Ep. 10 - Awakening from the Meaning Crisis - Consciousness
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 21 มี.ค. 2019
- New videos released every Friday.
Podcast Links:
•Anchor: anchor.fm/john-vervaeke
•Google Podcasts: www.google.com/podcasts?feed=...
•Spotify: open.spotify.com/show/43gIWKV...
•Breaker: www.breaker.audio/awakening-f...
•Pocket Casts: pca.st/EYU4
•RadioPublic: radiopublic.com/awakening-fro...
Books in the Video:
• Bernard Baars - A Cognitive Theory of Consciousness
• James Gibson - The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception
• Wallace Matson - Sentience
• Andrew Newberg and Mark Robert Waldman - How Enlightenment Changes Your Brain: The New Science of Transformation
• L. A. Paul - Transformative Experience
• Steve Taylor - Waking From Sleep: Why Awakening Experiences Occur and How to Make Them Permanent
• Giulio Tononi - Phi: A Voyage from the Brain to the Soul
• Philip David Zelazo, Morris Moscovitch, and Evan Thompson (Editors) - The Cambridge Handbook of Consciousness
Series Playlist: th-cam.com/users/playlist?list...
Facebook: / vervaeke.john
Twitter: / vervaeke_john
Tenth episode of Dr. John Vervaeke's Awakening from the Meaning Crisis.
I have 50 hours of these lectures to watch, and I feel like I need to watch each one three times. Going to wave goodbye to gaming for the foreseeable future as this is filling in so many of the gaps.
How is your journey progressing?
Right here with you! At least one RE-watch for each video. Such a great series!
@@rosscoyne01 that's great. I can't wait to finish the series!
I feel the same way!
On my second run-through!
Most underrated thing in all of TH-cam.
This series should be internationally on TV on repeat
Absolutely I wasn’t sure the first three episodes, but now each episode has great information and the book list is stunning
This is so epic
I don’t even want people to see this series, that’s how good and special it is
I couldn't agree more! John Vervaeke's content is like a hidden gem on TH-cam. The depth of his discussions is truly unparalleled. It's great to see more recognition for such valuable content!
I love how he thanks us for our time, it's like no, THANK YOU DUDE.
Lmao don’t his lectures and Jordan’s go great together if you have to imitate John raise your voice and hit the white board lol
It overwhelmed me while I was listening before work one day, centering myself before my shift started. It makes me feel like I really need to take as much as I can from these videos and put it out into the world to deserve his appreciation for my participation.
He loves what he does and is genuinely grateful to have an audience as he shares what he has learned. I love it
He is so genuinely humble and kind.
fr
Imagine a world where everyone had listened to this series and understood it.
What a profound thought.
I'll need a minute.
I was thinking that this material should be taught starting in all grade schools
A better being of respectfully ground and space and not on face value. Chumpa Chogong / RG for BUMMA
It's gobbledegook.🙃 He really believes computers are intelligent. (Green Fire, UK) 🌈🦉
These individual episodes are so tightly packed with pertinent and meaningful information that I have to watch them like two or three times per episode to completely integrate it into my knowledge
Your listening skills must have improved by then, have you gotten better? I also wonder if you are really listening or having this in background. Writing down helps me. Glad to find your comment!
Turns out the most effective therapy for me has been not speaking to a therapist but deeply listening and understanding this lecture series by Dr. John Vervaeke. This has been precisely the explanation of meaning and consciousness that I have been trying to personally understand and explain for myself for 20 years. Thank you so very much, forever grateful John. Ram Ram.
Thank you so much John. I have watched each episode up to this one and I am going to stop here and watch them again. I am so grateful for you.
Finally! Relevant, holistic and coherent lectures about meaning, consciousness and wisdom (and without the culture wars). This channel deserve more views and subscriptions. I’m learning a lot, I’m connecting ideas and hopefully acquiring insight, so thank you very much John!
I am absolutely in love with these lectures! So many things I could never put into words done with some kind of surgical precision!
