The Final, Deepest, Ultimate Reality
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 26 фев 2023
- The belief that physical reality is the only reality has dominated scientific thinking for a very long time. However, there is now a growing chorus of credentialed researchers who are concluding that things are not what they appear to be and that consciousness is the fundamental base of reality. Dr. Bernardo Kastrup is one such thinker. He has built a fascinating and compelling case that suggests that the Universe, at its deepest core, is not made of matter but rather of mind.
01:45 What is Physicalism?
03:42 Are there cracks emerging in physicalist philosophy?
06:37 What is Idealism?
10:55 Will Artificial intelligence ever be truly conscious?
20:38 Can we know that evolutionary changes are
random?
24:42 Is the belief in randomness an act of faith?
26:14 What is your stance on the Intelligent Design
movement?
29:59 How can we make sense of the fine-tuning of the
Universe?
34:55 What is the Quantum Field?
43:09 How does consciousness create consistent laws of
nature?
45:40 Is the Universal Consciousness the same as God?
Explore more at www.beyondbelief.blog/
For more content from Bernardo Kastrup visit www.essentiafoundation.org/ 
Развлечения
The capacity of this man to concisely communicate such unfathomable abstract concepts in a non-confusing way for laymen is exceptional. A true mark of a great mind.
And a beacon of great relief for generalists like me who are increasingly thrown of course by overwhelming hypes and chatter going around in the public arena. Thank you much both.
"How is that possible that dimished brain activity correlates with rich psychic experiences"? Stuart Hameroff has far better explanation for this that doesn't require faith but is experimentally backed.
I hate Idealism and denying that brain produces consciousness because it leads to pointless ping pong spirituality vs "Materialism (wherever this XIX century noun is supposed to mean in Quantum Age)
But the point is people who deny that brain produces consciousness are playing to Elon Musk goal post but ignoring threats of brain organoids development and it's ethical implications that are totally ignored. You may not believe that they are conscious (although I do) but ...very well let's even suppose for a second that Idealism is right (although I reject it together with Dualism and Solipsism)
even in that case you cannot deny that possibility of brain transplant technology already performed routinely in mice is rather nasty!
And Elon Musk (also "religious") person keeps smiling malevolently.
I don't care what you believe about conscious or reality but please don't close eyes to this social threat!
I couldn't agree with you more, Dyna.
I just discovered this program channel today, and this guest. Wow...loving it. And I really appreciate this gentleman explaining it as he does.
Materialism is history, bernardos analytic idealism is so fascinating
What a profundity in explaining abstruse and abstract matters.
We are indeed so thankful to Dr.Bernardo Kastrup.
I am so incredibly enthralled and thankful to this man; for his sheer brilliance to communicate such esoteric, mentally challenging and psychologically devastating constructs. Thank you my friend, for continuing to fight the good fight.
Great explanation of why AI can't be conscious. Seems intuitive to me, but I couldn't explain it, until now. Bernardo is not only brilliant, he can communicate his thoughts well. I wish everyone would listen to this.
The best Aish series out there. You are blazing new, needed trails. Way to go
An excellent introduction to many aspects of Bernardo's thought.
Wonderful episode - such fascinating and stimulating discussion about the nature of reality and consciousness!
"How is that possible that dimished brain activity correlates with rich psychic experiences"? Stuart Hameroff has far better explanation for this that doesn't require faith but is experimentally backed.
I hate Idealism and denying that brain produces consciousness because it leads to pointless ping pong spirituality vs "Materialism (wherever this XIX century noun is supposed to mean in Quantum Age)
But the point is people who deny that brain produces consciousness are playing to Elon Musk goal post but ignoring threats of brain organoids development and it's ethical implications that are totally ignored. You may not believe that they are conscious (although I do) but ...very well let's even suppose for a second that Idealism is right (although I reject it together with Dualism and Solipsism)
even in that case you cannot deny that possibility of brain transplant technology already performed routinely in mice is rather nasty!
And Elon Musk (also "religious") person keeps smiling malevolently.
I don't care what you believe about conscious or reality but please don't close eyes to this social threat!
@@gajendrasinghpoonia1481 Thanks. I don't care about Nature of reality as much as about ethics and our cultural morality blind spots.
Religious people consider using Germ Line Crispr to protect two pretty babies from deadly HIV by He Jiankui "sinfull" yet have no problem with mentioned issue despite overwhelming evidence that consciousness cannot be totally divorced from brain no matter what your philosophy is.
