Consciousness, Being and Animacy; Whitehead, Bergson and the Bifurcation of Nature
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 14 окт 2024
- An introduction to the topics of consciousness and philosophy of nature within the thought of Alfred North Whitehead and Henri Bergson.
patreon.com/Fo...
/ discord
#consciousness #philosophy #videoessay #philosophyofscience #bergson #henribergson #animism
Oh heck yes. Stop everything else. Close the other apps. A new Formscapes video is on. Weeeeeeeee🎉
Get hype over my new cheesy intro thingy lmfao
My sentiments exactly!! ❤️
@@kristinak2211 philosophy nerds unite
This is absolute gold. Can’t find content like yours anywhere else on RUclips. Please don’t stop.
Can't stop. Won't stop 😎
good. loving your work. thanks@@Formscapes
You have a clear and concise way of explaining very complex subjects and their interrelatedness in a very engaging and entertaining manner. Also, great images and your narration is excellent! Thank you!
Thank you so much! Glad you like what I'm doing here ☺
You are slowly correcting my device induced ADHD with these videos Formscapes lol. Good timing on this video, a friend of mine just sent me an article to read about some of Einstein's Theories (haven't read it yet). I think ill dig into some of Whiteheads material to send my friend in return, along with this video, pt.1 and pt.2.
You kill it Formscapes, dynamite work as usual buddy, thank you.
www.blogs.hss.ed.ac.uk/crag/2015/06/25/what-if-bergson-was-right-and-einstein-wrong/
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whitehead%27s_theory_of_gravitation
www.blogs.hss.ed.ac.uk/crag/2015/06/25/what-if-bergson-was-right-and-einstein-wrong/
Pure gold here. Thank you for your insights and effort.
Ive watched this five times, will probably watch it several more. Really great.
Thanks!
Formscapes is dope been waiting on a new one
I'm glad yall like the videos. I'm gonna keep em coming as regularly as possible
0. Potential = Actual
1. Actual = Becoming (actualized)
The actualization of potential is Eternal and the potential for actualization is Infinite, because only Eternity can fully embrace Infinity.
We are Life at large, experiencing itself as all of us simultaneously. Therefore, we are all It to an unknowable/inexhaustible extent, as the facets of a Diamond are 'both' distinct from each other 'and' the Diamond itself.
Love is the recognition of our shared Being.
Indeed. 0 is the Luminous Dark
@@Formscapes 💝
I watched your morphic resonance playlist and I think you've just become my new favorite
Thanks fam 😎
There’s you and there’s Galahad Eridanus. There seems to be some kind of convergence.
terrific content, i was familiar with the work of Levin and Sheldrake but this takes the interpretations to a whole new level.
thank you for your dedication, your efforts are hugely appreciated.
Keep up The Great Work! ;)
Thank You!
Wonderful video, deeply thought provoking. You have lit the fire of my interest for deeper engagement with process philosophy. It’s an astounding concept and almost criminal it remains on the fringe. Teeing it up with a recap of the origins of the Cartesian worldview that dominates Western scientific thinking and its crisis of exhaustion is the perfect introduction. It is so clearly exhausted and it’s fascinating to see intellectual quietism take hold in bastions of science rather than an honest search for a solution. Why this is so is a subject in itself. Maybe long advocacy for a dead or mechanistic universe has given the holders of these views dead hearts and dead souls?
A very big part of it is that the center of the intellectual world shifted from Germany to the U.S. following WWII. The dominant view in the U.S. is "If it works, it's true enough", in which "works" translates to "makes money". We see this in Feynman's infamous "shut up and calculate", and in the fiasco surrounding the development of the SSC in Houston; Spending money simply for the sake of creating jobs and stuffing pockets, while the word "science" gets thrown around as a smokescreen for bureaucratic corruption.
@@Formscapesinteresting. American mindset/philosophy is pragmatism, if it works its good enough like you said.
@@thobraa I would, however, not necessarily conflate the "pragmatism" of American culture with the epistemological "pragmatism" of James, Dewey, Peirce, etc. Those aren't really the same thing.
