0:00 Welcome, everybody. 1:21 What’s the last book or author you’ve read that you would highly recommend? 5:20 When you abandoned physicalism, did you lean towards any ontology that wasn’t idealism? 9:41 What are your thoughts on neutral monism? 14:36 Would you debate David Chalmers? 17:13 What are David’s arguments against idealism? 19:56 You're starting living your ontology. How do you navigate such a shift in worldview with a partner? 22:25 Is every cell that constitutes our body an alter? 26:31 Is there any way to create a mathematical basis for analytic idealism? 32:50 [Intermission] 33:41 Do you think that beings people encounter during religious or psychedelic experiences have an inner life of their own, or are they an archetype? 38:19 A paper on psilocybin and cerebral blood flow shows relative increases in perfusion, but when measured globally CBF decreased everywhere. What does this mean? 48:51 What is it that determines an alter’s unique point of view? Why am I me instead of you? 53:54 What are your thoughts on distributed solipsism and open individualism? 56:50 How did fundamental consciousness become fragmented? 1:03:07 Have you heard of the Qualia Research Institute? 1:04:11 Do you think reality is fundamentally absurd? 1:12:56 If you had to choose a religion, which one would it be? 1:25:34 Considering the closure on the problem of evil, can you speak more on God as a suffering being? 1:40:48 Are you a vegetarian or a vegan? 1:49:42 What do you think poorly explained physical phenomenons-like the big bang, black holes, dark matter-are pointing at? 1:59:39 [Intermission] 2:00:21 Are our memories integrated into the universal mind when we die, and is there a corresponding physical image of the process that maintains the structure of our memories? 2:08:46 You speak of a layout of reality during NDE experiences being based on some experiences being more sticky. Doesn’t this add another assumption to a non-metacognitive field of experience? 2:13:30 What are your favourite Dutch things? 2:23:41 Thank you. Have a good night. References: 4:49 Nicholas of Cusa en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicholas_of_Cusa 38:19 Two dose investigation of the 5-HT-agonist psilocybin on relative and global cerebral blood flow europepmc.org/article/MED/28711736 2:15:26 GroenLinks en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GroenLinks 2:19:04 Poffertjes en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poffertjes or pannenkoeken en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pannenkoek 2:19:32 Stamppot met boerenkool en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stamppot
Must be exhausting to do these super long conversations almost every week, diving deep into very complex topics. Bernardo is very committed to introducing an alternative to materialism in our culture and I appreciate that.
... yes, P. It is both, Enervating & Energizing. Bernado has a Mission, & IT-IS, all layed out in the groundwork. He is well prepared, playing by the already established rules, & bit by minute bit, he very patiently unpacks a "wholey" entangled, messy ball of kNOTS. & Although iam not completely with him, as yet, so far, i truly believe that he is on track to stand & deliver a much more meaningfully correct paradigmatical positional attitude, for Humanities Very Next & Monumental Step ...
Indeed; now I am actually worried about death and the afterlife -- even if as God at last! Because being God sounds ridiculous in Analytic Idealism...dumber than Homer Simpson!!
@@davidchou1675... And, so it goes, David. Peoples of the 20th & 21st centuries are right up against it, having to deal with the extremes & consequences of living through the end of ultra materialisms over consumption in an over populated enviroment, & the confrontational reality of that, being unsustainability & total societal collapse. & Then there's its transformational opposite. The Essentia Foundation Think Tank, whose whole premise is being based & anchored through Analytic Idealism, maybe, the only really true & viable A.I. A strong directional indicator is Essentia. or is it really, an Escean Foundational Mystery School-? Let-Us-See-!!! ...
Bernardo, I am a HUGE admirer and student, so to say, of your philosophy... I've been a non-dualist (Advaita Vedantin) for many years, but you have helped fill in many of the visualization gaps/blindspots I mentally tripped over, despite the fact that I intuitively knew that non-dualism was true... really my only question regarding your view is in regard to Mind@Large... i can't imagine it would have taken consciousness all of it's beginning-less existence to have at long last finally evolved meta conscious beings (such as humans)... my intuition is that all conscious beings are being played out INTENTIONALLY in/by the One... I strongly believe that the One must be meta conscious Itself, yet forgets Itself/disassociates Itself to seemingly become humans, etc, but in a way that follows an ordered, fine-tuned, well mapped script---a seamless, voluntarily forgotten script. I feel that Mind@Large dresses in the cloak of space/time, plays out an elaborate Script (being all the actors), then tears up the Script and plays again with a new Script (universe). In that sense, Mind@Large must be meta conscious (otherwise, It's never more insightful than the most insightful creature evolved 🤔) ...and, if evolution isn't fully random, then that also points to some sort of a plan, doesn't it, not just instinctive? I'm not the most articulate writer, so I'm struggling to type my intuitions adequately here.... but, I hope maybe you are at least catching my drift so to speak? And, if so, I would LOVE to hear your feedback, as maybe I'm just missing something. Thank you! Pleeeease keep up the writing and podcast appearances... I watch them all!!! Ryan
Well that makes Mind at Large sound so mindless if it's just endlessly reiterating different forms of pain -- life is suffering, after all -- and it's my biggest problem with Analytic Idealism...seems to me that no philosophy explains the necessity of pain and suffering which is if you think about it the one common denominator and yet nothing seems to account for its "ontological basis".... Or farts and feces for that matter -- like, WTF??? What "process in the Field of Mentation" manifests itself as such utterly absurd facts of everday life??? All this "vedic-like woo" is fascinating but it completely shrugs off the responsibility to account for the incredible amount of shit that permeates everything...that's really the ultimate mystery right there! That, and why no one demands that their philosophy/religion/ideology explain all the shit!!!
@davidchou1675 "God likes to play hide-and-seek, but because there is nothing outside of God, he has no one but himself to play with! But he gets over this difficulty by pretending that he is not himself. This is his way of hiding from himself. He pretends that he is you and I and all the people in the world, all the animals, plants, all the rocks, and all the stars. In this way he has strange and wonderful adventures, some of which are terrible and frightening. But these are just like bad dreams, for when he wakes up they will disappear. Now when God plays "hide" and pretends that he is you and I, he does it so well that it takes him a long time to remember where and how he hid himself! But that's the whole fun of it-just what he wanted to do. He doesn't want to find himself too quickly, for that would spoil the game. That is why it is so difficult for you and me to find out that we are God in disguise, pretending not to be himself. But- when the game has gone on long enough, all of us will WAKE UP, stop pretending, and REMEMBER that we are all one single Self- the God who is all that there is and who lives forever and ever. You may ask why God sometimes hides in the form of horrible people, or pretends to be people who suffer great disease and pain. Remember, first, that he isn't really doing this to anyone but himself. Remember too, that in almost all the stories you enjoy there have to be bad people as well as good people, for the thrill of the tale is to find out how the good people will get the better of the bad. It's the same as when we play cards. At the beginning of the game we shuffle them all into a mess, which is like the bad things in the world, but the point of the game put the mess into good order, and the one who does it best is the winner. Then we shuffle the cards and play again, and so it goes with the world." ~Alan Watts
Yes I've got "The Book" too but it still doesn't explain literal shit...so God is a cropophiliac??? He's into shit-play and "watersports"??? I mean I'm not into it certainly! How the hell did such a powerful seemingly creative Being come up with something like feces??? Never mind all the life-is-suffering self-mutilation...this is what God takes to be "play" and fun????? Now you will probably explain at this point that that was just a metaphor and that the Ultimate Truth is beyond intellectual concepts and thus beyond language...which is fine, sure, but then we're really no further along than before. Bernardo's great contribution, you see, is his use of Dissociative Identity Disorder to explain the age-old "All is One"...I've come across Alan Watts (whose work BTW Bernardo's said elsewhere that he's not usually fond of but he didn't elaborate why not on that occasion) literally decades ago as well as philosophy like his but it all just sounded like nice poetry -- pretty metaphors -- but nothing that really explains anything in the admittedly limited way of Aristotelian Logic...until Bernardo's innovation with D.I.D. (hint for future interviews: ask him for the origin story of that! Must be something interesting there, the moment when he first realized how D.I.D. can work as a mechanism of explaining All-is-One). So, okay, Bernardo's settled that one now! But now this much harder question of "why"...WTF ordered all this shit and why??? There's something deeply strange about a universe like this!!! And I don't mean in a nice inspiring way like they show in nature documentaries!
@@davidchou1675... Yes, ALL THE SHIT & It's opposite. SUCH, IS, "thee" CON'UN'DRAMATIC DUALISTICKY PARADOX OF JUDGEMENTALITY. &, THEE "only" way to EFECTIVELY deal with it, is to put the CONSEPT of SELF, completely asside. & That IS, both-at-once, simultaneously, the easiest & most difficult premise to deal with. &, When IT happens, YOU-WILL-KNOW-!!!
Zeer boeiend interview. Ik volg Bernardo al enkele jaren en zijn argumenten worden steeds duidelijker en scherper. Ik had stiekem gehoopt hier een nederlands interview te horen want als Belg hoor ik dadelijk dat de gastheer een Nederlander is. ;)
@~53:00~ exactly. Another way of perceiving it is by asking yourself if you are the same "you" from some previous point in time. Like... You have a memory / concept of you from whatever point in time but are you that person now? No. You just carry the temporary memory/burden of your previous ego state.
50:08 absolutely blew my mind. I’ve been thinking about Idealism, Consciousness, spacetime, Self, etc, for many years. This had never crossed my mind as a way to see how we are all One. Bernardo is so brilliant. Wow. What a powerful way to see Oneness when you grasp what he’s saying. Thank you, Bernardo!
Yeah? Now try this: Hitler fighting Stalin is just you and me playing chess! Putin fighting Joe Biden is just you and me playing chess! You and me okay chess is just you and me being us which is me being you and you being me so let's not worry about any of this because it's just God at play -- only He/you/me are into self-mutilation and pain and suffering...screams are music to our ears!!!
