I have been a panpsychist for a very long time and I think this discussion was very informative and will look more into Christian's work. Thanks for sharing this!
Thank you Jeffrey Mishlove for this interview about Panpsychism with Christian de Quincey. I first came across this video in January 2021 and have since gone on to read all of the his books featured in this video. Very fascinating way to view the world that has given me a lot to think and wonder about. Subscribed. Hope you have a good day!
22 years ago at the age of 13, I was sitting in my physics class at school listening to my physics teacher talk about how inanimate atoms formed all things. Even at that young tender age I realised the ridiculousness of the idea that conscious living beings are composed, fundamentally out of inanimate, non living, non conscious things. I realised all those years ago that ofcourse all things are imbued with various levels of Conscious awareness. I've held that point of view for all these years. Today I discover that philosophers and some scientists think the same now and call it panpsychism!
Joy Mukherji Thank you Joy for the info. Much of whats contained in the book I realised early on in my spiritual Journey when I began meditating at the age of 14. For a more detailed description of the Nature of Reality, please have a look at the Seth Material, specifically "The Unknown Reality" Volumes I and II. You can read some extracts from these amazing books online if you search for Seth jane roberts quotes: www.nirvikalpa.com/bookquot.php4?&submit=Search&book=The+Unknown+Reality%2C+Volume+1&startrec=0 All the Seth books are excellent.
+farceadentus You're trying to use your scientifically ignorant "common sense" to study the fundamentally difficult questions of existentialism. That's like driving on a highway with a bicycle. Your primal intuitions were not made to ponder the difficult questions of consciousness and the cosmos but rather to run away from lions and other predators in Africa. That's why radical emergence of things from simple material processes is so unimaginable to you. You simply aren't enough imaginative. 500 years ago you'd have thought it's ridiculous that the earth is round. Your primal intuitions would tell you that the people and creatures on the "lower" side of the earth would fall off it's surface. This argument through which you came to your erroneous conclusions is simply lack of power to imagine reality as it really is.
Because inanimate objects (or rather basic particles and forces) DO form everything there is. And it's your lack of imagination and knowledge, combined with scientific illiteracy that causes the primal common sense instincts to kick in with you. We're not hiding from lions here, though. We're exploring the deepest mysteries of the universe. And your common sense intuitions are really out of place in this realm.
I loved Christian's "Ahhh!" when Jeffrey mentioned the NDE. Though they didn't get into that too much, I really enjoyed the discussion of the sense of consciousness inherent in every thing. My mom named all her cars & dumbfounded my father several times by finally getting a car started by patting the dashboard familiarly & gently asking the auto to start after he had tried a number of his 'tricks.'
I read "radical knowing" i was at the Seattle library and saw it . Some how it caught my attention. Then i read radical nature. Then read becoming animal. Before i read radical knowing i read philosophy in the flesh by george lacoff.de quincy is among one of my favorite contemporary philosophers. My other include John gray-nassim talib. Exc....
Christian de Quincey is really a delight, I would like to hear more... Jason Silva is currently making waves through social media with his short philosophical videos. It would be incredible to have him on the show. :)
i would assert that Whitehead represents a Panentheistic perspective, very similar to his Indian contemporary, Sri Aurobindo. The issue hinges on the view of temporality - Whitehead's God includes a primordial pole which is timeless out outside of time, paralleling Aurobindo's "transcendent poise" (both have a triune concept of God: transcendent, universal, supramental/individual, or; primordial, consequent, superjective). David Lawrence (1999, "Rediscovering God with Transcendental Argument") makes a similar case for Whitehead as panentheistic (and parallel to the Kasmiri Saiva darsana of pratyabhijna philosophy)
On the story of communion with the rock, the only word I can go with is potentiality. At the atomic level we have fundamental similarities to the rock. The rock has fundamental ingredients of a human even if they formed differently and less complexly.
Out of body experience: The same as smoking crack, the brain makes you think you are something else than your body, and since the mechanism of the brain is to support its belief it can create a vision of outside body experience. However since the information is still stored in the brain due to being recalled at a later time, consciousness is still part of the brain.
