I would have said exactly the same... I am reading a book that is exactly about this topic as well. I wish Sr. Ilia Delio, the author of "The Not-Yet God, Carl Jung, Teilhard de Chardin and the Relational Whole" could have been included in this conversation. Her book is about this very topic.
What a wonderful conversation between Dr. Iian McGilchrist and Bernardo Kastrup. Humanity becomes visible and alive. With the deepest appreciation and reverence, I thank all of you. 🙏♥️🌍🌏🌎🌿🕊🎵🎶💫✨️💫
Holy sh*** it FINALLY happened! The long-awaited Iain and Bernardo dialogue debut!!! For the past 3 years, I’ve had the honor of being a direct student of these two brilliant minds and my life is forever (and ongoingly) changed. I’ve been trying to arrange for Iain to be our guest in the BK class… this debut dialogue is a great launch pad!!!
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, Bernie displayed abject ignorance when discussing the topic of animal consumption. Hopefully, he will one day realize how incredibly hypocritical he is in this regard, 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 how did your life change exactly? I'm still grasping how they are contributing to a better world, by talking and writing about how the world should be better...
@@FilipinaVegana I am well bellow this level of eloquence , conceptual clarity and depth of philosophical thought you have just express. I do believe that you are right in describing Benardo's philosophy as being close to spiritual teaching of Adavita Vedanta. What you refered to as "his infatile uderstanding of suffering " is , I believe , the difference between eastern end western thoughts . His approach to this is in line with christian religion and Jung death psychology which is much closer to me. I understand this much better. Or, at list seems, to me I understood it better. I am not English and I learn English when I was almost 40 so my apology for bad spelling and grammar
My God, you just moved me to tears because your conversation on truth hit the nail so much on the problem I face with some people. Thank you very much !
Amazing conversation. It's so gratifying to hear people that are capable of verbalising and clarifying some of the randomness that floats around in my head haha. Thank you! 🙏
I can’t believe I not only tolerate the idea of God, I embrace it as true. I was a devout, staunch atheist until I actually began to reason it all out… and explore. These two in conversation makes me delighted to be alive. Even in these end times.
@@nickwest9039that’s right. I now see that it takes enormous effort and hubris to overlook the fact there is a god 1:05:19. I don’t pretend to know more than that but I can say the more I ask to be revealed is revealed. And love really is the key.
THANK YOU. It is such a refreshing pleasure to hear these two men talk together. It rekindles optimism in me. And thanks to the interviewer for giving them lots of space. Wonderful wonderful
This is amazing...serendipitous...just yesterday i was thinking how amazing it would be to have both these giants on one platform and here we are today...❤
Insane match up. Thank you for this. Dr. McGilchrist' books have been some of the most illuminating books I've ever decided to read. And I've only just begun. The more I read his book The Matter With Things the more important and almost life changing it appears to be for me
@@Louis.R inspired by a personal reading of Schopenhauer. If he was explicitly restating the man, the rest of academic philosophy wouldn't have gotten his metaphysics so utterly wrong.
What an amazing start to this discussion between two great thinkers - what is consciousness? In fact, the Vedas proclaim - “yato vAcho nivartate; aprApya manasA saH: Anandam brahmaNo vidwAn”. Meaning - “where speaking ceases to exist; that which cannot be grasped by the mind; the wise say brAhman or consciousness is pure bliss / experience / absolute truth”. Also interesting to point out that there is a branch of logic that was developed for this called “neti vAda” or “not that” to arrive at “what that is”. The realization that consciousness is not all that 😊
Very meaningful and timely discussion, thank you for sharing! 👍💡 Here is a formula of relevance: That which religions refer to as "God" = That which science refers to as "Nature" = That which the philosophy of panpsychism refers to as "Consciousness" = That which the philosophy of analytic idealism refers to as "Mind at large" = Awareness.
1:09:22 this way of understanding God as not being omnipotent or intervening would differ from the traditional Christian conception, as I understand it. Can anyone point me to any YT vids or articles where Iain or Bernado have addressed this with a Christian thinker or where they’ve gone into more detail about their objections to the Christian point of view? How brilliant to witness this conversation. Thanks chaps ❤
I felt that the Jung reincarnate was very demure when Iain said he would make a great psychiatrist!! This is a delightful watch not least for Iaian and Bernardo's delight in one another :)
To answer the final question on the meaning of this life.. probably many.. but one of the reasons must be to re-embrace our actual home (being in heaven).. Imagine the joy of not knowing oneself then after death going through the process of being brought back up to heaven! This happens hundreds of thousands of times a day.. the then reality of heaven for however many years until the next life would bring back infinite joy.. Such a good feeling/feelings..