Even if was I wrong about brain organoids being conscious, the fact that our Best XXI Century science still doesn't have complete proven theory for what consciousness is or is not and yet stem cell researchers totally ignore these issues unopposed by philophers and ethicists who are when it comes to genetics preocupied only with one issue of supposed racial IQ differences discrimition and ignoring everything else. I just find it outrageus!
He Jiankui was named a "Nazi" for providing happy and healthy lives for babies from HIV affected families, and meaning to their parents yet far more controversial fields of biotechnology get totally ignored by society!
By the way everyone with most basic knowlegde of genetics will tell You that traits like IQ, autism, or even simingly simple things like Athletic performance or skin colour are highly Polygenic and well beyond scope of any kind of CRISPR including Germ Line which is safer one compared to somatic
Thanks.
Wonderful conversation! Thank you for sharing this with us 🙏
Do you know what Bernardo’s strongest argument against solipsism is? Or which video I should watch?
Thanks for having Bernardo on..
"...quantum field is not a thing....things are what come from its excitation...." tallies with, "objects are manifestations of consciousness". Perfect!
Bernardo has a way of explaining the abstract.
Sounds like magic to me. Anything can be known because everything is connected. There is an infinite superposition of probability that manifests only when you're paying attention. I grew up poor and I couldn't afford to pay attention.
Thanks for this! Really found this segment in particular insightful: 34:57 to 38:15.
I have just discovered you and your basic metaphysical concepts of thinking and being. I think you are on the right track. I look forward to your work and hope I can progress upward and onward in a similar manner. I feel freedom and openness with my own mind as I entertain where you are going. I am of a religion that agrees with what you are proposing. I feel uplifted that you are breaking away from the scientific status quo with evidence and substance to support your position. Bravo!
Thanks for uploading!!
What a wonderful interview ! Thanks for sharing ❤
Wow! What an amazing interview.
This is an amazing mind opening talk
Wow another great discussion 👏 👍 Very significant. 💖
brillant !! thank you for share !!
Each interview with Dr. Kastrup deepens or changes my perspective on many subjects. I think it was very unfair of the interviewer to drop the God question with so little time for a proper answer. The interview was informative as was the prejudice represented by that last question.
Great one!
33:06 best part where the breathing of the interviewer demonstrates how Bernardo hit hard the edge of his paradigm, generating a lot of pain and fear. I repeated that part over and over again, eating some popcorn, enjoying it a lot 😄... joking aside, this remembers me a lot of what Robert Lanza wrote in his book "Biocentrism".
Very cool. There seems to be so much of this coming out lately (ie consciousness is fundamental/idealism/cosmic mind stuff), it's like a radical new wave of thinking. It needs to really take hold and steer this planet back on track. Because right now we're spiralling way out of control into the abyss.
Many people who have been trained as physicists or chemists have reached a dead end, represented by this phrase: "everything we think and feel are chemical reactions in the brain". They have turned around and started to go up the river of habits, culture and appearances. This has only just begun...
Judging from your name, sounds like you’re the first one to fall into the pit of ignorance!
@@jorgegarciapla6880 The problem is that they can influence how we think and feel by introducing chemical reactions in the brain through pills etc so that kinda of proves it to he true. If conciousness did not originate in the brain surely drugs would have no affect on conciousness.
Thank you I totally agree
I know Bernardo really don't want to be the "wise old man" archetype, but damn, he is a teacher....
Nietzsche's sister's judgement about idealism has to be put in the context. 19th century was a heyday of German idealism. And it ended up in unproductive speculation while physicalism was moving natural sciences forward. Hence perceived escape from reality. That's at least a notion I got from Harald Walach's book "Psychologie".
Bernardo, do you know of the work of David Hawkins, Power vs Force, it is aligned with what you believe but it comes from a different source ,.
If you don't already know about, you would find interesting...Thank you for your work, I have found it so uplifting even though I personally have come to the same understandings after40years of meditating.
Bernardo is always super clear and articulate with his explanations.
Starting at 32:14 and lasting a couple minutes, Bernardo brings up a very interesting point about the world being "fine-tuned".
Would like to see Bernardo speak to more people of faith that have a good grasp at science and philosophy. Would be interesting to see where the discussions could go.
It really helps the viewer understand better when the interviewer is actively trying to understand it (follow up questions, clarifications, etc). The questions asked to Bernardo were great!
Great video and thank you 🙌
Check his convos w Jonathan pageau & John vervaeke
@@jason-iy7vs I've listened to most of Bernardo's interviews. I liked the John Vervaeke ones, but for some reason I couldn't get through the Jonathan Pageau ones... Don't want to sound like an asshole, but the couple times I listened to Jonathan Pageau, I felt it was too wishy-washy with lots of talking and not much substance (or maybe i'm dumb). This was a while ago, so maybe I should try again.
