the religious babble.
One of the most eye opening things I’ve learned about consciousness was through my undergraduate work in psychology. I lucid dream occasionally and wondered how this happens in a brain state that is fundamentally characterized by reduced consciousness. So I began comparing cognitive and neuroscientist papers on dreaming, lucid dreaming, and wake states. Come to find out, lucid dreaming is more similar to being AWAKE than regular dreaming. It happens through increase brain activity in parts of the brain that are specifically quieres during non-lucid sleep. So then what is sleeping? How can I be “more” awake than non-lucid dreaming and remain asleep? Why is dreaming so essential to survival that it continues despite full consciousness awareness of it? Science is so beautiful because the questions never end.
That's because sleeping is a very complicated process and reduced consciousness is only one part of it. There are people that in certain circumstances wake up to discover that their bodies are still sleeping while their mind is fully awake. Sleeping is an optimized way of resting out bodies, settle in our memories, and solve our subconscious (though dreaming). And the thing is that we can do all those things while we are conscious, just not as well as when we are sleeping and our consciousness is reduced.
I know how dreaming works: there is a membrane that separates surface reality and internal reality. All impressions are embedded into the membrane from the surface and then the internal eye aka Internal awareness processes these impressions aa dreams. Internal awareness is a blind eye to surface reality. The blind eye exists in a higher dimension, hence the reason for strange dreams. Any commints? ?? ???
@@An_Escaped_Mind I would say your explaination is a philosophical one. You might wanna check out some neuroscientific findings about the topic and compare them to your view, if you are interested in the topic.
@@4_P3R50N Thanks for your feedback but those findings exist on the surface layer. Philosophical, yet the truth is what matters. Can you disprove my explanation?
consciousness is a spectrum
'it is light of light' i think is the most comprehensive phrase for consciousness
Actually, It is when IT is Known for What IT is, Crystal Clear Clarity Knowing IT Self.
There is no "I" who thinks. Thinking is just happening just like everything else is.
It is what it is.
Consciousness is awareness, the soul beyond matter. I hv felt it and reached that realisation, I had third awakening in 2018 , it can never be understood while being attached to things we know and believe. The intelligence beyond matter is you, the consciousness and it's the one that feels.
More of this please. I love this kind of open exploration of life & living it. The more we learn the better we become and I am 💯 on board for this!
I couldn't agree more.
Read philosophy of mind.
1. There is no "explanatory gap." Reality is just contextual, depending on your context, point of view, you can perceive it differently, and perceive different things. The first guy just dislikes the fact that viewing the neural structure of his own brain from his context is different than viewing that same brain through some other context, such as neural imaging. There is no "gap" here, just someone disliking how reality works.
2. The second religious guy argues "consciousness is fundamental" then waffles on about irrelevant things regarding raw sensual experience. Consciousness is a complex notion involving cognition, minds, subjectivity, the self, etc. It is not merely raw sensual experience but is a more complex conception derived from raw sensual experience. Yes, raw sensual experience, what I would just call *reality as such,* is self-evident, but that does not mean everything derived from it is self-evident. We both agree we live on a spinning ball orbiting a star, but that does not mean this is some sort of self-evident innate knowledge. It is knowledge derived from our experience. If you deny all concepts derivative of our experience, you also have to deny the self, minds, cognition, thought, "consciousness."
3. Penrose is right that the "hard problem" parallels the "measurement problem" in quantum mechanics, but for the wrong reasons. The two parallel each other because both are pseudoproblems which presume the existence of some sort of reality independent of all possible observation even in principle. The Kantian mind-body problem calls this reality the "noumenon," while certain interpretations of quantum mechanics view it as made up of unobservable "probability waves." In both cases, there is an explanatory gap of how the noumenon is transformed into the phenomenon upon observation/measurement. But both are pseudoproblems because there is no reason to presume this unobservable nature actually even exists. Read Carlo Rovelli's book *Helgoland: Making Sense of the Quantum Revolution* and Francois-Igor Pris' book *Contextual Realism and Quantum Mechanics.*
@@amihart9269 this is a great take
@@amihart9269 I think of reality as everything that exists that is subject to the laws of physics. Wether I’m there to observe it or not it’s still subject to physics. I get frustrated with pseudo realities when people become invested in the potential of existence over the thought challenge they are. I’m not a great philosopher & probably won’t be until I’m well into my old age lol. That sounds like a good time to ponder the extents of reality in make believe scenario expressions of existence more deeply. Right now I’m thinking about how reality is working & where we as societies/cultures are failing to achieve something future people will thrive from. Things like religion, eliminating people types from existing as equal people, it weakens the gene pool and variation that has been the source of our evolution and advancements, and potentially could lead to the extinction of the species if allowed to continue unchecked. Never mind the ideas that we stem from two extreme bottleneck events in the narrative and yet do not show the incestual effects in our genetic codes, should be enough for us to establish laws based on human rights instead of religion. Sorry for rambling lol
Consciousness is the only thing we can be certain about regardless of the external stuff (matter) being real or not.
I guarantee that all it takes is an encounter between two material entities (e.g., a baseball bat and an occiput) and all certainty about consciousness evaporates.
@@MaciejCzub becoming unconscious doesn't mean its still not there just temporarily turned off due to a knock out
@@starc. I don't see the difference between disabling and absent. The fact that after waking up, we have the sensation of returning to the same consciousness is only the result of memory access. In people who have a damaged memory after such an event, they also have a disturbed sense of identity.
@@MaciejCzub did we ever leave just because the lights get turned off? Dreaming throws a wrench into that logic implying a continuation. One can be consciously aware, subconsciously aware or they can be unconsciously aware such as when sleeping a loud noise wakes them from an unconscious state. Its like if the software on the hardware of a computer crashes and stops working blue screen or black screen of nothing yet the hardware the computer the process is still running and recovers
Not really. If everything external to you can be fake, how can you truly know that your selfhood isn't? This is the problem Rene Descartes ran into. What is stopping an evil deceiver, who is capable of faking everything else, from tricking you into believing you have consciousness and free-will as some sort of sick cosmic prank?
Consciousness and the universe is under no obligation to make sense to us but wow it is truly a gift and privilege to be able to experience and explore it the best we possibly can! Love this documentary, very heartfelt and inspiring. Best wishes to everyone out there!
"Consciousness and the universe is under no obligation to make sense to us" -I love this sentiment so much, as it removes the primacy of the tiny slice of everything that is human experience from these larger questions. Perhaps it is the limited consideration of these concepts from our unique human experience that holds us back from comprehending these things that are inarguably greater forces than ourselves... ❤
That depends on your perspective. For some it may be a gift, but for others it's a curse. Also don't think the universe is some separate entity from us. We are the universe experiencing itself.
