Is Reality an Illusion? - Professor Donald Hoffman, PhD
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 8 дек 2022
- Get early access to our latest psychology lectures: bit.ly/new-talks5
If I have a visual experience that I describe as a red tomato a meter away, then I am inclined to believe that there is, in fact, a red tomato a meter away, even if I close my eyes. I believe that my perceptions are, in the normal case, veridical-that they accurately depict aspects of the real world. But is my belief supported by our best science? In particular: Does evolution by natural selection favor veridical perceptions? Many scientists and philosophers claim that it does. But this claim, though plausible, has not been properly tested. In this talk, I present a new theorem: Veridical perceptions are never more fit than non-veridical perceptions which are simply tuned to the relevant fitness functions. This entails that perception is not a window on reality; it is more like a desktop interface on your laptop. I discuss this interface theory of perception and its implications for one of the most puzzling unsolved problems in science: the relationship between brain activity and conscious experiences.
---
Prof. Donald Hoffman, PhD received his PhD from MIT, and joined the faculty of the University of California, Irvine in 1983, where he is a Professor Emeritus of Cognitive Sciences. He is an author of over 100 scientific papers and three books, including Visual Intelligence, and The Case Against Reality. He received a Distinguished Scientific Award from the American Psychological Association for early career research, the Rustum Roy Award of the Chopra Foundation, and the Troland Research Award of the US National Academy of Sciences. His writing has appeared in Edge, New Scientist, LA Review of Books, and Scientific American and his work has been featured in Wired, Quanta, The Atlantic, and Through the Wormhole with Morgan Freeman. You can watch his TED Talk titled “Do we see reality as it is?” and you can follow him on Twitter @donalddhoffman.
Links:
- Get our latest psychology lectures emailed to your inbox: bit.ly/new-talks5
- Check out our next event: theweekenduniversity.com/events/
- Prof Hoffman’s profile: www.cogsci.uci.edu/~ddhoff
- Prof Hoffman’s book: amzn.to/3njNX1G
- Prof. Hoffman’s content/interviews- bit.ly/3bvyNUn
Human consciousness is a spark from infinite conscious. Eventually the spark that is you and me returns to the source when tire of the folly of creating stories. The study of consciousness is a never ending story.
And in India this fact was always known. The whole existence itself has been called interplay of Consciousness ( Shiva) and Energy ( Shakti) and everything has been seen as MAYA,The Grand illusionist
100% these people read vedanta for sure but don't give credit
The upanishads figured it all out a long time ago because they have thought of it from the right starting place. If you are a western based scientist you have the baggage of starting from the wrong end of the spectrum. Hence as he said a cooperation between scientists and spiritual world would be beneficial for a understanding. Though on a individual basis this was always the case. Many scientists became deeply spiritual over the course of their lives
If everything was maya why don't you eat cow it's not real its grand illusion you believe as fact everything around you is unreal why you believe them as sacred to be prayed when they are just maya.
You might enjoy the discussion with Rupert Spira then, called The Convergence of Science and Spirituality @@robabc
Gibberish
There is always been one answer to a question I’m asking myself for the last few years. The question is:
“What is really left there in life, which I truly enjoy?”, and the consistent answer has been:”Nothing!”
Thank god, since I experienced the sweet feeling of joy again after soooo long by watching the entire of this wonderful lecture.
Thanks professor Hoffmann and everyone who recorded this precious video and made it available on RUclips!
🙏🏼🌺❤️
Have you listened to Mooji? You might be amazed, as I am.
@@stevesmith8155 Unfortunately I haven’t, but I’ll surely do. Thanks Steve! 🙏🏼
You are ready to take the plunge. Love God with all your heart, all your mind and all your strength. And love your neighbor as your self.
The moment.
JOY IS THERE WHEN YOU'RE NOT
It's nice to hear an uninterrupted flow of Professors Hoffman's theories, I found the interviews a little hard to follow.. Thankyou for this!
I have listened to 2 interviews of his conscious agents before looking for more interviews of his. This lecture is better than some interviews I have watched. Most hosts can’t grasp the idea he is trying to convey. Their questions can’t add to the clarity of Professor Hoffman’s research. I have listened to many NDE (near death experience) stories, read a few books about soul journey and I find the idea “consciousness is here to explore” is very in line with people who converse with the other side. Our souls (if this is one and the same as consciousness) is indeed here to experience.
Consciousness lectures will not reveal your true self.
Marina very true.
Really enjoy Hoffmann’s lectures. It’s nice how his work is in a state of transition, what I mean is that he always presents new information and new studies, expanding his current work. You always learn something new. He is also great at acknowledging other viewpoints. Great stuff!
geshsehehe
He changed the way I think about the world around us. Amazing work done by him!
I assure you that when I woke up after open heart surgery the pain was so intense even with the most drugs a person can take and still be self aware that we are here it is not a dream this body is what we are living in reality.
Reality is that which when you choose to stop believing in it persists nonetheless.
An illusion is like a mirage that is later contradicted by another perception, the mirage does not come into existence, it was merely a false appearance. So the only way reality could be an illusion is if we all cognized another perception that cancels our universal experience that we call reality.
It’s amazing to me that I, personally, know people who are not, in the least, interested in this marvelous information in which I have no experience but I am wise enough to access knowledgeable scientific sites on YT. Thank you, especially since I know that everything in all
the universes are connected-I like the reality that I’ve created. Hallelujah 💥🌸🎶
Thank you Dr. Hoffman. More please!
Excellent presentation, very grateful.
What amazes me is how many of us believe in this theory and have no idea, and in fact, push back against it.
This furthers the theory that it's all about perception.