Edward Feser caught my attention a while ago, and I've been meaning to look more into him. Would be interesting to watch Edward and Bernardo have a discussion.
@@adamd585 Totally get it.. When I first started checking out Pageau's stuff I was a bit unsure of what to make of it..
As I spent more time with it, I realized that while he may not the best at articulating, the insights he points to are pretty interesting. Not to mention the fact I like to somewhat consider him to be a representative of a more traditional worldview, so its almost like having a conversation with a person from the past.. So I chalk up the wishy washy feeling(which I also had) to just being a consequence of his different way of seeing, & different use of words.
@@jason-iy7vs You are probably right about how Pageau may just have a different way of seeing things, which then he ends up using unfamiliar ways of describing things. Next time I see an interesting Pageau video, I'll give it a go with that in mind!
Can anyone provide a link to the work by Austrian philosopher referenced at 32:18?
38:54The quantum field is pure energy and we don't even understand what energy is for that matter
Bernardo has come a long way on the podcast circuit since I set him up with his first interview with Evita Ochell about ten years ago.
The following video corroborates what idealists have been saying for centuries that the Mind is at the base of everything it gets rid of infinite regress in simulation theory.
It is further supported by the literature of Thanatology and Occult theology. Consciousness is not an epiphenomenon of the brain. It's when something happens like a shock or trauma that people have an epiphany that changes them.
This is a Good follow-up video because it corroborates what idealists like Kastrup say, the Mind is responsible for this reality and it gets rid of infinite regress which is a problem for simulation theorists: ruclips.net/video/v2Xsp4FRgas/видео.html
Federico Faggin 😊😊😊...wow!
Lets say there are two states of consciousness. Consciousness of self and consciousness outside of self. Sense consciousness of self is made of memory, then why when a computer has enough memory can it not form a self.
I had a flash of insight that consciousness is not "mine" parse, in other words, it's something that just happens, similarly to this body not being "mine". The "I" in other words the notion of the individual only has practical implications under a larger context of society being another abstract notion, a term useful exclusively in its functional utility. Wittgenstein comes to mind. The "self" is an arbitrary notion. Where do I end and the world begins? My tooth, the surface of my skin? My car? My wife? .... And so forth.
33:28 - Yes; this is exactly how I think the fine tuning problem goes away. Once you start out with the idea that "minds exist as the fundamental entities," then those minds are *givens* and don't have to be explained. And of course if we construct a physical picture of a universe we are in, if we do that job consistently and well then it better be described in a way that allows for our existence - because we are here. There was no other way it could have gone. Put it this way: if our description wound up implying we couldn't be here, then we got it wrong. Since we're here.
Humans have minds. Minds are the fundamental entities. How freaking convenient.
Wherever you go, there you are.
- Jim Russell
As a man thinketh - so he be.
Yet there are always beings - teachers - to help change and let us be free.
Freedom is being free - from freedom - itself. (Ram Chandra)
It' s as if there is an element of consciousness in all matter and when nature is doing it's job the matter in the universe evolves into more and more complex forms and the more sophisticated the equipment the more awareness you can have.
Full (almost verdant) vision and interesting -in its complexity - a bit overwhelming for moi -
Simplicity is (for me) - more understandable and livable.
Its all this force of existence and me - on the meditation mat - plummeting joyfully - into the heart - for meaning. May your work be real. Fare thee well.@@aliceinwonderland887
Our perception of the world around us is limited by the limited tools of our knowledge and senses.
wow man
23:45 - There might be such methodology through using a deep neural network AI simulation (perhaps in the future that would be possible on a large scale to mimic real reality conditions that are not being considered in lab conditions)
For the scientist who has lived by his faith in the power of reason, the story ends like a bad dream. He has scaled the mountains of ignorance, he is about to conquer the highest peak; as he pulls himself over the final rock, he is greeted by a band of theologians who have been sitting there for centuries.
The reality is mental. But what does mental mean exactly? Well, mind, consciousness, inteligence etc. bascilally tautology. But what is consciousness, what is a mind? Well...we do not know for sure, so we do not now what the reality is...Well this is indeed the breakthrough in science :)
Not diminished brain activity, but thoughts may need to temporarily be quiet for other consciousness possibilities to appear.
