David Chalmers - Why is Consciousness so Mysterious?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 27 июл 2024
- How can the mindless microscopic particles that compose our brains 'experience' the setting sun, the Mozart Requiem, and romantic love?
Click here for more interviews with David Chalmers bit.ly/1MtKy4p
Click here for more thoughts on why consciousness is so mysterious bit.ly/1hILxoL
Click here to buy episodes or complete seasons of Closer To Truth bit.ly/1LUPlQS
For all of our video interviews please visit us at www.closertotruth.com
These videos start so blurry, I almost thought I was seeing David Lee Roth from 30 years ago.
I'm still waiting for the guitar solo.
I'm at 3:37 and realizing how this talk is a highlight of my day! they both are visually different but similar inside - it's like a good father-son-talk.. enjoying it and not even stoned
If consciousness is an illusion, than why am I conscious of the illusion?
"Professor Chalmers, are you free tomorrow for our iterview?"
"Sure, I'm having an MRI; wanna just drop in and do the interview there?"
I observed something odd about this guy and had to watch twice to see it..........he doesn't blink
Whoa. You're right. That's very strange. Good eye
Blinked around 7:00
I.was up to there as I read this comment. He blinks lol
Neither does Mr. Chalmers, for the most part, in fact, almost always, ever say "uh" or "um." Which I find very commendable. I very much enjoy listening to him speak, because he speaks in words, for the most part carefully chosen words, and in words only. Sounds easy to do, but it ain't. I'm not sure about the non-blinking, but the speaking in complete sentences and using only words, while avoiding unnecessary and meaningless fillers like "uh" and "um" is the mark of a clear thinker and a concise speaker. Maybe the non-blinking has something to do with his high powers of concentration and lucidity? Anyway, thanks kindly for pointing out the non-blinking; helps me better appreciate this gent's remarkable abilities.
Check out 1:26.
Ray Wing If you are blinking at the same time as him you will miss it. I saw him blink. But probably not every time. Also, part of the time the camera is at the wrong angle at times.
This guy is really smart.
Outstanding!
David Chalmers plays guitar for a Def Leppard tribute band called Müt Tyegher #themoreyouknow
Chalmers could be on to something,
Fundamentals: space-time, energy-matter, information-consciousness.
Actually, space-time-energy-matter can be decomposed into information-consciousness.
This dude sold me weed in the 90s!
Great interview. Going for a book
Saw that too (lack of blinking).
I noticed that, a bit odd lol
I think all that the word consciousness should mean to anyone is physical computational process consisting of a combination of the memory of the recent past and the prediction of the soon-to-be future. It just happens to be the _extremely_ recent past and the _extremely_ soon-to-be future; such extreme fringes that it is almost indistinguishable from the present.
I support this theory
What "consciousness" is to me at this time:
Energy and harmonized energy.
Starting with energy in the body and brain, new energy enters the body. The energy goes over quantum thresholds, (otherwise it doesn't move on), and/or under quantum ceilings, (what doesn't fit gets "chopped off"). When energy frequencies align (harmonize), they rise to a higher level. Doing this over and over and "consciousness emerges".
I watched the whole thing, and he never sang "Bang Your Head." So disappointed.
Spinal Tap!!!
amazing question that remains open to develop has got only 15k views. it has to be billions
I Am That I Am !!
Long before Descartes.
Yes & yes
Yes & yes
I never saw something in the idea of Plato that there was a world of forms since I thought it was about "the ideal triangle" etc. But now I think I understand it better that Plato had the insight that the mind, the soul, ideas, forms can't possibly have their origine in this universe but could belong to another corresponding 1:1 plane where they are in a way almost like real(Platonic realism) objects. It sounds far fetched I know (where is the Ockham razor) but today when we have dark energy, dark matter, many worlds(anything you can imagine could exist somewhere) and the seeding universal quantum field, it gives me the feeling that matter is becoming more and more something immaterial (values of field strengths) and some introduce even thinkthe universe is made of information. So Plato was perhaps not spot on but close since a lot could be hidden in that universal vacuum quantum field.