@@Formscapes not familiar with those names, just finding it interesting that their whole culture seems pragmatic, and ando that they created an different philosophical thought of pragmatism as opposed to the european philosophers. So I just found this to be a curious thing. Also it has occured to me what you are saying about the importance of wwii, how it made, at least where i live, english or more specifically american culture, the template par excellence. Whereas earlier german culture had a higher status.
Thank you for a fantastic channel, giving me so much food for thought. I’m in awe of your work and knowledge!
@@thobraa thank you!
Yeah the introduction alone to Process and Reality is SO good. Reading it for the first time made me feel wayyy less alone...like he was putting into clear terms ideas that I had vaguely had since childhood. I still go back to that book all the time in my 30's now just to help me with my own system building endeavors.
What was the process inside the big bang?
New Formscapes insanity video dropped everyone!!Bucke up for this one💪🏼🚜🏛️
😎👉👉
bot comment
great video good job :) you might wanna make a video on how post kantian philosophy takes on this theme in general ... im thinking of hegel schopenhauer and marx who all develop their philosophies based on what you have discussed in the first 10 minutes here :) happy to see phil content this well articulated
I talk about Kant more thoroughly in my most recent video "The Unfolding of the Human" but German Idealism is something I'm going to be talking about alot here in general
I was drawn to the channel because of the opening song, but I stay for the transcendent thoughts!
love it too! anyone knows the title?
Truly you are making great strides in accomplishing the great work.
Appreciated.
The ascended ones look favorably upon you!
lol your username tho
@@Formscapes what can I say,
*”He who lives the life shall know the doctrine!”*
-M. P. Hall
This is a high quality channel
I agree about your clear a concise speech
I wish i could speak so eloquently and thread words together so well x)
My mind sounds different than my words so i appreciate your abilities.
Thank you!
Digging the intro sequence and thanks for the videos.
Glad you liked it. I was slightly worried that it was a bit too long but I guess it's fine as is. I'll probably tweak it some over time though.
Loved the video.
I've been wondering how free will fits into ideas in this realm of thought. Unless I'm misunderstanding something (which isn't exactly unlikely lol) this seems to be just as compatible with determinism as a mechanistic world. Like, I think I can probably look at this super-set of all potentialities (I can't remember the terminology, mb) through the lense used for the many worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics, there's every version of me doing every possible thing. Since I do not know which version of me I'll be, I can pretend I have choice, but I am inevitably consciously experiencing exactly one of these life paths.
The many-worlds interpretation of quantum theory was a last-ditch effort to preserve the Newtonian clockwork universe by hiding it in an endless array of unobservable universes. It is as unscientific as saying "faeries did it" or "dark matter did it".
Living systems are indeterminate bc they make real decisions which select from possibilities. Nothing is "random". Randomness is a mathematical abstraction created to account for human uncertainty.
You decide which "version of you" you will be. You feel free because you are. This is just an obvious fact which no intelligent person ever questioned until we all became brainwashed into thinking that we were machines.
Modern "psychologists" will tell you otherwise bc convincing people that they have no free-will is great for convincing them that experimental drugs are the solutions to their problems - and also because those drugs tend to take away people's sense of agency, so it's very convenient if people believe that their agency was an illusion to begin with anyway.
@@Formscapesfairies are made of dark matter 🤷🏻😄
@@Formscapes my current workaround has been to live as if I have free will despite not believing I truly do in the grand scheme of things, and just living with the dissonance that's inherent with those beliefs.
Despite you greatly helping me understand the difference between potential and actual realities in the comment on the first ep of this series, I have trouble widening the scope of that concept. All potential realities exist as actual realities to some potential frame of reference, that's a core aspect to my own deterministic belief. While I still think that's valid (because the frame of reference is equally potential as the reality), I'm still struggling to make that distinction between potential and actual, certainly because of my own nature and the recency of this revelation to me. It almost feels like a slippery slope to me, because I still treat other potential reference frames as if they were real, namely in the perspectives of other conscious beings I encounter. I believe your conscious experience is as real as mine, but from my perspective it's technically a potential, not an actual (I think?). So if I already trest those as real it's easy to treat potential realities as real.
Sorry if this doesn't make sense. I'm not entirely sure if there's really an equivalence between potential realities and potential reference frames, but offhand they seem analagous.