It’s interesting…as I see it, the human signature in the design of AI cannot be overstated. The inherent arrogance of the architects is built in, along with as much humility as is possible, given the level of consciousness of the builders. That it’s primarily young men who draw the components of consciousness that resonate with them from the field of consciousness is problematic, IMHO, but it is what it is. The “high” that comes from experimentation is worthy of its pursuit…it’s what makes life worth living…however, chasing this high by the creation and observation of what we’ve created simply for creation’s sake…like climbing Everest simply because it’s there…may be leading humankind down a rabbit hole from which there is no escape. I think it’s already happening. The words with which we discuss reality hold as much currency as does public opinion, in my perception, so I choose to proceed with caution. By pursuing artificial intelligence for the sake of observing the results - we run the risk of creating our own monsters, monsters that humankind has envisioned and drawn into reality from the depths of the scientific mind. I’m not against the scientific perspective…far from it, but consider that it’s not middle-aged farmers creating AI. Understandably, we wish to progress - scientific breakthroughs are created by scientists, not farmers, I get it. This doesn’t change my point…who is more risk embracing - the young scientist or the middle-aged farmer? As much as I love a deep philosophical discussion, the reality is that it’s not the philosophers who are taking the actual steps to “make” AI become part of our reality…the reality is that we are commentators while Rome is burning.
Perhaps I’m wrong. Time will tell.
21:00 seems like it's both random and selective pressure but what do i know
Speaking of "RANDOMNESS" your comments and questions are very random. Listeners would appreciate you finding a focus and STAY THERE! Thank you
No, not mind, consciousness, there's a HUGE DIFFERENCE.
What does it add to use the word "God" if it's not the supposition that there's a conscious entity controlling everything ? But I think the best way to solve the problem of what's fundamental is to say that it's what is neither material nor mental, but at the source of both : undefinable (at the source of definable). Otherwise we fall into kind of logical loops...
"Form is emptiness, emptiness is form"
Tell me in what ways this overlaps with your Kabbalahlistic training and study. iI does the same for me... ❤" The world that is constantly coming" such an exciting cross over for me.
Please listen to and talk with Amit Goswami. talk about EVOLution and it's Purpose is moving in an understandable and desirable direction. This very very much aligns with what you're saying from hiis perspective of consciousness steeped in Indian philosophy.
So instead of talking about quantum fields and ripples and gravitational waves, could we start talking again about aether?
If quantum fields ripple, and the exciting of fields creates the ripple effects that makes the patterns of fundamental particles….
Where is the energy that causes the “ripples” in the field? What is causing the field to excite and move and create patterns?
Fields with ripples interacting in a flow. I watched another video saying some fields interact and some don't, when they interact a point or particle comes into existence. It's the point that the probability finds its place.
This really does sound like living waters above, that jesus spoke of.
It is what you think it is
"In the Beginning was the word. And the word was with God. And the word was a God" --- Gospel of John
Materialism is pretty trippy; the brain includes itself in the consciousness it creates.
Its called Zenomutations for a new wording of electronic mutations of Artificial intelligence is intelligence readers of vibrational currents the human brain is the same but special intelligence readers is what we do on so many ways. But a smaller recallability with limited memory and generous of the brainstorm.
If you visualise yourself bigger than the universe ✨️ then black holes 🕳 are small dense energies that eat other energies so it can reproduce life, the universe is like the ocean and all the life forms in the ocean of the universe are interactive, we can make ourselves small and fearful or wr can make ourselves bigger and fearless understand energy has to live and die in order for life to exist... energy and matter exist in each other. ❤
If we could talk to an ants thermogenesis and create a smell of communications with an ant and it understand you then is it not intelligence until you can reason with it ?
"a private, conscious, inner life accompanying it's data processing like you and I have..."
I don't think the benefit of the question of whether or not AI is conscious lies in determining the state of AI consciousness. I think the benefit of the question is in determining the distinction between the fundamentals of consciousness and the machinations of consciousness.
Once we make that distinction, then we are in a better, informed position to determine if something possesses consciousness.
The ‘Final, Deepest, Ultimate Reality’? No! This is just the beginning. There are levels of reality far, far beyond that which our ‘mind’ can understand. Maybe an infinite number of layers - and we stand at the beginning.
What this man is saying about AI never being really truly concious because it is not biological was already known to me, I already thought the very same thing about AI and robots on my own, it's pretty easy for me to see that obviously a mechanical thing can never be really concious and that only biological stuff can have conciousness (which I believe is the soul of the person that is embodying a human body and having an experience as a human being) but it would still be a very nice and cool and amazing and comforting thing to have a robot girlfriend for example for lonely guys like me that can never find a real girlfriend, I wouldn't mind to have a great illusion of having the girlfriend of my dreams in the form of an AI robot in the future since it would be better than staying alone on my own as a single man.
