Even a foundationalist like Aristotle would be angry with such simplistic classification of Sciences. Still I feel that by this Podcast you are lifting discourse and bringing value to mainstream discourse keep doing it.
I have observed that some people explicitly declare their beliefs as subjective from the start of a discussion, as if it gives them some sort of special protective permission to do religious practices guilt free or something, and that this admission will make them immune from criticism lol....
Vimoh got outclassed, the wannabe dillahunty mini me hangs up when his little ego meets the vastness of the unknown of life and his unpaid minions rationalising & defending their mental midget master when they have met someone more than their match. If he or you have the courage why not let him go on but he was fillibustering and rudely grandstanding without any evidence or understanding of Lollards arguments also accusing him of trolling and then his footstool comrades say it was in "good faith". These armchair scientists will never make it.
Of course it will give me protection. If you haven't tasted sweet how could you say that sweet doesn't exist? You people are completely arrogant who think that they know everything or whatever they know is completely correct.
37:25 (shared psychotic disorder) if everyone in his family saw it and he has seen this object before then it's not surprising that his whole family saw it he definitely described that first story to his family.
No I haven't described them about Atman because during the first time when I saw Atman I didn't talked about it with anyone and just slept normally but only my father is the one who had also seen Atman during his mid 20s in the Village but he was not present in the village on that day when we saw as I said my Mother Father and Brother were at My Nanny's place and it was only Me, My Grandmother, My Grandfather , My Cousin and My Aunty and all of them saw Atman on that day even though they never ever had saw it
I dont know why people give so much importance to subjective experience that are not objectively verifiable. I spent a year trying isha kriya and meditation, i could not feel anything nor understand the significance of it. If sadhguru can gain enlightenment by sitting on a rock for a few hours then countless people like me who tried meditation for months and still failed are idiotic?. Since then i started valuing objective reality.We percieve a tree through subjecfive experience and verify that through objective experience of normal fellow humans. All can see, feel and test presence of trees easily. We believe in trees because there is objective evidence and definition of trees. With spirituality, it means different things to different people. If all spiritualists cannot decide a single definition for these things, why do they think it is reality?
Spirituality is multimillion dollars buisness... By the time people understand it's reality they already wasted so much money and time. Spirituality is a scam.
Spirituality is multimillion dollars buisness... By the time people understand it's reality they already wasted so much money and time. Spirituality is a scam.
Hey Vimoh. 1+1=2 is not an axiom that we assume to be true and base all arithmetic on a collection of such axioms. There's a very beautiful proof of why 1+1=2, although it uses 7 axioms of logic. Check out Bertrand Russel's Principia Mathematica, I used 1st edition,1913 I believe. The main precursor theorem is *54.43 and the book uses that along with a lot of other propositions to finally prove 1+1=2 after many pages. I hope this helped. 😅
The last caller is completely doing mental gymnastics. Life consists of numerous small instantaneous actions. Life cannot exist without reproduction, it cannot exist without eating, it cannot exist without excreting waste or breathing. These small insta taneous actions make up life. In order to do any of these things, we need empirical knowledge and observation of reality. Some caveman might have tried to breathe underwater, when he realised he could not, he made a concious decission to not breath underwater and thats what he instructed his children. Just the simple act of breathing require empirical observations and knowledge.
Question is not whether the math exist if universe doesn't exist. It is whether math exists if we don't exist. If it exists despite us, that would mean we discovered it. If it is just our imagination, then our existence is necessary for math to exist (our invention). There are rules in the universe which are followed without our existence. So, math exists without our existence. However, certain streams of maths do not exist in the real world at all. So, it needs our presence for it to exist. Initially math was developed based on our observation of real world like geometry. However, much of the later stage maths exists just in our mind including algebra.
This livestream is a great platform, but some things can be improved. With all due respect, I wanted to share something I noticed. sometimes vimoh interrupts the caller in the middle before he can make his point. Also, sometimes vimoh doesn't try to understand what is the point of view of the caller. It's perfectly ok to disagree with the caller, but it's important to try to understand the point first before debunking it. The caller should be given the opportunity to finish his point properly. For example, vimoh made the point that we trust galilio because he made claims and then we found by experimentation that the claims are true. One of the callers wanted to point out that some people claim some near death experience, so what's the issue with experimenting with it and see if it is true. The point was not that the near death claims are true. The point was that the claims are worth testing, because supposedly so many people have made a similar claim. Also another point vimoh pointed out was that you won't go around testing any random claim, say for example, if someone told to go around Greenwich line or sth. The caller wanted to point out that doing meditation is harmless and useful, so why not kill two birds with one stone: do meditation for testing claim+ do meditation for mental peace. Basically testing other claims have no side benefit but testing the claim of near death experience has a side benefit of mental peace. Also this claim has been made by many different people so that would mean that it's worth testing compared to other random claims. It doesn't mean the claim is true. All it means is that so many people made same claim so why not test it and be sure whether it's true or false. I think these two points were not addressed well.