There is only one truth: finding long term purpose which u can hold on to, maintaining good mental and physical health and solidifing your relationships.
The rest is just an endless multidimensional game which I don't recommend to get involved much cuz u will lose yourself and identity.
Perception is the correct phrase. Humans are VERY limited in what we can sense or perceive, of what we can see, smell, taste, touch and smell is miniscule in comparison to what we know is there but we can't observe or perceive without using technology. Then there's the stuff what is probably there what we don't even know exists and will never understand the full picture. The things that we THINK we know and can prove already through science which seem accurate only seen accurate to use because we invented the laws of science as we perceived them with our limited senses. Imagine if we only saw UV light or were colourblind or if we never evolved to have eyes. Our perception would be very different but would still be accurate to us.
It's fascinating how nothing is more intimate to our personal experience than our own consciousness. And yet as we go through life, most people receive no education on it, or reflect much on its great mystery. I recall some time in my later teenage years I looked down at my hands, opening and closing them as I was just sitting, lost and thought. And asked myself "how the hell am I doing this?" It was a serious question, and had nothing to do with stereotypical drug-induced tropes.
That moment set off a cascade of questions that I later learned was a thing called "philosophy", which then later led to attempts at concrete answers through science. The deeper I went, the more of a mystery it became.
It's not surprising that Don is trained in computer science. I feel like a great deal of my intuition about consciousness started to develop as I moved into computer science. A lot of the metaphors he uses sound insane to average people. But to a programmer, it's startlingly plausible.
When we develop complex systems, as programmers, a great deal of the effort goes into "hiding" information complexity, and instead making elaborate fictions that seem to relate but aren't at all the same.
For example when Don posits that perhaps the brain itself is just a fictional indicator, it seems wildly off base. But I think about when we program a video game and every time the player uses a sword, they see an indicator in a slot that correlates. When we play the game we know that the icon of the sword is not "the sword" we are holding. Or even that the sword we are holding is really a sword! But we do know there's a programmatic relationship between the icon and some underlying process. In other words, a programmer has ensured that we don't get confused. When we see the icon of a sword, we expect our character to hold a sword.
The crucial point is that we still know that that's only a bit of code that only correlates that icon to the player holding the sword. We wouldn't be shocked if one day the icon glitched out, and yet we're still there standing with a sword in our hands. And yet, we have trouble seeing how our brain could be like the icon. In other words, linked to our consciousness through some (generally unfailing) programmatic relationship, but nothing more.
Evolution as we know it has created absurdly complex systems out of adaptation. It would actually be a shock if it didn't shape our perceptual systems in equally dramatic ways. Nature really is the most impressive programmer we know of. Wherever we look, it has already discovered and used our clever algorithms, data manipulation, function encapsulation and information hiding well before we even started working with crude tools.
I think as we move forward and switch out the old metaphors of mechanics and hardware, and adopt new ones of information and algorithms, these concepts that Don speaks of will not seem so foreign to average people. And there will be a path forward where we no longer live in mutually exclusive universes where one is made of "stuff" and the other "consciousness." Which is probably the most absurd place to be, if we are allowed to reflect on our moment in history.
Good one
Yours is the most well thought out (and regarding a very important subject at that!) comment I've ever read in the RUclips comment section 👍
"Stuff" is the brain, and "consciousness" is a manifestation of the mind.
The material obvious and the other the "hidden".
Really well said. Thanks.
I remember being a kid and my mum driving me to school and I just looked around and thought “why am I me? Why am I not this other kid at school?” and even tried to see if I could be someone else! But I guess I just knew no one knew and had to accept it. Now I’m 31 and in the last few months I’ve really gone down the rabbit hole and can’t believe I never wondered any of this before, and that other people don’t care! I’ve only really been watching Bernardo Kastrup and reading NDEs but looking forward to looking at Hoffman’s stuff
*Jagaat mithya , brahma/atma satya*
(The material objective world is an illusion and not nitya , onely pure absolute consciousness is the truth) ~ Adi Shankaracharya ( 2nd century CE)
This talk has nothing to do with any religious myths.
This is a beautiful knowledge to acquire. Makes me perceive how limited I am as a human, but also marvel at the wonder of experiencing life as a human.
For me, It's best to enjoy this limited consciousness.
A major argument against Hoffman's theory is that evolution has
actually led us to perceive the world pretty much as it is.
If our perceptions were too far removed from reality, we would
not be able to function effectively in the world and survive.
Our technology, medicine and other scientific advances are based
on our perception of reality. If our perceptions were as far from
true reality as Hoffman suggests, how could we achieve such
consistent and repeatable results in science and engineering?
There are many studies that show how the brain processes information
from the environment and how this processing leads to our perception.
These studies suggest that our perception, although not perfect,
is based on real data from the environment.
One can argue that the burden of proof is on Hoffman. It is up
to him to present convincing evidence that our perceptions
differ from reality as drastically as he claims.
Some philosophers argue that Hoffman's theory leans toward
extreme idealism, stating that only the mind and its perceptions
exist. This is in contrast to other philosophical views that
state that an external, objective reality exists.
Many of us have a “ shared’ reality?
Hoffman is a nutjob just look at him. Doesn't take an FBI agent to read his body language and facial expressions to tell he's just a pseudointellectual conman.
Think you’re smart until REALITY HITS YOU
This is brilliant. It shows a convergence of science and spirituality. And Donald Hoffman is one of the most sincere persons, when he talks about his own illness and how he experienced it in spacetime spacetime.
There is no science in this lecture. This is pseudoscience.
