@@williamburts5495 Nobody says they are not real. In fact they are so real we can stimulate the temporoparietal junction of the brain in order to reproduce them.
ok, so what is it that you really understood from the doctor? Does the soul exist? Is consciousness a product of the soul? The anchor of this show seems not to accept that concept, if it can not be proved by science, law of physics or whatever he will not accept that concept. I guess he will have to wait until someone invent a scanning machine capable of recording the soul.
@@Lalakis That's actually not true. When people talk about "reproducing NDEs," what they really mean is that they can stimulate the brain in such a way as to reproduce certain aspects that people report in an NDE, but not the experience itself. The *really* deep and profound NDEs, the ones that people report taking them to an entirely different plane of reality (or however you wish to interpret it) are in a class all their own. So that we can reproduce certain aspects of the NDE isn't actually all that strange at all. If the brain's acting as a receiver for a consciousness that exists *outside* the physical brain, then toying around w/ it to reproduce certain extraordinary experiences is no more fantastical than using psychedelics.
Very interesting topics and questions on this channel. Fine with a skilled researcher, Sam Parnia, who has results, so there is something to relate to. From NDE, cardiac arrest, we know that people see and hear what is going on during the operation, but it is not possible for the patient to communicate with those who operate while they are clinically dead. Another factor several patients report, during clinical death, is that they also record what the surgical team thinks. Consciousness, during clinical death, is in a way both limited, but also very extended to something we cannot explain.
Yes, perfect analogy. We are beginning to lift the curtain. I am already there. That’s where I live. It’s why I don’t fit in anywhere currently. I am here to make a world where I fit in. Who am I? I am the future. ❤️🔥♾
This question has baffled the most brilliant of minds for thousands of years, yet every person who leaves a comment on a CTT video somehow has the answer!
Consciousness is a materialistic dualism of the quantum cortex, therefore we postulate that it is an ambiguously inept emergence of self. The preceding sentence clearly defines consciousness...I GOTS NO IDEA MANNNNN🤷♀️😂😜🤷♂️. Brilliant!😎
@@l.ronhubbard5445 You're the one who seems to be concerned with being misconstrued. Maybe you and xenu should come up with another handle if it makes you that uncomfortable.
I find it weak. A TV may be damaged but not the shows it presents, else they would appear damaged on other TV sets. A damaged brain however entails a damaged mind, which for each mind has only one outlet (if the analogy holds at all) and that is the brain it is otherwise associated with.
We all would love that solution. Im inclined to think that essential parts of brain/counciousness work some minutes after heart stops beating. Dolphins are sentient yet I dont think they fear the end as much as we do.
I love how humble and open minded the people that are exploring this area are. Most materialist reductionists are so full of pomp and arrogance it’s hard to listen to them.
they arent rovolutionizing anything, they are just in youtube, the real people revolutionizing are in the labs, just check who wins Nobel Prizes and you will have an idea of the difference between scientists and celebrities giving interviews.
@@ivanleon6164 They are absolutely revolutionizing. They give answers to things like consciousness. Those lab rats only reduce the question without any answer and dismiss it. Doctors like Sam Parnia will be viewed as heroes like Galileo in the future
Sam Parnia's clear explanation is the first i heard in a long time that makes sense and can be understood by ordinary people without the the high language and words used by other so-called experts.
I have been thinking this EXACT Theory for years! Never once have I heard anyone repeat it. It is the most logical and simplest explanation and it explains the subconscious mind.
Sam Parnia always keeps such a level head during interviews, even when the person interviewing is sighing and acting really unprofessional. I appreciate him so much.
I noticed that also. I thought Kuhn was trying to belittle Parnia by calling it hypothesis and beliefs rather than the solid documented instances of NDE's. Parnia was just relaying fact and Kuhn kept trying to portray it as beliefs. I thought Kuhn was borderline disrespectful to Parnia and find it disturbing!
Mankind has created many religions over the centuries trying to understand conciousness, as an atheist pantheist i would say that there is a big possibility that conciousness is fundamental and primordial and the brains similar to tv sets are channeling conciousness
Consciousness is fundamental. Every thing is an appearance in consciousness. That's ancient Hindu philosophy of Vedanta stated. Subject can't appear from object.
@@Dion_Mustard Possibly, but I doubt it because when researchers monitoring sleeping subjects awaken them and ask if they were dreaming, the subjects always say yes when certain patterns of neural behavior are present and always say no when those patterns are absent. I think we forget our dreams because evolution has designed us to avoid accumulating meaningless debris that comes into being as a side effect of the process in which all the thoughts in our memory are adjusted to accommodate the day's experience. I wouldn't be surprised if that process, which involves an immense amount of comparison and evaluation, discards most short term memory that is mundane, of little or no significance. And I suspect that if the process detects something that, for example, bears strongly on survival or seems of great significance, then the process might trigger creation of a memory that will persist until the sleeper again becomes conscious to then perceive that memory as a dream. Kekulé's discovery of the structure of benzene came from pondering his dream of a snake looking like a ring because it was eating its tail . (Google Kekulé to get the story).
evan J / What?🤔😟😞🥴😏 What he said at the end represents the worst stupidities I've ever heard about consciousness./ If you really want a relatively good conversation about consciousness, see this : th-cam.com/video/CSkfHDdZZ3o/w-d-xo.html
Parnia is very open and clear-minded. I like what he says, that consciousness “is a scientific entity and it most likely has some type of materiality, some sort of physicality except that it’s so subtle that we don’t yet have the tools to be able to measure it.” This is such a fine point that not many will consider it. But even neutrinos wouldn’t explain other NDE details. What if there is no physical, material explanation for consciousness? How would science come to that conclusion?
Demonstrating the experience of consciousness outside the body is precisely what I experiences 3 times in my life. People can debate this all they want, but, unless one has experienced the vividness of being out of their bodies, the debate with go on and we, as exeriencers, can only watch with interest how much the intelligentsia really don't know.
This is by far, the best answer to the whole consciousness topic. Science is obsessed with the obligation to make everything scientifically explainable. When it comes to consciousness, NDE’s etc., they are stuck and lost since ages. Stories like yours tell so much more about life, death and all in between. Blessings
Swami Sarvapriyananda has a lot of talks about consciousness and Sam Parnias research is supporting the vedantic point of view, that consciousness is fundamental, not produced by brain.
I agree but he isnt in belief that there is some afterlife on the other side either. The tests he did in the hospital with the images would have confirmed if people were seeing real time.
My opinion of Dr. Parnia went up, up, up during this interview. He seems very sincere and down to earth. The first two AWARE projects did not yield any conclusive results (though it did yield one eyebrow-raising tidbit) ... hopefully there will be an AWARE III and IV ... it is the single most important thing we could be studying. It is amazing to me that we are not putting a lot more time, money and effort into researching this most important subject.
Interesting video. Personally I like the idea that the brain channels consciousness. It’s like the wind in the trees. We may study the movement of the leaves, but that tells us nothing about the wind itself.
@@thedudegrowsfood284 thanks, it was my realisation after studying for a psychology degree, trying to learn more about consciousness. In addition, the problem is the scientific empirical method isn’t suitable for studying consciousness because we can’t observe it with our senses, similar to that invisible wind in the trees but even less visible. Scientists make elaborate models to measure the movement of the leaves but cannot measure the wind itself.
@@david.thomas.108 they can measure the wind with instruments thats easy ,in terms of empirical evidence they can observe and measure brain function but they carts see the objective experience
Consciousness becomes easy to understand when you realize that Consciousness is the Origin of everything. It is there in the Source, and in its rediscovery in the evolution.
