I remember the Madonna song, "We are living in the material world and I am a material girl." Even in the song video, she realizes gathering material stuff does not make her happy. She should take this course and learn that her thoughts are the primary building blocks of her life!
🤣🤣🤣 How marvelous; cutting edge ideas and understandings on the fundamental nature of 'reality' and consciousness with the excellent Bernardo Kastrup and here is a comment thread sincerely discussing the merits of Madonna's 'Material World' The universe surely is a spontaneous and ever-surprising happening! 🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏
I heard her say that she follows the Kyballion so I think she knows already. The same truth is found in all the major religions but it's not easy to see in the Bible. 🙏✌️💓
For anyone who had had that ' flash ' of experience that the existence is ' weird ' this is incredibly important and puts scientific foundations to ancient philosophies like advaita Vedanta that Essentially say that what seems to be real is false and that which is true is hidden in plain sight . Peace 🕊️🕉️
@@anyariv Yes it's all a bit scary overall with some less scary bits . Walk in the snow today - one of the few things that make life temporarily bearable at least . Best wishes ✌️🕉️
In this speculative scenario, let's consider Leibniz's Monad (first emanation of God), from the philosophical work "The Monadology", as an abstract representation of the zero-dimensional space that binds quarks together with the strong nuclear force: 1) Indivisibility and Unity: Monads, as indivisible entities, mirror the nature of quarks, which are deemed elementary and indivisible particles in our theoretical context. Just as monads possess unity and indivisibility, quarks are unified in their interactions through the strong nuclear force. 2) Interconnectedness: In the Monadology, monads are interconnected in a vast network. In a parallel manner, the interconnectedness of quarks through the strong force could be metaphorically represented by the interplay of monads, forming a web that holds particles together. 3) Inherent Properties: Just as monads possess inherent perceptions and appetitions, quarks could be thought of as having intrinsic properties like color charge, reflecting the inherent qualities of monads and influencing their interactions. 4) Harmony: The concept of monads contributing to universal harmony resonates with the idea that the strong nuclear force maintains harmony within atomic nuclei by counteracting the electromagnetic repulsion between protons, allowing for the stability of matter. 5) Pre-established Harmony: Monads' pre-established harmony aligns with the idea that the strong force was pre-designed to ensure stable interactions among quarks, orchestrating their behavior in a way that parallels the harmony envisaged by Leibniz. 6) Non-Mechanical Interaction: Monads interact non-mechanically, mirroring the non-mechanical interactions of quarks through gluon exchange. This connection might be seen as a metaphorical reflection of the intricacies of quark-gluon dynamics. 7) Holism: The holistic perspective of monads could symbolize how quarks, like the monads' interconnections, contribute holistically to the structure and behavior of particles through the strong force interactions. em·a·na·tion noun an abstract but perceptible thing that issues or originates from a source.
I'm looking forward to this but I couldn't help but chuckle at an idealist giving a course debunking materialism, while referring to the ideas in the course as material. 😁
Bernardo I'm glad I stumbled onto your channel and lectures. I'm also a big fan of Rupert Spira and Amit Goswami's book "The Self-Aware Universe". I like the idea that "we" are just consciousness experiencing itself and I enjoy other perspectives on how to describe this phenomenon like idealism. A question I've been pondering is "is everything just a metaphor?". Are we just describing something that is completely undescribable using our pathetically limited sensors/instrument/brain? The materialists are conditioned beyond hope with their hard coded gotta be "right" subroutine on infinite loop though so it's impossible to talk to them about it. I appreciate another outlet for bigger unconditioned ideas.
@@olbluelips Yes in a matrix of metaphors. In this train of thought I like to consider is there such a thing as direct knowledge? Can you think of something you know without the aid of some other already invented construct? Even gravity...do we have direct knowledge of gravity or is it another metaphor describing how our finite corner of consciousness was/is somehow agreed upon to work? I do know I am not my thoughts which is why I enjoy pondering these things and don't get defensive about being right or wrong. Right or wrong is irrelevant. These are just thoughts.
Bless you Bernardo... It has been my opinion since I first heard you speak on sages and scientists conference that you are one of the greatest and clearest minds of our time... Just wondering if you have come across Grand master Wolf... Would love to see you both in conversation, think you would like him, he's just lovely, also a clear mind though from a very different set of life experiences, check him out ...
