Consciousness and the Physical World: A Conversation with Christof Koch (Episode
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 8 июл 2024
- Sam Harris speaks with Christof Koch about the nature of consciousness. They discuss Christof’s development as a neuroscientist, his collaboration with Francis Crick, change blindness and binocular rivalry, sleep and anesthesia, the limits of physicalism, non-locality, brains as classical systems, conscious AI, idealism and panpsychism, Integrated Information Theory (IIT), what it means to say something “exists,” the illusion of the self, brain bridging, Christof’s experience with psychedelics, and other topics.
Christof Koch is a neuroscientist at the Allen Institute and the Chief Scientist of the Tiny Blue Dot Foundation. He is the former president of the Allen Institute for Brain Science and a former professor at the California Institute of Technology. He writes regularly for Scientific American and is the author of five books, most recently Then I Am Myself the World: What Consciousness Is and How to Expand It.
Website: christofkoch.com/
July 9, 2024
SUBSCRIBE to gain access to all full-length episodes of the podcast at samharris.org/subscribe/ OR become a channel member to access episodes on RUclips. For those who can't afford the full subscription price, we offer full and partial scholarships www.samharris.org/subscribe/s...
Subscribe to the YT channel: ruclips.net/user/subscription_c...
Follow Making Sense on Twitter: / makingsensehq
Follow Sam on Facebook: / samharrisorg
Follow Sam on Instagram: / samharrisorg
For more information about Sam Harris: www.samharris.org 
Наука
So happy to have found a podcast that isn't so much hype and health products sales. Really appreciate the calm tone
Wait until the TDS shows it's head
WE ARE SOOOO BACK
Yes this is the stuff I want
My take would be consciousness is fundamental; mind is elemental and emerges with quantum events.
A primitive seeing a lamp and lamp light for the first time would likely assume that the lamp was responsible for the light.
It is hard for materialists they are not used to thinking beyond the physical or the elemental. For religious people it is easy that consciousness just is, and is not dependent on anything; physical or elemental.
Agreed; hopefully more content on core stuff
Sam, I really hope that one day you will do video format. It's really a style of long form content that I personally value, I find it more engaging and as a result I take away more from the conversation when I engage both vision and hearing as opposed to just listening.
I agree. I prefer video too as I live off grid in wilderness and need to see human conversations that s why I haven't subscribed yet
You just wanna watch naked huh? 😅
@@ZeuzBluez i was laughing till i realised i lived in a city and don't have many human conversations myself
For what it’s worth - it’s not surprising to me that slight weight differences in isotopes of xenon produce discernible changes in anesthetic potency. That slight weight difference (present in each of the 500 billion-billion-billion molecules per second it’d take for the anesthetic effect) would change the rate at which the gas can enter the blood through the lungs, and the rate from blood to neuron, and the effectiveness with which the molecule can interact with chemical receptors. Adding up all of the discrepancies among all of the relevant junctions (including many I didn’t mention) dissolves the surprise that such a small weight difference can make on potency (which, ofc, is how much of the drug it takes to cause an effect)
I’m going to read this comment instead of taking melatonin from now on. Game changer 💪🏻. Thank u
American spent $90 billion dollars last year on Halloween products. Imagine if we redirected our resources to neurological research, creat entire Industries and fields of research, high paying jobs you could attain with college degrees. Try and imagine the breakthroughs you would see, in areas of addiction, mental illness, depression and so much more.
none, since they are all mental dysfunctions not biological ones.
your strategy leads merely to dependency on pharmaceuticals that manage the symptoms ie. essentially nothing for most except the chronically ill, with a host of life-destroying side-effects. developing methods of rigorously observing the mind on the other hand actually works and in case you havent noticed the world around you, exactly whats needed and what will bring you all back from the precipice.
Christmas is 10x that! Literally, by an order of magnitude. Recently, Americans spent over *900 billion dollars* on this one-day event, and that's not even counting all the travel expenses and celebratory meals.
Reality is that most people don't think like that. If you would show a podcast like this to the majority of people, probably many could not reproduce the subject if asked and would get distracted quite quickly.
I listen to you and use your ways of engaging in debate in my office spaces and even in my personal life as well......Big Fan
except on israel where he only listens to one side :)
@@radscorpion8 one side is a genocidal death cult that uses children as human shields. Sam listens to the right side.