As always Bernardo is such a treat, very good AMA, thanks alot. Read all his books and recommend them all. And thanks Bernardo for bringing up the point that meat eating is a borderline criminal. it is. With that said I would like to add some points on why I think Bernardo should take a second look at continuing eating chickens or any other animal products if he is doing it at the moment. -The chickens that Bernardo eats have a chicken's life, he says. This does not make sense to me. Chickens can live from 5-10 years, in farming they get slaughtered around 6-7 weeks of life. -Male chicks are ground up alive, this we know. He says this is unacceptable but still pays for it to happen when he doesn't have to. Actions speak louder than words. -There is no reason to eat chickens or any animal if you live in societies as Bernardo and I do. -He says production(productation) of animals is unethical and wrong but still his action of paying for it says otherwise. -Free range better? It's mostly a marketing strategy to make us feel better buying the product, not for the chicken's life's sake. Look up dominion or any other documentaries and see how free range chickens around the world are treated. -The argument about the low intelligence and nervous system. They have a will to live and don't want to suffer. This should be respected if we have the opportunity to. My take and opinion is; We should stop buying these animal products so they stop breeding these poor animals into existence to only suffer and be killed by humans. -As for eggs; male chicks get ground up alive here as they can't produce eggs. Normal chickens lay around 10-15 eggs a year. We have genetically modified today's chickens to lay on average 300 eggs a year. This takes a massive toll on their bodys. When egg production declines they get sent to the slaughter house. -Dairy products; Calf is taken away from its mother after birth. If it's a male calf it can't produce milk and ends up as useful as a male chick in the egg industry. It gets killed for veil at around 16 weeks of life. The mother is kept pregnant after every birth by humans so they can produce more milk. When her body is spent and her milk production declines she gets sent to the slaughter and to an early death. So by being vegetarian you still cause the same suffering to animals as an animal eater and oftentimes even more. -Then someone may say; but plants are intelligent and alive. Yes, but they can't feel pain and the animals eat around 8-10 times more plants than we do, so if you care about plants you should stop eating animals as well. Landuse and water waste is also another factor as he mentions. It's a great bonus that a plant based diet is better for the environment and climate change. But people won't stop eating animals because of the environment or climate change in my opinion, maybe when their own life gets affected by it. I think the only way for humans to stop is if they truly see/understand the unnecessary, unspeakable injustice and suffering these animals have to go through for some minutes of pleasure for our taste buds. -The only time eating animals would be acceptable in today's age is if you had to to survive. Watch Dominion: ruclips.net/video/LQRAfJyEsko/видео.html
Why are human lives to be privileged?? Indeed, animals used for experiments -- including cats and dogs and horses and chimps -- are called "sacs," as in "sacrifices"...to the God of Science, the God of Human Privilege. But why stop there; clearly we have inferior half-peoples among us?? And even vegetables want to live! Notice how Englishakes a distinction between the thing itself and its function as food -- "pork" instead of German's more immediate "Schweinefleisch" or "pig-flesh" and the whole class history involved in French imports via the Norman Conquest.... I want a philosophy that will account for shit like this, all the pain and absurdity, such as how we're forced to literally rob others for our own survival...to what ends?? To add to God's cosmic database as Analytic Idealism proposes??? Bah! Such poor motivation for all this effort! What's really disconcerting isn't that Hitler/Stalin/etc. is actually us as dissociations of The One but that *they are actually the best of us* since they have clearly played the evolutionary game to the hilt -- precisely as our 4D dashboard was designed to facilitate!!
I think the shortest way to arrive at idealism is, that you think, that there is only one onthological category (physicalism also tries to arrive at the "theory of everything"), and then you cannot see any way to reduce consciousness to anything else.. so you are almost forcefully directed to the only thing left - idealism.
I really enjoy listening to Bernardo Kastrup and think he has amazing insights about so many things. One point of disagreement I have though, is that I think neutral monism is actually more plausible than idealism. The idea that all matter is the image of a mental process makes sense when we're talking about large groups of matter made up of billions or trillions of atoms (one example I recall that he gave was that a person crying is an example of an image from the outside looking in of the internal mental phenomenon of sadness). I can imagine that sensations of pain, pleasure, and many thoughts could also be correlated with observable physical events that we could assume do not involve matter but are just the images of the mental process. But these physical representations involve billions and billions of atoms. My challenge/question on this is how could we say that a single atom or molecule is the image of a mental process? What would the mental process represented by a single atom even look like? It takes the interaction of millions of atoms to draw a correlation to even the most rudimentary, basic form of mental experience, so it just doesn't make sense to me that an atom is a mental event. Materialism definitely cannot explain where consciousness comes from and why we're not p-zombies though, so I'm not suggesting that. I also think that there are problems with dualism since it seems pretty absurd that consciousness would magically emerge and be produced as a fundamentally different thing from a certain configuration of matter. What I'm suggesting is that I think positing a third, unknown substance or fundamental unit of the universe that can be either mind or matter (or both at the same time) seems like the most reasonable position. This was Bertrand Russell's position if I recall, and I think a good analogy he used was that in the same way a man could be both a father and a baker at the same time, there could be a single substance more fundamental than physicality or mentality and this substance/nature of reality could be both physical and mental at the same time.
@@singhskeptic5742 ... i think you will eventually see that the whole of Analytic Idealism IS nothing but a continuous practice of meditation. Somewhat Like pi, but running in both directions simultaneously, toward an infinitly of of endless Awe & Wonder ...
It is unbelievably lovely how Bernard's cognitive and metacognitive paths work. He uses the same data a metarialist would use to proove conclusion A and he prooves conclusion B which is exactly the contrary/invert to A. Beautiful and absolutely disarming reverse engineering method.
I love the way you see the world it speaks to me so much . I listen with a big joy to your words and to your insights into the world. Thanks so much Bernardo and thanks for sharing this video
From 1:13:00 : linking fear of others' religion to the fact we lost our own roots might be true to some extent, but the example Kastrup gives, namely the Spain Inquisition, happening far from our modernity, proves itself that "being connected to our roots" allows conflict (here in the name of christianity), persecutions and wars too, so....
I know what you mean but "objectively speaking" it seems as if Bernardo's "only" contribution is to provide a plausible mechanism for "age-old woo" by using Dissociative Identity Disorder as a conceptual missing link, bridging the heretofore chasm between Cosmic Consciousness and our own individual ones. It's a hell of an innovation, to be sure, but no proof as such, since there's still no similar mechanism or bridge to link or explain in a detailed way his "brain is in mind, not mind in brain" with "ow this hammer to my balls really fuckin' hurts"...right now, it's simply taken as a given that since Mind is all, then even pain is just in the mind -- which feels unsatisfying in the same way that "all is One" before Bernardo's incredibly important contribution using D.I.D. to explain it.
... yes, this is for those who have been hard at it struggling for the correct descriptors in which to frame it. Like having the scattered & disporate prices of a once perplexing puzzle come together, &, finally Bernado has done it. But, NOW, the real work begins, that of putting it all to the most positively actionable, benificial work for as many as is possible to fo. Thank you, Bernado & team, Essentia ...
The jnani has a legitimate path to God Realization and perhaps Analytical Idealism is a valid western intellectual means of discerning Reality if it is competently guided. Bernardo needs a Zen master!
About Neutral Monism (around 10:00) : what is in play here, that to me Kastrup doesn't see (and I'm astonished because at times I find him very brilliant, interesting), is that neutral monism does agree with Idealism on the point that all what appears (things, feelings, thoughts...) can be named "consciousness". But it postulates (if I understand well), which is obvious, that we can't define what consciousness, so defined, is expression of. Postulating in advance that what happens to one individual is part of a something of the same kind (consciousness) that this time contains all individuals has nothing obvious and it seems to me that Kastrup lets himself being the play of concepts, here at least. The idea that Consciousness (in that sense of containing all individuals' cousciousness) is the substratum of eveything is to me not realy a problem, but adds a problem which is we can't know if consciousness goes beyond individuals. Another problem is we can't imagine what it means to "be" all individuals at the same time... Can we "imagine" (describe) what we can't imagine ? That said, there's no reason not to orientate science in a direction that would take all what happens for an individual as of the same kind (consciousness) and try and see what links we could find between the "physical" and "minds", in an all-and-everything-is-interconnected way. So that we would put our interest more on the "how" the whole thing works (can we find mathematical laws containing already known physical laws and interconnectedness, linking everything(-one) to everything(-one), deduced from our "user interface" ? Don Hoffman goes in that direction in his way and it seems it could lead somewhere...) than on the "what" ("...is it ?"). Cheers.
49:29 Interesting to see how Bernardo can answer the same exact question in radically different ways on a different day -- this very "why-me-not-you" is given a much more "sympathetic consideration" in his later AMA with Donald Hoffman...not wrong or anything but just a very different "understanding" of the question and thus a different approach to answering it. Probably because in the later AMA with Hoffman Bernardo was influenced by hearing the voice of the questioner himself whereas here it's just something familiar read off to him second-hand. Anyway, someone should ask him about Wheeler's half-serious one-electron theory of the universe for some laughs.
Your definition of Free Will, as put in your article in American Scientinst (2020) is in my opinion a dealbreaker; in the sense, that most modern philosophers, of the kind of Harris, Dennett and the lot, are either for or against free will. You head off by 90 degrees, and cast cosmos off from biology, and in my opinion, thereby uniting God and Cosmos.(- in my laymans terms.) Pro tem, you are my primary hero! (- which says a lot, me being an agnostic.)(By the way - you too - a little?)
Just a thought: computers convert info into info - mind coverts info into Understandings (fundamentally imbude with emotion) then converts that back to info. Explicit finite to implicit infinite. The mind can be thought of as a computer that computs Understandings . It is not possible to have experience without at least one prior understanding ie not even random but nothingness. From this so much follows.... My qualifications are unusual.
