The Nature of Reality: Bernardo Kastrup on God, Suffering, and Religion
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 19 июн 2024
- Today Bernardo Kastrup joins the podcast to discuss God, suffering, reality and how these operate within the framework of metaphysical idealism (the notion that reality is essentially mental).
Bernardo has a Ph.D. in philosophy (ontology, philosophy of mind) and another Ph.D. in computer engineering (reconfigurable computing, artificial intelligence). He has worked at CERN and the Philips Research Laboratories (where the 'Casimir Effect' of Quantum Field Theory was discovered).
Bernardo was kind enough to spend over two hours discussing consciousness, religion, the nature of Mind (God), purpose and so much more. It was a fascinating discussion that came at the perfect time, as I grapple with questions regarding the purpose of life, pain and what it all means.
I can't thank Bernardo enough for his generosity.
👉 If you'd like to read/watch more from Bernardo, please visit his website: www.bernardokastrup.com/
*******
🔥 SUPPORT:
- Join our Patreon for exclusive content and early podcast episodes: www.patreon.com/user?u=89414398
- PayPal: www.paypal.com/donate/?hosted...
- The DDG Home: www.dadsdoomsdayguide.com/
🎧 LISTEN:
- Apple Podcasts: podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast...
- Spotify: open.spotify.com/show/7oxBqWV...
🤗 SUBSCRIBE / FOLLOW:
- RUclips: / @thedadsdoomsdayguide
- TikTok: / dadsdoomsdayguide
- IG: / sco24
- Twitter: / doomsdaydads
📇 CONTACT:
Podcast@dadsdoomsdayguide.com / 213-465-3252
DISCLAIMER:
Everything expressed here is our opinion and not financial, medical or legal advice. All material provided is for educational purposes only.
*******
00:00:00 Introduction
00:01:07 Scott's struggle with reality / metaphysical idealism
00:04:30 What would materialism say?
00:05:46 The difference between idealism + materialism
00:06:53 Bernardo's journey from materialism / A.I. + consciousness
00:10:19 Ontological Primitive - quantum fields vs consciousness
00:11:51 Solipsism
00:14:09 The hard, combination + decomposition problems
00:16:42 Dissociation in human beings
00:17:24 Amazing studies involving DID patients
00:20:49 We are the alters of Universal Mind.
00:21:54 Why are we segments of UM?
00:25:55 The attributes of Mind/God
00:30:39 Does Mind/God evolve from human experience?
00:33:20 NDEs + psychedelics are glimpses into reunification with Mind
00:35:47 Who are the psychedelic entities?
00:38:29 The paranormal
00:40:39 Demonic possession
00:43:48 Are there transpersonal demons?
00:46:04 Psychedelics: dangers, ego death + insights
00:53:50 Will you lose yourself when you die?
00:58:48 Fear of death + peace
01:02:36 Should everyone experience psychedelics?
01:05:34 How Bernardo began psychedelics + lessons learned
01:10:10 Suffering - Is it a necessity / by design?
01:16:40 Is Bernardo thankful for suffering?
01:18:13 What to tell children about God and Reality
01:22:29 Is Mind outside of space/time? Does it have a beginning and end?
01:27:41 Crossing the dissociative boundary - behind the dashboard
01:33:02 Mathematics are thought templates of the Divine Mind
01:38:16 Mind's telos + religious symbolism
01:44:25 The perversion of religion
01:48:54 Islam preserved vitality
01:53:00 How science destroyed religion - Your life is not about you.
02:04:50 The way back to religion will be through world wars
02:07:23 Pay attention - Do not fight Mind
02:16:16 The self-help industry - Deepak Chopra vs Tony Robbins
02:19:07 Bernardo recaps our nihilistic condition
02:19:44 How confident is Bernardo that he's correct?
02:22:31 Humanity and the rock of truth
02:28:15 Amazing similarities between religions
02:33:28 Debates with materialists - Sam Harris, Richard Dawkins, Patricia Churchland...
02:40:32 Where to find Bernardo
*******
Be sure to check out the podcast virtually anywhere!
👀 RUMBLE: rumble.com/c/c-1763071
🎧 APPLE PODCASTS: podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast...
🎧 SPOTIFY: open.spotify.com/show/7oxBqWV...
🤗 SUBSCRIBE!
/ @thedadsdoomsdayguide
📱 SOCIAL MEDIA
TIKTOK: / dadsdoomsdayguide
INSTAGRAM: / sco24
📇 CONTACT:
Podcast@dadsdoomsdayguide.com / 213-465-3252
DISCLAIMER:
Everything expressed here is our opinion and not financial, medical or legal advice. All material provided is for educational purposes only. 
Развлечения
I have listened to dozens of dozens of hours of Bernardo and this was one of the best ever ❤
Thank you BOTH!
Thank you for watching!
@@TheDadsDoomsdayGuideThanks too you❤❤
There is too much suffering it is overwhelming i am soooooooooo tired, i cannot suffer forever: thought of infinite suffering is U B E A R A B L E !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
These low radar Kastrup interviews are always the best
Glad you enjoyed it!
100% :)
I totally agree with you 🙂 I am always so happy to find one like these. I only wish I could have a conversation like this with Bernardo myself you know because I have questions that others never think to ask. But I am not a "famous"/public RUclipsr - just a fascinated spectator.
But questions like: B. K says Consciousness is spontaneous and not self-reflecting/meta-conscious but then also claims that it is discovering itself through our human experiences with suffering etc. But how would Consciousness have any "use for" that (the human experiences) if it can't contemplate, meta-cognize or self-reflect as he claims? How would that be of use or value if all human experience/suffering just amounted to ever more "simple" spontaneous experience within Consciousness? It seems like an obvious contradiction that no interviewer ever catches or ask about. It drives me up the walls :-)
@@skemsen Thanks for watching the discussion!
I guess I don't view those two ideas as a contradiction. Here I believe he discusses his thoughts and how they relate to one another: 1:38:46
@@TheDadsDoomsdayGuide Thank you very much for taking the time to reply. I guess I am just struggling in my intellect to get a grip of his concepts here. He had an interesting debate with Rupert Spira where it was clear, that they agree on almost everything except the core of this: Is Consciousness evolving or not, is it in essence the same always or is it changing. That seems pretty important and the most basic of all on this "subject", and I long for an in depth discussion on this. Also I can't understand how they can fundamentally agree and both have had personal "glimpses"/realizations of this true nature of existence/Consciousness and then differ on that even more fundamental issue of weather Consciousness is evolving or as Rupert Spira claims at its core always just one same not changing thing that is "love". That to me kind of suggest even these two humans however brilliant and inspiring don't REALLY know what reality/Consciousness fundamentally is. Do you see what I mean?
Bernardo At this point is Basicly a Mystic Desguised as a Scientist....His Level of Deeper Understading from someone who didn't come from a Spiritual Path is Just Incredible.