I used to be a debate bro in my 20s but that was in a pizza kitchen, I can't imagine trying to bother people in an office setting lol your coworkers must love you around the water cooler when you say they don't have free will and they have to go back to staring at their computer screens in their cubicles.😅
@thecoleslaw I am a 31 yr old teacher. When I was young at that time I thought teaching skills will give me salary hike, but with age I realised what's the real game here to increase the salary. Now I do teach to my students with the best of my capabilities every single lecture, what I am doing now which I initially didn't is arguing back to my principal about her criticism of my lecture and for that I always see Sam Harris, Jordon Peterson etc. Guys what I learnt is be so much deadly great, a fucking genious when it comes to your craft and be humble to those colleagues who deserve it and be ruthless and argue with those who are there to just exploit you. I got 90 percent hike when I started arguing, I am telling you it's really needed and must be used wisely and yes ruthlessly. I am from Bharat, my initial salary was 28k now I am earning close to 60k and part time extra since I moved to city 30k so it's real great. Now I do not listen songs I just listen debates, learn from them apply my own logic and understanding. Focus on real issues is the game changer guys. Peace
@thecoleslaw I am a 31 yr old teacher. When I was young at that time I thought teaching skills will give me salary hike, but with age I realised what's the real game here to increase the salary. Now I do teach to my students with the best of my capabilities every single lecture, what I am doing now which I initially didn't is arguing back to my principal about her criticism of my lecture and for that I always see Sam Harris, Jordon Peterson etc. Guys what I learnt is be so much deadly great, a fucking genious when it comes to your craft and be humble to those colleagues who deserve it and be ruthless and argue with those who are there to just exploit you. I got 90 percent hike when I started arguing, I am telling you it's really needed and must be used wisely and yes ruthlessly. I am from Bharat, my initial salary was 28k now I am earning close to 60k and part time extra since I moved to city 30k so it's real great. Now I do not listen songs I just listen debates, learn from them apply my own logic and understanding. Focus on real issues is the game changer guys. Peace
Always a pleasure to listen to you and your guests
Could you have a chat with Bernardo Kastrup?
I am a 31 yr old teacher. When I was young at that time I thought teaching skills will give me salary hike, but with age I realised what's the real game here to increase the salary. Now I do teach to my students with the best of my capabilities every single lecture, what I am doing now which I initially didn't is arguing back to my principal about her criticism of my lecture and for that I always see Sam Harris, Jordon Peterson etc. Guys what I learnt is be so much deadly great, a fucking genious when it comes to your craft and be humble to those colleagues who deserve it and be ruthless and argue with those who are there to just exploit you. I got 90 percent hike when I started arguing, I am telling you it's really needed and must be used wisely and yes ruthlessly. I am from Bharat, my initial salary was 28k now I am earning close to 60k and part time extra since I moved to city 30k so it's real great. Now I do not listen songs I just listen debates, learn from them apply my own logic and understanding. Focus on real issues is the game changer guys. Peace
loved this one, great conversation
I've heard it said that a person's personality resembles that of the five people that they spend the most time with. If audio/video counts, Sam Harris would be in my top five.
Hell yeah… go deep Sam Harris… go deep.
how many inches deep?
All inches please
bad audio.
You are a LEGEND! Your Waking Up course change my entire understanding about consciousness and self. I am literally ARRIVED! Thank you a lot!
Was really waiting for a more cerebral and philosophical episode. Well needed break from all the war coverage
Fascinating conversation. I listened on the non-subscriber feed to the point where Sam describes the ultimate telemarketing employee.
Thank you..
Great conversation.
Sam Harris is just too good for this comment section, and he knows that.
Очень классно! Пожалуйста, продолжайте
Finally some people addressing the hard problem of consciousness
Let's go
Great talk. Poor mic for the guest. Had to blast the volume to hear Christof.
Thanks Sam
Sam you need to have Dr. Jonathan Shedler on, he is the master of the unconscious mind.
There must be a solution to "What is consciousness ?". Two epistemological 'puzzle pieces' are 1) thought is physically made of forces flowing through the brain's neural structures and sub-systems that include loops, comparitors, differencing and summing, and 2) existence is always and exactly now (the duration of every Now is exactly zero). This is why when being in states of flow, the sense of time disappears. Feeling conscious is 'simply' experiencing those changing, merging, and opposing forces in every moment.
After experiencing this conclusion, and with practice, one can step into this knowable state by simply choosing to BE. The causal continuum of forces (that is the entire universe) is just running; it cannot do otherwise. Enjoy the ride.