I love how hard Sam is working to find the answer only if their was more people like him and I believe we would find the answer much sooner or get really close to it one question I have we all want to meet our loved ones specially our parents so if their is life after death obviously we will want to meet our parents and our parents meet their parents and their parents their parents and so on and they all would want us to meet each other and it will probably go all the way down to the first 2 people on earth so how would that work that's one thing I'm wondering alot
I think we will have enough time to meet every loved ones since time doesn't perform in the beyond in the same way it does in our dimension. So our parents have already met their parents before we get there and when we join them they will have already spent "time" with their parents and will then be able to spend time with us. Or the law of physics is different in beyond. Each of our souls can be surrounded by people/souls they love most. You with your parents and your children. Your parents with you and their patents and so on. I think meet our loved ones as you explained would not be an issue in beyond. Maybe when we see our loved ones we dont have the desire to spend a long time with them as we would in this world. Maybe we will just meet them enough to ease our pain and sorrow and then they move on to another stage of their soulful development
There is only one universal mind, and it is all of us. Consider your ego and everyone's else just a passing wind, a momentary reflection on the water, a dream. So, you and your parents and their parents are the same incomprensible eternal being. You'll meet them when you meet yourself
@@DaP84 he basically said that when you plug out parts of the tv you lose that function from what the tv is doing. for example if you removed the sound connection. So if someone loses the part of their brain that controls sound it’s not that their brain produced that conscious ability it’s just that mechanism Is gone.
Consciousness existing after someone is brain dead is only a complete contradiction if you think consciousness emerges from the brain. Which is quite an assumption to make. I hope they do prove this, so that we can move on into a time where we fully realize that the brain is a conveyor of consciousness and not the producer of consciousness.
@@TheBookofBeasts Patricia smith churchland, a neuro scientist , is extremely negative and dismissive theoretical physicist ,brian green and even some philosophers the enduro scientist susan greenfeild however very respectful and open minded and a real breath of fresh air against the arrogance she has been doing some wonderful cutting edge research and has yielded some really interesting insights thanks for your reply
Consciousness is not the self. That is the "personality". Consciousness is the phenomena that allows a self to experience the self, to experience the visual experience. To experience.
When I had such experience, I can assure without doubt that it was 1000x more real to me than anything I experienced before, or afterwards. Believing it is not required. Those experiencing know the answer as a witness. Whether that is a mystery, or a malfunctioning of the brain, nobody so far can prove. But I support the notion of the brain being a detector that filters all-pervading consciousness, and possibly it's ultimate goal is to reflect the full depth of consciousness. To me that is fascinating and gives sense to life. But I do not claim to be able to prove it in a scientific sense. I wonder if that ever will be possible. Whoever saw a tree in it's subtle expressions with an expanded awareness will never go to nature without such very subtle knowledge and the understanding how much we hurt our lives and nature through reduced awareness and short-cutted highly engrossed thinking.
Cont. From previous post. Consciousness is a Combination and Coordination of the Resources for the Organisational/personal goals. RESOURCES are: - s) Spiritual Entity b) Material Energy I Am OK NO Matter What 😊😊😊❤❤❤
Interesting analogy of electromagnetic waves and TV suggesting we humans are unique receivers of consciousness. I wonder if we are more like a mobile phone that is both receiving and transmitting consciousness at the same time. Extending that analogy, may be other living beings are also transreceivers of consciousness but working at a different levels or frequencies.
Yeah, might as well add a transmitter and some entity or other that is originating all the content to the equation. Makes a lot of sense. HA, HA, HA, HA, HA, HA! Ridiculous.
I suppose this is possible but it just seems to kick the consciousness can down the road. If the matter in our crania is just a receiver of consciousness from some outside source, what is generating the consciousness in this outside source? Or is that source just serving as an intermediate (analogous to ham radio repeater)? Is there some hypothesis for the origin of this signal or is it turtles all the way down?
@@wthomas7955 Well, a lot of things are possible. But that doesn't mean that I give all possibilities the same credence. Some are just more plausible, or have more compelling explanations, than others. Personally I find this proposal to be more woo woo than reason; but I suppose it _is_ possible. As a biochemist by training and trade, I don't find it overly astounding that consciousness is an emergent property of biochemical and biophysical processes. At a simple level, one might consider the motility of a bacterium towards a glucose gradient as consciousness. This can be understood from the cascade of signals initiated by glucose receptor in the cell surface.
Great interview.. I've certainly said this before, but if we change the verbiage from consciousness to awareness, much of the mystery tends to vanish.. all animals have varying degrees of awareness, and awareness is critical to survival hence it's selection by the natural pressures of evolution...Peace.
You 're totally right, that awareness is key to survival and higher awareness has evolutionary benefits. However it still doesn't answer the question of the video: did brains evolve to produce higher awarness or did brains evolve to better utilize the awarness, that is out there.
Yup. Humans developed this higher awareness to compensate for the fact that we have vulnerable bodies compared to other animals. It gave us an evolutionary edge to stop our species from going extinct. There's really nothing "mysterious" about it.
@@gergelyszekely9778 Thanks for the reply.. In my humble opinion, Brains evolved for DECODING information (I can expand there) from the environment in the effort to FIND food, and avoid becoming food.. Whether it's the simplest worm with only 300 neurons and very LITTLE awareness of it's environment, or higher primates like ourselves, the brain is all about situational awareness.. The current social meme of the so-called hard problem of consciousness, MAY predominantly apply to philosophers..
@@dancharles6009 I'll expand a LITTLE on the decoding thing anyway.. ALL information is solely carried on either particles or waves..No other way..Brains evolved to decode that existant information, nothing more .
6:16 "Wouldn't that be occurring all the time?" I think it occurs in surprising ways. I knew a woman who had a dream in which a deceased relative appeared to her. That relative said, "Your husband has cancer. You have to get him to the doctor tomorrow!" The bewildered woman did take her husband to the doctor the following day and he did have cancer. (He survived for at least two more years). Our minds seem to behave in ways that we can't possibly anticipate.
That has zero scientific value. It is just an anecdotal non falsifiable story. Even if your story is true ( which i doubt it is ) there are millions of cases where a deceased relative did NOt appear in dreams to warn anyone about cancer.
My other thing is the fact of the rich man asking about Lazarus giving him a drop of water. When King Saul went to find the seer to call up Samuels soul. The transfiguration Moses and Elijah.
@@Lalakis sure give it to me. But just so you know the Bible States that Jesus seen Satan fall from heaven like lightning ,and what does Zeus have in his hand but a lightning rod. Bible also States about how Satan is the prince of the power of the air, which thunderstorms happen, and fronts collide in the air.
I was looking up more about the properties of ammonia. What could be more mundane than that ? I discovered in some situations it's not a base but it can also act as a very weak acid. Next I discovered sodium amide and biuret.. There seems to be a lot of advanced chemistry with those simple substances we learned in school. Everything is complex like art, but it came from a uniform, formless state from which quarks and plasma formed and forces.. and finally all our dazzling chemistry. But perhaps not finally and consciousness came as the last phase transition. But the problem is that everything that came before seems one family while consciousness is like so different. Perhaps there was already from the beginning another family we have no knowledge about and that evolved too.
The one real trouble I have with Dr Parnia is where he says essentially the moment the heart stops the patient is "dead" and the brain has shut down. In the same conversation he will say, "Death is not a moment but a process". Seems an inherent contradiction there that allows for brain function that is not presented through expression or speech to gradually fade. My father had two cardiac arrests one night and survived. He had no NDE and only remembered waking up. But, some weeks later he had these euphoric experiences where he though every person in the world spoke to his at once and told him he would recover from his illness.
heart stop is usually termed Clinical death, not Death death. and yes death is a process of decomposing, the further you live without a heartbeat, the less reversible the state is
Since the Bible talks about discernment I'd have to say the mind is a conveyor of our consciousness and what our consciousness is after, what it discerns after.