@@FormscapesI never thought of randomness that way and I agree! I always had a hard time with these concepts; I just always said “it’s both random and determined somehow” but I like your take better!
@@JamesTWood Faeries are made out of subtle bodies and folk-consciousness. Dark matter is made out of lies.
27:00
At this point I realized the comments I made in the video before this one that you posted Pretty much line's up with how I perceived reality With the subjective and the objective being inexorably linked Through probabilistic fields That determined the potentiality of Futuristic events.
I do believe death has a unique role to play in this. I'm not sure exactly what happens to us when we die but I know everything is reducible to the most basic form of Existence being energy itself. It cannot be created nor destroyed which means we must be preserved in some way or another even if altered once we pass away.
Love Bergson- McGilchrist writes about him a lot. I found out his sister was married to the Golden Dawn dude. Sooo interesting
That's actually news to me. I should read a biography of him at some point.
Quite a thought-provoking video. I like the idea that consciousness is a fundamental property of all matter, But for me the hard part of the hard problem of consciousness is that we know some of the mechanisms of perception. Like there are neurons firing to transmit signals to our brains and then brain does some spooky data processing, and it seems like the consciousness arises from that data processing, but nobody know how. Like if we postulate that there is this low-level consciousness in atoms (no semantics, no data processing, no logic), then there is this rather mechanistic level of data transmission to the brain (a much higher level of organization of matter, but does not really take part in our conscious experience), and then there is this high-level brain with very systematic conscious experiences. And we know that there are parts of the brain which have little impact on conscious experiences. So there is something special about the brain that brings the consciousness to a new level from the atomic level, or generates it from nothing if the conscious-atom hypothesis happens to be wrong.
Construing the issue as "consciousness being fundamental to matter (or not)" is itself a potentially obfuscating way of thinking about the nature of consciousness - and matter, for that matter. If you really look at what's implied by Whitehead, Bergson, Bohm, etc etc etc, then the implication is less that consciousness is "in" matter at a fundamental level, but rather than matter is the **activity** of consciousness.
The next step in that analysis, then, is how wholes come to be formed from parts; how the experiences of atoms become those of proteins, which then become those of cells, which become those of tissues and organs, etc etc. The questions at that stage are questions of organization, aggregation and ontology, not questions of consciousness per se.
@@Formscapes are you saying that consciousness is more fundamental than matter? In this case it is kind of a loop that consciousness creates matter which contains consciousness. Like we know very well that our minds are easily affected by different substances, and we understand pretty well how those substances are interact with our brains, on the chemical level. It is hard though to predict how the experience will be affected by those substances, but it's not that there is some more fundamental interaction than ordinary chemistry, which is well-understood at the moment.
I recently read The three body problem and I really liked how the character is taking seriously the model of the world consisting of two rotating spheres surrounded by a sea of fire. The only question was whether the model fits the data and whether it makes useful predictions. So I'm not rejecting metaphysical theories (at least because the current physical theories are incomplete and they are aware of it). On its own the idea that interactions between particles are fundamental building blocks of consciousness is totally fine for me (I still think that I didn't nail it down completely though) but the mains questions is what are the implications and predictions of such theories. Like how do we explain, for instance, that there are only three basic colors and we cannot experience anything other than a mixture of these three colors. Can we influence our brain to experience new colors? Or is it possible to transplant the consciousness from a brain to an electronic device, or is it bound to the brain physically?
cool video. will pick up text by Whitehead and Bergson. Have you made any videos incorporating / discussing MWI in relation to your worldview? its funny how many different forms the attempt to "heal the rupture" takes. Was just reading (well trying) this paper by David Wallace where he attempts to scratch at a kinda mechanistic interpretation of consciousness as fundamental and its interesting stuff.
Sorry I'm not sure if I know what "MWI" refers to in this context
Excellent lecture. Thank you. Would like to read a contemporary book about it.
The simplest introduction to these ideas in book format would probably be Matthew David Segal's book *Physics of the World Soul*, Though if you want a deeper or more thorough dive then I'd recommend checking out the works of William Irwin Thompson, or the primary source materials; Bergson's *Creative Evolution* or Alfred North Whitehead's *Science and the Modern World*
@@Formscapes Thank you for your recommendations, I appreciate them.
