After Skool's animated video with Sheldrake's talk: th-cam.com/video/y9pTbMoufp4/w-d-xo.html Watch all the Holberg Debates here: holbergprize.org/en/en/holberg-prize/holberg-debate
Biological Or chemistry YES! ((Sub-atomic)) wasn't mensure! And yes you can build microwaves and sub-atomic particle guns to disrrupt your Gama and alfa waves driving you crazy! So do good things with that like ''telequinesis'' ''telapathy'' and alcalinization of our water bodyes NO cause nobody want this ((skillsets)) cause they would be call squizofrenic or other label easy to discart
Sheldrake is right, everything is a projection of the mind. The "image of God" is all you see, and is the imagination of the mind. The projector of all existence, only the mind is real. Existence created form reality, which is pure infinite eternal consciousness. All that is, has been, and ever will be. Omniscient, omnipresent and omnipotent, God is All, and All is Mind. Like a movie projector projecting the image, all information is within the projector, the image is an illusion. This is the truth, my information comes direct from God.
Moravec and Minsky among others postulate consciousness is simply patterns of data. Their idea is one of downloading of personality into computers scheme in order to live forever. Will a downloaded Moravec be aware of what it is thinking? There are many ways of arguing that it will not be aware unless some additional sentient element is present to provide that awareness. One such argument was presented by the 17th-century philosopher, Leibniz in his theory of monads: Supposing that there were a machine whose structure produced thought, sensation, and perception, we could conceive of it as increased in size with the same proportions until one was able to enter into its interior, as he would into a mill. Now, on going into it he would find only pieces working upon one another, but never would he find anything to explain perception. It is accordingly in the simple substance, and not in the composite nor in a machine that the perception is to be sought (1714). In recent years, the philosopher John Searle has become famous for another version of this argument. Searle considered a hypothetical computer program that can answer questions posed to it in Chinese. The program gives answers that are in proper Chinese, and it can pass the Turing test. Searle proposed that the computer program should be executed by a person who sits in a room and receives the questions through a window in coded form. We assume that this person does not know Chinese. He simply manipulates marks on pieces of paper according to the program's instructions, which are written in English. Searle's point is that even though the "computer" in this case is certainly conscious, it has no awareness of the meaning of the Chinese questions and answers. In contrast, a real person answering questions in Chinese would have this awareness. Searle concluded that just because an algorithm is executed by a computer, we cannot therefore say that there will be any awareness of what that algorithm is doing. If consciousness arises from the “push and pull” interactions of molecules following simple physical laws what would cause it to arise from such disparate interactions? If the world is composed of many simple insentient elemental entities juxtaposed to each other following simple mechanical rules in a certain pattern of behavior, why would we suppose any of them are conscious? No entity “knows” in any sense of what the others are doing. The answer given is conscious awareness somehow corresponds with physical behavior, aka a computer can be conscious if it simulates by calculation the appropriate physical events occurring in a person’s brain. Yet in a computer’s “memory” unit there is stored a list of numbers encoding simple logical and arithmetical operations, and all a computer is doing at any one time is mechanically (or electronically) is carrying out the instruction corresponding to one of these code numbers. The total behavior of the computer is simply the net result of the execution of many of these instructions, one after another. Since only a few interactions are happening at any one time, it is hard to see how the computer be conscious. If the computer were slowed down (as is possible) so that each simple step was stretched out over several seconds, the pattern and sequence of the steps would remain the same. Why would executing the instructions at one speed would generate conscious awareness of the thoughts being simulated, while at another speed there would be no consciousness of these thoughts. Changing the construction of the computer should presumably not affect its consciousness as long as it is programmed to carry out those steps, for this assures that it’s behavior will exhibit the same pattern. Say the computer instructions are used to set up a giant “game” which could be played by a child step by step (in the manner of a Turing machine). As the child carries out those steps, will the same consciousness of the simulated thoughts be manifested there-stretched out, perhaps, over several years? This hardly seems plausible, but otherwise how are we to judge which of many computers with equivalent programs will be conscious and which ones will not? This suggests consciousness may be a primary irreducible, mathematically indescribable fundamental element the way an electron is (a quanta of electricity) or bosons and fermions; A quanta of consciousness.
@@HolbergPrize Consciousness is the least ephemeral phenomenon we experience, hence “I think, therefore I am” axiom of Descartes. Matter is ephemeral. I just demonstrated housing the example of Searle and Liebnitz to show that matter can never attain consciousness. Patterns or bits of computer memory are just disparate unconscious parts of the whole. By what mechanism does consciousness arise from such processes? No one knows because it never happened. Consciousness is a separate energy from matter, it observes the latter and thus can’t be measured in material terms. Consciousness is recognized as one of the foremost “problems” of science. Consciousness can’t be explained by physics so their picture of the world is drastically incomplete. The Materialists’ idea is that by writing down certain equations and saying the universe is a solution to these equations you describe all of reality. Full stop. But they are having trouble having their equations work out properly by unifying the Relativity and Quantum theories, while simultaneously leaving out the glaring problem of consciousness. You can’t even begin to think of consciousness in terms of equations. Many prominent materialists have been aware of the problem such as Darwin’s bulldog Thomas Huxley who recognized consciousness can’t be explained in material terms. He stated, “I understand the main tenet of materialism to be that there is nothing in the unirerse but matter and force: and that all the phenomena of nature are explicable by deduction from the properties assignable to these two primitive factors. . . . It seems to me pretty plain that there is a third thing in the universe, to wit, consciousness, which . . . I cannot see to be matter or force, or any conceivable modification of either." He thought everything matter does can be explained in terms of Newtonian physics (the 19th century scientific view versus the modern theory of quantum mechanics, etc). Yet he was convinced consciousness was real and unexplainable by the laws of physics. He also thought that the latter could influence our state of consciousness but not vice versa. He concluded that if consciousness affects matter, then a materially indescribable thing can affect physical objects, meaning Newton’s equations can’t be the last word. Noble prizewinning physicist Eugene Wigner said we don’t know of anything in nature where A influences B but B doesn’t influence A in some manner. Therefore he reasoned consciousness can influence matter and that our equations of physics can never be complete. They can only be approximate-not complete. This would mean physical science is fundamentally limited. A common man by careful thought and introspection can come to this conclusion-that I am a non-physical conscious entity. He can also recognize he’s not in control of matter or material energy. He can realize that as matter goes on automatically there is also a link between my desires and the world. (Will power; moving one’s arms etc.) One can understand there is a higher guiding intelligence that provides for our needs and arranging the actions of matter so we are able to function. The real question is: why am I aware of all the disparate interactions of matter going on in the body? A popular current theory known as functionalism, which provides a framework for research in artificial intelligence, relegates the activities of the mind to computer-like responses to external stimuli. The concept of consciousness is dismissed, and all human feelings and sensations are reduced to mathematical constructs. For example, in the case of a headache, the experience of pain (which we naturally consider to be the headache) is not referred to at all. What then is a headache? Hard as this may be to believe, MIT artificial intelligence researcher Jerry A. Fodor, one of functionalism’s main proponents, states, “To have a headache is to be disposed to exhibit a certain pattern of relations between the stimuli one encounters and the responses one exhibits." In other words, what he calls a headache is defined to be some brain software that makes us behave as if we have a headache. But pain itself is left out of the picture, because pain cannot be written into a computer program. Due to this obvious failure to explain personal experiences, even Fodor, who is fully committed to a physical explanation of consciousness, admits that mechanistic theories such as functionalism are incomplete. He states, “Many psychologists who are inclined to accept the functionalistic framework are nonetheless worried about the failure of functionalism to reveal much about the nature of consciousness. Functionalists have made a few ingenious attempts to talk themselves and their colleagues out of this worry, but they have not, in my view, done so with much success. As matters stand, the problem of qualitative content [of consciousness] poses a serious threat to the assertion that functionalism can provide a general theory of the mental." Because the issue of consciousness has raised a fundamental impasse in all mechanistic attempts to explain human existence, some scientists have rejected the widely accepted mechanistic viewpoint. Among the dissenters is renowned Nobel laureate physicist Eugene Wigner. "There are two kinds of reality or existence: the existence of my consciousness and the reality or existence of everything else,” states Wigner. "The latter reality is not absolute but only relative." Wigner observed that external, measurable phenomena are known to him only by virtue of his consciousness, and thus consciousness is, if anything, more real than these phenomena. After extensive research in this area, Alan Gevins of EEG Systems Laboratory in San Francisco concluded that the mind may have transcendent qualities. Gevins says, “when it comes to creativity, inspiration, the more ethereal aspects of the mind-well, they might ultimately be mysterious. l’m not as firm as some of my colleagues in the belief that the mind can be reduced to the flow of a few electrons.” One would have to demonstrate at what point consciousness arises from disparate insentient atoms. Materialists like the Functionalists convinced themselves into denying the most objective reality they experience-their own conscious awareness. One of the best analogies is Leibnitz’ grain mill analogy to the inside of the brain. We could see the mechanics of the hardware or Brian, the c-fibers that fire when we hurt ourselves, but the wetware of the brain won’t explain the experience of pain. That’s can’t be programmed into a computer. In other words you could explain the workings of such a computer or machine that mimicked humans without ever referring to the notion of pain. Conscious awareness is something totally different qualitatively from the body. There are many clear and direct examples showing how conscious awareness is entirely different from the physical behavior associated with it. For instance, what happens when a person accidentally strikes his thumb with a hammer? Certain characteristic patterns of behavior result-the person may shout, wave his hand, grimace, etc. Nobel-laureate neurobiologist John C. Eccles, who wrote, "Hitherto it has been impossible to develop any neurophysiological theory that explains how a diversity of brain events comes to be synthesized so that there is a unified conscious experience of a global or gestalt character. The brain events remain disparate, being essentially the individual actions of countless neurons that are built into complex circuits." Scientists such as Bernard Rensch, attempting to overcome this problem, have offered the explanation that patterns of matter also have consciousness, and that we are merely one set of these patterns. But if this is so, then two conclusions follow. First, there must exist complex metaphysical laws governing the production of consciousness in response to the presence of certain patterns. Second, the consciousness of the pattern must be-in comparison with the individual consciousness of each element of the pattern-an entirely new metaphysical entity, a "higher" consciousness capable of accounting for our unified human experience. At this point we would have within the human body a rather complicated metaphysical apparatus consisting of varieties of conscious entities [trillions of semiconscious atoms, patterns possessing higher unifying consciousness) and laws governing their appearance. It would be simpier, however, to revive the concept of the soul-a single irreducible unit of consciousness capable of functioning as the integrator of experience with the body. John C Eccles and philosopher Karl R. Popper propose something like this in their book The Self and Its Brain. Recognizing the short comings of monistic theories, they formulate a version of interactionism between the mind and brain. Eccles states, “The experienced unity of consciousness comes, not from a neurophysiological synthesis, but from the proposed integrating character of the self-conscious mind."
The problem with using anesthesia as evidence of oblivion, is that there is no way to rule out the possibility of a rich experience during anesthesia that is not stored in the memory of the brain. It could be that anesthesia shuts off biological memory, such that when one comes to it seems as if there was only oblivion. Imagine a computer running but nothing gets saved, the computer will by definition not recognize any of the states it was in when the memory was shut off, but it was still running.
@@REDPUMPERNICKEL Exactly - both are subjective - and I use that word carefully- so impossible for a system to reliably assess itself - because the act of assessment changes the system. Besides we know that we “lose” consciousness every night - what does it mean to lose consciousness? It means that although we are conscious of some aspects of our existence, like heart and liver etc, we are not aware of our existence. Awareness of existence is not needed for existence. People say they can feel what deep sleep is like as opposed to anaesthesia - but I don’t believe that. It’s a projection. Both are states of non-existence. You might call that death- and that we die every night, and then finally we stop waking up. But all we are doing is returning to the darkness from where we sprang.
We were obviously 'there' (before we were born) before we were 'here' (in a physical body) ...... so what's there to be scared of - absolutely nothing. Everything is nothing & nothing is everything! In 'living' we die And in 'dying' - we live!
I fell asleep while watching this. I then dreamed I was in a house talking with these guys. I got rather upset because they wouldn't let me talk! Eventually I woke up to realize the voices weren't the people in my dream, but these guys having a debate. I laughed.
Ah, yes: I "appear" on all sorts shows and videos during my sleep! I've whiled away perhaps a quarter of my life sitting there mute, sleep-chatting with the lads on the Ricky Gervais Show (ft. Karl Piklington).
I always found that one's own inner determination could do more to answer this question then an outwards studying of the scientific properties within it
Except that one's inner determination is not without cause. That we are all born with separate genetics and life happened to us in differing ways to cause that certain inner determination. That the so called inner determination still can't escape from being an hallucination of the brain. Their mention of the self organizing system, I find the most intriguing. Consciousness could possibly be the separate self organizing systems having literal effects on all other self organizing systems. I find interesting how the fungal growth in the soil has affect whether or not the forest lives or dies. This is some proof of self organizing system (the fungi) having an effect on all other plant life (the forest) Of coarse the forest also keeps the humans and animals alive. So some self organized consciousness?
An aside observation: I have watched this "discussion"/debate, and subsequently been forced back to it though auto-play at least a few dozen times. Not blaming you, not even necessarily blaming a potential ad/video sponsor by 'Holberg Prize' to promote the video...just making an observation. How about this, Im just noticing an interest spice in the ingredients to the 'cake' of a sentence you constructed. Hmmm, is youtube algo trying to tell/influence me on something? Maybe I can delusional-ly inflate my ego and believe Holberg people want me on their side? Nah, minimum, can I say, "wtf is going on here?"...accidentally auto-playing this discussion dozens of times to me...ah, with MILLIONS of videos uploaded daily; from what I understand?
@@FrancesE.DekEsquire by the same logic we are all the children of god...pssst, using your THEOLOGICAL labeling...you are a son of god...Religious people are so dumb most of the time. They seem to have a thought with no clue where words came from or how different cultures used them...and then their thought is now truth...Literally, they have a thought, and they just assume they are right about it. Yeah?