I think it's the latter...that like a t.v. set, our brains r conveyors of consciousness. As a very young child, I used to ask my parents all these mind boggling questions. I believe these thoughts came from outside of my cognition. From another place & time!
6:00 "if that was true - I don't believe that"... As a scientist, you don't have to "believe" or "disbelieve" anything. You have to be open-minded enough to contemplate and investigate all possibilities. Such is supposed to be the mentality of a scientist, not the mentality that comes out of a belief system. If you start by believing something, you started already from a huge mistake, for you're starting already biased.
It's one thing for a scientist to posit that she believes something, it's a very different thing to say that she doesn't believe something; the difference is in the burden of proof. When scientists indicate that they don't believe something, they're usually suggesting that there is insufficient evidence for the positive claim, which should be the default position.
@@PrateekLala you didn’t get my core point: beliefs have to be out of the equation as much as possible, especially when we can test the hypothesis and gather data. Parnia is an excellent example of that as he says: “I’m not interested in my own opinion”. Aside that, it looks like you’re romanticizing scientists. Usually what happens is the opposite of what you say, I mean, they usually (usually, but not always...) don’t dismiss a hypothesis because of the lack of evidence. They do it because of their strong beliefs and resistance to change their paradigm. Their beliefs lead them to bypass the strong body of evidence or dismiss it as bs, even without reading or trying to replicate the experiments (crisis of lack of replication is a big issue in science). There are innumerable examples of all that in the history of science. Refusal of the scientific community to accept Darwin’s huge work, refusal of Einstein to accept the evidence of quantum mechanics (“god doesn’t play dice”) etc. Unfortunately, the scientists’ ego play a large role in the evolvement of science and that’s why we move slowly forward.
"…if we can demonstrate that the experience is occurring when the brain is offline and non-functioning, then we have to question our paradigm about the relationship between the mind and the brain." Sure, but it’s going to be difficult to prove that all brain activity has stopped, some of it could be quite subtle. Just because we don’t detect any brain activity from the outside doesn’t mean there isn’t any. Occam’s razor would say, the brain is active, but it’s still an interesting question.
We don't use Occam's razor when we have scientific proof that all brain activity ends after cardiac arrest. The studies have been performed on animals and in threshold testing on humans. Postulating that some kind of undetectable brain activity somehow continues is absurd. That would also mean we don't actually need the brain lobes to work in the way that they do to make us conscious. You may as well suggest that your foot has taken over the job.
@@marktomasetti8642 Yes. Electrical activity of the brain was measured during cardiac arrest, for example during surgery, or during threshold testing in ICD-implantation. Following the cardiac arrest (‘no flow’), the EEG flat-lined after an average of 15 seconds and remained flat despite external resuscitation (‘low flow’) (Moss & Rockoff, 1980; Losasso et al., 1992) If you stop the petrol supply into your car's engine, the engine doesn't keep running, does it ? Brains run on blood containing oxygen and glucose and other nutrients. Stop the blood flow and everything stops.
Aatmiya DIVINITY Be Blessed HARE KRSNA Experience amazing Contentment hearing this talk and able to share personal views about the Brain/ Heart/Consequences/Cardiac Arrest... 1) Brain is a material energy structure having affinity for Consciousness. 2) Heart shutting or recovering to functioning is relating to the absence or presence of Consciousness 3) Consciousness facilitating material structures like brain, heart to perform their functions, no way brain, heart enable Consciousness 4) Thinking about the Consciousness existing indipendently is absolutely WRONG because it is omnipresent, omnscient, omnipotent, Irreducible, invisible, permanent and is occurring the entire universe space, time, matter, energy. We one and all are the creations of Universal Consciousness and matter. We are OF the Universe and We are IN the Universe 😊😊. Delightful to say, our entire loop relationship at this time, space and energy level is because we all are Conscious plus science/technology of communicating is functioning properly. Very respectfully Loving 💕🙏 ING You One and All DIVINE 💟
Before Greeks, Indians had already answered this question. West never acknowledge this. We Indians always believed that this body is just a wrapper for the atma or soul or consciousness which never dies and is eternal but only changes its clothing every birth.
the brain is incredibly complex and I don't see consciousness emerging from something else, I mean it's sophisticated enough as a physical machinery to put it first on the list of what causes consciousness, but of course you never know. One thing is very clear to me, that everything we see, hear, remember, etc. is processed by the brain.
@@francesco5581 "Near death experiences" tells you absolutely nothing relevant about the subject in discussion. There is no temporal delimitions, there is no rigurous scientific methodology involved. These are just people talking stuff. Just like UFO sightings and this kind of stuff. It's interesting? Maybe. It's relevant? Nope. There is no evidence whatsoever in the whole history of conciousness outside a brain or without brain functions.
@@adriancioroianu1704 NDE are scientifically accepted. And thanks to scientists like Parnia a scientific methodology is applied too. Otherwise you can also say that dreams do not exist because no one have recorded it yet, lets not be silly. So denial does not works here. Of course one can say that there is a physical/chemical explanation or not. But NDE are a real fact, scientifically accepted (of course cant be accepted that are a clear sign of an afterlife).
Australia is fake, made up by the dark bringers fish folks of Tegstasias. So we believe in a sphere earth. Only when you taste the red thought, you will be free.
Philosophically I think anything that processes information processes it for the sake of something apart from itself . The eyes process light for the sake of the brain . The brain made up of the same material (flesh ) as the eyes processes information most likely for the sake of something else behind it , unless we are to believe that all the information in the universe terminates into the cerebellum or that the brain is the living embodiment of all information. I also think there’s a difference between consciousness, and the conscious link With others
@TheDirtyDeDerShow neural plasticity shows that the brain physically changes as a result of abstract learning and ideas. Whether thinking about the past or the future, the brain physically changes as a reaction to something that doesn’t even exist at the moment. What this shows us is that the physical material of the brain is reactive to immaterial abstractions beyond space and time, - the stuff which consciousness is made of. As far as instinct, awareness is the highest order of consciousness. What “we “ call consciousness is simply processing already learned concepts. But at the level of awareness we know the truth of everything, and that which is left over from conceptual awareness is what we call “ gut instinct”
@TheDirtyDeDerShow i’m an undergrad studying psychology and I must say I’ve always thought about this but never really heard anyone talking about it I agree with you, the information is stored in DNA, genetics, the brain comes after, first the information comes from DNA, but at the same time the brain can change due to outside information and that can also affect future generations, so in a way the genes and the brain go back and fourth, so one might say that awareness is everywhere on the body, not just on the brain
@TheDirtyDeDerShow I stand corrected, even consulted a professor, some language barriers and misunderstandings from my part have made me jump to a wrong conclusion. what’s coded in DNA is simply instructions on how to make specific proteins. instincts seems to be an emergent property, not fundamental, and also currently psychology avoids using the term “instincts” on humans, seeing more appropriate for animal behavior
''or is the brain simply a conveyor'' (that quote at the end of the video) ties into the last point, I'm going to fail badly at trying to make, but I'll try none the less, Your Spirit Mind, kicks in, the moment your Earthly Mind stops functioning due to physical death (even if only temporary due to Cardiac Arrest for example) but here is the more amazing realization, it's never non active, your spirit mind houses naturally your eternal identity, which comprises, your identity, your experiences, your memory's, etc..and it's always ''backing up'' your earthly brain/mind experiences, If this is hard to grasp for some of you, ask yourself this: Do Angels have body's? Do Angels have the ability to make decisions? Do Angles require a brain made largely of organic matter like a human being in order to ''think'' ? Consciousness at a minimum when properly put into context confirms as at a minimum the reality of a ''spirit body''
Samuel Clements, when asked if he was afraid to die. He said" No, I was dead for billions and billions of years before I was born and noticed not the slightest inconvenience."