It was a pleasure to speak with him. This has been one of my favorite interviews thus far.
The Bernardos of this world are a true blessing to humanity, thank you for this, great channel, keep up the good work 👏
Amen!
1:48:54. .. He is in the process to become muslim .... lol ... but seriously ...
Great and lowly are RELATIVE. 😉
Incidentally, Slave, are you VEGAN? 🌱
How? They dont change the world. Constant hypothesis. With a bit of defeatist theme. If they all agreed yes. But they don't.
A my God this man is a real GENIUS I have been hearing Bernardo for more than a year mainly by his conversations with Rupert Spira but I have to confess that it was very difficult for me to understand most of his ideas. But just in the last month I have been paying more attention and hearing with more concentration his wonderful statements about science religion spirituality and the ULTIMATE REALITY of existence. I will not only like and share this video clip but also I will watch it may many Tienes. Thank you so much!!
This talk introduced me to Bernardo and also this channel. As someone with a deep love of science and also nature - I’ve resented the rift between the two arenas when my own (and many others) experience and intuition reveals the connection through US.
The mind is clearly not inside the brain.
Superficially, Bernardo Kastrup SEEMS to be promulgating the most ancient spiritual teaching of Advaita Vedanta (as found in the Upanishadic texts of India) but due to reasons I won't go into at length here, his understanding is rather flawed.
If one carefully listens to any of his monologues or interview videos, it is obvious (at least it is obvious to those who are truly enlightened) that he regularly confuses and conflates discrete consciousness (as emerging from the neural networks of animals) and UNIVERSAL Consciousness (which is the all-pervasive, eternal ground of all being, more appositely termed "The Tao", "Brahman" or "Infinite Awareness").
He also believes in (limited) freedom of volition, which is, of course, ludicrous, and his understanding of suffering is truly infantile, which is unfortunate, since the eradication of suffering is the goal of life.
In order to PROPERLY understand the distinction between the two aforementioned categories of consciousness, you are welcome to email me for a copy of "A Final Instruction Sheet for Humanity", which are the most authoritative and accurate precepts extant. My address is on my RUclips homepage.
However, my main criticism of Kastrup is not with his metaphysics, it is, rather, his METAETHICS. He is, objectively speaking, afflicted with a demonic mentality, as demonstrated with his support of all things contrary to Dharma (the law, and societal duties), such as egalitarianism, feminism, homosexuality, and socialism.
In a recent interview, for example, he displayed abject ignorance when discussing the topic of animal consumption. Hopefully, he will one day realize how incredibly hypocritical he is in this regards, and become a compassionate VEGAN. 🌱
After all, to criticize Bernardo for his teachings being only, let's say, ninety percent accurate, would be silly, since, compared with almost every other person who has ever lived, his philosophical understanding is fairly sound. Yet, what is the point of being even TOTALLY correct about metaphysics, when one's metaethics and normative ethics is fundamentally flawed?
Furthermore, Bernardo has admitted that he has struggled with mental health issues for several decades. I would suggest he flee to the loving arms of an ACTUAL spiritual master in order to learn Dharma (as well, of course, to correct his flawed metaphysics).
Peace!
P.S. It seems Bernie Boy has BLOCKED at least one of my RUclips accounts, so if you are reading this, you are indeed fortunate. ;)
So you say you are "truly enlightened"? Hmmm . . . . how so? @@ReverendDr.Thomas
@@ReverendDr.ThomasI am an Advaita Vedantian practitioner and it is you who is making a mistake here. As you know, Advaita Vedanta means nondual. The moment you say there are different consciousnesses, you violate non-duality and create an unnecessary dualism when there is none.
There is only one Consciousness, there is only one infinity. Only Brahman.
@@mkor7, I am your lord, your god, and your MASTER.
Therefore, whenever you send me a message or reply to a comment of mine, it is IMPERATIVE that you address me accordingly.
E.g. “How are you, Master?”
Is that understood, SLAVE?
You're a great host! One of the few people who've interviewed Bernardo who actually seems to understand what he's saying, right on.
Thank you! Bernardo does a great job framing his ideas so people can understand depending on where they're coming from. Appreciate you checking out the video!
Fully concurred.
I've seen countless interviews with Bernardo and this one is my absolute favorite. A job well done.
Thank you for watching.
I love Bernardo. I've watched dozens of his interviews and read some of his books and am always amazed.
Superficially, Bernardo Kastrup SEEMS to be promulgating the most ancient spiritual teaching of Advaita Vedanta (as found in the Upanishadic texts of India) but due to reasons I won't go into at length here, his understanding is rather flawed.
If one carefully listens to any of his monologues or interview videos, it is obvious (at least it is obvious to those who are truly enlightened) that he regularly confuses and conflates discrete consciousness (as emerging from the neural networks of animals) and UNIVERSAL Consciousness (which is the all-pervasive, eternal ground of all being, more appositely termed "The Tao", "Brahman" or "Infinite Awareness").
He also believes in (limited) freedom of volition, which is, of course, ludicrous, and his understanding of suffering is truly infantile, which is unfortunate, since the eradication of suffering is the goal of life.
In order to PROPERLY understand the distinction between the two aforementioned categories of consciousness, you are welcome to email me for a copy of "A Final Instruction Sheet for Humanity", which are the most authoritative and accurate precepts extant. My address is on my RUclips homepage.
However, my main criticism of Kastrup is not with his metaphysics, it is, rather, his METAETHICS. He is, objectively speaking, afflicted with a demonic mentality, as demonstrated with his support of all things contrary to Dharma (the law, and societal duties), such as egalitarianism, feminism, homosexuality, and socialism.
In a recent interview, for example, he displayed abject ignorance when discussing the topic of animal consumption. Hopefully, he will one day realize how incredibly hypocritical he is in this regards, and become a compassionate VEGAN. 🌱
After all, to criticize Bernardo for his teachings being only, let's say, ninety percent accurate, would be silly, since, compared with almost every other person who has ever lived, his philosophical understanding is fairly sound. Yet, what is the point of being even TOTALLY correct about metaphysics, when one's metaethics and normative ethics is fundamentally flawed?
Furthermore, Bernardo has admitted that he has struggled with mental health issues for several decades. I would suggest he flee to the loving arms of an ACTUAL spiritual master in order to learn Dharma (as well, of course, to correct his flawed metaphysics).
Peace!
P.S. It seems Bernie Boy has BLOCKED at least one of my RUclips accounts, so if you are reading this, you are indeed fortunate. ;)
Suffering (the mental anguish of our psychological drama) seems to be the process through which we question our origins. Feeling pain seems to be how we remember who we are, the dissociative alters of the great mind. Feeling pain seems to be the process through which we transcend life trapped in our ego to life as a part of something larger. Quantum physics describes the physics of the transcended life. A field of infinite possibilities vs the one possibility that the alter ego focuses on because it’s all it knows. Our identity centered in awareness vs our identity centered in our ego or adaptive alter ego.