It would, unfortunately, look a lot like India. It may be true that our perception of the world is something similar to a dashboard of dials, as Kastrup puts it, but those dials are very, very important! We developed those dials through a long process of evolution for a reason - to tackle the challenges before us and better navigate the nature world. A culture that studies those dials and their relationships will be better able to flourish in a natural world, than one that ignores the dials and chooses to focus on some ephemeral notion of "ultimate reality" which for all intents and purposes, is an inaccessible fiction for most of us.
@@openenquiry I see your point very clearly. But I have to point out that India is not necessarily the inevitable end state of an entity that realizes that the dashboard dials -- although they correspond to reality -- are not reality. I will not argue that point. I leave this bit here. "Before enlightenment, carry water, chop wood; after enlightenment, carry water, chop wood." Being enlightened and being comfortable trumps being enlightened and miserable. One can be materially prosperous even while under delusions; one can be "enlightened" and be utterly incapable of dealing with the material world. I'll take the former, thank you very much.
The thoughts of other people are not objective. They are subjective because it relies on your interpretation of their words as you are hearing or reading them.
@@olbluelips I would believe that you are capable of thoughts, for sure. But that's not relevant to the point I'm making here because I'm not trying to prove that solipsism is true or false. My point is that if you are hearing words, those words are the product of someone's subjective interpretation of the world around them, and the interpretation of person hearing the words is also subjective. So this guy saying "thoughts are objective" is wrong. Speech objectively exists if you can hear it and understand that the sounds being made are actual words, but the ideas conveyed by that speech are entirely subjective.
@@olbluelips You've just entirely proven my point, internet friend. Once again, I'm not trying to prove or disprove solipsism, and neither is the guy in this video.
While I agree with almost all of Bernardo's theory, it isn't complete. What he has done is simply shift the duality problem over to the "mind" side, which opens up more questions such as "where do thoughts come from?"; "what is "mind"? I have recognized a pattern/system that is a holographic expression of the fundamental workings of Reality and Self. This system is triune in nature and expresses itself naturally, organically, at the fundamental description of Reality. One could say that it is a holographic expression of the fundamental qualia of Reality and Self The theory is explained here: ruclips.net/video/0k7_nSnYGrU/видео.html I implore you to watch this with "Beginners mind." Although roy dopson is relatively unknown, that doesn't mean that he's automatically a crackpot. This model/theory is fundamental in that I did not create the model, but recognized it where others have not. Then I subtly adapted the starkly dualistic model of "thing"/"nothing", as it is this trainwreck of paradox, convolution and self-reference that projects materialism itself. In fact there is no alternative to materialism within the English language; it's baked in, as shown in this two-part video: ruclips.net/video/wvLKIv0uaQ4/видео.html ruclips.net/video/V5gV9Z4xrA8/видео.html I get this. All of THIS. Maybe someone should interview me...
Yes, the observer is joined to the observed, but it is not a "permanent union", it is not even a union, but the observer and the observed are only images (fragments) in the undivided and unlimited consciousness. There is no climate change, for example, existing autonomously with respect to the observer, the "human being". "Human being" and "climate change" are correlated images in the mind or consciousness. Consciousness looks at itself from infinitely many different points of view; from one of them, it sees the image "human being", and from a different one it sees the image "climate change". Causality is not an intrinsic property of the mind, but only a quality of its own texture, just as are matter, space, time, feeling, and so on. Therefore, no one is causing climate change, nor can anyone prevent it, nor the opposite.
This is the contingent and less real side of the zero-of you. The other side is necessary and more real. There's an event horizon to the zero-dimensional space binding your quarks together with the strong force. God's on the other side. This side is the absence of God; to know Good from Evil using the Logos.
Wrong! The world is neither subjective nor objective; it just is. What's subjective or objective is one's perception-conception of the world. IOW, what Kastrup thinks about the world is wrong.
I'm interested to see how the comments evolve. It's starting out with a nice mix of characters. 🙏
awesome sauce. like the format, you're doing great work.
I remember the Madonna song, "We are living in the material world and I am a material girl." Even in the song video, she realizes gathering material stuff does not make her happy. She should take this course and learn that her thoughts are the primary building blocks of her life!
