Colin McGinn - Does Consciousness Defeat Materialism?
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 7 ก.ค. 2023
- Free access to Closer To Truth's library of 5,000 videos: closertotruth.com/
What would it take for consciousness to defeat materialism or physicalism? This is the worldview that only the physical is real, which is the dominant view of scientists and philosophers. Here’s what it would take: our inner awareness, our experience of what things feel like, could not be explained by physical brain alone That’s it. A tall order, though.
Support the show with Closer To Truth merchandise: bit.ly/3P2ogje
Colin McGinn is a British philosopher, currently Professor of Philosophy and Cooper Fellow at the University of Miami.
Register for free at CTT.com for subscriber-only exclusives: bit.ly/3He94Ns
Watch more interviews on consciousness: rb.gy/xxb4i
Closer To Truth, hosted by Robert Lawrence Kuhn and directed by Peter Getzels, presents the world’s greatest thinkers exploring humanity’s deepest questions. Discover fundamental issues of existence. Engage new and diverse ways of thinking. Appreciate intense debates. Share your own opinions. Seek your own answers.
My dog is empathetic. He loves me, as I love him. He shows affection and empathy, but not just because I provide him food and shelter. He can discriminate between different types of my whistling. He understands different hand signals. He treats my handicapped wife with more empathetic behavior than he treats me (I'm his fun dad).
There are many things I can't sense, but there are percievable indicators of things I cannot "see." I cannot actually see creativity, but there are myriad indicators justifying that creativity is real. Yes, there is justification for creativity.
My dog...has consciousness. Can he paint a representational picture? No. But being able to sense moods, have moods, have a sense of humor (he tries to trick me while he furiously wags his tail), tells me that he has consciouness.
Consciousness is an adaptive characteristic that allows a creature to empathize and react to indicators of another's internal experience. This is linked to social behavior.
Can a dog have a Buddha Spirit? I say, "yes, sort of."
By the way, in which genus Homo did human consciousness begin? There's no telling. We're finding new things about Homo prehistoric art and burial sites all the time.
A dog can have a buddha spirit. He just won't be a dog anymore once he's free of ignorance.
Of course, dogs and all animals have consciousness. There nothing special about being humans.
All things with brains are conscious to some degree. Where there are functioning brains, there is consciousness. If someone asserts there is consciousness without functioning brains, they have the burden to prove that assertion.
@@user-gk9lg5sp4y You can't BE anything unless you know it., so, you can't BE dead unless you know it, and you can't know it without a consciousness. put the pieces together... YOU CAN NEVER BE DEAD. You can experience death, but you can never BE dead.
@@TheDeepening718 🐃💩
The answer is a big YES.
It's not even a question
Where is your Nobel for figuring out how consciousness works?
The topological architecture of the brain & body is imperative for consciousness.
And anything else you missed?
If we look at processes like Wetness,hotness or even coldness . These can be quantified or measured. These are dependent on something like. Wetness on the interaction between the water and molecules with a surface like solid or anything. Similarly, the sensation of heat or coldness is correlated with the origin or source of the temperature. If an object is heated, it will feel hot to the touch, whereas if it is cooled, it will feel cold. The correlation between the origin and the property of heat or coldness is evident in physical temperature changes.
And third . These requires some kind of interaction or dependency on each other. In these 3 phenomena physical process we can never fit Consciousness no matter how hard you try .
These are not created by external stimuli and when you interact with it than only you will produce this. These all point out to Consciousness as something different.
You are like saying water,heat or ice is imperative for these things.
However the main concerns are:
Quantifiability: While physical processes like wetness, hotness, and coldness can be quantified or measured using objective methods, consciousness cannot be directly quantified in the same way. Consciousness is inherently subjective and cannot be fully captured through external measurements alone.
Subjective Experience: Consciousness involves the subjective experience of awareness, thoughts, emotions, and perceptions. These subjective qualities cannot be fully explained or reduced to objective physical measurements or observations. Consciousness encompasses a realm of first-person experience that differs from the objective, third-person perspective typically used to study physical phenomena.
Lack of External Dependency: Unlike other physical processes that rely on interactions or dependencies with external objects or substances, consciousness does not require such interactions to exist. While external stimuli may influence conscious experiences, aspects like introspection, thoughts, and personal experiences can arise independently of immediate external influences.
By highlighting these distinctions, I argue that consciousness does not fit within the same framework as other physical processes. Consciousness cannot be directly quantified, its subjective nature sets it apart, and it does not have the same level of external dependency as observed in other physical phenomena.
While materialists may argue that consciousness is dependent on the brain, I point out that even if we consider consciousness as arising from the brain, it still possesses unique characteristics. Introspection, thoughts, and subjective experiences are not simply products of external stimuli, but arise from an internal process that is distinct from the external interactions seen in physical phenomena.
Some level of correlation also required:
As for the aspect of "what it is to know," the subjective experience of knowledge and understanding is not easily reducible to specific patterns of brain activity or external stimuli. Conscious knowledge and understanding encompass a deeper sense of meaning and comprehension that extends beyond purely physical or external factors.
Similarly, introspection, the act of self-reflective awareness, is not directly observable or quantifiable through external measurements. It involves a subjective examination of one's own thoughts, emotions, and experiences, which is not reducible to physical processes alone.
The brain and the body contain a soul, you. When you are awake, it is called being conscious. Falun Dafa
This guy Colin McGinn says many interesting and intelligent things to ponder on. Great video , thank you Robert 🙏🏻.
Ponder this on the Ponderosa. Materialism is actually playing in the mud. The alternative is to seek the Divine, your choice.
I wanted to understand what the person was like who had written a piece I came across since i'm quite skeptical on these matters but I have a feeling my understanding of the human consciousness is in good hands, what an intelligent don x
I think,
Consciousness is the pure subject, that we trying to understand as object. And this is impossible.
There is something which the materialistic theories lack and that's explaining how is not Consciousness different from the other physical processes?
Didn't understand lemme make you.
If we look at processes like Wetness,hotness or even coldness .
These can be quantified or measured.
These are dependent on something like.
Wetness on the interaction between the water and molecules with a surface like solid or anything.
Similarly, the sensation of heat or coldness is correlated with the origin or source of the temperature. If an object is heated, it will feel hot to the touch, whereas if it is cooled, it will feel cold. The correlation between the origin and the property of heat or coldness is evident in physical temperature changes.
And third .
These requires some kind of interaction or dependency on each other.
In these 3 phenomena physical process we can never fit Consciousness no matter how hard you try .
Inability to be Directly Quantified: Consciousness cannot be directly measured or quantified using the same methods employed for physical processes. While physical phenomena can be observed, measured, and studied through objective means, consciousness is inherently subjective and cannot be fully captured through external measurements alone.
Distinct Nature of Subjective Experience: Consciousness involves the subjective experience of awareness, thoughts, emotions, and perceptions. These subjective qualities cannot be reduced to or fully explained by objective physical measurements or observations. Consciousness encompasses a realm of first-person experience that differs from the objective, third-person perspective typically used to study physical phenomena.
Lack of External Dependency: Unlike other physical processes that often rely on interactions or dependencies with external objects or substances, consciousness does not require such interactions to exist. It can persist in the absence of external stimuli or sensory input. The subjective qualities of consciousness can arise and be experienced independently of immediate external influences.
For the third point the materialists may argue that Consciousness is dependent on Brain.
That's not the case in the sense I am speaking.
Like okay just like wetness comes from water but for this wetness to become wetness there was a interaction I mentioned are we observing the same kind of interaction with anything for consciousnees?
The external stimuli you may say interact with it however what about introspection, thoughts , experience.
These are not created by external stimuli and when you interact with it than only you will produce this.
These all point out to Consciousness as something different.
Consciousness is when you, the soul, is awake. From our earliest age we have mistakenly been led to believe we should get an education and become successful. Wrong. We are here for one reason, to seek the Divine and to return home to Heaven. This planet is just dirt and we have settled for playing in the mud. ........Falun Dafa
Consciousness is you, the soul.