How then does time pass if there are presumably an infinite number of "nows" occuring between any two events?
Great question. A continuum can still flow and change even if any considered moment or state is "as wide as an integer on the number line". That's what Calculus is about in mathematics; any selected number on the number line has width=0, yet there are an infinite number of values between 0 and 1. It's not valid to think zero can be multiplied by infinity and produce a particular or arbitrary finite value. We think of the distance from 0 to 1 as finite, yet it contains an infinity, a continuum, of points (so it is simultaneously both finite and infinite).
The perception of flowing time is fundamentally not time 'moving', but is physical reality changing. If all physical state around your awareness completely stopped, you wouldn't know if time had passed. Our perception of time requires 1) state/forces to change, 2) a memory or storage of prior state, and 3) comparison/differencing of what's occurring now compared to stored prior state (producing the forces we call consciousness). Without memory or change, we wouldn't perceive what we call time.
Enjoy the forces, enjoy the flows, enjoy the ride.
Muito bom!
[Another decent-seeming, fav-multi-channel, out-of-context repost here, originating from Louise Perry's MMM.]
I have several things to say here:
I'll again invoke the late Hitchens. While his Anti-theism argument elicited mine, and almost everyone's disagreement, I maintain that his counterfactual in which the harms of organized religions outweighed the social utility, is VERY CLOSE to reality, and informative for the future, to ensure that those social organizational/ritual systems remain benign.
Similarly, I think Hitch's moral argument that the US had an obligation to intervene around the world was also NEARLY defensible in its specificity, and he was mistaken regarding CAPABILITY, not regarding DUTY.
I was politically activated as an adolescent in opposition to Neoconservatism, however Hitchens walked this line ALMOST perfectly.
He was mistaken in his support for certain specific policies, but somewhat amazingly, proceeded to catalog EVERY SINGLE WAY in which those policies he supported were being poorly implemented, over a period of time.
I consider the two great inheritors of the Christopher Hitchens legacy, to be Douglas Murray in the area of culture, and Michael Weiss in the area of policy.
Now, SHOULD the US be the police of whole world? Frankly, yes, unless you're a moral relativist (and fail to apply the moral arbiter of human health) there are lots of 'crime infested neighborhoods'.
However, CAN the US police the whole world? HW Bush might have said, 'it's possible we could just barely pull it off,' however the answer ultimately seems to have been: not rly, and especially not at this juncture.
Arriving at the nub of my thesis:
Women, and men as well, should not necessarily suppress their moral reflexes, when faced with the overly harsh realities of the world.
But the correct response is not to pull everyone in the water, onto the lifeboat of a Western society, and thereby sink the lifeboat.
The correct response is to GET IN THE WATER.
(I recently recommended a movie called Machine Gun Preacher someplace, in a similar context).
If I'm not mistaken, Michael Levin was brought to Massachusetts from the Soviet Union, by a Jewish missionary group. He's probably our next Einstein, in biophysics.
Maajid Nawaz wouldn't be back here, helping to save our society, if not for Amnesty International (pre-woke).
Yeonmi Park wouldn't have survived, and be helping to rescue escapees plus doing other important work, if not for a Christian missionary group.
Whether it's preserving the lives of our next geniuses and heroes, or protecting and providing medical support to as many innocents as possible, let's replace "woke" with "moved and inspired," let's turn our 'sinners' into 'saints'.
The now-underway era of deglobalization will increasingly result in mass famine, and self-contained local/regional conflicts, as global supply chains break down. It will not be practically possible for Western nations to intervene, nor for that matter to avoid inflicting collateral damage in certain instances (despite our best efforts) nor disrupting certain supply chains for the sake of everyone's best interests.
For the most part, the ability of yesteryear's internationally funded and supported relief and protection organizations to meaningfully intervene around the world, is significantly reduced.
'Religion' should not be some 'us against them' mobilizing tool, or some larping ritual, or some childish magical, metaphysical set of notions. Therefore, it rly doesn't even need to be 'religion,' it should be possible today for a civil society movement, to fill a similar role, if ppl would stop navelgazing, and allow themselves to be appropriately moved and directed, by the real need that exists in the world.
It's one kind of service to society, to do what Louise is doing for example, educating the next generation through New Media, seeking knowledge, and raising a healthy family.