Wonderful conversation 👏🏻 Loved listening to them both, but Bernardo possesses my "favorite brain" in the world bar none! I found the section where they discussed "truth" to be particularly fascinating, especially by omission. What seemed to be omitted is any association of truth with self knowledge. From one perspective, the only thing we don't know or understand is exactly *what* we are. We know how we appear, as a body/mind/sense complex with an ego running the show; and we know how the creation appears to us, but what exactly the essence of either/both is is what is unknown. The common denominator for why "truth" seems to be of such utmost importance to everyone, which seemed elusive to both speakers, seems like it would be obvious if it is associated with self knowledge. If we do not know what we actually are, and we are interested in knowing (which if we don't think we are, we almost certainly will be once our demise is imminent), then inevitably we feel some or other degree of existential doubt, and along with it, fear of nonexistence. I wish I could have presented this observation/question to them, and heard their take on whether the ubiquitous nature of the "importance of truth" is because in whatever form it appears, it is ultimately a proxy for self knowledge. After all, the only "thing" (which of course is not one) that never appears and is always present is "me," so imagine the benefit (to make a monstrous understatement) of knowing with a settled certainty what that is?
Fab to listen in to you amazing minds in motion 😊 I think Iain's 'encounter' is like Marx's 'dialectic'; I think the triad of goodness, beauty and truth are like god, Mary and Jesus (and I'm an 'atheist'); and I think this kind of conversation takes us closer to our capacity to appreciate each other as aspects of a thinking universe - and political forms which reflect that. As a composer I hear, feel and form music 'unconsciously' then apply thought to grasp those events. So... when we ask "what is consciousness" we must address what is 'unconsciousness'... What do yous think about Parmenedes "It is useful to think, and so to say, that Being is"? (and Heidegger's interpretations?) Love you both xxx
What is consciousness and how did we get there? And, Iain says it's a process of co creation, and how we come about....And I only see it as consciousness is conscience. "It comes about through attention...." And there is the consciousness and conscience behind McGilchrist, co creation. It's that damn wallpaper and the aesthetically pleasing and homey backgrounds he has behind and around him. You may laugh, but some of us watch McGilchrist just for his background and home. And we listen, yes, but we are looking at those patterns around him....I often send my sister the latest, look at the latest McGilchrist! We make jokes about it.
Avid follower of both. Brilliant minds. I think Dr IM did not have a complete understanding of Dr BK, and i was very pleased that it appears their ideas resonate so well. And that IM has become aware of this and is pleased. If you have read and listened to both, you must feel that they are speaking 2 different languages (Neuroscience for IM, elite physics/elite philosophy for BK), but arriving at the same conclusion. That there is fundamental purpose in life! Consciousness is primary, and God is real
Just this - God is change less - being the Essence of Change - as in everything. Change is the process - one : moving from the Divine State and two : returning to the Source Where there is movement - life expresses itself Where there is absolute stillness - is Absolute - alone.
Thank you for this wonderful conversation! Lovr both of these thinkers... A question: when McGilchrist said towards the very end that he was associated with some small seed communities, could you tell me what they are more specifically?
As many of the commenters have said, I’m a big fan of both, great conversation. I find both convincing so I have to think about where they disagree (particularly the whole “dashboard” idea)
Fittedness is the co-pilot, we can not trust ourselves, it’s not the dashboard but the feelings. School taught ‘I know before I am’ but we are born before knowing anything but the feelings before the pattern of words and the force required to accept words for ‘feelings’. Individualism sucks, we need each other more than we believe. Care is before value. Stupid and evil, can be judged by the same results. M Atwood
God is Nature. God is the Universe. We are living within God. We are part of God. When we enjoy and love Nature, the Universe, we are adding love to God, and to ourselves. So, our purpose in life is to spread love, no matter where we are. Do everything with Joy and Love. It's the butterfly effect. I Love you all. 🤗💕🥰
God is not nature, God is the top of a hierarchy that is capable to create and invent. Nature is just a local environment, with life as a derivative of God.