😂😂😂😂
What a fantastic presentation. Very clear, very comprehensive and very rigorous! I truly appreciate Professor Hoffman's honesty as exemplified by his comments at the end of the lecture about him being like other "normal" people and behaving as if space-time is real, while he knows that it is not. I will be forwarding the link to many of my friends and colleagues who will undoubtedly be inspired by this lecture, as I have been. THANK YOU!
Inspired to do what? Be still, and know that I am.
Very clear ? Very rigorous? Hmm Interesting
lol
@@michaelg1569YOU are an open minded person, obviously you think for your self 👍🏻 ! Thought I was a part of a very few people who won’t take everything said ,written or seen as truth ! 👍🏻🙀👵🏻😱 AT LEAST QUESTION It , see if the cake bakes up 🎂pretty or falls flat! 🫓
I wish the ads every 5mins. were an illusion.
I have taken DMT and this all makes perfect sense. I experienced a Dimension which consisted solely of Information.
Truth:
We Do Not Exist,
In Any Shape or Form... We Are Thoughts That Became Self-aware...
I never tried DMT, but tried mushrooms as a youth and realized time was an illusion. So are bodies are really just machines that let us experience linear time.
Buddhism, especially the "Mind Only" and Yogachara schools have posited for almost 2000 years that "mind" is fundamental. Consciousness arises out of fundamental mind and appearance of external objects arise out of consciousness.
I'm a pan psychist but I also accept the headset reality. I don't see that the two views are contradictory. As a pan psychist I just add to it that our reality is a headset reality and within this headset reality all things have a form of consciousness.
Thank You for very wide explanation. Because of my mental problems I was speculating and reading some sources about consciousness and it seems to me as an connection between our brain and the universal "Cpu". Consciousness is main factor in forming reality, but what is reality is question because it is to much changable and depends of many competitive structures which are forming it. We could like it or not but there is something like the matrix with the ocean of sub matrixes; every exposed, successful individual has his sub matrix with orbiting trabants, and what is than with great organisations with millions or even billions envolved persons. How we could successfuly compete in forming our own true reality. And there are too much of us with own Pseudologia phantastica, perhaps I am writing this exactly because of my Pseudologia phantastica and searching in Your explanation for confirmation of it regardless of the fact that I am aware of the tendency for confirmation. What is true reality, and is it possible?
There's a lot of very interesting ideas in Prof. Hoffman's theories, yet I can't get past the fact that 'our consciousness creates our reality' is in conflict with what we know to be true, namely that you can put 100 people in a room and ask them to identify a tree, and they will all identify it as a tree. That is to say that they all experience the same (general) reality in relation to that object (yes, they may see it in different colours or have variations of topological shape caused by their visual apparatus, but they'll all say 'tree'). No-one will call it a boat. That therefore indicates that all 100 people are experiencing the same 'objective' reality, and that their individual consciousness is not creating one tree which only they and no-one else experiences. Or am I missing something? He has argued that when you perceive an object, it exists, then when you turn away it no longer exists, for you - that it is 'trash binned' (his own description). But that is easily undone by turning away and having another person say what exists out of your field of vision - therefore it's not that it doesn't exist, it just isn't perceived by you - which is a whole different idea.
I agree, this solipsistic idea is debunked by the universal experience of every human.
He explains this by saying we are all using the same interface in this VR game, so we see the same things.
@@clarealohi But that just doesn't have any evidential support. Life isn't a video game. And 5bat isn't consistent with him saying that when we don't see something it doesn't exist.
@@philweight3480 true, this is all still in theory, and likely always will be while in this reality, because that’s the way it was set up. When we are here we can’t know what’s outside of here. If you see it as logging in to a multiplayer game with the same code, design, and map, even if the something is not on our screen, the code will display that something to whomever is within view of it, sensorially. The five senses are another component that has us jacked into this illusion. But what we do know, is that materialism is dead and this is not as solid a reality as we were taught. Some feel by design. But that’s also not provable. I believe tapping into the intuitive sense and growing that sensation as one would grow a muscle gives more knowledge inaccessible to those who use only the 5 senses, however muscle testing/kinesiology is another way to gain answers from the field.
@@philweight3480 As regards everyone seeing the same object, you might look at Husserl's Phenomenology
The same object 'appears' differently in every perception of it. He calls it the 'noema'.
Phenomenology however does not negate he world, instead it focuses on the 'experience' of the object through an 'intentionality' of consciousness
11:57, Area b4 and magnets, is that positive or negative?
My experiences is not an illusion...... and even when i'm not looking at the moon its there that's why who's next to me are around me is still seeing what I've seen.
Nobody can thoroughly explain how life is an illusion.
Life is not an illusion!
"Jerry, just remember... it's not a lie, if you believe it." - George Costanza
Just remember Jerry is a Zionist
This is the most exciting idea I've ever come across in my life-time. It has the potential to provoke a paradigm shift!
So far the best RUclips video I've watched this decade
This guy is onto something
The perspective seen by the cat in the thought experiment called Schrödinger’s cat, is that only one cat entered and possibly exited the box. So, the outcome is predetermined (called collapsed) to be what the cat saw, rather than a random draw by Schrödinger from the superposition of all possible outcomes, if and only if, the cat is conscious and so has a perspective. The experiment shows that consciousness is the same as a collapsing outcome.
Reality is not an illusion, reality is a definition-one we cannot separate from our own consciousness. Concepts r us.
I wish reality was an illusion. This world can be brutal
Exactly.
You create your own reality, also media does just that as it creates your perception of reality in parts of the world you have never been and when has medias been truly honest? Sure there are stuff that goes one that is unethical, but what are you certain of at 100% certainty? #rené descartes
About Gödel there are much more compelling theorems by Gregory Chaitin on algorithmic complexity theory which are extending and combining Gödels algebraic and Turings algorithmic theorems. Chaitins mathematics is quite on par with your interface concept. Please take a look at his work, and the definition of the number Q!