And yet, perhaps when their children are more grown up, it will be incumbent on as many adults in the West as possible, to go to seriously dangerous places around the world, and try to help save as many innocent lives as they can, via privately funded, sort of startup charitable groups (perhaps even with the assistance of protective, small Western militia groups in some cases, but that's a tenuous prospect).
Ppl in the discourse have been pointing out, perhaps rather nervously at times, that certain populations for example in Sub-Saharan Africa, have been growing much faster than others, which are shrinking.
But this is entirely the wrong perspective, the anxiety impulse should not be activated, the empathy impulse should be activated.
What, are they going to invade Western countries with far superior militaries? No.
And, what do you think is going happen to places like this with far larger populations than they can support, when the international market breaks down and whatever food resources they imported are no longer available, and whatever local resource sustained their economy is no longer internationally bought and sold?
The obvious answer, is that they're ALL GOING TO DIE, current terrifying projections indicate that a BILLION ppl will die for these reasons, perhaps over 10-20 yrs or less, that's "BILLION" with a "B".
(From the societal perspective, birthing a large population is nothing, sustaining a large population is everything).
During previous eras of isolationism, going back a couple centuries, it was the 'providence' of citizens' philanthropic groups, to alleviate the suffering and prevent the loss of as many lives throughout the world as possible.
Westerners are experiencing malaise? Feeling the need for some grand mission? Having trouble appropriately directing their moral impulses?
School's out kids, welcome to the real world. There will never be any deficit of that kind, for anyone who opens their eyes, and takes a good look.
*This message brought to you by Mortality Salience on Tap.
That was a struggle to read. It seems as though you're simply complaining that the West doesn't provide enough relief to/for the rest of the world. Allow me to push back.
First, let's assume that the other First-world states do not need our 'arbitration' in order to develop on their own. We do not become Relativists by simply avoiding political conflict; there can be reasonable disagreements over the degree to which we're willing to impose our interference onto other nations. Such interventions end up having societal costs that are not easy to see, the economic and cultural reverberations of which often lasting for generations. Let's not conflate inaction with _amorality._ In any case where there is a complex system to be tinkered with, if all variables cannot be accounted for, and thus all outcomes predicted with certainty, then it becomes _immoral_ to entertain the idea of a foolhardy interference. The back and forth, knife-edged partisanship of the West has arrived as of yet at no such stability; we only oscillate between our extremes here, and surgery requires a steady hand. The West remains too internally conflicted to be in any way fit enough to impose itself on the rest of the developing world. Saying so is not Relativism; claiming otherwise is hubris.
You use the analogy "GET IN THE WATER" to suggest that our developed nations ought to level themselves with the underdeveloped by eschewing their life-raft altogether. The rosy sentiment implied is that we could all form a survival ring together, and keep afloat as a singular, self-reinforcing leviathan that becomes incapable of drowning. Nonsense. Humanity is a bucket of crabs, and should we become capsized, we will all drown. Our scarce resource is what allows us to continue to survive.
This reply divides the world into two distinct cases-developed and undeveloped-and most of us will find this condition unpleasant to some degree, because fairness appeals to our intuitive sense as one of the highest ideals. But fairness alone isn't justice. Though the First world continues to produce its economic success only by pillaging the natural resource (and labor) of the still-underdeveloped areas, nevertheless, humanity has found no other way to 'create' its wealth. To assume wealth can somehow be generated with positive feelings and undiscovered technologies is to blow the dandelion and make a wish; we cannot make today's subsistence from future earnings.
You will not find this pleasant to admit. Our entire culture, even that of academia, is forcing its head into the sand. The following fact is an ecological reality that is rooted in economic and mathematical certainty: the Earth is finite, and its resources cannot supply the standard which the First world has become accustomed to to everyone. 'Relief' is not a repair. Relief given _from_ the comfortable and _to_ the developing will reduce the level of comfort from the former and still fail to increase the level of comfort for the latter. Aid is necessarily temporary; if it cannot be established, then it cannot be considered to be a repair. We can continue to argue the ethics of abandoning our life-boat, but the _de facto_ morality of the First world remains oriented towards its own self-interests. Under that directive, relief will remain permanently nominal.
There is one unavoidably unpleasant reality that we in the West still have yet to admit, and it is this: artificially increasing a locality's carrying capacity increases its population. And this now-higher population creates an even higher demand on future resources in an area that was already strained before the 'intervention.' Please, consider that we can easily kill with kindness. Sometimes inaction is the more compassionate morality. Not all things can be fixed. Stay in the boat, and count your blessings.