Thank you.
Excellent..... thanks 🙏.
Very sharp analysis from McGinn.
People often misrepresent materialism. They attack some extreme forms of it like eleminative materialism or try to narrow it down to a very specific view.
It's even more funny when you see some religiously motivated people trying to attack atheism by attacking materialism. Atheism/naturalism is compatible with different views of consciousness (including idealism).
Sure, atheism is compatible with idealism. But seeing as most philosophers nowadays ascribe to some variant of materialism, it seems fair to assume most atheists presently do too. More than that, I'd imagine it's generally easier to motivate a theistic position if one is first able to reject all forms of materialism.
From our earliest age we have mistakenly been led to believe we should get an education and become successful. Wrong. We are here for one reason, to seek the Divine and to return home to Heaven. This planet is just dirt and we have settled for playing in the mud. ........Falun Dafa
@@N.Bryant Sure, it seems fair to assume most atheists are materialists. No problem with that. But it is completely mistaken to assume that by defeating materialism, you have defeated atheism. I would also say that it is easier to motivate some kind of pantheistic position rather than a theistic position by sticking to idealism.
@@jeffforsythe9514 Cringe.
@@anteodedi8937 Agreed
It's the *_two-way nature of the peripheral nervous system_* that associates physical sensation with mental states, yielding the _qualia,_ or sensorial richness, of being conscious. You can play back memories and reproduce some of the same sensations as originally experienced, especially emotions. This is what puts the "tingliness" to being alive. Not present when sedated.
Heres my opinion.. The concept of Qualia is in NO way evidence of mind/ body dualism.. Materialism can account for EVERY thought a mind has, and how information is assimilated.. Peace.
I'm thinking we agree..
But as memories age, the accuracy and meaning or emotions of that memory change too. The memory of something 1 week ago could be qualitatively very different, 20 years from now. After a week, the memory still jolts you. Twenty years from now, you may say, and feel as though, "It was nothing." Qualia morphed.
@@gooddaysahead1 I think the qualia morphed in that case due to the underlying physical deterioration of certain parts of the brain, thereby proving pazitor's point.
you are basically saying that the brain is just a tool that we use to get back emotions ...and maybe this apply to other areas too. There are millions of cases of the consciousness of people very active when sedated too ...
Understanding Reality Through a Multi-Dimensional Lens: Exploring the Navomitto Framework
The external world is a vast and intricate tapestry, teeming with complexity and nuance. Our everyday experience, however, often feels fragmented and uncertain, prompting philosophers and scientists to seek frameworks that can help make sense of reality in a more comprehensive and comprehensible manner.
One such proposal is the Navomitto framework, an intriguing conceptual model that views reality as a continuum spanning from nothingness to existence, all contained within an all-encompassing illusion. This illusion houses infinite dimensions, each representing different concepts, properties, and relationships.
In the Navomitto framework, dimensions can be understood with varying degrees of clarity through hierarchical levels known as clarions. Higher clarions offer more differentiated perspectives within each dimension, providing greater clarity. However, this increased clarity comes at the cost of losing some of the global information available at lower clarions.
Differentiation and Clarions
The process of transitioning from lower to higher clarions is called differentiation. This involves separating the superimposed information at a lower clarion into clearer but less encompassing perspectives at a higher clarion.
Clarion zero represents nothingness, where all dimensions remain undifferentiated. Clarion one is the most uncertain state of existence, where all perspectives are superimposed, and the illusion begins to take shape.
Dimensions of Consciousness
Navomitto posits that consciousness arises from multiple dimensions within the illusion:
1. Sensory dimensions - visual, auditory, tactile, etc. These provide the raw data and subjective experiences that form the content of consciousness.
2. Cognitive dimensions - thoughts, memories, ideas, concepts. These give consciousness logical structure and meaning.
3. Emotional dimension - feelings, moods, values. These provide affective tone, motivation, and flavor to consciousness. Emotional dimension emerges at lower clarions as undifferentiated feelings of pleasantness or unpleasantness, evolving to more differentiated emotions at higher clarions.
4. Volitional dimension - desires, intentions, will. This dimension directs consciousness towards goals and motivation.
These dimensions interact and give rise to perspectives within consciousness at different clarions. The clarion of one's consciousness determines how integrated and coherent one's perspectives are. Through differentiation, consciousness can ascend to higher clarions, gaining insight but never reaching absolute clarity.
Implications and Questions
The Navomitto framework raises profound questions about the nature of nothingness and existence, illusion and reality, and the hierarchical structure of our understanding. While speculative, Navomitto offers an intriguing multi-dimensional approach for mapping reality in a comprehensive yet comprehensible manner.
By exploring the Navomitto framework, we can better understand the complexities of reality and the limitations of our own perspectives. This exploration may ultimately lead to a more profound appreciation of our world and our place within it, fostering a deeper sense of humility, wonder, and curiosity.
drmora.ir/2023/04/06/navomitto/
Consciousness may be able to interpret materialism in an holistic manner different from a pure practical, physical world format.
In consciousness or a ' being with consciousness ' allow one to make Discriminating Decisions that will be different from ' time to time '/ ' places to places ' / unlike a "AI" unabled machine.. Brain or power of Neurons are VALUE ADDED by Consciousness and IT differ from person to person while the imagery of the brain may be the same..
In other words, one can always be right simply by selecting definitions of processes that confirm one's starting hypotheses.
It never seems all that clear to me what is being defined as consciousness?
Is it the state that I am aware of myself, my surroundings, thoughts and feelings?
It seems that it often means different things to different people.
What can be take away from our experience and yet still leave us being a conscious being?
We could take away feelings yet still be aware of our surroundings and thoughts.
Take away our senses such as sight, sound, touch and taste and again, we might still have internal thoughts yet without emotion, much like a robot.
It's an interesting subject to think about.
When we sleep and dream and are aware of dreaming while doing so, are we still conscious to some degree?
If we don't dream or at least remember having any, where we not conscious.
Is awareness the same as consciousness?
Yes.
excellent points. i would say consciousness is the fundamental material of existence, so to speak.. that everything emerged from consciousness. i think consciousness is infinite and has its own plasticity and can reach infinite levels (i.e sleep/meditation/out of body states etc).
@@Dion_Mustard Your definition is called, Idealism. Check it out. It's an ancient proposion from about 3000 years ago. I think pantheism is very similar, if not the same thing, with a different colored shirt.
@@Dion_MustardI would say matter is fundamental to material and conscious existence. Matter always references itself. Consciousness references something else.
@@Dion_Mustard How can consciousness be fundamental if it didn't exist for billions of years after the Big Bang?
This guy is right on the money. But I prefer the clone problem to explain it. There are many of the same building blocks (i.e. protons, electrins etc) you or I am made from all around, so if we could clone me perfectly atom-for-atom, would I be two me's - if not, what is then responsible for the me that I know I am?
Our us-ness must be tied to something which can't be counterfeited. Like a particular length of unbroken (well correlated) blockchain of memory which feedbacks on itself. The thought of merely thinking, or the remembering of remembering. Perhaps we are simply an uninterrupted oscilating area of the electromagnetic spectrum being taken on a ride with matter, and that the ride itself references the oscillation of the electromagnetic field. We are both matter and light convinced we are one single joint entity.
Study the behavioral part of the mental function also involves studying the subject inner mental representation of the reality by the subject. Study consciousness from the neuroscience perspective is the best way to find out what consciousness is.
Consciousness is simply you, the soul, when you are awake. From our earliest age we have mistakenly been led to believe we should get an education and become successful. Wrong. We are here for one reason, to seek the Divine and to return home to Heaven. This planet is just dirt and we have settled for playing in the mud. ........Falun Dafa
@@jeffforsythe9514 you forgot that we also here to receive presents from Santa Claus in Christmas and get coins from the tooth fairy when we loose a tooth 😃
The soul, you, is reading this right now, that is consciousness. The soul awake.