@fredm.7145 Evangelicals? as in, the christian groups that evangelize...since...at least a few years ago, right? You get sarcasm, yeah? To me, superficial is 72% of the US population self proclaims christianity as their faith system, yet I don't see anything near a 28% of political representation of non-christians...superficial, representation? Control? In other words, I guess I am asking you to understand where your position really is, verses your feelings of "push back"...as the "other" non-evangelicals have FELT the "push back" for quit some time now. Dont get me wrong, to appeal to apposing views is quit the task, from my position I request you walk in some none-evangelicals shoes...and please keep in mind the trappings of exaggerated stereotypes predominating "others"...we, regardless of personal positioning, are all feeling/ignoring "push back". Coming to the table of health conversation does require each at the table to accept "push back" and some ability of compromise...generally speaking, the evangelicals are another group among other groups that are...pushing back, compromising, preaching, etc. The image of being "reasonable" while a VERY non-compromising weird BILLIONAIRE pushes people around with name calling and hand shaking with LITERAL dictators and authoritarians...doesn't help your cause.
@fredm.7145 You seem to know nothing about evangelicals beyond the dogma of your particular political persuasion. A persuasion that seems to rely extensively on emotionally charged falsehoods to conjure the cult like behaviour of it's adherents. And I might add that it seems, quite ironically, to be lead by the type of people who are obsessed with controlling other people's lives and wish to bring about the destruction of humanity as we know it and succeeded in the Soviet Union, Communist China et al.
A year ago I went 5 times. to a pain management clinic for my multiple sclerosis’ pain and depression. I was given ketamine for 5 sessions. It was unfortunately a temporary success for pain and depression but I had the most worthwhile spiritual experience! I was comforted to understand the various dimensions of life and consciousness.
Even though it's a debate I find it really relaxing which seems counter intuitive to what I'd expect from a debate. Goes to show how todays program always makes us think people have to be loud and yell at each other. Thank goodness we can hear everyone speak and find each point of view interesting enough to give it some air to ponder.
@@MusicPLUSBusiness So true I wish I'd explored debating whilst in school As the arts are often compartmentalized to one side of the school where I was. But I still found talking to the physics students fascinating. Probably because now I know there's a lot more connection. Sound waves, math, geometry have a lot more in common than I realized back then.
@@aubreylegendre8174 Ok. But the culture that values learning above winning is a better culture than one that values winning over learning. In the latter, people present all kinds of misconduct - ad hominem attacks, shouting people down, false equivalence, and a wide range of biases. The former culture becomes aware of these problems and works to identify and correct them. It does not excuse these errors as "different strokes for different folks." In this way, learning persists through humility and wisdom. By contrast, triumphalism in argument leads to arrogance and self-aggrandizement. Finally, learning contains the lessons of winning and failing, but the desire to win excludes the lessons taught by failure. For all these reasons, the desire for learning is better that the desire for winning. Those 500 people who are screaming at each other are engaged in a activity that is less effective than the people who humbly desire to learn.
@@MusicPLUSBusiness debates are every bit about defending a position, not about finding common ground. that said, they aren't fighting, and the only debates we see today, political debates, aren't really debates
28:10 Consciousness I'll leave my last words for the poet Emily Dickinson who in a 28:15 beautiful 1862 poem wrote the brain is wider than the sky for put them side by 28:24 side the one the other will contain with ease and you 28:29 besides
I had dreams of being in a building or outside of one, and in my mind I am familiar with interior and what is on each floor, and even behind the building, and around the corner down the street. I have visual recall of these aspects and details of the environment. I also know the people, their names and remember what we talked about two or three days ago, but when I wake up, I have no idea of who and where I was. In the dream, I knew specifics like room #s, and locker key combinations, and I also know if I have 2 minutes or 10 minutes to get where I am going and I feel the urgency to get there. When I wake up, just 2 seconds later, there is no reference for anything I was just deeply involved in. I try to recall the place, people and details, but nothing. I think I am living a different life in my sleep. I feel that I am the same person in the dream, but recalling memories from a different life. When I am thinking in the dream, the relevant ideas and information to the present moment or circumstance are fresh and readily available in memory, as if I am accessing an established way of thinking and believing, I am not familiar with when I awaken.
I think the phrase "state dependent" is germane to your comment although "mode dependent" might be a more accurate way to say it. Differences in the awake mode being-conscious-process and the sleep mode being-conscious-process (i.e. dreaming) have been discovered by researchers. Speculatively speaking, perhaps memories 'captured' while these different processes run, have something subtly different in their neural discharge timing patterns thereby rendering them inaccessible to any other mode of being conscious, something analogous to the radio spectrum, channels and tuning.
In retrospect, rather than "radio spectrum, channels and tuning", the concept of 'resonance' may have been the better analogy. This one minute video illustrates the resonance concept very clearly... th-cam.com/users/shortsPagl1zg0j4A I *have* noticed several themes currently, among my fairly rare dreams. For 50 years I spent almost every winter weekend skiing down hills or mountains. One of my dream themes involves skiing (understandably, eh). The question I have is, why do my skiing dreams not all take place on perfect powder snow under perfect lighting conditions, after all, they are my dreams? Or is it that my unconscious brain processes simply don't, or can't, give a fig about my preferences? (Which would very much reflect the world in general (except in socialist leaning democracies, eh (it is just good luck I live in one))). Edit: 9 months later... Sleep refers to a particular mode of brain activity. In this mode, all the billions of representations being encoded and maintained by neural-discharge-timing-patterns throughout one's brain are being adjusted by the intermodulation of these timing patterns as mediated by the synapses which impose a kind of analog logic on the process. All of that in the interests of achieving a representation of the world in which everything makes sense and is without contradictions. Thus, upon awakening in the morning one begins experiencing a clear headed feeling and that all confusion has evaporated. Thus the civilized human animal's ability to function well, in its almost entirely cultural habitat, contributes to survival, both his and his group's survival made more likely. All nicely in accord with the evolutionary process.
Psychic abilities ~ aka visions so continue exploring and you may end up having a message for someone or saving some one s life or confirming something for yourself or someone else _ namaste
Very lively debate and a very diverse field of study. I spent a few years of my life trying to quantify consciousness for the purposes of determining how much anaesthetic should be given to a patient in order to safely keep them unconscious. This debate touched on this subject and a few other related subjects. Anil Seth very skillfully side stepped how consciousness originates and assumed that consciousness only resides within the physical confines of the human brain (Tanya Luhrmann was a little more philosophical about this). Instead they both focused on the physical aspects of consciousness, which are all that any scientist can measure. This is a totally rational way to think, based on the scant information we currently poses on this topic. These physical aspects, give us absolutely no clues as to the nature of human consciousness and its origins. Debates of this kind tend to become very philosophical and go around in circles as one is left to speculate because of the fundamental lack of information. Rupert Sheldrake seemed to me to be a lot more open minded on whether consciousness can extend outside of the human brain and even though he's considered as something of a maverick and heretic by many of his (biologically minded) peers, I like his open mindedness and some of his ideas, which leaves the door open for new ideas. Work on machine consciousness has been progressing for many years. There are various schools of thought on how to give machines self awareness. The problem has been that the predominant school of thought was that consciousness would be achieved by increasing the complexity of the artificial neural networks used to build AI. But with gigantic leaps in the computing power of these artificial neural networks, self awareness akin to human consciousness has not been achieved. So most probably, brain complexity is not the origin of human consciousness. The work of Physicist Roger Penrose and Neuroscientist Stuart Hameroff on human consciousness adds a quantum component to the workings of the human brain, by way of the nano-tubules found within brain cells. This seems to suggest that consciousness could originate from quantum interactions within brain cells. Quantum entanglement of subatomic particles has shown us that space-time is non-local. If this hypothesis of consciousness holds true, it could also lead us to the conclusion that consciousness can reside outside of the human brain. Again, this is hypothetical. There are many other schools of thought on this issue. One hypothesis pointed to by string theory is that we could be living inside a black hole, in which case we could be living inside a 2D hologram which feels and looks like a 3D universe. The interesting thing about holograms is that each element which makes up the hologram contains all of the information contained in the entire hologram. If that's the case then our consciousness might be contained in the tiniest elements which make up this universe ......... pure speculation, but again, we're in the realms of pure philosophy here. The simulation hypothesis is another, where we could be living inside a huge computer simulation, in which case non of what we experience is real and that anything is possible within the bounds of the computer simulation. Or, we could all be parts of some massive universal consciousness which connects everything and could mean that our consciousness does not reside within our physical brain. Such a theory of mind could also tie in with emerging physics hypotheses of consciousness and information theory, where information itself has mass and therefore energy, and that consciousness could be more fundamental than either energy or matter. Again hypothetical, but possibly mathematically provable ? or disprovable ..... The questions these scientists and others are asking are as fundamental as the questions about creation of the universe and life itself. These are the deep questions we have asked for thousands of years, and could take thousands more years to truly answer, if at all..... They will not be answered by biologists. The answers will come by integrating fields such as physics, mathematics, biology and chemistry. Each science describes one small piece of the puzzle.
I'm thinking of consciousness of refined to the individual's brain, but maybe capable of emitting and receiving information with a quantum-level method, i.e. entanglement. Just like a radio which does not exist 'outside' the radio itself, but emitting and receiving radio waves.
I NEVER STAY OUT AND ALWAYS BECOME CONSCIOUS FOR A FEW SECONDS DURING SURGERY....WIERD.....AND I GET A BONER AS WELL..LOL SO GOOD DREAM I GUESS. AND WHEN ON ACID WHICH ONLY HAPPENED A FEW TIMES I CAN DO PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE THNGS. FOR EXAMPLE I FLIPPED A CIGARETTE PACKAGE IN THE AIR AND LANDED IT ON THE SMALL EDGE OVER 30 TIMES IN A ROW.
The difference between an optimistic person and a pessimistic person is that an optimistic person thinks the world could not be a better place; and the pessimist person fears the optimistic may possibly be correct.
it's actually pretty good, but at least is on the path toward truth. on the other hand, relying on dreams, fantasies, and drug induced delusions is a pretty sure way of getting absolutely terrible explanations.
The second speaker just waffled on about how things seem to superstitious people. The mind can deceive you. Even a modicum of caution should prevent someone from assuming these religious experiences are real. Funny how such experiences overwhelmingly map to the religion one is exposed to.
their diversity created a very nice symbiotic environment. respect to everyone on the panel. i liked how they exchanged their diverse ideas in very respectful manner, and no one seemed to outsmart others rather they showed an excellent listening attitude without causing any interruption whatsoever!
I went under anesthesia for a colonoscopy, when I had awakened I was loudly saying “woo hoo”! I remembered skiing with one ski down a mountain. I’ve never gone skiing before.
I went under general anesthesia for surgery, my experience didn't stop. one moment I'm on the operating table, the next I'm on the beach in China at night time watching the waves. It was very peaceful, but I didn't disappear. Maybe some people just don't remember what they do under anesthesia
This is true, it is not anesthesia itself, it is deepness of anesthesia. I am anesthesiologist and I experienced many patients telling me what they had dreamed during anesthesia. Anesthetics like Morphine or Ketamine produce halucinations. It is possible to put body narrow to death with anesthetics and then thgere is total black out. But this is not the aim of anesthesia.
Not me, I started counting back from ten, got as far as nine and then I was back in the ward hours later with no sense of time passing. I was one place and then I was somewhere else, it was weird.
you can remember with practice, its because the memory can seem like a glitch so its discarded like a dream memory but yeah u must be a natural :) Many years ago i had access to pure medical grade K and we studied its effects in some depth, we kinda found that my best friend has a great memory and would remember 90% of the time id have a clearer recall but only remembered 50% the time due to my disorganized memory but you find over time you are able to remember more easily, taking too much can give you amnesia tho! its not a guarenteed effect like hitting a switch but it enables you to use your mind in ways that might otherwise require a vow of silence and lifetime of meditation to reach and unlock its kinda like a shortcut.. Look into the "cia gateway method" its not hallucination i can assure you as multiple people are able to travel together and i was doing this kind of projecting with my friend 15 years before I found out it was a known possibility, i found out n was like omg they know we have powers and hide it from us instead of teaching us to be self aware we are conditioned into obedience its disgusting.. Its as if theres a place we can go but theres many methods to reach it some convenient others heavily taxing like going to LA by luxury car, walking, or using your front teeth to drag urself along the road lol many routes to the same ends.. i recommend K personally and most importantly it must be clean pure or cut with inactives and pharma grade genuine stuff tho the RCs and methoxetamine arent the same at all and any weird extra additives will increase your chance of hallucination and loss of control.. Robitussin dxm actually is an option but heavily taxing on the body and long after effects its really for emergency exit of dimensions only as it cannot be used frequent enough for research or recreation.. The shamans and old communities know, cia knows, i expect the vatican secret archives and all the knowledge lost during the cruscades, witch hunts and all the other atrocities attempting to hide our true power from us would likely cover much of these topics but obviously those in power tried to wipe them all out and burn any records so we are left with a quite badly broken record of history and things considered heretical ✌❤️
This was my first experience of Luhrman, and I much appreciated her summary that the essence of consciousness lies in our relationship with external 'others', which seems to fit well with Sheldrake's emphasis on the interconnectedness of self-organising systems and also Anil's refutation of the idea the brain is 'merely' an information-processing system. However, I found the discussion on information-processing moved on a bit too quickly and dismissively; there is much explanatory power in Karl Friston's work that seems to me to have great value, even though I agree that information processing is not the whole story. Malone did a fabulous job of holding the space for a creative tension in the debate, and it was a pleasure to experience his style of inquiry again (I hope he will be making another of his wonderful films soon). My own curiosity has settled recently on the related and emerging area of inquiry labeled as "enactive cognition" and it would be wonderful to see a future debate bringing these ideas into tension with those of enactivists like Di Paolo and Thompson, plus phenomenological insights from the likes of Maclaren and Callard. I share Anil's frustration with Silicon Valley's pursuit of technology such as AI regardless of the ethics, also seemingly with scant regard for the dangers of their move-fast-and-break-things approach. On a positive note, my limited exposure to the AI community at least comforts me that they are an extremely curious and deep-thinking community. The problem, it seems to me, is the lack of transparency on the part of tech firms that don't share their research data with public academics; more patient science is needed to inform the work of these clever engineers and developers. My fear is not of the technology so much as its financial backers, and the profit- and power-oriented goals that most tech leaders are pursuing. For all the early talk of not wanting to repeat the mistakes of social media platforms, some vocal segments of AI culture seem to have confabulated their way towards justifying any innovation on the grounds of its 'great potential' for humanity - here we go again...