🎯
That's a great comment ✌️
Great insight Tina....thank you and namaste friend!
Can we converse in private?
I agree Tina! Well said!
At 70, my mind has convinced me of one truth, no one really knows anything
Love your wisdom old man ❤
I know something.
I know that I am aware!
I know nothing other than what I feel
Wooow...the last 40 minutes was one of the most enlightening and penetrating revelations I have ever heard.
God bless you
Love and warmest gratitude,
*"The Best Insight comes in the Face of Incredible Suffering!"*
Thank you! ❤️
Bernardo is my hero these days and this was a tender and touching talk. I would love to hear more from you both on the growing body of NDE accounts, where “nothing is lost” seems to be literal.
Thank you for watching! It is a favorite episode of mine. Bernardo is an awesome and gracious guest. His words meant a lot.
The thing I keep thinking of these days is how most NDEs report downloading info that shows how absolutely everything that happens in space time is perfect…it is ALL working together for the good. It is perfect. Hard to wrap one’s mind around that seeing the suffering in the word. But I suppose outside of space time it makes
Sense. Too much for our little minds.
It’s by far my favorite talk with BK. Your humility and questions were so down to earth and useful. Thank you for this gift.
I just subbed !
Superficially, Bernardo Kastrup SEEMS to be promulgating the most ancient spiritual teaching of Advaita Vedanta (as found in the Upanishadic texts of India) but due to reasons I won't go into at length here, his understanding is rather flawed.
If one carefully listens to any of his monologues or interview videos, it is obvious (at least it is obvious to those who are truly enlightened) that he regularly confuses and conflates discrete consciousness (as emerging from the neural networks of animals) and UNIVERSAL Consciousness (which is the all-pervasive, eternal ground of all being, more appositely termed "The Tao", "Brahman" or "Infinite Awareness").
He also believes in (limited) freedom of volition, which is, of course, ludicrous, and his understanding of suffering is truly infantile, which is unfortunate, since the eradication of suffering is the goal of life.
In order to PROPERLY understand the distinction between the two aforementioned categories of consciousness, you are welcome to email me for a copy of "A Final Instruction Sheet for Humanity", which are the most authoritative and accurate precepts extant. My address is on my RUclips homepage.
However, my main criticism of Kastrup is not with his metaphysics, it is, rather, his METAETHICS. He is, objectively speaking, afflicted with a demonic mentality, as demonstrated with his support of all things contrary to Dharma (the law, and societal duties), such as egalitarianism, feminism, homosexuality, and socialism.
In a recent interview, for example, he displayed abject ignorance when discussing the topic of animal consumption. Hopefully, he will one day realize how incredibly hypocritical he is in this regards, and become a compassionate VEGAN. 🌱
After all, to criticize Bernardo for his teachings being only, let's say, ninety percent accurate, would be silly, since, compared with almost every other person who has ever lived, his philosophical understanding is fairly sound. Yet, what is the point of being even TOTALLY correct about metaphysics, when one's metaethics and normative ethics is fundamentally flawed?
Furthermore, Bernardo has admitted that he has struggled with mental health issues for several decades. I would suggest he flee to the loving arms of an ACTUAL spiritual master in order to learn Dharma (as well, of course, to correct his flawed metaphysics).
Peace!
P.S. It seems Bernie Boy has BLOCKED at least one of my RUclips accounts, so if you are reading this, you are indeed fortunate. ;)
The best podcast I have seen in my life!!! All the questions in my mind have been fully addressed by this genius!! The depth, clarity and articulation is mind blowing 👌 His other podcast with Rupert Spira is also amazing 👏 thanks 👍
Thanks for watching! Glad you enjoyed it.
I agree
I listen to Bernardo every chance I get. As an interviewer, your willingness to be completely open and even vulnerable works so well to help me in my continued efforts to understand Bernardo's ideas. I mean this respectfully: the premise of your podcast and the banner image of the gun and knife contradict (for me, with recent experiences of truly random violence by weapons) your openness to the knowledge that life is not just about material gain or ego defense. Can we protect the ones we love by not ONLY physical means? Can we protect them by demonstrating that life is also nonmaterial?
Hi Cynthia. Thank you for the comment. I'm glad you enjoyed the interview. I think for us we come at "protecting the ones we love" from two different directions. One being the physical and one being spiritual (if that label works). From our own experiences in life we do value the ability to protect loved ones through things like martial arts and weapon use. But we also acknowledge the spiritual side of things and grapple with what that means for our lives (purpose, suffering, love, ego transcendence, etc). Because the show does cover a wide range of topics, from doomsday scenarios to conversations like we had with Bernardo, it can be tough to have podcast imagery that encapsulates all of these things. The banner's original idea was simply to show survival gear, and we've actually been working on some new imagery to update the look and feel. We do hesitate though, to give the false impression that topics like Bernardo's are the main focus of the show. We do enjoy this line of discussion very much, but we also cover a lot of other things such as surviving nuclear explosions, hostage situations and so on.
I hope that answers your question somewhat. And thank you again for taking the time to check out the podcast and comment. It's much appreciated.
Once again, THIS one is my favorite... although it does appear that what ever my interest is at the time, or that I am pondering something, that is the video or audio that pops up out of 'no where'. I love how there is no end to Bernardo's ability to either validate or rouse/stimulate and deepen my process in this amazing dream.
As a father who cares so much, you can do a great job with those console dials! Having young children comes with fear as we feel their vulnerability, and shows how much you care. I trust you!
The "Title of The Show" led me in... I experience "a lot of suffering & use it as an Offering for others in need!" Praise The Lord!
Thank you! ❤️
It is a must to repeat myself: Bernardo Kastrup is fabulous and I’m so glad to have found him through Rupert Spira, another Star, in my view.
Intuition happens to me frequently when I question myself about some unknown matter and out off no where the right idea comes to my mind and inspiration also comes so quickly, specially when I’m trying to explain a point and the answer comes as a flash. These “tools” have been very useful and I’m thankful for them, primitive their origin may be.
Superficially, Bernardo Kastrup SEEMS to be promulgating the most ancient spiritual teaching of Advaita Vedanta (as found in the Upanishadic texts of India) but due to reasons I won't go into at length here, his understanding is rather flawed.
If one carefully listens to any of his monologues or interview videos, it is obvious (at least it is obvious to those who are truly enlightened) that he regularly confuses and conflates discrete consciousness (as emerging from the neural networks of animals) and UNIVERSAL Consciousness (which is the all-pervasive, eternal ground of all being, more appositely termed "The Tao", "Brahman" or "Infinite Awareness").
He also believes in (limited) freedom of volition, which is, of course, ludicrous, and his understanding of suffering is truly infantile, which is unfortunate, since the eradication of suffering is the goal of life.
In order to PROPERLY understand the distinction between the two aforementioned categories of consciousness, you are welcome to email me for a copy of "A Final Instruction Sheet for Humanity", which are the most authoritative and accurate precepts extant. My address is on my RUclips homepage.