@@MendeMaria-ej8bf No problemo, fam 😎
U really are amazing
This intro beats my soul.
Thanks fam!
Love your channel
Thank you!
"Knots of electromagnetic process."
You have been great at talking about what others have thought. When do we get a chance to hear what you think?
90% of doing philosophy is picking apart other people's ideas. If someone is out here just spewing their own opinions without making reference to those who came before, there's a very good chance that their opinions haven't actually been thought through very well.
As much as I would love to be the first genius to come up with all this, the reality is that Plato had basically all of it figured out 2500 years ago and it would be very disingenuous for me to pretend that I made it all up myself.
@@Formscapes your videos feel very much like conversations. Usually, in a conversation, I like to hear what the other person thinks. Just saying
@@robertoperez2579I feel like he’s injected his opinions kinda sprinkled throughout the videos- that’s kinda what I like about them. On the more political topics one can’t help but have an opinion even if it’s non polarizing
the sources cited paint a picture of the author's opinions
@@JamesTWood I agree with that. I think we are all getting a sense of his world view.
You should do a conversation with Matt Segall (Footnotes2Plato)!
Already did. It's on his channel
Love this channel
❤
Awwwww fuck yeah, new video.
😎👉👉
what's the music used in the background of this video?
I make all of the music from scratch for each video
#Respect
Great video
Thanks fam
❤❤
I am a system of a’ priori modes, not a body of limbs and organs. We need to move beyond the notion of “We” because we as humans is a loose premise at best. In essence, the body conduit has no fixed predicate in the abstract lens. What is it of us that knows that?
We should begin to define ourselves as a set of a’ priori modes. A set that allows for systemic alignment. A set synthesised with realities structures and stresses. This is the next step. Everything else is tied up in a field of inverted axioms and that path is a dead end.
Every human soul is a constellation of formative potentialities, because everything that exists is a constellation of formative potentialities.
Wohhh You said "organizzzmic". That's a badass word,right there. I'm gonna be a DJ and call myself "Oganizzmixx"...because I mix and I have a big organ..meaning ,I have an old Rhodes MK8,it's a real pain to lug it around everywhere, kinda like my unit ,meaning my mix table,its awkwardly heavy,like my piece ,meaning my Les Paul guitar, it's pretty huge,like my dick. Meaning my friend Rich. He's gotta weight issue,he binge-eats taco bell all the timeOK I'LL STOP!!🤷🤦♂️
My fellow "Anthropos Cartographer" (ltn. "homo cartagraphus") species members,
A map is an (e.g. "sensory") abstraction. It only includes details that the cartographer deems relevant to its purpose. (Witness a typical subway system map, as designed for use by its passengers.) On that note, for your thoughtful consideration, a word of advice:
It is wise to maintain an accurate map of the territory. It is folly, however, to mistake one's map for the territory.
The linguistically instructed 'movie' in your imagination ('sensory-experiential simulator') about how we came to be is your 'on-board' sensory environment-mapping computer's (or, if you prefer the contemporary idiom, "your brain's") decoded 'facsimile' (a map in turn) of someone' else's linguistically encoded and shared map.
But take heart! The fact that you have a map is incontrovertible proof that the universe is intelligently aware of its own being.
Man has made the brained animal's sensory mapping of its environment his adaptive evolutionary niche specialization, even to the extent of developing his sensory reactive vocalizations into a sophisticated self-addressing sensory information indicating, and internally indexing, and thereby encoding and sharing utility.
What’s the intro music?
Music that I made specifically for the intro which I have titled intromusic.mp3
@@Formscapes it’s cool u should post it somewhere
Whats the painting on 0:06??
Selene, Goddess of the Moon, 1880 by Albert Aublet
Regarding the moon rock samples tested, the results indicated a single parent origin. Did anyone publicly question if it was an intentional false moon rock provided originally, sourced from Earth explaining the results? It seems highly likely which would negate any reason to speculate on it at all.
I don't remember talking about this in the video so I'm not really sure why you're bringing that up, but I do think that "single origin" could potentially mean a number of different things depending upon which assumptions are actually true or false regarding the formation of our solar system.