Enjoyed this very much. Given Bernardo Kastrup's affinity to Indian traditions and Christianity, I'd be curious if he's ever encountered the theology of Mary Baker Eddy. So much of what he says seems concordant with her spiritual monism. Here is an example: “The verity of Mind shows conclusively how it is that matter seems to be, but is not. Divine Science, rising above physical theories, excludes matter resolves things into thoughts, and replaces the objects of material sense with spiritual ideas…. No form nor physical combination is adequate to represent infinite Love. A finite and material sense of God leads to formalism and narrowness; it chills the spirit of Christianity. A limitless Mind cannot proceed from physical limitations. Finiteness cannot present the idea or the vastness of infinity. A mind originating from a finite or material source must be limited and finite. Infinite Mind is the creator, and creation is the infinite image or idea emanating from this Mind. If Mind is within and without all things, then all is Mind; and this definition is scientific.”-Mary Baker Eddy, Science and Health
Someone please help me understand something. And get a message to Bernardo Kastrup, if possible. I love Bernardo Kastrup and have enjoyed the many hours that I have spent listening and watching him. His brilliant explanations of analytic idealism have been very helpful, like a boost of energy and profundity along my personal endless pilgrimage toward truth that started when I was young back in the 1970's with Fritjof Carpra's Tao of Physics. Absolutely wonderful! My concern has to do with what he says about the "criminality of eating meat". I fear that his pride may be blinding him on the issue of animal ethics. He just seems too sure of himself about this topic. The reason I say "I fear" in this sense is that I may possibly now have doubts regarding his other claims (about his main fields of study: physics, philosophy, etc). I want to trust that he has done his homework in these areas, because I'm pretty sure he has not done his homework in my field of study, which happens to be animal ethics. I very much want to know if he is aware of the profound differences between factory farming (feedlots and mono-agriculture) and regenerative practices (100% grassfed ruminants, like beef and bison). The former is definitely unethical - no argument there - but the latter is exactly the opposite. Ruminants that spend their entire lives on green pastures, - when responsibly managed by ranchers with love and care, in accordance with how nature functions - have the best lives that they could possibly have, and then their lives end in a way that minimizes their suffering, unlike how they would die in nature. We know it that ruminants raised this way are a natural and necessary component for healthy soil and a healthy ecosystem overall. These grasslands are home to a vast array of biodiversity and actually sequester carbon and keep water in the ground, where it naturally belongs. Again, I wonder if he's aware of this. This is the type of beef that I get for me and my family. It's affordable and easy to get if you open your mind and eyes. I think it's the most natural and ethical way for humans to eat.
... Yes, & very much so, BACK, when the total population of people on Earth was no more than a half of a billion, 500,000,000 or so, and the animal kingdom, far & above, outweighed all of us, bipedal uprights. But, in less than a few centuries, our kind has exploded in such numbers, to the detriment of all, including humans, in this world, &, the amounts of toxic chemicals that have only recently been released into the environment, where it took nature billions of years to sequester & make safe the environment for there to be a fully fit place for organic beings to survive & thrive. What has been done, industrially, in only a few centuries, is nothing less than a Black Magic Mirical, for want of more fitting, or better, way to express it. It's going to require a White Magical Mirical, to fix this situation, &, in this regard, i very much DESIRE to be a Participating Witness. GOD, BLESS IT ALL ...
1:58:54 Hmmm...looks like I'll have to get that book of his sooner rather than later; I have absolutely no idea what he means here but it sounds fascinating as usual!
I wonder if Bernardo has developed his idealism enough to accommodate the highest teaching of Advaita which is that of non existence . Sri Ramana Maharshi - the ' embodiment ' of Advaita - said that discussing the nature of Reality is like discussing the characteristics of the child of a barren woman 🕉️ .
Bernardo grew up a Christian but is inclined towards Hinduism (no, not the pantheon of gods) in the shape of Vedanta. But it is clear that Christ himself was not a Vedantist. To attempt to understand Christ through Vedanta would be a huge misunderstanding.
One way to read distributed solipsism, is that there is a potentially infinite plurality in where from which each point of view has a plausible solipsistic perspective , at least prima facie. I think it takes a bit more effort to come to the point where we think everyone is just us living a different life.
Just learned about this computer scientist. Interested in understanding his views. To me brains have neurons, we call the ability to process information a mind. That it simply arises from matter in reality, such as quantum. I have found that a species of worm is said to have the simplest brain with just 300 neurons. I wonder how few neurons are needed for awareness of self? I’d say these neurons are used for a function of sorts for sure, such as finding food for survival… but I’m just speculating on this
Michael Levin talks about the flatworms that don't have the same dna in every cell. In fact the cells are vastly different in dna, even though it's the same worm..
59:00 et seq. Well, these aren't the only two options of course Just as likely, nature created compartmentalised beings in order to generate specific experience, because without almost-closed systems of experience we couldn't have particular experiences at all. You can't be a fishmonger in France unless there are people, countries, and fish.
58:14 This feels like one of those little sleights of hand that Bernardo indulges in on occasion: time and space are born of dissociation according to his Analytic Idealism but here Bernardo presupposes time before dissociation (unless he has in mind some kind of hyper-time à la his colleague Bernardo Carr [IIRC] at the Essentia Foundation). Anyway, some tradition or other holds that God created the world due to loneliness -- so that's a kind of trauma, at least possibly.
Another example of such "sleight of hand" is this separation between Nature/Mind/Consciousness/God and evolution when Bernardo talks about how Nature/Mind/Consciousness/God didn't undergo the evolutionary pressures necessary to develop meta-cognition/self-reflection -- but everything is Natural/Mind/Consciousness/God already so it's like Bernardo's saying Mind did not undergo Mind (like how he says "given enough time" when time comes from the dissociation of Mind in the first place).... Sure it's hard talking about these things since language is based on space and time but it's like he means all this literally here so someone should ask him how it is he just separates Mind from itself like that, from its own processes which are just a reflection of itself and thus are itself....
... yes, David, the business of ISNESS is so fully engaged in the generation of it's IS-NESS, that there is k'NOW-TIME, All+OF+THE-TIME in which to FULLY EXPERIANCE EVERY THING AS ANY THING WHAT+SO-EVER AT ALL FOR EVER ... ...
53:00 Does Kastrup ever explicitely argue for this view on time in any if his other material? Yes, time being just another spatial dimension is a popular view in the metaphysics of time but it's not one I find at all convincing. I need additional arguments for it.
Physical beings arguing consciousness is fundametal (universally so) seems entirely counter intuitive. Its kind of like saying we as autonomous entities are discrete unitis, yet commensurate with the whole. But the whole is not the sum of it's parts. So Hoffman seems fundamentally wrong but i can't get what Katstrup is propising with this shut your eyes and tge world ceases to exist stuff, if i understand in ge least. All we seem to have access to is the material world. Thought is mysterious but seemingly emergent from wetwork. There are a million flights of fancy about whatever the hell consciousness is. None of them seem deserving to me of candidacy for real world modelling until theres sonething than conjecture. Until then I see meat that computes.
did anybody understand the word he likes so much? "...form?" I listened again and again but could not pick up the word. If the word is a german word, it could be "Erscheinungsform" - can anybody please help?
It would help if you have a timestamp, but I think the word is “verschijningsvorm”. It’s a Dutch word meaning “appearance” (or literally appearance form).
@@toomanydonuts True statement because our individual and collective life experience is totally dependent upon the contents of our individual and collective minds. It's all about energy / consciousness and it creative power, which material scientists are yet to overstand
Omg. Omg. [So sorry, I skimmed the questions didn't realise it was summarised 🤦🏾♀️] Omg.(Sorry, teens fangirling 😅) can't wait to listen to this. I'm so appreciative thank you.
@@AskingAnything further to the abusive messages from this person, I urge you to block this user to prevent any further harm coming to those who wish to view your videos.
I believe that God is love. Within him all things are possible. The Bible tells us that God, Christ, and the Holy Spirit are one and the same. All those who love have God. All who have God have love. We are all one in God. St. John said God is love. I interchange the word God and the word love when I read the Bible. Within love all things are possible. In scientific words, "There exists a conscious and intelligent mind and this mind is the matrix of all matter." -Max Planck
Hey Bernardo! I like your way of thinking. An omniscient god? OK. But God is also all mightiy in the sense that he has all the power there is (omnipotent); and he is omnipresent to boot. What can the sum of those three attibutes mean? God is Cosmos. All is in him, by him and of him. Cosmos. That is the idea that came into my mind, listening to you. Tell me, is this just my crazy mind, or is it a reasonable perception?
1:16:45 I agree with everything you say Dr. Kastrup and have been following your work for a long time now but on this question I would disagree with you on which intrigues me even more. Because though I have not had that diagnosis, I have been to 2 combat theaters in Iraq and Afghanistan and the old saying there are no atheists in foxholes is completely bull shit lol 😂 It’s almost laughable. In combat might be one of the only ways (I’m sure there must be more) that you ontically know that all religions are bull shit and not just that but a pox on human kinds house in every respect of the sense of utter ignorance and stupidity. Maybe I’m just jaded from watching men, women and children and my friends and brothers die for nothing but religion is for the weak of heart that is too afraid to look deeper into reality.
And furthermore when you are *literally* cornered by the “enemy” where the shit is again literally closing in around you and you literally have no where to run because you’ll give away your position to the enemy. I can almost guarantee you it’s not any god or religion that we’re turning to good sir. It’s our fellow brothers and sisters in arms with us.