Michael Polanyi was a Hungarian medical doctor who worked on the front line duging WWI. After the war he did a Ph.D. in physical chemistry and eventually moved to Manchester with the rise of nazism. He did pioneering work in x-ray absortion and diffraction. Two of his students, Melvin Calvin and Eugene Wigner won a Nobel prize, in chemistry and nuclear physics respectively. His son John Polanyi won the chemistry Nobel prize.
Before working several years on what he titled "Personal Knowledge", he also wrote books on Economics and Monetary Policy, anticipating key issues in those fields. His brother Karl Polanyi wrote the book "The Great Transformation", which stands as the antithesis to von Hayek's "Road to Serfdom" and the neoliberalism he underpinned.
These are incredible personal stories.
These lectures are transforming my salience landscape
Thanks John V., this is salient as hell.
A cognitive scientist who believes cognitive science can save the world, what could be more fascinating!
If cognitive science does not save the world, nothing will.
I found these lectures really insightful. Each episode is taking me around 2-3 hours to watch. I’m treating them with the respect they deserve, taking notes and learning the material, processing it, and playing out the dialogue in my mind. I’d advise anyone going through this course to do the same. So much can be missed from passively watching lectures.
I'm absolutely L O V I N G this series of videos. No bullshit here! (which is really saying something in this day and age)
I don't know if I'm getting tired or if you're getting funnier by I'm finding myself cracking up more frequently in this and the last video.... Some of the the phrases that you pull out of the air as completely appropriate and likely the best way to get your point across are also very funny....such as "YOU also make salient that the extra space is non-candy space!" (WE can't be fooled when it comes to candies!!!!") o.k...maybe it's just past my bedtime.... :)))
I’ve watched it five times and still going deeper
💞 like always, really good.
Getting into “deeper contact with the guts of the world” he says... yes, I think I want that. That also sounds terrifying! But meaningful.
6:29 "The hard problem of meaning". this is good.
i think this has to be viewed by every human in this planet
This lecture is harder for me than previous lectures, but I really grateful that I have you doing the explain thing.
Love the consciousness as desktop analogy. It is akin to McGilcrist's concept that the brain does not emit or transmit, but rather, permits consciousness. A kind of prism through which most of the bits of information that could pass through, either are filtered out, or get transformed into a larger whole. Of course, this does not explain how, but only, what.
I am way more lucid of how my consciousness process information after this episode
It feels like I'm another person
I guess I'm on the right Path to be Awaken
I seriously need to find a thesis and be accepted for a PHD so I can spend my life working on these subjects !!
Thank you Dr. Vervaeke ♥️ This is just a miracle
Whenever Vervaeke zeros in on his cup and it's relation and interaction with reality I am taken back to an acid trip.
37:15 re-watching this for the 4th time 😬. Every time is more insightful.
OMG: he nailed it in this ep. Genius!
i'm watching it for second time and man oh man, I had literally goosebumps listening to him, it made so much more sense this time.
I see a new upload, I click, and start another journey!
The presentation is masterful, and it is intense at times because it must be so! This is the pinnacle of human exploration into the workings of the mind, scraping against fundamental questions of existence. WOW! Thank you, John (& team) for sharing.
John series of talks are life transforming.
In my case, one of my most critical awakening experiences left me with a sense of no-self, meaninglessness and "Shit, I've lost it!". This kickstarted an endless cycle of getting attached to the past experience, trying to repeat it... that obviously didn't work.
After that experience, my meaning structure collapsed. Yes, I felt exactly that "THAT" experience was more real than "THIS" experience... I lost the ability to touch this higher state and that gave me a lot of angst. (Dark night of the soul, probably)
This didn't get me to a better quality of life, as John exposes. It made me very sad and depressed, without any drives at all, for many years.
I did my best effort to forget it and live a normal life, but it's impossible to forget what you saw once.
I continue to meditate as a basic requirement to keep my mind together and not get lured into self-deceptive stories... but that's it.
