I’m I’m glad 😃😀 it 👨💻 I love 💕 and and I’ll give it 👩💻 star 🌟 thanks 😊 I’ll let let her in there tomorrow if I I need her I just want you and and I’m happy 😊 see it 👨💻 love 💕 kiss kiss 💋 love 💕 baby 🍼 I I miss my heart ♥️ you too and love 💗💗 I’m glad 😀 is getting a good 😌 I think 💭💭 but but no it’s it’s it’s been nice 😊 it’s just like like 👍🏼 said yeah I’m just kidding it’s not really nice nice 😊 you just need me a kiss 💋💋 and I’m happy happy 😆😊 you have been great 😌😊 and I’m sorry 😢 I’ve got you all good 😊 I’ve I’ve never 👎 get a a lot more like 👍🏼 and you you deserve me me you and kiss 😚 I kiss 😚 you all kiss 💋💋💋 and you have have been great 😌 you you are all so beautiful beautiful 😻 you have been great 😌😊😌 we have all our prayers love love 💕 hope your best for yourself hope you’ve got some rest today hope your next day will love 💕 more beautiful 😻 I miss my dreams love 💗 too sweet girl kiss 💋 loooooooooooooooooomooooooooooooooooooooooooookkkokmk klkkkk Klmkkmk Mllkkmk lol Kellner Llmkkmk Llmmkkkk Llkkkmmmkkkmkkmk Klkkkkkkkkkmmkmkmkmkmkklkmmmkkmkkkkkkkllmkmmkkkkmkkmmkkkmmkkkmkkkmkkkkkkkkkmmkmkkmkkkmkkkmmkmkkkmmkkmkmkkkmkmkkmmkkmmmkkkkkkkkkkmkkkkkkkmkkkmmkmkkkkmkkmmkkmkkkmkmkkkkk
Thank you to Heythrop College for putting this up on RUclips. Even if it did take two years for it to go up from when the lecture was delivered. This is gold and I guess gold is worth waiting for.
Jordan Peterson & Iain McGilchrist are my religion. (This is one of the best things I’ve ever seen in my life, I’m not kidding! - I’d like to thank anyone and everyone involved in recording and posting this content - and of-course Iain! whose book I HAVE TO get and read ASAP.)
@@meganchalmers6564 haven’t you heard someone say “music is my religion” or “you could make a religion out of this” or “science is my religion”. Not using the word all that seriously. These two are big influences on my sense of spirituality though. I’m not exactly trying to see them as prophets. Also you need to listen to more of JP if that’s what you think about him smh
@Mike Kane I came to the same conclusion after listening to Iain a couple of times. What he does is drop ideas from the popular psyche, lots of them in succession. This gives the illusion of depth, when its pretty superficial. Leaving people to fill in the gaps is a psychiatrists method and pointing to a direction going nowhere really. I also think he's too full of himself and speaks in an unnatural accent.
Iain McGlichrist explodes my heart and mind! I watched this and then immediately watched it again - a thing I NEVER DO. Saved to watch yet again. I agree with Rob Vel below - one of the best things I've ever seen. Thank you, Heythrop College, for posting this.
Yes. I am looking for something beyond me. My life depends upon it. A very heartfelt thank you to Dr. McGilchrist for your courage, your many years of research, your philosophical inquiry. I am feeling and thinking 100 percent better...I am a better person and I will carry this with me.
He spent 7 minutes just reciting quotes. That is how much power is needed to combat left-brain thinking, people who are so narrow minded that they need a mountain of evidence to move them before they can even begin to contemplate something beyond the limits of their left brains.
I feel that beauty (aesthetics) relates to something 1) ephemeral. A rainbow, or a child's giggle , flower blooms in the desert after the rain. Words don't give justice to beauty for how can beauty have words? Maybe a brick or a maths equation have beauty. Maybe it is 2) subjective (only in the eyes of the beholder). 3) relative - we see thousands of pictures everyday in this world of digital, data, and information., my mind is trying to continually sort out the crap from the gold. It gives me headaches sometimes. Maybe its my small brain.4) meaning-- an art work on a cave in France had meaning to the artist when he killed the bison, ate it , shared it .,respected ,it. Doodling with a pencil would not be considered as beauty to most people. To see a great piece of architecture or sculpture for the FIRST time invokes a sense of awe and wonder, just as much as looking at a view from a mountain for the first time. After a hundred times it becomes a bit boring. Why do we seek perfection? How long is a piece of string? Are quarks and leptons seeking recognition in parliament? Time for a cuppa.