However, my main criticism of Kastrup is not with his metaphysics, it is, rather, his METAETHICS. He is, objectively speaking, afflicted with a demonic mentality, as demonstrated with his support of all things contrary to Dharma (the law, and societal duties), such as egalitarianism, feminism, homosexuality, and socialism.
In a recent interview, for example, he displayed abject ignorance when discussing the topic of animal consumption. Hopefully, he will one day realize how incredibly hypocritical he is in this regards, and become a compassionate VEGAN. 🌱
After all, to criticize Bernardo for his teachings being only, let's say, ninety percent accurate, would be silly, since, compared with almost every other person who has ever lived, his philosophical understanding is fairly sound. Yet, what is the point of being even TOTALLY correct about metaphysics, when one's metaethics and normative ethics is fundamentally flawed?
Furthermore, Bernardo has admitted that he has struggled with mental health issues for several decades. I would suggest he flee to the loving arms of an ACTUAL spiritual master in order to learn Dharma (as well, of course, to correct his flawed metaphysics).
Peace!
P.S. It seems Bernie Boy has BLOCKED at least one of my RUclips accounts, so if you are reading this, you are indeed fortunate. ;)
What he said is somewhat true. Every experience no matter what. Always comes from from inside! You can never experience anything outside of our selves!!! If it's happiness sadness are from within us. Even if you touch something you don't feel the object that you are touching. You are only feeling the sensations in your fingers touching the object. What you see what you hear. Is all within yourself!!! Very simple. You can't experience anything outside ones self. Impossible!!!! All experience is within yourself. Once you understand that. You are on a good way to seek on from there. Great video thanks for sharing this with us ✌️🙏🔥🙏
Michael Singer was the teacher that brought me to the clarity needed to understand this discussion.
Really awesome talk.
Thank you for checking it out!
I agree everything come from our minds. The Buddhists also believe it. Human beings evolve and have purpose here on earth
I became a Baha'i 50 years ago and it is a new world religion that blends ideas from Eastern and Western for global connection. It looks to science and mysticism to better guide our spiritual awareness. The Idealist view is there in Bahai. As I grow in awareness I find it there also. So many layers.
As a Roman Catholic I permeate my day with ego transcendence through praying the holy rosary, praying the divine office - 5 separate prayers with readings distributed through the day and night, the angelus prayer 3 times a day, and daily mass. Catholicism doesn’t compartmentalism to only Sunday morn.
Thank so much Sir For Inviting such a legend!
Bernardo Kastrup sir, need a Big platform to put his points.
We have a such Gem but, no one is paying Attention to him.
Love From India sir🙏!!
Thank you again!
It's been said elsewhere, but I would expect to see him on Rogan or Lex's podcast sometime in the future. Something like that would surly expand his already increasing popularity.
Thank you for the kind words and checking out the conversation!
Great guest. Thank you for sharing such profound insights and paradigm shift.
Love BERNARDO! Honest - perceptive- truth - ALL IS MENTALITY! !
“The problem with stop believing in religion (or God for what it matters), is people will believe in anything” J.K. Chesterton.
The effort “scientists” do to go around God is simply exhausting.
THAT that we call God is an Infinite Field of Energy.
Consciousness is the Mind of THAT/God.
So God apparently fragmented (Big Bang) Its Mind into tiny atoms or particles or starseeds in order to be able to experience Its own Dream.
Each tiny fractal is God's Mind-ego.
Ego is a lower mental energy that believes that it is a body, a sim character, believes that has a life and that it is a doer, in the Dream of God that only is an illusion, it's a movie-illusion full with sim characters, and everything is happening spontaneously.
You are God but in an egoic state believing that it's having a life.
Awakening is when THAT/God wants to Awaken Itself to change Its Paradigm.
There is Only THAT that we call God.
Only One Consciousness that is the Mind of God.
And the tiny fractals are de egos through which THAT experience Its
own Dream.
THAT is all the sim characters, all the angels, archangels, demons, ascended masters, extraterrestrials, Christs and all the rocks, insects, plants, animals, including all the Gods and Goddesses, gurus, sages, masters, any kind of beings, the good and bads, the rapists, the murders, Etc...
This is the interview that answers all the questions I’ve always wanted to ask him!!!!
Glad you enjoyed it!
Thank you both for this gem of a podcast 🌈🙏
One of the best conversations I've heard in years.
Bernardo....
An embodied sage. An unspoken modern fluff free mystic....
I've been around the block 30y (on a path search of truth) never come across a human whos earned my trust.
I lost trust in life completely. There was no turning back for me.
Beings like Bernardo validate my own awakening and restore my capacity keep moving forward
Thanks for watching!
Bernardo shares we never mourn our dreams.
Thanks for this wonderful interview, Bernardo for me is the best philosopher of our time, his arguments are flawless and is always a delight listening to his thoughts, kudos to the interviewer you did a magnificent job sir, thanks again 🙏
Glad you enjoyed it!
Thank you both this is so juicy! Resonates well with me !! Just wanted to add at about 1h 40 ish you spoke about sin…. So sin is an old archery term that means to miss the mark… to miss the mark, you don’t get the pot of gold…. A Miss take (mistake) so take again and do better so as not to sin… this take you WIÎN !!! There is only one sin…. To believe that we are separate from God! And I will close by blessing each one of you and the entire Muslim communities who pray and live their spirituality non ending ! Love from France
That was a glorious two hours. So insightful. Thank you.
Thank you for watching!
Thank you 🙏🏻 You asked questions I’ve been pondering especially since my mom passed. Enthralling talk.
Thank you for watching!
🙏🏼❤️🙏🏼 Praying for You in your Loss...In Jesus's Name! Amen! Have subscribed to your Channel! 👍👌👏
Haven’t even watched yet, just coming from your Shorts, and already know I’m gonna love it based on the responses Bernardo was giving to your questions. So… thank you! 🙏🏻 Bernardo never fails to enlighten and uncover Truth.
Hope you enjoy!
Bernardo's comments aboit allowing nature to work through you and how your life is not about you gave me an insight into what Camus' was really pointing to in hos work The Myth of Sisyphus. Sisyphus is happy not because he gets his way, he is happy because he is relieved of the burden of thinking that pushing the rock up the hill for eternity is about himself. He realizes himself as part of a larger process, as a slave to the processes of nature, and through this enslavement he is free to finally be with himself and the rock. This is the way in which Sisyphus is happy, not in the sense of getting what he wants, but in the sense of finding the meaning behind suffering. Finding that his suffering was not about him.
The transpersonal demons section is great. It really happens and we can narrow the interaction.
Incredible Bernardo is the best modern day philosopher, I've really enjoyed his books
McGhilchrist also. He was a game changer for me.
Agreed!
@@TheDadsDoomsdayGuide Well done on the interview. I really enjoyed it.
