If you have any questions for Robert, please comment below. I'll do my best to ask as many as possible during our next discussion. THANKS FOR WATCHING! If you enjoyed the content, please like and share this video, subscribe to the channel, and turn on notifications for future updates. :)
Thanks, forgive me I'm not a learned man such as yourselves.... As an atheist beyond the Big Bang possible multiverses. Following probably wont make any sense. Absolute nothingness is paradoxical it does not make sense, what came before it should never existed because it was something, I don't understand it. Way beyond abstract concepts like "platonic objects" imply a certain level of being or reality, even if it is not physical or material.
@drtevinnaidu Is mathematics discovered or invented? The state/condition of a message that has been discovered and is going through the process of interpretation, is one that expresses both discovered and invented qualities simultaneously. The number system is a message and "quantity" is the incorrect interpretation of the message. Math is the ongoing attempt to interpret the message based upon the incorrect initial interpretation The message is SAMSARA. The number line is a linear expression of a cyclical process (self-evident). I'm saying that cyclical process is expressing the positive feedback loop that humanity trapped within. The number system is an updated version of "Samsara' I have 3 videos on my channel where I go into far greater depth and detail. It's also a map that shows where humanity is within the cycle I got this Tevin. I honestly do
Getting "Closer to truth " is a goal or target, objective -- a syntropic process, teleological. If you are seeking truth then you are using duality! Absolute truth is dual to relative truth -- Hume's fork. The past (everything) is dual to the future (nothing) -- time duality. We know everything about the past as we have experienced or measured it and nothing about the future as it has not happened yet. "Physics is what we know and metaphysics is what we do not know" -- Bertrand Russell. Knowledge is dual! Physics (a posteriori or measured) is dual to metaphysics (a priori or not measured) -- synthetic a priori knowledge, Immanuel Kant. Absolute time (Galileo) is dual to relative time (Einstein) -- time duality. Time is a dual concept. Space is dual to time -- Einstein. Everything (a posteriori) is dual to nothing (a priori) synthesizes the present (something). Concepts are dual to percepts -- the mind duality of Immanuel Kant. The concept of the future or nothing is built from your past experiences or knowledge (history, memory). "Always two there are" -- Yoda. Your mind is creating something from nothing -- time duality! Seeking truth requires duality! Questions are dual to answers.
@@hyperduality2838 - You are an idiot if you think the future hasn't occurred yet.. The special theory of relativity was published in 1905 even due to your failures to read.
Closer to Truth is an excellent program. Mr. Kuhn is oftentimes more well-read on the issues than even the prominent guests he has on, which always makes for a captivating discussion.
@@drtevinnaidu Agreement is dual to disagreement synthesizes objective democracy (a goal). Science wins through consensus. Consensus is mutual agreement or objective democracy. Objective democracy is dual to subjective democracy -- duality! The laws of physics conform to a principle of objective or absolute democracy as they are the same and equal for all observers everywhere. "Always two there are" -- Yoda.
I have followed CTT from the beginning. I witnessed Robert's knowledge increase as the series unfolded. He became more knowledgeable on the topics than the experts he interviewed. He was always gracious in letting the interviewees express their thoughts, but also challenged them to clarify their statements. Robert Khun is a trailblazer in the search for truth.
As a subscriber and member, and agnostic searcher for the answers, I have been fascinated by the series since first happening upon it through RUclips. Likewise, I very much appreciate the openness with which Dr. Kuhn approaches each concept and interviewee. I chuckle at the disclosure of those on both sides asserting that Kuhn is either a closet theist from some and a closet atheist from others. I had pondered those very questions. Thus, it is impressive that Dr. Kuhn is so magnanimous in demeaner and process. Thank You!
Hello Mr Naidu. Dr Kuhn is not even close. Why would you even need to store memory (consciousness = memory) in our proven block universe (simultaneous/absence of time). Albert Einstein's twin paradox has been proven with atomic clocks and the "block universe" is the 'Einstein twin paradox' amplified to grander but logical scales. Neils Degrasse Tyson, and every university teach that you are technically being born.. and technically dying... at the same point in time (block universe). THINK ON THIS: Would a brain engram be redundant for memory .. if that memory (first kisses, graduations, etc) was concurrent to forever. What most humans ASS/U/ME is that our brains need to somehow encode and store everything we have ever seen or heard or felt... Is it smart to start off a conversation about consciousness with an ASSUMPTION? -------------------------- Imagine for a second that memory is as I describe here.. Your memory of a first kiss is NOT an engram in your wee noggin. No neuroscientist will EVER find a brain memory engram.. the brain is at best an antenna.. a chemical factory for our meat suit. Robert Kuhn starts off with the assumption he is a 'real boy', when in fact.. a better way to understand your nature is to think of 'reality' as a common dream. He claims to have an open mind about non materialism... I even wonder if you can grasp what I am saying here.. you seemed to be his fan somewhat.. and I get it.. he seems like he knows his stuff.. but no. IMAGINE LIFE WERE HERMETIC PRINCIPLE # 1. Or... as the Hindu state (pre caste hinduism is good) Essentially you live inside a simultaneous giant imagination... NOCTURNAL DREAM TOAST = KITCHEN TOAST. You cannot prove you are even real.. self pinching and the word of his mommy is all dr lawrence kuhn has to prove he's not living the same dream as the rest of us. You have two ways to prove youre not living the dream. 1) mommy woo: our mommies told us we are real boys and we ass/u/me she isn't a dumbass. and 2) self pinching: really really hard LOGIC AND REASON dictate science itself is the daftest of all religions if we share a common dream (true or false?) I solved consciousness and reality.. many years ago.. and honestly.. Kuhn is pretty clueless. A neuroscientist can never become closer to the truth unless he is born to a smarter mom.. lifetime to lifetime we grow. YOU PERSONALLY were a plant to learn to breathe.. You personally were a fish that waggled its butt to move.. You were a crab to learn opposable thumbs.... I am NOT wrong... and my theory of everything explain positive thinking and manifesting... EMERGENCE does not exist Mr Naidu.... Probabilities DO NOT exits Mr Naidu... 'Your toaster (void of brain) is aware (memory = consciousness) that it is simultaneously (block universe) at the factory being made'. ^^^^^^ - is why a rock thinks the hard problem of consciousness is ridiculous. ruclips.net/video/DWxm4Gu7Jb0/видео.htmlsi=vQBm7xNNEkfs4IwX
Getting "Closer to truth " is a goal or target, objective -- a syntropic process, teleological. If you are seeking truth then you are using duality! Absolute truth is dual to relative truth -- Hume's fork. The past (everything) is dual to the future (nothing) -- time duality. We know everything about the past as we have experienced or measured it and nothing about the future as it has not happened yet. "Physics is what we know and metaphysics is what we do not know" -- Bertrand Russell. Knowledge is dual! Physics (a posteriori or measured) is dual to metaphysics (a priori or not measured) -- synthetic a priori knowledge, Immanuel Kant. Absolute time (Galileo) is dual to relative time (Einstein) -- time duality. Time is a dual concept. Space is dual to time -- Einstein. Everything (a posteriori) is dual to nothing (a priori) synthesizes the present (something). Concepts are dual to percepts -- the mind duality of Immanuel Kant. The concept of the future or nothing is built from your past experiences or knowledge (history, memory). "Always two there are" -- Yoda. Your mind is creating something from nothing -- time duality! Seeking truth requires duality! Questions are dual to answers.