Is there anything more in Hoffmann's ideas than in Kant's concept of the 'thing in itself' (different from what we see) and in his recognition that space and time are merely 'forms of perception' rather than real things ??? 🤔
I deeply appreciate the work of Donald Hoffman and it blows my mind. Listening to this, the question came up to me, why we still are truthseekers ... we are designed for fitness and survival of our species, but still there is this curiosity in human beings like in all these impressive scientists ...
Interesting expression “blows my mind”. The truth is revealed when the mind is incapacitated.
That is again part of human psychology and wanting to understand what around us.There is no answer to chase we just exist really.
If reality is an illusion the pain isn’t.
True from my chronic illness I can feel how real i am.
We thank Dr Hoffman for this new revelation of an Ancient truth🙏
Loved it thank you. Enjoy the game of life everyone
That's exactly the concept of vedanta. Concept of Maya
You can read that D. Hoffman researched vision-perception at MIT. I was never 50% conscious of the WORK in his research until I drew, by hand, red/blue anaglyph geometry for the glasses. When I asked which drawings seemed more 3D, I heard two different answers. I have to ask more clients to get a better idea. All of it is 🫤😥😴😴😴😴😴 but not boring.
Another very interesting thing he mentioned is time. Many NDE (near death experience) people mentioned there’s no time on the other end.
@@cirilloucazzu4457 no thing is every thing
@@cirilloucazzu4457 an interpretive error from use of natural language
without distinctions to segregate; all becomes united.
this is really the realm of ontology/epistemology & therefore dependent upon one's framework rather than simply "natural/naive" logical formalism alone.
There exists an observable topology whereby what I've said could be understood & considered correct.
~~~e.g.~~~
If you remove all integers / between zero and infinity by way of some consolidating map/continuous function then repeat the sub-function for the final iteration; removing / subsuming all classes of there remains the in itself singularly observed of itself.. in itself. {0,♾} -> {} ~ {0,♾}
@@cirilloucazzu4457 You cannot truly have "no thing" and expect to keep your preconceptions along the way, no?
"No thing" is filled to burst of emptiness and sheer potential of that which (n)ever was(n't)
@@cirilloucazzu4457 Why would I be offended by such a blatant lack of curiosity or self reflection?
Your response reads as nothing more than a tired hand wave.
Surely your uninvestigated priors hold no bearing over what you hold to be unshakeable epistemic truths, my mistake (/s)
Weary banality indeed.
Lazily calling bullshit then claiming a polite exit and you must also believe I'm the one gaslighting myself? Perhaps because you mistakenly believe all of structural formalism must be limited and adhere to a rigid algebraic form that you can recognise? Pah!
You can lie to me but please be honest with yourself.
In abstract algebra; ''a monad is a monoid in the category of endofunctors' and so; what of Leibniz's metaphysical monad?
If philosophy is synonymous with bullshit in your conceptual framework then I'll happily report to be guilty as charged and disappointedly concede that, at least in the immediate sense, there's no further discussion to be had on your part.
At least I can console myself in being mellifluous for you, always happy to send the beclouded to sleep with their own obnubulations.
@@TheYahmez "Tohu wa bohu" Nothingness is Ultimate Possibility
We all need stability and love. Living with animals gives us that stability of everyday love and touch. Real love is love stability. Real love is when the person who says I love you never abandons the other person. Real love is unconditional love.
Superb!
Reality is by definition what we experience. Nothing else …. you can call it illusion or whatever, but we have only this 😎
Not necessarily.
Dead right
Exactly!
Then your dream is same reality as walking reality 🤔🤔
Seeing a Mirage is same as seeing anything.
@@SanatanSurya12 Yes, dream is a form of reality. Ideas, Poems, Software, History, Mathematics, Predictions …. all this are parts of our reality.
Under 7 yrs of age reality was as real as my dreams , to stare and look into things turned into colors objects moved with the beating of my heart .
🙄
Hmm .... I wonder what would happen applying the magnet that removes the conscious experience of colour when a person is experiencing closed eye hallucinations on a psychedelic. This may tell us something interesting since there would be no sensory input. Would the experience of colour disappear from the hallucination?
How do you spell where you say replaced space and time call amphe___?
This is what Hinduism or to be precise Sanatana Dharma has been saying over a thousands of years . MAYA.. if only the western scientific World spent more time looking into the Hindu philosophy much more deeply and understand it they would have all the answers that they are looking for..
The answers can be found in Samadhi.
Surely one would first have to show that the vedas are a source of truth in the first place?
If you believe everything is maya why you believe cow as sacred holy you can eat them bcz you believe everything is maya they aren't real.
The difference is the Hindus never proved it mathematically.. .seems like they knew something they couldn't describe and scientists are trying to describe something they don't know
It's amazing how he builds a 'case against reality' step by step.
If the scientific community follows this approach, it could be a profound & much required step towards understanding reality. Aligning more with ancient knowledge from many philosophies & core teachings of eastern religions.
Minute 34 is eye opening!
One of the last illusions in the hierarchy of illusions is that illusions are to be removed, the very last illusion of the whole tower is that peeling away illusions constitute an ascension while it actually constitutes a descent. Illumination is achieved at rock bottom and results in a strong impulse to rise back from the bottom of the abys. Rising back to the surface, gasping for air; and repopulate reality with culture, meaning, symbols, colors, with a new found appreciation for those once rejected so called illusions.