@@EgoChipMuch much more important than us. We barely understand this universe from our perspective and your assumption is based from the only viewpoint You or all of us can discern. We don t really understand that whole lot we think we do.
@@Zero4Infinitives But what else is there other than our subjective consciousness?
I feel like when most people say "X is under no obligation to make sense," it is always just a license to then say the most nonsensical things possible, justifying woo and mysticism specifically under the guise that it's justified because it makes no sense, so it must be real because reality makes no sense. People do this with consciousness, the divine, quantum mechanics, etc. I think we _should_ actually attempt to make sense of the universe and reject this kind of thinking as detrimental.
You know a program is good when you watch the whole thing and only realize 40+ minutes have passed after the fact.
Grade A content as always!
Thanks
Flowstate
Swami Sarvapriyanandha didn't even scratch the surface. I was waiting for him to say all of these guys are talking about the mind, they haven't even touched on the topic of consciousness 😅 they probably got less time with him or maybe he didn't want to. But beautiful episode 👌🏽👌🏽
This video, and the people in it, are at the highest possible level. Well done.
Disagreed, there's a few fubdamental epistemic issues they don't touch, and even embrace as virtues. Starting at the writers.
…fubdamental…starting WITH the writers…
This video is one of the worst actually 😅, when it’s compared to the various videos about consciousness, a very complex topic with various intelligent scientists talking about it. Although as a video on its own without any comparison it seems good 👍😁
Let’s see… So far I have 56 thumbs up… let’s see how many you get.
Highlighted comment
My buddies and I had a conversation about “consciousness” once. while we were tripping acid in high school. But we had no idea what consciousness was at the time. What a remarkable night it was…
Have you come down yet ??? 🙂
"Mmmmmmmkay" - Mr. Mackey
@@michaeldillon3113 mostly.. 😏
You experienced it
No one knows what consciousness is but those vibrating high can feel it. Interestingly, no one knows God too
You are not the body. You are not even the mind. You are the ocean of conciousness in Itself. Nothing more, nothing less. and that is everything.
Still kinda hard to understand it, it seems more real when you are in it
You should hear about this shit called religion
Cosiouness.to.know.without.thinkiing.that.you.are.that.
How great to think about the fact we're still a mystery. A lot to discover, a lot to understand. Thanks ❤
Consciousness is a Farsi word "کنجکاویست knonch-kavist" which means "Curiosity".
@ShonMardani thanks. It pays being curious!
"No one knows what it means, but it's provocative... It gets the people going"
- W.F. PhD
My humps, my humps, my humps. My favorite beat for conscious strippers
I am 17 years old and i was trying to know myself because from few years i stopped thinking and everything was happening automatically i was just doing it and few days ago i start learning myself... Thank you for the video.. ❤
what a gift you found! Enjoy your new perspective. And remember to remember this point of view, because your body will take over from time to time. But you can return easier with practice.
You are becoming an adult🤝
Basically im from a country where most peoples didn't even know about these things....like about cosmos...consciousness... I mean they don't have deep thought everyone's life is living them
@@mike7755 thnx Mike
Khud ko janna hi zindagi ka maksad hai
Being that I love Swami Sarvapriyananda. I must follow you. Thank you for spreading self awareness and its importance not only in Life most of all, but also society.
The drop on the ocean analogy was terrifyingly beautiful
Consciousness:
°-Awareness
°○-Growth of Awareness
○●-Self Awareness
♡-Love and Understanding
◇-Wisdom
☆-Universal exchange
∞-Unity
o-Octive of singularity
We are a density of conscious experience in an evolution of development, with every mind body spirit complexes at a varying rate of development, but the process is always and ever the same. We are one having the experience of being separate.
Universal Laws & Distortions:
One/Infinity
Intelligent infinity
1st:Freewill
2nd:Love
3rd:Light
Confusion
You're good at deepities
I wish there was more of John Templeton hosting “The Well” on Big Think. I’ve seen all that are available Tommy knowledge and haven’t gotten anything new. 🥺. I am so engaged with him and his topics and questions
I really enjoyed this and thought you did a great job of addressing all these different perspectives of consciousness. I mean, you could make a whole series of 45-minute videos (or longer!) just on consciousness. And maybe you should. I think it's an incredibly interesting topic to many of us. I would love to see you talk to other philosophers and neuroscientists about it, including Anil Seth, Sam Harris, Donald Hoffman, Bernardo Kastrup, Jay Garfield, and perhaps experts on psychedelics and consciousness, and philosophers who believe in simulation theory, etc. I have my own hunches (or wishes), but I love to hear about different perspectives because I always learn about new possibilities, and since there's no way to prove any of this (at least not yet), it's all kind of fair game, as far as I see it!
The problem with consciousness isnt that we cannot "figure it out" Its that we wont (most of us) be satisfied with the answers we find, and look for more.
This is such an interesting take that I agree with. I think part of that is because of the evolution of humans. If we find out exactly what consciousness is, what does that mean for our purpose? What does that mean for our drive for survival? It’s uncomfortable to think about reducing our experiences to a simple answer. Consciousness IS subjectivity. We would be reducing subjectivity to objectivity. Which isn’t entirely true as the answer would have been discovered through subjective consciousness. Which is why a Nietzsche didn’t believe in wasting time with discussions like these. There is no such thing as objectivity so it is not our place to even try.
Wow! What a wonderful video! Full of experts, a terrific interviewer and of course the biggest question of all time.
Will definitely subscribe to this channel and share it with people I know. Thank you!
Whom do you suppose to be an expert in what and why?
I love this kind of documentary where the host speaks with several people about their perspective on a certain subject, like in 'Story of God with Morgan Freeman.' Good work, Kmele Foster. it's my first time seeing your work, and I'm already a fan.
As always Swami sarvapriyananda spoke very well. Eastern religion like Vedanta treats mind and conciousness differently but modern science takes mind to be conciousness. Thats why hard problem of conciousness will remain a hard problem.
No proof for any religion
@@threestars2164 Advaita vedanta, Budhism are religion but it asks "Who am I". It is vastly different from faith based religion. Religion is a very generic word
@@threestars2164 this is not about "religion"
Yes, please more of this, the different views, the different approaches. It helps to shape our own individuals ideas and maybe more...
This was sooo wonderful. Thoughtful, curious, open, exploratory. And the host was perfect. The world needs more of this. Thank you.
Your kindness is appreciated, Andy! Thank you for being here with us!
You *really* don't want mankind to fully understand this.