I agree with your points. I think there can be better counter arguments from Vimoh. But I still on the side that these gurus' claims aren't reliable because experiences during meditation are very subjectives. I used to study about Lucid Dream, Astral Projection, and Near Death (NDE) or Out of Body Experience (OBE). I noticed that people mostly see things related to their religious world view during NDE. So it's possible people experience their past memories of religious stories or dead family members. Also if you notice people from different religions do some short of meditation and have experience things related to their beliefs and religion. So it's possible if someone meditate to know of reincarnation or a specific God experience, then your brain try to create experience according to it. That's why mystical meditation experience of Shaolin monk and Hindu Baba is different. That's why checking Babas' claims by doing meditation isn't reliable because if you go with the intention to have these claimed experience then your brain can create those experience. And if you do meditation skeptically and don't have those experiences, then these Babas have excuse that you are not ready or worthy yet to experience. And if those experiences aren't real then you will spend whole life chasing false experiences.
I talked with my one Muslim teacher who was into mystical philosophy and he said that although there are discrepancies between different meditators regarding the experience, all agree that there was something in it. His point was that we don't have solid evidence for any one particular interpretation, but we do have solid evidence for the existence of the thing which is god. All meditators agree on God. That means God is the reproducible result of the meditative experience. However the variant of God is not a reproducible result since it changes from person to person based on religious biases. So the point is, according to science, results have to be reproducible. Experiments conducted independently must yield same result. Different meditators get different gods. Hence one particular type of God's existence is not reproducible result. But all reach same conclusion that God exists. So the existence of God did reproducible result. Point is, existence of God is proven via the meditative experience conducted independently by different sages across the world. But the existence of the TYPE of God (Allah/Krishna etc ) is not a reproducible result, hence cannot be proven
I think what the last guy was trying to say is that we don't need a conscious understanding of science just to be able to apply it in daily life. You mentioned about animals being taught by their parents how to eat, which is true for most mammals and birds. However, snakes, frogs, alligators, insects etc. are never taught this. They just know how to apply the science without actually having to consciously know science. An amoeba doesn't have a single neuron, yet it can engulf a food particle, "digest" it and remove it through a vacuole. This is all application of science without knowing it. Maybe what the last caller was getting at is that religion or spirituality largely tries to make people apply what they think is scientific knowledge; but we can only now point out the flaws due to our sound scientific method.
I think that too!!!. "Religion or spirituality largely tries to make people apply what they think is scientific knowledge" but I don't think religion was made for applying their scientific knowledge, I think religion was made so that we can be controlled and put together (and I read it somewhere too). What do you think about it?? And sorry for my bad English🙃
@@SusGuts526 I largely agree. I think theism and religion initially started off as ideas that were both philosphical and so called "scientific". The main reason for its propagation and growth is definitely to control the masses. Think of it as content creators creating content. They start off just by putting ideas into the world. However, once they have an understanding of what their audience wants, they start manipulating content and become an echo chamber or push false narratives to widen and secure their public support.
I want to ask u abt ghost possession and black magic..........if lets say ghosts dont exist...or soul doesnt exist after death.........so whats abt people who perform black magic n make other people life hell. Is black magic just an ancient trick to destroy someone physical and mental health .....because many ghost possession signs r part of symptoms of psychological illnesses......... Or there is something more to ghost possession n black magic ......Your Views Sir... Ur response will be highly appreciated 😇
Mainly it's due to psychological issues, epilepsy, schizophrenia ... They get seizures, but people think they're possessed by ghosts or something, and if the affected person is religious, they can convince themselves they're possessed due to their religious beleifs, so they are likely to get a seizure after hearing a biblical verse, or religious phrases. You might want to watch The exorcism of emily rose, this movie is based on such a case.
Hi Vimoh, if I Define Spirituality as below, To Know yourself by having self observation of your perspectives and day to day activities and finding its root cause. by root cause I mean finding how much greed, desires, fear and emotions played a role in your actions. for example, if I choose Data Science as my career and believe that it's my passion. by self observation I found my chose was based on salary so greed is root cause, not passion. in short, it a way to extract one true motive and intention which make's one less biased. It's there any inconsistency in above statements ?? N Wish you and all a happy New year 😄
Isn't it called Introspection? Or if not exactly then I'm sure there are exact words for what you just describe. I don't see any need to use a vage word, like spirituality, when there are so many different meanings of a word.
Maths doesn't 'exist' in reality, so much as functional quantities, ratios, and geometries do. Scalar mathematics is expressed in ratios of an arbitrary unit (a.k.a number one), whereas in reality, we have to define the unit. Quanta of matter exist and interact in space-time, and we can express these interactions with mathematics. The difference between math and matter is like that between music and music theory. Objects vibrate at certain frequencies which are perceived as tones. Musical scales are built on the basis of the ratio of different frequencies, relative to each other. Sheet music is a representation of relative frequencies, whereas the absolute frequency in reality for each note is defined by us. For instance, the note A4 is commonly assigned a frequency of 440Hz, but it could be considered 436 Hz , or 432 Hz as well, and would work with the same theory so long as the instruments are tuned accordingly. That's apparent in our use of macroscopic physics, when we start off with human-defined units such as kg and km, but when we get into the atomic scale then perhaps we can get closer to what may constitute a 'unit' of reality. But then again, two atoms of the same element may act in similar ways, but there are isotopic differences between them as well, such as Hydrogen, and Deuterium. And whose to say all sub-atomic particles are precisely the same? A proton may act as a unit of positive charge, but I don't think we have the scope to ascertain that all positive charges are exactly equal, despite consistency in their functional properties. So to sum up, I don't think we've arrived at an absolute unit, but we do perceive functional units in reality, which makes math a good tool to parse it, but we can't conclude that maths is 'real' in absence of a true indivisible unit of existence. Two plus two is four because we've ascribed a word 'four' to a certain perceived quantity. In base 3 maths, two plus two is eleven, but it's essentially the same thing. It doesn't become real until we ask "four of what?" then realize that four bananas in a bunch are all different slightly, but look and taste the same to us.