I love this channel! Great interview! I am glad Mario Bunge made it into the landscape! Loved the paper and Closer to Truth. Glad you had this interview.
Reductionist could plausibly ask why there's anything more than (the) one, given there is existence. My answer is that (the) one split, and the rest is induction, in mathematical sense. There's a nice parallelism to Adam and his rib from which Eve was formed. Considering God created man in his image. In my model the parallelism actually goes further, and killing of Abel equals a binary choice (the first in the system's evolution) where an alternative causal path becomes counter-factual. And it coincides with the beginning of time in physical sense, and in biblical text, a tau written in Cain's forehead.
So good to see Robert in this excellent interview. The CTT video backdrops are beautiful too, even capturing insect sounds. But my favorite things to point out was the camera angles and the contrasting architectural lines of the buildings. Thank you Tevin💛
Robert is so good at asking questions and for me he is the best and because he has so much knowledge on the subject he can reformulate questions and bring new angles and depth. He is on the same level as the person answering. He is in some sort a person who bears a Greek heritage, a modern Sokrates.
Very interesting. If you put your finger on the screen (iPad anyway) and hold it down, the video speeds up by 2x, and you can still understand everything perfectly!
Whenever "Closer to Truth" attempts to explain consciousness, I watch it. This was a very unique and interesting interview and I'm very happy to have the link to Robert's paper. My own attempts at explaining our consciousness closely revolves around a better understanding of our sensory receptors and perceptions (see my book: "Origins of Life's Sensoria").
A question for, well, you both …. “What is ‘information’ - as a phenomenon in its own right & not just what any of it ‘says’, or means, or does - & where does it fit into the grander scheme of things ? Is ‘information’ physical ? Warning : Long comment ahead. About ‘information’ - as a phenomenon in its own, as well as the role it fills in all mental/mindful phenomena such as ‘thought’, ‘mind’, ‘cognition’, ‘intelligence’, ‘knowledge’, ‘learning’, ‘understanding’, ‘sentience’, the ‘self’, ‘consciousness’, & ‘self-consciousness’ (to far less than exhaust the list). ‘Space’ & ‘time’, ‘matter’ & ‘energy’ - ‘information’. Elementary elements of reality ? An only slightly more exacting examination of reality - of the world around us - of our situation in all of its fullness, of the realm of whatever it is that we are & as to whatever particular ‘sphere/magisteria’ within which we are located (within which we live, & move,& have our being) - enables any serious student thereof recognise that at this precise moment in time - namely 2024 - although ‘information’ is widely believed to be - along with ‘space’ & ‘time’, ‘matter’ & ‘energy’ - a basic, fundamental, elementary, even central, component of reality, nevertheless - & however surprisingly - currently its ontological identity remains completely unspecified - & totally unknown & wholly misunderstood. Not only has its correct - & fully verifiable - ontological identity not been established, but neither has a full, good, proper & fully verifiable science of the phenomenon also been first recognised, & then (verifiably) established. Put another way, the answers to the following questions remain completely unanswered. Worse. Even the most respected & most widely referenced of investigators suggest answers which are manifestly incorrect, or hopeless inadequate. What is ‘information’ ? Is it a distinct & ‘stand alone’ phenomenon ? If so what is its standing in the existential hierarchy ? Is it an elemental phenomenon or does it emerge somewhere above some certain number of upward rungs of the ladder of the scala naturale ? What role does it play &/or fulfill here in the Universe ? What is its causal efficacy - if it has any ? How does it come into being ? Can it be erased ? Is it conserved regardless of the interactions in which it may be involved ? What role, if any, does it fulfill in any mental, or mindful, or sentient phenomena, such as, say, ‘thought’, ‘mind’, ‘cognition’, ‘intelligence’, perception, conception, memory, ‘phenomenal awareness,’ ‘knowledge’, ‘learning’, ‘understanding’, ‘sentience’, the ‘self’, ‘consciousness’, & ‘self-consciousness’ (to far less than exhaust the list). Is ‘information’ a strictly physical phenomenon, or does it belong to some (currently unacknowledged) immaterial, intangible realm ? Is ‘information’ (quintessentially) ‘digital’, & can (& do) digit-using machines, systems & devices ‘think’, &/or be ‘conscious’, & if so can these devices be ‘intelligent’ ? Are such phenomena as ‘thought’, ‘mind’, ‘cognition’, ‘intelligence’, ‘knowledge’, ‘learning’, ‘understanding’, ‘sentience’, the ‘self’, ‘consciousness’, & ‘self-consciousness’, digitally/computationally tractable, or is some other significantly different set of handling procedures &/or mechanical operations required by which any (designedly dedicated) information-using machine, entity, system, gadget, contrivance or device can be, & is at least during operational times, critically involved in any or all of these mental/mindful/sentient phenomena ? Are computers merely vastly upscaled, electronically automated abacuses ? While, are even properly, verifiably ‘thinking’, ‘feeling’, ‘emoting’, humans merely up-scaled, flesh & blood robots ? If ‘thinking’ turns out to be ‘using information gathered outside the systems to first monitor then actively (via something kind of mechanical &/or electronic ‘switching’ device) guide & direct certain critical actions &/or movements inside the system, as these actions/movements relate to the objects &/or events external to the system, & strictly in regard to the information gathered there from’ - & it is (& this is ‘thinking’), then patently the Roomba cleaning your floors, the automatic doors vacillating your entry into the Supermarket, the climate control systems in you home, car & office, the automatic pilot of the plane in which you ride - are all properly ‘thinking’ entities. Once ‘informations’s correct (as-yet-to-be-divulged) ontological identity is recognised, known & understood, & further factored into its rightful place in the reality equation, it becomes both amply & verifiably apparent that although ‘thinking’ (that is, using