Totally agree with Colin here, he's just talking sense. We are currently unable to integrate our third-person scientific explanations of brains and behaviour with our first-person direct experience of our consciousness. They seem to be totally different categories of stuff - "the tug of dualism" as Dennett would say (at least he admits there is a tug, shame his attempts to resist it fail completely in my view). It bugs me when clever people pretend they can't see this problem (Sean Carroll, I'm looking at you).
The brain is merely like the cockpit of an aircraft and the pilot is the soul, you. From our earliest age we have mistakenly been led to believe we should get an education and become successful. Wrong. We are here for one reason, to seek the Divine and to return home to Heaven. This planet is just dirt and we have settled for playing in the mud. ........Falun Dafa
The brain is not conscious it is the soul from which all thought springs.......Falun Dafa
I believe every language has its own unique point of view and tends to support its own unique approach to logic. It's a way of " looking at " the world from a particular perspective. And no one speaks English better than those from a British background. That's my opinion. I like what he has to say as much as the way he says it.
Buddha said that language contains many hints for understanding the meaning of life, for example: The word conscience is the prefix con (with) and the word science, conscience.........................Falun Dafa
@@jeffforsythe9514 thumbs up for that interesting point.
McGinnis is my favorite philosopher
Consciousness or awareness observed from insde to outside and materialism that is energy observed on the outside to inside are at a phase angle of 90deg..trying to find one negates the other..just like sin and cosin..
One who experience pure consicousness will tell matter is illusion..
Brilliant! One way I can think of to tackle the mystery of phenomenal experience of our mental states is to ask what is the gain for the organism in employing qualia as opposed to keeping it a dark automaton.
It is also possible that Qualia are produced in a one-way street as a superfluous byproduct - after all we are heavily biased towards attributing qualia significance. They might not be able to feed back any causation to the system after all. In that case we wouldn't ever be able to study their nature by principle, because scientific inquiry only works in a causally closed system.
Furthermore I find it mandatory to consider, that one body might be inhabited by a large number of souls, as it were, each one of them believing that they are the only one. Split-brain experiments seem to suggest something like that.
Two comments caught my attention. "Science can only work...closed system."
Take a look at chaos theory...fascinating. Simultaneous quests for predictable biology. Found out the opposite. The time, place, and success or failure of any mutation is utterly random/unpredictable. Yet, the arc of the evolutionary process is very predictable. There's total randomness within a knowable system. Without the randomness, the whole system fails. The funny thing is culture, language, religion, and the universe works this way as well. Successful mutations in culture flourish for a time until they become brittle. Cultural entropy takes over. But while the culture grows, small bands break off and start a village. If they have the "right thing," they begin to grow... a bit different than the initial culture. Slowly, we go from Greece to Rome... from a little Jewish cult to the official religion of Rome. Amazingly, all of this is random... completely unpredictable. Think of the arts. The same thing happens, constantly, and relatively fast. Actually, everything in the universe operates this way. Unpredictable accidents are the events that sustain everything... until entropy eventually wins. But this reality keeps entropy at bay for a very long time.
The second thing? Spirits? Really?
Yes, epiphenomenalism makes sense to me. I think consciousness (including the sense of self and experience of free will) is a neat trick evolution came up with as a way of processing information to direct goal-oriented behaviour, especially social behaviour. It seems to me that the causal power lies in the information processing going on in the brain, which we can explain perfectly well with materialism, and consciousness is a necessary by-product. We don't understand yet why this type of information processing gives rise to consciousness; your point that it's the very lack of causal efficacy that makes studying this impossible is a new argument to me and I like it!
@jonstewart464 Evolution doesn't come up with neat tricks. Evolution is a trial and error variety of random mutations. They are genetic mistakes. Most of them are detrimental to survival. I'm beginning to think that Eastern philosophy is on the mark. Self, is a creation of imagination, experiences, culture, etc. There is nothing that is actually a self. Self-consciousness is being aware of a contrivance.
I am familiar with chaos theory. You are absolutely correct. There is chaos in every system. There is chaos in language development. There is chaos in cultural development. There is chaos in the development of religions. The arc of the system seems predictable, but it is filled with random events. Most of the random events fail. The few that don't fail branch out. You know, like fractals. It is impossible to predict when or where these fractals will branch off. It is impossible to predict which ones will be successful or not. It depends on their external environment, which is always changing. It really works fast in the arts.
The spirits really caught my eye. Was he talking about liquor? In that case, multiple spirits will make you very sick.
A misconceived question (like this one) cannot have a correct answer. What is “materialism”? The view that human beings are entirely material? If “entirely material” means “has no immaterial parts”, then it’s hardly informative (since there is no such thing as an “immaterial part”; the phrase is literally meaningless).
Likewise, what kind of “consciousness” does the question concern? The consciousness which we lose when we fall sound asleep or are knocked out (and which we recover when we wake up)? Or the consciousness _of_ things (like the consciousness of global warming, which we ought to increase)? It’s not as if there’s a single, univocal concept of “consciousness” (the term has a variety of related uses), as the question pretends.
Awareness is the ONLY constant of ALL experience what could be more fundamental to reality than that?
Protozoa are aware....they seek pleasure and avoid pain.
All of life is conscious, but it increases in complexity but doesn't violate the laws ,( known and unknown) of physics.
If existence exist as something what is that something, and if existence exist as all things what knows all things?
If you'd like to watch a fantastic movie about the topic of consciousness and tea drinking, find "After Yang." It is in English. It's about a family who purchases a cybernetic brother for their daughter. Obviously, the setting is in the future.
The cybernetic boy asks the father what drinking tea means to him, because the boy can't fathom meaning. The father gives a very poetic answer... I became tearful because I wished the cyber boy could experience "meaning."
It is a sad, but very moving movie that artistically communicates human meaning/consciousness.
I think asking questions about meaning and finding true meaning for yourself is a very high level of consciousness. Yes, I believe it has levels. I'm pretty sure of it.
Great film
I’m not fully convinced of the value of distinguishing internal experiences from external behaviors. It may be that the internal experience is simply a side effect of producing the external behavior.
the event 'tukdam' in taipei 2020 disproved materialism.
Voodoo death... Kurt Richter
They cut the conversation at the most interesting part - I would have asked the question how can we know that we have duplicated not just the outside but also the "inside" of being conscious in a machine?
You are a soul inside a body. Soul is consciousness. From our earliest age we have mistakenly been led to believe we should get an education and become successful. Wrong. We are here for one reason, to seek the Divine and to return home to Heaven. This planet is just dirt and we have settled for playing in the mud. ........Falun Dafa
Machines have nothing to do with consciousness, it is you, the soul.
Materialism as the Philosophy that only material things exist, is refuted by the necessity of having said matter in a location in space & time, then materialism became physicalism to include space-time, energy & information, the catagory space-ti e can include the possibility of hyperdimensionality, I favour a model where cons iousness is a subset of experience which in essence is Physicality, that subset being meta-experience, the reflexive experience of experience, but e enough with this physicalist model that doesn't prove physicalism, which is non-falsifiable, as you can't prove a negative.
Without awareness of the material which requires the existence a point of consciousness, the whole question of whether the material is or is not is moot. One can understand why some might insist that the material precedes consciousness. There can be no doubt as to which of the two is more important to the observer participating in an event.
The material world is subject to entropy. Entropy is, in a way, possibly time's biggest tell. One might wonder at what point the a conscious being might become unconscious of entropy as its biological nervous system shuts down. One might question whether this moment might almost be imagined to be like a little trans-dimensional hole in which time becomes irrelevant and that consciousness in a sort of a state of flux might create for itself another experience characterized by certain conditions which are, perhaps, subject to entropy, just like conditions are for you and me right now.
I've spent quite a lot of time at little mental playground. It's a lot of fun there. It helps awareness of a Pleroma presided over and experienced by continuous consciousness seem almost probable.
Consciousnes is outside the body -- there is ONE Consciousness between all our bodies -- 1 piece that connects all the humans and animals and computers, etc....
Sorry, consciousness resides inside the body and is you, the soul. When the soul leaves the body, the body dies but the soul reincarnates.