The thing with aura of babas like sadhguru, osho is similar to the aura of singers in events. thats why these babas are also doing such events nowadays.😂 I get such experience from wwe wretslers.
It seems many people come to the stream claiming to be open-minded seekers, ready to change their mind if the right evidence or knowledge is provided but they seem to keep presenting vague or cherry-picked examples to support their pre-existing beliefs and keep shooting down or ignoring whatever sensible stuff is told to them.
I think maths is not inherent in nature. Its a fiction we make up just like language. It happens to be useful to describe the natural world. You can take any set of rules or axioms (as we call them in maths) as your foundation and form a entire branch of mathematics from it. But its true that at the beginning of mathematics. When we were inventing things like geometry etc. Most of these axioms were taken from the real world (like geometry postulating that two parellel lines never intersect which is true in the physical world). But it doesn't have to be necessarily like this. You can have things which are not true in our physical world as postulates and still get a rigid mathematical system from it.
“it doesn't have to be necessary like that” Well no,All mathematical truths are necessary truths based on empirical observation. Although I agree with you that mathematics sometimes sounds irrational because it transcends empiricism at many points which is because majority mathamaticians sees mathematics as metaphysical subject. Take the example of godel incompleteness theorem,it states we can never be able to prove that mathematical statements like 2+2=4 is necessary truths unless we don't get out of the system. This is absurd like we got empirical evidences to support 2+2=4. It's human's imagination like a human back introduced the proof system in mathematics i.e mathematical truths should be proven mathematically instead of empirically. Godel incompleteness theorem real definition should be that we can't prove mathematical truths mathematically. We shouldn't conclude something that 2+2≠4
Proof theory is so important in mathematics. Imagine If I discovers pythogorous theorem based on empirical observation and didn't give mathematical proofs. But you gave the mathematical proof of pythogorous theorem then it would be you who will be awarded field medal not me.
To the caller who was talking about reincarnation and near death experiences..I would like to say that he was talking about doctors testimonials which has got no basis as that at the end is a claim and would be turned down as an appeal to authority logical fallacy.even the appropriate scientific definition of death is not what the so called "scientific" gurus or some youtubers had told as to clearly understand the state of death as it happens to a living being is very technical and involves a lot of objective parameters which are needed to be evaluated.medulla oblongata ka size decrease hota hai...what??? ....you won't function properly if that happens.what i find appaling is an inability or i don't know whether there is some hideous motives behind telling scientific sounding stuff/words and conglomerate them to make rational sounding sentences/arguments as if doing that would provide a justification to my forced scepticism or agnosticism. I mean if I don't know something and there are many I would simply say I don't know but rather then accepting that I don't know and may be I should stop extrapolating my wild skeptic thoughts and preconceived notions about religion into sentences which make them sound scientific and my religious grandiosity/bias thus,gets satisfied or my spiritual position gets appropriated. The pseudo claims of spirituality concocted with half understandable scientific jargons really paves the way for the new age advaits,spiritualists,occultists. I mean you have to be many things eg a scientist,a doctor,an engineer,a philosopher,historian etc to explain things in an all encompassing phenomenon.most of us can't do that thats why we say we don't know about topics we don't understand.not everything is supposed to be understood by everybody and thus creates gaps in our understanding and viola the God of the gaps eg SADHGURU appears with his enticing laugh.
My mind is incapable of following the last caller. I just got that he was trying to say you dont need to know what the scientific method is to simply live life as some things are instinctive. So what?
Vimoh bhai.. mere bhai ka ek paranormal encounter hua tha few years ago. He an his 3 more friends saw a lady at night around 1am when they were roaming around their hotel in bir biling. All 4 saw that lady sitting in white dress. Or charo ki gand ek sath fati. They got scared enough and left the route and turned back to hotel without disturbing or interacting with that lady. I asked my brother to describe the appearance of that lady. Brother said- she was sitting like her head down in her folded knees...her hairs are in front and parted. Shes wearing white.. and for some reason it seems like she's glowing like bloom effect. Me and my brother are both big sceptics..we both are atheist. My question is - why a lady sitting alone in jungle type area at night @1am. She wasn't moving like wtf. My bro is honest guy but I don't believe this story because it feels like they all must have wrong interpreted the situation for some reason.
01:37:37 - There is a show called 'Psych'. its protagonist is a brilliant detective, and he is so good at what he does that people find it unbelievable. So he tells everyone that he is a psychic, and Boom, everybody starts believing him. So that show is about a brilliant detective who pretends to be a psychic, and its a bloody hilarious show. 02:00:39 - You dont put ANYTHING in your mouth and swallow it. It needs empirical knowledge to understand what you consume and what you cant. You can see even animals stay away from poisonous ivy, and other insects that are venomous. THAT IS SCIENCE ! YOU NEED SCIENCE TO LIVE. It might not fit 'your' particular brand, but it IS scientific knowledge. We all use it. And as far as 'teaching somebody to eat' goes, I HAD to teach my son how to swallow food. He is on the spectrum and did not know how to chew and swallow. It had to be taught to him like many other things that he still struggles with today that might sound mundane to all of us.