For moments I feel wiser, seeing impermanence and not grasping, not pushing or pulling, and for moments I get completely trapped into delusion. It would be great to just be at one side or the another, and not in the middle lol.
can u elaborate more? how did it happen? did u do drugs or sth? I appreciate ur time to answer this qustion.
Youre more interesting than JV and you can communicate; meaning you dont require to be so verbose like him, which i find irritating and unhelpful.
@@Ghtr5623 LOL, well, JV has laid out a whole conceptual map around this. That has its own merit. I only can talk about my particular experience, but probably not systematize a whole theory (Yet).
This lecture is a must for anyone who wants to be a real learner. How can a college student enroll in an educational endeavor with out learning how we think?
So true.
This has been excellent. I followed Peterson's Maps of Meanings, but it really left me wanting more. I've thoroughly enjoyed your lecture series and intend to focus my senior thesis around the Meaning Crisis. I've mostly studied anthropology, but have extended my studies to dominantly the fields of study you are attempting to integrate into your theory. I found you through your interview with Rebel Wisdom, and I just have to express my gratitude, this has been incredibly informative, and is exactly what I'm searching for right now. Thank you.
Check out Dr. Robert Sapolski's lecture series on Human Behavior Biology.
@@alexandercamlin8889
This is so odd... I've been watching Sapolsky's lectures these last weeks, and came upon John's lectures through an older conversation with Jordan Peterson. Now here I am, a few days fully immersed in this wonderful serie of lectures, and I am reading your (seemingly) random recommendation of Sapolsky's lectures. Ha! The world can be so weird sometimes. :-)
@@ThePathOfEudaimonia Synchronicity :)
@@alexandercamlin8889 Good recommendation for grounding in neuroscience aside from all the psychology.
Such a blessing to be able to incorporate this utterly profound series with Petersons Biblical series. Vervaeke is the man😎
So glad there are freakin 50 of these lectures. infinite gratitude.
This episode brought back memories of my higher state of consciousness I had when I was 23, thanks to magic mushrooms. I recall meditating and it having a healing effect on the world, the grass grew and three hummingbirds circled over my head. The birds were real because my friends pointed them out to me and everyone saw them. I recall feeling so euphoric and in touch with a deeper reality. Upon understanding my place what I call the “gates of heaven” opened to me. I’ve never gone back to psychedelic drugs as that was the ultimate experience.
Thank you so much for presenting us with this wealth of ideas. I appreciate your noble aim of helping people out of the meaning crisis. I watch this though from a completely different perspective. I am a Muslim and I already consider that life is meaningful. As human beings, we are given the job of representing God on Earth. For me personally, I understand this as emulating God's "features" conveyed to us through His Holy names. For example, He is The Most Merciful. Our duty is to cultivate mercy to our fellow human beings as we experience God's mercy in our lives. Wisdom to me is knowing the right thing, and then doing it. For us as Muslims, or for Christians or Jews for that matter, the right thing is more or less laid out to us. Our job is to recognize the right thing and cultivate the patience to actually do it.
Up to this minute in the series, I don't know what you are offering us exactly. It is quite beautiful but also theoretical. Does the insight you promise afford us the wisdom to do the right thing? How can we individually decide it is the right thing? Moreover, it seems that mindfulness, meditation, and contemplation are only for a select few who are willing to practice them for years. And at the end of those years of practice, is the result guaranteed? Do I become wiser?
Excellent questions, I would love to hear his answers
Its kind of sad to see how the views on the videos hoes down as the series goes on. I'm more excited to continue than anything.
Who else is considering jamming through all this texts he lists in this series that would be the most epic psychology-mysticism-transformation book list ever!!
Deep. Deepening.
I feel like I'm both learning a bunch of new stuff and not comprehending any of it at the same time
He might just be the most profound human on earth right now
Key topic!
Consciousness is building the salience landscape: which patterns can we see and then act on? Child vs adult
36:45 "it all makes sense now"
40:45 psy xp -> mystical -> transformative
41:45 I had this xp and it justifies the change
53:30 becoming wiser: child sees through the illusion
These last two episodes have been BaNgErS
Thanks John.