I love you
🤣🤣🤣 How marvelous; cutting edge ideas and understandings on the fundamental nature of 'reality' and consciousness with the excellent Bernardo Kastrup and here is a comment thread sincerely discussing the merits of Madonna's 'Material World'
The universe surely is a spontaneous and ever-surprising happening! 🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏
I heard her say that she follows the Kyballion so I think she knows already. The same truth is found in all the major religions but it's not easy to see in the Bible. 🙏✌️💓
For anyone who had had that ' flash ' of experience that the existence is ' weird ' this is incredibly important and puts scientific foundations to ancient philosophies like advaita Vedanta that Essentially say that what seems to be real is false and that which is true is hidden in plain sight . Peace 🕊️🕉️
I came to the realization that this life is a complete fabrication. We live in a simulated reality.
@@anyariv Yes it's all a bit scary overall with some less scary bits . Walk in the snow today - one of the few things that make life temporarily bearable at least . Best wishes ✌️🕉️
In this speculative scenario, let's consider Leibniz's Monad (first emanation of God), from the philosophical work "The Monadology", as an abstract representation of the zero-dimensional space that binds quarks together with the strong nuclear force:
1) Indivisibility and Unity: Monads, as indivisible entities, mirror the nature of quarks, which are deemed elementary and indivisible particles in our theoretical context. Just as monads possess unity and indivisibility, quarks are unified in their interactions through the strong nuclear force.
2) Interconnectedness: In the Monadology, monads are interconnected in a vast network. In a parallel manner, the interconnectedness of quarks through the strong force could be metaphorically represented by the interplay of monads, forming a web that holds particles together.
3) Inherent Properties: Just as monads possess inherent perceptions and appetitions, quarks could be thought of as having intrinsic properties like color charge, reflecting the inherent qualities of monads and influencing their interactions.
4) Harmony: The concept of monads contributing to universal harmony resonates with the idea that the strong nuclear force maintains harmony within atomic nuclei by counteracting the electromagnetic repulsion between protons, allowing for the stability of matter.
5) Pre-established Harmony: Monads' pre-established harmony aligns with the idea that the strong force was pre-designed to ensure stable interactions among quarks, orchestrating their behavior in a way that parallels the harmony envisaged by Leibniz.
6) Non-Mechanical Interaction: Monads interact non-mechanically, mirroring the non-mechanical interactions of quarks through gluon exchange. This connection might be seen as a metaphorical reflection of the intricacies of quark-gluon dynamics.
7) Holism: The holistic perspective of monads could symbolize how quarks, like the monads' interconnections, contribute holistically to the structure and behavior of particles through the strong force interactions.
em·a·na·tion
noun
an abstract but perceptible thing that issues or originates from a source.
KAstrup is my only GURU 🙏
THANK YOU!
I'm looking forward to this but I couldn't help but chuckle at an idealist giving a course debunking materialism, while referring to the ideas in the course as material. 😁
Bernardo I'm glad I stumbled onto your channel and lectures. I'm also a big fan of Rupert Spira and Amit Goswami's book "The Self-Aware Universe". I like the idea that "we" are just consciousness experiencing itself and I enjoy other perspectives on how to describe this phenomenon like idealism. A question I've been pondering is "is everything just a metaphor?". Are we just describing something that is completely undescribable using our pathetically limited sensors/instrument/brain? The materialists are conditioned beyond hope with their hard coded gotta be "right" subroutine on infinite loop though so it's impossible to talk to them about it. I appreciate another outlet for bigger unconditioned ideas.
I would say physics is made of empirically tested metaphors
@@olbluelips Yes in a matrix of metaphors. In this train of thought I like to consider is there such a thing as direct knowledge? Can you think of something you know without the aid of some other already invented construct? Even gravity...do we have direct knowledge of gravity or is it another metaphor describing how our finite corner of consciousness was/is somehow agreed upon to work? I do know I am not my thoughts which is why I enjoy pondering these things and don't get defensive about being right or wrong. Right or wrong is irrelevant. These are just thoughts.
@@denbrah1481Gravity does not exist. It is a *literal* reification.
Bless you Bernardo... It has been my opinion since I first heard you speak on sages and scientists conference that you are one of the greatest and clearest minds of our time... Just wondering if you have come across Grand master Wolf... Would love to see you both in conversation, think you would like him, he's just lovely, also a clear mind though from a very different set of life experiences, check him out ...
great.
I would be deeply curious about what a culture would look like that has this philosophy as its cornerstone...
It would, unfortunately, look a lot like India.