I'm leaning toward panpsychism, but I think of it as empirically identical to materialism. I am not convinced that things like OBEs or synchronicity are anything more than illusions, because you would expect illusions like that to happen in a materialist universe. I think matter is what "stuff that exists" looks like from the outside, and consciousness is what it looks like from the inside. I also think that for consciousness to be recognizable in the way that we know it in ourselves, there needs to be a system of integrated information, like the neural network of the brain.
Wonderful, thank you! I had such a deep intuition that everything was alive in some sense when I was young. I think this may be a common experience for young children until they are told otherwise. It clearly is the experience of indigenous peoples -- animism -- which is very similar to panpsychism. When I took Christian's class at JFK, and he said that everything HAS consciousness, I could verbalize what I felt/knew. I included Christian's understanding in my own book: The Child as Transformer of Consciousness.
Current evidence points to consciousness as an essential characteristic of this universe. Edgar Mitchell has pointed out even the smallest parts of matter exchange information and exhibit pre-conscious elements. It seems to me that consciousness, life and spirit are all related in that consciousness grows in the evolutionary processes and spiritual reality is a by-product of highly developed consciousness of individuals and species. Chardin points out that hominization was accompanied by reflective consciousness, generating individual consciousness and now we are on the cusp of super personalization where each individual is deeply connected to the "Noosphere" - probably structured quantum holography where the whole history of everything resides according to Mitchell. Of course, Chardin being a Jesuit, believes this Omega point of super personalization will allow each to see into the heart of another, or heart of the matter, as the mystics and early adopters, or first fruits, like Jesus could do.
Dear Sam: Thank you a lot for your so very true and correct Commentary! Already 60 years ago I myself did study Chardin in Germany, who was very much in fashion there at that time! If you bother to read my above AngeL Muk (Muc is the this airport-name of Munich) Commentaries, concerning one`s eternal SELFsoul-awareness in comparison with one`s limited and so short-lived brain-consciousness, and including LIFE (= Self-Soul) WITHIN absolutely all forms of universal matter- existence ... then, even the most ardent matter/mater faith-believer should start considering, if not EVERY human being actually IS a Jesus Christ ...; especially as this New Testament does insist that "ALL humans are from God": (`God`? See this Bible-Genesis named HVH, that "All-SOUL".) "God" as this Jewish All-MATTER -existence named "YaHVeH/JeHoVaH/etc.", alias a `Lord` (?) named "ADoNaY". (Authentic Hebrew, alike this original Koran, always was written only in consonants, without any vocals at all! And every word and name ending with an "H" is of female gender.) In the German language there are two kinds of reality: One is alike our reality here, like in English, but the other one is named "Wirklichkeit", meaning multi- dimensional (English "big reality"), including that word "wir", meaning "we" and this concept of "wirklich", meaning "truthfully real"! Greetings! A. L. M.
regarding the consciousness of the earth toward the end of the video, human pandemics from viral infections could be one way that the earth might respond, consciously, toward the threat of human activity.
I sure wish he would say more about why Idealism isn't right, other than that it isn't well-accepted in the West. Idealists are saying Panpsychism is the last-ditch effort of materialists to hold onto the concept of matter, whereas what I'm hearing in it is that Panpsychists don't believe in matter, but not in non-duality, either.
Look into Simulation Theory, just to add other entire dimensions to your options. If we do exist in an A.I. generated holographic universe, then all bets are off. Reality is hackable.
Now that I've listened again, it appear he's saying there is no 'solid' matter, but there is matter which always contains mind, the same as there is mind which always involvess matter or form. This is a much better position to me than either of the extremes of materialism or idealism.