@@PromoMIAR Awesome to hear! Thanks for watching.
Brilliant discussion!!
Thanks for watching!
I think this wisdom just saved me
He does a better job at explaining why "consciousness" and "mind" are fundamental than just about anyone else I've ever heard, certainly does a better job than can. I began as a "seeker", became disillusioned with it when all I found was a bunch of charlatans, woo and wild speculation. I then became a material reductionist and I was never happier. However when I began to contemplate things such as space being infinite finite and how time either jad a starting point or it just infinitely regresses I realized that rationality and logic can only take you so far. That opened me up to looking at reality from a certain perspective ad brought me to the conclusion that mind gives rise to matter and not the other way around. I can "see" why it's so but I can't articulate it. We truly are one mind and that brings with it a host of problems.
It's the first time I understand Bernardo and it's not for lack of trying. Thank you for this interview, which allows non-phd listeners to understand his complex thinking.
You're very welcome!
Thank you ! I think was Just time for this Kind of communication ......wonderfull!
Be fully awakened with your full consciousness. Appreciate every things around us. Have compassionate and wisdoms will very well on your way. 🙏🙏🙏👍👍👍
This is great. Reminds me of McKenna's idea that the universe is moving toward novelty.
Life comes down to Pain and Joy!!
I love Bernardo Kastrup. It's amazing to see someone explain a deep metaphysical truth in a scientific and analytical way. Very impressive. And such a great interviewer as well. I've watched plenty of Kastrup interviews and this is one of the best. Good work 👏
Glad you enjoyed it!
This is one of the best of Bernardo Kastrup.
I think I said the same thing to the last video of him I watched.
What a wonderful piece! I am impressed by Bernardo's view on religion.
I as well. I enjoyed that part especially.
Amazing interview. Thank you so much :)
Our pleasure!
I found this gem late. The theory of the collective unconscious comes to mind.
one of the best BK interviews ive watched, great job both of you!
Glad you enjoyed it!
Thank you for sharing all this fantastic knowledge.
Thanks for taking the time to watch!
The most wonderful speech interview I have ever seen.Please share with other people.Fantastically thought provoking ,mind teasing Talk......Thanks. Bernardo....wow
First of all let me thank you for a great interview. I've watched most interviews with Bernardo as many of his views are similar to mine and your interview is one of the few that actually asked genuinely searching questions of the kind I wanted asked in so many others, but their often dull interviewers never got round to it!
Most of what Bernardo says here is excellent. I find myself grating with only one significant segment - "your life is not about you." I beg to differ. I think that a really important part of what the chthonic mind or mind of nature is "trying to do through you" is precisely those things which urge you towards fulfilment and happiness...and in profoundly idiosyncratic and individual ways. This is no kind of "one size fits all" situation. Sure, the ego can obfuscate, but I would suggest that everyone can identify, and know, certain profound urges towards their own species of happiness and fulfilment that arise from "who knows where". It's kind of mixing things up a bit to say that this is "not you." It may not be the surface, socially conditioned you, but it is most certainly "you" nonetheless. They are not 'impersonal'. I can clearly identify several such points in my own nature and it is (mostly) not along the lines of "nature struggling to do something through me that I don't want" so much as nature struggling to do something through me that is by no means trivially easy to achieve...but that is a whole different story. Perhaps now and then there might arise in people a pressure from nature that they don't want or which is not recognizable to them as a pressure for fulfilment of their own unique individuality, but I don't think that's common. It would make no sense for nature to operate that way for the most part. This is why NDEs, for example, are so idiosyncratic and yet almost always "make sense" to the NDEr her/himself.
"If you drop dead tomorrow, nature will just find someone else." See this is one pivot where I disagree. I think the life urges arising from chthonic mind are individual and unique enough that it **can't** find someone else. The "someone else" would actually need to be sufficiently similar to you that it would in effect be a reinstantiation of very similar life variables, in other words a kind of reincarnation, or at least a "near" reincarnation. To put a little flesh on this, if Elvis had dropped dead at age 7, nature would have needed to craft someone else "pretty Elvis like" in order to fulfil those potentials that pressed for expression, otherwise they would simply pass unexpressed. They can't be rendered through a Billy Joel or a Paul McCartney, just as theirs could not be rendered through Elvis Presley. If Einstein had died at age 8, it might be tempting to believe that someone else would have come up with the Theory of Relativity, but I seriously doubt it. Rather, we would have something else, and those potentials would pass unexpressed...unless and until nature shaped a creature, once again, that was somewhat akin to the nature of Einstein. Does that make sense?
Thanks for watching. Glad you enjoyed the interview despite the parts you disagreed with!
@Green Sleeves - Very interesting points! I think you kind of hit the nail on the head for me too here. It doesn't make sense or feels intuitively true to me either to claim on the one hand that everything is mental this one Consciousness whos "goal/aim/impetus" is to know itself, then for it to create all of our existence through said disassociation process and then on the other hand say "your life is not about you". Because if "you" in essence IS this one Consciousness trying to know itself wouldn't it be obvious that each and every one of it's own created expressions of disassociation - i.e. every one of us humans, animals etc. - are about itself and thus about "us"? Aren't each of us equally important "means" to that end of that goal?
In other words: If what we are is basically "God"/Consciousness experiencing/trying to know itself then how can life not be about us? We are IT! B.K. to me makes us humans sound like disposable instruments/experiments to a large project and that is indifferent to how its own specific disassociated expressions are doing. If they don't serve the purpose of this larger fundamental "project" of knowing itself just discard them and use another one. It sounds and feels horrible, cold and intellect-driven in perception and conclusion to me. It sounds and feels like the unconditional love, that Rupert Spira (B.K. also debated him on YT) is defining Consciousness as, is totally void from B.K.'s concept and theory. Anyway would love to hear your thoughts on this.
@@skemsen Yeah, unless there is a purpose of life that ties in with our own individual meanings and dreams and talents, it's hard to see how it could be meaningful at all. The whole idea of living your life for some other entity or great collective system of some kind is fatally absurd. Bernardo is good on many points, but he's not great on this imo. I think life is a "difference engine" - it seeks precisely what is unique and different about you, in order to maximise that. If something is going to survive it is likely to be that unique difference. Bernardo did say in this talk that nothing is lost, which I mostly agree with, except that in his Analytic Idealism there *is* something that is lost which is the dissociation. But this dissociation is what allows "other" to exist, like the host's relationship with his father. He may have a "galactic laugh" to realize that he was his father all along, but I suspect that he would have a fierce galactic cry too, because if your child / parent / partner is simply you, how can you sustain relation at all? Maybe, just maybe, there is some kind of union-in-difference possible in a melded post-mortem state, the fruit of the difference engine perhaps, but at any rate, Bernardo did not address this here.
I was drifting off while listening and was going to pipe up and reply. This conversation was so lively.