Nice jumper, professor, and thank you for taking your time and time of production team to share this with us. Please know that this helped me resolve some of meaning issues I have been dealing with. There are no words to express the gratitude, but people here also know it as "thank you" ❤️
P.s. "no bullshit" really fits the style
I have just realized, this is relevant.
This series is surely one of the most wonderful consequences of the Internet Revolution and social media revolution. I cannot be thankful enough.
Nice job as always!
‘Consciousness is not what the ear can hear, but that whereby the ear can hear’.
In german the word for “term“ is “Be-griff“. “Griff“ means “grip“ or “grasp“. Just a little insight I had while watching.
Very similar in Dutch: "begrijpen". Given the fact that Dutch is a Germanic language, this observation can be considered trivial, therefore, to make things more interesting I can add the fact that in a totally unrelated language, Turkish, the verb "kavramak" means both "to understand" and "to hold something".
Thank you so much John. I am really enjoying engaging with your train of thought and your delivery. I have been following and learning and agreeing until this video when I have to say from my direct experience I feel John, you are missing a trick, which I hope might be coming. You, in this video, equate cognition and consciousness and insist on rationality which centres all consciousness in the mind. I feel wisdom grows from connectivity of all our centres. We can know and be in our gut, our heart, our body, our mind, our awareness of senses etc etc. Our intuition comes from our awareness of the energy flowing through us, part of the spiralling of energy that was the Big Bang, that is the flow, that is everything in existence. We do not come to that through mind alone, through rationality. We experience consciousness by dropping back into our awareness of consciousness as it flows through us as energy. We fall back into deep knowing of connectivity of every element of ourselves and of everything which is consciousness itself. We realise we are that with all that we are.
You are discribing what goes on in the right hemisphere of the brain, being more holistic or more accurate, Gestalt. Other cultures have recognised the difference and attach the non computational 'mind' to other parts of the body like the heart (India) or other organs (China). Made sense at the time and still does to some degree as the body needs to survive outside the mind. But there is better science now to explain the dufferent processes.
Wonderful to see Michael Polanyi shaping current thought. I thought his "Personal Knowledge" had gone into oblivion, just like George Santayana and Thorstein Veblen who do not exist today. But he remains at least in cognitive psichology.
Roger Penrose interprets the Goedel Incompletness Theorem as a proof that ultimate human knowlege is not algorithmic, but intuitive. It transcends algorithmic operations.
Marvelous.
Each of the episodes is really good, but this one is awesome, it explains so much why people in certan stage can´t understand other, as if you think from the tribalism conciusness you can´t think from the universal morals as Kant, Rumi or Sócrates where talking about, you are in an infantile stage of morals as Kolberg explains or piaget of Gebser, is just amazing, to see and understand there are much more similitudes between Buda, Jesus, Sócrates and Plotino, Pitagoras or Platon than we where used to think, just amazzing.
Verveake, my deep condolences for your sacrificial and valiant personality.
God, I love this channel :-)
so many thanks....
I love watching these and then going to the comments for more uplifting, intelligent discussion
Thank you John for the illuminating content.
It just gets better and better. Attention span recovered.
I'm sharing these lectures to my friends how I understand it and uses analogy and some simple terms. It's funny how they pay attention. It's as if something relates and agrees with them subconsciously.
Dr Vervake, I am deeply grateful to have been led here and for your dedication, investigations and these invaluable presentations. Having experienced a Kundalini Awakening 8 years ago, hearing these perspectives is like finding a missing piece of the puzzle in my own enquiry. Thank you !
Thank you so much Dr Vervaeke, this series gives me insights into my experience. These insights let me know what happens to me and what I wanna pursue.
I'm aiming to finish this series before the time that After Socrates begins. At this point I am glad to be grasping the language a bit better. I must say, I really appreciate the book reccomendations you give along the way.
I finished a few days ago ❤️
Thanks for reminding us that most human problems are perennial problems.