Animals stay away from poison because of their evolutionary instincts, not because of scientific knowledge. They don't know that these chemicals contain these compounds and they would react in such a manner to kill them.
.The last caller was the epitome of logical fallacies.according to him life will occur instinctively whether you want it to happen or not...for eg you lie down for a while and you feel hungry,so what will happen is that gradually you will become so hungry that your primal unconscious monkey brain will force you to go and fetch food by whatever means possible (and I mean it eg killing a dog infront of your house and start eating it or maybe eat some raw maggots,ants and leaves )and remember everything is happening instinctively,no food preparation or opening the fridge is allowed as that involves scientific phenomenas to occur and you may get self conscious of the scientific phenomenology and thus your instinctive pattern of cognizance might not be the same. it may also happen instinctively that you are not able to fetch food as you have COVID due to lack of energy but you are hungry and you can't go anywhere so after few days of shouting for food like sick monkeys, instinctively your voice will numb down and you will die of hypoglycemia instinctively and viola your circle of suffering had come to an end just like some wild animals who die in the wild instinctively. I guess this way of instictive existence which happens spontaneously is good for them who had achieved a significant amount of success monetary wise in their life and now somehow found that all this has no meaning as everything was mindless wealth accumulation without compassion towards life and now they just want this weird thing of instictive existence happen to them (a pretty lame way to exist) and somehow want to rationalize their position as pretty natural.
The debate on Mathematics is slightly immature in terms of not being able actually use a really precise language more established in domain of Philosophy of Mathematics buf still interesting.
I disagree with Pranav about languages existing in another realm & him explaining empirical science or math & he sounded like a Theist with his descriptions. Parminder didn't seem to understand what you were saying. He was ready to accept the meditators were authority, at least consider a possibility that what they're saying is right. But he's not ready to do it for those claims that take more effort. And the guy after him sounded like BeerBiceps, with his fake English accent but bad grammar(no offense to him). Lolard with his Word Salad calling "Scientific Jargon" ironically with his Spiritual Jargon.
Pranav's right about maths though. You can have mathematical models that exist in their own reality, and not necessarily have the kind of interactions with physics, chemistry or other domains of science to support the science or themselves. Whether they have validity or not depends on the context they are being used in. If it is just for playing with numbers, sure it's a great theoretical exercise. If you want to prove God exists with it then no.
@@mrrahulkurup I don't know of any other reality besides the one I'm experiencing. Phrases such as "in their OWN reality" is exactly what makes it similar to theistic arguments. "God exists OUTSIDE of time & space i.e. a DIFFERENT reality on its own Or God exists in a DIFFERENT reality/a reality of its own that we haven't yet learned to test & access via Science, instead you should have faith in God to experience it". Mathematics, as far as I know, is created by us human beings & as such, wouldn't exist without us. I don't know what you mean by "interactions" or "context". After hearing Western Christians for so long, the term "context" arouses an immediate doubt in me.
@@chethanburre6016 Yes, Mathematics was invented by human beings. And human beings can also make up mathematical systems that don't reflect reality. We can make up stories and we can make up logic for those stories. This tendency can be applied to mathematics as well. For real scientific and societal progress, we consider the mathematics that reality can back up to make important decisions through a holistic process. Those occur in the interactions that I mentioned such as chemical equations, physics problems, and algorithms. Nothing is considered in isolation.
@@mrrahulkurup Almost everything was made up by human beings. Yes, so I don't understand how Math "exists in its own reality" when as far as we know its existence relies on the existence of humanity. Is there any non-real scientific & societal progress?
I don't think anyone in your comment section used axioms to defend the notion of God. That would be utterly bizzare and stupid. What people did in your comment section was to defend philosophical idealism using axioms. There is utterly no reason to take materialism as axiomatic given. In fact, taking materialism as an axiom is stupid in one sense because you are having complete faith in your senses. One faith replaced by another You and Pranav shouldn't misrepresent the arguments presented by others in order to quash them. There are better ways
Vimoh congratulations for 10K 🎉 …Happy New Year 2024 🎉
Even a foundationalist like Aristotle would be angry with such simplistic classification of Sciences. Still I feel that by this Podcast you are lifting discourse and bringing value to mainstream discourse keep doing it.
I have observed that some people explicitly declare their beliefs as subjective from the start of a discussion, as if it gives them some sort of special protective permission to do religious practices guilt free or something, and that this admission will make them immune from criticism lol....
Vimoh got outclassed, the wannabe dillahunty mini me hangs up when his little ego meets the vastness of the unknown of life and his unpaid minions rationalising & defending their mental midget master when they have met someone more than their match. If he or you have the courage why not let him go on but he was fillibustering and rudely grandstanding without any evidence or understanding of Lollards arguments also accusing him of trolling and then his footstool comrades say it was in "good faith". These armchair scientists will never make it.
Of course it will give me protection. If you haven't tasted sweet how could you say that sweet doesn't exist? You people are completely arrogant who think that they know everything or whatever they know is completely correct.
@@parvinderrana1371 why do you assume they haven't experienced religious practices?
@@RoeJoy you really didn't understand the meaning of subjective experience
@@parvinderrana1371 all experiences are subjective with objective traits for many.
Would love to see debate/discussion with Alex O'Connor aka CosmicSkeptic
37:25 (shared psychotic disorder) if everyone in his family saw it and he has seen this object before then it's not surprising that his whole family saw it he definitely described that first story to his family.