Steiner goes into great depth explaining all of these things, as does Seth, in The Eternal Validity of The Soul. Gigi Young I'm sure is related to Blavatsly, and takes ancient wisdom through quantum physics, into vivid intel for us today 💐 well, I think she's spot on, like Michael Feeley ....great times to be alive!! 🧡💫
I was introduced to Seth at age 12, and always loved the work Jane did channeling Seth.
lol?
Amazing, love the mix of science and spirituality. A long time ago, before the terms of AI were created, I wrote an essay on how both are at best searching for the truth and aiming to help humanity. Now I'm thinking we're all a spark of the divine consciousness.
Precisely ❤
Yet not even one of these divine entities bothered to save those in Libya who were screaming for help as the flood took them away.
Occam’s razor tells us not to include any unnecessary assumptions in a theory because those extra presuppositions might be illusions. A theory explaining consciousness, to the listener “myself”, does not need to presuppose the brain is conscious or presuppose the brain does our thinking such that it becomes aware. The concept of conscious observation exists outside the concept of an aware brain or computation. For example, we usually observe people and animals acting aware, outside of needing to also know we are an animal. Observation exists is provable to “myself” though, reading text for example. So, the concept of reading text sufficiently forces observation to exist. The illusions we found and debunked above were: light exists, the brain is a conscious computation, and the philosophy of the listener “myself” is explainable as an individual experience.
Loved listening to this 🙏🏻🫶😊
My bills aren't an illusion.
He explains that in 45 min. Like his icon of the folder on the screen - our bills are serious, but not real :-)
@@mona5217 It's incoherent, none of that is illusionary or should be described as such.
Your Bills are concepts, we agree upon. They have no reality in Africa, or in reality.
He literally said you should take your perceptions very seriously
😅
In Sanskrit it's called MAYA. A whole philosophy/spiritual teaching in Vedanta.
Yep,same consciousness( brahman )
???? This has nothing to do with religion.
@@TheGuiltsOfUs Yes Ask chatgpt…..who created human beings? Only 3 religion is based on god but not Hinduism…then you get answer about consiousness ,illusion and reality…
scrolled down 100 comments, is there a summary of the lecture? thanks
So so good!
If it's an illusion, is it a real illusion?
I like how this ties in perfectly with what spirituality believes, which is that we each create our own "reality"... and that only means that we create our own Experience of said reality.
We are both the Creator and the Creation of our experience of reality.
What separates us from fully knowing this truth is our constant, unconscious choosing of opposing beliefs - I am less than what I fear.
What utter drivel. Go tell that to the child dying of starvation screaming out for help!
Tell that to those who died in gas chambers in Auschwitz.
Is this related to Ernst Mach's bucket experiment?
Countability, although infinite, generates a by property of finite values similar to phi, confining this and any universe populated with isosimilar objects to repeated instances of a finite matrix.
What Donald calls "illusion", normal people call "limited perceptual ability", or "perceptual keyhole". Donald is the Deepak Chopra of consciousness, science and game theory.
I agree. Our universal experience would have to be canceled by a cognition that exposes what we took for reality to be an illusion, only then would this choice of wording be coherent.
It would be good if Hoffman would formulate a concrete and falsifiable prediction. Otherwise it's just philosophy.
He can’t: it’s definitely (bad) philosophy.
@@christopherhamilton3621 What is misleading is that he suggests that it is actual science.
The moment a particle is a wave; it has to be a conscious wave! Gravity is the conscious attraction among waves to create the illusion of particles, and our experience-able Universe. Max Planck states "Consciousness is fundamental and matter is derived from Consciousness". Life is the Infinite Consciousness, experiencing the Infinite Possibilities, Infinitely. We are "It", experiencing our infinite possibilities in our finite moment. Our job is to make it interesting!
Gödel's incompleteness.
Defining something adequately enough to use it in a sentence is called “completeness”. Gödel's incompleteness states that that sentence, and hence every sentence, is still incomplete. So, let consciousness be defined as adequate proof in words that the universe exists, words we could use in a sentence to explain how consciousness works. Hence, consciousness is a computation (a proof that the universe exists). And, the mechanism of consciousness is the activity of completing, e.g., grasping, explaining, defining, or proving.
Corollaries.
The exception to Gödel's incompleteness is the activity of completing.
The exception to not being conscious is the activity of completing.
Consciousness is the illusion that the universe exists, the rule that rules are observed.
Is what we perceive as reality an illusion? good one..
Thank you for this thought-provoking example of an AI Robot reporting as though he was a scientist-no heart here-I find it eerily fascinating.
Funny. I'm a die-hard Hoffman fan, so my ears hear him in a certain (admittedly biased) light. I tried listening with your perspective in mind ... and you are right. He comes off as a scientist all the way to the core.... or heart. He does "better" in more casual interviews. If you find his ideas intriguing and want to listen to a more human interview, try ruclips.net/video/HJlA5mHYK4w/видео.html (perhaps it takes a woman to bring out his more human side).
Interesting, I find much humanity in his tone and approach. He's soothing to listen to, could be confirmation bias.
18:44, Reality is perspective , that’s why mankind created languages and mathematics, so we can share our perspectives, communication has many levels, like the five senses and then some, we are spirits or energy first at different frequencies at different times, just knowing is communicating, for some the mathematics is a slow down,a wall or a vail not unlike the vail between awake and dreaming, I have no doubt that,that’s the reason more physicists are hanging out with philosophers, because they can’t do the math, neither can I
Brillient lecture
If the world, which includes Hoffman, is an illusion, then so is Hoffman. How can an illusionary man, such as Hoffman, determine what is real and isn't?
Hoffman’s consciousness and your consciousness are one and the same so he communicates with you through that medium not as a physical bodily physicist but rather as a fellow conscious entity who superficially seems to be a physical human being.