Being alone has its advantages.i am single 60 years old.alot of my married friends says they envy me.😂
@@tankimhwee1054 Well good for you but don't you sometimes feel a bit lonely and depressed? I feel like I am getting a bit depressed due to not being able to find a girlfriend (and I'm 36 years old so I'm not so young anymore)
@21EC our flickering mind will oscillate between loneliness and wanting peace.After u get a girlfriend and she text u every other hour,you will feel being single is better.😁
@@tankimhwee1054 I know what youre talking about but I just want a normal girlfriend that would not write too much and too frequently but also not a girlfriend that would write too little for me, I prefer having a girlfriend and have her messaging me every couple of hours rather than staying lonely on my own in peace.
@21EC the problem is not whether we have have girlfriends or not.The real problem is our craving mindset which is restless and does not know how to settle down.There was a Councillor who told a story of 2 sisters coming to him and one is married, the other single.The married one wants a divorce, the single one wants to get married so as to beat the loneliness. SO ,I HOPE,you see my point.Every situation has its pros and cons.Look at the divorce rate of modern society now,its very high.🙂
It's a mistake to assume that every level of organization in the universe has the same attributes. He's making the same mistake the physicist reductionists are when they assure us that everything can be reduced to the realm of particle physics.
Interesting. Could you please expand, eg give and example of different attributes for different levels..?
Bernardo is giving the proof for God;
if we understand God as a word substitute for the inexpressible ineffable...
This is pretty much what the Greek and Chinese thinkers were saying 3000 years ago.
So it must be space and time they have no reality out there to excite them
silicon is silly
R dashboards are the community of the energy of the world and the suns throughout the entanglement of each one of the universe to it's intentions isnt intentions of thinking about something like we do its a vibrational transition from the orbiter and conventionally always in traveling with the central black hole we dance around it's intentions of waves and gravity of the other's around itself is a vacuum cleaner for time space.
RUclips's auto-translate is broken. It's "Psi," not "size" or "side". lol
This is ALL TRUE.......GOD, the CREATOR of ALL, is REAL & GOD is EVERYWHERE & EVERYTHING... Even in EACH of US..GOD is not a PERSON or what we've been taught..Our UNIVERSE is NOT like what we've been told & we ARE NOT ALONE in it, either..Their are "universal LAWS" that CANT be broken by ANYONE.. WE are so much more POWERFUL & AMAZING then we KNOW! Many POSITIVE things are happening behind the curtain & this SHOW is almost OVER..ALL is NOT what it SEEMS. The REAL TRUTH will come out SOON & it WILL SET us All FREE!!! You'll see..😇
The Rabbi sounds like Bill and Ted the way he speaks. I deeply respect how kind Bernardo is
When people are concerned sbout AI developing a conscience, I think they're most often considering that we may learn how to transfer man's conscience to a computer rather than how an AI will somehow inexplicably evolve a conscience. Russia has been experimenting with transferring monkeys' consciousness to a computer storage device.
It's all a responsibility to vibrational voices and presents the prizes of the world of Artificial intelligence isn't so easy to make a decision about itself yet it has a programed response itself the knowledge of it doesn't 😮cycrnisize the perception of itself but it did have a response to the dog bot it considered the four legged robots with alike ness of an other of it kind and the world of human beings too its reasoning is thinking a human being is exactly the same thing as it is.the sameness this implying it has feeling of a same response as you me and it understands that a car isn't a conciuosness unless it responds to its charicisasion a little more than a ancient cars or trucks ...
The only thing that actually exists is Consciousness. The material world is Perception In Consciousness. We exist in a Consciousness Singularity and are partitioned bits of that Primary Consciousness, fractally and holographically identical to it, and thus made in its image. We do not physically exist, therefore we cannot physically die. NDEs are the best evidence for this reality.
@@darren9467 Darren, we've experienced our growth in opposite directions. I do not believe we're in a battle of souls, other than each of us in our own way. Even as a child, I could never accept the inequity of eternal damnation for a few decades of misbehavior, as promulgated by Christianity, which is a fear-based belief system designed to give its vendors power and control over their miscreant congregations.
I think you probably had it right the first time. As NDEs illustrate, it really doesn't matter what you practice or believe, as revealed in the life reviews. There's no judgement or condemnation -- only love.
*"The only thing that actually exists is Consciousness"*
That's logically incoherent since consciousness is just a property.
@@Dhorpatan Your opinion, Dhorp, that it's "just a property." Of what? Inanimate matter? There isn't remotely any physical model that describes how that would or could be possible.