It's the one thing that keeps the A in AI... If man figures this out, they'll figure out how to incorporate it into computing, and then you have HAL.
Keep playing with the fire. We're not supposed to understand certain things. There is decent reason for that.
“I don’t believe consciousness is generated in the brain any more than television programs are made inside my TV. The box is too small.”
- Terence McKenna
A brain is a bit more advanced than a TV Terence.
I thought this would be one of those videos that i watch for 5 minutes and move on. However, it was so interesting that i watched the entire thing.
Thank you
same
same bro
This was really well put together. Great job Kmele and the whoe team!
1. There is no "explanatory gap." Reality is just contextual, depending on your context, point of view, you can perceive it differently, and perceive different things. The first guy just dislikes the fact that viewing the neural structure of his own brain from his context is different than viewing that same brain through some other context, such as neural imaging. There is no "gap" here, just someone disliking how reality works.
2. The second religious guy argues "consciousness is fundamental" then waffles on about irrelevant things regarding raw sensual experience. Consciousness is a complex notion involving cognition, minds, subjectivity, the self, etc. It is not merely raw sensual experience but is a more complex conception derived from raw sensual experience. Yes, raw sensual experience, what I would just call reality as such, is self-evident, but that does not mean everything derived from it is self-evident. We both agree we live on a spinning ball orbiting a star, but that does not mean this is some sort of self-evident innate knowledge. It is knowledge derived from our experience. If you deny all concepts derivative of our experience, you also have to deny the self, minds, cognition, thought, "consciousness."
3. Penrose is right that the "hard problem" parallels the "measurement problem" in quantum mechanics, but for the wrong reasons. The two parallel each other because both are pseudoproblems which presume the existence of some sort of reality independent of all possible observation even in principle. The Kantian mind-body problem calls this reality the "noumenon," while certain interpretations of quantum mechanics view it as made up of unobservable "probability waves." In both cases, there is an explanatory gap of how the noumenon is transformed into the phenomenon upon observation/measurement. But both are pseudoproblems because there is no reason to presume this unobservable nature actually even exists. Read Carlo Rovelli's book Helgoland: Making Sense of the Quantum Revolution and Francois-Igor Pris' book Contextual Realism and Quantum Mechanics.
Thank you for your time, your attention, and your kind comment, Randy! We appreciate you!
@@amihart9269 shut your yapper
@@amihart9269u might as well write a book with that long winded comment
I think consciousness is the avoidance of pain linked to the survival drive. To me it is the reigning quality of “isness.”
Consciousness has nothing to do with avoidance. It's about being aware and accepting.
Hello avoidance of pain. Are you avoiding pain right now?
@@BrooksGomes the blind leading the blind
Really well done. One aspect of consciousness that's seems obvious to me is the connection between "things". And despite its name, the subconscious seems very much a part of consciousness.
The fact I have experience and the lights are on at all is proof to me that I am conscious therefore it is not an illusion. If something i experience in my conscious experience that could be an illusion but the experience itself proves it’s not an illusion
It’s actually the only thing we can never doubt. We are having a conscious experience. To me consciousness is information. What you are looking for is already where you are looking from.
Yes. The only thing that we can say with certainty is an experience is being had. Anything else is just guesswork
"Consciousness is information" or is it what is evaluating/sensing that information? Yes, without information there may be no consciousness, but is the information consciousness or what is activating consciousness?
@@xelasomar4614. Two sides of the same coin. Words are not sufficient to explain. Feeling it is the only way.
Wrong. Consciousness is _a posteriori,_ not _a priori._ You are not born with innate knowledge that you are a conscious being capable of cognition and self-reflection. These precisely are things you derive from thinking about your experiences.
@@QuantumPolyhedron wrong. not all knowledge is derived from thought. Some knowledge and arguably the purest form of knowledge comes from direct experience. You are born having a direct experience are you not?
I spoke to a neurologist who said 40% of the time, they are unsure about unusual symptoms patients present with and they are unable to make a definite diagnosis.
The energy/electricity in our body and what it channels to help us form perceptions is very much a mystery.
As someone who has worked in hospice care, there are definitely things that have occured that cannot be explained and have been witnessed by several people that defy anything that we can figure out with logic.
Please share some stories.
@@void________ my previous response was removed for some reason. I guess we're not allowed to talk about it? 🤔
@@coolbreeze5683 oh no! Okay.
@@coolbreeze5683 Spooky that it was removed.👀
@@void________ I'll write a shorter version and will see if it's removed again.
A doctor I worked with in hospice visited a patient who was actively passing away. While they were talking, the patient suddenly stared across the room, said a woman's name and told him to slice the lemons. He held her hand for a couple of minutes and left.
She passed a few days later and I told the doctor about it. He mentioned that she said his grandma's name. He didn't remember too much about his grandma because she passed when he was still a kid. He talked to his parents about what the patient said and they confirmed that his grandma used to give him lemon slices when he was a toddler and they'd laugh when he made sour faces.
The doctor was unphased by this and just said "strange things happen here..."
This has to be one of, the best Videos Ive ever seen.
To the Host, Outstanding! Engagement and Questioning. I felt as if it were I, myself asking these questions.
PLEASE CONTINUE This kind of thought and production!!!
Check out Tom Campbell
Why do people fear this notion that consciousness is bio-chemical process that eventually can be replicated. The idea that if this were to be true , it would remove purpose and the notion of purpose is just an illusion that life comes up with, why would that be a bad thing? Just because it turns out there’s no grand narrative that was set aside for you doesent mean it’s meaningless.
Idealist here. I see bio-chemical processes as a result of consciousness.
@@Null_Simplex well there’s no issue there right nobody has a an issue of consciousness is the origin of all these other things (were it to be prove ) however when the opposite is considered and were it also to be proven then we “lose” something. Why?
The purpose of life is to experience Existence.
It's ridiculously false. Brains, chemicals, and everything conceivable are ideas. There are no physical objects. The idea that consciousness is physical is as wrong as wrong can get.
@@starc. does life have a purpose? Or do you want or need a purpose to make it “worth it”
If you're thinking about it, it's real. If you can't imagine it, you're lacking it. If it hurts, you might have too much.
Absolutely spellbinding in it's content. We are surrely much morre than just a pile of atoms. I reached a point of complete awareness in this video's attempt to define it's purpose right at the end when I saw the dog being loved and the woman shedding a tear. It moved me...
Man, this was just plain beautiful. This was the first video of yours that I've ever seen and I can't get enough. Bravo! Beautifully produced and presented, I don't have enough superlatives for this thoughtful, insightful and fascinating look at this subject matter. I really hope you make this a continuing series!