We ARE human. We HAVE problems in the abstract.
great, intelligent talk. thank you!
Regarding the 'higher' state of consciousness question, I suspect that the ineffableness is the result of neurochemistry reaching some tipping point that results in a sudden structural change.
Consciousness seems to be the ability to monitor over time things that present relevance to a value structure. This functions to allow sudden changes to any of those factors to immediately be attended to while still minimising the required working memory. It could be that it functions positively by adding all relevant information constantly to your working memory, but I think it more likely that it functions negatively by removing things from working memory in order of least relevance. This would explain why young people see much more detail in things, but much less ability to focus; they have not built up the internal functional simulation of those parts of the world to the point where they can be removed from their list of relevant factors, and the scale of that which is potentially relevant is much larger than the scale of that which they can constantly monitor.
Back to the altered state of consciousness, I think a useful analogy would be having a digital camera with a memory card that is almost full, and then replacing that memory card. It wasn't a specific photo that was taken that produced that change. My guess at the specific change in the brain is either a destruction->rebuild of the value structure, or a destruction->rebuild of the relevance filter.
Thank you enjoying the series.
I had a systematic insight into systematic insight as such when he made the destination between a single insight and a systematic insight. 👏
You should go on Sam Harris’s podcast John, that would be a higher state of consciousness
This must happen!
tbh, 100% of what I've heard from Sam Harris is 'this thing is dumb because listen to this dumb analogy I made up'. If you can point me towards any real substance from Harris, I'd like to see it.
Tony Chapman he has some,good podcasts on mindfulness
Forever learning, thank you Dr Vervaeke! Also that access to this is free*!
Amaizing series!
Thank you
Renata, from Mexico
This is really a magnum opus of philosophical thought absolutely brilliant work
GREAT STUFF!!!
great videos, thank you John
Thank You! მადლობა! ( in my native language also )
My dreams are at the foreground of my salience landscape -- I consider them some of the most meaningful, transformative, and real experiences of my life.
Very interesting. I have done fairly intense spirituality for a while, both traditional/mainstream and more fringe/experimental. As such I have had different experiences, some of them quite intense. For example a vision during an angelic meditation, that was so beautiful and intense that I was whaling with tears of joy. But despite of their intensity, the doubting/scientific part of me recognize that much of it could be self delusion. Much like a dream, or in fact also our perception of material reality.
However I have also had that one mystical experience, that was utterly transcendent and different. Something that was an experience of eternity and oneness, but otherwise impossible to explain in words. This experience I will go to the grave, saying that it was “real”. I can simply not envision that it wasn’t. Which comes down to the nature of the experience itself. Its size, scope and otherness.
I've fallen behind. Great content!
On: "Trying to explain consciosness is like trying to explain God". That is a very apt comparison. One could argue they are the same problem as with the Creator, our consciousness is part of our image of God.
If one tries to explain conciousness without God, one must essentially describe that 'divine' part of us, that one would need to describe about God when describing Him. We end up describing the same problem either in divine context or profane context. And it is not at all clear, which one is the 'easier' to explain, but many people have strong metaphysical preferences on which they would like to try first.
SO much going on here...i feel like there should be a John Vervaeke Awakening from the Meaning crisis discussion group!
Thank you!
*_Awesome_*
Seeing a homuncular running inside my head. Overwhelming insight.
We need a vocabulary list! I guess I should have been taking notes! XD Loving the lectures!
Nothing much to say! Just great👍 Thanks
I notice almost every time John says the word "important", he subtly emphasizes the "import" part. Let us analyze this word:
An etymological analysis indicates it comes from words that have to do with movement: "to bring in from abroad" or "to carry through" in the sense of a "journey". We use the word "port" to indicate a ship, for example, entering a place where items are offloaded after having traveled in a journey from one place to another. A port is like a doorway to the next phase of a things life, where it has the distinguished honor of being chosen as highly valued and significant enough to require it's passage to the consumer. Same thing with the word "portal", that is, a gateway that is indicative of something of great significance on the other side. And if something is "important" as we understand it, we generally think of it as being very "consequential". "Consequence", (con- (meaning "with, together”) + sequence (from "sequi" meaning “to follow”)) implies not just a step by step movement (a logical sequence) from one thing to another, but a situation where each new state includes what was brought to the table by the previous state. Something "important" or "of great consequence" in this sense, is not just causal of, but is somehow carried forth (con-) into the next stage of development (-sequence).