externally gathered information to guide & direct internally generated action &/or movement, duly executing this action/movement back towards whatever thing or event initially gave rise to the information being so used in this guidance fashion, is verily indeed, ‘thinking’), it requires several ‘layers’ of internal monitoring being ‘fed’ back into the system for ‘consciousness’ to occur …. with cognitive self conscious awareness requiring even more layers of both internal & external feedback integrative monitoring to occur…. At least it can if you’ve got the necessary equipment. Do the thermostats & humidistats in climate control systems ‘think’, as the toggling of their monitoring devices mechanically switch various other parts of themselves on & off, thereby aligning these parts producing the cold &/or warmth, with the surrounding, external (mini-)climate ? Although I am a ‘rank-&-raving’, aging, un-credentialed, antipodean amateur (terminally curious about life, the universe & everything), some time ago my own research not too problematically allowed me to recognise - & verify, & establish - not only what ‘information’ is (its correct & fully verifiable ontological identity) (as a phenomenon in its own right, & not just what any of it ‘says’, or means, or does), &, further in addition, not only determine a full & fully verifiable science of the phenomenon, but also that of all of its closest cousins to boot, its ‘closest cousins’ being no less than such things as ‘thought’, ‘mind’, ‘intelligence’ & ‘consciousness’, ‘qualia’- all mental, mindful phenomena - which are quite manifestly (quite demonstrably) all information-related phenomena. With these particular (& fully verifiable) accomplishments under my belt, it is not difficult to show that one of the principal (& completely inexcusable) reasons we (the, err, current intelligentsia, nor yet ‘the common person’) have not so far come to any good & proper - nor fully verifiable - understanding of these otherwise greatly sought-after yet still highly mysterious phenomena is due in great part to the simple fact that the current intelligentsia does not presently also have a good & proper, fully verifiable understanding, or science, of ‘information’ itself - that is to repeat, the contemporary cadre of seriously inquisitive person do not presently also have a clear & fully verifiable definition & understanding of ‘information’ itself - which is to say of ‘information’ as a phenomenon in its own right & not just what any of it ‘says’, or means or does. Let alone any of its closest cousins …. Let alone where it fits into the greater scheme of things …. Just saying ….. please be so gracious to let me know if you will ask the otherwise most deservedly esteemed, Robert Lawrence - not to omit yourself - this question : “Why does ‘information’ currently completely lack proper (good & verifiable) identity & definition ? Why has it not been explicitly factored into any ‘consciousness’ - or even AI - studies ? And why has it been so thoughtlessly conflated with ‘computer digits’, & ‘thinking’ with mere counting & computing ?
Robert Lawrence Kuhn has been going round and round for many years around those questions. I think he needs a good dose of transcendence to break the spell
Thank you for watching. It was a privilege and pleasure for me personally. CTT genuinely changed my life for the better. Hope you enjoy the conversation. Feel free to reply to my pinned comment if you have any questions for Robert.🙌🏽
It's just so strange that science and scholarship has not made all of the worlds belief systems more rational and reasonable yet. Each one sits firmly upon religious traditions that preceded science and academy, and the intersection of them all lies in the study of consciousness. All of the world's problems exist because science fails to overcome this fear. It is the way that the world is stratified that resists it. All of the excesses and ridiculousness is happening because we do not want to offend these belief systems, yet a combined effort by anthropology, sociology, religious studies, philosophy, biology, chemistry, physics, and psychology can tell the story about how each of them have made us what we are today and explain their respective contributions to what we have accomplished in social cohesion, justice, life, politics, community, family, and career; and the faculty of Women's Studies is ready to guide us in the unpacking and critical theory of each new social construction that becomes of it.
One of the greatest movies of all time is The Godfather. Creative literature and screenplays reflect deep underlying philosophical, psychological, sociological, political issues. The first character you see is the mortician (mortality) Americo Bonasera which translates as goodnight America (night is predetermined to follow day). He requests the death of two young men who assaulted his innocent daughter and broke her jaw. In the later scene Vito’s son innocent Michael sits in that same office with a bruised jaw plotting the assassination of two men. The movie is really based in “could Michael have done otherwise?”. His fate seems to become the head mobster as one older brother dies and another is passed over because he lacks the talent. I would say contrarily that rationality does a good job at “offending religion” but religion does a very good job at preventing marginalization because like great literature it reflects deeper parts of the human mind. ruclips.net/video/eZHsmb4ezEk/видео.htmlsi=ERKX6y1A-uHqfG-p
@@vicp7124 I agree with the role literature and screenplay and art play in everything, but I don't agree with the role religion plays in the study of consciousness; science should have primary role in the same way science plays a primary role in literature, art, and art. Art supports science but doesn't contradict it ontologically, and religion needs to follow suit. For that to happen, science will need to study areas now considered to be sacred, and compare them.
@@shawnewaltonifyTrue but you can argue from the other pov. Before the Enlightenment and Newton, the Church was the central Western Institution of culture and learning. The tensions most cite today are between the fundamentalists and the science extremists.
@@vicp7124 it would be great if there was more common sense understanding that some scientistific discoveries are still held back by this, and as the pile of undiscoverables grows, they become more and more pertinent and closer to the central issues on the globe.