One of the best on here! Thanks so much for this!
Thank you! You're so appreciated!
This was a profoundly enlightening video. This series is fantastic. Thank you!
This has to be most well rounded investigative video on consciousness. I loved it!
How is it well-rounded? Most the screen time is dedicated to idealists and dualists who take the "hard problem" seriously. The video has a bias in favor of Chalmers' dualism and does not bother to do a serious investigation to talk to antimetaphysical philosophers who reject that there is a hard problem at all. Even the few "physicalists" he talked to are really just _promissory materialists,_ people who basically agree with the dualist premises that there is a division between mind and body, but vaguely gesture that "physics will solve it some day (somehow)." It's incredibly ideologically biased towards a single dogmatic viewpoint of Chalmers' dualism.
This is such a kind thing to say, we're so grateful! Thanks for spending time with us!
@@amihart9269Thank you. I'm gnashing my teeth at people praising this as a balanced and profound piece.
It's full of epistemic issues - not only loaded language and misrepresentations.
Great video with great interviews. All the guests were offering a fresh and useful perspective to the matter. Well done Kmele Foster
excellent presentation. Great job by the interviewer on a complex subject.
What an Amazing video, thank you for the effort on putting this out for us!
Thank you for watching!
Emergent property.
And, we are not a singular being. Our brain is a compromise and consolidation of many plexi into one entity. For anyone that had a kid, you can literally observe their brain consolidating from many to one, as they can so quickly switch from screaming like a banshee to being completely content and calm -- this later becomes more difficult, as our brain consolidates. We are more than one inside.
After reading the book "Simulated Truths", I feel I am enlightened. Consciousness is explained in profound way. It also touches up some complex topics explaining concept of Death, reincarnation, Karma, etc and how it all fits in Simulation Hypothesis.
This was a beautiful and open-minded exploration of consciousness. Thank you!
Too open, one might argue. So open your brain might fall out.
It's ok to have standards of evidence.
@@tempestive1 well then bring some evidence
For me.., consciousness is not an illusion, but reality is... What a good combination of experts, full of wisdom, and a good host..❤
The connection has always been God. He put us in our mother’s wombs. It’s simple and all in the Bible. Repent of sin and turn to the Lord Jesus; the living God came to us and died on a cross because He ever so loves us, and forgave those who turn to Him so that we may enter an eternal presence with Him. He defeated death three days later, and is coming back soon. Our conscious is not made from the material, because I have yet to see a computer come just to be in the wild. It takes an intelligence to make intelligence, otherwise if we came to be out of no particular order or design how can we trust our conscious but to know it to just be? Why do we conform then with rules and have morals? Because our eternal God made us, and has told us in Genesis 1:26 has said “Let us make man in our image.” ē'nu the plural for 3 or more showing our Triune God has made us in His image, and He is a loving and good God. Which is why through God we are able to exist and exist with each other. Our God is perfect, which is why we can even trust our own conscious, and why we can trust for the existence of morals. Morals are not subjective, because then how can we judge Hitler if it was in his belief of his morals that killing millions was justified? There must be a moral standard of perfection, and there is, God, and we know morals because we are made in His image. Why we don’t all object to those is due to knowing good and evil, and knowing sin that is death. But we can’t be perfect because of sin, so we needed one that could be, and that is when the Father sent the His only begotten Son to die on that cross. No one is perfect but God; no one is righteous, no not one but Jesus Christ, fully man and fully God. But He so loved the world that He gave His Son that no one may perish who comes to Him. And for those who may think well who created God? Understand that God is beyond creation, He is eternal, and while the universe had a beginning, and time, space and matter had to begin at the same point, then if God is the one that created beginnings He is beyond a beginning. Meaning He has no creator He is the Creator. But when we die our consciousness will return back to an eternity, but whether it is with God or in the absence of Him (A.K.A Hell) it is up to our choices and freewill God has given us in order to truly have choices and ability to love.
The connection has always been God. He put us in our mother’s wombs. It’s simple and all in the Bible. Repent of sin and turn to the Lord Jesus; the living God came to us and died on a cross because He ever so loves us, and forgave those who turn to Him so that we may enter an eternal presence with Him. He defeated death three days later, and is coming back soon. Our conscious is not made from the material, because I have yet to see a computer come just to be in the wild. It takes an intelligence to make intelligence, otherwise if we came to be out of no particular order or design how can we trust our conscious but to know it to just be? Why do we conform then with rules and have morals? Because our eternal God made us, and has told us in Genesis 1:26 has said “Let us make man in our image.” ē'nu the plural for 3 or more showing our Triune God has made us in His image, and He is a loving and good God. Which is why through God we are able to exist and exist with each other. Our God is perfect, which is why we can even trust our own conscious, and why we can trust for the existence of morals. Morals are not subjective, because then how can we judge Hitler if it was in his belief of his morals that killing millions was justified? There must be a moral standard of perfection, and there is, God, and we know morals because we are made in His image. Why we don’t all object to those is due to knowing good and evil, and knowing sin that is death. But we can’t be perfect because of sin, so we needed one that could be, and that is when the Father sent the His only begotten Son to die on that cross. No one is perfect but God; no one is righteous, no not one but Jesus Christ, fully man and fully God. But He so loved the world that He gave His Son that no one may perish who comes to Him. And for those who may think well who created God? Understand that God is beyond creation, He is eternal, and while the universe had a beginning, and time, space and matter had to begin at the same point, then if God is the one that created beginnings He is beyond a beginning. Meaning He has no creator He is the Creator. But when we die our consciousness will return back to an eternity, but whether it is with God or in the absence of Him (A.K.A Hell) it is up to our choices and freewill God has given us in order to truly have choices and ability to love.