No I haven't described them about Atman because during the first time when I saw Atman I didn't talked about it with anyone and just slept normally but only my father is the one who had also seen Atman during his mid 20s in the Village but he was not present in the village on that day when we saw as I said my Mother Father and Brother were at My Nanny's place and it was only Me, My Grandmother, My Grandfather , My Cousin and My Aunty and all of them saw Atman on that day even though they never ever had saw it
No we didn't talked about this topic until second Time I saw Atman
@@user-cl9bd1tz3bBhai aaplog psychologist ko 10-15 din ghar me hi rakho tabhi puro ilaz ho payega 💀
15 feet.... bhai nai naap b liya 😂
I dont know why people give so much importance to subjective experience that are not objectively verifiable. I spent a year trying isha kriya and meditation, i could not feel anything nor understand the significance of it. If sadhguru can gain enlightenment by sitting on a rock for a few hours then countless people like me who tried meditation for months and still failed are idiotic?. Since then i started valuing objective reality.We percieve a tree through subjecfive experience and verify that through objective experience of normal fellow humans. All can see, feel and test presence of trees easily. We believe in trees because there is objective evidence and definition of trees. With spirituality, it means different things to different people. If all spiritualists cannot decide a single definition for these things, why do they think it is reality?
Good point sir
Spirituality is multimillion dollars buisness... By the time people understand it's reality they already wasted so much money and time. Spirituality is a scam.
Spirituality is multimillion dollars buisness... By the time people understand it's reality they already wasted so much money and time. Spirituality is a scam.
Hey Vimoh. 1+1=2 is not an axiom that we assume to be true and base all arithmetic on a collection of such axioms. There's a very beautiful proof of why 1+1=2, although it uses 7 axioms of logic. Check out Bertrand Russel's Principia Mathematica, I used 1st edition,1913 I believe. The main precursor theorem is *54.43 and the book uses that along with a lot of other propositions to finally prove 1+1=2 after many pages.
I hope this helped. 😅
The last caller is completely doing mental gymnastics. Life consists of numerous small instantaneous actions. Life cannot exist without reproduction, it cannot exist without eating, it cannot exist without excreting waste or breathing. These small insta taneous actions make up life. In order to do any of these things, we need empirical knowledge and observation of reality. Some caveman might have tried to breathe underwater, when he realised he could not, he made a concious decission to not breath underwater and thats what he instructed his children. Just the simple act of breathing require empirical observations and knowledge.
Absolutely just listening to him made my blood boil, it did look like he was there to troll
Question is not whether the math exist if universe doesn't exist. It is whether math exists if we don't exist. If it exists despite us, that would mean we discovered it. If it is just our imagination, then our existence is necessary for math to exist (our invention). There are rules in the universe which are followed without our existence. So, math exists without our existence. However, certain streams of maths do not exist in the real world at all. So, it needs our presence for it to exist.
Initially math was developed based on our observation of real world like geometry. However, much of the later stage maths exists just in our mind including algebra.
The last dude kinda made sense, suffering is a social construct, pain is not. One doesn't necessarily need to suffer cuz his house got burned down 😮
Happy New Year Vimoh ji.
4:03 start
😢😢 i want to join but i forgot feeling sad
Maybe someone played a ''ghostly" prank on the 1st caller
Again I would like to remind you @vimoh about godels incompleteness theorem
This livestream is a great platform, but some things can be improved. With all due respect, I wanted to share something I noticed. sometimes vimoh interrupts the caller in the middle before he can make his point. Also, sometimes vimoh doesn't try to understand what is the point of view of the caller. It's perfectly ok to disagree with the caller, but it's important to try to understand the point first before debunking it. The caller should be given the opportunity to finish his point properly.
For example, vimoh made the point that we trust galilio because he made claims and then we found by experimentation that the claims are true. One of the callers wanted to point out that some people claim some near death experience, so what's the issue with experimenting with it and see if it is true. The point was not that the near death claims are true. The point was that the claims are worth testing, because supposedly so many people have made a similar claim.
Also another point vimoh pointed out was that you won't go around testing any random claim, say for example, if someone told to go around Greenwich line or sth. The caller wanted to point out that doing meditation is harmless and useful, so why not kill two birds with one stone: do meditation for testing claim+ do meditation for mental peace. Basically testing other claims have no side benefit but testing the claim of near death experience has a side benefit of mental peace.
Also this claim has been made by many different people so that would mean that it's worth testing compared to other random claims. It doesn't mean the claim is true. All it means is that so many people made same claim so why not test it and be sure whether it's true or false.
I think these two points were not addressed well.
I agree with your points. I think there can be better counter arguments from Vimoh. But I still on the side that these gurus' claims aren't reliable because experiences during meditation are very subjectives.
I used to study about Lucid Dream, Astral Projection, and Near Death (NDE) or Out of Body Experience (OBE). I noticed that people mostly see things related to their religious world view during NDE. So it's possible people experience their past memories of religious stories or dead family members.
Also if you notice people from different religions do some short of meditation and have experience things related to their beliefs and religion. So it's possible if someone meditate to know of reincarnation or a specific God experience, then your brain try to create experience according to it.
That's why mystical meditation experience of Shaolin monk and Hindu Baba is different.