Fantastic guy. Enjoyed listening to the end when he recanted about the woman from Bakersfield who watched him. Robert is ten years older than me and a fellow New Yorker. I believe he is also of the jewish background. Growing up with jewish friends and their families, they have a very objective on life and question any type of authority. Just think Robert drew some inspiration from another New Yorker who is ten years older than him. ruclips.net/video/vjH8V-D3ZuA/видео.htmlsi=mIM6Vte-PzcQknIP
"80 theories of consciousness", huh?! that makes me think of what einstein said when he was told about a book called "100 authors against einstein" he said, "why 100? if I was wrong, 1 would be enough" so why 80 theories? if 1 was right, it would be enough but you know what they say those who can, think those who can't...they compile taxonomies
whow he can provide guys from the global military industry all the information to weaponize everything around consciousness. without any form of conscience being involved. interesting
Information is actually dual. Getting "Closer to truth " is a goal or target, objective -- a syntropic process, teleological. If you are seeking truth then you are using duality! Absolute truth is dual to relative truth -- Hume's fork. The past (everything) is dual to the future (nothing) -- time duality. We know everything about the past as we have experienced or measured it and nothing about the future as it has not happened yet. "Physics is what we know and metaphysics is what we do not know" -- Bertrand Russell. Knowledge is dual! Physics (a posteriori or measured) is dual to metaphysics (a priori or not measured) -- synthetic a priori knowledge, Immanuel Kant. Absolute time (Galileo) is dual to relative time (Einstein) -- time duality. Time is a dual concept. Space is dual to time -- Einstein. Everything (a posteriori) is dual to nothing (a priori) synthesizes the present (something). Concepts are dual to percepts -- the mind duality of Immanuel Kant. The concept of the future or nothing is built from your past experiences or knowledge (history, memory). "Always two there are" -- Yoda. Your mind is creating something from nothing -- time duality! Seeking truth requires duality! Questions are dual to answers. If knowledge is dual then information must be dual -- syntax is dual to semantics.
@@drtevinnaidu We spend about a third of our lives unconscious. And obviously, unconscious when we are not alive. So unconsciousness is the norm, the usual condition.
@@drtevinnaidu When the sun becomes a red giant, we will all be unconscious ! And peace will return. No more wars. No more pain. And no more religion. Bliss !
@drtevinnaidu Robert has it. We have exchanged emails. He admits there is merit (he saved the attachments) he hasn't shown me where I'm wrong. He shared with me the direction he intends to take with his inquiry, which is odd, I think. As if he was telling me that the reason he isn't interviewing me is due to his wish to move in a certain direction This is not the path that leads to Truth and conclusion. This is simply a continuation down the path of delusion There are subtle nuances at these highest levels of inquiry and for some reason I am able to detect them. Robert is looking to reinforce his beliefs/world view. He isn't ready for truth I'm not sure you are either
Problem, reaction. solution (target) -- the Hegelian dialectic. If you want problems you are using the Hegelian dialectic. Getting "Closer to truth " is a goal or target, objective -- a syntropic process, teleological. If you are seeking truth then you are using duality! Absolute truth is dual to relative truth -- Hume's fork. The past (everything) is dual to the future (nothing) -- time duality. We know everything about the past as we have experienced or measured it and nothing about the future as it has not happened yet. "Physics is what we know and metaphysics is what we do not know" -- Bertrand Russell. Knowledge is dual! Physics (a posteriori or measured) is dual to metaphysics (a priori or not measured) -- synthetic a priori knowledge, Immanuel Kant. Absolute time (Galileo) is dual to relative time (Einstein) -- time duality. Time is a dual concept. Space is dual to time -- Einstein. Everything (a posteriori) is dual to nothing (a priori) synthesizes the present (something). Concepts are dual to percepts -- the mind duality of Immanuel Kant. The concept of the future or nothing is built from your past experiences or knowledge (history, memory). "Always two there are" -- Yoda. Your mind is creating something from nothing -- time duality! Seeking truth requires duality! Questions are dual to answers.
![Blox Fruits Dragon Rework Update [Full Stream]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/EqDAp8udhm0/mqdefault.jpg)
If you have any questions for Robert, please comment below. I'll do my best to ask as many as possible during our next discussion.
THANKS FOR WATCHING!
If you enjoyed the content, please like and share this video, subscribe to the channel, and turn on notifications for future updates. :)
Thanks, forgive me I'm not a learned man such as yourselves.... As an atheist beyond the Big Bang possible multiverses. Following probably wont make any sense. Absolute nothingness is paradoxical it does not make sense, what came before it should never existed because it was something, I don't understand it. Way beyond abstract concepts like "platonic objects" imply a certain level of being or reality, even if it is not physical or material.
Dear Bob, how does it feel to be a CCP shill? Regards, Eeyore.
XD
oh, bother...
@drtevinnaidu Is mathematics discovered or invented?
The state/condition of a message that has been discovered and is going through the process of interpretation, is one that expresses both discovered and invented qualities simultaneously.
The number system is a message and "quantity" is the incorrect interpretation of the message. Math is the ongoing attempt to interpret the message based upon the incorrect initial interpretation
The message is SAMSARA. The number line is a linear expression of a cyclical process (self-evident). I'm saying that cyclical process is expressing the positive feedback loop that humanity trapped within.
The number system is an updated version of "Samsara'
I have 3 videos on my channel where I go into far greater depth and detail. It's also a map that shows where humanity is within the cycle
I got this Tevin. I honestly do
Getting "Closer to truth " is a goal or target, objective -- a syntropic process, teleological.
If you are seeking truth then you are using duality!
Absolute truth is dual to relative truth -- Hume's fork.
The past (everything) is dual to the future (nothing) -- time duality.
We know everything about the past as we have experienced or measured it and nothing about the future as it has not happened yet.
"Physics is what we know and metaphysics is what we do not know" -- Bertrand Russell.
Knowledge is dual!
Physics (a posteriori or measured) is dual to metaphysics (a priori or not measured) -- synthetic a priori knowledge, Immanuel Kant.
Absolute time (Galileo) is dual to relative time (Einstein) -- time duality.
Time is a dual concept.
Space is dual to time -- Einstein.