I disagree with his thoughts on religion. I left Christianity in my twenties. I can't stand it. I was brought up as a Christian. It was used as a sledge hammer. God will send you to Hell if your not a good little girl. It screwed me up. I followed Buddhism for over 30 years and felt comfortable. The last few years I have been studying Hinduism and feel a real connection for the first time in my life. Go to church and support what I believe and feel is abusive and evil? Never.
I think your thinking is a little flawed because you seem to be basing everything that can be conceptualized in Christianity as just whatever American pastors or say whatever without analyzing the Bible through hermeneutics. Like there are so many different ways to think about what hell is and how it exists. Some theories like God being a being of pure light that created creation inside a void that is constantly trying to swallow him and creation, and sinful unsaved beings not purified physically cannot exist inside his creation (Heaven) and are thus repulsed into the void. And so many other theories that does seem to have scriptural support.
It's always interesting getting to know the person behind the fascinating thoughts but yeah Bernardo harbors some pretty pedestrian opinions for someone so philosophically astute! I find him very unreliable when it comes to many matters of culture, politics, and society -- including religion. He truly is a peasant! It may help to place him in the context of his beloved Netherlands, a mashup of a country between Flems and Walloons and now between secular white Christians and brown old-fashioned Muslims all caught within a system of dykes and canals that's all sinking into the sea...against this desperate backdrop it may be that Bernardo's trying to syncretize all the different stands of "what's going on" when he provides his very ho-hum common consensus type of social and cultural commentary.
God did not create hell. We do. As the orthodox church points out "According to the saints, the "fire" that will consume sinners at the coming of the Kingdom of God is the same "fire" that will shine with splendor in the saints. It is the "fire" of God's love; the "fire" of God Himself who is Love. "For our God is a consuming fire" (Hebrews 12:29) who "dwells in unapproachable light." (1 Timothy 6:16) For those who love God and who love all creation in Him, the "consuming fire" of God will be radiant bliss and unspeakable delight. For those who do not love God, and who do not love at all, this same consuming fire" will be the cause of their "weeping" and their "gnashing of teeth." Hell is a state of mind we create in rejecting God. ruclips.net/video/tiYf6ITgWbk/видео.htmlsi=46Djbr3N-kM6zugu
Nor were mine ... though it might have to do with me being kicked from the discord server for being critical (and referring to the 20th century democide in a discussion)
1:24:56 I find Bernardo incredibly naïve when he veers off into cultural criticism and history...people aren't simply insecure in themselves; people like things the way they are -- you wouldn't like to share your desk at work with someone, especially if that meant your desktop gets rearranged, especially if rearranged in a manner you don't like...this is just simple basic human nature. Elites like Bernardo (recall that he's a former high-flying senior executive at a legendary company) don't live among the peasants and don't understand it when peasants complain about the new neighbors. Not that racism and psychological poverty doesn't exist but it's but more and less than that: it's simply people like things staying mostly the same, just as they'd found it -- we're creatures of habit, after all, and unless your habit is to sing kumbayah from the safe distance of a nice protected location where things are just as you like them without threat of unwanted change (which is to say, unless you are among the privileged elite like Bernardo, Math and Mind bless him), it's not at all something as trivial as a sense of insecurity due to not being moored in one's own heritage that's behind an otherwise very normal rejection of unsolicited change.
I really disagree with his notion that religions are reflective of some underlying archetypes, I am actually convinced by his Idealism, but not his Jungian ideas.
But why aren't you convinced? Have you read Joseph Campbell's old classic "The Hero with a Thousand Faces?" But yeah I hear ya -- Bernardo seems quite the peasant when he ventures into social)historical/cultural commentary! He is an unquestioned Great Lord of Philosophy but just an everyman with a layman's opinion on much else (not meant as an insult and he'd probably genuinely take it as a badge of honor).
Bernardo comes off like an apologist for the state and a true believer in corporate governments whenever he starts talking about such things. I guess that's the European mindset these days. Collectivist obedience. Carl Jung would be sad to hear it.
I was surprised to hear him so self-righteous, virtue signalling and autocratic like " you have no right to"...."genocidal", so PC, etc. He forgot to say "how dare you!!" These judgemental moralists are unbearable.
It's sad to me when Philosophers try to dip their knowledge into diet, nutrition, and things like global warming. Bernardo simply is wrong, he scrutinizes scientific studies about the nature of reality, but doesn't at all when it comes to nutrition. He clearly agrees with evolution of humans so he should know that a diet high in animal fat and animal protein is the absolute KEY to us becoming human and our brains growing in size. As hunters humans evolved on an animal based diet. He would actually improve his own health with an animal based diet. Our brains are made up of animal fat and we need animal fat for them to be HEALTHY. This is not up for debate. There is a reason vegans have higher anxiety and depression as well as a myriad of autoimmune diseases. The less meat our society eats directly correlates to higher diseases of all kinds. Also the more meat we consume the longer we live, please look at hong kong as the highest meat consumption and longest living human population. As for climate change, you are ABSOLUTELY WRONG. Row cropping things like corn, wheat, and soy beans absolutely ruins our soil quality and our earth is turning into a dust bowl with no nutrients in the soil. Please look into local farms in your area and support regenerative agriculture farms that support healthy soil, and healthy cows. Beef and other ruminant animals are the most nutrient dense foods on the planet by far, also not debatable. He mentions that he likes his animals free range which is also supported in regenerative farms. They are amazing for the soil, they allow the animals to roam free like they naturally would, the animals live longer and are usually loved by the owners of the smaller farm and treated fairly, they also result in amazing nutrient dense foods that cannot be matched by and vegetable or wheat product. Sorry to rant, but he is factually false in everything he said about the subject. Row cropping gains is horrible as well as factory farming animals is also horrible. SUPPORT REGENERATIVE AGRICULTURE AT ALL COSTS. Please read the book sacred cow, and look into the work of Robb Wolf.
"Our brains are made up of animal fat and we need animal fat for them to be HEALTHY. This is not up for debate. " It's not only extremely up for debate, it's straight up contradicted by the literature. "It is the position of the American Dietetic Association that appropriately planned vegetarian diets, including total vegetarian or vegan diets, are healthful, nutritionally adequate, and may provide health benefits in the prevention and treatment of certain diseases." "It is the position of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics that appropriately planned vegetarian, including vegan, diets are healthful, nutritionally adequate, and may provide health benefits for the prevention and treatment of certain diseases." You said: "As for climate change, you are ABSOLUTELY WRONG. Row cropping things like corn, wheat, and soy beans absolutely ruins our soil quality and our earth is turning into a dust bowl with no nutrients in the soil." The problem is that most crops grown worldwide are to feed livestock. Approximately 80% of soy, grain and corn are fed to livestock.
@@dratkovic4631 it’s actually pretty much common sense based on facts about human evolution, and the fact that the earth can’t be healthy without animals roaming on the lands (which is why row cropping sucks) what part of this did you not understand I will try to elaborate more. But it seems you were going more for the internet trolling angle.
@@BakerWase don’t worry too much about % just try to focus on animal protein for lean body mass as being overweight boosts your chances of every known human disease and protein will help you not overeat. Animal protein (grass fed beef) is the most nutrient dense so I tend to stick to that. If you workout then shoot for 1 gram of protein per pound of body weight, that’s pretty much a universally known number. Then add plant foods in to fill the gaps. I tend to stick to fruit and organic honey as vegetables are terrible for my digestion (that’s why vegans are always bloated) some people do way better with veggies than others though so find what works for you. I would say mine is close to 50/50.
0:00 Welcome, everybody.
1:21 What’s the last book or author you’ve read that you would highly recommend?
5:20 When you abandoned physicalism, did you lean towards any ontology that wasn’t idealism?
9:41 What are your thoughts on neutral monism?
14:36 Would you debate David Chalmers?
17:13 What are David’s arguments against idealism?
19:56 You're starting living your ontology. How do you navigate such a shift in worldview with a partner?
22:25 Is every cell that constitutes our body an alter?
26:31 Is there any way to create a mathematical basis for analytic idealism?
32:50 [Intermission]
33:41 Do you think that beings people encounter during religious or psychedelic experiences have an inner life of their own, or are they an archetype?
38:19 A paper on psilocybin and cerebral blood flow shows relative increases in perfusion, but when measured globally CBF decreased everywhere. What does this mean?
48:51 What is it that determines an alter’s unique point of view? Why am I me instead of you?
53:54 What are your thoughts on distributed solipsism and open individualism?
56:50 How did fundamental consciousness become fragmented?
1:03:07 Have you heard of the Qualia Research Institute?
1:04:11 Do you think reality is fundamentally absurd?
1:12:56 If you had to choose a religion, which one would it be?
1:25:34 Considering the closure on the problem of evil, can you speak more on God as a suffering being?
1:40:48 Are you a vegetarian or a vegan?
1:49:42 What do you think poorly explained physical phenomenons-like the big bang, black holes, dark matter-are pointing at?
1:59:39 [Intermission]
2:00:21 Are our memories integrated into the universal mind when we die, and is there a corresponding physical image of the process that maintains the structure of our memories?
2:08:46 You speak of a layout of reality during NDE experiences being based on some experiences being more sticky. Doesn’t this add another assumption to a non-metacognitive field of experience?
2:13:30 What are your favourite Dutch things?
2:23:41 Thank you. Have a good night.
References:
4:49 Nicholas of Cusa en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicholas_of_Cusa
38:19 Two dose investigation of the 5-HT-agonist psilocybin on relative and global cerebral blood flow europepmc.org/article/MED/28711736
2:15:26 GroenLinks en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GroenLinks
2:19:04 Poffertjes en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poffertjes or pannenkoeken en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pannenkoek
2:19:32 Stamppot met boerenkool en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stamppot
Must be exhausting to do these super long conversations almost every week, diving deep into very complex topics. Bernardo is very committed to introducing an alternative to materialism in our culture and I appreciate that.