It may be true that our perception of the world is something similar to a dashboard of dials, as Kastrup puts it, but those dials are very, very important! We developed those dials through a long process of evolution for a reason - to tackle the challenges before us and better navigate the nature world. A culture that studies those dials and their relationships will be better able to flourish in a natural world, than one that ignores the dials and chooses to focus on some ephemeral notion of "ultimate reality" which for all intents and purposes, is an inaccessible fiction for most of us.
Look at the Indian sages and culture. This was it!❤
@@openenquiry I see your point very clearly. But I have to point out that India is not necessarily the inevitable end state of an entity that realizes that the dashboard dials -- although they correspond to reality -- are not reality.
I will not argue that point. I leave this bit here. "Before enlightenment, carry water, chop wood; after enlightenment, carry water, chop wood." Being enlightened and being comfortable trumps being enlightened and miserable.
One can be materially prosperous even while under delusions; one can be "enlightened" and be utterly incapable of dealing with the material world. I'll take the former, thank you very much.
The thoughts of other people are not objective. They are subjective because it relies on your interpretation of their words as you are hearing or reading them.
What if I never speak to you? You would still believe I have thoughts right?
@@olbluelips I would believe that you are capable of thoughts, for sure. But that's not relevant to the point I'm making here because I'm not trying to prove that solipsism is true or false.
My point is that if you are hearing words, those words are the product of someone's subjective interpretation of the world around them, and the interpretation of person hearing the words is also subjective. So this guy saying "thoughts are objective" is wrong.
Speech objectively exists if you can hear it and understand that the sounds being made are actual words, but the ideas conveyed by that speech are entirely subjective.
@djn48 I can only interpret the meaning of your actions, but I observe them in the objective world and infer that there are thoughts behind them.
@@olbluelips You've just entirely proven my point, internet friend. Once again, I'm not trying to prove or disprove solipsism, and neither is the guy in this video.
@@djn48 Your thoughts are outside me, but I know they exist, so it's fair for me to call them objective.
It's purely a mind world. So called physical reality is mind's version of itself.The mind worldbeing itself.
Is in an objective statement that everything is subjective?
objectivity is just the result of overlapping subjective viewpoints
While I agree with almost all of Bernardo's theory, it isn't complete. What he has done is simply shift the duality problem over to the "mind" side, which opens up more questions such as "where do thoughts come from?"; "what is "mind"?
I have recognized a pattern/system that is a holographic expression of the fundamental workings of Reality and Self. This system is triune in nature and expresses itself naturally, organically, at the fundamental description of Reality. One could say that it is a holographic expression of the fundamental qualia of Reality and Self
The theory is explained here:
ruclips.net/video/0k7_nSnYGrU/видео.html
I implore you to watch this with "Beginners mind." Although roy dopson is relatively unknown, that doesn't mean that he's automatically a crackpot. This model/theory is fundamental in that I did not create the model, but recognized it where others have not. Then I subtly adapted the starkly dualistic model of "thing"/"nothing", as it is this trainwreck of paradox, convolution and self-reference that projects materialism itself. In fact there is no alternative to materialism within the English language; it's baked in, as shown in this two-part video:
ruclips.net/video/wvLKIv0uaQ4/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/V5gV9Z4xrA8/видео.html
I get this. All of THIS. Maybe someone should interview me...
🤣🤣🤣🤣
Yes, the observer is joined to the observed, but it is not a "permanent union", it is not even a union, but the observer and the observed are only images (fragments) in the undivided and unlimited consciousness.
There is no climate change, for example, existing autonomously with respect to the observer, the "human being". "Human being" and "climate change" are correlated images in the mind or consciousness. Consciousness looks at itself from infinitely many different points of view; from one of them, it sees the image "human being", and from a different one it sees the image "climate change". Causality is not an intrinsic property of the mind, but only a quality of its own texture, just as are matter, space, time, feeling, and so on. Therefore, no one is causing climate change, nor can anyone prevent it, nor the opposite.
This is the contingent and less real side of the zero-of you.
The other side is necessary and more real.
There's an event horizon to the zero-dimensional space binding your quarks together with the strong force. God's on the other side.
This side is the absence of God; to know Good from Evil using the Logos.
Wrong! The world is neither subjective nor objective; it just is. What's subjective or objective is one's perception-conception of the world. IOW, what Kastrup thinks about the world is wrong.
What do you mean by the word "the world?"
@@ravivaradhan4956 , manifest objects.
wrong