@@nycgweed That reads very much like an AI hallucinatory response prior to human editing. Emotions are the essence of being human, not something to be rid of. Side note: for anyone reading this not aware of AI "hallucination" it is a well-documented phenomenon of the current so-called "transformer" type of AI such as ChatGPT. Essentially, an AI is a predictive text-based auto-responder, and so when it responds to a question on which it's learning data has limited or no information, it "hallucinates" or in other words makes things up rather than responding "I don't know the answer to that". In other words, it will attempt a prediction regardless of predictive accuracy because it is a machine and has no understanding of the things it is responding about.
There's a kind of "encounter in the liminal zone" - have a look for the work concerning dreams done by Henry Reed from Atlantic University and for writings by Edgar Cayce, too.
@@drdolittle1085 Many thanks for those recommendations, I look forward to reading some of their work. I've been studying Jung's work for a long time, and that of people like Hillman, Corbin and Donaldson around the imaginal mind - and more recent academics like Vervaeke (on wisdom and types of knowing). The experience of liminal 'space' is indeed a fascinating phenomenon.
@@majorjps1jadeja878 well, all you need to do is detect one of these ghosts, reliably. absent that well, you believe in ghosts, so you'll believe almost anything. so uh, give me $500 and help u talk to your a, great gramma.
@@LondongirlMaryam first of all, i don't believe in "such things". second, religion itself is the cause of the confusion. 3rd, the fact that so many people can believe so many things, with such fervor, yet disagree, shows you that humans are not terribly good at scientific thinking, and, that the vast majority of them are totally wrong.
It may be true, but history is more inclined to show that the opposite is the path more travelled... ever since our ancestors picked up a jawbone. There will be some that would use such a thing for personal gain, but true consciousness and everything within is without a doubt not a journey for the faint of heart. Try astral, and wind the window down... it's freaky. ✌
I understand your point of view but, sorry, I have never experienced any pain when I killed a cockroach, or an ant colony, esp., not when it decided to move into my home, and I am sure I never will.
"Life will offer you a diminishing number of opportunities to show how smart you are. It will offer an infinite number of occasions that require kindness, mercy, grace, sensitivity, sympathy, generosity and love. Life will require that you widen your repertoire of emotions, that you throw yourself headlong into other people. That you take the curriculum of intimacy. If you haven't mastered it yet, I ask you to turn to this task intentionally now." - David Brooks
@@PazLeBonsure yes go practice hate . It’s questions like these that are pretty silly and impractical. In practice what would be effective about practicing hate.
Hello ! May Allah protect and guide you to his light and happiness in this life and the hereafter, God bless, Ameen. Excuse me for giving a little presentation of Islam, because it is very misunderstood nowadays, especially on those « Antichrist's » times, where media and politics are mixed to distort history and truth. And terrorists (puppets of the Antichrist) who misinterpret verses, out of ignorance and political motivations, and take them out of historical context (just like radical atheists do by the way) don't help either. Thank you very much for your time. First of all, if you have any questions regarding Islam and yourself, just open the Quran randomly, and you will find the answer in front of you, like a miracle and a sign from God.
Islam is an arabic word that means the Surrender to the One and Only God, our Creator, Protector, Provider, who gives us life and all that we have, we are safe and sound by his will and grace, we are His and to Him we return, and we have to thank him in this trial life by submitting to him by our free will, or later in the Day of judgment when it's too late to save our own skin. Islam was the original Religion descended to earth from heaven with Adam and Eve (peace and blessing be upon them) in the beginning of humanity. and was passed to people with the succession of the 124 000 prophets and 315 messengers of God to all nations and civilizations since, passing by Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Ismaël, Joseph, Moses, Aaron, Joshua, David, Solomon and Jesus (Peace and blessing be upon them) during the history of mankind, the last replaces and completes the previous, until the succession of the last messenger of God fourteen centuries ago, Muhammad (Peace and blessing be upon him) to complete the noble morals of all mankind, to bring humans and jinns out of darkness into light, and to purify people's religion and belief from corruption and polytheism, and return it to purity and true monotheism, like it was in the times of the prophets (Peace and blessing be upon them). Many Religions that we know nowadays, at their beginning were true and under Islam, initiated by one of the prophets of God, but their original teachings, history and scriptures have been corrupted over time with falsification and polytheism, or lost and replaced with false ones. That's why Islam is the only Religion accepted by God nowadays, which consists in bearing witness that there is no god besides Allah (God in Aramaic, the original language of Jesus and the Gospel), and that Muhammad is His servant and messenger, just like Jesus and Moses and others are His servants and messengers. Never a messenger of God said he was God or literally son of God, it was the people after him who changed the words of God and corrupted the Religion. God is unique and absolute, He does not need to have a family and sons or to associate anyone else with His kingdom, He can simply create whatever He wants, everything belongs to Him, and to Him everything will return. Allah said in Surah Al-Mu’minun : “God has never begotten a son, nor is there any god besides Him. Otherwise, each god would have taken away what it has created, and some of them would have gained supremacy over others. Glory be to God, far beyond what they describe. The Knower of the hidden and the manifest. He is exalted, far above what they associate. (91-92 / Translated by ITANI). Allah means the one and only God, the God of all prophets and creatures, the creator of the universe and mankind, and the Master of the Day of judgment, where our destiny, Hell or Paradise, is decided based on our faith and deeds in this trial life, and above all, Allah's mercy. Allah said in Surah Al-Ikhlas : In the name of God, the Gracious, the Merciful. Say, “He is God, the One. God, the Absolute. He begets not, nor was He begotten. And there is none comparable to Him.” (1-4 / Translated by ITANI). Allah said in Surah An-Nisa : O FOLLOWERS of the Gospel! Do not overstep the bounds [of truth] in your religious beliefs, and do not say of God anything but the truth. The Christ Jesus, son of Mary, was but God's Apostle - [the fulfilment of] His promise which He had conveyed unto Mary - and a soul created by Him. Believe, then, in God and His apostles, and do not say, "[God is] a trinity". Desist [from this assertion] for your own good. God is but One God; utterly remote is He, in His glory, from having a son: unto Him belongs all that is in the heavens and all that is on earth; and none is as worthy of trust as God. Never did the Christ feel too proud to be God's servant, nor do the angels who are near unto Him. And those who feel too proud to serve Him and glory in their arrogance [should know that on Judgment Day] He will gather them all unto Himself: (171-172 / Translated by Muhammad Asad). Allah the Most Merciful said in Surah Ali-Imran : Behold, the only [true] religion in the sight of God is [man's] self-surrender unto Him; and those who were vouchsafed revelation aforetime took, out of mutual jealousy, to divergent views [on this point] only after knowledge [thereof] had come unto them. But as for him who denies the truth of God's messages - behold, God is swift in reckoning! Thus, [O Prophet,] if they argue with thee, say, "I have surrendered my whole being unto God, and [so have] all who follow me!" - and ask those who have been vouchsafed revelation aforetime, as well as all unlettered people, "Have you [too] surrendered yourselves unto Him?" And if they surrender themselves unto Him, they are on the right path; but if they turn away - behold, thy duty is no more than to deliver the message: for God sees all that is in [the hearts of] His creatures. Verily, as for those who deny the truth of God's messages, and slay the prophets against all right, and slay people who enjoin equity - announce unto them a grievous chastisement. It is they whose works shall come to nought both in this world and in the life to come; and they shall have none to succour them. (19-22 / Translated by Muhammad Asad).. God said : Say, “We believe in Allah, and in what was revealed to us, and in what was revealed to Abraham, and Ishmael, and Isaac, and Jacob, and the Patriarchs, and in what was given to Moses and Jesus, and in what was given to the prophets from their Lord. We do not differentiate between any of them. And to Him, we surrender.” (2:136 / Translated by Community) Salam (Peace) -----------------
Short answer: yes, of course it does. Even unicellular organisms have some modicum of consciousness to them. The more complex the organism's biological structure, the more complex the degree of conscious expression in the material.
note that only expression requires biologic complexity. there is no way to tell how much subjectivity is being experiened by anything, or if it is at all.
Quantum mechanics, through experimentations, has shown, again and again - the "material" world is an illusion and that everything, on it's basic levels, are nothing more than energy, vibrations and electromagnetism... The linear time and the physical is an illusion. Consciousness creates reality. THE "ALL" IS MIND.
I'm reading Being You, and have added Sheldrake and Lurhman to my reading list as well. Just wanted to stop by to say how much I loved this video, that I have it on repeat. I feel so many people would benefit from hearing more about the areas where these three perspectives, come close to meeting or overlapping. Please do more!
@@REDPUMPERNICKEL your quote "Quantum entanglement suggests we are living in The Matrix." My comment: I experienced something that makes the matrix real to me. When a part of my arm went through the arm rest of a couch, and I mean a couch from the 70's where the wood inside is thick and is made of real wood. I pulled it out and it was solid again.
@@ExperiencedGhost I have been conscious of hallucinations indistinguishable from what I am usually conscious of with the exception that I could move my hand through them. Most often these hallucinations occur after swallowing LSD but occasionally I experience a vivid dream that fools me completely (because the critical thinking ability is much disabled during the dreaming mode of being conscious). Because I have a pretty good understanding of how neurons and synapses work, it never occurs to me that I am in a matrix other than the one which is my brain. If quantum entanglement is an actual fact and scientists are not being fooled by something hiding in left field, then there may still be explanations awaiting discovery that have nothing to do with a matrix. Still, if I am in a matrix and am a virtual person, an NPC, then I would be concerned that a power glitch might end me. But if that should happen I wouldn't know it so no different from dying conscious in the top non matrix level. lol
Regarding dreams: “Tell me one last thing,” said Harry. “Is this real? Or has this been happening inside my head?” “Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” After dreaming that I've spent time with my dad, who died six months ago, I wake up having spent time with my dad. Whether or not it happened in a physical sense and whether or not his consciousness was involved are almost irrelevant factors to me.
Hello ! May Allah protect and guide you to his light and happiness in this life and the hereafter, God bless, Ameen. Excuse me for giving a little presentation of Islam, because it is very misunderstood nowadays, especially on those « Antichrist's » times, where media and politics are mixed to distort history and truth. And terrorists (puppets of the Antichrist) who misinterpret verses, out of ignorance and political motivations, and take them out of historical context (just like radical atheists do by the way) don't help either. Thank you very much for your time. First of all, if you have any questions regarding Islam and yourself, just open the Quran randomly, and you will find the answer in front of you, like a miracle and a sign from God.
Islam is an arabic word that means the Surrender to the One and Only God, our Creator, Protector, Provider, who gives us life and all that we have, we are safe and sound by his will and grace, we are His and to Him we return, and we have to thank him in this trial life by submitting to him by our free will, or later in the Day of judgment when it's too late to save our own skin. Islam was the original Religion descended to earth from heaven with Adam and Eve (peace and blessing be upon them) in the beginning of humanity. and was passed to people with the succession of the 124 000 prophets and 315 messengers of God to all nations and civilizations since, passing by Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Ismaël, Joseph, Moses, Aaron, Joshua, David, Solomon and Jesus (Peace and blessing be upon them) during the history of mankind, the last replaces and completes the previous, until the succession of the last messenger of God fourteen centuries ago, Muhammad (Peace and blessing be upon him) to complete the noble morals of all mankind, to bring humans and jinns out of darkness into light, and to purify people's religion and belief from corruption and polytheism, and return it to purity and true monotheism, like it was in the times of the prophets (Peace and blessing be upon them). Many Religions that we know nowadays, at their beginning were true and under Islam, initiated by one of the prophets of God, but their original teachings, history and scriptures have been corrupted over time with falsification and polytheism, or lost and replaced with false ones. That's why Islam is the only Religion accepted by God nowadays, which consists in bearing witness that there is no god besides Allah (God in Aramaic, the original language of Jesus and the Gospel), and that Muhammad is His servant and messenger, just like Jesus and Moses and others are His servants and messengers. Never a messenger of God said he was God or literally son of God, it was the people after him who changed the words of God and corrupted the Religion. God is unique and absolute, He does not need to have a family and sons or to associate anyone else with His kingdom, He can simply create whatever He wants, everything belongs to Him, and to Him everything will return. Allah said in Surah Al-Mu’minun : “God has never begotten a son, nor is there any god besides Him. Otherwise, each god would have taken away what it has created, and some of them would have gained supremacy over others. Glory be to God, far beyond what they describe. The Knower of the hidden and the manifest. He is exalted, far above what they associate. (91-92 / Translated by ITANI). Allah means the one and only God, the God of all prophets and creatures, the creator of the universe and mankind, and the Master of the Day of judgment, where our destiny, Hell or Paradise, is decided based on our faith and deeds in this trial life, and above all, Allah's mercy. Allah said in Surah Al-Ikhlas : In the name of God, the Gracious, the Merciful. Say, “He is God, the One. God, the Absolute. He begets not, nor was He begotten. And there is none comparable to Him.” (1-4 / Translated by ITANI). Allah said in Surah An-Nisa : O FOLLOWERS of the Gospel! Do not overstep the bounds [of truth] in your religious beliefs, and do not say of God anything but the truth. The Christ Jesus, son of Mary, was but God's Apostle - [the fulfilment of] His promise which He had conveyed unto Mary - and a soul created by Him. Believe, then, in God and His apostles, and do not say, "[God is] a trinity". Desist [from this assertion] for your own good. God is but One God; utterly remote is He, in His glory, from having a son: unto Him belongs all that is in the heavens and all that is on earth; and none is as worthy of trust as God. Never did the Christ feel too proud to be God's servant, nor do the angels who are near unto Him. And those who feel too proud to serve Him and glory in their arrogance [should know that on Judgment Day] He will gather them all unto Himself: (171-172 / Translated by Muhammad Asad). Allah the Most Merciful said in Surah Ali-Imran : Behold, the only [true] religion in the sight of God is [man's] self-surrender unto Him; and those who were vouchsafed revelation aforetime took, out of mutual jealousy, to divergent views [on this point] only after knowledge [thereof] had come unto them. But as for him who denies the truth of God's messages - behold, God is swift in reckoning! Thus, [O Prophet,] if they argue with thee, say, "I have surrendered my whole being unto God, and [so have] all who follow me!" - and ask those who have been vouchsafed revelation aforetime, as well as all unlettered people, "Have you [too] surrendered yourselves unto Him?" And if they surrender themselves unto Him, they are on the right path; but if they turn away - behold, thy duty is no more than to deliver the message: for God sees all that is in [the hearts of] His creatures. Verily, as for those who deny the truth of God's messages, and slay the prophets against all right, and slay people who enjoin equity - announce unto them a grievous chastisement. It is they whose works shall come to nought both in this world and in the life to come; and they shall have none to succour them. (19-22 / Translated by Muhammad Asad).. God said : Say, “We believe in Allah, and in what was revealed to us, and in what was revealed to Abraham, and Ishmael, and Isaac, and Jacob, and the Patriarchs, and in what was given to Moses and Jesus, and in what was given to the prophets from their Lord. We do not differentiate between any of them. And to Him, we surrender.” (2:136 / Translated by Community) Salam (Peace) -----------------
@@islamisthetruewaytogod6812 Hello, and thank you for making the effort to educate me about Islam. However, I knew a lot about Islam already, having had Muslims in my family for many years and having read the Qur'an - and unfortunately, it's not for me. I found no answers as such in the Qur'an, although there is some wisdom in it. I have found no religion that could make me believe. But I'm glad you have, because it must be a great comfort in life. Salaam.