Dear Mr. de Quincey: Out of every kind of `paranormal` (actually merely natural) personal experiences since early childhood, I myself of course agree with everything you say. There only is a different use of words, between the two of us: Also, understandably, being part of this American University business, you do have use this Christian word "spirit" instead of "SELF-SOUL", as Soul is this non-material Nothingness (Hindu "Nirvana") which in Judeo-Christian believes is `something` merely to be judged by their Gods. Thus, in Religions, "SPIRIT" is always used with a conscious mind creating it`s "spiritual" Logos-words, like for instants, this dogma of having to be "selfless", instead of "egoless". There is a huge difference between this "consciousness" of one`s material brain, this "I-ness", and this wordless, intuitive FEELING, this "awareness" of one`s very own SELF: Human brain-consciousness dies (to be rematerialised, reincarnated into whichever form and dimension), but one`s human SELFsoul-awareness is timeless and eternal. Just like any and every SOULself within any and every kind of matter within this Kosmos, down to the most tiny Quark-Atom: Thus, this all uniting, eternal ONENESS of all existence which you name "Panpsychism". In ancient Israelite Hebrew, "All-SOUL" is named HVH ... this material "Nothing"... (but since in Catholicism named as base of all `inherited sin`), and "All-MATTER" is named YHVH: Thus HVH is creating existence WITHIN (!) YHVH! This perfect POLARITY of Soul and Matter is named "Yin and Young" in Taoism, or, like in ancient Egyptian, this SELF was named "Ka", being part of All-SOUL, named "Ba". Just as in Islam, where this "Ka`Ba"-Shrine is worshipped in Mecca, (Makkah), this town formerly as well named "Ba`Ka". Etc., etc., etc. This worldwide, separating Duality would slowly stop to exist and change into harmonious Polarity, if people would finally understand, that, for instants, this united word-concept of "MYSELF" clearly indicates this difference of "MY" as one`s material Ego-being, but that one`s "SELF" is this eternal, timeless and all-uniting, eternal ONENESS of All-SOUL! But due to this dreadful Angst of their death (thanks to this religious Semite invention of `only one single human life!`) people are ego-absorbed instead of self-absorbed, ego- assured instead of self-assured, ego-conscious instead of self-aware, etc., etc. Frightened, depressed, selflessly lost in despair, due to any self-evident self-esteem at all. Their definitely is a logical and spiritual word-difference between an "ego" and a "self"! Dear Mr. de Quincey: I merely discovered your name and this video 3 hours ago. Naturally, myself I will by YOUR "Soul of the Matter"-book! With true 😍 admiration ... A. L. M.
but most people don't believe the universe is alive...so that logic is unusual. But I think you are right, well I am about 51% certain...these philosophers haven't got very far with this, panpsychism is glued to matter but ideas do not move on a spatial plane and it is inconceivable to see ideas move even on another plane than time, which does not seem like a physical plane, so for science to work on that, it must induce some type of dualism to account for this....so there is a gap for idealism to stroll in, although it doesn't handle the physical well at all. Whitehead says consciousness moves matter around, maybe like time does, it seems to me we have to forget causality to be able to conceive how time, thoughts and matter interact in each other, the wind moves the leaves as much as the leaves move the wind. I think I have to leave it there, no pun intended...I have already gone out on a limb.
Alot of people attempt to expose the "hard problem" by asking how something so ontologically abstract as consciousness can emerge from purely, non-conscious (presupposed) physical properties about the world. However, what I'm surprised by is the fact that the reverse hasn't been asked: how can a non-conscious world with innate physicality be directly perceived and analyzed by something as abstract consciousness? The only theories that even touch up on something such as this are representationalism and phenomenalism, but even they are limited, as talking about "the veil of perception" only attempts to discover what the perceptive bridge is rather than how the bridge emerges.
After studying philosophy for five years I cannot see how an informed honest philosopher can conclude that materialism is true. I think some philosophers cannot tolerate ambiguity and would rather choose over-simplification. Materialism provides this over-simplification of the nature of reality.
Pan-psychism is identical to (if the following are rightly understood) Advaita Vedanta and Nagarjuna's Madhyamaka Buddhist philosophy. The trend, especially in Advaita is actually *dualistic!* ... because the prevailing idea, in both East and Western interpretations, is to escape the wheel of rebirth. As such, it's currently a "world-hating" philosophy (as are literally *all* exoteric religions). They view Maya as pure illusion. It is not. (The Sanskrit word for pure illusion is "mithya") This wasn't what Adi Sankara (aka Shankaracharya) taught at all! Neither did Ramana Maharshi.
I don't think Advaita is like pan-psychism, Advaita does not think that Prakriti has a mind of its own, which would be the case with pan-psychism. Advaita acknowledges prakriti as jada (non-sentient). Also, instead of being "world-hating", Advaita emphasizes going beyond the duality of love and hate itself.
In a sense with the big bang theory science points towards idealism and not panpsychism.. there was no material or embodiment before the big bang, there was no matter or time or energy. I prefer Idealism as i see it that matter is reducible to perception.