@@sharonhearne5014 Which would also be an illusion, and two illusions can't interact at all, for only two reals have casual interaction. The incoherency of this position remains.
This is a brief record of my after death experience and the things I learned while in Gods presence in Dec 2022.
How did you build the universe? Answer: It is a massive self directing simulation like South Park is to us, but much more complex.
To set the stage properly it has to be realized God (our programmer), is not in his computer but sitting at it. He is not bound by the rules of our created simulation, any more than we are bound by the rules of south park or the Simpsons. He could be any one in his world, but because he can press delete, or adjust our reality to any thing he wishes, to us he is God.
I asked God, "Are you perfect". His answer was no, not then.
Are you now? Yes. I have an immortal body already of course, and will be in the new perfect heavens and earth along with you. I have dealt with every defect.
I then asked "Was Adam and Eve perfect. His answer was no.
Next, what about your re-action of deciding to throw Adam out and burn him instead of reviewing his schematics and correcting problems? Answer...I was a lot younger and more reactionary then.
I never sinned to be born. What is this crock of original sin? Answer: It is a glitch in the matrix I can not correct, and it affects all new introductions to the simulation.
What is Jesus? Answer: He is a patch program that if you use it removes this original defects called sin you inherit from the program.
I have been asked many times why death has to occur for this transfer to take place. Answer: Because at this time it is the limits of my technology.
The prayer includes several key words i will accent. Here it is.
JESUS, I BELIEVE in you, FORGIVE me this original SIN and all others, COME INTO my life and help me to live it better.
This patch does several things. One, the destination of your consciousness has now been transferred from hell, and paired with an immortal body that will be defect free and last forever. This body will also reside in a new defect free universe, on a redesigned, defect free earth. All this for the price of a one sentence prayer taking less than 30 seconds to pray. Why this way. Unknown, but I assure you it works. I have done it. This is his simulation, and he gets to choose the key words. What they are really does not matter, it is the effectiveness that counts.
As for the many evils and the horrendous crimes of our reality they are all real and I asked about this. Answer: This simulation has too much wrong, so I no longer fix it. I have left you to the consequences of bad self direction, and the destruction it brings. The new bodies are ready, the new universe almost ready so I have poured my resources into this. The reality of the universe you are now in is about to suffer total cascade failure, and end. As for all who accept this route of using the patch, no matter what you were, you are now perfect, and with a new destination after death.. This applies to us all.
What happens to those that do not accept. Answer: They end up in the trash, as they can not be allowed to destabilize the matrix of the new universe with there still present defects.
Do they burn forever. I then saw a vision of Scotland and its burning bogs. God assured me that this is the fire the defective people that die will suffer from, not constant burning of individuals, but with fires that can spring up anywhere and do burn forever. I also was listening to a rabbi talk of hell and there version is quite different and much more merciful. I think there version must be considered correct as this belief system is originally there’s. They should know.
ruclips.net/video/rI-Fpq1IzCQ/видео.html
In short, this is a bad reality we are in. It will not be corrected. Like an old car, you get rid of it and can drive away in a nice new one. Pray the patch prayer and see. In short God is saying make this change this way because as of now it is the only solution available.
ruclips.net/video/rF5KgpZXNeU/видео.html
ruclips.net/user/results?search_query=is+our+reality+pixelated
Thanks I needed to read this
Keeping a good constructive attitude toward mind and heart conscience . ☝️
This has nothing to do with your myths
What a ridiculous bunch of drivel. A childish concept to think of a person being eternally punished.
@@restlessdieselI saw hell. It is real and burniing.
Modern research on Near Death Experience by Raymond moody, reincarnation memories by Ian Stevenson/Jim trucker and past lives regression by Brian Weiss all independently but coincidentally show that our consciousness survive death, we live many lives and our thoughts and actions matter in the hereafter.
So be kind and helpful to others, be virtuous, meditate and cultivate ourselves to higher spiritual levels. Cheers.
44:40-47:23
55:00-1:01:00
1:05:00-1:32:05
1:25:06 on Parke-Taylor formula
If reality is an illusion, then it's an illusion that reality is an illusion.
It is an onion, and the center is emptiness.
🤔...... 🙂
If you believe that, then doesn’t that make you delusional ?
Then we have nothing to worry about.
Don't pay your bills and taxes you will know reality
Hoffman’s theory supports the theory of affirmations. We construct reality/ future. Karl Jung describes the simulation as the ego, the agent simulation - space time in physical objects. The self is not fundamental. Karl Jung argues that reality also exist beyond consciousness but beyond human perception - a reality waiting to be simulated by agents; the subconscious self as opposed to the ego.
The question is, how can agents consistently create reality that sustains human existence assuming non existence is not a desired state. No agent desires to be hit by a train.
The holy grail is the ability as agents of simulation to control our reality - to invoke the space and time we desire.
Objective reality refers to something that will not deviate from its essence no matter how you observe it. There are two important points here, one is to ensure the feasibility of diverse subjective perspectives, and the other is to achieve the identity regardless of the conditions of the first point under the condition of the first point.
Since "nothingness" does not exist, regarding what is "objective reality", if it is not finite, it is infinite. Obviously, finite things have their fixed stipulations as conditions, and finite things cannot exist without their essential conditions. Therefore, the real objective reality is by no means a pictorial physical universe (the simple assumption of materialism), but an infinite existence of uncertainty.