@@islamisthetruewaytogod6812 with my limited knowledge my thoughts race to the question of how this place was created, also why so many different religions have also been created ?
So interesting. I can honestly state that there’s NEVER been a time, when I KNOW that I’m being watched/stared at ; where I turn around to no one looking my way. There’s someone staring right back at me, and the directionality is spot on, EVERY time!
E= mc^2= Q(sentience), I learned also that thought is faster than the speed of light. I learned that this reality we experience as a human is an illusion - I was shown a halographic universe held by the intention of LOVE, which again, as I have stated, love is a force, not just a feeling. - CR
A segment from 'Saved by the Light of the Buddha Within'... My new understandings of what many call 'God -The Holy Spirit' - resulting from some of the extraordinary ongoing after-effects relating to my NDE... Myoho-Renge-Kyo represents the identity of what some scientists are now referring to as the unified field of consciousnesses. In other words, it’s the essence of all existence and non-existence - the ultimate creative force behind planets, stars, nebulae, people, animals, trees, fish, birds, and all phenomena, manifest or latent. All matter and intelligence are simply waves or ripples manifesting to and from this core source. Consciousness (enlightenment) is itself the actual creator of everything that exists now, ever existed in the past, or will exist in the future - right down to the minutest particles of dust - each being an individual ripple or wave. The big difference between chanting Nam-Myoho-Renge-Kyo and most other conventional prayers is that instead of depending on a ‘middleman’ to connect us to our state of inner enlightenment, we’re able to do it ourselves. That’s because chanting Nam-Myoho-Renge-Kyo allows us to tap directly into our enlightened state by way of this self-produced sound vibration. ‘Who or What Is God?’ If we compare the concept of God being a separate entity that is forever watching down on us, to the teachings of Nichiren, it makes more sense to me that the true omnipotence, omniscience and omnipresence of what most people perceive to be God, is the fantastic state of enlightenment that exists within each of us. Some say that God is an entity that’s beyond physical matter - I think that the vast amount of information continuously being conveyed via electromagnetic waves in today’s world gives us proof of how an invisible state of God could indeed exist. For example, it’s now widely known that specific data relayed by way of electromagnetic waves has the potential to help bring about extraordinary and powerful effects - including an instant global awareness of something or a mass emotional reaction. It’s also common knowledge that these invisible waves can easily be used to detonate a bomb or to enable NASA to control the movements of a robot as far away as the Moon or Mars - none of which is possible without a receiver to decode the information that’s being transmitted. Without the receiver, the data would remain impotent. In a very similar way, we need to have our own ‘receiver’ switched on so that we can activate a clear and precise understanding of our own life, all other life and what everything else in existence is. Chanting Nam-Myoho-Renge-Kyo each day helps us to achieve this because it allows us to reach the core of our enlightenment and keep it switched on. That’s because Myoho-Renge-Kyo represents the identity of what scientists now refer to as the unified field of consciousnesses. To break it down - Myoho represents the Law of manifestation and latency (Nature) and consists of two alternating states. For example, the state of Myo is where everything in life that’s not obvious to us exists - including our stored memories when we’re not thinking about them - our hidden potential and inner emotions whenever they’re dormant - our desires, our fears, our wisdom, happiness, karma - and more importantly, our enlightenment. The other state, ho, is where everything in Life exists whenever it becomes evident to us, such as when a thought pops up from within our memory - whenever we experience or express our emotions - or whenever a good or bad cause manifests as an effect from our karma. When anything becomes apparent, it merely means that it’s come out of the state of Myo (dormancy/latency) and into a state of ho (manifestation). It’s the difference between consciousness and unconsciousness, being awake or asleep, or knowing and not knowing. The second law - Renge - Ren meaning cause and ge meaning effect, governs and controls the functions of Myoho - these two laws of Myoho and Renge, not only function together simultaneously but also underlies all spiritual and physical existence. The final and third part of the tri-combination - Kyo, is the Law that allows Myoho to integrate with Renge - or vice versa. It’s the great, invisible thread of energy that fuses and connects all Life and matter - as well as the past, present and future. It’s also sometimes termed the Universal Law of Communication - perhaps it could even be compared with the string theory that many scientists now suspect exists. Just as the cells in our body, our thoughts, feelings and everything else is continually fluctuating within us - all that exists in the world around us and beyond is also in a constant state of flux - constantly controlled by these three fundamental laws. In fact, more things are going back and forth between the two states of Myo and ho in a single moment than it would ever be possible to calculate or describe. And it doesn’t matter how big or small, famous or trivial anything or anyone may appear to be, everything that’s ever existed in the past, exists now or will exist in the future, exists only because of the workings of the Laws ‘Myoho-Renge-Kyo’ - the basis of the four fundamental forces, and if they didn’t function, neither we nor anything else could go on existing. That’s because all forms of existence, including the seasons, day, night, birth, death and so on, are moving forward in an ongoing flow of continuation - rhythmically reverting back and forth between the two fundamental states of Myo and ho in absolute accordance with Renge - and by way of Kyo. Even stars are dying and being reborn under the workings of what the combination ‘Myoho-Renge-Kyo’ represents. Nam, or Namu - which mean the same thing, are vibrational passwords or keys that allow us to reach deep into our life and fuse with or become one with ‘Myoho-Renge-Kyo’. On a more personal level, nothing ever happens by chance or coincidence, it’s the causes that we’ve made in our past, or are presently making, that determine how these laws function uniquely in each of our lives - as well as the environment from moment to moment. By facing east, in harmony with the direction that the Earth is spinning, and chanting Nam-Myoho-Renge-Kyo for a minimum of, let’s say, ten minutes daily to start with, any of us can experience actual proof of its positive effects in our lives - even if it only makes us feel good on the inside, there will be a definite positive effect. That’s because we’re able to pierce through the thickest layers of our karma and activate our inherent Buddha Nature (our enlightened state). By so doing, we’re then able to bring forth the wisdom and good fortune that we need to challenge, overcome and change our adverse circumstances - turn them into positive ones - or manifest and gain even greater fulfilment in our daily lives from our accumulated good karma. This also allows us to bring forth the wisdom that can free us from the ignorance and stupidity that’s preventing us from accepting and being proud of the person that we indeed are - regardless of our race, colour, gender or sexuality. We’re also able to see and understand our circumstances and the environment far more clearly, as well as attract and connect with any needed external beneficial forces and situations. As I’ve already mentioned, everything is subject to the law of Cause and Effect - the ‘actual-proof-strength’ resulting from chanting Nam-Myoho-Renge-Kyo always depends on our determination, sincerity and dedication. For example, the levels of difference could be compared to making a sound on a piano, creating a melody, producing a great song, and so on. Something else that’s very important to always respect and acknowledge is that the Law (or if you prefer God) is in everyone and everything. NB: There are frightening and disturbing sounds, and there are tranquil and relaxing sounds. It’s the emotional result of any noise or sound that can trigger off a mood or even instantly change one. When chanting Nam-Myoho-Renge-Kyo each day, we are producing a sound vibration that’s the password to our true inner-self - this soon becomes apparent when you start reassessing your views on various things - such as your fears and desires etc. The best way to get the desired result when chanting is not to view things conventionally - rather than reaching out to an external source, we need to reach into our own lives and bring our needs and desires to fruition from within - including the good fortune and strength to achieve any help that we may need. Chanting Nam-Myoho-Renge-Kyo also reaches out externally and draws us towards, or draws towards us, what we need to make us happy from our environment. For example, it helps us to be in the right place at the right time - to make better choices and decisions and so forth. We need to think of it as a seed within us that we’re watering and bringing sunshine to for it to grow, blossom and bring forth fruit or flowers. It’s also important to understand that everything we need in life, including the answer to every question and the potential to achieve every dream, already exists within us.
I dedicate my life to the Mystic Law of cause and effect through the sound of the Buddha voice. The fusion of my life with the infinite potential of the universe and the temporary manifestation of all phenomena throughout the infinite space and time within vibrational interrelationships. Nam-MyoHo-RenGe-Kyo.
Tanya is impressive. She is taking this all in and is not concluding anything beyond what she can confirm. And yet does not claim to know everything. This is the true scientist brain. We need more of her.
that's not science. her evidence is anecdotal. subjective. and actually nosenscical. if consciousness is somehow connected to an outer spiritual experience, then why the hell is everyone having such a different experience? and yet, why are people who share culture have experiences that are more similar? the best explanation is that each culture invents their own, and none of them are real.
What a beautiful conversation. I like the respect shown by all three participants, despite their differing, but very studied, points of view. All three speakers have given me a lot to reflect on in this matter. Thank you.
Yes! Healthy respectful debates are so important to develop well rounded concepts. I so enjoy proper debates. Many debates these days are simply defensive and many participants are only interested in aggressively shutting down points of view that differ from their own. There is no progress here. If you have an idea, welcome debate and challenges . It's how concepts become refined and more accurate, in my humble opinion.
Currently half way through, what an incredible discussion. I really wish I could ask Rupert Sheldrake if the theory about the mirror isn’t directly contradicting the gaze experiment. Because if the person A having the gaze is looking towards a person B in a mirror and to A it will be the case that B is behind the mirror, then A will send his “gaze force” behind the mirror. But can B feel that, since B is on a physical location that differs from the location in the field where A has the energy of the gaze directed to. The easier explanation still may be that feeling a gaze is realizing the social /physical importance of someone looking at us rather than receiving energy from a field. The fact that we suddenly know that someone is gazing at us doesn’t strike me as very convincing because there are also enough reports of people not noticing that someone is intently looking at them. How often do you hear about someone having a crush on someone else and the receiver of the affection being the last one to notice it. Seems hard to explain if things like gazes and crushes directly are sent through a field. We may only “feel” the gaze once we turn around and discover that we have been gazed at, and if we turn around because we think we feel a gaze but there is nobody there, we may easily forget our earlier thought. This would make us biased to associate gaze feelings with situations where there was really a gaze.
@@tysyzygy i don’t find anything in what you say particularly in need of “fields” in the explanation of how gazes are picked up. For example: the animals that are hunted because they are too focused on an activity like eating or drinking, instead of not being tuned in to a field the more simpler explanation could be that they do ignore making a visual scan using head turning movements, because they prioritize eating or drinking instead of raising their head long enough to perform such a visual scan. And since you yourself indicate that the example of the woman detecting that she was stalked probably involves interpreting a lot of subtle behaviors from the stalker, I see no reason why these lots of factors would then exclude visual observing how often the stalker looks at you and how long before he looks at some other thing again. Which means a field is not per se necessary to explain how this woman might have inferred that the person was stalking her.
I talked to my mum about the nature of fish just the other day, explaining how I view it. I've never understood why people in general consider fish - or ticks and ants etc. - less valid (for lack of a better word) than animals like dogs and horses. I've often thought about fish in particular because I was told from a young age that they didn't experience pain. I've never accepted that claim as a fact... and at some point that led me to think about whether they had emotions as well, and I soon realised that I believed that they do. When I saw a video of a wild fish returning again and again to a man to be petted and even to be lifted out of the water and thrown back in, my conviction grew even stronger. Why would it do that unless it enjoyed it? And doesn't the feeling of enjoyment require a consciousness? Can you have feelings without a consciousness? It's hard for me to imagine that you can. Playful fish: th-cam.com/video/6at5gBa4ZbI/w-d-xo.html
Because dogs aid with hunting and herding animals and are a source of companionship. Horses aid with transportation, farming and warfare. They provide a utility that fish and ants do not, thus they are valued higher. Fish are deemed mere food and ants inconsequential at best and a pest at worse. Not all creatures are going to be on an equal footing. In terms of fish feeling pain; "the idea that fish flee noxious stimuli because they experience phenomenal consciousness (feel pain) is not the best explanation for this behaviour. It is more probable that fish demonstrate these behaviours because they have evolved innate reflexes associated with specific spinal and sub-telencephalic neural circuits" - www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4356734/ In terms of your fish video, you are just assuming it's returning to be petted. It could be doing so for any number of reasons & the assumption that its enjoying it is an unwarranted leap. Whereas a cat may make a gesture or prod the stroking hand to continue, the fish isn't given any signals to that end. It is merely returning to a spot where a guy happens to pet him. That it's being petted, could be incidental to the fish's choice to return. For all we know, it could be tolerating that behaviour in pursuit of something else. In addition, merely because a creature responds with what appears to be enjoyment, does not imply there is a consciousness there.