Excellent interview. I wonder what the panpsychist's view is on what exists outside the universe. I have held the view that pure consciousness exists outside the universe. However this would be inconsistent with panspychism which views mind as forming part of what matter is. Is the universe (which is made of mind-matter) all that exists? Beyond the universe there is only a void?
So would you say that mind takes up a physical space then? Also there is no such thing as avoid as nonexistence is non existent, there is not such thing as true nothingness, there is always something, I imagine you picture a void as being a huge empty infinite distance, yet that contradicts the idea of a void which is supposed to be void of anything, either way though no matter what is outside of our universe its all part of the same thing, its all one system as like true nothingness true separability is also impossible, for example think of anything you believe is separate, then ask yourself what it is separated by, is that thing that it is separated by not a connection thus it is not really separate at all? All things share the same identity and it helps to not get caught up on man made labels which are mere tools of measurement, not the reality itself.
In relation to your first question my answer is I don't really know. If panpsychism is true then mind does take up space. If panpsychism is not true then I would say mind does not take up space. With regard to the rest of your comment you appear to be adopting a Parmenidean ontology. Firstly, I used the word "void" to mean what it is traditionally used to denote - pure negation of being. I don't see any difficulty in the proposition that there is a void outside the universe - that us, nothing - not even space or time. I think the confusion arises only at the level of language. When I say "nothing exists" it seems like I am asserting an oxymoron or a contradiction. However, apparent contradiction is rooted in the limitations of our language. When I say nothing "exists" I do not use "exists" in the same way that I use it when applying it to trees or cats or feelings. Metaphysically speaking, I can see no problem with the existence of a void. As far as voids existing inside the universe I am sceptical. Perhaps, one might say it is possible for there to be the absence of matter in parts of the universe but not a void - because space and time would fill the gaps in matter.
Great stuff but I fail to see why panpsychicism is incompatible with panentheism and I suppose by extension pandeism since surely what goes on outside of the universe is irrelevant to conditions within it.as I understand it panentheism is effectively pantheism within the universe but with a dimension beyond it and ideas like kabala, Neoplatonism and Gnosticism are effectively kinds of panentheism.so the state of reality in the undivided One is outside of our ken although we may aim to get back to and unify with it.
Hah I have a video of me talking to a rock.. This rock God had a lot to say.. And it went on poking me with insights for weeks.. Who knew that rocks can talk a lot.. Deep stuff..
Typical human arrogance to think theirs is the only version of Consciousness and the only one possible. A subtle realm only seems that way through our lens of unknowing. There is no physical realm per se, and all realms are integral in their own way.
Hmm Sounds like a new religion to me , no facts , no proofs , absolut nothing to make this idea work. Well most people who are lost need to believe in something ... and this sounds scientific , but it is not.
![What Is Reality? [Official Film]](/img/1.gif)
I have been a panpsychist for a very long time and I think this discussion was very informative and will look more into Christian's work. Thanks for sharing this!
Thank you Jeffrey Mishlove for this interview about Panpsychism with Christian de Quincey. I first came across this video in January 2021 and have since gone on to read all of the his books featured in this video. Very fascinating way to view the world that has given me a lot to think and wonder about. Subscribed. Hope you have a good day!
22 years ago at the age of 13, I was sitting in my physics class at school listening to my physics teacher talk about how inanimate atoms formed all things.
Even at that young tender age I realised the ridiculousness of the idea that conscious living beings are composed, fundamentally out of inanimate, non living, non conscious things.
I realised all those years ago that ofcourse all things are imbued with various levels of Conscious awareness.
I've held that point of view for all these years.
Today I discover that philosophers and some scientists think the same now and call it panpsychism!
Check out I Am That of Nisargadatta Maharaj. Google for PDF copy. He has great answers for consciousness as the basis of everything
Joy Mukherji Thank you Joy for the info. Much of whats contained in the book I realised early on in my spiritual Journey when I began meditating at the age of 14. For a more detailed description of the Nature of Reality, please have a look at the Seth Material, specifically "The Unknown Reality" Volumes I and II.