I like McGilchrist’ s “ phases” of consciousness. However, although consciousness may be predominantly a “ process “ it has structure and is a “thing “ in the same sense that spirit is a “thing” and more like language as a “ thing”. Furthermore consider: There are “ kinds” of things. There are “ images”( patterns, structures) of things. There are “likenesses”of things. These conditions of things allow us to “ name” things( as is one of the callings to humans). “Naming” gives us identity ( CTMU) . This naming lends us understanding of categories. These categories blend into each other. Each category is fractal. In fractals perspective ( position of iteration is not going deeper into the fractal it is a further division, a smaller fraction of the same iteration) . Your perspective of your perception commands / determines your attention /attending. Considering phases of consciousness: An octopus swimming along without identifiable shape shifting is in a state of consciousness like in the experiment where people are asked to perform a specific action when they are aware of the function of the environment to which they are told/commanded/communicated they ought to perform that specific action. This is a negative correspondence with neural activity ( it can be shown that the decision to act was prior to the awareness of the intention to act). However when a shape shifting octopus sees/senses danger/food, it immediately changes patterns of its skin to match the environment. This is focused negative/positive phase of consciousness. The octopus has to be in direct control of what it is doing in relation to its environment. However this does not mean that it is “aware” of every chemical reaction taking place caused by one to one action/awareness. Hunting and running may be a third phase of consciousness especially if hunting/evading require tools or directive manipulation of the environment. This phase is either one:one or favors a positive correspondence to neural activity. Curiously, consider the eyes of an octopus vs the eyes of a human. Consider the relationship of the internal structure ( retinal cell direction) and that relationship with the part of the body being “ shape shifted”. ( I won’t give away the store just yet).
We seem to be collectively fond of reaching out in all directions to ease the pain that is inherent in being. In the world of thinking and abstraction the pain manifests as contradiction. We think ourselves upside down trying to find resolutions to the conflict that is woven into the fabric of being. I am wondering if this preoccupation is the psychological foundation off idealism/physicalism - theism/atheism etc. In that sense all these philosophical dispositions are, more or less, reductive.
I would have said exactly the same aa others about how much I love these to people, Iain and Bernardo - Bravo!!!... I am reading a book that is exactly about this topic as well. I wish Sr. Ilia Delio, the author of "The Not-Yet God, Carl Jung, Teilhard de Chardin and the Relational Whole" could have been included in this conversation. Her book is about this very topic.
Interesting disagreement on Karl Friston's work. I think Ian's point about there being things in our experience that can not easily reduced to measureable "dashboard" quantities and that we are "conscious" of more than we are aware of. I don't know the math of the matter, but I wonder Bernardo if the markov boundary allows us to "experience" or be "conscious" of the upper boundary of entropy but not be aware of it all. That is that our awareness acts as a filter that reduces the whole of our conscious experience in order to not go into entropy dissolution. There are phenomenological reports of consciousness expanding outside the "markov boundary" ie the body. Does the math of Friston limit consciousness to within the boundary. Or does it allow, like integrated information theory, for their to be "higher" levels of consciousness consciousness without the entropy dissolution of the constituitive parts?
Consciousness is primarily an extended nervous system. Consciousness is fractal, same as the impulsivity of expression. Consciousness is an alert system, a canary in the mine/mind. Consciousness is a forward facing awareness, while people live in the past, looking backwards for answers/escape. Consciousness is a trauma response.
Very, very interesting conversation indeed! And in reference to the middle of the talk I'd like to say: yes, I think you both are very right in what you say about reductionist materialists trying to vehemently persuade (at all cost) others of their nihilistic world view. It is furthermore interesting that Iain underlines this vehemence or downright anger with which they tend to do that, as this emotion, if I am not mistaken, is a left brain hemisphere quality. Or am I mistaken? And if my reasoning here is correct, might it then also be reasonable to think that that actual vehemence/anger is keeping those who have invested so much time and energy in a career and identity of being a hard-nosed reductionist materialist, wired in that left-hemisphere way of clear-cut convinction altogether?
I think Ian's and Bernardo's views CAN be reconciled by saying that the right hemisphere, although representational, provides a more accurate and rich representation of the world. Anybody?
Spinoza had access to translations of the Upanishads probably from the libarary in Alexandria. .He was merely repeating " There is nothing second to The Source"
I have listened to and resonate with BK more, but on "what is real" just prior to 18:32 I agree with McGilcheist far more. The whole "everything is illusion" position isn't supported by experience. Like IM said, we just understand it incorrectly.
What if we ARE God, having individual experiences simultaneously? We are all the divine as individual points of attention, infinite concious awareness, experiencing 3-dimentional reality that we are also creating.