A piece from a (not for the fainthearted) autobiography titled: Saved by the Light of the Buddha Within...
Myoho-Renge-Kyo represents the identity of what some scientists are now referring to as the unified field of consciousnesses. In other words, it’s the essence of all existence and non-existence - the ultimate creative force behind planets, stars, nebulae, people, animals, trees, fish, birds, and all phenomena, manifest or latent. All matter and intelligence are simply waves or ripples manifesting to and from this core source.
Consciousness (enlightenment) is itself the actual creator of everything that exists now, ever existed in the past, or will exist in the future - right down to the minutest particles of dust - each being an individual ripple or wave. The big difference between chanting Nam-Myoho-Renge-Kyo and most other conventional prayers is that instead of depending on a ‘middleman’ to connect us to our state of inner enlightenment, we’re able to do it ourselves. That’s because chanting Nam-Myoho-Renge-Kyo allows us to tap directly into our enlightened state by way of this self-produced sound vibration.
‘Who or What Is God?’ If we compare the concept of God being a separate entity that is forever watching down on us, to the teachings of Nichiren, it makes more sense to me that the true omnipotence, omniscience and omnipresence of what most people perceive to be God, is the fantastic state of enlightenment that exists within each of us. Some say that God is an entity that’s beyond physical matter - I think that the vast amount of information continuously being conveyed via electromagnetic waves in today’s world gives us proof of how an invisible state of God could indeed exist.
For example, it’s now widely known that specific data relayed by way of electromagnetic waves has the potential to help bring about extraordinary and powerful effects - including an instant global awareness of something or a mass emotional reaction. It’s also common knowledge that these invisible waves can easily be used to detonate a bomb or to enable NASA to control the movements of a robot as far away as the Moon or Mars - none of which is possible without a receiver to decode the information that’s being transmitted. Without the receiver, the data would remain impotent. In a very similar way, we need to have our own ‘receiver’ switched on so that we can activate a clear and precise understanding of our own life, all other life and what everything else in existence is.
Chanting Nam-Myoho-Renge-Kyo each day helps us to achieve this because it allows us to reach into the core of our enlightenment and keep it switched on. That’s because Myoho-Renge-Kyo represents the identity of what scientists now refer to as the unified field of consciousnesses. To break it down - Myoho represents the Law of manifestation and latency (Nature) and consists of two alternating states. For example, the state of Myo is where everything in life that’s not obvious to us exists - including our stored memories when we’re not thinking about them - our hidden potential and inner emotions whenever they’re dormant - our desires, our fears, our wisdom, happiness, karma - and more importantly, our enlightenment. The other state, ho, is where everything in Life exists whenever it becomes evident to us, such as when a thought pops up from within our memory - whenever we experience or express our emotions - or whenever a good or bad cause manifests as an effect from our karma. When anything becomes apparent, it merely means that it’s come out of the state of Myo (dormancy/latency) and into a state of ho (manifestation). It’s the difference between consciousness and unconsciousness, being awake or asleep, or knowing and not knowing.
The second law - Renge - Ren meaning cause and ge meaning effect, governs and controls the functions of Myoho - these two laws of Myoho and Renge, not only function together simultaneously but also underlie all spiritual and physical existence. The final and third part of the tri-combination - Kyo, is the Law which allows Myoho to integrate with Renge - or vice verse. It’s the great, invisible thread of energy that fuses and connects all Life and matter - as well as the past, present and future. It’s also sometimes termed the Universal Law of Communication - perhaps it could even be compared with the string theory that many scientists now suspect exists.