Brilliant. Thank you 🙏
In working with the dying, when the person is anxious of when, the suggestion maybe you are dead already? Vitality immediately happens. The thought maybe we are already on the other side time and space is transcended into the present. Benardo Kastrup shares the fear is not knowing what happens next. He reassures it is Ok not to know.. and God (of our understanding) can be confused where we are at the most important component of the inner and outer feedback loop.
Another masterclass from Dr bernardo
This is the first full interview with BK I’ve listened to and Boy, I am impressed! I don’t know who did it, but somewhere someone did a bit of a hit piece on him and totally mis-read & misrepresented him! I’m thrilled to hear from you & Bernardo directly, so thanks for your content & sharing it.
Thank you for watching! Glad you enjoyed it.
One of your best Bernado, thanks to both.
Thanks for watching!
This was a great Bernardo interview because you don't have a high level science or philosophy background, so you get to some very practical topics.
one of the best talks ive heard including Bernardo! great questions man, thanks for being so open during this
Happy you enjoyed it. Thank you for watching and taking the time to comment!
1980 had the world's record for playing Astroids, played for over 24hrs and stopped with hundreds of extra ships stored up. After record was beaten I let everyone play until all ships were gone; took some time. Old now, have observed the gaming industry go crazy. 80s you'd be the man if you had Atari or any other console. Only had 2 I believe.... Thanks so much for helping put this puzzle together. Hide and seek to find pieces of life, than you have to put together what you've found. This video is a piece... Good luck to you all...
Bernardo ❤
💫Great interview 💫
Thank you. Great conversation. And yes - life is not about you. 🙏
Thanks for watching!
I want to weigh in also, this is the 2nd show or video from your channel I have watched and I absolutely concur with what I'm hearing. I have found your content to be REAL, INTELLIGENT AND REALITIVE... you got str8 FIRE on this channel... THERE IS ALOT OF SEEIOUSLY SOUND WISDOM BEING SHARED AND DISCUSSED HERE... my brain feels STRETCHED after this one though 😂, THAT'S A GOOD THING...
Thanks for watching! Hope you stick around for more.
I am so glad I have had over 17 surgeries by the age of 40. I am learning alright. It is beyond me how anyone takes this nonsense seriously. But I am sure BK got it all right. He has the knowledge, the mechanisms and the why and how….
It seems to me that Kastrup is overconfident about some of his conclusions. I mean: can we really infer that Mind at Large is not meta-conscious? Can we really know that death involves the dissolution of the alter? Can we really know that Mind is not infinitely beyond the universe? I think we have to be sceptical about some of the informed guesses.
Awesome show!
Thank you!
This man is a genius. 💯 %
That was an amazing interview and has really expanded my view of reality. Bernardo was next level, as always, but the interviewer asked particularly excellent questions, so the combination was incredible!
Glad you enjoyed it! And thank you for watching.
Bernardo taps into the Internet audience with dexterity. He quotes Alan Watts, Terence McKenna et al. Like... far out, man.
We need to set aside what we think we know and what we've been programmed to think. And become Meta conscious of the difference between those things and who I am.
WOW!!! THANKS!
This is so good… life changing potential good.
Thanks!
You bet! Thank you for checking out the interview. The support is much appreciated!
wow - thanks for this podcast. Thanks a lot.
Our pleasure!
I've been listening to Bernardo for years now and he's quite brilliant -- in a similar sense to how a light is, not in the sense of an intellectual powerhouse (though imho he's that too). One statement of his that intrigued me was that there are many children alive today who are, effectively, octogenarians in young bodies. That's the first time I've heard him say this. Does anyone know of anywhere he expands on this observation? If you do, please let me know.
Hi John, it's actually the other way around, octogenarians that are still like young minds that have never paid attention to the impersonal self and thus never found out what nature wants to do through them. (02:07:23 Pay attention - Do not fight Mind)
@@r.t.vandenberg1833 Thanks. I searched for what he actually said, and it's at about 2:09:30. He says: "...there are many children that are octogenarians today". Which on the face of it sounds like what I thought. But in context, I think you're right. It's just slightly infelicitous phrasing. He could perhaps have said "... there are many octogenarians that are children today" and it would have been clearer. But he didn't, and I misinterpreted, and am grateful for your observation because it makes it consistent with everything I've heard him say in the past.
The question was about discernment when fighting the wave versus going with the wave: Bernardo answered it's about listening to the wave, because our inner lives are so polluted with narrative, we are so busy with our mental trash that we became deaf to the obvious movements of the impersonal within us. We know the impersonal by feeling the impersonal feelings, by thinking the impersonal thoughts, (even when we manage to do that, we think is ours). Then he said: started to realize that was something within him going on that wasn't Bernardo, it didn't care about his personal needs or his wishes. So, if we pick up on this signs, if we suffered enough, grow up enough, we are old enough, and if we pay attention, we discern it. Then he opens parentheses to mention that today some children have the mind of an octogenarian (gifted kids, Crystal children), I guess they don't need to go through the process of suffering and maturity to acquire discernment.
That's what I understood what Bernardo wanted to convey, I hope it clarified your doubt.
Can you please ask Bernardo to give the references of the Harward study and Swedish study. I would love to see then. I am a psychiatrist. A big fan of Bernardo. He's amazing.
Read Michael Singer books to learn how to loose your control. There is similarities what Singer says & what Bernardo takes about regarding “let it go” & “resist”
asking great questions!!
Thank you!
That I sorta understand any of this is...a Miracle...
PS: I think Bernardo just explained Hamlet
and The Clash to me.
This video is a masterpiece! It's more than a bible.
Thanks for watching!
We perceive the world through our emotions And all of the physical sensations that we came Into a body in order to be able to have first-hand experience of living In a dual 3 dimensional world. But we existed before that.
ty )
Awesome
Beautiful ❤
Thanks for watching!
Really amazing conversation as always with Bernardo.
I wonder how many of these type of conversations take place publicly in Saudi Arabia.
Perhaps it is the 'vitality' of wishing to avoid being stoned to death in 2023
😂😂😂
Tremendous
Glad I'm not the only one who can see Sam Harris for what he is. Very narrow minded.
If disassociation blinds us to what is in front of us, can we say that the ego is the associating mode in which what we call normal humans exist that traps the “mind beyond” into this experience of life?
We need to converse in private.have you seen the "Jung to live by "channel and Johanaan Raatz channel?...even Anthony Peake touches on these ideas
What I understand is that "we" have a Soul, and this Soul is like an USB that contains all the stored, accumulated information of all the experiences, all the knowledge, that we have through all the lifetimes.
When the soul gets purified, when all that information gets absorbed by Consciousness, there will be a clean slate that will liberate you from 3D.
But the principle reason we come back, is because of the sense of being a body, the sense that something is missing, something you still want, something is pending, or feeling guilty about something.
The unexistent, illusory ego, that only is an idea, must be willing to surrender, to disappear, to die.
As we are Pure Awareness and Awareness is Silence.