I think what drives people like Richard Dawkins is that they crave the feeling of already knowing what is true more than the feeling of always wanting to learn what is more true. So when others disagree with Dawkins, their ideas must be quashed as a threat to their know-it-all operating system.
Bernardo has almost all the knowledge he achieved but as he said he wasn’t given the imagination and he slightly envy Dante and yung because imagination is very rare and uncommon bless the very few one who were given access to the world of imagination it’s a magical world and life looses it meaning the soul arises to it’s highest pick what a gift , and gratitude to god
Wigner boxes and Schrodinger’s cat: given that tests on consciousness show a delay in the positive but equal in the negative ( do this vs don’t do this) the effect is that our senses observe( our consciousness is not synonymous with our senses).Consciousness as post observation vs observation? We delay in the positive because it hasn’t happened but are equal in the negatives because they have happened. This is in regard to observations pre awareness. That is : consciousness is aware simultaneously with the already observed but delayed with the new experience or previously not observed. Given the infinite regress of Wigner boxes this seems to be a function of observation and consciousness. Consciousness corresponds to observation as delayed in the positive experience but simultaneous in the negative experience( experience of action?). Ie God left him to know what was in his heart… If I plan a vacation I have not gone on vacation. However if I choose to cancel, not go on vacation I know immediately that I am not or did not go.
We are God embodiment as we name things. It is God incarnation, when somebody personnalise an experience, it exist not just subsist or waiting to be. I Am, that I AM, I Am that.
My two favorite living thinkers talking to each other. I can't express how much gratitude I have for this.
We play for the same team 👍
Was going to say the same.
Me too ❤
For thee. Keep watch!
I would have said exactly the same... I am reading a book that is exactly about this topic as well. I wish Sr. Ilia Delio, the author of "The Not-Yet God, Carl Jung, Teilhard de Chardin and the Relational Whole" could have been included in this conversation. Her book is about this very topic.
What a wonderful conversation between Dr. Iian McGilchrist and Bernardo Kastrup. Humanity becomes visible and alive.
With the deepest appreciation and reverence, I thank all of you.
🙏♥️🌍🌏🌎🌿🕊🎵🎶💫✨️💫
Holy sh*** it FINALLY happened! The long-awaited Iain and Bernardo dialogue debut!!! For the past 3 years, I’ve had the honor of being a direct student of these two brilliant minds and my life is forever (and ongoingly) changed. I’ve been trying to arrange for Iain to be our guest in the BK class… this debut dialogue is a great launch pad!!!
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, Bernie displayed abject ignorance when discussing the topic of animal consumption. Hopefully, he will one day realize how incredibly hypocritical he is in this regard, 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. ;)
@@FilipinaVegana Why do you comment on all of Kastrup's interviews? You're obsessed.
So how did your life change exactly? I'm still grasping how they are contributing to a better world, by talking and writing about how the world should be better...
@@FilipinaVegana i'd try to dissolve this narrow and certain world view, and see if it remakes itself, you're far to sure to be right, good luck
@@FilipinaVegana I am well bellow this level of eloquence , conceptual clarity and depth of philosophical thought you have just express. I do believe that you are right in describing Benardo's philosophy as being close to spiritual teaching of Adavita Vedanta. What you refered to as "his infatile uderstanding of suffering " is , I believe , the difference between eastern end western thoughts . His approach to this is in line with christian religion and Jung death psychology which is much closer to me. I understand this much better. Or, at list seems, to me I understood it better. I am not English and I learn English when I was almost 40 so my apology for bad spelling and grammar
What a joy to hear them resonate with each other.
Two of greatest intellectual heros in my life. Absolutely sublime. Thank you.
Read René Girard
Genuinely wanted these two to speak for ages. It did not disappoint ❤
My God, you just moved me to tears because your conversation on truth hit the nail so much on the problem I face with some people. Thank you very much !
Amazing conversation. It's so gratifying to hear people that are capable of verbalising and clarifying some of the randomness that floats around in my head haha. Thank you! 🙏
What a privilege to listen to two amazing men..full of heart intelligence culture knowledge curiosity kindness and Love❤
Thank you 🙏🙌🥰
Great meeeting. Thank you for sharing! Great public service for education and thinking.
So comforting listening to the conversation about God and reason and truth...Keep these coming please!!!!
I can’t believe I not only tolerate the idea of God, I embrace it as true.
I was a devout, staunch atheist until I actually began to reason it all out… and explore.
These two in conversation makes me delighted to be alive. Even in these end times.
So you REGRESSED in your metaphysical position.
No he improved and had greater insight into metaphysics.