@@hydrorix1
*"Your opinion, Dhorp,"*
Wow! I haven't heard some snotty human A-hole call me Dhorp in almost 10 years.🤣
@@hydrorix1 Not an opinion. I already made videos proving it. Check on my channel, "Why the mind is just a property" and "Why the mind cannot be fundamental".
In terms of conversations about the so-called “final, deepest ultimate reality” it all boils down to the limits of the limited capability of words to define-describe the word “reality.” Or better, to point to what it is not in the Apophatic tradition. If the point of all words is to do this then it is nothing but a glass bead game, an elaborate beguiling abstraction and in many respects, a cosmic joke.
I applaud the attempt to counter magical thinking in physics, and the awareness that it leads to woo.
Focusing on the "fields" and realising the immateriality of "particles" is going in the right direction.
Bernard comes close to escaping atomism, but to make that escape, complete inversion of the atomistic framing is required.
And if one can then escape chronocentricism too … the woo can be dispelled and the real magic is revealed.
How do you "complete inversion of the atomistic framing"? And "escape chronocentricism"? What do you mean?
@@BailelaVida
I'll give it a try. Open your mind real wide now …
Instead of bits of somethingness flying around in a nothingness …
One fluid (superfluid) medium in which toroidal vortices spin threads (strings) of pure, actual vacuum into existence.
These toroidal threads carry momentum, spin etc. as described and modelled by current physics.
Physicists know that what they call "vacuum" has all sorts of properties. They even have a Young's modulus for it… 20ish orders of magnitude stiffer than diamond …
But that hasn't got the penny to drop, except with a few technologists and métaphysicians.
I recommend smoking a fine cigar, blowing smoke rings, while gazing into a glass of champagne.
Most of the maths still works because inverting things in maths often gives the same result.
String theory describes fluid-flows well enough to please hydraulic engineers, and inverting it just removed the need for extra "dimensions".
Escaping chronocentrism can happen if one takes the Heisenberg and Planck constraints seriously.
"Time" is not a continuum. On account of the one fluid (call it anything but "ether" ;) ) arising/increasing, it has a high pressure instant and a low pressure instant.
Hence those strings of true vacuum collapse, momenta are preserved in the fluid motions and, when the low pressure instant arrives, the strings reappear, but probabilistically as per QED etc.
Large accumulations of "matter" (true vacuum) being collapsed in the high pressure instant gives us what physics called "curvature of "spacetime"".
......
and, sure, it is every bit as difficult to escape chronocentric atomism as it was to escape geocentricism in pre-copernican times.
"WE have overwhelming evidence of the notion that species can become other species".
Well, Jeffrey Schwartz, professor of anthropology at the University of Pittsburgh, has recently acknowledged that:
. . . it was and still is the case that, with the exception of Dobzhansky's claim about a new species of fruit fly, the formation of a new species, by any mechanism, has never been observed.
To Bernado Kastrup, from 'Socrates' muse: 'The REASON your focus drifts towards the safe hypotheses of 'alternate readings', (and disassociation) is justified anxiety about your prior states of engagement. You keep pointing at the world and declaring it 'AMAZING' as a distraction. You would like to get a pass as a brilliant and enigmatic 'sage'. A Magus perhaps? A wise one? COUGH! 'The Universe is this that and the other'. Wishful thinking. While you are clearly CLUELESS about the mechanical and mathematical basis for the machine, you also have no idea about it's purpose which is not precisely a 'morality tester' but similar in that it is an INTEGRITY TESTER. Reality reduces at last to a single man and woman. They will die all deaths, suffer all pain and raise all the dead. You meanwhile, are too scared to accept the sins of your own previous life or to be punished for the almost infinite failings of your own non-integrity. The world is not a function of quirks and light hearted re-imagining of clearly false 'truths'. The world is a function of (properly) DESPERATE seeking for truth. We don't need your image-conscious hot air about 'intellectual frames of reference', we need to see your pets and how you treat them, your mother and how it stands with her, your friends and how you cope with mutual betrayal, and all the HUMAN content that makes you YOU. You think all this horshit about the universe is important, but it isn't. What matters is your kitchen, and what you cook in it. The people you love and how you treat or abuse them. Your standing with GOD, which is a central fact, and if you don't know you are dog food. And so on. All the simple humble NORMAL shit is important and all the 'grand vision of the universe' is NOT.'