Just as the cells in our body, our thoughts, feelings and everything else is continually fluctuating within us - all that exists in the world around us and beyond is also in a constant state of flux - constantly controlled by these three fundamental laws. In fact, more things are going back and forth between the two states of Myo and ho in a single moment of time than it would ever be possible to calculate or describe. And it doesn’t matter how big or small, famous or trivial anything or anyone may appear to be, everything that’s ever existed in the past, exists now or will exist in the future, exists only because of the workings of the Laws ‘Myoho-Renge-Kyo’ - the basis of the four fundamental forces, and if they didn’t function, neither we nor anything else could go on existing. That’s because all forms of existence, including the seasons, day, night, birth, death and so on, are moving forward in an ongoing flow of continuation - rhythmically reverting back and forth between the two fundamental states of Myo and ho in absolute accordance with Renge - and by way of Kyo. Even stars are dying and being reborn under the workings of what the combination ‘Myoho-Renge-Kyo’ represents. Nam, or Namu - which mean the same thing, are vibrational passwords or keys that allow us to reach deep into our life and fuse with or become one with ‘Myoho-Renge-Kyo’. On a more personal level, nothing ever happens by chance or coincidence, it’s the causes that we’ve made in our past, or are presently making, that determine how these laws function uniquely in each of our lives - as well as the environment from moment to moment.
By facing east, in harmony with the direction that the Earth is spinning, and chanting Nam-Myoho-Renge-Kyo for a minimum of, let’s say, ten minutes daily to start with, any of us can experience actual proof of its positive effects in our lives - even if it only makes us feel good on the inside, there will be a definite positive effect. That’s because we’re able to pierce through the thickest layers of our karma and activate our inherent Buddha Nature (our enlightened state). By so doing, we’re then able to bring forth the wisdom and good fortune that we need to challenge, overcome and change our adverse circumstances - turn them into positive ones - or manifest and gain even greater fulfilment in our daily lives from our accumulated good karma.
This also allows us to bring forth the wisdom that can free us from the ignorance and stupidity that’s preventing us from accepting and being proud of the person that we indeed are - regardless of our race, colour, gender or sexuality. We’re also able to see and understand our circumstances and the environment far more clearly, as well as attract and connect with any needed external beneficial forces and situations. As I’ve already mentioned, everything is subject to the law of Cause and Effect - the ‘actual-proof-strength’ resulting from chanting Nam-Myoho-Renge-Kyo always depends on our determination, sincerity and dedication.
For example, the levels of difference could be compared to between making a sound on a piano, creating a melody, or producing a great song, and so on. Something else that’s very important to always to respect and acknowledge is that the Law (or if you prefer God) is in everyone and everything.
NB: There are frightening and disturbing sounds, and there are tranquil and relaxing sounds. It’s the emotional result from any noise or sound that can trigger off a mood or even instantly change one. When chanting Nam-Myoho-Renge-Kyo each day, we are producing a sound vibration that’s the password to our true inner-self - this soon becomes apparent when you start reassessing your views on various things - such as your fears and desires etc. The best way to get the desired result when chanting is not to view things in a conventional way - rather than reaching out to an external source, we need to reach into our own lives and bring our needs and desires to fruition from within - including the good fortune and strength to achieve any help that we may need. Chanting Nam-Myoho-Renge-Kyo also reaches out externally and draws us towards, or draws towards us, what we need to make us happy from our environment.
For example, it helps us to be in the right place at the right time - to make better choices and decisions and so forth. We need to think of it as a seed within us that we’re watering and bringing sunshine to for it to grow, blossom and bring forth fruit or flowers. It’s also important to understand that everything we need in life - including the answer to every question and the potential to achieve every dream - already exists within us. ruclips.net/video/NR5DdqjMxgA/видео.html
Let go, and let God - Olivia Newton-John Nam Myoho Renge Kyo
Let go, and let God - Olivia Newton-John Nam Myoho Renge Kyo
www.youtube.com
17:17 doesn't it just say consciousness is the combined whole of all those data points. Just as feeling a solid surface is the combined whole of all those atoms.
consciousness is focus
Body Mind And Consciousness are three different things. Body is a machine which get started during birth process by law of nature. Body system has operating system and drivers to run independent of Conscious-Mind only by taking energy. Brain is a part of the body. Mind stationed at front junction of chest ribs. Consciousness is not bodily. It comes to mind and go away during sleep and death. Consciousness with Mind forms Conscious-Mind which is the key thing. Conscious- Mind uses brain to perform by body through processing inputs taken by sencessery organs. Mind becomes inactive after death and consciousness never comes to body. Conscious-Mind leads to self identity, awareness and generate emotions, thought and desires. Fulfilling desire is happiness and whole life our Conscious-Mind drive our body through brain to achieve those desires. Brain is processor, memory, logics, judgement, body operator...