Everything (a posteriori) is dual to nothing (a priori) synthesizes the present (something).
Concepts are dual to percepts -- the mind duality of Immanuel Kant.
The concept of the future or nothing is built from your past experiences or knowledge (history, memory).
"Always two there are" -- Yoda.
Your mind is creating something from nothing -- time duality!
Seeking truth requires duality!
Questions are dual to answers.
@@hyperduality2838 - You are an idiot if you think the future hasn't occurred yet.. The special theory of relativity was published in 1905 even due to your failures to read.
Closer to Truth is an excellent program. Mr. Kuhn is oftentimes more well-read on the issues than even the prominent guests he has on, which always makes for a captivating discussion.
Agreed!
@@drtevinnaidu Agreement is dual to disagreement synthesizes objective democracy (a goal).
Science wins through consensus. Consensus is mutual agreement or objective democracy.
Objective democracy is dual to subjective democracy -- duality!
The laws of physics conform to a principle of objective or absolute democracy as they are the same and equal for all observers everywhere.
"Always two there are" -- Yoda.
Couldn't agree more!
That’s Dr. Kuhn to you
I have followed CTT from the beginning. I witnessed Robert's knowledge increase as the series unfolded. He became more knowledgeable on the topics than the experts he interviewed. He was always gracious in letting the interviewees express their thoughts, but also challenged them to clarify their statements.
Robert Khun is a trailblazer in the search for truth.
Agree 100%
As a subscriber and member, and agnostic searcher for the answers, I have been fascinated by the series since first happening upon it through RUclips. Likewise, I very much appreciate the openness with which Dr. Kuhn approaches each concept and interviewee. I chuckle at the disclosure of those on both sides asserting that Kuhn is either a closet theist from some and a closet atheist from others. I had pondered those very questions. Thus, it is impressive that Dr. Kuhn is so magnanimous in demeaner and process. Thank You!
Thank you! Really glad you enjoyed this episode and are on this journey with us!
Thanks so much for having Robert on the show, Tevin! Happy to have you in the Closer To Truth stratosphere 💫
Hello Mr Naidu. Dr Kuhn is not even close. Why would you even need to store memory (consciousness = memory) in our proven block universe (simultaneous/absence of time).
Albert Einstein's twin paradox has been proven with atomic clocks and the "block universe" is the 'Einstein twin paradox' amplified to grander but logical scales.
Neils Degrasse Tyson, and every university teach that you are technically being born.. and technically dying... at the same point in time (block universe).
THINK ON THIS: Would a brain engram be redundant for memory .. if that memory (first kisses, graduations, etc) was concurrent to forever.
What most humans ASS/U/ME is that our brains need to somehow encode and store everything we have ever seen or heard or felt...
Is it smart to start off a conversation about consciousness with an ASSUMPTION?
--------------------------
Imagine for a second that memory is as I describe here..
Your memory of a first kiss is NOT an engram in your wee noggin. No neuroscientist will EVER find a brain memory engram.. the brain is at best an antenna.. a chemical factory for our meat suit.
Robert Kuhn starts off with the assumption he is a 'real boy', when in fact.. a better way to understand your nature is to think of 'reality' as a common dream.
He claims to have an open mind about non materialism...
I even wonder if you can grasp what I am saying here.. you seemed to be his fan somewhat.. and I get it.. he seems like he knows his stuff.. but no.
IMAGINE LIFE WERE HERMETIC PRINCIPLE # 1.
Or... as the Hindu state (pre caste hinduism is good)
Essentially you live inside a simultaneous giant imagination...
NOCTURNAL DREAM TOAST = KITCHEN TOAST.
You cannot prove you are even real.. self pinching and the word of his mommy is all dr lawrence kuhn has to prove he's not living the same dream as the rest of us.
You have two ways to prove youre not living the dream.
1) mommy woo: our mommies told us we are real boys and we ass/u/me she isn't a dumbass.
and
2) self pinching: really really hard
LOGIC AND REASON dictate science itself is the daftest of all religions if we share a common dream (true or false?)
I solved consciousness and reality.. many years ago..
and honestly.. Kuhn is pretty clueless.
A neuroscientist can never become closer to the truth unless he is born to a smarter mom.. lifetime to lifetime we grow.
YOU PERSONALLY were a plant to learn to breathe..
You personally were a fish that waggled its butt to move..
You were a crab to learn opposable thumbs....
I am NOT wrong... and my theory of everything explain positive thinking and manifesting...
EMERGENCE does not exist Mr Naidu....
Probabilities DO NOT exits Mr Naidu...
'Your toaster (void of brain) is aware (memory = consciousness) that it is simultaneously (block universe) at the factory being made'.
^^^^^^ - is why a rock thinks the hard problem of consciousness is ridiculous.
ruclips.net/video/DWxm4Gu7Jb0/видео.htmlsi=vQBm7xNNEkfs4IwX
It's a privilege and pleasure!
Getting "Closer to truth " is a goal or target, objective -- a syntropic process, teleological.
If you are seeking truth then you are using duality!
Absolute truth is dual to relative truth -- Hume's fork.
The past (everything) is dual to the future (nothing) -- time duality.
We know everything about the past as we have experienced or measured it and nothing about the future as it has not happened yet.
"Physics is what we know and metaphysics is what we do not know" -- Bertrand Russell.
Knowledge is dual!
Physics (a posteriori or measured) is dual to metaphysics (a priori or not measured) -- synthetic a priori knowledge, Immanuel Kant.
Absolute time (Galileo) is dual to relative time (Einstein) -- time duality.
Time is a dual concept.
Space is dual to time -- Einstein.
Everything (a posteriori) is dual to nothing (a priori) synthesizes the present (something).
Concepts are dual to percepts -- the mind duality of Immanuel Kant.
The concept of the future or nothing is built from your past experiences or knowledge (history, memory).
"Always two there are" -- Yoda.
Your mind is creating something from nothing -- time duality!
Seeking truth requires duality!
Questions are dual to answers.
Closer to truth is a fantastic series.
Indeed!
I love this channel! Great interview! I am glad Mario Bunge made it into the landscape! Loved the paper and Closer to Truth. Glad you had this interview.
Glad you enjoyed it!