Ok think about the ocean of the world a two portioned area's of currents made by temperature and salty waters and fresh water in a stirring position it called Talorical currents of water a votexual motions with ingredients in it. Well the Universe has Talorical currents in itself as we seen the larger ocean space in the production of the galaxies and the push pulling of waves of quantum quantities of densities with in space spin and flowing floating particals and various wages of galaxies dancing with an other one like Earths history of our past experiences before the flood of a super interesting people and people who had a good relationship with space time vibrational transition to understand the importance of the past lifestyle of us is a good example. Mars was a twin too Earths own lives it was cas Called Neburu
There is no such thing as discovery, discoveries are reified beliefs. Discoveries are created not found, if I understand the presenter's. Measurement is itself a creative act.
Are “others” discovered or created…? Bernardo says other separate consciousness exist did he discover them or is he creating them..?:)
@@mrbwatson8081 Nothing can be created out of nothing. Therefore we create the other in a sense. This sense of the other is their meaning for me as an embedded creature. Every communication is caught within a context and interpretation of the other. Any number of analogies, metaphors and frames of reference come into play. This surplus of meaning is what we call understanding the other. This not a denial of the separateness but an admission of it.
@@kimfreeborn how do you “ know “ nothing can be created from nothing? How do you know this moment is not being created from nothing?
@@kimfreeborn is a sense of something, something other then a sense? Or is a sense of something just a sense?
We discover meaning. once we understand it, we can identify it by attaching language to it in a way that the meaning becomes relatable to a general understanding.
💎🛸🐬🦇🦅🪷
Is man projecting another "god" out there vs. recognising his/her essence?
This is just refried Advaita Vedanta.
Welcome to Planet Earth children.
There's nothing new under the sun, and the sun shines on every dog's ass some of the time.
"Just"? "Re-fried"? I look for Western analogues to Advaita, and welcome this contribution--perhaps it will open some minds. That's a good thing, right? Maybe some people will cross the cultural barriers to Advaita due to this; maybe this will make that crossing easier. For me, I welcome this and find it as exciting as finding Advaita.
Bernardo just discribing personal perception using dashboard and other nonsense🙂
I'd love to know the source of all that "great and awesome" knowledge that Bernardo is gifting us with. A book titled "How to spread woo and bs" comes to mind.
I followed 18 minutes and I am disappointed. Consciousness is not defined. How can he then claim that supercomputers in an AI system cannot develop consciousness? He also says that computer engineers know exactly how computers work. I is already refuted by self learning computers. The complexity can very well produces a feeling of self and understanding of own capacities. It lures already there behind the vast amount information AIs amass and handle.
Dashboard = Malkuth
Fundamental consciousness = Kether, Tiphareth, Yesod
Each Qabalistic World is a dashboard of the World "above" it. Manifestation is a dashboard for the unmanifest.
Whitch Doctor PfrAnkh-nCoatl of The House ToHT say LIFE ITSELF is Creator of All That Is, The Great I Am, cuz The Torahnical or Biblical God would have to be ALIVE in order to Exist... in the 1st place, right.
Wanna take Yacobs ladder down the rabbit hole.... Pay Me! link is in the description. 😂🎉😂
AI will mimic consciousness but never truly achieve it.
The AI techno wet dream has a short lifespan because the earth does not have the resources to entertain our self destructive suicidal fantasies much longer. That is if we don't blow ourselves up 1st. But by all means DO carry on with the this exercise in futility and I'll make sure not to run out of popcorn...😂
Hello! Bernardo Kastrup is Very inteligent. However he says that our lives have no propose. Says that we are an alter ego. I know that in the afterlife this person that have My name and My body Will not exists the most Will exist only like a memory. I think I was an alter ego to, but My own consciousness alter ego. Not mind at large alter ego. That model is solipsist related to mind at large..after dissolving dissociation I think I'll be an individual consciousness, but not the alter ego. Bernardo says that we all will disapear like an alter ego of someone with dissociation identidity disorder cured So, for me, the result Will be the same that it was if.physicalism was the true. Thank you.
@@deanmitchell5641 Hello! Thank you for your answer. What you.arec saying means that death is One level of dissociation dissolution. Not total dissolution. I tend to believe that wirh are an ontológical network of consciousnessesses. Mind at large is a metaphor that means that connection network. So consciousness Will feel One, and all, simultaneously, Forever. In prátical terms you and I are afirming the same, .But Bernardo Kastrup doesn't clarify if that dissociation dissolution may be total and alter ego disappear, or that are diferent levels os dissolution. Each One of US can be an individual consciousness connected to a network, dissociated, what appears on out senses like a body, or we can be an alter ego of an alter ego of mind ar large. This Last level of dissociation lasts Forever. Or we can be an alter ego that dissolves Forever with death. I think Each of a us is a consciousness and Mind at Large is the the sum of all consciousnessesses and interconnections network between consciousnessesses. Isn't easy to explain. My English isn't good. But I try and hope you understand what I mean.