You are urged to become VEGAN, since carnism (the destructive ideology that supports the use and consumption of animal products, especially for “food”) is arguably the foremost existential crisis.🌱
@@dmc6262no, just because an organism _looks_ like it's conscious doesn't necessarily imply that it _is_ conscious... but then you have to explain _why_ it would be evolutionarily beneficial for an organism to look conscious when in fact it isn't. And, given that we know that _we_ are conscious, and given that we _know_ that we evolved directly from the same organism in question (we share 97% of the same DNA with even the common fly), well... it's just more parsimonious to invoke Occam's Razor and assume the simplest explanation. Which is that if an organism _looks_ conscious then it probably _is_ conscious. To assume the alternate hypothesis is just revealing that tired old bias of human exceptionality. _Homo sapiens sapiens_ may be the smartest organisms on the planet, but we're not _that_ exceptional, and we're definitely not the only creatures that are conscious...
@@simesaid You might not need to necessarily explain that as not all cases of evolution are advantageous. Also just because you can come up with some explanation as to why it would be beneficial for it look conscious when it isn't, doesn't tell us if it's in fact the case. Just because we share heaps of dna, it doesn't mean that quality A found in animal A is therefore found in animal B. You don't get to down tools and just invoke occam's razor to settle on an explanation. "If it looks conscious then it probably is" - Not very scientific at all. I'm not assuming the alternative hypothesis either. Rejection of one claim doesn't mean acceptance of its alternative. My position is neutral. I neither claim they are conscious nor that they aren't. Well you may not think we're exceptional, that is subjective. But compared to other animals? I don't know. When they develop a civilisation capable of reaching the moon, and put a probe into deep space then i'd consider it.
I suspect the difference is that humans experience pain through resistance, and animals don't - they just experience as it is, with no thoughts, story, anxiety or evaluation, saying "this is bad" "this shouldn't be" "I am a poor suffering individual" "oh dear, what can I do, this is too much" etc. etc. With the mind in the way, humans experience a torment that animals don't - the torment of resistance, anxiety, anticipation and fear. When pain is experienced without those filters, it transforms, passes much more quickly, and is far less hard to endure.
These,discussions are crucial ! As even tthough it is taught by academia the mind is simply a machine that can be quantified the true state of science reveals thought is( at this time) a unquantifiable manifestation.
The only one who had certain experiences is Rupert Sheldrake and talks differently. Anil Seth talks nonsense, he doesn't believe that an energy in us will remain to exist when the body dies, while SCIENTISTS have already in 1967 proven that this energy really exist. It's measurable and even visual with right electronic devices. It's all about energies and frequencies. The Furhmann woman talks more religious, so totally on the wrong track about this subject.
@@REDPUMPERNICKEL What religious people call the "soul", scientists call that "consciousness", someone else might call that the "chi" or "lifeforce". All names for the same energy. It's not 110 volts. It's not that kind of energy. Not even that electromagnetic field that is generated when we move, do sport. When we speak of an energy, then it has a frequency. No matter what kind of energy. That energy is measurable with an electronic device, to know its frequency. What scientist know these days is not talked about in general, you need to look that up for yourself. So, that energy in our body is proven by many scientist. The many experiments of different kind about that "energy" in our body that has been conducted for decades, show/proof at least one thing: it exist. I've had since I was a child many experiences of what people call paranormal and supernatural. An apparition is that same energy that we all have in our body. A body cannot function without. The consciousness, memories and emotions are in that energy. A body would become instantly a pile of fles/blood/body if that energy would be out of the body. The body will not move at all. For example when someone has an out-of-body experience. I'm not even religious. That energy is scientific, not the twilight zone of religion.
@@ExperiencedGhost Just so you know, your answer has not appeared on my screen either. I have also been experiencing this same 'disappearing comment' problem lately. All my comments are present in my TH-cam archive but do not show up in the threads where they were made. Curious. Is TH-cam overwhelmed with data or their censoring algorithms run amok or have they hit some mysterious incompetence level that's starting to degrade the system? I don't know. Hope they can fix it.
Right, so much of nature has scaler/vector dichotomies but in truth and reality you can't easily separate one from the other. It's unfortunate that Science tends to choose the path that it can more easily study.
great video! really enjoyed the insights from all the speakers. but i can't help but wonder if we're overcomplicating the idea of consciousness. maybe it’s simpler than we think, and trying to link it to something beyond our brains could lead us astray. just a thought!
Its so weird I woke up from a nap to this video.this is something i think about every morning,my dreams try to keep me sometime when I'm dreaming it feels like I can remember being in my dream for 20 years and when I go back to sleep my dreams continue from where they left off.the only way I wake up from my dreams is by having a nightmare I wake up with my heart beating super fast and trying to ketch my breathe because by that point i can feel pain and I'm telling myself to open my eyes it takes awhile but eventually I can bring my consciousness back to reality and out of sleep its a scarry experience when I can't find your myself I think I get lost in the dream world and it feels like I'm dead like I have to connection to my body and I have to try so hard to get back to myself and make myself open my eyes ..sometimes I wake up and for a second forget where I'm at or who I am or who's with me . I had a dream I got murdered in this house and it was on repeat the dream and I remember what the house looked like what the mom looked like and I would walk out of. The room I was in there was my murders in that room and i had this feeling like I was gonna shit myself or my bowls were going to completely release so I run to the restroom and passing by a room is a dog that startles me and the mom is in the room in the background and she has burgendy fluffy wavy long hair she's old and gives me a dirty look and it felt like I did that three times untell i finally reached the restroom and I'm in the restroom its dark and something popes up in front of me and it seems like it yells at me I'm dead and I look in the mirror and my stomach drops and I feel like I'm falling and my whole life flashes before me then woosh I'm back in front of the mirror and that when I realise that its not me I'm looking aat its someone I've never seen before but I'm looking three her eyes and covered in black shit like oil or dirt all over me and I'm saying i don't want to dye this isn't my body and I fall to oblivion and wake up in a sweat breathing heavily ...and thats just one dream there all so vivid ..scary..most of the time
@Bad.az.barbie Whoa..! I love hearing other people's crazy, scary dreams. My sister and I talk together about our dreams all the time; no one else wants to hear it 😆. Your dream sounds intense as hell and very frightening. I hope you're okay and can just take it in stride. I have grown to find my 'scary' dreams just as interesting and intriguing as the fun ones. Stay well x
LOOK UP SLEEP PARALYSIS..I HAVE THAT CONDITION ALSO SOME STREET DRUGS AND PRESCRIBED MEDICATIONS AND EVEN SUPPLEMNTS CAN CAUSE NIGHT TERRORS EVEN BLOOD PRESSURE MEDS SLEEP MEDS ANTIDEPRESSANTS ETC LOOK UP ANY MEDS YOU MIGHT TAKE SIDE EFFECTS- ALSO DONT WATCH SCARY MOVIES YOUR BRAIN WILL REMEBER AND MIX IN STUFF TO YOUR DREAMS RANDOMLY AND YOU WONT REALISE ITS EVEN FROM A MOVIE OR BOOK ETC THJAT YOU WATCHED OR READ OR EVEN A VIDEO OR SONG YOU HEARD GOOD LUCK
Wow this video is popping off. I would've never thought that when I sat in the live audience :D This debate is the first of its kind hosted by a mainstream university (as far as I know and as said by Rupert), which could be a sign that times are changing. I recommend videos from the Essentia Foundation if you're interested in these kinds of topics.
Same here. And this is not the first time, I remember some of the comments, I have read this before, recently. TH-cam has some kind of brainwashing formula going here.
Me too. A tough, cruel illness to watch a person lose all their life's work of memories. Coconut oil seems to help with the clock drawing test. Recent research in Aust pointing to higher clusters in areas prone to blue/green algae - stagnet dead water. More side effects of unhealthy eco systems perhaps? Not a scientist.
@@highvalence7649 it might be on 'if Dementia patients have consciousness', which in my opinion they do, but in full alzheimers its a bit more debatable, as they literally stop thinking, knowing who they are, and much else
Wonderful! Too often, academics in the public space give categorical statements which encourage ridicule of anyone who doesn't hold to conventional wisdom. This debate was a fantastic antidote. I've no idea who is right, or if any of the speakers are right, but I'm so glad to hear their views being seriously considered. Although I am not a materialist, my favourite was Anil Seth. This is because of his intellectual humility and respect for those with different views.
Hello ! May Allah protect and guide you to his light and happiness in this life and the hereafter, God bless, Ameen. Excuse me for giving a little presentation of Islam, because it is very misunderstood nowadays, especially on those « Antichrist's » times, where media and politics are mixed to distort history and truth. And terrorists (puppets of the Antichrist) who misinterpret verses, out of ignorance and political motivations, and take them out of historical context (just like radical atheists do by the way) don't help either. Thank you very much for your time. First of all, if you have any questions regarding Islam and yourself, just open the Quran randomly, and you will find the answer in front of you, like a miracle and a sign from God.
Islam is an arabic word that means the Surrender to the One and Only God, our Creator, Protector, Provider, who gives us life and all that we have, we are safe and sound by his will and grace, we are His and to Him we return, and we have to thank him in this trial life by submitting to him by our free will, or later in the Day of judgment when it's too late to save our own skin. Islam was the original Religion descended to earth from heaven with Adam and Eve (peace and blessing be upon them) in the beginning of humanity. and was passed to people with the succession of the 124 000 prophets and 315 messengers of God to all nations and civilizations since, passing by Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Ismaël, Joseph, Moses, Aaron, Joshua, David, Solomon and Jesus (Peace and blessing be upon them) during the history of mankind, the last replaces and completes the previous, until the succession of the last messenger of God fourteen centuries ago, Muhammad (Peace and blessing be upon him) to complete the noble morals of all mankind, to bring humans and jinns out of darkness into light, and to purify people's religion and belief from corruption and polytheism, and return it to purity and true monotheism, like it was in the times of the prophets (Peace and blessing be upon them). Many Religions that we know nowadays, at their beginning were true and under Islam, initiated by one of the prophets of God, but their original teachings, history and scriptures have been corrupted over time with falsification and polytheism, or lost and replaced with false ones. That's why Islam is the only Religion accepted by God nowadays, which consists in bearing witness that there is no god besides Allah (God in Aramaic, the original language of Jesus and the Gospel), and that Muhammad is His servant and messenger, just like Jesus and Moses and others are His servants and messengers. Never a messenger of God said he was God or literally son of God, it was the people after him who changed the words of God and corrupted the Religion. God is unique and absolute, He does not need to have a family and sons or to associate anyone else with His kingdom, He can simply create whatever He wants, everything belongs to Him, and to Him everything will return. Allah said in Surah Al-Mu’minun : “God has never begotten a son, nor is there any god besides Him. Otherwise, each god would have taken away what it has created, and some of them would have gained supremacy over others. Glory be to God, far beyond what they describe. The Knower of the hidden and the manifest. He is exalted, far above what they associate. (91-92 / Translated by ITANI). Allah means the one and only God, the God of all prophets and creatures, the creator of the universe and mankind, and the Master of the Day of judgment, where our destiny, Hell or Paradise, is decided based on our faith and deeds in this trial life, and above all, Allah's mercy. Allah said in Surah Al-Ikhlas : In the name of God, the Gracious, the Merciful. Say, “He is God, the One. God, the Absolute. He begets not, nor was He begotten. And there is none comparable to Him.” (1-4 / Translated by ITANI). Allah said in Surah An-Nisa : O FOLLOWERS of the Gospel! Do not overstep the bounds [of truth] in your religious beliefs, and do not say of God anything but the truth. The Christ Jesus, son of Mary, was but God's Apostle - [the fulfilment of] His promise which He had conveyed unto Mary - and a soul created by Him. Believe, then, in God and His apostles, and do not say, "[God is] a trinity". Desist [from this assertion] for your own good. God is but One God; utterly remote is He, in His glory, from having a son: unto Him belongs all that is in the heavens and all that is on earth; and none is as worthy of trust as God. Never did the Christ feel too proud to be God's servant, nor do the angels who are near unto Him. And those who feel too proud to serve Him and glory in their arrogance [should know that on Judgment Day] He will gather them all unto Himself: (171-172 / Translated by Muhammad Asad). Allah the Most Merciful said in Surah Ali-Imran : Behold, the only [true] religion in the sight of God is [man's] self-surrender unto Him; and those who were vouchsafed revelation aforetime took, out of mutual jealousy, to divergent views [on this point] only after knowledge [thereof] had come unto them. But as for him who denies the truth of God's messages - behold, God is swift in reckoning! Thus, [O Prophet,] if they argue with thee, say, "I have surrendered my whole being unto God, and [so have] all who follow me!" - and ask those who have been vouchsafed revelation aforetime, as well as all unlettered people, "Have you [too] surrendered yourselves unto Him?" And if they surrender themselves unto Him, they are on the right path; but if they turn away - behold, thy duty is no more than to deliver the message: for God sees all that is in [the hearts of] His creatures. Verily, as for those who deny the truth of God's messages, and slay the prophets against all right, and slay people who enjoin equity - announce unto them a grievous chastisement. It is they whose works shall come to nought both in this world and in the life to come; and they shall have none to succour them. (19-22 / Translated by Muhammad Asad).. God said : Say, “We believe in Allah, and in what was revealed to us, and in what was revealed to Abraham, and Ishmael, and Isaac, and Jacob, and the Patriarchs, and in what was given to Moses and Jesus, and in what was given to the prophets from their Lord. We do not differentiate between any of them. And to Him, we surrender.” (2:136 / Translated by Community) Salam (Peace) -----------------
For any one interested in these conversations, I would encourage you to seek out some discussions with Bernardo Kastrup and with Donald Hoffman. They seem to me to be a step further on.