You can read some extracts from these amazing books online if you search for Seth jane roberts quotes: www.nirvikalpa.com/bookquot.php4?&submit=Search&book=The+Unknown+Reality%2C+Volume+1&startrec=0
All the Seth books are excellent.
+farceadentus You're trying to use your scientifically ignorant "common sense" to study the fundamentally difficult questions of existentialism. That's like driving on a highway with a bicycle. Your primal intuitions were not made to ponder the difficult questions of consciousness and the cosmos but rather to run away from lions and other predators in Africa. That's why radical emergence of things from simple material processes is so unimaginable to you. You simply aren't enough imaginative. 500 years ago you'd have thought it's ridiculous that the earth is round. Your primal intuitions would tell you that the people and creatures on the "lower" side of the earth would fall off it's surface.
This argument through which you came to your erroneous conclusions is simply lack of power to imagine reality as it really is.
+Mitja Irsic what makes you think it's an erroneous conclusion?
Because inanimate objects (or rather basic particles and forces) DO form everything there is. And it's your lack of imagination and knowledge, combined with scientific illiteracy that causes the primal common sense instincts to kick in with you. We're not hiding from lions here, though. We're exploring the deepest mysteries of the universe. And your common sense intuitions are really out of place in this realm.
*New Thinking Allowed*~ Where the nitty-gritty is discussed. Great talk.
I loved Christian's "Ahhh!" when Jeffrey mentioned the NDE. Though they didn't get into that too much, I really enjoyed the discussion of the sense of consciousness inherent in every thing. My mom named all her cars & dumbfounded my father several times by finally getting a car started by patting the dashboard familiarly & gently asking the auto to start after he had tried a number of his 'tricks.'
It's great that this show is going again. Great interview, and I look forward to seeing more from Thinking Allowed.
I read "radical knowing" i was at the Seattle library and saw it . Some how it caught my attention. Then i read radical nature. Then read becoming animal. Before i read radical knowing i read philosophy in the flesh by george lacoff.de quincy is among one of my favorite contemporary philosophers. My other include John gray-nassim talib. Exc....
Many thanks to you Jeffrey, you are a lovely human being
An absolutely wonderful discussion, really enjoyed it!
Christian de Quincey is really a delight, I would like to hear more... Jason Silva is currently making waves through social media with his short philosophical videos. It would be incredible to have him on the show. :)
that was very enlightening. thank you both.
Jeffrey great to have you back! You're a great man
i would assert that Whitehead represents a Panentheistic perspective, very similar to his Indian contemporary, Sri Aurobindo. The issue hinges on the view of temporality - Whitehead's God includes a primordial pole which is timeless out outside of time, paralleling Aurobindo's "transcendent poise" (both have a triune concept of God: transcendent, universal, supramental/individual, or; primordial, consequent, superjective). David Lawrence (1999, "Rediscovering God with Transcendental Argument") makes a similar case for Whitehead as panentheistic (and parallel to the Kasmiri Saiva darsana of pratyabhijna philosophy)
What a thoughtful and illuminating discussion. Thank you!
Excellent presentation and discussion. My compliments.
A new word for - we are all part of everything and everything is a part of us on some level
Thank you!
On the story of communion with the rock, the only word I can go with is potentiality. At the atomic level we have fundamental similarities to the rock. The rock has fundamental ingredients of a human even if they formed differently and less complexly.
Out of body experience: The same as smoking crack, the brain makes you think you are something else than your body, and since the mechanism of the brain is to support its belief it can create a vision of outside body experience. However since the information is still stored in the brain due to being recalled at a later time, consciousness is still part of the brain.
Great work Jeffery and Christian thank you!
Descartes' Dualism was revived Aristotelian Substance thinking.
I really enjoy your questions, and also their responses!
Thank you for this very insightful interview.
I'm leaning toward panpsychism, but I think of it as empirically identical to materialism. I am not convinced that things like OBEs or synchronicity are anything more than illusions, because you would expect illusions like that to happen in a materialist universe. I think matter is what "stuff that exists" looks like from the outside, and consciousness is what it looks like from the inside. I also think that for consciousness to be recognizable in the way that we know it in ourselves, there needs to be a system of integrated information, like the neural network of the brain.