That quote doesn't make any sense because it's contradictory. Who or what exactly was experiencing the state or condition of 'being dead for billions of years'? How can one describe a state of 'suffering' or 'not suffering' unless there is conscious existence in place to reference? Translates to "This didn't exist, but let me describe what this thing that didn't exist was not experiencing during this time period..."
My immediate first reaction: the brain is a master of interpolation and "filling the gaps". This happens all the time. So I am with Robert here in asking about the methodology of deciding if the accounts actually are conclusive, which I would wager, they aren't. However! I am very fond of the TV analogy and IF we actually find conclusive proof of this hypothesis, this would indeed be BIG!
I think that there's a problem with the definition of death. Apparently, by this doctor's testimony, the heart stopping and the machines that measure brain activity flat-lining is not a sufficient condition to declare death and that there is a problem with our measurement devices and our definitions of death. I'm not a medical doctor or a neuroscientist, but my definition of death includes not being able to be revived. I don't believe that any living person has ever been dead. I'm not arguing anyone's religious beliefs. Those are a separate issue.
Consciousness is not what makes me me. Consciousness is the condition by which I can become me through my own particular experiences. Everyone has consciousness, and a science would give a story about consciousness by describing aspects that we all share as conscious people.
@@francesco5581 Death is an arbitrary definition in medicine. In fact Parnia believes that death is a process rather than an event ( that takes more than 8 hours). So there is no such thing as a person alive at 20:01 and dead at 20:02. The whole death definition is an arbitrary definition by physicians that keeps changing according to our current knowledge. The whole "the brain flatlined" thing is just speculation. Parnia is using EEG electrodes during the intervals of resuscitation when they check for pulse ( because there are artifacts during chest resuscitation) that just check for basic cortical activity. We cannot put a patient in cardiac arrest in the fMRI scanner and see if there are areas of activity . So resuscitation and death are misnomers that we use to make our job easier.
@@Lalakis On that i totally agree and the process is well known if one believes that there isnt anything "after". But since we are talking at the possibility of an "after" then this process is unknown in many parts and so the "death" sentence assume totally different meanings and a totally different timing process. But in any case is a return from a process that would have lead to a "not return point"... But where that point is and where will be in 500 years is hard to say.
@@lamidom sleep and waking kinda go hand in hand. If you don’t wake,: you’re dead. Sleep and death are no where near the same thing. Are you really asking this?
When someone wakes up from a near death experience where their brain flatlined yet they still experienced things, can’t you just do an MRI the first time they recall the experience and see if the memory is being retrieved from in the physical brain? Because if nothing lights up on the MRI then that backs the idea that the consciousness is separate because that memory is initially coming from somewhere outside the brain. However, what I think is more likely, is that the memory will light up somewhere in the physical brain on the MRI, which begs the question of “how did it get there” if the brain was “dead”. Does consciousness have a memory capacity that it uses to hold onto the experience while the brain is dead and then it uploads it to the physical brain when it’s back online…?
That wouldn't work. If the brain is the receiver and not the emitter of consciousness and the memory is stored within consciousness, then if you measure the brain with an MRI what you could find is the brain receiving the memory from consciousness and thus lighting up. The whole point of the hard problem is that every consciousness and brain study ever is a correlation study, and correlation doesn't mean causation. If both the brain and consciousness are functioning you can never tell which one came first. It's the classic did the egg or the chicken come first? type of problem.
![ละลาย (LALALYE) - DAOU PITTAYA ต้าห์อู๋ พิทยา [OFFICIAL MV]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/wo6r9TgausI/mqdefault.jpg)
This man is so straight to the point... Wow. Makes us understand what he clearly meant.
NDE'S are real
@@williamburts5495 yes
@@williamburts5495 Nobody says they are not real. In fact they are so real we can stimulate the temporoparietal junction of the brain in order to reproduce them.
ok, so what is it that you really understood from the doctor? Does the soul exist? Is consciousness a product of the soul? The anchor of this show seems not to accept that concept, if it can not be proved by science, law of physics or whatever he will not accept that concept. I guess he will have to wait until someone invent a scanning machine capable of recording the soul.
@@Lalakis That's actually not true. When people talk about "reproducing NDEs," what they really mean is that they can stimulate the brain in such a way as to reproduce certain aspects that people report in an NDE, but not the experience itself.
The *really* deep and profound NDEs, the ones that people report taking them to an entirely different plane of reality (or however you wish to interpret it) are in a class all their own.
So that we can reproduce certain aspects of the NDE isn't actually all that strange at all. If the brain's acting as a receiver for a consciousness that exists *outside* the physical brain, then toying around w/ it to reproduce certain extraordinary experiences is no more fantastical than using psychedelics.
thank you for the work you are doing Sam Parnia!
Very interesting topics and questions on this channel.
Fine with a skilled researcher, Sam Parnia, who has results, so there is something to relate to.
From NDE, cardiac arrest, we know that people see and hear what is going on during the operation, but it is not possible for the patient to communicate with those who operate while they are clinically dead.
Another factor several patients report, during clinical death, is that they also record what the surgical team thinks. Consciousness, during clinical death, is in a way both limited, but also very extended to something we cannot explain.
7:20 is my favourite segment. The way he breaks down what the resuscination process does to the brain is on point, and explains so much.
Yes, perfect analogy. We are beginning to lift the curtain. I am already there. That’s where I live. It’s why I don’t fit in anywhere currently. I am here to make a world where I fit in. Who am I? I am the future. ❤️🔥♾
This question has baffled the most brilliant of minds for thousands of years, yet every person who leaves a comment on a CTT video somehow has the answer!
"Brilliant minds"? Like old l. ron hubbard?
Consciousness is a materialistic dualism of the quantum cortex, therefore we postulate that it is an ambiguously inept emergence of self. The preceding sentence clearly defines consciousness...I GOTS NO IDEA MANNNNN🤷♀️😂😜🤷♂️. Brilliant!😎
@@wthomas7955 it's a joke, not a dick. Don't take it so hard
@@l.ronhubbard5445 You're the one who seems to be concerned with being misconstrued. Maybe you and xenu should come up with another handle if it makes you that uncomfortable.
@@wthomas7955 no u
Fascinating topic. Love the discussion.
A great guest! Please bring him back for more conversation.
Either dualism or our brain is so damn sophisticated that it can contain consciousness in it. Both end are the reason to be grateful to be who are.
Possibly the most thought provoking and level headed guest yet - and I've never missed an episode. Beautifully articulated.
The tv analogy was perfect
I find it weak. A TV may be damaged but not the shows it presents, else they would appear damaged on other TV sets. A damaged brain however entails a damaged mind, which for each mind has only one outlet (if the analogy holds at all) and that is the brain it is otherwise associated with.
Indeed .. good analogy
For kids sure...For anyone knowing neuroanatomy and neurophysiology nope. And he is a cardiologist/icu doctor not a neuroscientist.
@@Lalakis yep; everyone can be part of the dialectic but not everyone who is, contributes.
We all would love that solution. Im inclined to think that essential parts of brain/counciousness work some minutes after heart stops beating. Dolphins are sentient yet I dont think they fear the end as much as we do.
I really love this intellectually honest discussions. It's very rare among all this crap on YT. Bravo!