Further more conscious mind has two chambers subconscious-mind and Conscious-Mind. Subconscious-Mind think of our reality and influence Conscious-Mind to produce desires accordingly to be done. Both way communication also take place sometimes.
Bawitdaba, da bang, da dang diggy diggy, diggy, said the boogie, said up jump the boogie
My name is kid
Kid rock!
Scientists are facing the 'Hard Problem of Consciousness'. How ever if they are willing to refer to the Quran, this 'Hard Problem' becomes easy.
Al Qur'an (39:42):
Allah takes the souls (nafs) at the time of their death, and those that do not die [He takes] during their sleep. Then He keeps those for which He has decreed death and releases the others for a specified term. Indeed in that are signs for a people who give thought.
With reference to the above, I would like to think the relationship between our physical consciousness and our spiritual nafs is like a car and its driver. A car can function as a car but need a driver to achieve its function as to what it is made for. A car is like our physical body with its consciousness and the driver is like our soul with its spiritual nafs. Our nafs is detached from our body just like the driver is detached from the car. When the driver needs a rest, he or she leave the car. Similarly when a nafs need a rest the nafs leaves the body to sleep while the nafs returns to God.
Similar to a car, our physical body is made from earth soil. Thus when it's life span expires it goes back to the earth. On the other hand our nafs is made from spiritual material. Thus when the life span of his/her car expires, the nafs continue living in different dimension, waiting for a new car or new body to drive on.
Science has progress so far in seeking knowledge, and now facing a brick wall not able to progress further, unless...
Hey! The hippie era was last century!
I wonder, if when technology has advanced far enough to create a computer or some kind of system that can replicate the processes of the human mind, that this artificial intelligence will actually have it's own consciousness and thinks/realizes that it, itself exists?
every one will have clone or so said as nowadays smart phone that we can use do to our job and is this clone us or is it us?
Why zombies!?!?? Why not sleep!????
1- The universe is either eternal (uncreated), or finite
2- We know by science (well, philosophical arguments are much stronger, but this should do) that is not eternal, it is therefore finite
3- There is logical necessity, possibility, or impossibility when trying to categorize things, example: 1+1 = 2 is a logical necessity, 1+1=3 is a logical impossibility , and a unicorn or yourself is a logical possibility aka you don't have to exist
4- If the world is finite (it means that it began to exist), so then it didn't have to exist aka a logical possibility
5- Then it needs someone who's a logical necessity (therefore eternal) with a will that chooses to bring that logical possibility into reality because if that thing wasn't eternal then it would be finite then we have to ask the same question until we concede infinity which is impossible or cut off the chain with something eternal as we did right here. It also has to have a will that eternal something because if it didn't then it would a simple cause, which would therefore render the universe eternal, but the universe is not eternal, so there is a conscious will therefore God exists.
I pray that people would look at the argument and criticize me if they found it unsound
+shuhan It's a very common misunderstanding that big bang theory states that nothing existed before it (i.e. that the universe came into existence out of nothing), but that is not the case. Big bang theory merely states that the universe expanded from a state that was very much smaller, denser and hotter about 13.8 billion years ago. This is referred to as the beginning of the universe as a matter of convenience, but it no more implies that the universe came out of nothing than than does the birth of a person implies that people come out of nothing rather than that new people are a rearrangement of atoms that already existed.
Then there is B-Theory of time, supported by Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity, in which the universe is eternal and the past does not cease to exist and the future exists already. More on B-Theory in this video ruclips.net/video/H1WfFkp4puw/видео.html
So, neither by science nor philosophical argument do we know that the universe isn't eternal, thus no need to propose eternal god-beings that poof universes into existence from nothing.
+shuhan Got some questions:
--What is the definite and strong phil. argument for universe having to be finite ?