Looking for consciousness in the brain 🧠is like looking for the internet🌐 on your phone/device📲
That's a good analogy.
Colin clearly put time, effort and thought into such inquiries, utilizing Reason; a genuine Philosopher. People make fun of philosophers, yet - metaphysics is all about dialectic. It just seems, that people think philosophers deny science, as if they should have no business with science. The truth is, if scientists are not philosophers themselves, then they have no sentiment of value. Metaphysics is hardwork; there is no cutting corners or simply selling what is consensually accepted, and if one is satisfied with that, sooner or later, you wont be holding your own in the debate.
You still have no idea what metaphysics is. Metaphysics isn't hard work at all. Playing make believe isn't that hard at all.
I don't think that's why a scientist who doesn't respect philosophy should have no business with science. And I seriously doubt that are that many professional scientists...ie scientists who make a living doing science or credited/published scientists that reject the value and underlying service of philosophy to the field so science. And it's not for 'sentiment of value' that they do or should value philosophy. It's because without philosophy, there is no basis to do science. And don't confuse philosophy with metaphysics. Metaphysics is a part of philosophy, but philosophy isn't just metaphysics. I don't think the part of philosophy that is important to science is the metaphysical part.
Most scientists who have PhDs know that their very degree title has philosophy in it. That's what the Ph is in their PhD stands for. It's the philosophy of science. Do you know why philosophy is essential to science?
Actually materialism should be defined as anything within the measurable range of energy. Matter is within that range because it is a compact form of measurable energy. Anything beyond the measurable range of energy is immaterial, non-physical.
And regarding whether something is conscious, there is normally evidence of growth, self programming and self multiplication which is reproduction and/or the inherent capacity to do so. The above description of consciousness is how it manifests itself in the physical world.
What about unknown, unmeasurable forms of energy?
Ultimately it's all physical.
@@tomgerste1818 No, not necessarily physical. Here are a few examples that cannot be measured in physical terms: love, anger, mercy, justice and the list goes on. Why and how do these "forces" act within the physical world? What measurable fundamental physical forces, the four known forces in physics, that account for these? What force in a beaker or in a quantum wave function that accounts for them. Can you point to their wave-particle at the quantum level or at any point? Is it in a beaker in a chemical laboratory? Where is it?
@@peweegangloku6428 all of your metaphysical or psychological terms are part of the experiential neural network. Limbic structures and underlying chemistry ( and perhaps further reduced physical attributes account for each. Love is the easiest and most explained thus far, but all have physicality.
@@tomgerste1818 No serious neuroscientist will agree with your comment. There is no way that these emotions can be itemized or quantified.
Matter consists of particles, the smallest that we can perceive today are neutrinos and quarks. The smaller each particle is, the more energy it contains. If we had a powerful enough microscope we would see that the size of matter particles decreases thousands of more times. each particle containing more and more energy. Thoughts exist at one level and are visible to enlightened being. That is just the beginning of the wisdom of Falun Dafa.
*Third Attempt:* Consciousness equals self-aware information. *Example:* Take the number *1* for instance. The number 1 at its earliest stage is simply raw information. It's _"one of something,"_ but there is no "something" associated with it yet. Then the number 1 evolves into physical matter as a single proton (hydrogen) via Big Bang. Now we officially have "one of something," but does this represent the total amount of data that can be extracted from the number 1? ... No!
The next stage of evolution for the number *1* is to evolve from a physical _"one of something"_ (hydrogen) into something that actually _comprehends_ what it is to be the number 1 (self-awareness). This is why we all feel so "unique."
We are sentient, self-aware manifestations of the number *1.*
Both are needed for our species to go up and out. At the moment we are completely out of balance... the more out of balance we are the less likely we are to get to what could be next. Thousands, millions of us have experienced things in life that no materialistic scientist could ever hope to explain within their current paradigm of thought. Easier for them to dismiss than risk having their reality shifted and shaken.
Matter consists of particles, the smallest that we can perceive today are neutrinos and quarks. The smaller each particle is, the more energy it contains. If we had a powerful enough microscope we would see that the size of matter particles decreases thousands of more times. each particle containing more and more energy. Thoughts exist at one level and are visible to enlightened being. That is just the beginning of the wisdom of Falun Dafa.
Why is it so difficult to explain consciousness objectively? Most of us assume that we are being objective, but we are not.
You know most of us? Consciousness is simply you, the soul, when you are awake, voila.
@@jeffforsythe9514 when we each define what consciousness is from our own experience then the difference is obvious
@@ZENTEN7777 Defining consciousness is like saying that a tree can be defined. A tree is a tree, and consciousness is the primordial soul. Fact.
1:14 ... matter itself is undermined materialism in the classical understanding because materialism was closely tied to mechanism a mechanism has been refuted by physicas time and time again so just as electromagnetism refuted materialism as it was understood in classical time consciousness also refutes it but that's matter that is to say electromagnetism is refuting materialism so there must be some other sense of materialism which is being questioned by consciousness and that's a difficulty to understand what that might be that further sense of materialism difficutly is always if you interpret materialism in a narrow sense and tie it to our current knowledge it seems empirically false if you widen it to include anything that might be discovered by the sciences then it just seems empty because you know it may tell you trivially true I suppose in the end physics decides it has to make irreducible use of mental states then they'll be mental. (right) 2:11 3:33 ... I think because they interpret the word consciousness in a different way from the way you and I and most people interpret it they always mean by consciousness the functions that are performed by a conscious being so they'll talk about the function of discriminating between one thing and another that's their version of what it is perceive something to see something and 3:51
Finally, something intelligent said about Consciousness. 👏 It would also be better to stop talking about "conscious states," as that conflates States of Experience, such as waking dream, and deep sleep, with Consciousness. We are aware of those States because they are "objects" of Consciousness. Those States come and go, but Consciousness remains.
Consciousness does not remain the same it changes like everything else we experience.
@@saigopala What is consciousness when I'm not conscious? Of course it doesn't 'change' consciousness, it just means I'm not conscious and if I 'come to' that means somehow consciousness, whatever it is, returns. Consciousness didn't 'go anywhere' it is just for that time, I wasn't. In that regard it is like and unlike life itself. Life is...life. When something is alive it just is. When it dies, it's not or is no longer alive. Life doesn't change, just the bodies 'state' which is/was alive. Instead of consciousness having states, isn't it the case that consciousness IS a state?
@@saigopala I have not changed the definition of consciousness. Consciousness is created by the bz
@@saigopala I have not changed the definition of consciousness I stated what is consistent with observations that consciousness changes. There was no older definition of consciousness that said consciousness does not change. Some people believed consciousness was unchanging while others believed consciousness changed. Consciousness does change from moment to moment we just have a feeling of continuity because we are able to remember the past.
@@saigopala The players in a move aren't affected by the movie, they are part of the movie, but nothing the movie does affects them in a feed back way. Does this view of consciousness allow for consciousness causing anything...does it do any work.
The smallest particle of matter is a fusion of spirits coming from the spiritual world of the Conscious Holy Spirit.
In the beginning is the "WORD", not coming from man's vocal chords, but coming from the vibration of spirits that had fused the Physical Universe as designed by the Holy Spirit.
We are conscious because our souls are free splits of the Holy Spirit. We are just temporarily residing inside our material brain for a chance of salvation through faith.
Religious jibberish.
@@tomgerste1818 Religion could be the reason why your loving mom allowed you to be born.
@@evaadam3635 could be, but alas not. A malicious gawd is never given the credit it deserves...only the cherry picked favorable outcomes. Malicious gawd might be the reason for childhood cancer and starvation.
@@tomgerste1818 Men's imperfect interpretations of a loving God through preachings, or through religious books, is not a logical basis to think or conclude that there is no God or to think that God is malicious.
The truth out there is independent from whatever men wrote on any religious book.
@@evaadam3635 serious mumbo jumbo. Try speaking of the real world and not a fictitious one that is full of words with no actuality. Spirits??? Are these subatomic particles or electromagnetic waves? Do you believe in ghosts 👻
If existence exist as something what is that something, and if existence exist as all things what knows all things?