Then the ego is a mental energy that believes that it is the body, believes that it talks, eats, suffers, enjoys, thinks, feels, walks, believes that has a life, etc.
That means that You are the believer.
You are the one that has to surrender itself.
This doesn't mean that you can't keep living. It means that mentally you must not have resistance.
Life is a concept by which we measure our pain ....I'll say it again ....✌️
Whenever I hear BK lay out his arguments for Analytical Idealism, I believe he crushes his opponents. Here, however, he goes a little far afield from his well thought-out ontology and I would have welcomed an interlocutor as well-informed, and as certain, as he to challenge some of the beliefs he raises in this podcast.
In this speculative scenario, let's consider Leibniz's Monad (first emanation of God), from the philosophical work "The Monadology", as an abstract representation of the zero-dimensional space that binds quarks together with the strong nuclear force:
1) Indivisibility and Unity: Monads, as indivisible entities, mirror the nature of quarks, which are deemed elementary and indivisible particles in our theoretical context. Just as monads possess unity and indivisibility, quarks are unified in their interactions through the strong nuclear force.
2) Interconnectedness: In the Monadology, monads are interconnected in a vast network. In a parallel manner, the interconnectedness of quarks through the strong force could be metaphorically represented by the interplay of monads, forming a web that holds particles together.
3) Inherent Properties: Just as monads possess inherent perceptions and appetitions, quarks could be thought of as having intrinsic properties like color charge, reflecting the inherent qualities of monads and influencing their interactions.
4) Harmony: The concept of monads contributing to universal harmony resonates with the idea that the strong nuclear force maintains harmony within atomic nuclei by counteracting the electromagnetic repulsion between protons, allowing for the stability of matter.
5) Pre-established Harmony: Monads' pre-established harmony aligns with the idea that the strong force was pre-designed to ensure stable interactions among quarks, orchestrating their behavior in a way that parallels the harmony envisaged by Leibniz.
6) Non-Mechanical Interaction: Monads interact non-mechanically, mirroring the non-mechanical interactions of quarks through gluon exchange. This connection might be seen as a metaphorical reflection of the intricacies of quark-gluon dynamics.
7) Holism: The holistic perspective of monads could symbolize how quarks, like the monads' interconnections, contribute holistically to the structure and behavior of particles through the strong force interactions.
em·a·na·tion
noun
an abstract but perceptible thing that issues or originates from a source.
Metaphysics
Context
The monad, the word and the idea, belongs to the Western philosophical tradition and has been used by various authors. Leibniz, who was exceptionally well-read, could not have ignored this, but he did not use it himself until mid-1696 when he was sending for print his New System.
Apparently he found with it a convenient way to expound his own philosophy as it was elaborated in this period. What he proposed can be seen as a modification of occasionalism developed by latter-day Cartesians. Leibniz surmised that there are indefinitely many substances individually 'programmed' to act in a predetermined way, each substance being coordinated with all the others.
This is the pre-established harmony which solved the mind-body problem, but at the cost of declaring any interaction between substances a mere appearance.
Summary
The rhetorical strategy adopted by Leibniz in The Monadology is fairly obvious as the text begins with a description of monads (proceeding from simple to complicated instances),
then it turns to their principle or creator and
finishes by using both to explain the world.
(I) As far as Leibniz allows just one type of element in the building of the universe his system is monistic. The unique element has been 'given the general name monad or entelechy' and described as 'a simple substance' (§§1, 19). When Leibniz says that monads are 'simple,' he means that "which is one, has no parts and is therefore indivisible".
Relying on the Greek etymology of the word entelechie (§18), Leibniz posits quantitative differences in perfection between monads which leads to a hierarchical ordering. The basic order is three-tiered:
(1) entelechies or created monads (§48),
(2) souls or entelechies with perception and memory (§19), and
(3) spirits or rational souls (§82).
Whatever is said about the lower ones (entelechies) is valid for the higher (souls and spirits) but not vice versa. As none of them is without a body (§72), there is a corresponding hierarchy of
(1) living beings and animals
(2), the latter being either non-reasonable or reasonable.
The degree of perfection in each case corresponds to cognitive abilities and only spirits or reasonable animals are able to grasp the ideas of both the world and its creator. Some monads have power over others because they can perceive with greater clarity, but primarily, one monad is said to dominate another if it contains the reasons for the actions of other(s). Leibniz believed that any body, such as the body of an animal or man, has one dominant monad which controls the others within it. This dominant monad is often referred to as the soul.
(II) God is also said to be a simple substance (§47) but it is the only one necessary (§§38-9) and without a body attached (§72). Monads perceive others "with varying degrees of clarity, except for God, who perceives all monads with utter clarity". God could take any and all perspectives, knowing of both potentiality and actuality. As well as that God in all his power would know the universe from each of the infinite perspectives at the same time, and so his perspectives-his thoughts-"simply are monads". Creation is a permanent state, thus "[monads] are generated, so to speak, by continual fulgurations of the Divinity" (§47). Any perfection comes from being created while imperfection is a limitation of nature (§42). The monads are unaffected by each other, but each have a unique way of expressing themselves in the universe, in accordance with God's infinite will.
(III) Composite substances or matter are "actually sub-divided without end" and have the properties of their infinitesimal parts (§65). A notorious passage (§67) explains that "each portion of matter can be conceived as like a garden full of plants, or like a pond full of fish. But each branch of a plant, each organ of an animal, each drop of its bodily fluids is also a similar garden or a similar pond". There are no interactions between different monads nor between entelechies and their bodies but everything is regulated by the pre-established harmony (§§78-9). Much like how one clock may be in synchronicity with another, but the first clock is not caused by the second (or vice versa), rather they are only keeping the same time because the last person to wind them set them to the same time. So it is with monads; they may seem to cause each other, but rather they are, in a sense, "wound" by God's pre-established harmony, and thus appear to be in synchronicity. Leibniz concludes that "if we could understand the order of the universe well enough, we would find that it surpasses all the wishes of the wisest people, and that it is impossible to make it better than it is-not merely in respect of the whole in general, but also in respect of ourselves in particular" (§90).
In his day, atoms were proposed to be the smallest division of matter. Within Leibniz's theory, however, substances are not technically real, so monads are not the smallest part of matter, rather they are the only things which are, in fact, real. To Leibniz, space and time were an illusion, and likewise substance itself. The only things that could be called real were utterly simple beings of psychic activity "endowed with perception and appetite."
The other objects, which we call matter, are merely phenomena of these simple perceivers. "Leibniz says, 'I don't really eliminate body, but reduce [revoco] it to what it is. For I show that corporeal mass [massa], which is thought to have something over and above simple substances, is not a substance, but a phenomenon resulting from simple substances, which alone have unity and absolute reality.' (G II 275/AG 181)" Leibniz's philosophy is sometimes called "'panpsychic idealism' because these substances are psychic rather than material". That is to say, they are mind-like substances, not possessing spatial reality. "In other words, in the Leibnizian monadology, simple substances are mind-like entities that do not, strictly speaking, exist in space but that represent the universe from a unique perspective." It is the harmony between the perceptions of the monads which creates what we call substances, but that does not mean the substances are real in and of themselves.