--Why does a finite universe imply a beginning ? And/or why not for infinite ?
--It is unclear when and how god enters this picture and/or what is meant by god.
--Why do you assume same logical possibilities applies to a universe's non-existence if universe is the origin of the logic ?
bizzee1 I expected such a powerful objection, but I could argue that B-theory has not been proven conclusively to be right because it is still pretty conjecture and to objectively say that it is fact you still have to show that special relativity is reconcilable with quantum theory. Plus William Lane Craig has shown that the A theory (which my original argument is based on) is still compatible with physics in his book (The Blackwell Companion to Natural Theology).
And even if it were true still my response will still be the same even on the b theory of time.
It goes like this:
B-theory states that time is a dimension of space.
The universe is either eternal or had a beginning.
If the universe was eternal then that time dimension would be an actual infinite with magnitude because of infinite events. (as b theory states).
Actual infinities with magnitudes are impossible based on many arguments primarily Avicenna's argument.
If there is no an actual infinite dimension then the dimension or time series is finite.
We said that if the universe was eternal then the time dimension would be infinite.
thus the universe had a beginning (complete the rest from my original argument)
I may have done a mistake, so please review this paper from which I formulated my counter counter argument it also is better sourced, researched, and has additional arguments.
(A Defense of the Kalam Cosmological Argument and the B-Theory of Time)
milesandrews.files.wordpress.com/2014/06/metcalfethesis.pdf
Infinitiely
1- One of the strongest philosophical arguments is that whatever changes must have had a beginning.
2-Because if it were infinite then it would be necessarily eternal, which would make it always existing aka a logical necessity(which means it would never be non existing);thus, if it was finite it would also necessarily mean it had a beginning thus a logical possibility ( it could exist or not). Why would infinite equals eternal well is you say the universe or space-time is eternal then you also affirm that time is eternal.
3- What we prove is a first cause with intention, if you want to call that God or Nature it is up to you.
4- The universe is not the origin of logic! 1+1 will always equal 2 even if there is no universe!!!
+shuhan What you look to me to have done here now is argue against anything being eternal by claiming the necessity that a thing has to be an actual infinite to be eternal, then arguing that actual infinites are impossible.
Relativity treats time as a spacial dimension. So, would also you argue that space (or anything else for that matter) can't be eternal (uncreated) unless there is an actual infinite amount of space? I'm not following why you think that there has to be an actual infinite amount of a thing for it to be uncreated (eternal). That looks like a non sequitur to me. So, I have to object to 1 and 4 also, and say that the universe could be both finite and eternal (uncreated) if, for example, B-theory of time is the case.
In 2 you said that we know by science and philosophy that the universe is not eternal. I merely objected to that by saying that we don't know that the universe is not eternal. I didn't say that B-theory has been proven conclusively nor that the universe has been proven conclusively to be eternal by any means. However, for you to retreat to a position in support of A-theory by pointing out that B-theory hasn't been proven conclusively implies that you know that A-theory also hasn't been proven conclusively either or you would have said, 'A-theory has been proven conclusively,' which it hasn't. Therefore I'll repeat that we don't know, in any scientifically rigorous sense of the word "know," that the universe is not eternal.
So, it looks to me that at least 1, 2 and 4 are not proven to be true statements in any rigorous sense of the word "proven." If you are to try to salvage those points, you'll have to back down to something less rigorous like rational warrant (i.e argue that A-theory is more reasonable to believe than B-theory). However, according to what I know about A-theory vs. B-theory, there is just not enough information as yet to form a rational belief about which is actually the case.
So, that could mean a tough slog for you (to say the least) to try to salvage something meaningful out of your argument. I mean, our everyday, intuitive experience of time seems like the future does not exist yet and the past no longer exists. However, Einstein's relativity has made some astoundingly unintuitive predictions about time that have been proven to be accurate (time dilation) to a high degree of accuracy. This lends weight to the idea that our intuitive, everyday perception of time is a very inaccurate representation of what time actually is, and that other predictions of Relativity are also true that the past and future are just as real and exist in the same way as the present. It's all far from settled as far as I can tell.