... yes, P. It is both, Enervating & Energizing. Bernado has a Mission, & IT-IS, all layed out in the groundwork. He is well prepared, playing by the already established rules, & bit by minute bit, he very patiently unpacks a "wholey" entangled, messy ball of kNOTS. & Although iam not completely with him, as yet, so far, i truly believe that he is on track to stand & deliver a much more meaningfully correct paradigmatical positional attitude, for Humanities Very Next & Monumental Step ...
I love Bernardo so much, this guy saved my sanity, literally...
Same here, love him too 💗
Somewhat opposite here. I feel imbalanced after investigating consciousness and being convinced of his Analytic Idealism.
Indeed; now I am actually worried about death and the afterlife -- even if as God at last! Because being God sounds ridiculous in Analytic Idealism...dumber than Homer Simpson!!
@@davidchou1675... And, so it goes, David. Peoples of the 20th & 21st centuries are right up against it, having to deal with the extremes & consequences of living through the end of ultra materialisms over consumption in an over populated enviroment, & the confrontational reality of that, being unsustainability & total societal collapse. & Then there's its transformational opposite.
The Essentia Foundation Think Tank, whose whole premise is being based & anchored through Analytic Idealism, maybe, the only really true & viable A.I.
A strong directional indicator is Essentia. or is it really, an Escean Foundational Mystery School-? Let-Us-See-!!! ...
His description of our religious tradition is so beautiful and spot on that almost moved me to tears.
Isn’t Andrea a woman’s name? If I may ask no disrespect, what do you know about “being grabbed by the balls” lol
Just playing.
Much love
♥️✌️🍄
Bernardo, I am a HUGE admirer and student, so to say, of your philosophy... I've been a non-dualist (Advaita Vedantin) for many years, but you have helped fill in many of the visualization gaps/blindspots I mentally tripped over, despite the fact that I intuitively knew that non-dualism was true... really my only question regarding your view is in regard to Mind@Large... i can't imagine it would have taken consciousness all of it's beginning-less existence to have at long last finally evolved meta conscious beings (such as humans)... my intuition is that all conscious beings are being played out INTENTIONALLY in/by the One... I strongly believe that the One must be meta conscious Itself, yet forgets Itself/disassociates Itself to seemingly become humans, etc, but in a way that follows an ordered, fine-tuned, well mapped script---a seamless, voluntarily forgotten script. I feel that Mind@Large dresses in the cloak of space/time, plays out an elaborate Script (being all the actors), then tears up the Script and plays again with a new Script (universe). In that sense, Mind@Large must be meta conscious (otherwise, It's never more insightful than the most insightful creature evolved 🤔) ...and, if evolution isn't fully random, then that also points to some sort of a plan, doesn't it, not just instinctive?
I'm not the most articulate writer, so I'm struggling to type my intuitions adequately here.... but, I hope maybe you are at least catching my drift so to speak? And, if so, I would LOVE to hear your feedback, as maybe I'm just missing something.
Thank you!
Pleeeease keep up the writing and podcast appearances... I watch them all!!!
Ryan
I’m finding myself feeling the same way lately.
Well that makes Mind at Large sound so mindless if it's just endlessly reiterating different forms of pain -- life is suffering, after all -- and it's my biggest problem with Analytic Idealism...seems to me that no philosophy explains the necessity of pain and suffering which is if you think about it the one common denominator and yet nothing seems to account for its "ontological basis"....
Or farts and feces for that matter -- like, WTF??? What "process in the Field of Mentation" manifests itself as such utterly absurd facts of everday life???
All this "vedic-like woo" is fascinating but it completely shrugs off the responsibility to account for the incredible amount of shit that permeates everything...that's really the ultimate mystery right there! That, and why no one demands that their philosophy/religion/ideology explain all the shit!!!
@davidchou1675 "God likes to play hide-and-seek, but because there is nothing outside of God, he has no one but himself to play with! But he gets over this difficulty by pretending that he is not himself. This is his way of hiding from himself. He pretends that he is you and I and all the people in the world, all the animals, plants, all the rocks, and all the stars. In this way he has strange and wonderful adventures, some of which are terrible and frightening. But these are just like bad dreams, for when he wakes up they will disappear.
Now when God plays "hide" and pretends that he is you and I, he does it so well that it takes him a long time to remember where and how he hid himself! But that's the whole fun of it-just what he wanted to do. He doesn't want to find himself too quickly, for that would spoil the game. That is why it is so difficult for you and me to find out that we are God in disguise, pretending not to be himself. But- when the game has gone on long enough, all of us will WAKE UP, stop pretending, and REMEMBER that we are all one single Self- the God who is all that there is and who lives forever and ever.
You may ask why God sometimes hides in the form of horrible people, or pretends to be people who suffer great disease and pain. Remember, first, that he isn't really doing this to anyone but himself. Remember too, that in almost all the stories you enjoy there have to be bad people as well as good people, for the thrill of the tale is to find out how the good people will get the better of the bad. It's the same as when we play cards. At the beginning of the game we shuffle them all into a mess, which is like the bad things in the world, but the point of the game put the mess into good order, and the one who does it best is the winner. Then we shuffle the cards and play again, and so it goes with the world."
~Alan Watts
Yes I've got "The Book" too but it still doesn't explain literal shit...so God is a cropophiliac??? He's into shit-play and "watersports"???
I mean I'm not into it certainly! How the hell did such a powerful seemingly creative Being come up with something like feces???
Never mind all the life-is-suffering self-mutilation...this is what God takes to be "play" and fun?????
Now you will probably explain at this point that that was just a metaphor and that the Ultimate Truth is beyond intellectual concepts and thus beyond language...which is fine, sure, but then we're really no further along than before.
Bernardo's great contribution, you see, is his use of Dissociative Identity Disorder to explain the age-old "All is One"...I've come across Alan Watts (whose work BTW Bernardo's said elsewhere that he's not usually fond of but he didn't elaborate why not on that occasion) literally decades ago as well as philosophy like his but it all just sounded like nice poetry -- pretty metaphors -- but nothing that really explains anything in the admittedly limited way of Aristotelian Logic...until Bernardo's innovation with D.I.D. (hint for future interviews: ask him for the origin story of that! Must be something interesting there, the moment when he first realized how D.I.D. can work as a mechanism of explaining All-is-One).
So, okay, Bernardo's settled that one now! But now this much harder question of "why"...WTF ordered all this shit and why???
There's something deeply strange about a universe like this!!! And I don't mean in a nice inspiring way like they show in nature documentaries!
@@davidchou1675... Yes, ALL THE SHIT & It's opposite. SUCH, IS, "thee" CON'UN'DRAMATIC DUALISTICKY PARADOX OF JUDGEMENTALITY. &, THEE "only" way to EFECTIVELY deal with it, is to put the CONSEPT of SELF, completely asside. & That IS, both-at-once, simultaneously, the easiest & most difficult premise to deal with. &, When IT happens, YOU-WILL-KNOW-!!!
Zeer boeiend interview. Ik volg Bernardo al enkele jaren en zijn argumenten worden steeds duidelijker en scherper. Ik had stiekem gehoopt hier een nederlands interview te horen want als Belg hoor ik dadelijk dat de gastheer een Nederlander is. ;)
This kind of content is what makes RUclips worthwile. Thank you
No, thank you. These kinds of comments is what makes creating content like this worthwile.
@~53:00~ exactly. Another way of perceiving it is by asking yourself if you are the same "you" from some previous point in time. Like... You have a memory / concept of you from whatever point in time but are you that person now? No. You just carry the temporary memory/burden of your previous ego state.
... read the book entitled "KNOTS" ...
Watching Kastrup talk is like Exploding the mind which is already exploding with awe!! so cool!
Having listened to this again for the first time I nearly a year I think Bernard speaks absolutely beautifully about our birth religion .✝️🕉️✌️
So glad I found your channel dude. Keep them coming
50:08 absolutely blew my mind. I’ve been thinking about Idealism, Consciousness, spacetime, Self, etc, for many years. This had never crossed my mind as a way to see how we are all One. Bernardo is so brilliant. Wow. What a powerful way to see Oneness when you grasp what he’s saying. Thank you, Bernardo!
Yeah? Now try this: Hitler fighting Stalin is just you and me playing chess!
Putin fighting Joe Biden is just you and me playing chess!
You and me okay chess is just you and me being us which is me being you and you being me so let's not worry about any of this because it's just God at play -- only He/you/me are into self-mutilation and pain and suffering...screams are music to our ears!!!
I am he, as you are he, as you are me
And we are all together.
Thank you for answering my question! 🙏🥰 Brilliant! 🌹
Thank you very much for posting! Wonderful interview!
As always Bernardo is such a treat, very good AMA, thanks alot. Read all his books and recommend them all.
And thanks Bernardo for bringing up the point that meat eating is a borderline criminal. it is.
With that said I would like to add some points on why I think Bernardo should take a second look at continuing eating chickens or any other animal products if he is doing it at the moment.
-The chickens that Bernardo eats have a chicken's life, he says. This does not make sense to me. Chickens can live from 5-10 years, in farming they get slaughtered around 6-7 weeks of life.
-Male chicks are ground up alive, this we know. He says this is unacceptable but still pays for it to happen when he doesn't have to. Actions speak louder than words.
-There is no reason to eat chickens or any animal if you live in societies as Bernardo and I do.
-He says production(productation) of animals is unethical and wrong but still his action of paying for it says otherwise.
-Free range better? It's mostly a marketing strategy to make us feel better buying the product, not for the chicken's life's sake. Look up dominion or any other documentaries and see how free range chickens around the world are treated.
-The argument about the low intelligence and nervous system. They have a will to live and don't want to suffer. This should be respected if we have the opportunity to.
My take and opinion is; We should stop buying these animal products so they stop breeding these poor animals into existence to only suffer and be killed by humans.