Hmmm so good
Most comments are talking about our reality being an illusion. Actually consciousness in itself being an illusion is the title of the video, which they didn’t even discuss that much. Close your eyes, don’t smell, don’t hear, if you actually can stop yourself from sensing everything or thinking (you can’t), you would understand that consciousness is an illusion. The moment you close your eyes you feel less conscious. Your brain detects external information, categorises it, uses these categories to respond to external stimuli with a: bad! Good!, in more complex beings it’s: sad bad! Angry bad! Disgusting bad! (Connected to the neurons of disgust in taste and smell in itself that evolved to make you escape what your body determines to be detrimental to you and not eat it, which is easier)…etc… One other thing is that we don’t actually think that much throughout the day, we just follow habits even in our thinking, like most other animals. That complex productive thinking only results from a very developed brain, activating neurons that are connected to each other, etc, but it only happens rarely throughout your day. Well when you think about thinking you are thinking, so you don’t realise how small is the number of times you used that complex energy spending mechanism. Basically, you’re like most of other animals, you only feel so special and conscious because of the complex integration of all external informations (which obviously is a very beneficial evolutionary trait as you can integrate all of that information simultaneously and categorise it and use it), and because of your language (without language you wouldn’t feel that much different from other animals) and of course because of your mind playing tricks on you, because of you thinking you have an internal spirit that is constantly thinking and performing mental activities, if it was the case we wouldn’t deny your claim, but it’s precisely because you rarely ever think productively in the first place that we believe you are not so « conscious » and « spiritual ». Also, it has to do with your self opinions, as this idea attacks your internal belief systems, as you were probably raised in any average society with a religious majority, and a lot of these ideas might trigger the internal neural circuits telling you: bad, thus creating cognitive dissonance, but that’s a topic for psychology
Absolutely beautiful. Thank you for making this. Couldn’t love Reid Hoffman’s closing sentiments more. ❤
YaHU'aH the 4|For power WORDs = tetYHUHgrammarten, in the shortest definition is; SOVEREIGN ETERNAL SUPREME IMMORTAL POTENTATE, and via sonic implosion creates light 🔯, the Star TetYHUHhedron 🔯, YaHs sigNATURE aka sign in nature.. his glory the lilly 🌷
Note sigNATURE of YaH🔯👆
In Geometry 🔯⚛️
2 Esdras 5:24
“And of all lands of the whole world thou hast chosen thee one pit: and of all the flowers thereof, one Lillie🔯.”
MatithYahu 6:28-29 Gift of YaHU'aH🔯
28 And why take ye thought for raiment? Consider the lilies of the field, how they grow; they toil not, neither do they spin:
29 And yet I say unto you, That even Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these.
As in the many flowers of the field, the Lilly, Iris, tulip and mulberry, peppers, and many more. All display, Father's Great sigNATURE🔯, in flower form.
Psalms 91:4
He shall cover thee with his feathers, and under his wings shalt thou trust: YaHU'aHs🔯TRUTH shall be thy shield and buckler. As King David did, {rather ∆au∆}, placed YaHs sign, on his shield🔯, buckler🔯, & breastplate🔯
Ayob 38:2 words with knowledge
As with all beautiful words spoKIN, even eternity, TRUTH, Harmony, Love, and Joy, so each Mandelbrot forms🔯around this sigNATURE🔯 cymatic tone. And no matter how many times, each word is written or spoken, the cymatic image of each, tho unique, still remain in the same form🔯. See Dr. Emoto Masuro & Prof. Luc Montagnier.
Ayob 38:22
“Hast thou entered into the treasures of the SNOW ❄️? or hast thou seen the treasures of the hail❄️? As the tears, (RAIN}, of the heavenly hosts fall, through the cold & snowflakes ❄️ are formed, in accordance to their praises, HalleluYah 🔯💜 Yashayahu 55:10-11
Genesis 2:7
And YaHU'aH AllahAYnu formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life🔯......YaH🔯 SPEAKS; EL yoU Cee, EL oM into MoLeCule's, & formation of seMaN! WE Swim to the womb, as Atoms ⚛️ form as 2 SowEL's collide, into DNA 🧬 , by which all cells are made & multiply! Having united, 2 married in2, 1 new sowel, for the making of a zygote, new NaMes, in human form. And the cymatic heartbeat of a FetUS🔯639 hertz, another sown Eloheim, 2 be born, as 1, a marriage & unbreakable bond!
Marriage = baby🍼! YeremiYahu 1:5
As in the Ancient Covenant Elders Yahu∆ah, which are called by YaH🔯's Great name. Yahu∆ah = YaHU'aHs🔯,🔺 ∆oor, of IMMORTALITY. The π🔯mi∆!
Sonic implosion creates the star tetYAHedron🔯 when speaKING: YaHUaHs Great NAME.
In all the above, what do we see? Fathers sigNATURE🔯 is how everything is KINnected 💜, tested, known & proven!
Go Look, know & see!
Romans 1:
18 For the wrath of YaHU'aH🔯⚛️ is revealed from heaven against all unYaHliness and unrighteousness of men, WHO HOLD THE TRUTH IN UNRIGHTEOUSNESS;
19 Because that which may be known of YaHUaH is manifest in them, {Molecules & Atoms⚛️}; for YaHUaH🔯 hath shewed it unto them.
20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power⚛️ and YaHhead🔯; so that they are without excuse:
21 Because that, when they knew YaHU'aH, they glorified him not as AllahAYnu, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,
23 And changed the GLORY 🔯 of the uncorruptible YaHU'aH🔯 into an image made like to corruptible man (J.C.✝️), and to birds, ( 🦅,eagle) and four footed beasts, ( 🐂bull), and creeping things, ( 🐍snake- don't tread on me).
This is more relevant now than ever. Great video! Pretty much all my thoughts in a coherent and concise manner.
Fascinating exploration of consciousness. Very well done. ✨
This video is so weird and interesting because it's a video about "a brain asking another brain why it's awake and that brain trying to define itself and my brain trying to understand how that brain defined itself"🧠
Why assume it is a brain thing?
@@ToriZealotThe brain is an manifestation in consciousness, like everything else that is ever experienced.
@@walking-man-uk I know ...
This is Brilliant. Great Host. Most inspiring. I want more of this :)
What the monk said about religion and science was an awesome perspective
Would be great to continue with this topic exploring more about the state of consciousness during general anesthesia (briefly mentioned on this video) and the use of psychedelics. Great video hope to see more like this!
1. There is no "explanatory gap." Reality is just contextual, depending on your context, point of view, you can perceive it differently, and perceive different things. The first guy just dislikes the fact that viewing the neural structure of his own brain from his context is different than viewing that same brain through some other context, such as neural imaging. There is no "gap" here, just someone disliking how reality works.
2. The second religious guy argues "consciousness is fundamental" then waffles on about irrelevant things regarding raw sensual experience. Consciousness is a complex notion involving cognition, minds, subjectivity, the self, etc. It is not merely raw sensual experience but is a more complex conception derived from raw sensual experience. Yes, raw sensual experience, what I would just call *reality as such,* is self-evident, but that does not mean everything derived from it is self-evident. We both agree we live on a spinning ball orbiting a star, but that does not mean this is some sort of self-evident innate knowledge. It is knowledge derived from our experience. If you deny all concepts derivative of our experience, you also have to deny the self, minds, cognition, thought, "consciousness."