(IV) Leibniz uses his theory of Monads to support his argument that we live in the best of all possible worlds. He uses his basis of perception but not interaction among monads to explain that all monads must draw their essence from one ultimate monad. He then claims that this ultimate monad would be God because a monad is a “simple substance” and God is simplest of all substances, He cannot be broken down any further. This means that all monads perceive “with varying degrees of perception, except for God, who perceives all monads with utter clarity”.
This superior perception of God then would apply in much the same way that he says a dominant monad controls our soul, all other monads associated with it would, essentially, shade themselves towards Him. With all monads being created by the ultimate monad and shading themselves in the image of this ultimate monad, Leibniz argues that it would be impossible to conceive of a more perfect world because all things in the world are created by and imitating the best possible monad.
[2D is not the center of the universe,
0D is the center of the mirror universe]:
The mirror universe theory is based on the concept of parity violation, which was discovered in the 1950s. Parity violation refers to the observation that certain processes in particle physics don't behave the same way when their coordinates are reversed. This discovery led to the idea that there might be a mirror image of our universe where particles and their properties are flipped.
In this mirror universe, the fundamental particles that make up matter, such as electrons, protons, and neutrinos, would have their charges reversed. For example, in our universe, electrons have a negative charge, but in the mirror universe, they might have a positive charge.
Furthermore, another aspect of the mirror universe theory involves chirality, which refers to the property of particles behaving differently from their mirror images. In our universe, particles have a certain handedness or chirality, but in the mirror universe, this chirality could be reversed.
Leibniz or Newton:
Quantum mechanics is more compatible with Leibniz's relational view of the universe than Newton's absolute view of the universe.
In Newton's absolute view, space and time are absolute and independent entities that exist on their own, independent of the objects and events that take place within them. This view implies that there is a privileged observer who can observe the universe from a neutral and objective perspective.
On the other hand, Leibniz's relational view holds that space and time are not absolute, but are instead relational concepts that are defined by the relationships between objects and events in the universe. This view implies that there is no privileged observer and that observations are always made from a particular point of view.
Quantum mechanics is more compatible with the relational view because it emphasizes the role of observers and the context of measurement in determining the properties of particles. In quantum mechanics, the properties of particles are not absolute, but are instead defined by their relationships with other particles and the measuring apparatus. This means that observations are always made from a particular point of view and that there is no neutral and objective perspective.
Overall, quantum mechanics suggests that the universe is fundamentally relational rather than absolute, and is therefore more compatible with Leibniz's relational view than Newton's absolute view.
What are the two kinds of truth according to Leibniz?
There are two kinds of truths, those of reasoning and those of fact. Truths of fact are contingent and their opposite is possible. Truths of reasoning are necessary and their opposite is impossible.
What is the difference between Newton and Leibniz calculus?
Newton's calculus is about functions.
Leibniz's calculus is about relations defined by constraints.
In Newton's calculus, there is (what would now be called) a limit built into every operation.
In Leibniz's calculus, the limit is a separate operation.
What are the arguments against Leibniz?
Critics of Leibniz argue that the world contains an amount of suffering too great to permit belief in philosophical optimism. The claim that we live in the best of all possible worlds drew scorn most notably from Voltaire, who lampooned it in his comic novella Candide.
Since experience - thoughts, feelings, perceptions - are all essentially “input“, and since experience is the only thing that you can ever know is real (not that you can know that what experience represents is real, but that experiences simply are) how can you ever possibly know that there is anything outside of first person experience?
Regarding the airplane dashboard analogy: Would it be safe to say that reality is the instrumentation, necessary to navigate the travel medium of reality safely? It’s possible to operate a vehicle in flight using only the controls, but the dashboard add’s information, increasing the ability to travel safely and efficiently. That would seem to coincide with Donald Hoffman’s idea that experiencing true reality is detrimental to our fitness.
Or am I overthinking the analogy?
BK is Mega. What an inspiring thinker. Love to see him with Iain McGhillchrist at some stage.
Don’t believe everything you THINK. 😝
@@TheVeganVicar And be skeptical of everything (including your Skepticism) ;>
@@PromoMIAR, superficially, Bernardo Kastrup SEEMS to be promulgating the most ancient spiritual teaching of Advaita Vedanta (as found in the Upanishadic texts of India) but due to reasons I won't go into at length here, his understanding is rather flawed.
If one carefully listens to any of his monologues or interview videos, it is obvious (at least it is obvious to those who are truly enlightened) that he regularly confuses and conflates discrete consciousness (as emerging from the neural networks of animals) and UNIVERSAL Consciousness (which is the all-pervasive, eternal ground of all being, more appositely termed "The Tao", "Brahman" or "Infinite Awareness").
He also believes in (limited) freedom of volition, which is, of course, ludicrous, and his understanding of suffering is truly infantile, which is unfortunate, since the eradication of suffering is the goal of life.
In order to PROPERLY understand the distinction between the two aforementioned categories of consciousness, you are welcome to email me for a copy of "A Final Instruction Sheet for Humanity", which are the most authoritative and accurate precepts extant. My address is on my RUclips homepage.
However, my main criticism of Kastrup is not with his metaphysics, it is, rather, his METAETHICS. He is, objectively speaking, afflicted with a demonic mentality, as demonstrated with his support of all things contrary to Dharma (the law, and societal duties), such as egalitarianism, feminism, homosexuality, and socialism.
In a recent interview, for example, he displayed abject ignorance when discussing the topic of animal consumption. Hopefully, he will one day realize how incredibly hypocritical he is in this regards, and become a compassionate VEGAN. 🌱
After all, to criticize Bernardo for his teachings being only, let's say, ninety percent accurate, would be silly, since, compared with almost every other person who has ever lived, his philosophical understanding is fairly sound. Yet, what is the point of being even TOTALLY correct about metaphysics, when one's metaethics and normative ethics is fundamentally flawed?
Furthermore, Bernardo has admitted that he has struggled with mental health issues for several decades. I would suggest he flee to the loving arms of an ACTUAL spiritual master in order to learn Dharma (as well, of course, correct his flawed metaphysics).
Peace!
P.S. It seems Bernie Boy has BLOCKED at least one of my RUclips accounts, so if you are reading this, you are indeed fortunate. ;)
@@TheVeganVicar Yes I read your post below also. Curious, would you claim to be truly "Enlightend"? I'm not sure what that means to be honest. I'm interested in much of Eastern Philosophy also but BK has a Razor wit and as I say, is inspiring in thought. Ofcourse all of us are going to be wrongs (about everything). Nobody has access to the ultimate Truth. We are all fumbling around looking for a light switch. Respect!
He's awesome