-As for eggs; male chicks get ground up alive here as they can't produce eggs. Normal chickens lay around 10-15 eggs a year. We have genetically modified today's chickens to lay on average 300 eggs a year. This takes a massive toll on their bodys. When egg production declines they get sent to the slaughter house.
-Dairy products; Calf is taken away from its mother after birth. If it's a male calf it can't produce milk and ends up as useful as a male chick in the egg industry. It gets killed for veil at around 16 weeks of life. The mother is kept pregnant after every birth by humans so they can produce more milk. When her body is spent and her milk production declines she gets sent to the slaughter and to an early death. So by being vegetarian you still cause the same suffering to animals as an animal eater and oftentimes even more.
-Then someone may say; but plants are intelligent and alive. Yes, but they can't feel pain and the animals eat around 8-10 times more plants than we do, so if you care about plants you should stop eating animals as well. Landuse and water waste is also another factor as he mentions. It's a great bonus that a plant based diet is better for the environment and climate change. But people won't stop eating animals because of the environment or climate change in my opinion, maybe when their own life gets affected by it. I think the only way for humans to stop is if they truly see/understand the unnecessary, unspeakable injustice and suffering these animals have to go through for some minutes of pleasure for our taste buds.
-The only time eating animals would be acceptable in today's age is if you had to to survive.
Watch Dominion: ruclips.net/video/LQRAfJyEsko/видео.html
Why are human lives to be privileged??
Indeed, animals used for experiments -- including cats and dogs and horses and chimps -- are called "sacs," as in "sacrifices"...to the God of Science, the God of Human Privilege. But why stop there; clearly we have inferior half-peoples among us??
And even vegetables want to live! Notice how Englishakes a distinction between the thing itself and its function as food -- "pork" instead of German's more immediate "Schweinefleisch" or "pig-flesh" and the whole class history involved in French imports via the Norman Conquest....
I want a philosophy that will account for shit like this, all the pain and absurdity, such as how we're forced to literally rob others for our own survival...to what ends??
To add to God's cosmic database as Analytic Idealism proposes??? Bah! Such poor motivation for all this effort!
What's really disconcerting isn't that Hitler/Stalin/etc. is actually us as dissociations of The One but that *they are actually the best of us* since they have clearly played the evolutionary game to the hilt -- precisely as our 4D dashboard was designed to facilitate!!
Very smart questions! Good work everyone :-)
I think the shortest way to arrive at idealism is, that you think, that there is only one onthological category (physicalism also tries to arrive at the "theory of everything"), and then you cannot see any way to reduce consciousness to anything else.. so you are almost forcefully directed to the only thing left - idealism.
I really enjoy listening to Bernardo Kastrup and think he has amazing insights about so many things. One point of disagreement I have though, is that I think neutral monism is actually more plausible than idealism. The idea that all matter is the image of a mental process makes sense when we're talking about large groups of matter made up of billions or trillions of atoms (one example I recall that he gave was that a person crying is an example of an image from the outside looking in of the internal mental phenomenon of sadness). I can imagine that sensations of pain, pleasure, and many thoughts could also be correlated with observable physical events that we could assume do not involve matter but are just the images of the mental process. But these physical representations involve billions and billions of atoms. My challenge/question on this is how could we say that a single atom or molecule is the image of a mental process? What would the mental process represented by a single atom even look like? It takes the interaction of millions of atoms to draw a correlation to even the most rudimentary, basic form of mental experience, so it just doesn't make sense to me that an atom is a mental event. Materialism definitely cannot explain where consciousness comes from and why we're not p-zombies though, so I'm not suggesting that. I also think that there are problems with dualism since it seems pretty absurd that consciousness would magically emerge and be produced as a fundamentally different thing from a certain configuration of matter. What I'm suggesting is that I think positing a third, unknown substance or fundamental unit of the universe that can be either mind or matter (or both at the same time) seems like the most reasonable position. This was Bertrand Russell's position if I recall, and I think a good analogy he used was that in the same way a man could be both a father and a baker at the same time, there could be a single substance more fundamental than physicality or mentality and this substance/nature of reality could be both physical and mental at the same time.
And this is why philosophy has been bullshit since 500 BC. ;-)
Bernardo Kastrup - the Galileo of Consciousness. Not just that but he has given advaita Vedanta a scientific basis .✌️🕊️🕉️
I would love him to practice meditation to experience what he believes
@@singhskeptic5742
... i think you will eventually see that the whole of Analytic Idealism IS nothing but a continuous practice of meditation. Somewhat Like pi, but running in both directions simultaneously, toward an infinitly of of endless Awe & Wonder ...
It is unbelievably lovely how Bernard's cognitive and metacognitive paths work.
He uses the same data a metarialist would use to proove conclusion A and he prooves conclusion B which is exactly the contrary/invert to A.
Beautiful and absolutely disarming reverse engineering method.
I love the way you see the world it speaks to me so much . I listen with a big joy to your words and to your insights into the world. Thanks so much Bernardo and thanks for sharing this video
1:42:39
lmao @ the idea of freerunning chickens
I'll eat chckens, but only if they're parkour chickens
From 1:13:00 : linking fear of others' religion to the fact we lost our own roots might be true to some extent, but the example Kastrup gives, namely the Spain Inquisition, happening far from our modernity, proves itself that "being connected to our roots" allows conflict (here in the name of christianity), persecutions and wars too, so....
Wow brother thank you!
@@TheVeganVicar Metaphysics mathematically anchors “metaethics”: m.ruclips.net/video/KRYOp1VnhKQ/видео.html
will be staying up late tonight it seems!
Bernardo... Espetacularmente brilhante!!!!
I’ve waited my whole life for Bernardo’s proof!
I know what you mean but "objectively speaking" it seems as if Bernardo's "only" contribution is to provide a plausible mechanism for "age-old woo" by using Dissociative Identity Disorder as a conceptual missing link, bridging the heretofore chasm between Cosmic Consciousness and our own individual ones.
It's a hell of an innovation, to be sure, but no proof as such, since there's still no similar mechanism or bridge to link or explain in a detailed way his "brain is in mind, not mind in brain" with "ow this hammer to my balls really fuckin' hurts"...right now, it's simply taken as a given that since Mind is all, then even pain is just in the mind -- which feels unsatisfying in the same way that "all is One" before Bernardo's incredibly important contribution using D.I.D. to explain it.
... yes, this is for those who have been hard at it struggling for the correct descriptors in which to frame it. Like having the scattered & disporate prices of a once perplexing puzzle come together, &, finally Bernado has done it. But, NOW, the real work begins, that of putting it all to the most positively actionable, benificial work for as many as is possible to fo. Thank you, Bernado & team, Essentia ...
The jnani has a legitimate path to God Realization and perhaps Analytical Idealism is a valid western intellectual means of discerning Reality if it is competently guided. Bernardo needs a Zen master!
Thank you
My heart went out to you as the semantic battery gauntlet strung nonsensical interrogation went on. having a headache must have made it extra special.
About Neutral Monism (around 10:00) : what is in play here, that to me Kastrup doesn't see (and I'm astonished because at times I find him very brilliant, interesting), is that neutral monism does agree with Idealism on the point that all what appears (things, feelings, thoughts...) can be named "consciousness". But it postulates (if I understand well), which is obvious, that we can't define what consciousness, so defined, is expression of. Postulating in advance that what happens to one individual is part of a something of the same kind (consciousness) that this time contains all individuals has nothing obvious and it seems to me that Kastrup lets himself being the play of concepts, here at least. The idea that Consciousness (in that sense of containing all individuals' cousciousness) is the substratum of eveything is to me not realy a problem, but adds a problem which is we can't know if consciousness goes beyond individuals. Another problem is we can't imagine what it means to "be" all individuals at the same time... Can we "imagine" (describe) what we can't imagine ? That said, there's no reason not to orientate science in a direction that would take all what happens for an individual as of the same kind (consciousness) and try and see what links we could find between the "physical" and "minds", in an all-and-everything-is-interconnected way. So that we would put our interest more on the "how" the whole thing works (can we find mathematical laws containing already known physical laws and interconnectedness, linking everything(-one) to everything(-one), deduced from our "user interface" ? Don Hoffman goes in that direction in his way and it seems it could lead somewhere...) than on the "what" ("...is it ?"). Cheers.
49:29 Interesting to see how Bernardo can answer the same exact question in radically different ways on a different day -- this very "why-me-not-you" is given a much more "sympathetic consideration" in his later AMA with Donald Hoffman...not wrong or anything but just a very different "understanding" of the question and thus a different approach to answering it.
Probably because in the later AMA with Hoffman Bernardo was influenced by hearing the voice of the questioner himself whereas here it's just something familiar read off to him second-hand.
Anyway, someone should ask him about Wheeler's half-serious one-electron theory of the universe for some laughs.
32:45 That's some serious lulz there!!! Nothing like a glitch in the ol' matrix to remind everyone who the sponsors of reality are....
Your definition of Free Will, as put in your article in American Scientinst (2020) is in my opinion a dealbreaker; in the sense, that most modern philosophers, of the kind of Harris, Dennett and the lot, are either for or against free will.
You head off by 90 degrees, and cast cosmos off from biology, and in my opinion, thereby uniting God and Cosmos.(- in my laymans terms.)
Pro tem, you are my primary hero! (- which says a lot, me being an agnostic.)(By the way - you too - a little?)
Just a thought: computers convert info into info - mind coverts info into Understandings (fundamentally imbude with emotion) then converts that back to info. Explicit finite to implicit infinite.
The mind can be thought of as a computer that computs Understandings .
It is not possible to have experience without at least one prior understanding ie not even random but nothingness. From this so much follows.... My qualifications are unusual.