I'd very much like to see a transcript of the quote from Erwin Chargaff with which Mr. McGilchrist begins this talk. Does anyone know if transcripts for these talks are available?
These type of discussions leave me wondering - how many people in the general population would understand (or care about) the arguments he is proposing? I doubt very many. Of the small portion who do, I find it interesting that he talks about atheism in such a way so as to diminish the journey someone might experience to go from being a theist to an atheist. I've known plenty of thoughtful, empathic people who concluded after decades of research that they did not believe in God, while still acknowledging the wonderful memories of their religion. Iain believes in a god who is becoming, which is obviously his own shape in the clouds idea of truth. That isn't to say there is a black and white way to summarize theists or atheists but simply that he could speak about atheism in a more understanding way rather than just bringing up autism. That would be like pointing out that theism is more common in less educated areas as a way to reduce the position.
I think the point of this talk is to propose a thesis rather than give advice that the general population can follow. It usually happens that these discussions begin in academia and make their way outwards after refinement. Might explain his less-than-empathic take on someone's researched atheism. Although in this talk, I didn't really take away that he was defending the teleological argument for God. It seemed more that he was just proposing a general progression and flow of the universe in accordance with an overaching purpose which is a point that definite atheists have made as well (Hofstadter and Dennett in The Mind's I, for example).
@@andrewruba6492 I believe it was in the Q & A on part 2 of the video series where someone asked him for his opinion on atheism and the hemispheric difference. He mentioned that most autistic people are atheists, and then tried to balance it by saying ardent theists can be bad as well. As much as I appreciate his talk, I can't help but feel this was a weak position for him to take.
@@cryptographicvisions9212 Ah, I haven't watched the Q and A yet but I will now. From a logical/rational perspective, I agree with you that it is a weak position to take. I found this one section from The Mind's I that maybe you'll find interesting. Throughout the book, they talk about "downward causality" rather than "teleology" but it seems to be the same thing to me. "Imagine an intricately bifurcating and rejoining domino-chain network. Suppose that each domino has a little time-delayed spring underneath it that stands it up again five seconds after it has fallen. By setting up the network in various configurations, one could actually program the system of dominoes to perform calculations with numbers, exactly as one could a full-scale computer. Various pathways would carry out various parts of the calculation, and elaborate branching loops could be set up. (Note how this image is not too different, then, from that of networks of neurons in a brain.) One could imagine a "program" trying to break the integer 641 into the product of its prime factors. "Why isn't this particular domino ever falling down?" you might ask, pointing at one that you've been watching for a long time. An answer on one level would be "Because its predecessor never falls." But that low-level "explanation" only begs the question, What one really wants-the only satisfying answer, in fact-is an answer on the level of the concepts of the program: "It never falls because it is in a stretch of dominoes that gets activated only when a divisor is found. But 641 has no divisors-it is prime. So the reason that domino never falls has nothing to do with physics or domino chains-it is simply the fact that 641 is prime."
I like Alain’s TED talk Atheism 2.0. He starts with “Of course there’s no God, or faeries or supernatural forces.” And then he says something like “Now what?”. Then he goes on to say we should see religions as a resource for models and insights and culture and on and on. You might want to look into that.
![Ice On My Teeth - ATEEZ エイティーズ 에이티즈 [Music Bank] | KBS WORLD TV 241115](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/c-n92OgbbwA/mqdefault.jpg)
This is quite possibly one of the greatest lectures of all time.
He is a great insightful doctor and I believe one of the most deeply aware and intelligent current thinkers.