LOOKING FOR CONSCIOUSNESS ITSELF REQUIRES (ASSUMES) CONSCIOUNESS / A CONSCIOUS ACTIVITY , OF LOOKING .
Consciousness is not a substance. It is a set of temporal relations between functions.
Does that make you a soulless ape or a soulless robot?
@@deanodebo What is a soul? Also, no one needs a soul to be a human. This is just an ad hominem. Are you an ape or robot if there is no soul?
@@CMVMic
You answered a question with a loaded question. If there’s no universe are you a robot? See? I reject your if statement
@@deanodebo i didnt answer your nonsensical question, I ignored it. I too reject your false dichotomy. Two can play this game really.
@@CMVMic
Actually I figured from your comment that:
1. You don’t believe you have a soul
2. You believe you’re simply a biological animal or essentially a biological machine.
So correct me if I made a bad assumption
Can something empathize with my internal state? If the answer is, yes, then maybe that's consciousness. Can something worry about the meaning of its existence? If the answer is, yes, I think that narrows things down.
Anthropologists are finding signs of ritual objects at Neanderthal burial sites, and other members of the genus, homo, as far back as 300K years ago. What does this say about consciousness. I think this is a puzzlement.
You are a soul and when you are awake it is called being conscious.
@jeffforsythe9514 No, you are a person, and whenever you become conscious, you will realize that gods are human creations. We had to do it. We're scared or egomaniacal or both.
@@gooddaysahead1 Not me, I am Blessed.
Colin was interesting and did a good job with the same arguments we always hear.. With respect, not ONE of them came close to defeating materialism.. The gentleman was misinformed on a few important points, one being that the EM field itself defeats materialism.. There are various lines of real evidence to support philosophical materialism and conversely, ZERO evidence to support mystical and supernatural ideas like dualism.. Peace.
Your claim requires that we should have a complete definition of nature in its entirety. Failing that, a word such as "supernatural" is meaningless since we don't know what "natural" means. When physicists barely understand only 4% of energy and matter in the Universe a complete definition of nature seems a long way off.
@MauriceLavenant You don't make any sense, friend.. your first assumption is certainly odd..
@@Bill..N "Supernatural" can only be defined in relation to a clear and complete definition of "natural", which we do not have. That being the case, the use of such concept/process as "supernatural" is vague and meaningless. Any physical singularity, including the Big Bang and black holes, could be labelled as "supernatural" since physicists do not have any natural explanations for them (I.E. all the known laws of physics break down).
I almost thought he disproved his point with that one. Indeed, what most think of as 'material' they often confuse with something like tangible as in you can walk over and touch it/pick it up and depend on it more or less behaving the say way all the time. But when we get to the quantum level, we (apparently) see that it's not so obvious what tangible even means since atoms are mostly vacant space with a field surrounding a nucleus. And when two 'atoms' seem to touch, nothing is actually touching...just a field. But we have no reason to say that field/force is not physical. We just don't understand it. So with that backdrop, it seems consciousness is among those really puzzling aspects of the physical world that we haven't and indeed may never fully understand. But that doesn't automatically mean 'non' physical is a better explanation or even an explanation at all. Before someone leaps from the material/physical to describe anything we experience, we'd have to first define the physical world fully and THEN define whatever is not physical and explain/determine why IT is a better explanation. From my POV, what consciousness is is a total mystery and I'll take on something akin to faith that it all boils down to or emerges from the physical world. I see no reason to assume anything else.
@@Samsara_is_dukkha "Your claim requires that we should have a complete definition of nature in its entirety. "
Maybe I don't know what claim of the post to which you responded you are referring to. And maybe I miss the entire point of your response. I think the underlying motive for many is that want to squeeze in/posit/allude to something OTHER than the physical or material for ulterior motives...ie they want to justify a god belief. If that is misunderstanding the direction you're going, then maybe my thoughts don't apply.
But, I think it's the other way around. I assume the physical world exists...I take it on faith for want of a better basis. With that as a back drop, someone who wants to posit that something else exists would have to first fully define nature in its entirety to show that it can't be the 'explanation' for whatever conundrum we're facing, and then fully define the other thing, whatever it is, that they want to posit as the explanation that the natural world can't explain. You are right that we barely understand 4% of the matter/energy of the universe so a complete definition is a long way off. But that argues against leaping to other assumptions not requiring that these other assumptions should be embraced UNTIL nature/the physical world/material is fully defined.
If I ask a powerful AI system, "What do I think about while I drink tea?" It would be impossible for it to know. I could be thinking about tea growing in China. I could be thinking about smelling my grandma's tea, 50 years ago. But my wife could know that I am wistful and thoughtful when I drink tea, so she is quietly drinking her tea, without asking me to do dishes (which I will do 15 minutes later).
enjoy your tea friend.
That is a very interesting way to think about the matter, really insightful
@@MrGabrucho Thank you 🙏
@@MrGabrucho If you'd like to watch a fantastic movie about this exact topic, of consciousness and tea drinking, find "After Yang." It is in English. It's about a family who purchases a cybernetic brother for their daughter. Obviously, the setting is in the future.
The cybernetic boy asks the father what drinking tea means to him, because he can't fathom meaning. The father gives a very poetic answer... I became tearful because I wished the cyber boy could experience "meaning."
It is a sad, but very moving movie that artistically communicates human meaning/consciousness.
I think asking questions about meaning and finding true meaning for yourself is a very high level of consciousness. Yes, I believe it has levels. I'm pretty sure of it.
Then that AI system is not powerful enough 😊 None of our current "AI" systems are really intelligent, in the sense that they don't learn from experience in real time. A proper AI can not only learn what you like to do while you drink your tea, but would know why it is very important for you to not be interrupted because maybe it doesn't like being interrupted while it is thinking deeply about something. In fact, we also need to learn what such an advanced AI likes to do and feels if it is convinced that it is conscious 🙂 An advanced AI would also know why you don't like doing the dishes and may be offer to help😅
Looking for consciousness in the brain is like lifting the hood of a car and expecting to find the driver.☮️
That what you are saying is just rubbish and you do not even know it.
Very poor analogy. Too many reasons to even explain.
not sure i understand the analogy. nevertheless, from personal experience of having countless out of body experiences i can tell you now that consciousness does NOT wholly reside in the brain.
@@Dion_Mustardhallucinations. All you have is your experience, no evidence.
@@carlosenriquegonzalez-isla6523and exactly what do you know, besides insulting?
A mirage doesn't defeat water. It just looks like water and anyone who thinks there's water there is a fool.
Can you make Colin say ‘Hello, Clarice’ next time you interview him?
Yes. With a threat of violence if he doesn't. 😮
With the proper reinforcement contingencies.
consiousness is part of materialism....like universe from the begining is structured but some idiots trying to prove it is unstructured and then begins all the shitty ideas of consiousness.Laws of universe or physics is real and noone can break that including consiousness
Oh boy... I keep saying there is no materialism! Everything is a product of, by, and for the consciousness. But of course I can't prove it
There is no need to prove it, it is self evident; hence self awareness.
Proof is contigent upon awareness not the other way around, as is all reality, past, present and future.
The last frontier is consciousness&awareness..not Space. You can see that allready from technology. The James Webb and other space telescopes to scan the Universe, but can we as easely look back at the cause, the origin of awareness, by means of technology?! The answer is no.
Colin McGinn is just superb. There is so much to absorb here - in just his opening moves, like his point about how materialism has long ago defeated materialism (ie. the “mechanistic” version of materialism). This point alone dispenses with mountains of crap from self-styled “realists” who are simply inadvertently repeating a naive 18th century mechanism that has been outdated since Einstein and Bohr . . . Yet these modern day mechanists have an outsized influence on scientifically minded people who regard themselves as modern thinkers. But what they don’t realize they have never left the 19th century!
The mechanism version of materialism has not been used since the 1800s.
@@kos-mos1127 The mechanism version of materialism has not been used in * scientific * circles, but it is referenced all the time popularly. In fact, in my experience this is the dominant view . . .