@Michael Cameron Dennett's position is self-refuting and if atheism is a worldview rather than the lack of a worldview then you got a burden of proof to meet.
+Gaining Understanding Not trying to support the other guy, but why do you think Dannett's position is self-refuting ?
Infinitiely Dennet supports eliminative materialism which denies the existence of consciousness (a first person perspective). But he consciously accepts this view. Therefore it's self-refuting. David Chalmers actually goes over this in the beginning of the video we're commenting on right here. When the host says there are those who deny consciousness he's talking about Daniel Dennett and Paul/Patricia Churchland and so forth.
+Gaining Understanding I thought he was just functional view guy. I thought he tried to show some of the common description of consciousness such s ineffable, personal etc. are not as clear cut. But yeah, if he is trying to get rid of it completely, he must be wrong.
Infinitiely He is, and this involves eliminative materialism.
Henning Strandin "To put it as clearly as I can: in his book, Consciousness Explained, Dennett denies the existence of consciousness. He continues to use the word, but he means something different by it. For him, it refers only to third-person phenomena, not to the first-person conscious feelings and experiences we all have. For Dennett there is no difference between us humans and complex zombies who lack any inner feelings, because we are all just complex zombies. ...I regard his view as self-refuting because it denies the existence of the data which a theory of consciousness is supposed to explain...Here is the paradox of this exchange: I am a conscious reviewer consciously answering the objections of an author who gives every indication of being consciously and puzzlingly angry. I do this for a readership that I assume is conscious. How then can I take seriously his claim that consciousness does not really exist?"
Source: John Searle's review of Dennett's book "Consciousness Explained"
These people have the wrong perspective. Human consciousness is self consciousness and it is a learned ability in the matrix of our societies. It requires the foundations of the ability to make distinctions between subject and object and also requires the objectification of the self as observer of the various objects or contents of consciousness. Essentially human consciousness is a construction from more basic elements of raw undifferentiated consciousness, which we as humans do not experience consciously.
Nothing mysterious about it! I't s neurology, biology, mediated by the reticular formation in the brainstem - functioning. It's mystery seeking.
If it's so easy, please provide definitive proof that Neurobiology and formation in the brainstem create Qualia. Not just actions implying Qualia, the actual experiences themselves. Until you can irrefutably do that it remans a mystery.
@@badmittens5160 Get books on brain neurology, dombo! Qualia? Ha, ha!
@@GeoCoppens given your reply, you're not that sharp, boi
@@brunopiga663 Ha, Ha, Ha!! Learn spelling, you dope!
@@brunopiga663 looking at neurons doesn't tell you anything about consciousness lol silly, you can't look at neurons & have any insight into experience, it's just electrical signals in the brain, but someone to whom those neurons belong to is having an experience.
Consciouness is biology, it's awareness, being awake! Nothing strange!
Wait...Mind experiment time. Say you are lying under a coconut palm and you are conscious that you are lying under a coconut palm, ok? Then a coconut falls down and hits you squarely on the head and knocks you out cold. Very good, now you are still lying under the coconut palm, right, but you are not conscious that you are because you have just been knocked out cold. And the specific reason that you are not conscious is obviously because the impact of the coconut on your head messed up the workings of your brain activity somehow. We know this observationally because if the coconut had hit you say on the foot you might be in severe pain, but you would still be conscious. So we can be certain that consciousness is a function of brain activity. Now if we accept that this as true then conscious can not be fundamental because it is a derivative of brain activity. So to postulate that consciousness is a fundamental property or principle of the universe like space or time enjoys no logical underpinning whatsoever because absent a rightly working brain, consciousness does not exist. Zombies need not reply.
Consciousness is NOT mysterious!
``when god created the world.`` LOL and there you go, lost all credibility. ahah
lol he said "to use a metaphor"... oh dear... there's all your credibility gone.
It was a metaphor, dipshit. Read a book.
when something came out of nothing there u lost or your crediability
btw he is an athiest