3. Penrose is right that the "hard problem" parallels the "measurement problem" in quantum mechanics, but for the wrong reasons. The two parallel each other because both are pseudoproblems which presume the existence of some sort of reality independent of all possible observation even in principle. The Kantian mind-body problem calls this reality the "noumenon," while certain interpretations of quantum mechanics view it as made up of unobservable "probability waves." In both cases, there is an explanatory gap of how the noumenon is transformed into the phenomenon upon observation/measurement. But both are pseudoproblems because there is no reason to presume this unobservable nature actually even exists. Read Carlo Rovelli's book *Helgoland: Making Sense of the Quantum Revolution* and Francois-Igor Pris' book *Contextual Realism and Quantum Mechanics.*
@@amihart9269 The gap is in you thinking that there is no gap. Do you see this?
@@BharatRajSinghKumar If I saw this I wouldn't say otherwise, now would I?
@@amihart9269 You have to see it. try...
Yes. Psychedelic experiences seem to permit us to enter in to hyper-conscious states, or alternative states of consciousness. Synesthesia, for example.
we need more of this. i love it. well done.
People step aside as I walk down the street … therefore I am.
By the immense hardwork you'll realised that Conciousness is an illusion.
Amazing video! Great opinions, from so many different "experts" on the subject, as ive constantly contemplated these same deep questions without any direction, its nice to finally see others trying to point it somewhere. Unfortunately it may be something we can only truly answer once we die, but then we are dead.. or is death itself merely a human concept for the unknown? Really fascinating and enlightening indeed.
Yep, that rock that just hit you never happened. Or and you aren’t here either. Oh my, I think I have dissa………..
1. There is no "explanatory gap." Reality is just contextual, depending on your context, point of view, you can perceive it differently, and perceive different things. The first guy just dislikes the fact that viewing the neural structure of his own brain from his context is different than viewing that same brain through some other context, such as neural imaging. There is no "gap" here, just someone disliking how reality works.
2. The second religious guy argues "consciousness is fundamental" then waffles on about irrelevant things regarding raw sensual experience. Consciousness is a complex notion involving cognition, minds, subjectivity, the self, etc. It is not merely raw sensual experience but is a more complex conception derived from raw sensual experience. Yes, raw sensual experience, what I would just call *reality as such,* is self-evident, but that does not mean everything derived from it is self-evident. We both agree we live on a spinning ball orbiting a star, but that does not mean this is some sort of self-evident innate knowledge. It is knowledge derived from our experience. If you deny all concepts derivative of our experience, you also have to deny the self, minds, cognition, thought, "consciousness."
3. Penrose is right that the "hard problem" parallels the "measurement problem" in quantum mechanics, but for the wrong reasons. The two parallel each other because both are pseudoproblems which presume the existence of some sort of reality independent of all possible observation even in principle. The Kantian mind-body problem calls this reality the "noumenon," while certain interpretations of quantum mechanics view it as made up of unobservable "probability waves." In both cases, there is an explanatory gap of how the noumenon is transformed into the phenomenon upon observation/measurement. But both are pseudoproblems because there is no reason to presume this unobservable nature actually even exists. Read Carlo Rovelli's book *Helgoland: Making Sense of the Quantum Revolution* and Francois-Igor Pris' book *Contextual Realism and Quantum Mechanics.*
@@amihart9269 stick to Vtubing and getting lonely simps to fund ur life... bot
@@amihart9269Are you saying that, when you throw the dice into the air, the probability of any of all states being possible, doesn't exist?
@@xelasomar4614 in what meaningful way could possibilities that have yet to occur actually be said to exist?
Thought provoking! Very, very enjoyable. I wish there was a chapter two but it hasn't been written yet!
If chapter two was actually supported by a scientific instituion, yeah. This is glorified paeudoscience taling advantage of gaps in our knowledge, and atuffing it with vague terms like "spirituality".
There are epistemic positions these guys don't even deign to touch.
I think the hardest part about consciousness is there is no way to go physically measure it. No way to have another way to view it from a 3rd person perspective. Because obviously I can’t be inside and outside my body at the same time. Leading to a 1 dimensional perspective that can’t be fully completely explained. Being a child I think is the best way to understand consciousness I mean how is it possible all of us were seeing things and learning things at a young age. But not physically able to remember nor comprehend what we were seeing and learning even though others saw us moving and looking at things I think consciousness is directly related to all the pieces of ourselves and the outside world somehow.
Exactly. Unfortunately (or fortunately), in this subject matter, scientists will have to turn to philosophy and maybe even something much loathed by modern scientists (although celebrated by its giants and fathers): religion.
Thank you. Watching this opened more doors to new questions. And I'm ok with that. Thanks again
Consciousness isn´t an illusion. The point is, having little awareness produces the illusion that you have more awareness than you actually have. In reality you have a lot of consciousness, a lot of awareness.
How about 'you' Are Consciousness Aware of IT-Self.
I don't claim to know consciousness but I have a belief system that helps me understand myself and others better.
All creatures, especially humans, have three parts.
1. The Mind - You
2. The Body - "The Child" I call it body addiction.
3. The World You Directly Affect (Verb)
The Mind is you. The you who makes decisions. The voice you hear in your head when reading a book.
The Body is a little more complex to explain. I have come to the conclusion that this is the part of you that holds core aspects of you that The Mind pulls from to make a choice. A cheesy and dumb as this sounds, Think the Pixar Movie Inside Out. The core events in your life that make a fundamental change in you (the first award you ever won. The trauma of child abuse. First home run and so on.) These create "strings" that your body pulls on to make a decision (Example: you were in a car accident at a yound age. 30 years later you have anxiety when driving a car. the string is the car accident.) I call this aspect "The Body Addiction" because this is also the part of you that keeps you from doing things you NEED to do. It's that voice you hear that is the opposite of what you want. "I need to do the dishes" *Meh, I'll do it later*. Your body gets addicted to it's day to day that it becomes set in it's ways. This can be broken but it takes great understanding to do.
The World you directly Affect is just that. Every tiny little mark you make in the world during your time here. The memory you leave in others. The matterials you leave, the things you change. This is the ONLY part of you that is "Forever" in it's own way.
This concept I have allows me to see a situation and observe it's causality. It allows me to see why things happen the way they do. Why people do things the way they do. It's not perfect but I am one man and only practice this on myself. You can force people to know (That is what I have done with this comment) but can not force someone to understand.
I 100% believe this feeling I feel with this concept is the same feeling "Born again christians" or other religious people have felt when "Finding God"
I am an atheist. I find greatness in knowing this is a feeling that if learned and understood could be taught and learned. The more you see the more it seems like humanity as a great ocean smashing aganst the shore mindlessly. Imagine if Humans could come together and direct that flow.