Wonderful, thank you! I had such a deep intuition that everything was alive in some sense when I was young. I think this may be a common experience for young children until they are told otherwise. It clearly is the experience of indigenous peoples -- animism -- which is very similar to panpsychism. When I took Christian's class at JFK, and he said that everything HAS consciousness, I could verbalize what I felt/knew. I included Christian's understanding in my own book: The Child as Transformer of Consciousness.
Current evidence points to consciousness as an essential characteristic of this universe. Edgar Mitchell has pointed out even the smallest parts of matter exchange information and exhibit pre-conscious elements. It seems to me that consciousness, life and spirit are all related in that consciousness grows in the evolutionary processes and spiritual reality is a by-product of highly developed consciousness of individuals and species. Chardin points out that hominization was accompanied by reflective consciousness, generating individual consciousness and now we are on the cusp of super personalization where each individual is deeply connected to the "Noosphere" - probably structured quantum holography where the whole history of everything resides according to Mitchell. Of course, Chardin being a Jesuit, believes this Omega point of super personalization will allow each to see into the heart of another, or heart of the matter, as the mystics and early adopters, or first fruits, like Jesus could do.
Dear Sam: Thank you a lot for your so very true and correct Commentary!
Already 60 years ago I myself did study Chardin in Germany, who was very much in fashion there at that time!
If you bother to read my above AngeL Muk (Muc is the this airport-name
of Munich) Commentaries, concerning one`s eternal SELFsoul-awareness in
comparison with one`s limited and so short-lived brain-consciousness, and
including LIFE (= Self-Soul) WITHIN absolutely all forms of universal matter-
existence ... then,
even the most ardent matter/mater faith-believer should start considering, if not EVERY human being actually IS a Jesus Christ ...; especially as this New Testament does insist that "ALL humans are from God":
(`God`? See this Bible-Genesis named HVH, that "All-SOUL".)
"God" as this Jewish All-MATTER -existence named "YaHVeH/JeHoVaH/etc.", alias a `Lord` (?) named "ADoNaY".
(Authentic Hebrew, alike this original Koran, always was written only in consonants, without any vocals at all! And every word and name ending with
an "H" is of female gender.)
In the German language there are two kinds of reality: One is alike our reality
here, like in English, but the other one is named "Wirklichkeit", meaning multi-
dimensional (English "big reality"), including that word "wir", meaning "we" and this concept of "wirklich", meaning "truthfully real"!
Greetings! A. L. M.
Truly wonderful
At 7:45 he speaks of the physical world as if it were something other than consciousness itself.
very good episode.
Organisms are contingent SYSTEMS: interactive mutually dependent wholes.
The myriad electrons in a mountain dominate the interaction-potential of our own electrons.
regarding the consciousness of the earth toward the end of the video, human pandemics from viral infections could be one way that the earth might respond, consciously, toward the threat of human activity.
I sure wish he would say more about why Idealism isn't right, other than that it isn't well-accepted in the West. Idealists are saying Panpsychism is the last-ditch effort of materialists to hold onto the concept of matter, whereas what I'm hearing in it is that Panpsychists don't believe in matter, but not in non-duality, either.
Look into Simulation Theory, just to add other entire dimensions to your options. If we do exist in an A.I. generated holographic universe, then all bets are off. Reality is hackable.
Now that I've listened again, it appear he's saying there is no 'solid' matter, but there is matter which always contains mind, the same as there is mind which always involvess matter or form. This is a much better position to me than either of the extremes of materialism or idealism.
everything is inseparable. Its all connected.
His panpsychism can't get away from a dualism. It may not the be the dualism, but certainly a dualism.
Agreed...at minimum other dimensions of reality create a dualism.
Enriching - thanks to you both! (Though, curiously, no mention of Monism or Spinoza.)
thank you very much
The present moment the only solution to all questions.
Dear Mr. de Quincey: Out of every kind of `paranormal` (actually merely natural) personal experiences since early childhood, I myself of course agree with everything you say.
There only is a different use of words, between the two of us: Also, understandably, being
part of this American University business, you do have use this Christian word "spirit" instead of "SELF-SOUL", as Soul is this non-material Nothingness (Hindu "Nirvana") which in Judeo-Christian believes is `something` merely to be judged by their Gods. Thus, in Religions, "SPIRIT" is always used with a conscious mind creating it`s "spiritual" Logos-words, like for instants, this dogma of having to be "selfless", instead of "egoless".