That's why checking Babas' claims by doing meditation isn't reliable because if you go with the intention to have these claimed experience then your brain can create those experience. And if you do meditation skeptically and don't have those experiences, then these Babas have excuse that you are not ready or worthy yet to experience. And if those experiences aren't real then you will spend whole life chasing false experiences.
I talked with my one Muslim teacher who was into mystical philosophy and he said that although there are discrepancies between different meditators regarding the experience, all agree that there was something in it. His point was that we don't have solid evidence for any one particular interpretation, but we do have solid evidence for the existence of the thing which is god. All meditators agree on God. That means God is the reproducible result of the meditative experience. However the variant of God is not a reproducible result since it changes from person to person based on religious biases. So the point is, according to science, results have to be reproducible. Experiments conducted independently must yield same result. Different meditators get different gods. Hence one particular type of God's existence is not reproducible result. But all reach same conclusion that God exists. So the existence of God did reproducible result. Point is, existence of God is proven via the meditative experience conducted independently by different sages across the world. But the existence of the TYPE of God (Allah/Krishna etc ) is not a reproducible result, hence cannot be proven
Happy New Year Vimoh 🎉
Happy new year!
I think what the last guy was trying to say is that we don't need a conscious understanding of science just to be able to apply it in daily life. You mentioned about animals being taught by their parents how to eat, which is true for most mammals and birds. However, snakes, frogs, alligators, insects etc. are never taught this. They just know how to apply the science without actually having to consciously know science. An amoeba doesn't have a single neuron, yet it can engulf a food particle, "digest" it and remove it through a vacuole. This is all application of science without knowing it.
Maybe what the last caller was getting at is that religion or spirituality largely tries to make people apply what they think is scientific knowledge; but we can only now point out the flaws due to our sound scientific method.
I think that too!!!. "Religion or spirituality largely tries to make people apply what they think is scientific knowledge" but I don't think religion was made for applying their scientific knowledge, I think religion was made so that we can be controlled and put together (and I read it somewhere too). What do you think about it?? And sorry for my bad English🙃
@@SusGuts526 I largely agree. I think theism and religion initially started off as ideas that were both philosphical and so called "scientific". The main reason for its propagation and growth is definitely to control the masses. Think of it as content creators creating content. They start off just by putting ideas into the world. However, once they have an understanding of what their audience wants, they start manipulating content and become an echo chamber or push false narratives to widen and secure their public support.
जय भीम सर जी,,
💯👌
Yaar I wish I was on this Livestream !
I want to ask u abt ghost possession and black magic..........if lets say ghosts dont exist...or soul doesnt exist after death.........so whats abt people who perform black magic n make other people life hell.
Is black magic just an ancient trick to destroy someone physical and mental health .....because many ghost possession signs r part of symptoms of psychological illnesses.........
Or there is something more to ghost possession n black magic
......Your Views Sir...
Ur response will be highly appreciated 😇
Mainly it's due to psychological issues, epilepsy, schizophrenia ... They get seizures, but people think they're possessed by ghosts or something, and if the affected person is religious, they can convince themselves they're possessed due to their religious beleifs, so they are likely to get a seizure after hearing a biblical verse, or religious phrases. You might want to watch The exorcism of emily rose, this movie is based on such a case.
Hi Vimoh,
if I Define Spirituality as below,
To Know yourself by having self observation of your perspectives and day to day activities and finding its root cause.
by root cause I mean finding how much greed, desires, fear and emotions played a role in your actions.
for example,
if I choose Data Science as my career and believe that it's my passion.
by self observation I found my chose was based on salary so greed is root cause, not passion.
in short, it a way to extract one true motive and intention which make's one less biased.
It's there any inconsistency in above statements ??
N Wish you and all a happy New year 😄
Is this how you define spirituality or what everyone thinks spirituality is?
@@kartya2000 This is my understanding and articulated it as far as i could.
Isn't it called Introspection? Or if not exactly then I'm sure there are exact words for what you just describe. I don't see any need to use a vage word, like spirituality, when there are so many different meanings of a word.
Maths doesn't 'exist' in reality, so much as functional quantities, ratios, and geometries do. Scalar mathematics is expressed in ratios of an arbitrary unit (a.k.a number one), whereas in reality, we have to define the unit. Quanta of matter exist and interact in space-time, and we can express these interactions with mathematics. The difference between math and matter is like that between music and music theory. Objects vibrate at certain frequencies which are perceived as tones. Musical scales are built on the basis of the ratio of different frequencies, relative to each other. Sheet music is a representation of relative frequencies, whereas the absolute frequency in reality for each note is defined by us. For instance, the note A4 is commonly assigned a frequency of 440Hz, but it could be considered 436 Hz , or 432 Hz as well, and would work with the same theory so long as the instruments are tuned accordingly. That's apparent in our use of macroscopic physics, when we start off with human-defined units such as kg and km, but when we get into the atomic scale then perhaps we can get closer to what may constitute a 'unit' of reality. But then again, two atoms of the same element may act in similar ways, but there are isotopic differences between them as well, such as Hydrogen, and Deuterium. And whose to say all sub-atomic particles are precisely the same? A proton may act as a unit of positive charge, but I don't think we have the scope to ascertain that all positive charges are exactly equal, despite consistency in their functional properties. So to sum up, I don't think we've arrived at an absolute unit, but we do perceive functional units in reality, which makes math a good tool to parse it, but we can't conclude that maths is 'real' in absence of a true indivisible unit of existence. Two plus two is four because we've ascribed a word 'four' to a certain perceived quantity. In base 3 maths, two plus two is eleven, but it's essentially the same thing. It doesn't become real until we ask "four of what?" then realize that four bananas in a bunch are all different slightly, but look and taste the same to us.