@, how so?
@@nickwest9039that’s right.
I now see that it takes enormous effort and hubris to overlook the fact there is a god 1:05:19.
I don’t pretend to know more than that but I can say the more I ask to be revealed is revealed. And love really is the key.
@@FilipinaVegana Why did you capitalise "regressed"? I sense some hidden resentment there. Using the scientific method, can you prove your statement?
THANK YOU. It is such a refreshing pleasure to hear these two men talk together. It rekindles optimism in me. And thanks to the interviewer for giving them lots of space.
Wonderful wonderful
FINALLY. A conversation between these two has been on my wish list for too long!
This is amazing...serendipitous...just yesterday i was thinking how amazing it would be to have both these giants on one platform and here we are today...❤
This was such a beautiful, wonderful conversation. Iain and Bernardo have woken me from an atheist death spiral. They are like a net under a highwire.
Brilliant!!! I'm only a half hour in but I just had to pause to express enormous gratitude for this epic matchup!!!🙏
Insane match up. Thank you for this. Dr. McGilchrist' books have been some of the most illuminating books I've ever decided to read. And I've only just begun. The more I read his book The Matter With Things the more important and almost life changing it appears to be for me
LITERALLY insane.
@@FilipinaVeganayou really don't know what you are talking about
Bernardo's ideas resonates very closly with Islamic concept of Waḥdat al-wujūd meaning "the Unity of Existence"
He got all his ideas from Schopenhauer
@@Louis.Rit’s true, he changes the language , adds support from neuroscience and quantum physics.
It's the same truth that is found in the scriptures of all the major religions including science and whoever got to name the Universe. 🙏
@ Not so.
@@Louis.R inspired by a personal reading of Schopenhauer. If he was explicitly restating the man, the rest of academic philosophy wouldn't have gotten his metaphysics so utterly wrong.
I don’t know is this the first time they’ve talked together live I know everyone has been wanting to get them together…
Here it is thank you so much!
Thank you for hosting 🙏 Great conversation!
Thank you so much! I’ve wanted to hear a conversation between these two for such a long time. Very inspiring!
What an amazing start to this discussion between two great thinkers - what is consciousness?
In fact, the Vedas proclaim - “yato vAcho nivartate; aprApya manasA saH: Anandam brahmaNo vidwAn”. Meaning - “where speaking ceases to exist; that which cannot be grasped by the mind; the wise say brAhman or consciousness is pure bliss / experience / absolute truth”.
Also interesting to point out that there is a branch of logic that was developed for this called “neti vAda” or “not that” to arrive at “what that is”. The realization that consciousness is not all that 😊
Our purpose is to live.
Very meaningful and timely discussion, thank you for sharing! 👍💡
Here is a formula of relevance:
That which religions refer to as "God" = That which science refers to as "Nature" = That which the philosophy of panpsychism refers to as "Consciousness" = That which the philosophy of analytic idealism refers to as "Mind at large" = Awareness.
Incredible podcast. Two giga brains having the best time together vibing off of each other to grow and learn.
Loved this! I’m going to listen again to make sure I haven’t missed anything!
I love listening to Bernado Kastrup. I love his voice, his accent, his ideas
Wow! Thank you for this Niall..... brilliant conversation 😊❤
Thank you both.
I thoroughly enjoyed listening. Thank you both for such an interesting listen. Makes such a nice change to hear such gentle wisdom.
This was utterly brilliant. Thank you 🙏
Gentlemen.... I'm no one of any distinction. However thank you both this was a wonderful mutual exploration and yes yes yes... ❤❤❤ Arwen
My Host Meek Niall thank you for attending unto our own and to have sincere conversations with our HOST Bernardo and our pop Iain Love you beloved!
These two giants are such a treat ❤
More discussion like this, please. Thank you.
I love these two. So exciting.
This is the duo I’ve been praying for!!
Nice talking Niell!! Quite happy in living in these times of expanding science into consciousness.
1:09:22 this way of understanding God as not being omnipotent or intervening would differ from the traditional Christian conception, as I understand it. Can anyone point me to any YT vids or articles where Iain or Bernado have addressed this with a Christian thinker or where they’ve gone into more detail about their objections to the Christian point of view?
How brilliant to witness this conversation. Thanks chaps ❤
Yay! Looking forward to this so much ...