This kind of existence seems inexplicable at first glance, but as long as we look at the two key points in the first paragraph, the answer will be obvious. The first is to ensure the feasibility of all possible infinite subjective perspectives, that is to say, no matter what form of things or reality you observe, it is feasible (possible) for the "objective reality", so adding The second point, we know that all kinds of things and reality in any perspective are different manifestations of "objective existence". Infinity is different from "nothingness", so infinite objective existence must exist in a certain form However, the form is limited, and to transition to infinity, one must jump out of the current form, so there will be a logical "fluidity". We know that time has undoubted fluidity, but time is only a fluidity of linear development. Therefore, logical fluidity refers to the "replaceability of form", and "objective existence" has the ability to replace any actual form without affecting the essence.
Were the:
Holocaust (1941-1945)
Rwandan Genocide (1994)
Cambodian Genocide (1975-1979)
Hiroshima and Nagasaki (1945)
Nanjing Massacre (1937-1938)
My Lai Massacre (1968)
Srebrenica Massacre (1995)
September 11 Attacks (2001)
all just illusions too?
Yes.
Every aspect of our physical realm is an illusion.
The native Aboriginals of Australia claim we are "Mud men walking through a dream world."
His description isn't far from what they claim; we just have a better ability to describe this illusion.
@@donaldwilliams4019 Yeah, look at where that has gotten Australian Aboriginals. To the brink of extinction because realists invaded their reality and took all the land from them. :-)
@@schmetterling4477 That doesn't dispute the fact that this is a holographic 3D computer program that we are playing around with.
@@donaldwilliams4019 Why are you trying to prove to me so badly that you had too much to drink, though? ;-)
@@schmetterling4477 Im backing up my arguments with examples and facts; you name-call and belittle.
Your example doesn't disprove Dr. Hoffman's theory. In fact, it supports the idea that conscious entities become more and more evolved in their ability to manipulate this 3D holographic realm.
The Aboriginals didn't have the language to properly describe this V.R. program, but they understood the implications of it.
Too bad so many "evolved modern men" can't see this glaring fact that "primitive cavemen" could comprehend. Makes you question the validity of "modern man" and his ability to understand things he can't see..
Illusion......so what? If everything is real or an lillusion, so what? What difference does it make? None. At all. It is what it is and what it has been for ever.
It’s actually very interesting it’s not as redundant as you make it seem. It’s not simply, is it illusion or not it has more to it if you just watch a bit bruh
And if you don’t care for the answer why are you watching let even alone clicking this video to begin with?
@@Fatima.ameen3 I would care for the answer if there was one. There is none and it is always disappointing. Indications of an answer are always clickbaits. So I'm equally stupid.
Theorem: The conscious entity “myself” is a by-product of the mechanics of the universe accidently proving to itself that the universe exists. (A mathematical constraint on all calculi, rather than an attribute of each conscious calculus). Proof: Before the first observer, a proof that the universe exists could be found if and only if a first observer occurred, and saw or felt the universe. Seeing the universe would prove to the first observer that the universe exists and hence a proof then would have been found. So, the mechanism of consciousness is the same as the mechanism of proving the universe exists. As such, the entity “myself’ is exactly the rule that rules exist (that rules exist is accidental proof that something exists and is the universe proving to itself that the universe exists), which is not a by-product of the activity in each brain.
Extremely interesting. Thanks 🙏🏽
Is reality an illusion? NO,.. Reality are basic foundamentle truths. This video isn't consistent.
Agree with ya
What is truth?You don’t make sense Prof does very logical in his scientific approach.
I have, in all my life, never experienced a more repetitious lecture than this. The first 59 minutes include not less than 200 restatements, yet he never in those 59 minutes states his own theory once. Unfortunately, when he finally gets to his theory, it is deeply flimsy, and mostly another restatement of the rejections he provided in the first part. This is not a theory really--just speculations backed by lots of facts that only partially address his theory without proving anything. This is no different from the 'theories' provided by highly intelligent conspiracy theorists. Like them, he chooses facts that seem to support his ideas without addressing entire contexts of ideas that do not provide support. None of this says his theory is wrong, just that it is no better than dreams until he actually provides at least SOME solid, unique supportive evidence and stops spending all his time disputing the realities of others.
What he said about deception and the group is true and happening in society to the point where it is becoming the way to be. Everyone is deceiving each other for their selfish benefit. Like he said, it leads to collapse.
this is a perfect definition of "the Ether"
I'm no expert, but this guy reeks of pseudoscience.
The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool. -RP Feynman.
This guy clearly has convinced himself, but I get the sense he wants his theory to be true, so much so that he fell in love with it, rather than knowing nature and reality.
What's the truth? We don't know, and so ought to proceed with circumspection. This is Jordan Peterson physics.
I think you fall in the category he calls biased by social pressure, exchanging your (probably socialist or at least leftist) views for truth. If you would know a bit more about mathematics, you would probably better understand that what he's proposing is far from pseudo science. If he would tell you we only detect the even subalgebras, he wouldn't make much sense to your ignorance either, so that's why I suppose you judge it pseudoscience, how very Dunning-Krueger of you. 😂
@@scififan698
I think you fall into the category he calls "enlightened" which is to say "willing to swallow his bullshit uncritically."
I have a degree in math.
What could disconfirm his theory? Nothing, it's unfalsifiable.
The irony is that everything you said is just projection.
He is dealing with the obvious issue in science, which has been pushing consciousness aside. Nobody knows how it works, and nobody would argue against the fact that it is the most important thing we could possibly learn about. Kind of an interesting place to be, no?
So with that in mind, you certainly do want some scientists (from whatever sphere of science they come from) to tackle the problem in novel ways. Ignoring it isn't an option.