Enjoyed this very much. Given Bernardo Kastrup's affinity to Indian traditions and Christianity, I'd be curious if he's ever encountered the theology of Mary Baker Eddy. So much of what he says seems concordant with her spiritual monism. Here is an example: “The verity of Mind shows conclusively how it is that matter seems to be, but is not. Divine Science, rising above physical theories, excludes matter resolves things into thoughts, and replaces the objects of material sense with spiritual ideas….
No form nor physical combination is adequate to represent infinite Love. A finite and material sense of God leads to formalism and narrowness; it chills the spirit of Christianity. A limitless Mind cannot proceed from physical limitations. Finiteness cannot present the idea or the vastness of infinity. A mind originating from a finite or material source must be limited and finite. Infinite Mind is the creator, and creation is the infinite image or idea emanating from this Mind. If Mind is within and without all things, then all is Mind; and this definition is scientific.”-Mary Baker Eddy, Science and Health
So you wanna say bernardo can just discard the Indian traditions.
Someone please help me understand something. And get a message to Bernardo Kastrup, if possible.
I love Bernardo Kastrup and have enjoyed the many hours that I have spent listening and watching him. His brilliant explanations of analytic idealism have been very helpful, like a boost of energy and profundity along my personal endless pilgrimage toward truth that started when I was young back in the 1970's with Fritjof Carpra's Tao of Physics. Absolutely wonderful!
My concern has to do with what he says about the "criminality of eating meat". I fear that his pride may be blinding him on the issue of animal ethics. He just seems too sure of himself about this topic. The reason I say "I fear" in this sense is that I may possibly now have doubts regarding his other claims (about his main fields of study: physics, philosophy, etc). I want to trust that he has done his homework in these areas, because I'm pretty sure he has not done his homework in my field of study, which happens to be animal ethics.
I very much want to know if he is aware of the profound differences between factory farming (feedlots and mono-agriculture) and regenerative practices (100% grassfed ruminants, like beef and bison). The former is definitely unethical - no argument there - but the latter is exactly the opposite. Ruminants that spend their entire lives on green pastures, - when responsibly managed by ranchers with love and care, in accordance with how nature functions - have the best lives that they could possibly have, and then their lives end in a way that minimizes their suffering, unlike how they would die in nature. We know it that ruminants raised this way are a natural and necessary component for healthy soil and a healthy ecosystem overall. These grasslands are home to a vast array of biodiversity and actually sequester carbon and keep water in the ground, where it naturally belongs.
Again, I wonder if he's aware of this. This is the type of beef that I get for me and my family. It's affordable and easy to get if you open your mind and eyes. I think it's the most natural and ethical way for humans to eat.
... Yes, & very much so, BACK, when the total population of people on Earth was no more than a half of a billion, 500,000,000 or so, and the animal kingdom, far & above, outweighed all of us, bipedal uprights. But, in less than a few centuries, our kind has exploded in such numbers, to the detriment of all, including humans, in this world, &, the amounts of toxic chemicals that have only recently been released into the environment, where it took nature billions of years to sequester & make safe the environment for there to be a fully fit place for organic beings to survive & thrive. What has been done, industrially, in only a few centuries, is nothing less than a Black Magic Mirical, for want of more fitting, or better, way to express it. It's going to require a White Magical Mirical, to fix this situation, &, in this regard, i very much DESIRE to be a Participating Witness.
GOD, BLESS IT ALL ...
1:58:54 Hmmm...looks like I'll have to get that book of his sooner rather than later; I have absolutely no idea what he means here but it sounds fascinating as usual!
"one of these California things" lol...rock on Bernardo
I am surprised that Bernardo can justify the killing of chickens and turkeys.We absolutely do not need to eat these animals for ANY reason.
You cant kill any living being. Not even plants.
Go Bernardo, bury Materialism !! Idealism is the real Reality.
I wonder if Bernardo has developed his idealism enough to accommodate the highest teaching of Advaita which is that of non existence . Sri Ramana Maharshi - the ' embodiment ' of Advaita - said that discussing the nature of Reality is like discussing the characteristics of the child of a barren woman 🕉️ .
Sri Ramana is wrong then.
Bernardo grew up a Christian but is inclined towards Hinduism (no, not the pantheon of gods) in the shape of Vedanta. But it is clear that Christ himself was not a Vedantist. To attempt to understand Christ through Vedanta would be a huge misunderstanding.
One way to read distributed solipsism, is that there is a potentially infinite plurality in where from which each point of view has a plausible solipsistic perspective , at least prima facie.
I think it takes a bit more effort to come to the point where we think everyone is just us living a different life.
Just learned about this computer scientist. Interested in understanding his views. To me brains have neurons, we call the ability to process information a mind. That it simply arises from matter in reality, such as quantum. I have found that a species of worm is said to have the simplest brain with just 300 neurons. I wonder how few neurons are needed for awareness of self? I’d say these neurons are used for a function of sorts for sure, such as finding food for survival… but I’m just speculating on this
This guy is something else entirely! (Which I guess means I am, too. And so are all of you! 😄
Michael Levin talks about the flatworms that don't have the same dna in every cell. In fact the cells are vastly different in dna, even though it's the same worm..
Spelling of the philosopher mentioned at the start is Nicholas of Cusa
his answer to this question alone is worth listening to the podcast...
1:42:35 Bernardo should watch "Super-Size Me 2" if he thinks so-called "free-range" chickens are living "a chicken's life!"
He should also watch American PBS' Nature documentary "The Natural History of Chickens" to see how chickens are kept as pets by Americans.
l thank you so much
59:00 et seq. Well, these aren't the only two options of course Just as likely, nature created compartmentalised beings in order to generate specific experience, because without almost-closed systems of experience we couldn't have particular experiences at all. You can't be a fishmonger in France unless there are people, countries, and fish.
58:14 This feels like one of those little sleights of hand that Bernardo indulges in on occasion: time and space are born of dissociation according to his Analytic Idealism but here Bernardo presupposes time before dissociation (unless he has in mind some kind of hyper-time à la his colleague Bernardo Carr [IIRC] at the Essentia Foundation).
Anyway, some tradition or other holds that God created the world due to loneliness -- so that's a kind of trauma, at least possibly.
Another example of such "sleight of hand" is this separation between Nature/Mind/Consciousness/God and evolution when Bernardo talks about how Nature/Mind/Consciousness/God didn't undergo the evolutionary pressures necessary to develop meta-cognition/self-reflection -- but everything is Natural/Mind/Consciousness/God already so it's like Bernardo's saying Mind did not undergo Mind (like how he says "given enough time" when time comes from the dissociation of Mind in the first place)....
Sure it's hard talking about these things since language is based on space and time but it's like he means all this literally here so someone should ask him how it is he just separates Mind from itself like that, from its own processes which are just a reflection of itself and thus are itself....
... yes, David, the business of ISNESS is so fully engaged in the generation of it's IS-NESS, that there is k'NOW-TIME, All+OF+THE-TIME
in which
to
FULLY
EXPERIANCE
EVERY
THING
AS
ANY
THING
WHAT+SO-EVER
AT
ALL
FOR
EVER ...
...
When Bernardo refers to simple rules that produce important changes, is he not simply referring to emergent systems; fractality?
Beautiful mind ☀️
53:00 Does Kastrup ever explicitely argue for this view on time in any if his other material? Yes, time being just another spatial dimension is a popular view in the metaphysics of time but it's not one I find at all convincing. I need additional arguments for it.
Physical beings arguing consciousness is fundametal (universally so) seems entirely counter intuitive. Its kind of like saying we as autonomous entities are discrete unitis, yet commensurate with the whole. But the whole is not the sum of it's parts. So Hoffman seems fundamentally wrong but i can't get what Katstrup is propising with this shut your eyes and tge world ceases to exist stuff, if i understand in ge least. All we seem to have access to is the material world. Thought is mysterious but seemingly emergent from wetwork. There are a million flights of fancy about whatever the hell consciousness is. None of them seem deserving to me of candidacy for real world modelling until theres sonething than conjecture. Until then I see meat that computes.
did anybody understand the word he likes so much? "...form?" I listened again and again but could not pick up the word. If the word is a german word, it could be "Erscheinungsform" - can anybody please help?
It would help if you have a timestamp, but I think the word is “verschijningsvorm”. It’s a Dutch word meaning “appearance” (or literally appearance form).
Religion is a hindrance to our spiritual development.
When people have a focus, like a belief, a practice, a religion they're affecting the probability of outcome.
@@toomanydonuts
True statement because our individual and collective life experience is totally dependent upon the contents of our individual and collective minds.
It's all about energy / consciousness and it creative power, which material scientists are yet to overstand
The same one everyone else chose if I were to choose at all . The one of belief .
Especially as someone who actually gets this and lives it.
Polyfragmented DID system.
I think Bernardo answers your question @ 56:50
Omg. Omg.
[So sorry, I skimmed the questions didn't realise it was summarised 🤦🏾♀️]
Omg.(Sorry, teens fangirling 😅) can't wait to listen to this. I'm so appreciative thank you.
@@TheVeganVicar slave?
@@AskingAnything further to the abusive messages from this person, I urge you to block this user to prevent any further harm coming to those who wish to view your videos.
Unsure if it is still showing as I reported the comment and is no longer visible from my end but have screenshotted it and can share.
💜
I am You😎
I'm still waiting for the philosopher who manages to weave a narrative together about Universal Bank Account or Checking Account at Large!
I love Bernardo but I don’t think many Christians will resonate with his view of God
1:29:00
Yes they will and do
I believe that God is love. Within him all things are possible. The Bible tells us that God, Christ, and the Holy Spirit are one and the same. All those who love have God. All who have God have love. We are all one in God. St. John said God is love. I interchange the word God and the word love when I read the Bible. Within love all things are possible.
In scientific words,
"There exists a conscious and intelligent mind and this mind is the matrix of all matter." -Max Planck
Nicholas DeCusa
Hey Bernardo! I like your way of thinking.