I felt that the Jung reincarnate was very demure when Iain said he would make a great psychiatrist!! This is a delightful watch not least for Iaian and Bernardo's delight in one another :)
oops I can't spell
Imagine if our politicians were this intelligent and debated this respectfully.
so cute that each other have so much fun talking together 💗💗
To answer the final question on the meaning of this life.. probably many.. but one of the reasons must be to re-embrace our actual home (being in heaven).. Imagine the joy of not knowing oneself then after death going through the process of being brought back up to heaven! This happens hundreds of thousands of times a day.. the then reality of heaven for however many years until the next life would bring back infinite joy.. Such a good feeling/feelings..
Comment for the algorithm.
Thanks for video 👍
Wonderful conversation 👏🏻
Loved listening to them both, but Bernardo possesses my "favorite brain" in the world bar none! I found the section where they discussed "truth" to be particularly fascinating, especially by omission.
What seemed to be omitted is any association of truth with self knowledge. From one perspective, the only thing we don't know or understand is exactly *what* we are. We know how we appear, as a body/mind/sense complex with an ego running the show; and we know how the creation appears to us, but what exactly the essence of either/both is is what is unknown.
The common denominator for why "truth" seems to be of such utmost importance to everyone, which seemed elusive to both speakers, seems like it would be obvious if it is associated with self knowledge.
If we do not know what we actually are, and we are interested in knowing (which if we don't think we are, we almost certainly will be once our demise is imminent), then inevitably we feel some or other degree of existential doubt, and along with it, fear of nonexistence.
I wish I could have presented this observation/question to them, and heard their take on whether the ubiquitous nature of the "importance of truth" is because in whatever form it appears, it is ultimately a proxy for self knowledge.
After all, the only "thing" (which of course is not one) that never appears and is always present is "me," so imagine the benefit (to make a monstrous understatement) of knowing with a settled certainty what that is?
This sounds something like Jung was asking of each and every one of us.
What am I ?
It is the far more pertinent question.
🤝👍Wszystkiego DOBREGO dla WAS👍DZiĘKUjĘ👍🤝
Fab to listen in to you amazing minds in motion 😊 I think Iain's 'encounter' is like Marx's 'dialectic'; I think the triad of goodness, beauty and truth are like god, Mary and Jesus (and I'm an 'atheist'); and I think this kind of conversation takes us closer to our capacity to appreciate each other as aspects of a thinking universe - and political forms which reflect that. As a composer I hear, feel and form music 'unconsciously' then apply thought to grasp those events. So... when we ask "what is consciousness" we must address what is 'unconsciousness'... What do yous think about Parmenedes "It is useful to think, and so to say, that Being is"? (and Heidegger's interpretations?) Love you both xxx
LOVE SELF only and it shall reflect to ALL, for I AM ONE , I AM EVERYTHING EVERYWHERE ALL AT ONCE
Fantastic conversation. Love to both. Thank you.
What is consciousness and how did we get there? And, Iain says it's a process of co creation, and how we come about....And I only see it as consciousness is conscience. "It comes about through attention...." And there is the consciousness and conscience behind McGilchrist, co creation. It's that damn wallpaper and the aesthetically pleasing and homey backgrounds he has behind and around him. You may laugh, but some of us watch McGilchrist just for his background and home. And we listen, yes, but we are looking at those patterns around him....I often send my sister the latest, look at the latest McGilchrist! We make jokes about it.
Finally! Thx!
Avid follower of both. Brilliant minds. I think Dr IM did not have a complete understanding of Dr BK, and i was very pleased that it appears their ideas resonate so well. And that IM has become aware of this and is pleased. If you have read and listened to both, you must feel that they are speaking 2 different languages (Neuroscience for IM, elite physics/elite philosophy for BK), but arriving at the same conclusion. That there is fundamental purpose in life! Consciousness is primary, and God is real
"All that you touch- you change
All that you change- changes you
The only lasting truth is change
God is change"
-Octavia Butler
Just this - God is change less - being the Essence of Change - as in everything.
Change is the process - one : moving from the Divine State and two : returning to the Source
Where there is movement - life expresses itself
Where there is absolute stillness - is Absolute - alone.
Finally Bernardo and Iain!!
Thank you for this wonderful conversation! Lovr both of these thinkers... A question: when McGilchrist said towards the very end that he was associated with some small seed communities, could you tell me what they are more specifically?
At last !!! 🤩🤩
Truth need not to force. But without force can be obtained.
Wonderful! Thanks!
Brilliant! They both come at such similar things in such different ways
58:53 You shouldn't debunk Strawsons - it's better to formulate Steelsons and then critique them
As many of the commenters have said, I’m a big fan of both, great conversation. I find both convincing so I have to think about where they disagree (particularly the whole “dashboard” idea)
When was this recorded ?