I'd love to see Sam and Donald Hoffman have a conversation or be on the same panel, they are revolutionizing how we perceive consciousness.
I love how humble and open minded the people that are exploring this area are. Most materialist reductionists are so full of pomp and arrogance it’s hard to listen to them.
@@nahbro5369 that's just your cognitive bias. Most people really want to believe that their "heart will go on" long after their body dies.
@Boris M. Emearia "larping"? Haha. Wishful thinking. That's all it is.
they arent rovolutionizing anything, they are just in youtube, the real people revolutionizing are in the labs, just check who wins Nobel Prizes and you will have an idea of the difference between scientists and celebrities giving interviews.
@@ivanleon6164
They are absolutely revolutionizing. They give answers to things like consciousness. Those lab rats only reduce the question without any answer and dismiss it. Doctors like Sam Parnia will be viewed as heroes like Galileo in the future
Sam Parnia's clear explanation is the first i heard in a long time that makes sense and can be understood by ordinary people without the the high language and words used by other so-called experts.
I have read Dr Parnia's books and highly recommend them.
I also read them and they were meh at best.
I have been thinking this EXACT Theory for years! Never once have I heard anyone repeat it. It is the most logical and simplest explanation and it explains the subconscious mind.
Sam Parnia always keeps such a level head during interviews, even when the person interviewing is sighing and acting really unprofessional. I appreciate him so much.
I noticed that also. I thought Kuhn was trying to belittle Parnia by calling it hypothesis and beliefs rather than the solid documented instances of NDE's. Parnia was just relaying fact and Kuhn kept trying to portray it as beliefs. I thought Kuhn was borderline disrespectful to Parnia and find it disturbing!
@@jimbo33 yep but he has to play detective and put the other side ,hes a materialist also by his own words a good 96 percent of them probabley are
Thank you, Mr. Parnia.
Mankind has created many religions over the centuries trying to understand conciousness, as an atheist pantheist i would say that there is a big possibility that conciousness is fundamental and primordial and the brains similar to tv sets are channeling conciousness
Consciousness is fundamental. Every thing is an appearance in consciousness. That's ancient Hindu philosophy of Vedanta stated. Subject can't appear from object.
Consciousness will a neverending puzzle, truly fascinating.
Very well explained. Thank you Dr. Parnia for your work!
There needs to be discussion on ‘blackout drunk’ somewhere in here.
Blackout drunk is like when you interfere with a radio so that the music can't be heard.
That might be a memory thing, but still worth discussion.
Is there any difference between ‘blackout drunk’ and dreamless sleeping
except the nature of the before and after?
@@REDPUMPERNICKEL i think everyone dreams at all times, but forgets the experience upon awakening.
@@Dion_Mustard Possibly, but I doubt it because
when researchers monitoring sleeping subjects awaken them
and ask if they were dreaming,
the subjects always say yes
when certain patterns of neural behavior are present
and always say no
when those patterns are absent.
I think we forget our dreams because evolution has designed us
to avoid accumulating meaningless debris that comes into being
as a side effect of the process in which all the thoughts in our memory
are adjusted to accommodate the day's experience.
I wouldn't be surprised if that process, which involves an immense amount of comparison and evaluation, discards most short term memory that is mundane, of little or no significance.
And I suspect that if the process detects something that, for example, bears strongly on survival or seems of great significance, then the process might trigger creation of a memory that will persist until the sleeper again becomes conscious to then perceive that memory as a dream.
Kekulé's discovery of the structure of benzene came from pondering his dream of a snake looking like a ring because it was eating its tail . (Google Kekulé to get the story).
quite possibly the best conversation yet on CTT
evan J / What?🤔😟😞🥴😏
What he said at the end represents the worst stupidities I've ever heard about consciousness./
If you really want a relatively good conversation about consciousness, see this :
th-cam.com/video/CSkfHDdZZ3o/w-d-xo.html
Sam parnia...great admiration💫
Parnia is very open and clear-minded. I like what he says, that consciousness “is a scientific entity and it most likely has some type of materiality, some sort of physicality except that it’s so subtle that we don’t yet have the tools to be able to measure it.” This is such a fine point that not many will consider it. But even neutrinos wouldn’t explain other NDE details. What if there is no physical, material explanation for consciousness? How would science come to that conclusion?
Demonstrating the experience of consciousness outside the body is precisely what I experiences 3 times in my life. People can debate this all they want, but, unless one has experienced the vividness of being out of their bodies, the debate with go on and we, as exeriencers, can only watch with interest how much the intelligentsia really don't know.
This is by far, the best answer to the whole consciousness topic. Science is obsessed with the obligation to make everything scientifically explainable. When it comes to consciousness, NDE’s etc., they are stuck and lost since ages.
Stories like yours tell so much more about life, death and all in between.
Blessings
Swami Sarvapriyananda has a lot of talks about consciousness and Sam Parnias research is supporting the vedantic point of view, that consciousness is fundamental, not produced by brain.
Whenever I read a 20 syllable hindu name of a "guru" I feel the urge to throw up. I wonder why is that.
@@Lalakis That's your problem. If you don't actually have an interest in metaphysics then why pretend that you do? Rhetorical question.
I agree but he isnt in belief that there is some afterlife on the other side either. The tests he did in the hospital with the images would have confirmed if people were seeing real time.
Maybe the best description I've heard yet
I dig this channel but after listening to the podcast I feel enlightened
probably the best snippet regarding consciousness on closer to truth that i have seen so far
why so
Clear and honest talk
The brain is the voice of your soul/consciousness
So brain is just complex biological machine.. Right?
Fascinating way to frame the "search" for the source of consciousness
This has cheered me up!
My opinion of Dr. Parnia went up, up, up during this interview. He seems very sincere and down to earth. The first two AWARE projects did not yield any conclusive results (though it did yield one eyebrow-raising tidbit) ... hopefully there will be an AWARE III and IV ... it is the single most important thing we could be studying. It is amazing to me that we are not putting a lot more time, money and effort into researching this most important subject.
year late but was so disappointed about AWARE II😢
Interesting video. Personally I like the idea that the brain channels consciousness. It’s like the wind in the trees. We may study the movement of the leaves, but that tells us nothing about the wind itself.
I like that.
@@thedudegrowsfood284 thanks, it was my realisation after studying for a psychology degree, trying to learn more about consciousness.
In addition, the problem is the scientific empirical method isn’t suitable for studying consciousness because we can’t observe it with our senses, similar to that invisible wind in the trees but even less visible.
Scientists make elaborate models to measure the movement of the leaves but cannot measure the wind itself.
@@david.thomas.108 so much hubris in science
@@david.thomas.108 they can measure the wind with instruments thats easy ,in terms of empirical evidence they can observe and measure brain function but they carts see the objective experience
Consciousness becomes easy to understand when you realize that Consciousness is the Origin of everything. It is there in the Source, and in its rediscovery in the evolution.
how can you realize consciousness is the origin of everything in the first place
@@zumaxex perhaps because everything that exists is consciousness. Actually the only thing that really exists is consciousness.