The thing with aura of babas like sadhguru, osho is similar to the aura of singers in events. thats why these babas are also doing such events nowadays.😂
I get such experience from wwe wretslers.
Jay bhim sir I am new
It seems many people come to the stream claiming to be open-minded seekers, ready to change their mind if the right evidence or knowledge is provided but they seem to keep presenting vague or cherry-picked examples to support their pre-existing beliefs and keep shooting down or ignoring whatever sensible stuff is told to them.
Mohit Rana stop nashe me nashedi reh chuka hu mujhe pata hai esa hota hai
I think maths is not inherent in nature. Its a fiction we make up just like language. It happens to be useful to describe the natural world.
You can take any set of rules or axioms (as we call them in maths) as your foundation and form a entire branch of mathematics from it.
But its true that at the beginning of mathematics. When we were inventing things like geometry etc. Most of these axioms were taken from the real world (like geometry postulating that two parellel lines never intersect which is true in the physical world). But it doesn't have to be necessarily like this. You can have things which are not true in our physical world as postulates and still get a rigid mathematical system from it.
“it doesn't have to be necessary like that”
Well no,All mathematical truths are necessary truths based on empirical observation.
Although I agree with you that mathematics sometimes sounds irrational because it transcends empiricism at many points which is because majority mathamaticians sees mathematics as metaphysical subject.
Take the example of godel incompleteness theorem,it states we can never be able to prove that mathematical statements like 2+2=4 is necessary truths unless we don't get out of the system.
This is absurd like we got empirical evidences to support 2+2=4. It's human's imagination like a human back introduced the proof system in mathematics i.e mathematical truths should be proven mathematically instead of empirically.
Godel incompleteness theorem real definition should be that we can't prove mathematical truths mathematically. We shouldn't conclude something that 2+2≠4
Proof theory is so important in mathematics.
Imagine If I discovers pythogorous theorem based on empirical observation and didn't give mathematical proofs. But you gave the mathematical proof of pythogorous theorem then it would be you who will be awarded field medal not me.
To the caller who was talking about reincarnation and near death experiences..I would like to say that he was talking about doctors testimonials which has got no basis as that at the end is a claim and would be turned down as an appeal to authority logical fallacy.even the appropriate scientific definition of death is not what the so called "scientific" gurus or some youtubers had told as to clearly understand the state of death as it happens to a living being is very technical and involves a lot of objective parameters which are needed to be evaluated.medulla oblongata ka size decrease hota hai...what??? ....you won't function properly if that happens.what i find appaling is an inability or i don't know whether there is some hideous motives behind telling scientific sounding stuff/words and conglomerate them to make rational sounding sentences/arguments as if doing that would provide a justification to my forced scepticism or agnosticism.
I mean if I don't know something and there are many I would simply say I don't know but rather then accepting that I don't know and may be I should stop extrapolating my wild skeptic thoughts and preconceived notions about religion into sentences which make them sound scientific and my religious grandiosity/bias thus,gets satisfied or my spiritual position gets appropriated.
The pseudo claims of spirituality concocted with half understandable scientific jargons really paves the way for the new age advaits,spiritualists,occultists.
I mean you have to be many things eg a scientist,a doctor,an engineer,a philosopher,historian etc to explain things in an all encompassing phenomenon.most of us can't do that thats why we say we don't know about topics we don't understand.not everything is supposed to be understood by everybody and thus creates gaps in our understanding and viola the God of the gaps eg SADHGURU appears with his enticing laugh.
My mind is incapable of following the last caller. I just got that he was trying to say you dont need to know what the scientific method is to simply live life as some things are instinctive. So what?
Vimoh bhai.. mere bhai ka ek paranormal encounter hua tha few years ago. He an his 3 more friends saw a lady at night around 1am when they were roaming around their hotel in bir biling. All 4 saw that lady sitting in white dress.
Or charo ki gand ek sath fati. They got scared enough and left the route and turned back to hotel without disturbing or interacting with that lady.
I asked my brother to describe the appearance of that lady.
Brother said- she was sitting like her head down in her folded knees...her hairs are in front and parted. Shes wearing white.. and for some reason it seems like she's glowing like bloom effect.
Me and my brother are both big sceptics..we both are atheist.
My question is - why a lady sitting alone in jungle type area at night @1am. She wasn't moving like wtf.
My bro is honest guy but
I don't believe this story because it feels like they all must have wrong interpreted the situation for some reason.
01:37:37 - There is a show called 'Psych'. its protagonist is a brilliant detective, and he is so good at what he does that people find it unbelievable. So he tells everyone that he is a psychic, and Boom, everybody starts believing him. So that show is about a brilliant detective who pretends to be a psychic, and its a bloody hilarious show.
02:00:39 - You dont put ANYTHING in your mouth and swallow it. It needs empirical knowledge to understand what you consume and what you cant. You can see even animals stay away from poisonous ivy, and other insects that are venomous. THAT IS SCIENCE ! YOU NEED SCIENCE TO LIVE. It might not fit 'your' particular brand, but it IS scientific knowledge. We all use it.