All of this indicates heavy reliance (at least in the historical sense) on these words being metaphors for something having to do with movement.
I don't have the slightest clue how this analysis is important or consequential to finding meaning, or having insight, but I just think it's interesting. Interestingly, the word "interest" is yet another example of words that imply a physical relationship. We use it to mean something that is important enough so as to grab ones attention. Literally it comes from Inter- (between) and esse (to be). Why would it "engage our attention" and be "important" and "consequential" to be "in between" something? Perhaps we can use the metaphorical conception of a "metephor" as a bridge that carries meaning from one sense of a word to another sense. If you are literally walking on a bridge it is frequently carrying you over a river or gorge or some other sort of physical obstruction. We often stop when we are on a bridge to look down and observe in awe what lies or flows below. The bridge - the place in between where you were and where you' are going - is the most interesting place on this important journey.
Jordan Peterson has said you find your life meaningful when you have one foot in chaos and one foot in order; a situation of being in between, perhaps as to facilitate the transferring of things of importance to you back and forth from order and chaos.
Verkaeke has said you experience life as meaningful when the patterns in your mind reflect and cohere to the patterns in the world.
This sense of being in between, or on an important and interesting journey where things are carried through doorways of significance, must be an indication of our subtle awareness of the nature of these worldly patterns.
32:40 "When things are super salient to you, that triggers bullshitting" it's funny because often when you fall in love, you feel stupid and get that "its too good to be true" super-salient bullshit detector activating and now suddenly you become aware of your heartbeat going faster
Dude, I had the same thought at this part! I immediately started thinking about how I am when I'm in love with someone - how super salient all their positive qualities become and how I focus on how we are a good match, how we line up, what a good couple we could be, while ignoring anything contradictory to that or failing to see any red flags. I fall prey to an illusion when I fall in love. I become unwise, immature.
@@TheHangedMan damn right!
John, absolutely love the series! I have to point out that gibson's ecological dynamics are incompatible with representational models like baars' global workspace. Would love to hear your thoughts on that. Thanks for putting out such amazing content!
I've really enjoyed the series so far, but this one has a lot to argue with. Starting with the Piaget experiment. While the insight that there might be a useful pattern to errors in development, this experiment does not demonstrate any. As John says, by the age of 4 a child can count well enough to abstract the concept of number and apply it to different things, and they have also developed, through food, a concept of size and its relevance. If they are offered 2 apples, pieces of cake or glasses of milk, they will take the bigger one because, especially with food, size is extremely relevant to nutrition, energy, growth, physical satisfaction etc.
But to the child choosing which row of sweets to prefer, the difference is IR-relevant because they get the same number of sweets in both cases. So there may the some efficiency in choosing the longer row because, while the child may not be able to explain it, the larger gaps between the sweets MAY hold some significance so choosing that row makes sense and the outcome is, at worst, no different in either case.
To genuinely experiment with cognitive dissonance, which is what this potentially shows, the shorter row should have MORE sweets than the longer one. Then, choosing the longer one WOULD be an error. It might even be worthwhile iterating with more and more sweets to see when the switch from size to number occurs. Since food is so absolutely central to young children, it would be interesting to see if the same applied to non-food choices such as small toys.
There's an old Australian joke about a kid surrounded by a crowd of boys who offer him a $1 con and a $2 coin and tell him to take whatever he likes. In Australia the $1 is bigger than the $2. The boy takes the $1 and the others laugh and run away. This happens again the next day and a teacher, seeing both events calls the boy aside and points out that the smaller coin is worth more. The boy replies that he knows that, but if he takes the $2, the game will end. An iteration strategy would also start to point to whether the kids can play meta-games.