Please do a video format, youre just as handsome as your voice is soothing 😂
If the contents weren't also "like something," we couldn't organize, make sense of, or recognize the contents, so I think it still just comes back to qualia. (Salience-mapping, all that good stuff).
I'm the lead researcher at Bro-Science Labs.
This is the only topic people want Sam to talk about
Sleep. Those little slices of death, how i loathe them.
Just add some aquatic sound effects and it will sound like Christof is in the bath and Sam is interviewing him from outside the bathroom door.
This guy does the best "Herr Flick"
I remember having a Ketamine induced hallucinations last year that somehow completely seperated me from my body for 20 minutes but it felt like months and it made me realise that either free will doesn't exist or every human has 2 consciousnesses (like 2 people in one body). One controls what you physically do with your body and the other consciousness is your senses. So its like riding a rollercoaster you cant control but you feel what happens throughout the ride if that makes any sense..... I haven't touched Ket since that happened.
Imagine a period in your life where you felt really socially conscious of people looking at you and multiply that by 100 and thats how I felt. This experience will not hit you the first time you try Ketamine, it will takes weeks of continuous use, preferably injected, and it will make k-holing seem like absolutely nothing.
I literally wrote this comment before I started to watch this podcast....
@@mrt445 the "two people in one body" might not be far off, actually, if we think about split-brain patients. I suspect that left brain and right brain might actually be two separate entities, it's just that the brain usually works together so seamlessly, that it feels like a singular experience.
Great work as always Sam! I do not understand why these eminent scientists detect/identify a hard problem of consciousness. Isn’t consciousness a result of the model building our brains do as a result of evolution. We fear, desire, experience, imagine, dream as a result of facilities selected for by evolution. Human consciousness is probably particularly emergent compared to other animals, with our constant generation of thoughts, feelings, and emotion. But it seems obvious to me that other species, that also have world models, however imperfect, they make from all their experience and stimuli, would also have some consciousness. Predator, prey, hierarchical social relations, sacrifice for kin, all kinds of challenges of reproduction could select for consciousness. It’s not an illusion! However, I just don’t see the explanatory gap!
How does the interaction of physical matter cause experience itself? Can experience be recreated through the right arrangement of physical matter?
I think everyone is gonna want to know if our AI is really conscious or not
Well..there's just one world and you're entangled with it. To the best of our understanding everything is quantum fields- including your thoughts and feelings. Whatever reality is, it is unity.
The illusion of the self is in itself an illusion. Just like this screen you are looking at is just a pattern of energy with no real color.
What do you think, is there a "real" beyond the illusion? If so, what would make that realm of the "real" less illusory?
@@Paakku97 Exactly!
Haha resonates with me. It's like "trying not to try is still trying."
I agree that the self is an illusion but what do you mean by _"real color"_ ? Color itself is an illusion. When you look at a red apple, that apple is not made up of red stuff or red atoms. Instead, what you call red is just a specific wavelength of light hitting the back of your retina which is then interpreted by your brain. So when you look at a red apple or a red picture on this screen, the same wavelength of light principle applies.
@@irrelevant2235 Yes, color is not real. It is another layered illusion. The 'Red' is a narrow ban of emitted/reflected radiation of no real 'color'. Our eyes mix 3 semi-distinct radiation bans to even see the 'red'. If another radiation band was also mixed in, we would not see red & blue (for example), but one color purple. We would not even know intuitively that there was any 'red' there at all.
off topic but Sam do you think its time to have tommy robinson as a guest ? his recent appearances have at least seemingly sounded reasonable…
When video
First
I like ze guy.
Getting into Michael Levin territory here...
🙏🏻 please please get Tommy Robinson on your podcast mate
Dude, I'm a physicalist (materialism is SLIGHTLY different, and reductionist). What exists depends on what you measure? Ok homie, we're merely ASSUMING there's a real world out there, fine, I'll take it.
I kinda just think, it's called being an empiricist, and also probably non-schizophrenic, lol.
I'm not convinced Kastrup's semi-compatibilist idealism, holds up very well at all.
Am I effectively denying a type of first person, observable ontology? No, I'm just arguing that physicalist epistemology, will basically explain it one day!
Any evidence for your consciousness being created by physical properties outside of your consciousness can itself only exist within your consciousness.
Sam consider interviewing Tommy Robinson
How do you know the cerebellum is itself not conscious? There may be more than one conscious entity arising from the mush inside your head.