I just discovered your channel. Very interesting conversations. Thank you for doing it! Please, keep it up.
Thank you! Glad you like it. Taking a short break for the festive season, but back up and running from Jan!🙏🏽🙌🏽
The legendary Robert Lawrence Kuhn. Agreed!
The man. The myth. The legend.
@@drtevinnaidu He's delusional
Reductionist could plausibly ask why there's anything more than (the) one, given there is existence.
My answer is that (the) one split, and the rest is induction, in mathematical sense.
There's a nice parallelism to Adam and his rib from which Eve was formed. Considering God created man in his image.
In my model the parallelism actually goes further, and killing of Abel equals a binary choice (the first in the system's evolution) where an alternative causal path becomes counter-factual. And it coincides with the beginning of time in physical sense, and in biblical text, a tau written in Cain's forehead.
So good to see Robert in this excellent interview. The CTT video backdrops are beautiful too, even capturing insect sounds. But my favorite things to point out was the camera angles and the contrasting architectural lines of the buildings. Thank you Tevin💛
Glad you enjoyed it!
Thank you, Tevin. I value this contribution you make. I also follow CTT and learn a lot from Robert.
Thank you!
I have been following closer to truth for last 5 years. In my view, RLK is the Einstein of "science of inquiry".
He is the glue that holds it all together.👌🏽
Mr Kuhn, love his work.
Ditto!
Robert is so good at asking questions and for me he is the best and because he has so much knowledge on the subject he can reformulate questions and bring new angles and depth. He is on the same level as the person answering. He is in some sort a person who bears a Greek heritage, a modern Sokrates.
Well said!
Mr Kuhn is the best there is. He is however like the rest of us a mystic in that we are all mystified.
Looking forward to this one!
You're going to love it! (I hope🤞🏼)
Fantastic channel
Thank you very much!
Very interesting. If you put your finger on the screen (iPad anyway) and hold it down, the video speeds up by 2x, and you can still understand everything perfectly!
That's how I listen to almost all podcasts... 2x
Thanks for this hot little tip. Works on Android too!! 😊
Whenever "Closer to Truth" attempts to explain consciousness, I watch it. This was a very unique and interesting interview and I'm very happy to have the link to Robert's paper. My own attempts at explaining our consciousness closely revolves around a better understanding of our sensory receptors and perceptions (see my book: "Origins of Life's Sensoria").
Thank you!!
Just found this! Subbed.
Welcome aboard!
A question for, well, you both …. “What is ‘information’ - as a phenomenon in its own right & not just what any of it ‘says’, or means, or does - & where does it fit into the grander scheme of things ? Is ‘information’ physical ?
Warning : Long comment ahead. About ‘information’ - as a phenomenon in its own, as well as the role it fills in all mental/mindful phenomena such as ‘thought’, ‘mind’, ‘cognition’, ‘intelligence’, ‘knowledge’, ‘learning’, ‘understanding’, ‘sentience’, the ‘self’, ‘consciousness’, & ‘self-consciousness’ (to far less than exhaust the list).
‘Space’ & ‘time’, ‘matter’ & ‘energy’ - ‘information’. Elementary elements of reality ?
An only slightly more exacting examination of reality - of the world around us - of our situation in all of its fullness, of the realm of whatever it is that we are & as to whatever particular ‘sphere/magisteria’ within which we are located (within which we live, & move,& have our being) - enables any serious student thereof recognise that at this precise moment in time - namely 2024 - although ‘information’ is widely believed to be - along with ‘space’ & ‘time’, ‘matter’ & ‘energy’ - a basic, fundamental, elementary, even central, component of reality, nevertheless - & however surprisingly - currently its ontological identity remains completely unspecified - & totally unknown & wholly misunderstood.
Not only has its correct - & fully verifiable - ontological identity not been established, but neither has a full, good, proper & fully verifiable science of the phenomenon also been first recognised, & then (verifiably) established. Put another way, the answers to the following questions remain completely unanswered. Worse. Even the most respected & most widely referenced of investigators suggest answers which are manifestly incorrect, or hopeless inadequate.
What is ‘information’ ? Is it a distinct & ‘stand alone’ phenomenon ? If so what is its standing in the existential hierarchy ? Is it an elemental phenomenon or does it emerge somewhere above some certain number of upward rungs of the ladder of the scala naturale ? What role does it play &/or fulfill here in the Universe ? What is its causal efficacy - if it has any ? How does it come into being ? Can it be erased ? Is it conserved regardless of the interactions in which it may be involved ? What role, if any, does it fulfill in any mental, or mindful, or sentient phenomena, such as, say, ‘thought’, ‘mind’, ‘cognition’, ‘intelligence’, perception, conception, memory, ‘phenomenal awareness,’ ‘knowledge’, ‘learning’, ‘understanding’, ‘sentience’, the ‘self’, ‘consciousness’, & ‘self-consciousness’ (to far less than exhaust the list). Is ‘information’ a strictly physical phenomenon, or does it belong to some (currently unacknowledged) immaterial, intangible realm ? Is ‘information’ (quintessentially) ‘digital’, & can (& do) digit-using machines, systems & devices ‘think’, &/or be ‘conscious’, & if so can these devices be ‘intelligent’ ? Are such phenomena as ‘thought’, ‘mind’, ‘cognition’, ‘intelligence’, ‘knowledge’, ‘learning’, ‘understanding’, ‘sentience’, the ‘self’, ‘consciousness’, & ‘self-consciousness’, digitally/computationally tractable, or is some other significantly different set of handling procedures &/or mechanical operations required by which any (designedly dedicated) information-using machine, entity, system, gadget, contrivance or device can be, & is at least during operational times, critically involved in any or all of these mental/mindful/sentient phenomena ? Are computers merely vastly upscaled, electronically automated abacuses ? While, are even properly, verifiably ‘thinking’, ‘feeling’, ‘emoting’, humans merely up-scaled, flesh & blood robots ?