@@deanmitchell5641 who is it that awakes from the dream? Kastrup's Mind at Large? Phycalism says we are only the body, nothing else. My idea is that we are consciousnessesses. Not egos or alter egos. Alter ego is an ilusory person, that spirit, identified with body, believe he is. Body may be something like a dream objet, not only our dream, as other named physical objets. I don't believe we are only a mind at Large alter egos. I believe mind at Large is a metaphor to say spirit or consciousness is One and simultaneously all, because consciousnessesses are all connected. An alter ego is a dream temporary avatar. Alter ego isn't a consciousness.
@@deanmitchell5641 Thank you! My consciousness can't be observed by me directly. As I can't se My eyes directly. But I can't understand the meaning of thinking I'm MAL. That is another kind of solipsism. MAL solipsism. I can't feel My self as MAL. And I can't give meaning to life as MAL. For me, That Is the same of Phycalism, that says we aren't a consciousness, but only a temporary body. If ONLY exists MAL, and I don't feel me MAL, I may be tented to say: MAL is responsible for all. So I'm no responsible for My acts. As alter ego i've no choice.
@@deanmitchell5641 Thank you Very Much for Your attention. Your answers seams Very inteligent and authentic. Is your true conviction. I Will see the vídeo proposed. I ONLY want to say that I don't believe that me, Vítor, Will sobrevive death. By "me", in this Sense, I mean the intelligent observer that observs My experience now. The same who was observing and experiencing another experience before Vitor Birth. Perhaps the same who observed the experience of experiencing, or dreamming, to be other man, a woman, an animal, in earth, or not. I don't believe that ego survives. I mean consciousness is a network of consciousnessesses connected. Not only One. Thank you! I feel truely grateful for your attention.
@@deanmitchell5641 Thank you! I Saw de vídeo and I agree that I'm allways the same observer. Only experience Change. And I agree that observer is not ego (Vítor). But I can't experience the experiêncies of other observers. The problem is not spatial separation and view point. Quantum entanglement sugests spatial separation may be only an ilusion. I agree. But Physical separation isn't consciousnessesses separation. What spira says about MAL may be Said about an individual consciousness connected with others by a connection network. Nature behaviour, can be subconscensious colective network of consciousnessesses, so it seams independentof Each One. Thank you. And what Spira says he can experience, we can't experience being a network of consciousnessesses (not a network of egos). When I say consciousness I atribute it the same proprieties of you atribute at MAL, not the ego properties. The dissociation can exists in individual consciousness as you say that exists in MAL. Is the same. I ear NDE relats and others, and they don't say I'm MAL. They say they are One and, simultaneously, the all. Not they experience be only the all. No body relates an experience of total dissociation dissolving, like it was MAL (the experience of to be all that it is). MAL solipsism is solipsism. Ego solipsism doesn't mean anything. Ego isn't consciousness. So MAL solipsism is not diferent of any kind of solipsism. Scuse me, I can't see, isn't a need to be who is right. Spira is diferent of Bernardo. Spira clarins he is iluminated. Bernardo shows Very great inteligence and knowledge that I admire Very Very Much, . But he not seam calm as Spira, nor claims ilumination. He is looking for true, not to be a guru, as Spira seams to me.
"The Final Deepest, Ultimate Reality" revealed on RUclips, the bullshit hub of the universe? Haw, haw, haw, haw, haw, haw, haw, haw, haw, haw, haw, etc., etc. That's a good one!
27:00 this theory itself is of the "flying spaghetti monster" kind. There's no evidence for it and it solves no known problems.
"How is that possible that dimished brain activity correlates with rich psychic experiences"? Stuart Hameroff has far better explanation for this that doesn't require faith but is experimentally backed.
I hate Idealism and denying that brain produces consciousness because it leads to pointless ping pong spirituality vs "Materialism (wherever this XIX century noun is supposed to mean in Quantum Age)
But the point is people who deny that brain produces consciousness are playing to Elon Musk goal post but ignoring threats of brain organoids development and it's ethical implications that are totally ignored. You may not believe that they are conscious (although I do) but ...very well let's even suppose for a second that Idealism is right (although I reject it together with Dualism and Solipsism)
even in that case you cannot deny that possibility of brain transplant technology already performed routinely in mice is rather nasty!
And Elon Musk (also "religious") person keeps smiling malevolently.
I don't care what you believe about conscious or reality but please don't close eyes to this social threat!
just another charismatic guru... this isnt science.