I’m I’m glad 😃😀 it 👨💻 I love 💕 and and I’ll give it 👩💻 star 🌟 thanks 😊 I’ll let let her in there tomorrow if I I need her I just want you and and I’m happy 😊 see it 👨💻 love 💕 kiss kiss 💋 love 💕 baby 🍼 I I miss my heart ♥️ you too and love 💗💗 I’m glad 😀 is getting a good 😌 I think 💭💭 but but no it’s it’s it’s been nice 😊 it’s just like like 👍🏼 said yeah I’m just kidding it’s not really nice nice 😊 you just need me a kiss 💋💋 and I’m happy happy 😆😊 you have been great 😌😊 and I’m sorry 😢 I’ve got you all good 😊 I’ve I’ve never 👎 get a a lot more like 👍🏼 and you you deserve me me you and kiss 😚 I kiss 😚 you all kiss 💋💋💋 and you have have been great 😌 you you are all so beautiful beautiful 😻 you have been great 😌😊😌 we have all our prayers love love 💕 hope your best for yourself hope you’ve got some rest today hope your next day will love 💕 more beautiful 😻 I miss my dreams love 💗 too sweet girl kiss 💋 loooooooooooooooooomooooooooooooooooooooooooookkkokmk klkkkk
Klmkkmk
Mllkkmk
lol
Kellner
Llmkkmk
Llmmkkkk
Llkkkmmmkkkmkkmk
Klkkkkkkkkkmmkmkmkmkmkklkmmmkkmkkkkkkkllmkmmkkkkmkkmmkkkmmkkkmkkkmkkkkkkkkkmmkmkkmkkkmkkkmmkmkkkmmkkmkmkkkmkmkkmmkkmmmkkkkkkkkkkmkkkkkkkmkkkmmkmkkkkmkkmmkkmkkkmkmkkkkk
I agree .
This deserves a million views.
Thank you to Heythrop College for putting this up on RUclips. Even if it did take two years for it to go up from when the lecture was delivered. This is gold and I guess gold is worth waiting for.
Jordan Peterson & Iain McGilchrist are my religion.
(This is one of the best things I’ve ever seen in my life, I’m not kidding! - I’d like to thank anyone and everyone involved in recording and posting this content - and of-course Iain! whose book I HAVE TO get and read ASAP.)
ruclips.net/video/-mgVpi8Xfiw/видео.html
@@meganchalmers6564 haven’t you heard someone say “music is my religion” or “you could make a religion out of this” or “science is my religion”. Not using the word all that seriously. These two are big influences on my sense of spirituality though.
I’m not exactly trying to see them as prophets. Also you need to listen to more of JP if that’s what you think about him smh
@Mike Kane I’m actually an atheist. I hate superstition and dogma. But we need to be careful not to be too closed minded with our materialism.
@Mike Kane I came to the same conclusion after listening to Iain a couple of times. What he does is drop ideas from the popular psyche, lots of them in succession. This gives the illusion of depth, when its pretty superficial. Leaving people to fill in the gaps is a psychiatrists method and pointing to a direction going nowhere really.
I also think he's too full of himself and speaks in an unnatural accent.
Iain McGlichrist explodes my heart and mind! I watched this and then immediately watched it again - a thing I NEVER DO. Saved to watch yet again. I agree with Rob Vel below - one of the best things I've ever seen. Thank you, Heythrop College, for posting this.
He is so damn eloquent it makes me want to read shakeapear and learn french read the classics climb a mountain slay a dragon...
Start with the dragon.
Yes. I am looking for something beyond me. My life depends upon it. A very heartfelt thank you to Dr. McGilchrist for your courage, your many years of research, your philosophical inquiry. I am feeling and thinking 100 percent better...I am a better person and I will carry this with me.
I’m reminded of something said by a gifted scientist friend: “The mark of a good scientist is their willingness to say ‘I don’t know.’”
Beautifully eloquent , god I love him
He spent 7 minutes just reciting quotes. That is how much power is needed to combat left-brain thinking, people who are so narrow minded that they need a mountain of evidence to move them before they can even begin to contemplate something beyond the limits of their left brains.
Or its the left brained presenter who has no right brained originality and way to capture people's imaginations succintly.
@@yoya4766 Neurobollocks
@@kipling1957 You probably are.
@@yoya4766 HaHa…
Love your response
Deeply respect his talks.
Im sure others will understand when I say his words are a relief. It's been a long road
Yes I understand that ❤
Yes, I enjoy listening to him also.
Yes loved this
I would really like to know how Iain is getting on with his new book.
Beautiful
What ignorance to cough your way through such a wonderful speech!
Ignorance or a cold.
So surprised that someone listening to this talk could be so lacking in compassion . How shallow.
Where is your compassion. I have a feeling you are missing the point of the subject.
Was it covid?????????????????