If ‘thinking’ turns out to be ‘using information gathered outside the systems to first monitor then actively (via something kind of mechanical &/or electronic ‘switching’ device) guide & direct certain critical actions &/or movements inside the system, as these actions/movements relate to the objects &/or events external to the system, & strictly in regard to the information gathered there from’ - & it is (& this is ‘thinking’), then patently the Roomba cleaning your floors, the automatic doors vacillating your entry into the Supermarket, the climate control systems in you home, car & office, the automatic pilot of the plane in which you ride - are all properly ‘thinking’ entities.
Once ‘informations’s correct (as-yet-to-be-divulged) ontological identity is recognised, known & understood, & further factored into its rightful place in the reality equation, it becomes both amply & verifiably apparent that although ‘thinking’ (that is, using externally gathered information to guide & direct internally generated action &/or movement, duly executing this action/movement back towards whatever thing or event initially gave rise to the information being so used in this guidance fashion, is verily indeed, ‘thinking’), it requires several ‘layers’ of internal monitoring being ‘fed’ back into the system for ‘consciousness’ to occur …. with cognitive self conscious awareness requiring even more layers of both internal & external feedback integrative monitoring to occur…. At least it can if you’ve got the necessary equipment.
Do the thermostats & humidistats in climate control systems ‘think’, as the toggling of their monitoring devices mechanically switch various other parts of themselves on & off, thereby aligning these parts producing the cold &/or warmth, with the surrounding, external (mini-)climate ?
Although I am a ‘rank-&-raving’, aging, un-credentialed, antipodean amateur (terminally curious about life, the universe & everything), some time ago my own research not too problematically allowed me to recognise - & verify, & establish - not only what ‘information’ is (its correct & fully verifiable ontological identity) (as a phenomenon in its own right, & not just what any of it ‘says’, or means, or does), &, further in addition, not only determine a full & fully verifiable science of the phenomenon, but also that of all of its closest cousins to boot, its ‘closest cousins’ being no less than such things as ‘thought’, ‘mind’, ‘intelligence’ & ‘consciousness’, ‘qualia’- all mental, mindful phenomena - which are quite manifestly (quite demonstrably) all information-related phenomena.
With these particular (& fully verifiable) accomplishments under my belt, it is not difficult to show that one of the principal (& completely inexcusable) reasons we (the, err, current intelligentsia, nor yet ‘the common person’) have not so far come to any good & proper - nor fully verifiable - understanding of these otherwise greatly sought-after yet still highly mysterious phenomena is due in great part to the simple fact that the current intelligentsia does not presently also have a good & proper, fully verifiable understanding, or science, of ‘information’ itself - that is to repeat, the contemporary cadre of seriously inquisitive person do not presently also have a clear & fully verifiable definition & understanding of ‘information’ itself - which is to say of ‘information’ as a phenomenon in its own right & not just what any of it ‘says’, or means or does. Let alone any of its closest cousins …. Let alone where it fits into the greater scheme of things ….
Just saying ….. please be so gracious to let me know if you will ask the otherwise most deservedly esteemed, Robert Lawrence - not to omit yourself - this question : “Why does ‘information’ currently completely lack proper (good & verifiable) identity & definition ? Why has it not been explicitly factored into any ‘consciousness’ - or even AI - studies ? And why has it been so thoughtlessly conflated with ‘computer digits’, & ‘thinking’ with mere counting & computing ?
Robert Lawrence Kuhn has been going round and round for many years around those questions. I think he needs a good dose of transcendence to break the spell
Robert is a greate thinker!
Let's make sure to recognize the incredible fans and their unwavering support!!!
🙏🏽🙏🏽🙏🏽
He's a hidden Gem on YT. I am also very much looking forward to this thank you both.
Thank you for watching. It was a privilege and pleasure for me personally. CTT genuinely changed my life for the better. Hope you enjoy the conversation. Feel free to reply to my pinned comment if you have any questions for Robert.🙌🏽
He’s great
It's just so strange that science and scholarship has not made all of the worlds belief systems more rational and reasonable yet. Each one sits firmly upon religious traditions that preceded science and academy, and the intersection of them all lies in the study of consciousness. All of the world's problems exist because science fails to overcome this fear. It is the way that the world is stratified that resists it. All of the excesses and ridiculousness is happening because we do not want to offend these belief systems, yet a combined effort by anthropology, sociology, religious studies, philosophy, biology, chemistry, physics, and psychology can tell the story about how each of them have made us what we are today and explain their respective contributions to what we have accomplished in social cohesion, justice, life, politics, community, family, and career; and the faculty of Women's Studies is ready to guide us in the unpacking and critical theory of each new social construction that becomes of it.
"𝘛𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘦 𝘪𝘴 𝘯𝘰 𝘴𝘶𝘤𝘩 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘢𝘴 𝘱𝘩𝘪𝘭𝘰𝘴𝘰𝘱𝘩𝘺-𝘧𝘳𝘦𝘦 𝘴𝘤𝘪𝘦𝘯𝘤𝘦; 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘦 𝘪𝘴 𝘰𝘯𝘭𝘺 𝘴𝘤𝘪𝘦𝘯𝘤𝘦 𝘸𝘩𝘰𝘴𝘦 𝘱𝘩𝘪𝘭𝘰𝘴𝘰𝘱𝘩𝘪𝘤𝘢𝘭 𝘣𝘢𝘨𝘨𝘢𝘨𝘦 𝘪𝘴 𝘵𝘢𝘬𝘦𝘯 𝘰𝘯 𝘣𝘰𝘢𝘳𝘥 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩𝘰𝘶𝘵 𝘦𝘹𝘢𝘮𝘪𝘯𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯."
-Daniel Dennett, Darwin's Dangerous Idea, 1995
One of the greatest movies of all time is The Godfather. Creative literature and screenplays reflect deep underlying philosophical, psychological, sociological, political issues. The first character you see is the mortician (mortality) Americo Bonasera which translates as goodnight America (night is predetermined to follow day). He requests the death of two young men who assaulted his innocent daughter and broke her jaw. In the later scene Vito’s son innocent Michael sits in that same office with a bruised jaw plotting the assassination of two men. The movie is really based in “could Michael have done otherwise?”. His fate seems to become the head mobster as one older brother dies and another is passed over because he lacks the talent.