No I don't a difference. Brain or biological being, it's the same. Both tells us about the body that exist in one frequency, while the energy in us is of an energy of a higher frequency. When the body dies, the energy remains - that's the one of a higher frequency.
I think consciousness could be the signal to which our antenna (Brain) receives. I think our brain, (the signal capturer), like our Wi-Fi or cable boxes, lack the complexity and comprehension to understand the signal. Our brains are simply the transmitter, the messenger if you will, to which the message is outside of our feeble grasp. Invoking a higher mind here responsible for this all. A God if you will, but not a God of the thousands of beliefs systems, but a God vastly far difficult to know and understand.
we KNOW the neurons are the ones that CREATE the consciousness , groups of them actually , one group sending signals to another group of neurons , that ''contrast'' between the two ... IS the consciousness ... we just don't know WHY it does this , but we know HOW it happens ... it's ALL physical , even the connection between the groups ... is physical / material and by fiat , so is the consciousness itself , PHYSICAL
I think the answer of consciousness lies in the why and not the how. The how could merely be the a painter brushstrokes on a canvas but negate the painter emotion and vision to create it. It's crazy to think that with out some sort of conscious observer anything would exist. Existing in itself is an observation.
@@ThermaL-ty7bwyea precisely, what caused the group of neuron to even fire in the first place? That is exactly what OP is saying. The brain is a transmitter.
1:25:28 - If it turns out that space-time is a brain made UI the inside-outside distinction might be a lot more complicated and at that point you'd need to consider more that a conscious being is, with Karl Friston's theory, a bundle of Markov blanketed sectors where what we experience as 'us' is a particularly Markov bundle that distinguishes our subjectivity from our experience of the outside / objective world, but the question is whether that Markov blanket exists within us and whether we're ultimately rendering (ourselves) something really complicated into the appearance of Baryonic matter.
1:36:49 Inspiration: "spooky action at a distance", Quantum Entanglement; Wave-particle duality of C60 molecules; Carbon based lifeforms such as humans, unpacking thought inperiments
Consciousness: I was run over by a car as a teenager. Next thing I knew I was floating above my body looking down at myself lying in the road. Our bodies are like a car in that we get in it, and it's an extension of ourselves that allows us to maneuver in the environment. Our souls live in or out of the body.
You’re literally just inserting “soul” So let’s run that back. For some reason “consciousness” is talking to us and telling us about a car crash that it experienced when it was a teenager. So apparently, consciousness, they’re actually just a person, has a memory in real time from neurons that fire in their localized system. In this memory they’re visualizing what it would be like to experience floating above ones own body as a ghost like entity after a lifetime of experiencing POV in current media Via the concept of VR, any given movie or television series, and video games in general. Even without these experiences the concept of single perspective or limited perspective exists on its own. So forget about the details or the intricate argument. What is the overall encompassing motive in the suggestion behind this comment. The vibe I’m getting is, “Souls do exist”, “therefore God” If not, then, OK souls exist, so what…? If so, then who cares about another imperfect being made of a compilation and processor, Especially one that’s impossibly difficult to work with. And don’t even try to suggest that perfection in any form exist in the slightest because you’re talking to a wall at that point.
@@estona_spinoza64 Who is to decide what perfection is? Good/bad , happy/sad… it’s all an experience for no one. The experiencer is contained within the experience. Nothing is.
That analogy breaks down when you look at it closer. A car is built to have a person crawl inside it and control it. It has a steering wheel, brakes, gas pedal, seatbelt, gear shifter, etc. It's obvious that a car is entirely designed for something to exist in it and control it. The brain doesn't look anything like that. Nearly everything that one might ascribe to consciousness has at the very least a physical explanation based on changes in gene expression, post-translational modifications of proteins, changes in receptor composition or density in the synapse, changes in numbers and/or morphology of synapses, or changes in neural networks. But all of these changes are autonomous and have no evidence that they can be meddled with by a non-physical ghost. A better analogy is that the brain is more like a Roomba. Fully autonomous, following rule sets that are determined by the structure of the controlling devices based on sensory input.
This discussion is based on astrophysics. Having the ability to tap into your consciousness is not tapping into your memories. As mankind is not capable of controlling the subconscious mind the memories stored in the brain is not chronological. Memory is association based. Even the subconscious mind associates' memories to store them more accurately. To astro project is to tap into the subconscious mind while conscious. At this point in reality, you are complete energy. Which allows you to travel to where energy travels. Energy is not binding to time and space. Even time itself is not binding to reality and space. However, energy is both in the past and currently lol in the present. There is no future. Tomorrow has not happened. No energy has made it there yet.
You give the impression that you conceive of energy as something like a ghost. Energy is not at all like that. Energy is simply the way we think about material behavior. @@rafaelgonzalez4175
I visualize this as the ability to tap into a river of light and energy from our universes creation like a stream, being able to jump like a small fish, from person to person, and forward and backward in time.
I saw this in a vision. Except rather than jumping like a fish....a life is more like a rivulet that splits from the main stream and flows alone for a time, before rejoining the main stream.
TOTALLY AGREE, I USED TO WEAR AND ELECTRICAL WATCH WITH AN ELECTRICAL DISPLAY, WHEN I WAS PARTYING HARD IT WOULD ACTUALLY FLASH.....LOL @@Miodrag.Vukomanovic
My favorite phenomena is when I worked retail and I would observe people behaving like herd animals. Say it was a tuesday morning, maybe 10 people in the store. You are at the cash register with no customers just twiddling your thumbs. Then all of a sudden people would make their final decision and converge on the register practically as one from all over the store and you'd have to call for backup. I swear there is some trigger that caused all of them to move together, they couldn't see each other, hear each other, and were not in communication. I saw this happen a hundred times at least.
It is same in restaurants, it can be dead and you get 1 customer and majority of times it will be that "herd" you talk about. It will rarely be just that 1, it is almost always followed by at least 1 more behind them or more. and then it will be dead again. Sometiems it is due to the time of day, like when most places let out for lunch, or shift change then at least the "herd" is caused by a known factor... or when the bars close, you get the predictable "herds" but I'm talking about the dead times like 3-4am... even then when 1 pulls in, usually 1 or more will be right behind them then go back to being dead.
@@nickgray8072 what truth , that we ARE pack animals ? which we are ... or that people are pattern seeking machines ... that like to stick to ... patterns ... whoop de do , you figured us out , we like patterns , our brain likes patterns , we behave IN patterns , job done ... that was hard to figure out , wasn't it ... ?
we all have the same brain , with the same pattern recognition machines in them , most of them use the same register , if they can , so most of them ARE going to walk to the same place , every time they come there , so are the rest of the people shopping there , so Yes , they are going to ALL come to the same pattern to follow they did the previous YEARS
May be confirmation bias. You might have only noticed the herd of customers becaue one or two customers coming to the register isnt memorable, definitely not as memorable as being swamped all of a sudden and wondering why.
Modern research on Near Death Experience by Raymond moody, reincarnation memories by Ian Stevenson/Jim trucker and past lives regression by Brian Weiss all independently but coincidentally show that our consciousness survive death, we live many lives and our thoughts and actions matter in the hereafter. So be kind and helpful to others, be virtuous, meditate and cultivate ourselves to higher spiritual levels. Cheers.
On reincarnation I would humbly say it is not conclusive because non-human intelligences like démons can induce false memories since they exist perpetually. So I agree we must be kind and good, but only because God the highest intelligence will judge us all.
@@DavidMorudu There is a massive difference between an NDE and a dream. That is that during an NDE one is brain dead, there is no blood circulation, no oxygen to the brain, and no neural activity as a result. Yet many people report that during this time they have experiences, and that should not be possible.
I'd love to have a solid understanding of how things like this happen - I've had many (sleeping) dreams that showed me future events and people that I would come in contact with. For example, I had a dream of sitting in a circle of people in chairs and we were talking. I saw the room and specific people - their faces, clothes, body positions, etc. Many years later, my uncle killed himself and I went to a support group for counseling. A few sessions in, I realized these were the people in that dream.
I don't know what the term is but something like randomization. Think of all the people in the world having multiple dreams every night, Someone is going to think/dream of something that will be similar to it in real life at some point. Other than that, no one in history has been able to consistently dream the actual future accurately besides in fables and tall tales.
@Charles-ij1ow that's a very certain assessment. Methinks it's a bit beyond your experience. No offense is intended, of course, but I'm just struck by how facile you are with your dismissal, despite millenia of testimonials attesting to the opposite of your claim.
Very interesting. At about 1:50 min they spoke about phantom limb pain? Loved it! I had a radical mastectomy at 43, now 68 and still have this itchy nipple that isn't there along with other pain from that surgery (but that was nerve damage that won't get better). I would think there's a large cohort of women who could be part of a trial or something about this when it comes to phantom pain/nipple itch, ya know? I LOVE Rupert- and believe his idea of the morphic field, his first (I think, 1988) book "Presence of the Past:" really changed how I think, opened my eyes and he keeps it up. At last I see he's making a difference. This group of egg heads were all very smart and interesting, I loved this discussion, thank you.
As a (rather mild) and thankfully cured (Aripiprazole 400mg) schizophrenic, I wont say former but the meds are good long term. I took the opportunity to have dialogues of many whispered discussions with whatever was listening. Apart from some overtly exterior voices and some inner voices, I at times had stomach grumbles that formed sentences, a bit muted for my hearing (I remember asking for a repetition of sentences several times which would rumble a response) but otherwise plain as day, I also had them rapping on windows and 'Gaussing' CRT screens once for yes, twice for no on several memorable occasions and had my matress shaken quite wildly during one or two of these sessions too. That's about the extent of it but the entities/voices would suggest and perform mental feats too. I don't know what state I was in but it was very receptive.
Glad you are well and thanks for sharing your experience. My best friend got that as well a handful of years back, if not maybe a bit more of a severe case, but the aripiprazole helps him a ton too!
@@thesayerofing Been feeling mentally well for years now, thanks and good to know that your best friend is benefitting. I find the meds subtle, you can't really feel any present effect which I find is a lot better than being constantly drowsy (Olanzapine) or zonked right out (Stelazine). The psychiatrist ttried to explain how Aripiprazole works to me, to the effect of "you can still get bad days and events but you'll bounce back rather than stay down and get worse". The same psychiatrist that swore his meds made you live 10 years longer though lol, so who knows. After such experiences I still don't know what to personally believe, the only thing I'm sure of is that if we can't get hold of the elixir of life before we die, cryonics are the best chance to be brought back, eventually. At least you'll be preserved as well as possible on the offchance of revival, I'll take it.
Incredible, after all this time this is it, really. Biology doesn't have consciousness, people other than this single point. All of the 3 dimensional universe is held together by consciousness and sits in the divine mind
It is extremely important to ask what general anasthesia and surgery do to the nature of consciousness in the body. There is a definite effect that causes people who've had surgery to be extremely objective, even when they dont want to be so objective
@@dawud7791 every thing is physical, even if consciousness exists without the body, its still a physical phenomenon. Do we call the wind or radio waves or light waves spiritual?
@@curtis-dj5bp I don’t know how to explain wind, or radio waves or photons, aside from energy. I don’t think they would be considered physical, even though they can cause a physical experience, And be measured. Interesting, never thought about it. I was refereing to the physical tangible body vs. consciousness, which to my thought would be more like elements you mentioned, but impossible to measure.
I feel seth took up way too much time talking, he didn't really give anyone else a chance to speak, I would have rather listened to Luhrmann and Sheldrake speak more...
After hearing this for the 3rd time, watching it now was real thought-provoking and clarifying as well. Very good to see different perspectives on the topic. The ideas of mind x consciousness and body x disembodiment are extremely interesting. Also, how it changes from just listening to actually looking at how each person presents itself on a debate. How to interpret what you said by sight and by hearing & how our brains receive an unprecedented amount of unconscious stimuli - but only what is conscious comes to surface... maybe? Thanks for putting this together. 👀🙌🏼
the lady is speaking all about what I used to call being a sensitive, just focusing your mind a little you can see people heath by the color of their aura. I now try and avoid this stuff as it never seems to end well, but i have been everywhere. today I visualize consciousness as two journeys, one to life until birth then a journey to death. this all begins with the first journey.
She's also talking about what is originally known as the witch's familiar. And today I guess they're calling them Tulpa's. Same thing, same practice, with a different title for the kiddos.
I genuinely believe that this subject cannot be fully investigated without seeing the problem from alternate angles. So - in the way that neurologists mapped functions within areas of the brain by studying brain damaged individuals than then lose very specific abilities based on the area that was damaged. It was very surprising to see that things we take for granted as part of the human experience that you wouldn't realise had a specific area for - such as face recognition, seeing edges - even detecting movement changes within a scene (if you lose this ability and you're at a train station, the train would just 'appear', you wouldn't see it pull into the station). Also, in a similar way that the structure of DNA was discovered by shining X-Rays through it and observing the shadow - what I'm trying to say, is that, by altering your consciousness, it could cast a 'shadow' of the shape and workings of it. Therefore, drugs that affect consciousness, especially psychedelics - would make a huge impact in learning about the workings of the self, the ego and consciousness and awareness. Designing specific drugs for altering the consciousness in specific ways could be used for investigative purposes. If you're aware of Alexander Shulgin and his books - 'PIHKAL' and 'TIHKAL' (amazing story and person) over the course of 20-30 years, he *legally* invented thousands of new psychedelic drugs and tested them all on himself. In support of this approach, I can say that anyone who has experienced the true 'mystical' or an extreme result from a psychedelic experience have experienced states that defy words and logic. We are not seeing the universe as it truly is, we have only evolved to cope with the model we are given. But there is so much more going on than we will ever be aware of. If you have experienced true 'ego death' - having your sense of self completely dissolved. You don't even need drugs. Long term meditation/Buddhists strive for those moments. You become one with everything and the walls or the bubble that 'you' live inside, disappears. The psychedelic experience is very similar to a deep meditative state.