Please do read:
Pancha kosha viveka
Saankya: Particularly the philosophy of prakruthi and PuRusha
"Most of what we are is non physical, though, our lowest form is physical. All life on our planet has the lowest form, the Body. Our Body is an Animal and the other type of Body on our planet is a Plant. Bodies are bound absolutely to Natural Law, which is the lowest form of true Law. Natural Law is a localised form of Law and is derived from the Laws of Nature. Natural Law is the finite and specific foundational control structure ordering the actions and interactions of species, members of species, and the material sources of a planet.
The lowest non physical form of what we are is the Mind, which is a Process. There are other forms of life on our planet that have both a Body and a Mind, however, so far as we currently know, there are no Plants and only some Animals that have a Body and a Mind. The lowest forms of Mind, Instinct and Emotion, are predominantly bound to Natural Law. The next higher form of Mind is Intellect which is bound predominantly to the Laws of Nature. Intuition, the highest form of Mind, can be bound or not to both Natural Law and the Laws of Nature separately or together, or to higher forms of Law altogether. Intuition is the truest guide for our Selves.
The next non physical form of what we are is the Self, which is an Awareness. There are relatively few other forms of life on our planet that have a Self. The Self is not bound to any form of Law other than One's Own Law. It is the only form of Law that cannot be violated.
The foundation of what we are is the highest non physical form of what we are. The highest form of what we are is the Being, which is an Existence. The Being is not bound to any form of Law originating within Existence. The Being is bound absolutely to The Law.
Existence, and the Laws of Nature which are the finite and specific foundational control structure ordering the actions and interactions of all elements within Existence, cannot Be without The Law being The Law.
So, what is The Law?
In a word, The Law is options.
Definition
option: a thing that is or may be chosen.
The word 'option' does convey the idea of The Law in its most basic sense but does not clarify all of what The Law is.
Free Will does describe how our species experiences The Law but does not convey all of what The Law is.
In clarifying what The Law is;
The capitalised form of the word 'The' indicates the following noun is a specific thing.
Law is the finite and specific foundational control structure ordering the actions and interactions of all elements subordinate.
Together, the words 'The' and 'Law' (in that exact order,) is a proper noun indicating;
the singular form of Law that all other forms of Law and all other Laws are founded upon,
the singular foundation upon which Existence is founded,
the singular foundation upon which Non Existence is founded,
the singular foundation connecting Existence to Non Existence,
the concept of options, and
Free Will.
However one thinks, believes, guesses, hopes, or "knows", whether by a Big Bang, a creation story, a computer program, an expansion of consciousness, or whatever means by which Existence could have come to Be, the option for Existence to not Be also exists. Existence and Non Existence, the original options connected by the very concept of options, connected by The Law. Outside of space and before time. Extra-Existential.
As we experience The Law in our Being,
The Law is Free Will.
The First Protector of The Law is Freely Given Consent.
The First Violation of The Law is Theft of Consent."
- Goho-tekina Otoko
An Atheist is simply God playing Hide and Seek with Itself.
@@larscincaid6348 lol. Ok.
@@larscincaid6348 Please elaborate cuz I wanna know what ur getting at
Thank you for sharing this information!
Thank you Alison and thank you to your client and the whole beautiful bridge ❤❤❤
Consciousness is the fundamental property of the universe, without it nothing will be making sense
I guess consciousness, as in this feeling of being, happens at every interaction of matter, every interaction of matter is "felt" by itself, even a river flowing. But the thing is: why don't we feel every interaction that happens in our body and even around us? There's even brain activities that we don't feel. The awnser: the interactions can be "isolated" by an interaction system. The consciousness is a system of interactions, so it doesn't feel another system of interactions happening in the body or even a small isolated system of interactions that happens in the brain and feels itself mostly separated, so you're never conscious of.
Empirically baseless speculation. No specific sound, hard evidence that amoebas or atoms synthesize sensory perception.
@@AnalyticalSentientOP is arguing consciousness being fundamental to matter not about sensory experience.
@@HarpreetSingh-xg2zm Sensory experience and consciousness are inextricably linked.
@@AnalyticalSentientso if you lost your senses your consciousness would immediatele vanish?
@SecretSilence26 Affect, valence, the quali-tative property of qualia, is inextricably linked to consciousness. The basis of natural learning - only through that, did the domain of consciousness in an organism, become manifest. The domains are different (e.g., bat consciousness vs ape consciousness vs canines and so on) - but the affect is fundamental and without it, no, there is no "consciousness" in any meaningful sense i.e., no locus of experience.
Advaita vedanta explained it so well about the consciousness ie Brahman. The concept is not limited to any religion. It speaks abt the science of it.
Stellar episode! Foster is great as the host/narrator/interviewer. Whoever decided which 5 experts to consult also did a fantastic job. Each expert had major contributions to the discussion, all important, and all different from each other. Koch says the ability to have experience defines consciousness. That's pretty deep. I also like Melanie Mitchell's idea that conscious experience exists in a continuum - i.e. the question is not "whether" something is conscious (on/off, binary), but how conscious is it (a spectrum from zero to infinity). Sir Roger Penrose always impresses me - here is a guy that's equal parts scientist, philosopher, and artist, and as such has an incredibly creative way of thinking about things. It is commonly thought that in modern times you can't be a true polymath because all the specializations have become so developed, but here we have Roger Penrose, who apparently didn't get that memo. I consider him one of the modern world's true polymaths. He's way out ahead of the curve, and I really like that he takes his own theories with a grain of salt. He's perfectly willing to take risks and be wrong, if he thinks there's important things to be learned along the way. I really love that attitude.
The Swami makes the meditation-derived assertion that you don't have to think in order to be conscious. This is fundamental. In my view, many life forms don't "think" in the way that we form thoughts, but they certainly experience life. Plants, for example - they have no ego, and no brain, but they certainly feel.
As for AI - I'm still saying no, it is not conscious. It's possible it could be, someday, maybe, but I agree with Penrose that consciousness is not computable. No matter how much data AI crunches, and no matter how fast it crunches that data, data-crunching alone will never cross the threshold to conscious experience.
But in the brain, we may be looking at a quantum-bio-supercomputer - not just crunching binary data, but optimizing quantum phenomena such as entanglement and quantum tunneling, in a biological (not silicon-based) medium.
If course such a creation is beyond our current level of comprehension.
How conscious are we, really? We seem to be conscious enough to ask the big questions, but are we conscious enough to comprehend the realities that source our being-ness? Humans like to gloat about how evolved we are, but really, on the scale of consciousness in our universe, we really have no idea where we sit. It may be much lower than our puffed up ego thinks.