The Theia collision hypothesis seems to be just absolute contrived nonsense to me, and I put basically no stock in that theory whatsoever.
As for whether the samples are actually real or not, I'm really not sure, but I would definitely be more confident if there were samples taken by independent researchers, apart from those which were garnered by a massive government project with ties to the CIA and the Cold War.
Gang gang
So what started everything?
"It is the Thought that produces Thinker, not the Thinker producing the Thought" This is not philosophical fact, it is a fundamental truth. "Mind" as most know it, is an instrumentation of Matter, thus cannot be separate from it. Matter is an infinite meta in Reality, and to that which is infinite can only orgin from that which is eternal. Matter being the infinite "thinker", must be produced by an eternal "thought" of Reality Which, for matter, is the "Ideal"
I'm usually happier when I'm skeptical of any French thinker. Especially French skeptic thinkers.
If the universe truly depended on my mind to hold it all together, a lot more things would be randomly disappearing as I forget about them.
You wouldn’t remember them if they disappeared
Why try understand why not just sit in silence and feel ..our physical time is short .
Bc understanding the world is not merely saying statements about it. Our understanding of the world conditions the way that we relate to the world, and therefore conditions how the world comes to be revealed to us.
There is immense beauty and depth in nature that can only be revealed by such engagement. Sitting in silence is but one manner of relating to the world, and thus but one manner of understanding it.
@@Formscapes has it been understood? Is the human mind capable ? Has the knowledge gathered been used positive? The giant leeps forward can have no use with out most of US having a spiritual leao ..2023 satélites reach Júpiter and beyond yet children die of hunger ..too much looking outwards not enough looking inwards there is not Even balance.
😎👉👉
😎👉👉
How are you not famous?
I'm working on it lol
the McKenna of our generation lol
and I mean that in the most positive way
What does "living" "alive" "animate" and "organic mean"? You are referencing self-organization so I assume it is more than just that abstract idea of "animate" in like, a spiritual(?) way?
Did anyone ever claim that electron orbitals of atoms were "particles existing everywhere (rather a certain subset of everywhere) at the same time? Like obviously people do say that and it is like one the most popular ideas or as I would call it, misconceptions. It's like, people were either so confused by the stuff or they just liked how confusing and "advanced" or whatever "particle existing in many places at once" or "cat being alive and dead at the same tim!" sound that this idea got pushed to be really popular. But if you look at what the theories say, it really doesn't make any sense to think of it like that and much more of a field or something of possibilities one of which gets actualized under certain conditions (isn't that literally what it says? like how do you understand that as "particle exists in many places at once, uhuhuh"?). Not that that isn't a pretty abstract idea but I would argue less abstract and more sensible then "cat is alive and dead at the same time". Those just feel like something you would say to intentionally confuse people.
About science, I've come to currently view it like this: You ignore all the questions of "why are things the way they are", you observe what you observe and that is true. Now you try to construct a "model" for what you observe, the purpose of which is mainly to be able to make predictions about future observations based on past observations. These models you want to develop and optimize, and science is like a framework, agreed upon methods and such for that. These provide you with a structured approach mostly to testing and evaluating theories or rather models.
This solves some problems, as now no one is claiming that "there is an electron" or "there is matter", it is just that matter and electrons is our currently best model for describing the phenomena we encounter (our observations). I like this because I always found the idea, actually of existence in and of itself so confusing, by viewing it like that this gets eliminated or at least shifted.
The problem now obviously is that we basically just avoided a whole lot of questions, maybe even much more denied them, but that also kinda was the idea. Because as I said, these questions are really abstract and confusing, like, I am not even convinced that someone could do more than just theorize what lies beyond the observations.
lol I'm not reading all that. Get wrecked nerd
You talk like Terrance McKenna 😊
Entitize a process?! 🤔 Sounds like spiritualizing matter.
The mechanistic universe adherents love 'stroking' the hard problem of consciousness...🤣
İ don't think it's the exception but the other rule.
you're a wildchild
All day every day
Somesay reality is not real,ilusion and doesn't exits you say notbonly reality is real but alive as well.