@@hamiltonpaul73examples please
@@hamiltonpaul73 That is what I said science moved to the dynamic system
form of materialism.
@@9snaga To give one example familiar to the “Closer to Truth” series, brain researchers will often claim that consciousness is accounted for entirely by the brain. Their model for consciousness is clearly mechanistic . . . I suspect the brain is necessary, but not sufficient to explain consciousness . . . The mechanistic view did not work for matter and I don’t think it is going to be sufficient to explain consciousness - which is a more difficult problem.
It was Never a War between conscioussness and matérialisme everything has its own value but materialism Can Never be the whole reality cause a madness materialism will be certainly a human being's self destruction.
Materials sometimes fail.
Knowledge can only be acquired by tethering its search to the purpose of satisfying the needs of all beings.
And the only immediately accessible entity that sustains 100% of all life in the entire known universe is PLANTS.
The air we breathe and the food we eat (even all flesh) originate from them. All our thoughts, hence also consciousness have to be sourced through them.
So if we restrict our search for knowledge to discovering the mathematical model of the mechamism how particle interactions inside the earth compose seeds, water and fertilizers to develop plants on its surface for delivering and sustaining beings through them, we'd be able to derive the answers to all these questions as subfunctions of that model.
Beings (animals and humans) must be viewed as RCD (Remote Control Devices) that are delivered by the earth to steer its own internal function in such a way that SATISFACTION OF THE NEEDS OF BEINGS COINCIDES WITH PRODUCTIVE FUNCTIONING OF THE INTERIOR OF THE EARTH ITSELF.
PRODUCTIVE, thereby, must be understood literally as generation of new particles by the center of the earth.
Thus nature has a definite purpose. The first, second and third laws of thermodynamics MUST be substituted by:
1) Matter can only be generated but never destroyed.
2) The purpose of life function is to increase the quantity of matter in the universe.
3) Satisfaction of the needs of all beings coincides with productive functioning of the interior of the earth.
The third law facilitates the ultimate balancing of the equations.
HENCE THE ARROW OF TIME IS STEERABLE TO COTINUE REDUCING ENTROPY BY OUR OWN ACTIVITIES ETERNALLY
= OUR OWN PRODUCTIVE ACTIVITIES CAN RENDER THE EARTH A PERPETUUM MOBILE.
Modern Quantum Physics has shown that reality is based on probability:
A statistical impossibility is defined as “a probability that is so low as to not be worthy of mentioning. Sometimes it is quoted as 1/10^50 although the cutoff is inherently arbitrary. Although not truly impossible the probability is low enough so as to not bear mention in a Rational, Reasonable argument." The probability of finding one particular atom out of all of the atoms in the universe has been estimated to be 1/10^80. The probability of just one (1) functional 150 amino acid protein chain forming by chance is 1/10^164. It has been calculated that the probability of DNA forming by chance is 1/10^119,000. The probability of random chance protein-protein linkages in a cell is 1/10^79,000,000,000. Based on just these three cellular components, it would be far more Rational and Reasonable to conclude that the cell was not formed by un-directed random natural processes. Note: Abiogenesis Hypothesis posits that un-directed random natural processes, i.e. random chance formation, of molecules led to living organisms. Natural selection has no effect on individual atoms and molecules on the micro scale in a prebiotic environment. (*For reference, peptides/proteins can vary in size from 3 amino acid chains to 34,000 amino acid chains. Some scientists consider 300-400 amino acid protein chains to be the average size. There are 42,000,000 protein molecules in just one (1) simple cell, each protein requiring precise assembly. There are approx. 30,000,000,000,000 cells in the human body.)
Of all the physical laws and constants, just the Cosmological Constant alone is tuned to a level of 1/10^120; not to mention the fine-tuning of the Mass-Energy distribution of early universe which is 1/10^10^123. Therefore, in the fine-tuning argument, it would be more Rational and Reasonable to conclude that the multi-verse is not the correct answer. On the other hand, it has been scientifically proven numerous times that Consciousness does indeed collapse the wave function to cause information waves of probability/potentiality to become particle/matter with 1/1 probability. A rational and reasonable person could therefore conclude that the answer is consciousness.
A "Miracle" is considered to be an event with a probability of occurrence of 1/10^6. Abiogenesis, RNA World Hypothesis, and Multiverse would all far, far, far exceed any "Miracle". Yet, these extremely irrational and unreasonable hypotheses are what some of the world’s top scientists ‘must’ believe in because of a prior commitment to a strictly arbitrary, subjective, biased, narrow, limiting, materialistic ideology / worldview.
Every idea, number, concept, thought, theory, mathematical equation, abstraction, qualia, etc. existing within and expressed by anyone is "Immaterial" or "Non-material". The very idea or concept of "Materialism" is an immaterial entity and by it's own definition does not exist. Modern science seems to be stuck in archaic, subjective, biased, incomplete ideologies that have inadequately attempted to define the "nature of reality" or the "reality of nature" for millennia. A Paradigm Shift in ‘Science’ is needed for humanity to advance. A major part of this Science Paradigm Shift would be the formal acknowledgment by the scientific community of the existence of "Immaterial" or "Non-material" entities as verified and confirmed by observation of the universe and discoveries in Quantum Physics.)
Damn it bro.
But what's your theory on Consciousness.
Non local or it emerges from brain?
no, consciousness does not defeat materialism.
it does because is a necessary presence for matter to have a meaning ... if a matter thing cannot be felt by a conscious agent then is totally irrelevant .
From my own personal experiences (and once skeptic), I have had numerous 'Out of Body Experiences' throughout my adult hood, and I can tell you now that my consciousness/awareness expanded beyond my body. It's hard to explain it UNTIL you experience it yourself. There are techniques you can try in order to induce this. My 'OBEs' drew me into a reality more real than the current one I am in at the moment. Everything was ULTRA real and I was able to travel to certain locations in what seemed like a second of time. After years of these experiences I have no doubt that consciousness is fundamental and is not limited to the body. This has something to do with Quantum Entanglement and non-local duality.
How did you objectively determine that your OBE experiences were real, or more real?
@@brothermine2292 good question. well firstly, compared to my current reality which obviously feels "real", my OBEs felt considerably more real than this feeling of "realness"..so the experience was ULTRA ULTRA real, beyond anything I could put into words, and secondly, and I guess more significantly, I was able to think of a location and I went there. As well as thinking of someone who had died and just like that they appeared. My Grandma who died at 90 appeared to me in this Lucid state and she was as clear as day. We had a conversation and I just knew it was her and not a figment of my imagination.
It's really something you have to experience to understand.
That simple.
You should consult a professional before you get worst
@@carlosenriquegonzalez-isla6523 not sure what you mean.
@@Dion_Mustard : You're basing your belief on a feeling, which isn't objective. The brain can produce a feeling called "certitude" that can fool people into believing a false idea is true. Also, the brain is capable of producing dream states and schizophrenic states that seem real while the person is dreaming or having a schizophrenic episode, so it's not a stretch to imagine a brain can also produce states such as you've described.
Humans are hybrids... of matter and spirit....
*Does consciousness defeat 'materialism!' Huh? Does an ''outhouse'' defeat a ''toilet''?" (Voila!) (*It's integrated SCIENCE!*)
i think that also consciousness defeat materialism because consciousness is clearly a necessity in whatever reality . A reality without an agent without perceptions is basically not existent .
But what IS consciousness? Just saying it's non-material doesn't say what it is. That's just saying what it isn't.
@@rizdekd3912 Consciousness is what makes "something" perceive/feel/experience the reality around itself allowing also to adapt/react to it. if its just an "illusion" created by matter then was not a necessity... But to me is clearly a necessity, feeling what there is around you is a necessity
@@francesco5581 I agree with your first sentence. That says what consciousness does, but what IS it...what is its foundational substance? Just saying it's nonmaterial...which is what I assume the phrase 'consciousness defeat[s] materialism' is implying...doesn't really say what it IS.