There is a huge difference between this "consciousness" of one`s material brain, this "I-ness", and this wordless, intuitive FEELING, this "awareness" of one`s very own SELF:
Human brain-consciousness dies (to be rematerialised, reincarnated into whichever form and dimension), but one`s human SELFsoul-awareness is timeless and eternal.
Just like any and every SOULself within any and every kind of matter within this Kosmos,
down to the most tiny Quark-Atom:
Thus, this all uniting, eternal ONENESS of all existence which you name "Panpsychism".
In ancient Israelite Hebrew, "All-SOUL" is named HVH ... this material "Nothing"... (but since
in Catholicism named as base of all `inherited sin`), and "All-MATTER" is named YHVH: Thus HVH is creating existence WITHIN (!) YHVH!
This perfect POLARITY of Soul and Matter is named "Yin and Young" in Taoism, or, like
in ancient Egyptian, this SELF was named "Ka", being part of All-SOUL, named "Ba".
Just as in Islam, where this "Ka`Ba"-Shrine is worshipped in Mecca, (Makkah), this town formerly as well named "Ba`Ka".
Etc., etc., etc.
This worldwide, separating Duality would slowly stop to exist and change into harmonious Polarity, if people would finally understand, that, for instants, this united word-concept of "MYSELF" clearly indicates this difference of "MY" as one`s material Ego-being, but that one`s "SELF" is this eternal, timeless and all-uniting, eternal ONENESS of All-SOUL!
But due to this dreadful Angst of their death (thanks to this religious Semite invention of `only one single human life!`) people are ego-absorbed instead of self-absorbed, ego-
assured instead of self-assured, ego-conscious instead of self-aware, etc., etc.
Frightened, depressed, selflessly lost in despair, due to any self-evident self-esteem at all.
Their definitely is a logical and spiritual word-difference between an "ego" and a "self"!
Dear Mr. de Quincey: I merely discovered your name and this video 3 hours ago.
Naturally, myself I will by YOUR "Soul of the Matter"-book!
With true 😍 admiration ... A. L. M.
Great Interview !!!
The rock is part of the universe, the universe is alive. That is also how the rock can be alive. Great video thanks.
The rock is smart enough and conscious to know it is not air.
but most people don't believe the universe is alive...so that logic is unusual. But I think you are right, well I am about 51% certain...these philosophers haven't got very far with this, panpsychism is glued to matter but ideas do not move on a spatial plane and it is inconceivable to see ideas move even on another plane than time, which does not seem like a physical plane, so for science to work on that, it must induce some type of dualism to account for this....so there is a gap for idealism to stroll in, although it doesn't handle the physical well at all. Whitehead says consciousness moves matter around, maybe like time does, it seems to me we have to forget causality to be able to conceive how time, thoughts and matter interact in each other, the wind moves the leaves as much as the leaves move the wind. I think I have to leave it there, no pun intended...I have already gone out on a limb.
Thank you for showing the photo of Alfred North Whitehead, and verifying that indeed, the top of his head is very white.
Seriously, this was another great discussion. Thanks for providing these videos, Jeffrey.
Alot of people attempt to expose the "hard problem" by asking how something so ontologically abstract as consciousness can emerge from purely, non-conscious (presupposed) physical properties about the world. However, what I'm surprised by is the fact that the reverse hasn't been asked: how can a non-conscious world with innate physicality be directly perceived and analyzed by something as abstract consciousness? The only theories that even touch up on something such as this are representationalism and phenomenalism, but even they are limited, as talking about "the veil of perception" only attempts to discover what the perceptive bridge is rather than how the bridge emerges.
There is no non conscious world out there. If it exists, we as conscious being don't and can't know about it to examine of do anything with it?
After studying philosophy for five years I cannot see how an informed honest philosopher can conclude that materialism is true. I think some philosophers cannot tolerate ambiguity and would rather choose over-simplification. Materialism provides this over-simplification of the nature of reality.