I feel that beauty (aesthetics) relates to something 1) ephemeral. A rainbow, or a child's giggle , flower blooms in the desert after the rain. Words don't give justice to beauty for how can beauty have words? Maybe a brick or a maths equation have beauty. Maybe it is 2) subjective (only in the eyes of the beholder). 3) relative - we see thousands of pictures everyday in this world of digital, data, and information., my mind is trying to continually sort out the crap from the gold. It gives me headaches sometimes. Maybe its my small brain.4) meaning-- an art work on a cave in France had meaning to the artist when he killed the bison, ate it , shared it .,respected ,it. Doodling with a pencil would not be considered as beauty to most people. To see a great piece of architecture or sculpture for the FIRST time invokes a sense of awe and wonder, just as much as looking at a view from a mountain for the first time. After a hundred times it becomes a bit boring. Why do we seek perfection? How long is a piece of string? Are quarks and leptons seeking recognition in parliament? Time for a cuppa.
The view from a mountain never bores me. My heart and mind sing together and thank the body for its great effort.
Superb!
Ahhh.Could have lived without the first ten minutes of math talk. Having said that, this gentleman is kinda the premier Genius of our Age.
I'd very much like to see a transcript of the quote from Erwin Chargaff with which Mr. McGilchrist begins this talk. Does anyone know if transcripts for these talks are available?
Research note: so we return the mind… (yagyu munenori)
Past fewsure present dna gift. The serpent from nanother time shall rise from deep inner space?
These type of discussions leave me wondering - how many people in the general population would understand (or care about) the arguments he is proposing? I doubt very many. Of the small portion who do, I find it interesting that he talks about atheism in such a way so as to diminish the journey someone might experience to go from being a theist to an atheist. I've known plenty of thoughtful, empathic people who concluded after decades of research that they did not believe in God, while still acknowledging the wonderful memories of their religion. Iain believes in a god who is becoming, which is obviously his own shape in the clouds idea of truth. That isn't to say there is a black and white way to summarize theists or atheists but simply that he could speak about atheism in a more understanding way rather than just bringing up autism. That would be like pointing out that theism is more common in less educated areas as a way to reduce the position.
I think the point of this talk is to propose a thesis rather than give advice that the general population can follow. It usually happens that these discussions begin in academia and make their way outwards after refinement. Might explain his less-than-empathic take on someone's researched atheism. Although in this talk, I didn't really take away that he was defending the teleological argument for God. It seemed more that he was just proposing a general progression and flow of the universe in accordance with an overaching purpose which is a point that definite atheists have made as well (Hofstadter and Dennett in The Mind's I, for example).
@@andrewruba6492 I believe it was in the Q & A on part 2 of the video series where someone asked him for his opinion on atheism and the hemispheric difference. He mentioned that most autistic people are atheists, and then tried to balance it by saying ardent theists can be bad as well. As much as I appreciate his talk, I can't help but feel this was a weak position for him to take.
@@cryptographicvisions9212 Ah, I haven't watched the Q and A yet but I will now. From a logical/rational perspective, I agree with you that it is a weak position to take. I found this one section from The Mind's I that maybe you'll find interesting. Throughout the book, they talk about "downward causality" rather than "teleology" but it seems to be the same thing to me.
"Imagine an intricately bifurcating and rejoining domino-chain network. Suppose that each domino has a little time-delayed spring underneath it that stands it up again five seconds after it has fallen. By setting up the network in various configurations, one could actually program the system of dominoes to perform calculations with numbers, exactly as one could a full-scale computer. Various pathways would carry out various parts of the calculation, and elaborate branching loops could be set up. (Note how this image is not too different, then, from that of networks of neurons in a brain.)
One could imagine a "program" trying to break the integer 641 into the product of its prime factors. "Why isn't this particular domino ever falling down?" you might ask, pointing at one that you've been watching for a long time. An answer on one level would be "Because its predecessor never falls." But that low-level "explanation" only begs the question, What one really wants-the only satisfying answer, in fact-is an answer on the level of the concepts of the program: "It never falls because it is in a stretch of dominoes that gets activated only when a divisor is found. But 641 has no divisors-it is prime. So the reason that domino never falls has nothing to do with physics or domino chains-it is simply the fact that 641 is prime."
I like Alain’s TED talk Atheism 2.0. He starts with “Of course there’s no God, or faeries or supernatural forces.” And then he says something like “Now what?”. Then he goes on to say we should see religions as a resource for models and insights and culture and on and on. You might want to look into that.
Music is intrinsically sad? I do disagree.
that person coughing needs a kick in the junk
Haha
...was someone coughing?
Whyre you calling yourself a ''mother'' instead of a father of midwiving the Earth or whatever?