The neurophysiological approaches were extremely exciting to me and 20 years ago I was close to entering the field. But in hindsight I'm glad I didn't because we have met huge roadblocks. Today, it its clear that AI and a breakthrough in physics are likely needed to inch towards solving the mystery. Hoffman is quite right in citing the prevailing thought of modern physics that spacetime is essentially an illusion (more accurately, a low-resolution approximation of some more fundamental process, likely to be describable with 4+n-dimensional mathematics.
So all Hoffman is doing is posing an inverted assumption (consciousness before experience (IE: what we call "physical") and seeing where it takes him in terms of potentially useful mathematical modeling. He is quite clear that he is probably wrong, and that nonetheless it is expedient for someone such as himself to still take up the case and see how far it might go. Who knows if it's fruitful, but I agree with Hoffman in that it is an obvious avenue to pursue given a multitude of factors.
@@sibbyeskie
Maybe I just don't have the anthropocentric hubris to think that consciousness, which we only know of in humans, is at the bottom of reality. Humans are not the end all be all of reality. I like humans and think they're amazing, but I don't let that dictate what the universe has to be like. If you want a theory that puts mind at the bottom of reality, we already have that: go to Church.
Is it an interesting idea? Sure, perhaps. But so are alchemy and New-age-ism and theism. Another hack theory to add to the pile of hack theories, a dime a dozen. That so many people get snookered into this bullshit just proves Barnum right yet again.
@@11kravitzn I think you're conflating an attempt at understanding a bonafide mystery using scientific tools, with an unsophisticated approach that has no scientific methodology or end goal.
If you revere the pursuit of science, then you would notice that all of the surprising facts we have discovered in the past century would have been derided in exactly the tone you choose here. Conceptions of time, space, matter and causality have been totally transformed and forced to include unintuitive truths at their center simply because people dared to posit inverted assumptions and see where they lead.
Personally, my aesthetic naturally prefers a deterministic, clean and simple to understand universe. But intellectually I know that is an absurd position to hold at this point and science will leave me behind if I am unwilling to entertain the philosophical mysteries with modern methodology and understanding. I think Don is absolutely clear about being on that track, and not at all convinced in the conclusion, but rather picking an assumption and seeing where it leads. It's important to see things with nuance and intellectually open without having to commit to a hypothesis or be concerned about one's ego.
Perfect presentation by Donald Hoffman, to explain this Hadist Qudsi :
يَقُولُ اللهُ تَعَالَى: أَنَا عِنْدَ ظَنِّ عَبْدِي
“God the Almighty said: I am as my servant (you) thinks I am “
“Tuhan berfirman: Aku adalah prasangka hambaku..” Muhammad (600)
"Manunggaling kawulo - gusti", "You, are your own God" “You, are the creator of your own reality” Syech Siti Jenar, javanese scientist (1481)
“I think therefore i’am” Rene Descartes (1637)
“Do you really believe the moon is not there when you are not looking (believe) at it?“ Albert Einstein, the confused scientist towards quantum physics and reality (1921)
"Game of life" Brilliant!!! It is what we all do. The evolution is our term for a higher intilligence .
Consciousness is fundamental as it is where all ideas form, some of which become paintings, chairs, houses, etc
While I find Donalds optimistic mindset inspiring, it's impossible to ignore his drive to put the Hermetic religious dogma into mathmatical garbledeegook that must be taken at face value. Fortunately, we have seen this act before. Of course the lay person can't grasp the meaning. We need a priest of the Hermetic science to translate the unintelligable for us. A "decorated permutation" indeed. This new permutation is impressive in it's complexity by comparison to the more banal culty examples I've heard so far. Congratulations.
Insisting that there be a one to one correspondence between a physical process in the brain and a taste for a vision that we experience misses the point of what consciousness is the greater consciousness is. The below language experience of oneness that you experience from deep meditation or just real stillness, just being, not doing. The rest is just mechanics and you can get lost in that
'' I present a new theorem: Veridical perceptions are never more fit than non-veridical perceptions which are simply tuned to the relevant fitness functions.''
I'm glad I read this sentence in the description!
Now, I won't waste my time on the video.
While I am an adequately educated person, I do not have the vaguest clue what is meant by the terms space-time, or even the term quantum theory. In 78 years of successfully living on this planet, I have never identified any necessity to know anything whatsoever about either. It simply isn't necessary to know everything about everything. I also can't play the violin, but I can listen to violin music. I can also listen to Hoffman, but I don't actually need to understand any of it. If you think that you do need to understand it, that very thought might not be consistent with the reality.
The idea of superposition (to overlap) also can be to obscure (to hide from conscious observation). So, the idea called “collapsing the causal wavefunction” is mathematically equivalent to the idea called “conscious observation”. Proof: The common units of measure of change is “meaning” since collapsing to fewer outcomes means observing fewer meanings.
Plants and animals exist among the causal wavefunction (the earth evolving) simply because they don’t overlap with other objects, and not because they are conscious or intelligent. The existence of animals is an objective fact or logical outcome, called consciousness.
It is clear that seeming separate objects, such as motor cars, curtains, and computers, for example, are really only ideas in our minds, as without a mind to label them as such, they could not exist as cars, curtains, and computers.
It seems reasonable to apply the same logic to all visual objects, even " natural " images.
A " tree " does not call itself a tree.
A body does not call itself a body.
And bodies do not contain any qualities, such as kindness, humour, honesty etc.
We think that the material world perceived by bodies , has some meaning of its own, yet only our minds can give meaning to anything.
A body cannot be a real, enduring self, as they are in continual change.
For something to be real, or true, it cannot change.
"The task of properly relating science to transcendental knowledge is a great and holy task"
What are conscious agents, the ontological primitive of this theory?
Are they an infinite network of single entities?
If conscious is a fundamental and is all there is, why there are infinity agents?