@@Lucmercurius well, that is currently just a theory
I love how hard Sam is working to find the answer only if their was more people like him and I believe we would find the answer much sooner or get really close to it one question I have we all want to meet our loved ones specially our parents so if their is life after death obviously we will want to meet our parents and our parents meet their parents and their parents their parents and so on and they all would want us to meet each other and it will probably go all the way down to the first 2 people on earth so how would that work that's one thing I'm wondering alot
I think we will have enough time to meet every loved ones since time doesn't perform in the beyond in the same way it does in our dimension. So our parents have already met their parents before we get there and when we join them they will have already spent "time" with their parents and will then be able to spend time with us. Or the law of physics is different in beyond. Each of our souls can be surrounded by people/souls they love most. You with your parents and your children. Your parents with you and their patents and so on. I think meet our loved ones as you explained would not be an issue in beyond. Maybe when we see our loved ones we dont have the desire to spend a long time with them as we would in this world. Maybe we will just meet them enough to ease our pain and sorrow and then they move on to another stage of their soulful development
There is only one universal mind, and it is all of us. Consider your ego and everyone's else just a passing wind, a momentary reflection on the water, a dream. So, you and your parents and their parents are the same incomprensible eternal being. You'll meet them when you meet yourself
Awesome (plugging out the sound jacks on a tv analogy was perfect) that has always been my issue with the out of the brain model for consciousness.
Didn't catch that, could you elaborate further on the problem and your conclusion? Thanks
@@DaP84 he basically said that when you plug out parts of the tv you lose that function from what the tv is doing. for example if you removed the sound connection. So if someone loses the part of their brain that controls sound it’s not that their brain produced that conscious ability it’s just that mechanism
Is gone.
@@dueldab2117 ah, okay an analogy! Could mean either-or
Even if, Dr. Parnia said the brain can still be a conveyor as opposed to the producer of consciousness.
Consciousness existing after someone is brain dead is only a complete contradiction if you think consciousness emerges from the brain. Which is quite an assumption to make.
I hope they do prove this, so that we can move on into a time where we fully realize that the brain is a conveyor of consciousness and not the producer of consciousness.
Yes, it is the means to experience conciousness not the producer of it. A reciever that filters it through our own experiences.
their be alot in the scientific community opposing acceptance of that
@@chrisbennett6260 There are scientists for and against this idea and scientists can’t prove it or disprove it in anyway.
@@TheBookofBeasts Patricia smith churchland, a neuro scientist , is extremely negative and dismissive theoretical physicist ,brian green and even some philosophers
the enduro scientist
susan greenfeild however very respectful and open minded and a real breath of fresh air against the arrogance
she has been doing some wonderful cutting edge research and has yielded some really interesting insights
thanks for your reply
@@chrisbennett6260 I will look her up.
Consciousness is not the self. That is the "personality". Consciousness is the phenomena that allows a self to experience the self, to experience the visual experience. To experience.
Isn't that really splitting unnecessary hairs. There is no personality without consciousness
When I had such experience, I can assure without doubt that it was 1000x more real to me than anything I experienced before, or afterwards. Believing it is not required. Those experiencing know the answer as a witness.
Whether that is a mystery, or a malfunctioning of the brain, nobody so far can prove. But I support the notion of the brain being a detector that filters all-pervading consciousness, and possibly it's ultimate goal is to reflect the full depth of consciousness. To me that is fascinating and gives sense to life.
But I do not claim to be able to prove it in a scientific sense. I wonder if that ever will be possible.
Whoever saw a tree in it's subtle expressions with an expanded awareness will never go to nature without such very subtle knowledge and the understanding how much we hurt our lives and nature through reduced awareness and short-cutted highly engrossed thinking.
Sam Parnia eres fantastico 👌
This conversation is perfectly sensible for me
had an NDE ?
Glad you approve lol.
Cont. From previous post.
Consciousness is a Combination and Coordination of the Resources for the Organisational/personal goals.
RESOURCES are: -
s) Spiritual Entity
b) Material Energy
I Am OK NO Matter What 😊😊😊❤❤❤
Interesting analogy of electromagnetic waves and TV suggesting we humans are unique receivers of consciousness. I wonder if we are more like a mobile phone that is both receiving and transmitting consciousness at the same time. Extending that analogy, may be other living beings are also transreceivers of consciousness but working at a different levels or frequencies.
Absolutely correct
Yeah, might as well add a transmitter and some entity or other that is originating all the content to the equation. Makes a lot of sense. HA, HA, HA, HA, HA, HA! Ridiculous.
I suppose this is possible but it just seems to kick the consciousness can down the road. If the matter in our crania is just a receiver of consciousness from some outside source, what is generating the consciousness in this outside source? Or is that source just serving as an intermediate (analogous to ham radio repeater)? Is there some hypothesis for the origin of this signal or is it turtles all the way down?
@@mikel5582 Do you really suppose this guy's theory is possible? Somehow I'm not convinced of that, heh, heh.
@@wthomas7955 Well, a lot of things are possible. But that doesn't mean that I give all possibilities the same credence. Some are just more plausible, or have more compelling explanations, than others. Personally I find this proposal to be more woo woo than reason; but I suppose it _is_ possible.
As a biochemist by training and trade, I don't find it overly astounding that consciousness is an emergent property of biochemical and biophysical processes. At a simple level, one might consider the motility of a bacterium towards a glucose gradient as consciousness. This can be understood from the cascade of signals initiated by glucose receptor in the cell surface.
The television comparison blew my mind
Part of me wants to move to NYC and become friends with Sam, just in case I decide to die one day. This man might actually bring me back.
Excellent talk. I think the issue is now beyond doubt. Look at numerous NDE'S recorded by Doctors, Surgeons and end of life carers.
Sam Parnia has clarity of thinking
Consciousness is the ground of all creation and "reality"...
Great interview.. I've certainly said this before, but if we change the verbiage from consciousness to awareness, much of the mystery tends to vanish.. all animals have varying degrees of awareness, and awareness is critical to survival hence it's selection by the natural pressures of evolution...Peace.
You 're totally right, that awareness is key to survival and higher awareness has evolutionary benefits. However it still doesn't answer the question of the video: did brains evolve to produce higher awarness or did brains evolve to better utilize the awarness, that is out there.
Yup. Humans developed this higher awareness to compensate for the fact that we have vulnerable bodies compared to other animals. It gave us an evolutionary edge to stop our species from going extinct. There's really nothing "mysterious" about it.
@@gergelyszekely9778 Thanks for the reply.. In my humble opinion, Brains evolved for DECODING information (I can expand there) from the environment in the effort to FIND food, and avoid becoming food.. Whether it's the simplest worm with only 300 neurons and very LITTLE awareness of it's environment, or higher primates like ourselves, the brain is all about situational awareness.. The current social meme of the so-called hard problem of consciousness, MAY predominantly apply to philosophers..
@@dancharles6009 A definite factor friend .
@@dancharles6009 I'll expand a LITTLE on the decoding thing anyway.. ALL information is solely carried on either particles or waves..No other way..Brains evolved to decode that existant information, nothing more .
During convulsions and desaue , the debarkation of consciousness is very clear and mark able .
Its not only when death occurs there is one more way it can occur. In very deep meditation the body shutsdown. Only consciousness can be felt.
I think consciousness is an awareness of things
TODAY (dez 2022) WE KNOW IT BETTER !!!
6:16 "Wouldn't that be occurring all the time?" I think it occurs in surprising ways. I knew a woman who had a dream in which a deceased relative appeared to her. That relative said, "Your husband has cancer. You have to get him to the doctor tomorrow!" The bewildered woman did take her husband to the doctor the following day and he did have cancer. (He survived for at least two more years). Our minds seem to behave in ways that we can't possibly anticipate.
That has zero scientific value. It is just an anecdotal non falsifiable story. Even if your story is true ( which i doubt it is ) there are millions of cases where a deceased relative did NOt appear in dreams to warn anyone about cancer.
He is so good 😭
Finally, life and passing on makes sense!!
My other thing is the fact of the rich man asking about Lazarus giving him a drop of water. When King Saul went to find the seer to call up Samuels soul. The transfiguration Moses and Elijah.
I have a great story with Asterix that went and met up with Caesar and in the way they came across Zeus and the Loch Ness master, wanna hear it ?