BTW, this persistence in choosing food by size persists well beyond 4 years. And experiment was done a few years ago with alcohol being served in short wide glasses and tall narrow ones. People, including bartenders, consistently chose the tall glasses with the higher level of drink in them, even when there was less actual booze in the taller glass.
rlmrdl it is not irrelevant which row (of candy) the child chooses, because the error is systematic, which means there is a pattern to it. Plus, intentionally choosing the row with larger gaps in between the candy allows for the conclusion that the child equated “bigger” with “better”, which is not an axiomatic truth, not even concerning food, so you’ve got an error right there. Plus, the candy has got an interactional quality for the child - which he can grab and count and eat. There is no interactional quality with the void in between the candy. The conclusion that the child equates size with substance is an error. So, all errors for the child. A good thing, then, that it grows up!
@@GB-qc2ye I go back to my previous point. Was the experiment conducted with fewer sweets in the longer row. THAT would clinch it. The thought that the child, in fact, equates size with substance is not tested by this experiment.
I found the exploration of Salience landscaping particularly fascinating. Vervaeke's insight's into meaningful crisis making resonate with me, and I appreciate the interdisciplinary approach. How do you think Vervaeke uses visceral emotionless impulse to explain fits into the broader discussion on consciousness? Looking forward to hearing different perspectives!
Wow💕
Wow
Obrigado
Michael Polanyi's Personal Knowledge: Towards a Post-Critical Philosophy.
The (commercial) Bleb says:
"In this work the distinguished physical chemist and philosopher, Michael Polanyi, demonstrates that the scientist's personal participation in his knowledge, in both its discovery and its validation, is an indispensable part of science itself. Even in the exact sciences, "knowing" is an art, of which the skill of the knower, guided by his personal commitment and his passionate sense of increasing contact with reality, is a logically necessary part. In the biological and social sciences this becomes even more evident."
"Trying to explain consciousness is like trying to explain god". That's because they're the same thing!
(In my opinion, obviously.)
This dualist agrees 👍🏼
I am in agreement here but this can be interpreted in different ways one of which we end up with thinking that consciousness created reality: consciousness is god, god created the Universe, consciousness created the Universe. That seems false. The way I see it is that god is a reflection of our consciousness when we try to understand reality: consciousness creates the image of reality, consciousness is god therefore god created the image we have about reality. God is a subjective notion not objective as we don't really have access to absolute objectivity but rather our objectivity is relative to the image we have about reality. God evolves as our consciousness evolves.
That would be the best way to see it by the current scientific orthodoxy, and may well be right. I won't be surprised if science one day discovers conciousness of a sort did create reality though - the nothing that created the something. Either way, god is just a metaphor we invented to explain existence.
My personal experiences point towards properties being a construct, in the domain of Object; while Nothingness = Consciousness (that which perceives qualities but is devoid of qualities itself).
The Supreme Object, Sarguna Brahman. The Supreme Subject, Nirguna Brahman...both aspects of the same Divinity.
I made such an imprecise statement. I needed to add that that consciousness does not create reality. Consciousness creates the image we have about reality. We are confusing "god created reality" with "god creates the image of reality".
All incredible though
'can totally relate to the experience of a meaning crisis, having experienced recurring episodes of ego death, existential depression, neurotic depression and other fun stuff, but it all greatly subsided after Christ gave me his spirit at age 27, despite still being isolated and broken
Exact same for me. Age 23. Nothing has been the same since
This begs the question, how tightly coupled is consciousness to visual processing? Is vision the top of the consciousness integrated sensory net hiearchy? Here is my valence of each constitutive sense to magnitude of consciousmess gestalt quanta hiearchy: vision, hearing, tactation, olafacation, and gustafacation. Holy potatoes, cogsci is fun!
Begs a whole lot of other issues mainly the mistake of linking conciousness to problem solving. Typical left hemisphere solution..
I am an agent in the environment of TH-cam, increasing my salience landscape