That would mean it is possible to find conscious experience in the cerebellum
What you said is interesting to think about. Consider split-brain patients as an example where both hemispheres of the brain seem to be having their own individual conscious experiences.
I believe IIT suggests that the cerebellum, due to its modular makeup, would consist of many very simple conscious structures that are not unified with each other, nor with our cerebral consciousness.
i want to know sam view on scotus declaring trump immune
As soon as you measure a particle that's entangled with another on the opposite side of the universe, the entanglement breaks, doesn't it? I guess the fact that you measured the same disentanglement event shared between two particles that are so far apart is something.
The state of a particle is changed with measurement and as a conequence this breaks an entanglement of that state. The 'disentangement event' is a deduction in our model and not a measurement in itself. (I'm not 100% certain of all that so maybe someone can confirm that for me).
Could you at least add some drawings?
🤔
Tiktok brain?
@@DiogenesNephew No, Japanese. As of 2024 the highest IQ in the world at 106.48. Where are you from? and let me check your people.
@@DiogenesNephew Redbar is watching!
I found the discussion of IIT to have all sorts of breakdowns. By the end of it, Christof seemed incoherent. Still defining basic terms like “experience” and “belief.” A good conversation, even if your guest seemed a bit of a prick.
But nevermind that. When are we going to hear about the supreme court?! I feel like I speak for your entire audience, here. -Cheers!
Sam Harris, We want to hear what you have to say about Biden and the Democratic Party
He's been writing about it on Substack.
Sam’s bailiwick !
I am obviously a layman but I feel like the criticism of physicalism that it's unclear what physicalism is and how to define it falls flat when consciousness itself is equally as vague and ill-defined if not more so. If someone gave me a physicalist explanation for consciousness it would be 100% clear and well-defined, I can't imagine a clear and well-defined explanation of anything that is not physical. But maybe that's my lack of imagination.
What if the reality of the situation can't be defined or conceived in language?
Any physical explanation for anything will be turtles all the way down.
Second
I don't think the phrase or idea "what or something it is like to be ____" is very useful as a synonym or placeholder for consciousness occurring internally, because there is something that it is like to be a rock, which doesn't possess the structures a/o circuitry (such as feedback loops) to be conscious.
"X is a Illusion". It has become extremely fashionable to make all sorts of videos substituting something for X.
No Islam bashing ?
Ramana maharshi said that we see others from our level of realization. Ramana said there are no others.
What we think of Trump tells us what we are. I see a wise man but really a bunch of waves and particles
So Trump is nobody
@@Paakku97 no body. Not a body yet a part of the universal consciousness. I don't get why Sam hates him so much. If he watches cnn everyday then his mind is being controlled by a very dishonest source . These so called news agencies are ruthless propagandists and as someone who had to listen the British psyops all my life I find propaganda repulsive. It does a lot of harm in the long run. They have tried every "dirty trick" on Trump to the point its actually making people believe them. Same old bs . A woman he touched inappropriately suddenly comes forward lmao. Are people so dum?
Consciousness never exists without someone consciously perceiving something. So let's focus perception (and intentional behavior). Pure consciousness (qualia) is a religious myth. As, in this case, there is nobody to experience something (which were only conscious access) but pure phenomenal awareness - why bother at all? Such a pure consciousness (e.g. a pain per se) would have no ethical relevance at all.
What do you think about Musk endorsing Trump to the tune of 45 mil per month? I think he’s lost his damn mind.
Proof that exposure to Twitter rots the brain.
poor sam harris has to get in touch with alan wallace, like koch did
Sam has a solid understanding of dzogchen teachings so I'm not sure what you're trying to imply?
@@JR-tc4kq no he doesnt, and he hasn't even accomplished shamata in order to resolve the mind-body problem. hes a standard western academic except he hasnt done any of the maths like alan wallace has, who has now been in 1yr permanent retreat doing actual meditation unlike sam 14h min
per day.
Still no reaction to Trump?
Of course not, people like Sam are the ones who openly encouraged this.
@@JOHNNY-zx1lc Tone it down. When harsh rhetoric comes from your side, you scoff at it like it's just "locker room talk." Now all of a sudden, words have consequences? They didn't seem to while that mob was storming the Capitol.
And I'm surrounded by the hard Right here; don't play the victim, because I've seen your Facebook feed. We all have.
@@JOHNNY-zx1lc
Sam didn't.