But as to the rest of your comment, I am not familiar with all who talk about what consciousness is, so I don't know what everyone is saying. But are there those who are saying or implying it's 'just and illusion created by matter,' or is that how you think it just must be IF consciousness is a product of physical (material) brains? I am not sure why we would refer to it as an illusion, just because it emerges or is a product of matter.
Why couldn't it be a necessity of life just because or even if it might be a product of the natural world? IOW, I agree that for a complex life form (one with multiple cells or multiple components that have to work together to survive and reproduce) to exist there has to be a coordinating feature. I'd call that feature consciousness or at least, in lower animals, a precursor to consciousness. So whatever it is, it does work and is not 'just an illusion.'
Whatever the explanation for consciousness, for it to make sense to me, it would have to also explain what I assume is consciousness in many other animals.
Does Colin believe in ghosts?
The answer to this question is no.
No, it does not.
No
Yes
With the lord we are ONE
🙄 we are also one with Santa?
If God is unarguably the most important issue in all our lives and you don't know the creator of the creation exists is because the cult wants you ignorant believing in the impossible to hurt you. Atheism is blind faith in the impossible, the belief inmune to arguments that all reality is the universe. Would you memorize a logical fallacy to preserve knowledge and not lie to innocent and vulnerable children? Atheism is a logical fallacy that assumes God is the religious idea of the creator of the creation to conclude wrongly no creator exists because a particular idea of God doesn’t exist. The atheist logical fallacy would test your IQ and honesty and the error in reasoning is easy to understand being honest and impossible lying to oneself. Innocent and vulnerable children would be good judges and would understand who wants to hurt and deceive them. The proof that atheism is a logical fallacy is that atheists ask to prove that the creator of the creation is God, when God is whatever created the creation by definition! The proof that atheism is a logical fallacy is that atheists consider debunking the religious idea of God proof that God doesn’t exist. If you believe the idea of God is fantasy or dogma of faith that belongs to religion is because the cult deceived you manipulating the information. The idea of God belongs to philosophy or rational thinking and all societies have an understanding of the intelligent creator of the creation, that atheists don't believe exists. Atheists commit the atheist fallacy everywhere always because they believe God is sky daddy and don't believe God exists, and they are wrong because they believe. The question "does God exist?" means "does the creator of the creation exist?" and doesn't mean what atheists want you to believe it means. Atheists can not live a moral life because atheism is a lie that harms innocent and vulnerable children. To end the war in Ukraine the discovery that atheism is a logical fallacy has to be news. The censorship is killing your own innocent and vulnerable children and lying and obstructing the truthful information that saves lives is murder in God's eyes, that know all because is literally all reality. Life is not joke that was created from nothing like atheists believe and everything we do has an effect on God.
Dr. Hannibal Lecter is a bright guy
Why can't I edit my comment, bad design yet again
Consciousness is the last bastion of the religious and woodo spiritualists. Since they and their religious claims and superstitions have been comprehensively defeated with the advance of scientific enlightenment and reason. In the process of retreat and for defense they have clinged onto the remnants of ancient eastern spiritual woowoo
sorry i disagree. i have never been religious in my life, nor spiritual, yet during periods of meditation and sleep states, I had ultra real out of body experiences. until you have these experiences yourself, you really cannot judge these things or make such ridiculous insulting comments.
i suggest you try meditation and techniques to induce out of body experiences then come back and re-write your above statement. and religion has NOTHING to do with it. this has everything to do with consciousness.
@@Dion_Mustard The comment u made doesn't apply to me cause I was a harcore idealist and spiritual follower of mystics like jk, rupert spira for years.
All it takes is rigorous objectivity and trying to falsify the things that u want to believe in to come to right conclusions.
@@Raj0520 well you are wrong. end of.
Wise words my friend
@@Dion_Mustard This is the kind of reply u expect from somebody who prefers intellectual laziness and instinctive beliefs over objective reasoning and questioning.
Awareness is known by awareness alone; is the sole irriducible axiom of reality. To put forth a syllable to the contrary is but to concede.
Consciousness{1} uses the Brain[2] to control the Body(3). 1 2 3
Nope, the brain controls everything. The illusion of consciousness is a by product.
Consciousness is you, a soul.
@@jeffforsythe9514 another believer of ghosts.
I am seeking a sponsor for a book I have written on the profound topic of Consciousness. This book aims to delve into the depths of human understanding, surpassing any previous attempts to explicitly explain the nature of consciousness, its evolution, our current state, and its future trajectory.
Your investment is secure, as you will not be required to spend a single penny if you are not completely satisfied with the content and insights presented within the book.
I kindly request that only serious individuals contact me, particularly those with a background in philosophy, as I believe their perspectives will greatly contribute to the profound exploration of consciousness. While I appreciate the contributions of scientists, my intention is to approach this subject through a philosophical lens.
Throughout this book, I have formulated a philosophy guided by the principle that every question holds the potential to be answered. It is my firm belief that within the pages of this work, readers will find thought-provoking answers to their deepest inquiries.
Erroneous. The book shall not offer what is claimed as the subject matter is not profound nor does life require understanding. Your comment is a product of lexical disassociation. As language stratifies thought, so evolution stratifies life. I created a blueprint (describing all components, ready to build) Which replicates my cognitive potential, which is not informed by reason or insight but an expression of being alive . If you "think in words" the operational expedience bypasses recognition of causal incoherence. Every living human can replicate their faculties unless they chose to pursue truth (false differentiation) rather than serve life here . Belief cannot be exhibited beyond the declarative format, thus cannot be subjectively associated to faculty , not can an incomprehensible being be a viable typological structure.... This is known to any child within minutes of musing upon epistemology. Humans have made no attempt to understand reality, only measure it, for indexing (evolution). We can't invent brain structures, the claim that we invented language is not only evolution denial, it evidences that science is insincere and has not been earnestly attempted. As a child I modelled possible mathematical expressions of DNA, before hearing of evolution, it wasn't a prediction, it wasn't insight or intellect but because this language is blatently an evolutionary form and the way we measure is unimaginative , and of course fits . Of course, as a life I don't care about trophies , but the scientific community has little avenue for communication beyond absurd posturing. I advise that you write a motivational book instead, the usual human bs, because consciousness is no mystery, scientists are simply playing dress-up. Inventions are products of evolution, the clowns screeching "come get Nobel" or "so sky daddy did it?" Are practically catatonic. They are equivalent to a bird building a nest and then admiring its own geniosity, there is no reason, only profound confidence.
Hello @ZahraLowzley,
I want to provide you with an update regarding my previous post.
I received responses from people interested in potentially collaborating with me on the project.
This enthusiastic response highlights the intriguing nature of the concept I am exploring.
The book will fall into the genre of science fiction.
It’s not just about potentially engaging readers, but also about leaving a lasting impact on the world of literature.
With talented individuals expressing interest in collaboration, we have the opportunity to create a story that pushes the boundaries of imagination and explores the true nature of reality in science fiction form.
You can expect to receive a copy by the middle of next year, which will allow you to evaluate its contents for yourself and form your judgment.
It is worth considering that if Charles Darwin had contacted people to discuss the book on evolution he was writing, they might have been dismissive because they thought they already had complete knowledge. God created everything as it is.
This reminds us of the importance of keeping an open mind. Even over the next million years, new discoveries and knowledge will continue to emerge.
I appreciate your position, you can join us if you wish, together we have the opportunity to contribute to the ever-changing world of literature.