And as far as 'teaching somebody to eat' goes, I HAD to teach my son how to swallow food. He is on the spectrum and did not know how to chew and swallow. It had to be taught to him like many other things that he still struggles with today that might sound mundane to all of us.
Animals stay away from poison because of their evolutionary instincts, not because of scientific knowledge. They don't know that these chemicals contain these compounds and they would react in such a manner to kill them.
Hii pranav❤
Hey Vimoh Good morning! I have few questions to ask.
Jai jai jai bheem❤❤❤❤❤❤❤🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉
1:38:20
श्याम मानव जी,
अखिल भारतीय अंधविश्वास उन्मूलन समिति के राष्ट्रीय समन्वयक
last wala dictionary leke baitha tha fancy words fekraha tha cool banne 😅
Sir Hindi me bat kariye na plz😅
Thoda problem aa raha h samjhne me
Jo jis bhasha mein sawal puchhta hai usi bhasha mein jawab deta hoon. Jise Hindi nahi aati usse Hindi mein kaise baat karoon?
@@vimohlive ok sir 😊
Love you Vimoh bhai ♥️♥️♥️♥️
👍👍👍
36:31 koi atma 15 feet ki nahi hoti. Zyada se Zyada 14 feet ki hoti hai. Yeh caller jhuth bol raha hai.
.The last caller was the epitome of logical fallacies.according to him life will occur instinctively whether you want it to happen or not...for eg you lie down for a while and you feel hungry,so what will happen is that gradually you will become so hungry that your primal unconscious monkey brain will force you to go and fetch food by whatever means possible (and I mean it eg killing a dog infront of your house and start eating it or maybe eat some raw maggots,ants and leaves )and remember everything is happening instinctively,no food preparation or opening the fridge is allowed as that involves scientific phenomenas to occur and you may get self conscious of the scientific phenomenology and thus your instinctive pattern of cognizance might not be the same. it may also happen instinctively that you are not able to fetch food as you have COVID due to lack of energy but you are hungry and you can't go anywhere so after few days of shouting for food like sick monkeys, instinctively your voice will numb down and you will die of hypoglycemia instinctively and viola your circle of suffering had come to an end just like some wild animals who die in the wild instinctively.
I guess this way of instictive existence which happens spontaneously is good for them who had achieved a significant amount of success monetary wise in their life and now somehow found that all this has no meaning as everything was mindless wealth accumulation without compassion towards life and now they just want this weird thing of instictive existence happen to them (a pretty lame way to exist) and somehow want to rationalize their position as pretty natural.
03:45
20:34
35:00 15 feet bhai nai naap b liya 😂😂😂
The debate on Mathematics is slightly immature in terms of not being able actually use a really precise language more established in domain of Philosophy of Mathematics buf still interesting.
I disagree with Pranav about languages existing in another realm & him explaining empirical science or math & he sounded like a Theist with his descriptions.
Parminder didn't seem to understand what you were saying.
He was ready to accept the meditators were authority, at least consider a possibility that what they're saying is right.
But he's not ready to do it for those claims that take more effort.
And the guy after him sounded like BeerBiceps, with his fake English accent but bad grammar(no offense to him).
Lolard with his Word Salad calling "Scientific Jargon" ironically with his Spiritual Jargon.
Pranav's right about maths though.
You can have mathematical models that exist in their own reality, and not necessarily have the kind of interactions with physics, chemistry or other domains of science to support the science or themselves.
Whether they have validity or not depends on the context they are being used in. If it is just for playing with numbers, sure it's a great theoretical exercise. If you want to prove God exists with it then no.
@@mrrahulkurup
I don't know of any other reality besides the one I'm experiencing.
Phrases such as "in their OWN reality" is exactly what makes it similar to theistic arguments.
"God exists OUTSIDE of time & space i.e. a DIFFERENT reality on its own
Or
God exists in a DIFFERENT reality/a reality of its own that we haven't yet learned to test & access via Science, instead you should have faith in God to experience it".
Mathematics, as far as I know, is created by us human beings & as such, wouldn't exist without us.
I don't know what you mean by "interactions" or "context".
After hearing Western Christians for so long, the term "context" arouses an immediate doubt in me.
@@chethanburre6016 Yes, Mathematics was invented by human beings. And human beings can also make up mathematical systems that don't reflect reality. We can make up stories and we can make up logic for those stories. This tendency can be applied to mathematics as well.
For real scientific and societal progress, we consider the mathematics that reality can back up to make important decisions through a holistic process. Those occur in the interactions that I mentioned such as chemical equations, physics problems, and algorithms. Nothing is considered in isolation.
@@mrrahulkurup
Almost everything was made up by human beings.
Yes, so I don't understand how Math "exists in its own reality" when as far as we know its existence relies on the existence of humanity.
Is there any non-real scientific & societal progress?
@@chethanburre6016 People hypothesize made up models in any domain. It is a form of hobbyist theory crafting. It does not mean anything in particular.
I don't think anyone in your comment section used axioms to defend the notion of God. That would be utterly bizzare and stupid.
What people did in your comment section was to defend philosophical idealism using axioms. There is utterly no reason to take materialism as axiomatic given. In fact, taking materialism as an axiom is stupid in one sense because you are having complete faith in your senses. One faith replaced by another
You and Pranav shouldn't misrepresent the arguments presented by others in order to quash them. There are better ways