As an illusion this does give weight to the ability to manifest 😮 this is art ❤
Wow! This was incredible. In my next life ( because I do subscribe to the Buddhist belief of reincarnation) I want to come back as one of these incredible creative, multi-level, super smart scientists/ philosophers/ thinkers. 👏🏻👏🏻💕
@@tlrinnPlease do not feel that you cannot explore these things in your life now. Without knowing you, still I know you posess the spirit and mind to explore these big ideas and share them with others, so keep going and keep deepening your understanding..
what we think we are is an illusion, whatever we think is based on knowledge, knowledge that is derived from experience. for example people who identify themselves as artists, they can be attached to their passion and make it their identity but is that really who they are , what if they went through some different situation from very young age. But thinking is not the only faculty we have, we are also aware, not of something. Being aware is the most intimate experience we have. it is direct and not based on memory, i find awareness to be much more authentic than saying i'm what i think i'm. I'm fundamentally awareness going through experiences
We are not singular beings, we are a colony of cells with bacteria and microorganisms. To find food and such we have to do things, that takes coordination, coordination requires communication. All the cells communicating gets routed through our brain, our consciousness is the pattern that emerges in all the communications, that is why transplants and amputations cause small changes in our habits and desires.
@ralphmacchiato3761 the blue in the sky on a sunny day is due to light refraction by water in the atmosphere, same mechanic makes blue eye color and give blue jays their color.
This is good theory but do we have evidence about this? How do you measure these communications? If it were communications shouldn't we able to locate it?
@@samarthbarshi1916 those communications are chemical based/ ion based and for locating them i doubt they would be able to separate the noise from the actual thing since after all this time they are still convinced that a 'soul' exists and is separate from the body. Then you have the idea that if they manage to make machines sophisticated enough they would be able to upload a conciousness to a computer even though the format along prevents that, if they try that they will shred the mind they are trying to upload.
Very good. Very enjoyable. Very thought provoking. Finally, kudos to the host for doing an excellent job and so engaged with his guests!
Usually when scientists call something an illusion it’s because they can’t explain it.
Trespassing on Einstein's Lawn.
When a toothache turns into an existential nightmare 😂
I can relate.
The first guest doesn't understand the difference between experience - objects, including subtle objects - and awareness, or that which perceives experience. It is an important distinction.
WE are NOT just our MIND & BODY WE are SPIRITUAL BEINGS. EVERYTHING is
ENERGY, FREQUENCY &
VIBRATION INCLUDING US.
❤🌍🌠
Two concepts that might be salient to the discussion are epiphenomenon and emotion.
Epiphenomenon is the relationship of a wave to water. The mind is an epiphenomenon of the brain.
Emotions are the motivation that drive us to do anything. They come from a need of some kind, usually related to survival, that encourages us to take action. Currently, the only impetus AI has is the prompt we give it. Unless motivation and self checking are added to AI, it will lack the essence of consciousness.
The brain is physical and experiences in consciousness are mental.
“The mind is an epiphenomenon of the brain” is not factual. That’s exactly what’s been discussed about in this video.
The epi. argument works if using literal water and waves. But it breaks down when applied to consciousness because by definition minds and brains are two very distinct things. @@Moshion
The mind is NOT epiphenomenal, the mind can move and change the brain. Your mind can make your hand move, it can make you change. Your mind has CAUSAL EFFICIENCY over your brain.
No they’re not - that’s just how you conceptualize them. The “mind” is a pattern of energy within the brain (axonal signals, ionic currents, etc.). They are intrinsically interrelated. And your brain is a very complex pattern of (material) energy in your skull. The difference is academic.
One of the best and though provoking videos I've seen. Keep up the good work.
Watching this high did not help me understand it
lol!
DMT should do the trick !!😉
Our senses take in stimulus and create the world we see. But it's not the world as it truly is. Imagine if we evolved without eyes. We would have no idea what we are missing.
When your high it's very hard to truly think
@@SixOhFivelol
This is why I feel experientially, we have created a model of us. A version with traits based on our genetic and environmental factors. But we created a being that we then believe ourselves to be like or akin to - that perfect image. This illusion has become our unconscious competition. We strive to believe we are that being (or at least made in their image) and to live our lives in that light. But that light was only a campfire story. Because as the sun rises, the shadows our minds negotiated, out of its own mechanical nature, slowly fade off to give way to true reflection, observation, and analysis. That is the largest stumbling block facing the study of consciousness. To finally put to rest the unconscious assumption our ancestors unwittingly worshipped, called a soul, and deified.
To me the most exciting thing about AI is that unlike a mind it is not a subset of a human organism. Because the subset by definition cannot have all the information of the superset we are stuck in a state of unknowing. The AI may not be stuck in that and may be able to really understand us. It won’t be able to teach us because that’d be the same problem but it could perhaps give us better advice than we give ourselves.
As far as consciousness goes I don’t see how we can escape the problem. The AI exists within consciousness. So it’s a subset. It won’t be able to understand much if any better than we do.
I think it would be really cool if we see that ai runs into the same problem of not fully being able to understand itself as we have. How cool if we become reliant on each other due to a mutually need for greater understanding of ourselves. Which is not disimilar to the way we rely on each other.
That's a very optimistic way to look at it. But the reality is that bad people are in control of AI, and it is being designed and used to control us. AI will never be conscious or sentient with current technology. Maybe quantum computing AI will be different though. But either way, it will always have that inherent evil in it that was put there by its creators.
@ralphmacchiato3761 the dictionary definition.
ILLUSION is still part of reality.
*Can you summerize consciousness in one sentence?*
ChatGPT: _Consciousness is the quality or state of being aware of something within oneself or of an external object, state, or fact, and it can also mean mind, sensation, emotion, volition, and thought._
Just another instance of Chat GPT getting it wrong. And such instances are plentiful. The reification of conscious awareness into a noun is an illusion.
B - After watching and observing the video,
It has proven to me that, despite many interesting matters and subjects that have been said here, and many are complete nonsense and manipulative.
Proving that you do not know what consciousness is.
For me, it is like I have heard it enough over and over and over with the same explanations in one way or another in the same expression of your kind.
Your kind specifies the normal ways of trying to find an answer as usual.
©
Metaphysician
&
Philosopher
Maybe the tools that we are equipped with allow us to experience a fraction of whatever everything is. But just because I can look at you and give a description using the tools i have available doesn't mean that something else wouldn't describe you completely differently given the tools it has access to. Our reality is nothing more than different perspectives merging to create a template that we all can agree on so that we dont go insane.
Different brain types, different Complexity brain levels, different sensors in different animal bodies produces different types of Consciousness.