@@MrHelkeys My loyalty is to life. When I was born until now I have never pursued a meaning to life or purpose because I live here, billions of us do. My book is an apology , and a definition of life, a very simple mechanism which doesn't require knowledge. "God" has no parameters, it exists in your head as all, everything, almighty . You came here, saw life, and demanded more , stratified life . There is no religious text which does not expressly warn you what happens if you pursue knowledge of good and evil, you see enemies where there are none . I do not see individuals, only your decision to ignore what life and God is, undifferentiated. You want heaven? Paradise? God? It's here, You made it , split into billions of pieces just as you demanded , here to suffer , to be alone. Everything wasnt meaningful enough for you. Heaven is a paradox for life . I couldn't be in heaven , I would stand invisible beside you for eternity because you might be alone . Humans don't even have a word for the opposite of lonely because it isn't useful . I will tell you the meaning of life right now. The big answer . For a moment we exist here together , you can know nothing, be utterly lost , have nothing , completely unsuccessful because you are my meaning, life. I cannot differentiate , I'm loyal to no group , I am ashamed that any human in the past, now, and forever has been ignored . Understand, I am not an athiest , I am not a thiest , your worth is not based on what you find to be true , what you believe, I am alone with no community because I refuse to divide our home . I really can model evolution without any gaps , but no scientist will be allowed to use my words to attack someone's hope , even if that person identifies me as a godless evil . My book is a mathematical proof that I understand nothing because I don't want to be defined as insightful or rational but as the standard of ignorance , the human without learning, without have to be intelligent. As you can see, all I have said must be insincere, but I will evidence it, I will die as a verified clueless , worthless , useless person, but undeniably not driven by reward or acclaim but proof that humans do exist who want nothing more than a friend.
What he really wants is to believe that human consciousness is special and will survive the death of the body. Fear is what drives this quest. We didn't exist then we did and then we won't. We are animals. Consciousness is a process that ends when our bodies die. This time is all we have. Now.
not sure it's as simple as that. many people do not fear death , whatsoever, and describing consciousness as a process that ends when our bodies die, is just a meaningless statement. there is certainly no evidence brain produces consciousness.
@@Dion_Mustard Is the statement 'there is certainly no evidence the brain produces consciousness' just another way (or your way) of saying the brain does not produce consciousness?
If so, what does produce consciousness and why couldn't a computer ever be conscious? Or do you think a computer could become conscious since it isn't dependent on a brain?
@@rizdekd3912 consciousness is fundamental.
Materialism defeats consciousness when you die. 😢
As far as our consciousness knows, yes. lol
Kinda sad ^(
That’s nothing but a belief just like those who believe in an afterlife. Materialism is also entirely faith based. Matter is a concept conceived by mind alone and then assumed to be more than the idea that it is, it's assumed to actually be independent and primary despite it's entire model being born of mind. All you materialists fall at the first hurdle, you don’t even know how many of your beliefs are based on assumptions you take as fact.
@@ProjectMoff A rock on earth is still matter even if there were no consciousness on earth that could perceive it as such.
@@ProjectMoff
I understand your denial. Sometimes I try to deny it too. But it's more than an assumption that biological entities like ourselves die and the body dissolves back into the cycle of Nature while our truly impressive consciousness intelligence evaporates into Nothingness. I know that seems absurd, impossible, yet all the evidence points to that being true. I just accept it. Others erect defense mechanisms. I don't blame them. The reality is harsh and sad. Thank you.
Awareness is known by awareness alone.
Guys abstrac conscience on materialism reality though conscience. He shows absurd miticism in his conscience prooceeding. Rambling gibberich . No sense anď baseless phich evidence
Semantic exercise for bored housewives and couch potatoes . Looks like auto-suggestion therapy
Someday a far-advanced neuroscience will deconstruct consciousness on a first person level, exposing the magic for magician's tricks, and there are some who fear that day.
Oh so the materialists are hoping for that day without any idea lol.
No need to hope. Materialists just don't believe in fairy tales, the supernatural, ghosts or spirits. Go ahead if you want, the collection plates love you.
@@tomgerste1818 But the materialists hope for that day like the above guy.
@@LOGICALGUY-jm5fu it's more logical than believing in ghosts and spirits.
@@tomgerste1818 Without any idea very logical.
What a reasoning you have
Consciousness is unnecessary for survival.
What?
Consciousness may not be necessary for survival, but it certainly aids in survival. For example, it helps you process the information of a predator coming at you and in your decision to escape the predator to live long enough to pass on your genes.
@@browngreen933 p-zombies can do the same
@@dimaniak
Are p-zombies real zombies or Hollywood zombies? Totally different things.
Without consciousness no-one would care whether they survived or not. The concept of survival wouldn't exist. The concept of separate objects in a 3 dimensional space wouldn't exist.
You may disagree but without consciousness you wouldn't exist to disagree with anything.
You didn't think this through, did you.
If reality were only material- there would be no systems, no time, no motion, and no differences- and also no consciousness, because consciousness being purely material would be no different than the material that surrounds it . There would be no contrast for knowledge learning and love.
Nonsense entirely. Reality is only the material world and all of that stuff exists just fine within it. Consciousness is nothing more than chemistry.
@@Gnaritas42 but all the things in between what you would call differences can be reduced to material objects too. And so in a purely material universe, nothing can be different, and there can be no systems or contrast because the borders in between contrast can themselves be reduced to material objects to the point where everything is the same. The fact that everything appears different to us tells you that there are contrasts between metaphysical and physical reality.
@@MrSanford65 Well, metaphysical reality has no evidence, so ...
@@MrSanford65 you have no idea what you're talking about and very little ability to reason. What you just said was stupid as hell, all things are material and they most certainly can be differentiated. Your inability to understand macro scale separation is not a limitation of the universe, but of your small mind. Just because we can zoom in and see that everything is made from atoms doesn't mean we can't say my arm and the air around it are different things. You are not smart, you might think you are, you're trying very hard to sound "deep", but guy, you're not.
Ideas are meta-physical, they still correspond to physical reality as those ideas are made from the states and actions of neurons in a dance of chemical reactions. There is nothing that isn't part of the physical world, including all meta-physical notions.
@@MrSanford65 Why can't things be different in a 'purely material' universe? What do you mean by material? A materialist doesn't think that only tangible things exist. He also thinks intangible things exist but they emerge and are dependent on material things. I don't know if that's true, but I have no reason to doubt it. And how does the fact 'everything appears different to us' (whatever that means) tell us that there are contrasts between metaphysical and physical reality?
The simple answer is... no it doesnt.
It's all nonsense, reality is what it is. And it's not material.
there are infinite levels of reality, not just one, so to speak.
@@Dion_Mustard It's one reality which contains infinite levels, but fundamentally it's one and the same namely consciousness in itself
Consciousness undermining materialism is just the wishful thinking of those with a religious instinct...
rubbish. ignore religion for a moment, the bigger question is..what is consciousness? is consciousness an emergent property of neurons OR is it fundamental and "non-local"? i am not sure i stand by the usual scientific paradigm that consciousness is just a product of a complex neuronal system in the brain. so where do we stand now?
Materialism undermining faith is just wishful thinking for those with a materialistic instinct
@@Dion_MustardIt is just the last bastion of the human instinct to believe in the supernatural and woodoo mysticism.
all 10yos are physicalists.
all 10yos lack a method of rigorously observing their mind.
physicalists use their folk introspection and the inconsistencies that go along with it as a basis for their church-like worship in the metaphysics of physicalism.
@@Raj0520 Just like ai becoming conscious the woodo of scientific mysticism one day.
Such questions as 'does consciousness defeat materialism' is absolutely incorrect and quite telling. There is no physics and metaphysics; there is no science and then theology; there is no spiritual and then material. We make up these divisions, due to our conditioned state, erroneously thinking it will help us understand or discover some kind of truth. Materialism is coarse, gross, dross and is unrefined, is inert - the lowest state. Light is pure, subtle, formless its form, beyond refinement, at rest.
Everything that modern science teaches, looking without being the direction, in hopes of discovering such knowledge, for meaning perhaps or what have you, is antithesis to the real Knowledge, and is counter-intuitive. There is no spirit and then material. They made it up. And such an outset will surely lead one astray.
The entirety of the consensus of todays modern science is contemptible - nobody real Knows, and everybody just going along, nobody wants to rock the boat.
Does ice defeat water? Or does steam defeat ice?
I actually know what you are thinking. I know I can read your mind because you let me do it. I understand symbolic references.
Jun 25, 1006
I'll save you some time, no it doesn't. Consciousness is a product of chemistry, nothing more.
Nothing more than describe all it's properties in one go.