Wed, 22nd Jan, 2025 : )
Fittedness is the co-pilot, we can not trust ourselves, it’s not the dashboard but the feelings.
School taught ‘I know before I am’ but we are born before knowing anything but the feelings before the pattern of words and the force required to accept words for ‘feelings’.
Individualism sucks, we need each other more than we believe.
Care is before value.
Stupid and evil, can be judged by the same results. M Atwood
I AM the only ONE who knows MY feelings and thoughts , hence I AM GOD of me with CHOICE , I AM the CREATOR of my reality
There we have it - and maybe things change - as they must - as change is the dynamic universal.
God is Nature. God is the Universe. We are living within God. We are part of God. When we enjoy and love Nature, the Universe, we are adding love to God, and to ourselves. So, our purpose in life is to spread love, no matter where we are. Do everything with Joy and Love. It's the butterfly effect. I Love you all. 🤗💕🥰
That’s word salad pablum
God is not nature, God is the top of a hierarchy that is capable to create and invent. Nature is just a local environment, with life as a derivative of God.
@@johnhall2708 Pablum? You're so fucking worried about censorship you can't say what you really want to say. I have zero respect.
In the mystic practice - is dissolving into Love - to become Love
Which then again - merges into the heart of the Beloved - in an Absolute way.
@theostapel 🤗💕🥰
👍
We are here to one give a unique perspective to source, also to optimize for discern and moral agency
I like McGilchrist’ s “ phases” of consciousness. However, although consciousness may be predominantly a “ process “ it has structure and is a “thing “ in the same sense that spirit is a “thing” and more like language as a “ thing”.
Furthermore consider:
There are “ kinds” of things.
There are “ images”( patterns, structures) of things.
There are “likenesses”of things.
These conditions of things allow us to “ name” things( as is one of the callings to humans). “Naming” gives us identity ( CTMU) . This naming lends us understanding of categories. These categories blend into each other. Each category is fractal. In fractals perspective ( position of iteration is not going deeper into the fractal it is a further division, a smaller fraction of the same iteration) . Your perspective of your perception commands / determines your attention /attending.
Considering phases of consciousness:
An octopus swimming along without identifiable shape shifting is in a state of consciousness like in the experiment where people are asked to perform a specific action when they are aware of the function of the environment to which they are told/commanded/communicated they ought to perform that specific action. This is a negative correspondence with neural activity ( it can be shown that the decision to act was prior to the awareness of the intention to act). However when a shape shifting octopus sees/senses danger/food, it immediately changes patterns of its skin to match the environment. This is focused negative/positive phase of consciousness. The octopus has to be in direct control of what it is doing in relation to its environment. However this does not mean that it is “aware” of every chemical reaction taking place caused by one to one action/awareness. Hunting and running may be a third phase of consciousness especially if hunting/evading require tools or directive manipulation of the environment. This phase is either one:one or favors a positive correspondence to neural activity. Curiously, consider the eyes of an octopus vs the eyes of a human. Consider the relationship of the internal structure ( retinal cell direction) and that relationship with the part of the body being “ shape shifted”. ( I won’t give away the store just yet).
I had a dream these two would speak. This is it.
These two are going to be great friends 🌸
Wonderful ❤
❤❤❤❤❤ too good!!
We seem to be collectively fond of reaching out in all directions to ease the pain that is inherent in being. In the world of thinking and abstraction the pain manifests as contradiction. We think ourselves upside down trying to find resolutions to the conflict that is woven into the fabric of being.
I am wondering if this preoccupation is the psychological foundation off idealism/physicalism - theism/atheism etc. In that sense all these philosophical dispositions are, more or less, reductive.
I would have said exactly the same aa others about how much I love these to people, Iain and Bernardo - Bravo!!!... I am reading a book that is exactly about this topic as well. I wish Sr. Ilia Delio, the author of "The Not-Yet God, Carl Jung, Teilhard de Chardin and the Relational Whole" could have been included in this conversation. Her book is about this very topic.