I do.
@@PlayNiceFolks yet people like you call Trump a n@ zi. Oh the irony 🤡
He does not understand quantum entanglement, it does not happen instantaneously, nothing (we know of) can travel faster than the speed of light, nothing breaks locality, special relativity applies.
That seems to be only because scientists 'say' that entangled particles are one object....yet they do not explain how this is so.
@@mrp9023 which scientists say they are one object? 1 state, 2 (or more) particles.
Wow every time I hear "you will only hear the first part of this conversation", I leave the conversation. It doesn't matter that I could beg you to hear it. I shall not.
Yeah here we are collectively breaking things down into categories and looking further into the micro and further out into the macro. Realizing that consciousness is also a product of quantum effects obviously as everything is. That we live in a paradox that here we are the evolved consciousness of the universe. Contemplating our place in the universe and the arising of consciousness not realizing awareness is the key and the observer effect is always happening. There's also an intelligence that wants you to know you are it and your ego holding on so tightly to the intellect as if you could lose it. Is what is going to keep you from realizing what's really happening here and you won't reach enlightenment because you're blocked off from it. the ego death that you are keeping at bay with your rational intellect. Will still be rationalized by you because you feel it happen in the mind and you are not going to surrender to your direct experience. While people like me have had direct experience with enlightenment but I've also had otherworldly experiences and continue to have them. I also see things that others can't because I see them and once you see them you can't unsee them. Sam has muted himself his feelings and emotions whether he had them fully available to begin with I don't know. He's obviously clinging so strongly on to the intellect he isn't open to a conscious universe.. you have to surrender to the subtle nature of reality and that is only known within. The Kingdom of heaven is within, it's all metaphor for what cannot be pinned down and only known through direct experience. It cannot be articulated only those that have had the initiation will understand the language. That it's not just hyperbole or metaphor delusion whatever, even though everyone's delusional on some level and there will be distortion no matter what it is. The fact is truth and connection to the primal reality is in silence, it can never truly be articulated. Which will drive Sam nuts because he loves overly articulating things people already fundamentally understand.. just don't be so arrogant about your beliefs when it comes to your subjective perception of reality. One that you are creating within your mind and the delusional landscape. When nothing you say is an actual accurate description of what you're seeing. Because what you're seeing is actually absent of any words or labels. Once you start to see reality through that lends then you might start connecting the dots. Doesn't mean words are irrelevant but you must see through them.. in short we evolved in a 3D reality where we perceive ourselves separate from the whole and in reality we are the whole.
Theres not much out there
Sam you have worked hard on ur production values and optimised your vocal delivery to us. A person has much to gain by coming on your show. Many of even the most presumably lucid people suddenly become ypsilons when it comes to electronic sound production. If you operated a filter and made it a condition of their appearance with you you would be influencing all of those geeks to the better and make them think twice before polluting someone else's podcasts --- and our auditory canals, with their unlistenable voices.
Please?
Very hard to understand people over Zoom, just have them phone in!
@cp-nl2zp - how pathetic ones life must be to post negative comments about a podcast you chose to listen to? Is there nothing in your life you could do to add value to society?
Lol, the philosophy and philosopher of gaps. People are so interested in studying consciousness because science has still left them a small "safe space" to speculate about pseudo-transcendental stuff. Nah dude, this is a just low hanging fruit for mediocre philosophers, just like other previous gaps in scientific knowledge had led to many such "philosophies" in early nineteenth century. And of all the people, sam harris is possibly the most under-equipped person to study the horizons of modern science, his pretentions of being a scientist or philosopher haven't impressed anyone except teenagers and some adult teenagers. Consciousness is not beyond the realm of empirical sciences, it is just that the experiments to understand it are illegal and rightfully so. But believe me, it ain't the safe space that you are looking for.
In a hypothetical case, Give me a 1000 new born identical twins and let me do social and medical experiments on them, and voila I will throw some light on the enigma. (Which obviously is not an ethical thing to do). You are barking at the wrong tree.
Science can study that which is measurable. You can measure certain phenomena that are correlated with conscious experience, but you can't measure conciousness itself.
And you seem to have some supernatural knowledge about what can and cannot be quantified/measured or be observable, even in future!? How so!?
See, you are again appealing to the fallacy of ignorance. You don't know how consciousness emerges, I don't know it either. All I know is that it is material(exists because of material processes), it is biological, is affected by chemicals and can be altered by various processes and that is where I will stop.