Yes! I always felt that Niel Degrasee Tyson and what has become the "modernist" scientific community. Many of these characters want intentionally disconnect our souls from our bodies. Degrasse Tyson is such a dark, creaking, creep!
The problem with death might be is that with anesthesia consciousness goes first but with death other brain processes might go first that are relevant for perceiving the passage of time. So it might happen that you don't experience time passing and you are still conscious. And that might mean, that your last conscious moment is there "forever", at least forever for you. That might be what is considered eternal life. From the outside it's a glimpse, from the inside it never ends.
Yeah, maybe. Maybe the quality of that experience depends on the memories, emotions etc that you accumulate during your life. That sounds almost religious... Maybe you experience all of them at once without the time-like sequence. This can be something like what people call "life review" in near-death experiences.@@mikeh3559
@@mikeh3559Yes and no, I’ve experienced and do have a overwhelming sense that I’ve died before , I also have memories of living before, certain things change up, even if it’s just a little bit. But it’s more of a timeline thing. But think of it this way though, if some of this stuff weren’t a little bit true, none of us wouldn’t be here. This is what sparked my interest, apparently that’s the power of the internet, and its algorithms, it attracts people with a sense for what it is.
When the body dies there’s no longer a “house” to hold the consciousness/soul (awareness of one’s soul). Our Consciousness goes on to another plane of existence, it can’t stay on the flesh & blood plane.
I feel like you could make the most scientifically sound paper hinting at the possibility that conciousness extends beyond the brain and it wouldnt pass peer review just because of the premise
Consciousness is infused within the material universe and we happen to be a concentrated center of consciousness, less concentrated in a dog, and still less concentrated in a rock. Through Sartori we are able to experience this, which is beyond thought and conceptualization, therefore any intellectual discussion will always fall short. We are an eyeball of the conscious universe “seeing” itself.
While I would agree that we are the universe observing itself in a certain sense, this notion that consciousness is "infused within the material universe" seems, at the very least, deeply misleading and preassuming that what we term "physicality" actually exists as a fundamental aspect of the World itself. However, all that we know about what we term the "physical universe" comes from our own qualitative experience of it, which is intrinsically non-physical in nature - therefore why should we then take the leap beyond our own primary experience of the World to say that the reality outside of our individual minds (which I do believe exists) is physical in nature? It seems far more likely (and, indeed, converging scientific arguments from the like of Donald Hoffman and Karl Friston would support this) that physical reality is more akin to an interface that we use to interact w/ reality. It's a tool that we use, not a thing that actually exists fundamentally.
Within? How did you test this? How do you know consciousness is in matter and not matter in consciousness seeing as it takes a leap to say matter exists outside of consciousness when you can never get out of consciousness to prove that assumption. How do you know about “quantities” of consciousness and how much each animal has? Your thoughts are just thoughts, and the you that has thoughts is also just a thought too, another model you’ve made up and assumed to actually exist, along with this apparent “universe”. Reality only experiences itself of course but this universe and you are mere models, assumptions, imaginings.
Rather than extending the mind,I prefer considering that we have more than the most obvious 5 senses. In the days of telegrams, my prorperty was farmed by a woman (with husband) whose identical sister lived in another province. She felt her sister's death before receiving a telegram. The direct gaze is stronger than the periferal gaze. I once accidentally established a line of force with a direct look at a lady. I was able to break it by looking away. On looking back, it reset and I could see that she had no control was terrified. So,I looked away.
On topic, that initially, within the biological realm, plasma was assumed to be irrelevant to the inner biomechanics of mitochondrial development❗️ Now it’s known to be the forefront of Epigenetics✅ So, 🦋🙌🏽🍸 🐉🧭🌴that the instinctive response to coping mechanisms of an evolving biological process/entity, is the Epidemiology of self preservation 🎶☂️ 0:47
I just wonder what Seth means when he says that the question what life is has been solved or dissolved. Do we really know what life is in a better or deeper way than what consciousness is? Can anyone point to the science or understanding of what life is?
I have been under general anesthesia twice. The first time, I went under speaking and terrified and came out laughing. Coming out of anesthesia laughing even shocked the nurse, but I felt really expanded and deeply happy. It was a very odd experience.
I can remote view, I'm willing to volunteer for a scientific blind study involving this ability using eeg, or artificial intelligence that can visually see what the mind is seeing and represent it digitally. The universe and consciousness is porous to me also.
I enjoyed this conversation. Having said that, I wish the panelists would have included someone like Bernardo Kastrup. With all due respect to Tanya Luhrmann and Rupert Sheldrake, the panel needed someone who would have pushed back more aggressively to the myopic perspective and logical fallacies inherent in Anil Seth's reductive materialism.
Sheldrake is far too experienced to be combative with people whose position is: "We know what's true know, so the question is what should we do with what we know isn't true? "
@@PazLeBon It's a false proposition friend. The current standard secular model of the universe is every bit as willful as those of the past filled with gods and cosmic dragons.
@nietztsuki What are the "logical fallacies" inherent to Seth's view? It's rational and pragmatic to study the potential materialist foundations of consciousness first, and to preference that approach since brains do exist and changes in brain states do nominally appear to correlate with changes in conscious states, rather than opening up the discipline to anyone with a pet theory that relies upon their personal "intuition" or self styled metaphysical woo woo..which is more often than not just a cover for their religious bias.
Rupert has always been a favorite of mine. So much to learn from him. He is the definition of humility. Such a kind soul, such a gentleman. I continue to strive to be more like this man. Just in general. What a brilliant gift to this world.
He is so deeply biased and presents "evidence" with confidence which has either been falsified or is unfalsifiable (pure speculation with no experimental support). I would gladly accept the psychic staring effect is real, but it's so easy to test and has never been conclusively demonstrated. Go ahead and test it with yourself and a group of friends. Look at any one of his popular theories (e.g. Morphic Resonance). He claims it is easily observed in crystals, yet there is no evidence for this effect.
I really gravitate towards Luhrmann's view of consciousness, as a creative and (more or less) open space (or field - same thing) where different egos develop - depending on the cultural tribal metanarrative. Just as we learn to associate symbols with ideas (call them reality) and dissociate self from other (through comparison, dreams, memory) - a god story can impart a benevolent wise figure in my internal communion of beings. I have an 8yo Pomeranian who is attracted to all other Pomeranians, but hates all French Bulldogs. Last night he stopped a woman walking past and started sniffing her entire leg, standing on his heels - which never happened before. She smiled and told me she has a Pomeranian at home. So there is proof that the mind of Pomeranians is not limited to their small craniums. The mind is definitely outside! Mental health could be revamped with positive stories and selftalk. Last point: bring on the real sharman, someone from the Amazon who timetravels on ayahuasca to a state of atomised non-existence (call it death). Intellectualising in ever increasing academic orbits around the hard problem is futile without asking the seer who has returned from his astral travels.
I will never forget the last time I had anesthesia. I woke up smiling. I was mad that I was interrupted and felt great. I couldn’t remember anything but I knew that it was wonderful….
this was my experience also, and i had an ostomy done (thankfully temporary-its been reversed now) so it wasnt good times lol. i also noted the stark difference between normal sleep and the anesthesia, i have a sense of time passed when i awake from sleep, but i literally had no timeframe of how long i had been under the anesthesia. i was amazed when they told me id been out for hours, in my mind it could have been seconds or days for all i knew. i awoke literally smiling and cheerful, i joked with the surgeon
@@SeanHH1986 Maybe it's enjoyable because you are getting a deep sleep that you normally don't get and it feels good. On another note, my father had heart surgery back in the day when they had to open up his rib cage to perform the operation. Right in the middle he woke up, horrified. They put him right back to sleep but OMG how horrible!!!
I experience a shift in conscientiousness when I became emotional about an answer to a question I needed and the person I needed to ask physically emerged in my surrounding, even though he was in a different state, after I experienced that, I called him and I asked him if he gave me the answer to the question I was thinking about when we were together, in person, and he hesitated before saying no, so I didn't bring up the experience I just encountered but later in that day I wondered why he hesitated before answering the question, maybe he also had an experience in that moment but even if he did I don't think he would have excepted it because he practice ministry
Consciousness originated before matter. Brain filters info for survival purposes. Mind universal. Brain recieves input, thinking it originates thought, whereas it recieves& interprets. Mind not in brain but vice versa. Latter like bucket. Former like sea. Mind exists before & beyond brain. Plants live react move eat grow but no brain. Yet has awareness of sunlight, joy, stress.
Exactly, it explains all the errors in their arguments. The brain is more like an antenna. I have met people who were missing as much as half of their brains missing, and they were still able to hold a normal conversation. Some months later they passed away from the injury. But some can continue with their lives if the injuries are not too bad.
This is a beautiful description of consciousness. Although personally i don't think it's 'everywhere', but instead that it exists as a global property of a group of conscious, connected humans.
This is probably going to sound silly, but Bob Marley sang off a natural mystic flowing through the air, and he certainly wasn't the only one to think in those terms, there's nothing scientific about that song but it certainly has always made me wonder..... For what it is worth I think that consciousness itself is one phenomenon but with different flavours, a bit like I think physics is one thing but also with different flavours, I am obviously no expert but plasma physics seems to be opening up new exiting doors, and so too are studies into consciousness and while in my opinion there always will be more questions than answers we do seem to be on the precipice of a exiting (yet scary) new age
No it doesn't need to be 'defined' neccesarily. You have it - a subjective experience. This is why spirituality focuses on engaging with it experiential. Definitions are more abstractions within consciousness. They're not 'wrong' but they won't neccesarily do what people hope
@@simonsharp3319I agree with you that if the knowledge is experiential, and therefore self-evident, you don’t need a definition. However, if you want to discuss it with others, to compare different perspectives, you do need a definition as others’ ideas of consciousness may be quite different from yours. For example, Hindu philosophy considers consciousness to be the Subject of any search, be it for Consciousness or a lost watch. Therefore, just as the eyes cannot see themselves, Consciousness cannot be revealed by any search. It is the “field of all experiences” but cannot, itself be experienced as the Object of a search.
When all experience of thought is taken to be self only, one's experience is entirely selfish. One becomes prone to addictions. Worse, a person has nothing truly creative or original to share. Just pure, narcissistic opinion and self centred fear. Religion can open the door. So can magic mushrooms. So can music, mathematics, and falling in love. As long as it is not just merely one's own thoughts.
In the universe us animals eat each other to survive mostly. It is not beautiful. The universe does not owe you beauty or need it. It doesn't matter how selfish or how anything that makes one, or how bad or amazing it makes them become, anecdotal to truth, it just is.
@@paulrussell1207Animals eating each other is very beautiful. You just don't have the aesthetic capacity to see it. Truth and Beauty are bigger than you.
I agree with Rupert.with regards to Extramission I believe, based on a universal observation called 'Atomic Spectroscopy' which is the study of the electromagnetic radiation absorbed and emitted by atoms. That the electromagnetic radiation our eyes obsorb are then re-emitted back out into the world when the electron returns from its energised excited state, to its rest state. That electromagnetic energy would shoot back in the same direction and angle it was received by. So if someone was staring at you, you would theoretically would be able to feel the electromagnetic radiation being projected from yourself, to the person's eyes looking at you and then back to yourself from their eyes. Which is why it's frequency feels so familiar creating the feeling a that someone is staring at you.
I have my doubts that an electron would be able to re-emit at the exact angle of incident. From my understanding an electron's energy decides the electron shell it falls into and thus the shape of its 'orbit'. So it seems very unlikely. However, I have an alternative crank theory which I've derived from 3 things. 1) entanglement 2) "photons don't experience time" 3) the quantum eraser experiment. You feel it, because the photons communicating your shape and colours are entangled with you and any fields surrounding you and your brain.. now perhaps unrelatedly since these photons don't experience time it is as if their birth and death are the same instance.. so now upon death when they hit someone else's retina their entanglement to you transfers to another person and you feel their consciousness touch yours. Like I said, crank theory.. but maybe it is closer to reality than the alternatives.
@@joshua-c44 great concept. I like it. That feeling like someone is watching is the feeling of spooky action at a distance. From my brain storming on entanglement, I when I was asking the question: Is there an objective and local reality. An entangled particles spin is set at the point of entanglement. They are not in a super position (2 realities simultaneously) The reality of their spin direction is unknown until measured. Measuring it does not manifest reality, it manifests Information about an objective reality that was created at the point of entanglement. They are 1 or the other. Conservation of angular momentum forces the particles to be opposite at the point of entanglement, as the interaction between the two particles causes them to bounce off In Opposing forces. Like 2 billardballs rolling into each other. At the point they collide, one spins up, the other spins down and the move apart in opposite directions. If we call that entangled, the moment you measure one ball, you immediately know the spin of the other. Things have to be objectively real whether we observe them or not, as 2 people observing the wave functuons of matter at different times experience the same reality and describe it identically. One person didn't see it first and manifest it into reality and make everyone else see it that way. It is the way it is and always has been due to the nature of the fundamental particles it's composed of. So I do t believe entanglement is an actual thing. Just our best guess in an unexplainable phenomenon that we don't have the technology to test yet.
I could understand how this concept could hold water. Electromagnetic energy is limited to its range. Depth of field. Then if my aura is not reaching the peering eyes, it would be the energy that is disturbed by the energy of the peering eyes that attract my attention. The particle is photon. I would argue the photon has the unlimited range and line of sight. When another photon comes in the line of sight, they exchange energy and velocity to match and move on. However, if the energy is more neutrons than protons then it would be negative energy. That could interfere with absorbing positive energy, leaving a feeling of negativity from a specific direction.