Pan-psychism is identical to (if the following are rightly understood) Advaita Vedanta and Nagarjuna's Madhyamaka Buddhist philosophy. The trend, especially in Advaita is actually *dualistic!* ... because the prevailing idea, in both East and Western interpretations, is to escape the wheel of rebirth. As such, it's currently a "world-hating" philosophy (as are literally *all* exoteric religions). They view Maya as pure illusion. It is not. (The Sanskrit word for pure illusion is "mithya") This wasn't what Adi Sankara (aka Shankaracharya) taught at all! Neither did Ramana Maharshi.
I don't think Advaita is like pan-psychism, Advaita does not think that Prakriti has a mind of its own, which would be the case with pan-psychism. Advaita acknowledges prakriti as jada (non-sentient).
Also, instead of being "world-hating", Advaita emphasizes going beyond the duality of love and hate itself.
In a sense with the big bang theory science points towards idealism and not panpsychism.. there was no material or embodiment before the big bang, there was no matter or time or energy. I prefer Idealism as i see it that matter is reducible to perception.
Was he talking about a potential tree uprising at the end there?
*Ask The Mountains* ~ Vangelis and the sweet Stina Nordenstam.
Excellent interview. I wonder what the panpsychist's view is on what exists outside the universe. I have held the view that pure consciousness exists outside the universe. However this would be inconsistent with panspychism which views mind as forming part of what matter is. Is the universe (which is made of mind-matter) all that exists? Beyond the universe there is only a void?
So would you say that mind takes up a physical space then? Also there is no such thing as avoid as nonexistence is non existent, there is not such thing as true nothingness, there is always something, I imagine you picture a void as being a huge empty infinite distance, yet that contradicts the idea of a void which is supposed to be void of anything, either way though no matter what is outside of our universe its all part of the same thing, its all one system as like true nothingness true separability is also impossible, for example think of anything you believe is separate, then ask yourself what it is separated by, is that thing that it is separated by not a connection thus it is not really separate at all? All things share the same identity and it helps to not get caught up on man made labels which are mere tools of measurement, not the reality itself.
In relation to your first question my answer is I don't really know. If panpsychism is true then mind does take up space. If panpsychism is not true then I would say mind does not take up space. With regard to the rest of your comment you appear to be adopting a Parmenidean ontology. Firstly, I used the word "void" to mean what it is traditionally used to denote - pure negation of being. I don't see any difficulty in the proposition that there is a void outside the universe - that us, nothing - not even space or time. I think the confusion arises only at the level of language. When I say "nothing exists" it seems like I am asserting an oxymoron or a contradiction. However, apparent contradiction is rooted in the limitations of our language. When I say nothing "exists" I do not use "exists" in the same way that I use it when applying it to trees or cats or feelings. Metaphysically speaking, I can see no problem with the existence of a void. As far as voids existing inside the universe I am sceptical. Perhaps, one might say it is possible for there to be the absence of matter in parts of the universe but not a void - because space and time would fill the gaps in matter.
being noted now. 20.01.2019
The sound coming from the guests microphone sounds bad.
Great stuff but I fail to see why panpsychicism is incompatible with panentheism and I suppose by extension pandeism since surely what goes on outside of the universe is irrelevant to conditions within it.as I understand it panentheism is effectively pantheism within the universe but with a dimension beyond it and ideas like kabala, Neoplatonism and Gnosticism are effectively kinds of panentheism.so the state of reality in the undivided One is outside of our ken although we may aim to get back to and unify with it.
wow.
Non Duality a truth or a goal?
La-La-La and such is the content of Moonlight well sprinkled with Faery Dust
Daniel Dennett disagrees
Hah I have a video of me talking to a rock.. This rock God had a lot to say.. And it went on poking me with insights for weeks.. Who knew that rocks can talk a lot.. Deep stuff..
Non-dualisme is the answer.
I see, says the blind man.
. . .As he picked up his hammer, and saw.
Labels? all preconditioning. all is consciousness and you are a tiny part of the truth.
non physical mind consciousness underpins humanities. Remembering.the lost truths of indigenous vouce vision and reason may well be studied by all.
Typical human arrogance to think theirs is the only version of Consciousness and the only one possible. A subtle realm only seems that way through our lens of unknowing. There is no physical realm per se, and all realms are integral in their own way.
14:00
Hmm
Sounds like a new religion to me , no facts , no proofs , absolut nothing to make this idea work.
Well most people who are lost need to believe in something ... and this sounds scientific , but it is not.