@@Lalakis sure give it to me. But just so you know the Bible States that Jesus seen Satan fall from heaven like lightning ,and what does Zeus have in his hand but a lightning rod. Bible also States about how Satan is the prince of the power of the air, which thunderstorms happen, and fronts collide in the air.
I love comment section of this video.
I was looking up more about the properties of ammonia. What could be more mundane than that ? I discovered in some situations it's not a base but it can also act as a very weak acid. Next I discovered sodium amide and biuret.. There seems to be a lot of advanced chemistry with those simple substances we learned in school. Everything is complex like art, but it came from a uniform, formless state from which quarks and plasma formed and forces.. and finally all our dazzling chemistry. But perhaps not finally and consciousness came as the last phase transition. But the problem is that everything that came before seems one family while consciousness is like so different. Perhaps there was already from the beginning another family we have no knowledge about and that evolved too.
The one real trouble I have with Dr Parnia is where he says essentially the moment the heart stops the patient is "dead" and the brain has shut down. In the same conversation he will say, "Death is not a moment but a process". Seems an inherent contradiction there that allows for brain function that is not presented through expression or speech to gradually fade. My father had two cardiac arrests one night and survived. He had no NDE and only remembered waking up. But, some weeks later he had these euphoric experiences where he though every person in the world spoke to his at once and told him he would recover from his illness.
heart stop is usually termed Clinical death, not Death death. and yes death is a process of decomposing, the further you live without a heartbeat, the less reversible the state is
Since the Bible talks about discernment I'd have to say the mind is a conveyor of our consciousness and what our consciousness is after, what it discerns after.
Get out with bible babble, this is not magic sky daddy fantasy forum. Get out.
@@NeverTalkToCops1 it's an order to life. Earth was without form and void. Then God spoken an created order to it.
The ability to feel you are not alone
I think it's the latter...that like a t.v. set, our brains r conveyors of consciousness. As a very young child, I used to ask my parents all these mind boggling questions. I believe these thoughts came from outside of my cognition. From another place & time!
Fascinating conversation!
*KNOW THY SELF*
Not the body or ego but
Thy true self.
Not only the content of the videos aré remarcable, every location Is aswell
6:00 "if that was true - I don't believe that"...
As a scientist, you don't have to "believe" or "disbelieve" anything. You have to be open-minded enough to contemplate and investigate all possibilities. Such is supposed to be the mentality of a scientist, not the mentality that comes out of a belief system. If you start by believing something, you started already from a huge mistake, for you're starting already biased.
It's one thing for a scientist to posit that she believes something, it's a very different thing to say that she doesn't believe something; the difference is in the burden of proof. When scientists indicate that they don't believe something, they're usually suggesting that there is insufficient evidence for the positive claim, which should be the default position.
@@PrateekLala you didn’t get my core point: beliefs have to be out of the equation as much as possible, especially when we can test the hypothesis and gather data. Parnia is an excellent example of that as he says: “I’m not interested in my own opinion”.
Aside that, it looks like you’re romanticizing scientists. Usually what happens is the opposite of what you say, I mean, they usually (usually, but not always...) don’t dismiss a hypothesis because of the lack of evidence. They do it because of their strong beliefs and resistance to change their paradigm. Their beliefs lead them to bypass the strong body of evidence or dismiss it as bs, even without reading or trying to replicate the experiments (crisis of lack of replication is a big issue in science).
There are innumerable examples of all that in the history of science. Refusal of the scientific community to accept Darwin’s huge work, refusal of Einstein to accept the evidence of quantum mechanics (“god doesn’t play dice”) etc. Unfortunately, the scientists’ ego play a large role in the evolvement of science and that’s why we move slowly forward.
The Trillion Dollar question, may be worth more :D Thanks for taking us...Closer to Truth!
"…if we can demonstrate that the experience is occurring when the brain is offline and non-functioning, then we have to question our paradigm about the relationship between the mind and the brain." Sure, but it’s going to be difficult to prove that all brain activity has stopped, some of it could be quite subtle. Just because we don’t detect any brain activity from the outside doesn’t mean there isn’t any. Occam’s razor would say, the brain is active, but it’s still an interesting question.
We don't use Occam's razor when we have scientific proof that all brain activity ends after cardiac arrest. The studies have been performed on animals and in threshold testing on humans. Postulating that some kind of undetectable brain activity somehow continues is absurd. That would also mean we don't actually need the brain lobes to work in the way that they do to make us conscious. You may as well suggest that your foot has taken over the job.
@@tim59ism - do you have any references for the "scientific proof that all brain activity ends after cardiac arrest"?
@@marktomasetti8642 Yes. Electrical activity of the brain was measured during cardiac arrest, for example during surgery, or during threshold testing in ICD-implantation. Following the cardiac arrest (‘no flow’), the EEG flat-lined after an average of 15 seconds and remained flat despite external resuscitation (‘low flow’) (Moss & Rockoff, 1980; Losasso et al., 1992)
If you stop the petrol supply into your car's engine, the engine doesn't keep running, does it ? Brains run on blood containing oxygen and glucose and other nutrients. Stop the blood flow and everything stops.
This guy is good 😊
Woo-woo with crystals in the background!
Who needs cardiopulmonary resuscitation when we have crystals?
Brilliant mind
Similarly, if we discover leprechauns we'll have to question all our paradigms. Fascinating.
Yeah, still waiting on him to talk to an irish folk teller about the nature of the end of rainbows.
@@TheEnfadel Equal time for equal concepts.
Are you saying you are not conscious?
Aatmiya DIVINITY
Be Blessed
HARE KRSNA
Experience amazing Contentment hearing this talk and able to share personal views about the Brain/ Heart/Consequences/Cardiac Arrest...
1) Brain is a material energy structure having affinity for Consciousness.
2) Heart shutting or recovering to functioning is relating to the absence or presence of Consciousness
3) Consciousness facilitating material structures like brain, heart to perform their functions, no way brain, heart enable Consciousness
4) Thinking about the Consciousness existing indipendently is absolutely WRONG because it is omnipresent, omnscient, omnipotent, Irreducible, invisible, permanent and is occurring the entire universe space, time, matter, energy. We one and all are the creations of Universal Consciousness and matter. We are OF the Universe and We are IN the Universe 😊😊.
Delightful to say, our entire loop relationship at this time, space and energy level is because we all are Conscious plus science/technology of communicating is functioning properly.
Very respectfully Loving 💕🙏 ING You One and All DIVINE 💟
Before Greeks, Indians had already answered this question. West never acknowledge this. We Indians always believed that this body is just a wrapper for the atma or soul or consciousness which never dies and is eternal but only changes its clothing every birth.
One of the best episodes!
Is the Brain a TV set tuned into consciousness?
Thought is immaterial. Even matter is not solid at atomic scale, just probability waves
the brain is incredibly complex and I don't see consciousness emerging from something else, I mean it's sophisticated enough as a physical machinery to put it first on the list of what causes consciousness, but of course you never know. One thing is very clear to me, that everything we see, hear, remember, etc. is processed by the brain.
Sam Parnia has said all there is to say.
Most amazing. I like the Plato’s indicative of consciousness
Me too, but he's wrong. If general anesthesia was a thing back then he would've been in the opposite team, i'm almost certain of it.
@@adriancioroianu1704 th-cam.com/video/JL1oDuvQR08/w-d-xo.html
@@francesco5581 "Near death experiences" tells you absolutely nothing relevant about the subject in discussion. There is no temporal delimitions, there is no rigurous scientific methodology involved. These are just people talking stuff. Just like UFO sightings and this kind of stuff. It's interesting? Maybe. It's relevant? Nope. There is no evidence whatsoever in the whole history of conciousness outside a brain or without brain functions.