An omniscient god? OK. But God is also all mightiy in the sense that he has all the power there is (omnipotent);
and he is omnipresent to boot.
What can the sum of those three attibutes mean? God is Cosmos. All is in him, by him and of him. Cosmos.
That is the idea that came into my mind, listening to you.
Tell me, is this just my crazy mind, or is it a reasonable perception?
Can radical individualsim be one of the causes that causes cancer? - looking at the behavior of cancer cell
1:16:45 I agree with everything you say Dr. Kastrup and have been following your work for a long time now but on this question I would disagree with you on which intrigues me even more. Because though I have not had that diagnosis, I have been to 2 combat theaters in Iraq and Afghanistan and the old saying there are no atheists in foxholes is completely bull shit lol 😂 It’s almost laughable. In combat might be one of the only ways (I’m sure there must be more) that you ontically know that all religions are bull shit and not just that but a pox on human kinds house in every respect of the sense of utter ignorance and stupidity.
Maybe I’m just jaded from watching men, women and children and my friends and brothers die for nothing but religion is for the weak of heart that is too afraid to look deeper into reality.
And furthermore when you are *literally* cornered by the “enemy” where the shit is again literally closing in around you and you literally have no where to run because you’ll give away your position to the enemy. I can almost guarantee you it’s not any god or religion that we’re turning to good sir. It’s our fellow brothers and sisters in arms with us.
@@Wandering_Chemist I personally agree with his metaphysics and many of the things he has said, but I honestly think his Jungian side blinds him.
@@KnightofEkron... The concept of self must be put asside, for to be non judgementally & fully receptively wide open ...
Thankfully idealism isn't even taken seriously in philosophy today
I disagree with his thoughts on religion. I left Christianity in my twenties. I can't stand it. I was brought up as a Christian. It was used as a sledge hammer. God will send you to Hell if your not a good little girl. It screwed me up. I followed Buddhism for over 30 years and felt comfortable. The last few years I have been studying Hinduism and feel a real connection for the first time in my life. Go to church and support what I believe and feel is abusive and evil? Never.
I think your thinking is a little flawed because you seem to be basing everything that can be conceptualized in Christianity as just whatever American pastors or say whatever without analyzing the Bible through hermeneutics. Like there are so many different ways to think about what hell is and how it exists. Some theories like God being a being of pure light that created creation inside a void that is constantly trying to swallow him and creation, and sinful unsaved beings not purified physically cannot exist inside his creation (Heaven) and are thus repulsed into the void. And so many other theories that does seem to have scriptural support.
It's always interesting getting to know the person behind the fascinating thoughts but yeah Bernardo harbors some pretty pedestrian opinions for someone so philosophically astute!
I find him very unreliable when it comes to many matters of culture, politics, and society -- including religion. He truly is a peasant!
It may help to place him in the context of his beloved Netherlands, a mashup of a country between Flems and Walloons and now between secular white Christians and brown old-fashioned Muslims all caught within a system of dykes and canals that's all sinking into the sea...against this desperate backdrop it may be that Bernardo's trying to syncretize all the different stands of "what's going on" when he provides his very ho-hum common consensus type of social and cultural commentary.
God did not create hell. We do. As the orthodox church points out "According to the saints, the "fire" that will consume sinners at the coming of the Kingdom of God is the same "fire" that will shine with splendor in the saints. It is the "fire" of God's love; the "fire" of God Himself who is Love. "For our God is a consuming fire" (Hebrews 12:29) who "dwells in unapproachable light." (1 Timothy 6:16) For those who love God and who love all creation in Him, the "consuming fire" of God will be radiant bliss and unspeakable delight. For those who do not love God, and who do not love at all, this same consuming fire" will be the cause of their "weeping" and their "gnashing of teeth." Hell is a state of mind we create in rejecting God.
ruclips.net/video/tiYf6ITgWbk/видео.htmlsi=46Djbr3N-kM6zugu
Who decided on the questions? Quite disappointed that none of mine were featured.
Nor were mine ... though it might have to do with me being kicked from the discord server for being critical (and referring to the 20th century democide in a discussion)
Non-human animals don't have 'mind'? Bold.
It would be so nice some English subs.....
1:24:56 I find Bernardo incredibly naïve when he veers off into cultural criticism and history...people aren't simply insecure in themselves; people like things the way they are -- you wouldn't like to share your desk at work with someone, especially if that meant your desktop gets rearranged, especially if rearranged in a manner you don't like...this is just simple basic human nature.
Elites like Bernardo (recall that he's a former high-flying senior executive at a legendary company) don't live among the peasants and don't understand it when peasants complain about the new neighbors.
Not that racism and psychological poverty doesn't exist but it's but more and less than that: it's simply people like things staying mostly the same, just as they'd found it -- we're creatures of habit, after all, and unless your habit is to sing kumbayah from the safe distance of a nice protected location where things are just as you like them without threat of unwanted change (which is to say, unless you are among the privileged elite like Bernardo, Math and Mind bless him), it's not at all something as trivial as a sense of insecurity due to not being moored in one's own heritage that's behind an otherwise very normal rejection of unsolicited change.
Should I contact the FBI over this matter?
Yet our left and right brains have different personalities and agendas
And yet he is committed to an amoeba being a dissociated alter.
#bernardokastrup
evil is not big deal.... but I'm vegetarian ;-)
Vegetarians are just as evil.
I really disagree with his notion that religions are reflective of some underlying archetypes, I am actually convinced by his Idealism, but not his Jungian ideas.
But why aren't you convinced? Have you read Joseph Campbell's old classic "The Hero with a Thousand Faces?"
But yeah I hear ya -- Bernardo seems quite the peasant when he ventures into social)historical/cultural commentary! He is an unquestioned Great Lord of Philosophy but just an everyman with a layman's opinion on much else (not meant as an insult and he'd probably genuinely take it as a badge of honor).
Bernardo comes off like an apologist for the state and a true believer in corporate governments whenever he starts talking about such things. I guess that's the European mindset these days. Collectivist obedience. Carl Jung would be sad to hear it.
I find him a very learned man but he's simply mistaken about a great many things outside of philosophy.
"Put not your trust in princes"....
I was surprised to hear him so self-righteous, virtue signalling and autocratic like " you have no right to"...."genocidal", so PC, etc. He forgot to say "how dare you!!"
These judgemental moralists are unbearable.
It's sad to me when Philosophers try to dip their knowledge into diet, nutrition, and things like global warming. Bernardo simply is wrong, he scrutinizes scientific studies about the nature of reality, but doesn't at all when it comes to nutrition. He clearly agrees with evolution of humans so he should know that a diet high in animal fat and animal protein is the absolute KEY to us becoming human and our brains growing in size. As hunters humans evolved on an animal based diet. He would actually improve his own health with an animal based diet. Our brains are made up of animal fat and we need animal fat for them to be HEALTHY. This is not up for debate. There is a reason vegans have higher anxiety and depression as well as a myriad of autoimmune diseases. The less meat our society eats directly correlates to higher diseases of all kinds. Also the more meat we consume the longer we live, please look at hong kong as the highest meat consumption and longest living human population. As for climate change, you are ABSOLUTELY WRONG. Row cropping things like corn, wheat, and soy beans absolutely ruins our soil quality and our earth is turning into a dust bowl with no nutrients in the soil. Please look into local farms in your area and support regenerative agriculture farms that support healthy soil, and healthy cows. Beef and other ruminant animals are the most nutrient dense foods on the planet by far, also not debatable. He mentions that he likes his animals free range which is also supported in regenerative farms. They are amazing for the soil, they allow the animals to roam free like they naturally would, the animals live longer and are usually loved by the owners of the smaller farm and treated fairly, they also result in amazing nutrient dense foods that cannot be matched by and vegetable or wheat product. Sorry to rant, but he is factually false in everything he said about the subject. Row cropping gains is horrible as well as factory farming animals is also horrible. SUPPORT REGENERATIVE AGRICULTURE AT ALL COSTS. Please read the book sacred cow, and look into the work of Robb Wolf.
"Our brains are made up of animal fat and we need animal fat for them to be HEALTHY. This is not up for debate. "
It's not only extremely up for debate, it's straight up contradicted by the literature.
"It is the position of the American Dietetic Association that appropriately planned vegetarian diets, including total vegetarian or vegan diets, are healthful, nutritionally adequate, and may provide health benefits in the prevention and treatment of certain diseases."
"It is the position of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics that appropriately planned vegetarian, including vegan, diets are healthful, nutritionally adequate, and may provide health benefits for the prevention and treatment of certain diseases."
You said: "As for climate change, you are ABSOLUTELY WRONG. Row cropping things like corn, wheat, and soy beans absolutely ruins our soil quality and our earth is turning into a dust bowl with no nutrients in the soil."
The problem is that most crops grown worldwide are to feed livestock. Approximately 80% of soy, grain and corn are fed to livestock.
Are you nutritionist or agricultural expert?
@@dratkovic4631 it’s actually pretty much common sense based on facts about human evolution, and the fact that the earth can’t be healthy without animals roaming on the lands (which is why row cropping sucks) what part of this did you not understand I will try to elaborate more. But it seems you were going more for the internet trolling angle.
Interesting, would you say a diet that is 50% plant and 50% meat is healthy ?
@@BakerWase don’t worry too much about % just try to focus on animal protein for lean body mass as being overweight boosts your chances of every known human disease and protein will help you not overeat. Animal protein (grass fed beef) is the most nutrient dense so I tend to stick to that. If you workout then shoot for 1 gram of protein per pound of body weight, that’s pretty much a universally known number. Then add plant foods in to fill the gaps. I tend to stick to fruit and organic honey as vegetables are terrible for my digestion (that’s why vegans are always bloated) some people do way better with veggies than others though so find what works for you. I would say mine is close to 50/50.
Bernardo, please come visit South Africa! Afrikaans. is. so. close to. Dutch !