Now you also don't know anything more than science knows, but you get wild with your speculations to put conditions and constraints on what and how consciousness should be, which you have nothing to back up with, except your intuition and sheer metaphysical arguments and you create this pseudoscientific pseudo-philosophical lore around it. While I just accept my ignorance regarding the things that we don't have evidence for.
But guess what, the science/physical world doesn't care about your intuitions and arguments, things are what they are and can be what they can be. Consciousness is as much a topic of philosophy as digestion or cardio-vascular processes are, which is zero.
The mediocrity of Sam Harris is glaring for everyone to see(given that they are philosophically and scientifically literate) , he brings in his acid-trip inspired neo-buddhism B.S into neuroscience, with zero evidence or even an attempt to study it empirically. For thousands of years people "philosophised" the living sht out of nature of time, from mystifying time to mythologising it, but then modern science just closed the whole business and guess what? all people speculating about time were no where close to grasping the nature of time.
The same goes for consciousness, which arises out of the functioning of the nervous system and evolved from guess what? entirely from the biological process of evolution, it is so simple and so evident.
Yet just because science hasn't solved the problem, the mediocrity of pseudo-intellectuals has an allure to give their ignorant 2 cents about things that they themselves don't know anything about. Sheer sophistry and to be fair to Sam Harris, he hasn't got that much success in his sophistry either.
No matter how many twin babies you experiment on, any evidence for your consciousness being created by physical processes outside of your consciousness must itself exist within your consciousness.
@@saimbhat6243 The only honest response I can have to that diatribe is to wish you luck, because I remember what it was like to be a forceful and way-too-certain early 20-something. It's a tough row to hoe, but keep reading.
Whether you like it or not, the closer you look, the more things will keep getting less and less simple; there are reasons why consciousness keeps being called a 'hard problem.' Just one little piece of advice, if I may: while you're out (t)here exposing the hard truth for the rest of us to see, can you try to not be so tough on the rest of us? We don't all share the luxury of your enormously gifted mental clarity.
@@pocket83squared
I am 29 years old and I have a phd in civil engineering, hope that helps you.
Unlike you, i am claiming my ignorance about any theory of origin and workings of consciousness. Similarly as many other people in history claimed theirs about origin and workings of time, but most didn't. Then to their surprise, the nature of time didn't care about their metaphysical musings.
Metaphysical arguments don't count as knowledge. You can by default accept any metaphysical account of consciousness because it doesn't require any instrumental evidence. Whole argument is from fallacy of ignorance. I.e. "well science doesn't seem to explain this particular phenomena right now, LET ME TAKE A GUESS OUT OF MY INTUITION".
This has been the case since birth of philosophy, with thales speculating that everything is made of water, Descartes speculating that soul is in pineal gland, others claiming that time is composed of experiantial events and some claiming that consciousness is immaterial.
Just because science can't explain any phenomena, doesn't mean any of the metaphysical arguments will do. Lol
Consciousness is to metaphysics as digestion is to it.
And sam harris took an 2 year honorary degree in neuroscience after his midlife crisis, with no science background, i would love to see him pass a college entrance level science test. Yet the chutzpah of untangling the engima that actual neuro-scientists and actual philosophers have differed to future. Lol
It is something, the trickery of making this whole charade work and earn money from it.
You gonna way in on Biden at all? It's been 10 days since the debate. Guess Trump being the worst thing ever isn't really what you believe.
Let me solve the problem of Necessary Causality and Consciousness: Quran says: “Allah:there is no deity worthy of worship except he”:The Neccessary life/consciousness,sustainer of life/consciousness.” Wire like neuronal structures that conduct electricity via ions/neurotransmitters in the CNS/PNS possess no attribute of thinking/life and yet that has “randomly” led to life. Consciousness/thinking is an innate idea(“Fitra”)that is distinct from carbon skeleton and yet the materialist scientist believes that chemistry turned into biology via “god of randomness”/”Emergent property”/”law of nature”. Finite/imperfect Consciousness can only stem from Necessary Consciousness (Allah-one/indivisible/loving/self-sufficient Infinite Perfection.
Very average discussion.
Sam is a World Champion Pseudo intellectual.
Sammy The Pseudo Harris.
Bot
Nobody cares about you
you'd have to gain 50 IQ points to reach the level of pseudo intellectual...
And a Jewish supremacist, if I may add.
@@FBUK That's what they think too, and that's what they're crying about.