Dr McGilchrist is talking with Sr Ilia Delio on 13th June
Ohhhh yeeeaaaahhhh 😎
Interesting disagreement on Karl Friston's work. I think Ian's point about there being things in our experience that can not easily reduced to measureable "dashboard" quantities and that we are "conscious" of more than we are aware of. I don't know the math of the matter, but I wonder Bernardo if the markov boundary allows us to "experience" or be "conscious" of the upper boundary of entropy but not be aware of it all. That is that our awareness acts as a filter that reduces the whole of our conscious experience in order to not go into entropy dissolution. There are phenomenological reports of consciousness expanding outside the "markov boundary" ie the body. Does the math of Friston limit consciousness to within the boundary. Or does it allow, like integrated information theory, for their to be "higher" levels of consciousness consciousness without the entropy dissolution of the constituitive parts?
Thank U hx
Consciousness is primarily an extended nervous system.
Consciousness is fractal, same as the impulsivity of expression.
Consciousness is an alert system, a canary in the mine/mind.
Consciousness is a forward facing awareness, while people live in the past, looking backwards for answers/escape.
Consciousness is a trauma response.
Very, very interesting conversation indeed! And in reference to the middle of the talk I'd like to say: yes, I think you both are very right in what you say about reductionist materialists trying to vehemently persuade (at all cost) others of their nihilistic world view. It is furthermore interesting that Iain underlines this vehemence or downright anger with which they tend to do that, as this emotion, if I am not mistaken, is a left brain hemisphere quality. Or am I mistaken?
And if my reasoning here is correct, might it then also be reasonable to think that that actual vehemence/anger is keeping those who have invested so much time and energy in a career and identity of being a hard-nosed reductionist materialist, wired in that left-hemisphere way of clear-cut convinction altogether?
Pop Iain, thank you for thinking of thy Son. Likewise, i think of thee!
I think Ian's and Bernardo's views CAN be reconciled by saying that the right hemisphere, although representational, provides a more accurate and rich representation of the world. Anybody?
The Kew Gardens Christmas light show had a display projected on to a screen of water. From my perspective, the Xmas scene appeared to be moving in 3d.
That's odd Bernardo, only the other night I had a dream and was left with the sentence "The Spy Who Fell to Earth"! Ha! ;)
Spinoza had access to translations of the Upanishads probably from the libarary in Alexandria. .He was merely repeating " There is nothing second to The Source"
18:15
39:30
41:35
1:11:10
I have listened to and resonate with BK more, but on "what is real" just prior to 18:32 I agree with McGilcheist far more. The whole "everything is illusion" position isn't supported by experience. Like IM said, we just understand it incorrectly.
Niall thy shared "i" Am came with sincere conversations given just for thee and thy shared Feet. From here.
What if we ARE God, having individual experiences simultaneously? We are all the divine as individual points of attention, infinite concious awareness, experiencing 3-dimentional reality that we are also creating.
I think what drives people like Richard Dawkins is that they crave the feeling of already knowing what is true more than the feeling of always wanting to learn what is more true. So when others disagree with Dawkins, their ideas must be quashed as a threat to their know-it-all operating system.
my weekend starts now,
Kinda like how the countless You Tube Content Creators give us Content Consumers a window into viewing "worlds" we could never otherwise.
Anyone else pause to google the psychological meaning of "fluid compensation" ?
Really like Gilchrist..bc the other points have to reduce things rather than the infinite which is present in all experience a priori.
Bernardo has almost all the knowledge he achieved but as he said he wasn’t given the imagination and he slightly envy Dante and yung because imagination is very rare and uncommon bless the very few one who were given access to the world of imagination it’s a magical world and life looses it meaning the soul arises to it’s highest pick what a gift , and gratitude to god
FUCKING YES 🎉❤
Wigner boxes and Schrodinger’s cat: given that tests on consciousness show a delay in the positive but equal in the negative ( do this vs don’t do this) the effect is that our senses observe( our consciousness is not synonymous with our senses).Consciousness as post observation vs observation? We delay in the positive because it hasn’t happened but are equal in the negatives because they have happened. This is in regard to observations pre awareness.
That is : consciousness is aware simultaneously with the already observed but delayed with the new experience or previously not observed.
Given the infinite regress of Wigner boxes this seems to be a function of observation and consciousness. Consciousness corresponds to observation as delayed in the positive experience but simultaneous in the negative experience( experience of action?).
Ie
God left him to know what was in his heart…
If I plan a vacation I have not gone on vacation.
However if I choose to cancel, not go on vacation I know immediately that I am not or did not go.
I’m not a believer,not an agnostic and not an atheist …not sure what I am…
We are God embodiment as we name things. It is God incarnation, when somebody personnalise an experience, it exist not just subsist or waiting to be. I Am, that I AM, I Am that.
The brand new babies are super upgraded