@@adriancioroianu1704 So true! No evidence, don't be biased from anecdotes and wishful thinking
@@adriancioroianu1704 NDE are scientifically accepted. And thanks to scientists like Parnia a scientific methodology is applied too. Otherwise you can also say that dreams do not exist because no one have recorded it yet, lets not be silly. So denial does not works here. Of course one can say that there is a physical/chemical explanation or not. But NDE are a real fact, scientifically accepted (of course cant be accepted that are a clear sign of an afterlife).
Consciousness is Australia.
Australia is fake, made up by the dark bringers fish folks of Tegstasias. So we believe in a sphere earth.
Only when you taste the red thought, you will be free.
@@ShutUpWesley th-cam.com/video/06aktT8wGjk/w-d-xo.html
Mind-boggling 👌👍
Philosophically I think anything that processes information processes it for the sake of something apart from itself . The eyes process light for the sake of the brain . The brain made up of the same material (flesh ) as the eyes processes information most likely for the sake of something else behind it , unless we are to believe that all the information in the universe terminates into the cerebellum or that the brain is the living embodiment of all information.
I also think there’s a difference between consciousness, and the conscious link With others
@TheDirtyDeDerShow neural plasticity shows that the brain physically changes as a result of abstract learning and ideas. Whether thinking about the past or the future, the brain physically changes as a reaction to something that doesn’t even exist at the moment. What this shows us is that the physical material of the brain is reactive to immaterial abstractions beyond space and time, - the stuff which consciousness is made of. As far as instinct, awareness is the highest order of consciousness. What “we “ call consciousness is simply processing already learned concepts. But at the level of awareness we know the truth of everything, and that which is left over from conceptual awareness is what we call “ gut instinct”
@TheDirtyDeDerShow is it that outlandish to believe inherited instincts stored in the DNA influencing the brain?
@TheDirtyDeDerShow i’m an undergrad studying psychology and I must say I’ve always thought about this but never really heard anyone talking about it
I agree with you, the information is stored in DNA, genetics, the brain comes after, first the information comes from DNA, but at the same time the brain can change due to outside information and that can also affect future generations, so in a way the genes and the brain go back and fourth, so one might say that awareness is everywhere on the body, not just on the brain
@TheDirtyDeDerShow It is widely accepted that instinct comes from information stored in DNA. There are countless scientific papers that back this up
@TheDirtyDeDerShow I stand corrected, even consulted a professor, some language barriers and misunderstandings from my part have made me jump to a wrong conclusion.
what’s coded in DNA is simply instructions on how to make specific proteins. instincts seems to be an emergent property, not fundamental, and also currently psychology avoids using the term “instincts” on humans, seeing more appropriate for animal behavior
You can find this idea in castaneda's books, where it is not presented as an hypothesis but as a fact which can only be experienced.
''or is the brain simply a conveyor'' (that quote at the end of the video) ties into the last point, I'm going to fail badly at trying to make, but I'll try none the less,
Your Spirit Mind, kicks in, the moment your Earthly Mind stops functioning due to physical death (even if only temporary due to Cardiac Arrest for example)
but here is the more amazing realization, it's never non active, your spirit mind houses naturally your eternal identity, which comprises, your identity, your experiences,
your memory's, etc..and it's always ''backing up'' your earthly brain/mind experiences,
If this is hard to grasp for some of you, ask yourself this: Do Angels have body's? Do Angels have the ability to make decisions? Do Angles require a brain made largely of
organic matter like a human being in order to ''think'' ?
Consciousness at a minimum when properly put into context confirms as at a minimum the reality of a ''spirit body''
Samuel Clements, when asked if he was afraid to die. He said" No, I was dead for billions and billions of years before I was born and noticed not the slightest inconvenience."
That quote doesn't make any sense because it's contradictory.
Who or what exactly was experiencing the state or condition of 'being dead for billions of years'?
How can one describe a state of 'suffering' or 'not suffering' unless there is conscious existence in place to reference?
Translates to "This didn't exist, but let me describe what this thing that didn't exist was not experiencing during this time period..."
My immediate first reaction: the brain is a master of interpolation and "filling the gaps". This happens all the time. So I am with Robert here in asking about the methodology of deciding if the accounts actually are conclusive, which I would wager, they aren't. However! I am very fond of the TV analogy and IF we actually find conclusive proof of this hypothesis, this would indeed be BIG!
Finally, the NDE phenomenon is introduced into this discussion instead of clueless physicists, and other physicality scientists.
Sounds like fun!
I think that there's a problem with the definition of death. Apparently, by this doctor's testimony, the heart stopping and the machines that measure brain activity flat-lining is not a sufficient condition to declare death and that there is a problem with our measurement devices and our definitions of death. I'm not a medical doctor or a neuroscientist, but my definition of death includes not being able to be revived. I don't believe that any living person has ever been dead. I'm not arguing anyone's religious beliefs. Those are a separate issue.
Consciousness is not what makes me me. Consciousness is the condition by which I can become me through my own particular experiences. Everyone has consciousness, and a science would give a story about consciousness by describing aspects that we all share as conscious people.
Do people always remember their dreams ? No. Why then, should everybody remember experiences when «dead».
Good way of explanation
If they are alive, they were never dead.
CPR = Cardiopulmonary RESUSCITATION. that name was give by medics.
@@francesco5581 Death is an arbitrary definition in medicine. In fact Parnia believes that death is a process rather than an event ( that takes more than 8 hours). So there is no such thing as a person alive at 20:01 and dead at 20:02. The whole death definition is an arbitrary definition by physicians that keeps changing according to our current knowledge.
The whole "the brain flatlined" thing is just speculation. Parnia is using EEG electrodes during the intervals of resuscitation when they check for pulse ( because there are artifacts during chest resuscitation) that just check for basic cortical activity. We cannot put a patient in cardiac arrest in the fMRI scanner and see if there are areas of activity .
So resuscitation and death are misnomers that we use to make our job easier.
@@Lalakis On that i totally agree and the process is well known if one believes that there isnt anything "after". But since we are talking at the possibility of an "after" then this process is unknown in many parts and so the "death" sentence assume totally different meanings and a totally different timing process. But in any case is a return from a process that would have lead to a "not return point"... But where that point is and where will be in 500 years is hard to say.
If you woke up this morning, you were never asleep? 🤔🙄
@@lamidom sleep and waking kinda go hand in hand. If you don’t wake,: you’re dead. Sleep and death are no where near the same thing. Are you really asking this?
When someone wakes up from a near death experience where their brain flatlined yet they still experienced things, can’t you just do an MRI the first time they recall the experience and see if the memory is being retrieved from in the physical brain? Because if nothing lights up on the MRI then that backs the idea that the consciousness is separate because that memory is initially coming from somewhere outside the brain. However, what I think is more likely, is that the memory will light up somewhere in the physical brain on the MRI, which begs the question of “how did it get there” if the brain was “dead”. Does consciousness have a memory capacity that it uses to hold onto the experience while the brain is dead and then it uploads it to the physical brain when it’s back online…?
That wouldn't work. If the brain is the receiver and not the emitter of consciousness and the memory is stored within consciousness, then if you measure the brain with an MRI what you could find is the brain receiving the memory from consciousness and thus lighting up. The whole point of the hard problem is that every consciousness and brain study ever is a correlation study, and correlation doesn't mean causation. If both the brain and consciousness are functioning you can never tell which one came first. It's the classic did the egg or the chicken come first? type of problem.
@@Pietrosavr Yes, exactly. Using objective means to find the subject will never work.
very clear discussion .......