I would say contrarily that rationality does a good job at “offending religion” but religion does a very good job at preventing marginalization because like great literature it reflects deeper parts of the human mind.
ruclips.net/video/eZHsmb4ezEk/видео.htmlsi=ERKX6y1A-uHqfG-p
@@vicp7124 I agree with the role literature and screenplay and art play in everything, but I don't agree with the role religion plays in the study of consciousness; science should have primary role in the same way science plays a primary role in literature, art, and art. Art supports science but doesn't contradict it ontologically, and religion needs to follow suit. For that to happen, science will need to study areas now considered to be sacred, and compare them.
@@shawnewaltonifyTrue but you can argue from the other pov. Before the Enlightenment and Newton, the Church was the central Western Institution of culture and learning. The tensions most cite today are between the fundamentalists and the science extremists.
@@vicp7124 it would be great if there was more common sense understanding that some scientistific discoveries are still held back by this, and as the pile of undiscoverables grows, they become more and more pertinent and closer to the central issues on the globe.
Fantastic guy. Enjoyed listening to the end when he recanted about the woman from Bakersfield who watched him. Robert is ten years older than me and a fellow New Yorker. I believe he is also of the jewish background. Growing up with jewish friends and their families, they have a very objective on life and question any type of authority. Just think Robert drew some inspiration from another New Yorker who is ten years older than him. ruclips.net/video/vjH8V-D3ZuA/видео.htmlsi=mIM6Vte-PzcQknIP
designedbyai AI fixes this. Kuhn's consciousness exploration project.
Define "truth"
Define "define"
"80 theories of consciousness", huh?!
that makes me think of what einstein said when he was told about a book called "100 authors against einstein"
he said, "why 100? if I was wrong, 1 would be enough"
so why 80 theories? if 1 was right, it would be enough
but you know what they say
those who can, think
those who can't...they compile taxonomies
I hope they cure aging and you live young forever and for free in eternal pleasure bodies.
You put your life that I understand but how do you put your sole
Language is the problem. No language, no hard problem. Pretty simple.
Once we added "ness" to the word conscious
It was all down hill.
Decadence prospers exclusively through ignorance.
it is all really awareness consciousness is an overthought meaningless concept like infinity neither can exist in nature
Taxonomy has nothing to do with consciousness!
Third person antagonist. Write a book.
whow he can provide guys from the global military industry all the information to weaponize everything around consciousness. without any form of conscience being involved. interesting
Information is actually dual.
Getting "Closer to truth " is a goal or target, objective -- a syntropic process, teleological.
If you are seeking truth then you are using duality!
Absolute truth is dual to relative truth -- Hume's fork.
The past (everything) is dual to the future (nothing) -- time duality.
We know everything about the past as we have experienced or measured it and nothing about the future as it has not happened yet.
"Physics is what we know and metaphysics is what we do not know" -- Bertrand Russell.
Knowledge is dual!
Physics (a posteriori or measured) is dual to metaphysics (a priori or not measured) -- synthetic a priori knowledge, Immanuel Kant.
Absolute time (Galileo) is dual to relative time (Einstein) -- time duality.
Time is a dual concept.
Space is dual to time -- Einstein.
Everything (a posteriori) is dual to nothing (a priori) synthesizes the present (something).
Concepts are dual to percepts -- the mind duality of Immanuel Kant.
The concept of the future or nothing is built from your past experiences or knowledge (history, memory).
"Always two there are" -- Yoda.
Your mind is creating something from nothing -- time duality!
Seeking truth requires duality!
Questions are dual to answers.
If knowledge is dual then information must be dual -- syntax is dual to semantics.
He is very impressed by consciousness.
But he has no interest in unconsciousness.
Why am I unconscious when I am asleep ?
Depends. Are you dreaming?
@@drtevinnaidu
Not at the moment.
But when I am dreaming, I'm not actually conscious.
I mean, I am not aware of my surroundings, such as the bed.
@@drtevinnaidu
We spend about a third of our lives unconscious.
And obviously, unconscious when we are not alive.
So unconsciousness is the norm, the usual condition.
@@drtevinnaidu
When the sun becomes a red giant, we will all be unconscious !
And peace will return. No more wars. No more pain.
And no more religion. Bliss !
Lol. I think Robert is a reluctant atheist.
Ask him why every single one of those 220 theories is wrong.
My theory shows why and where they're all wrong and then it fixes that singular problem
Reply to my pinned comment with a summary of your theory, and I'll tell Robert about it during our next conversation.
@drtevinnaidu Robert has it. We have exchanged emails. He admits there is merit (he saved the attachments) he hasn't shown me where I'm wrong. He shared with me the direction he intends to take with his inquiry, which is odd, I think. As if he was telling me that the reason he isn't interviewing me is due to his wish to move in a certain direction
This is not the path that leads to Truth and conclusion. This is simply a continuation down the path of delusion
There are subtle nuances at these highest levels of inquiry and for some reason I am able to detect them. Robert is looking to reinforce his beliefs/world view. He isn't ready for truth
I'm not sure you are either
Problem, reaction. solution (target) -- the Hegelian dialectic.
If you want problems you are using the Hegelian dialectic.
Getting "Closer to truth " is a goal or target, objective -- a syntropic process, teleological.
If you are seeking truth then you are using duality!
Absolute truth is dual to relative truth -- Hume's fork.
The past (everything) is dual to the future (nothing) -- time duality.
We know everything about the past as we have experienced or measured it and nothing about the future as it has not happened yet.
"Physics is what we know and metaphysics is what we do not know" -- Bertrand Russell.
Knowledge is dual!
Physics (a posteriori or measured) is dual to metaphysics (a priori or not measured) -- synthetic a priori knowledge, Immanuel Kant.
Absolute time (Galileo) is dual to relative time (Einstein) -- time duality.
Time is a dual concept.
Space is dual to time -- Einstein.
Everything (a posteriori) is dual to nothing (a priori) synthesizes the present (something).
Concepts are dual to percepts -- the mind duality of Immanuel Kant.
The concept of the future or nothing is built from your past experiences or knowledge (history, memory).
"Always two there are" -- Yoda.
Your mind is creating something from nothing -- time duality!
Seeking truth requires duality!
Questions are dual to answers.