@@ExperiencedGhostwell for starters id like to see your double blind experimental evidence to verify that claim. secondly, your eyelid skin is not solid. Light can travel through your eye lids, they are translucent. electromagnetic radiation can penetrate a lot of "solid" matter, as 99.99% of matter is generally unused space. Maybe if your eye lids were made of lead, then i would agree my theory falls apart.
Its amazing that science in the light is catching up to the fact that human consciousness resides within the Noosphere (it has a little - above one of the o's but I don't know how to write that here)
Thank you Bergen/Holberg Prize, Seth, Luhrman & Sheldrake, for this excellent and fascinating discussion; that for me among other things, serves to confirm Thomas Berry's 7th principle for a functional cosmology ie; 'The human is that being in whom the universe activates, reflects upon, and celebrates itself in conscious self awareness'.
The question I have is: and how does that definition not apply to other living things? Can we be sure those other organisms don’t do that in their own way? Does the evidence need to satisfy human criteria for self-awareness? How long have humans been here compared to fungi? How do fungi interact with their environment, solve problems, seek and allocate resources, etc. Do you see the species-centric assumptions in that definition?
Interesting points you raise here about being 'species-centric'. What we can be sure of is that the human is the only species we know of that deliberately reflects upon and celebrates the universe using story, ceremony and ritual. One needs to read all 12 of Thomas Berry's principles to realize that his overall cosmology is not 'species-centric'. Principle 12 for example refers to 'our immediate need to assist in activating the inter-communion of all the living and non living components of the Earth community'.. @@Kormac80
Berry's principle #7 could be loosely interpreted as being 'species centric' in that as far as we know, it is only the human that deliberately reflects upon and celebrates the universe using story, ceremony and ritual. However, one would need to consider all 12 of Berry's principles to realize that his overall cosmology is not 'species centric'; on the contrary, it strongly advocates the inter-communion of all the living and non living components of the Earth's community. @@Kormac80
@@Kormac80 I think it's just self awareness, just not many other animals are self aware, but it would hold true for a crow perhaps, and definitely AI when it becomes self aware.
@@CorTec Self-aware on whose terms? Ours? If you aren't familiar with the work of Stephen Buhner I'd recommend starting with The Secret Teachings of Plants. Also, consider the work of Marko Pogacnik who writes about Nature Spirits. I've also investigated Shamanism deeply, via my own plant medicine work, and reading the memoirs of Shaman and the academic take via Michael Winkelman. The upshot of it all is it's very easy in this culture to have a human-centric bias. But to assume other living beings lack self-awareness is questionable. Black Elk speaks is another useful resource to understand the wisdom of nature as it perceives us, which is a form of self-awareness.
Seth presented himself as an entirely banal product of his time, and apart from a certain cautious sensitivity to that fact, Luhmann really wasn't that much different. Sheldrake emerged as the only person worth listening to.
At 1:47:13 when Seth starts talking about not having a "need" for consciousness outside of the brain, he gives the game away that he is not a genuine truth-seeker but rather a scientistic worshipper of the kind of debunked 18th century materialism Sheldrake mentioned in his talk. In any case, the truth doesn't have anything to do with what you "need" or what you don't. It just is what it is. But because his ego leans so heavily on archaic materialist assumptions, Seth makes a kind of sideways appeal to Occam's Razor by pretending that an inside-only explanation of consciousness would be the "simpler" one. Really, it isn't simpler at all, because as Sheldrake pointed out, fields are a fundamental part of physical reality. You can see the kind of person Seth is just by looking at his aggressively-shaven bald head.
@Margatroid Haha - the last comment got me. Yes - couldn't agree more. It took me years of arguing with characters like Seth before I realised what was goimg on. It's simply a limitation. Talking to people like Dawkins or Seth about anything other than what they consider tangible, is like talking about unsolved problems in mathematics to someone with dyscalculia, about harmonics to someone who is tone-inaudible, about the spectrum to someone with colour-insensitivity or about empathy to the so. cio. path. ic. It's attempting to discuss qualities with people to whom those qualities have no reality. Only once you've worked that out, does their baffling inability to understand what is being said, make sense.
As someone who’s been fully conscious outside of my body, I say yes. However I have no evidence, aside from the witness with me who I told what we would see ahead, where we would see it, and how we would see it.
There are millions of you people everywhere. Out of such a large number I would expect at least a little bit of evidence would be available from at least one of you. I’ve had hallucinations so I know they can happen. I’m sure you have had realistic dreams. The truth is that no one even has the ability to be able to prove to themselves whether something was real or an hallucination.
I know what you mean. I’ve been to space. I know I have. People dispute it with me. I have no way of proving it but it’s a fact. I walked on the moon. I walked in Mars. I actually left the solar system. No one believes me though. I saw cows when I was on Mars. Nobody believes that either. There is a McDonalds on the side of the moon that we can’t see from earth. I can’t prove or demonstrate any of this and never ever will be able to but this doesn’t mean it’s not true right? I’ll be totally honest though and tell you that the burgers on the moon are a bit different from the ones here on earth. There are just so many skeptics these days.
How do people from all cultures around the world experience UAPs, energy beings and other things in very similar way if they have never experienced it before and their definitions and understanding of those significantly vary across cultures, and yet the experiences and descriptions of experiences are so similar. What we experience directly is an illusion, but not in a way that it doesn't exist, but in a way that we only get but a tiny fraction of the actual essence of anything. We get a shadow of it. The light that reaches our eyes, or the sound waves that reflect to our ears, at the same time we do change the reality by consuming and converting those signals, we absorb them from the world. The photons that end up in your eyes, won't end up in anyone else, effectively all our senses consume and transmute energy, and from this consumption we inquire about what that energy was in contact with before, what it was changed by. Everything around us could be an infinitely complex multidimensional entity of which we only see an electromagnetic shadow. This is the illusion part, but the illusion is itself real. The distinction we should make is that when we're looking at something we're not seeing the object, but the light it didn't absorb. Everything is real. Both in and out. And everything ultimately is subjective, as it's not possible for two people to see the same photon (as it gets consumed) nor for two measuring instruments to measure the same system without affecting or changing it in some way. There's no objective perception, there's no separation, there's no chierarchism. Everything is entangled and intimately bound to everything else. It's a huge quantum soup, without any clear borders, there's no fundamental difference from the place your body ends and air begins, it's part of the same soup of existence. I believe with consciousness is the same, the fact that we don't 'feel like the rest of things' doesn't mean there's no feeling there, just like the fact that we don't feel past our body, doesn't mean there's nothing to be felt there.
im so sick of youtube recommending this video to me and autoplaying it when i have my headphones on and am lying in bed or working around my room. it keeps playing this.
The issue of the gaze (1:00:01) is interesting. People sometimes can sense when somebody out of field of vision is looking at them. I am writing this, and then the speaker confirms it!
@@rsmonge you’re right. I noticed too, that 9 times out of 10 having sex has no lasting effects, so the other times when a child was born didn’t happen. Confirmed sex does not sometimes create extraordinary results, and you can’t detect someone staring at you, because it only does so 10% or less of the time, which is the same as never.
I cannot count the times I've fallen asleep watching a TH-cam video with AutoPlay turned on, so that several videos play to my subconscious mind... there are few things as frustrating as trying to participate in a conversation and being completely ignored. Reminds me of a girlfriend I had who could talk nonstop, endlessly; once, after attempting to participate in her dialog and realizing she wasn't allowing an opening for me, I quit trying and set the timer on my phone. About 12 minutes in, with not a word escaping from my lips, I gave up, grabbed my things, and left. Never went back.
Without a doubt. I see the brain as a communication trans/rcv, and anitimocal control center. Reasoning is completed outside the brain to an as yet identified metaphysical center.
Not only that but you should look into the recent planaria study done by biologist Michael Levin. It showed that memories do not exist in a brain but rather, the brain is more of a conduit for memories. They trained planaria to find food through a maze, then cut off their heads. When they grew back the new brains, they had the same memories from their past brains. So basically the brain contains nothing, The brain is literally just a representation from a finite sense perception point of view.
I'm not sure i believe in observation collapsing the wave function (Sean Carrol's views on this have been very convincing), but if observation DOES collapse the wave function, wouldn't AI be just as valid an observer? obviously, I have no clue but what an awesome question you posed!!
I think you have a misunderstanding of what it means to observe something, it's a common misconception. Quantum superpositions like in the double slit experiment exist when not being observed because the physical process of observing them causes their wave function to collapse. You can't measure them without observing/interacting with the superposition, and superpositions always collapse when interacted with. So yes, if the AI has a physical eye of some kind, the process of bouncing photons off the experiment and into the AIs "eye" will collapse the wave function. That doesn't tell us anything about whether the AI is sentient though, the "observer" could be a manufactured tool or literally anything else and it would still collapse the wave function if it interacted with it.
![แฉกลโกงงานวัด 2024 [ โกงมั้ยครับ ep.106 ] | DOM](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/taC5dpP3HXA/mqdefault.jpg)
After Skool's animated video with Sheldrake's talk: th-cam.com/video/y9pTbMoufp4/w-d-xo.html
Watch all the Holberg Debates here: holbergprize.org/en/en/holberg-prize/holberg-debate
Biological Or chemistry YES! ((Sub-atomic)) wasn't mensure! And yes you can build microwaves and sub-atomic particle guns to disrrupt your Gama and alfa waves driving you crazy! So do good things with that like ''telequinesis'' ''telapathy'' and alcalinization of our water bodyes NO cause nobody want this ((skillsets)) cause they would be call squizofrenic or other label easy to discart
Sheldrake is right, everything is a projection of the mind. The "image of God" is all you see, and is the imagination of the mind. The projector of all existence, only the mind is real. Existence created form reality, which is pure infinite eternal consciousness. All that is, has been, and ever will be. Omniscient, omnipresent and omnipotent, God is All, and All is Mind. Like a movie projector projecting the image, all information is within the projector, the image is an illusion. This is the truth, my information comes direct from God.
Moravec and Minsky among others postulate consciousness is simply patterns of data. Their idea is one of downloading of personality into computers scheme in order to live forever. Will a downloaded Moravec be aware of what it is thinking? There are many ways of arguing that it will not be aware unless some additional sentient element is present to provide that awareness. One such argument was presented by the 17th-century philosopher, Leibniz in his theory of monads:
Supposing that there were a machine whose structure produced thought, sensation, and perception, we could conceive of it as increased in size with the same proportions until one was able to enter into its interior, as he would into a mill. Now, on going into it he would find only pieces working upon one another, but never would he find anything to explain perception. It is accordingly in the simple substance, and not in the composite nor in a machine that the perception is to be sought (1714).
In recent years, the philosopher John Searle has become famous for another version of this argument. Searle considered a hypothetical computer program that can answer questions posed to it in Chinese. The program gives answers that are in proper Chinese, and it can pass the Turing test. Searle proposed that the computer program should be executed by a person who sits in a room and receives the questions through a window in coded form. We assume that this person does not know Chinese. He simply manipulates marks on pieces of paper according to the program's instructions, which are written in English.
Searle's point is that even though the "computer" in this case is certainly conscious, it has no awareness of the meaning of the Chinese questions and answers. In contrast, a real person answering questions in Chinese would have this awareness. Searle concluded that just because an algorithm is executed by a computer, we cannot therefore say that there will be any awareness of what that algorithm is doing.
If consciousness arises from the “push and pull” interactions of molecules following simple physical laws what would cause it to arise from such disparate interactions? If the world is composed of many simple insentient elemental entities juxtaposed to each other following simple mechanical rules in a certain pattern of behavior, why would we suppose any of them are conscious? No entity “knows” in any sense of what the others are doing.
The answer given is conscious awareness somehow corresponds with physical behavior, aka a computer can be conscious if it simulates by calculation the appropriate physical events occurring in a person’s brain.
Yet in a computer’s “memory” unit there is stored a list of numbers encoding simple logical and arithmetical operations, and all a computer is doing at any one time is mechanically (or electronically) is carrying out the instruction corresponding to one of these code numbers. The total behavior of the computer is simply the net result of the execution of many of these instructions, one after another.
Since only a few interactions are happening at any one time, it is hard to see how the computer be conscious. If the computer were slowed down (as is possible) so that each simple step was stretched out over several seconds, the pattern and sequence of the steps would remain the same. Why would executing the instructions at one speed would generate conscious awareness of the thoughts being simulated, while at another speed there would be no consciousness of these thoughts.
Changing the construction of the computer should presumably not affect its consciousness as long as it is programmed to carry out those steps, for this assures that it’s behavior will exhibit the same pattern. Say the computer instructions are used to set up a giant “game” which could be played by a child step by step (in the manner of a Turing machine). As the child carries out those steps, will the same consciousness of the simulated thoughts be manifested there-stretched out, perhaps, over several years? This hardly seems plausible, but otherwise how are we to judge which of many computers with equivalent programs will be conscious and which ones will not?
This suggests consciousness may be a primary irreducible, mathematically indescribable fundamental element the way an electron is (a quanta of electricity) or bosons and fermions; A quanta of consciousness.
@@HolbergPrize Consciousness is the least ephemeral phenomenon we experience, hence “I think, therefore I am” axiom of Descartes. Matter is ephemeral. I just demonstrated housing the example of Searle and Liebnitz to show that matter can never attain consciousness. Patterns or bits of computer memory are just disparate unconscious parts of the whole. By what mechanism does consciousness arise from such processes? No one knows because it never happened. Consciousness is a separate energy from matter, it observes the latter and thus can’t be measured in material terms.
Consciousness is recognized as one of the foremost “problems” of science. Consciousness can’t be explained by physics so their picture of the world is drastically incomplete.
The Materialists’ idea is that by writing down certain equations and saying the universe is a solution to these equations you describe all of reality. Full stop. But they are having trouble having their equations work out properly by unifying the Relativity and Quantum theories, while simultaneously leaving out the glaring problem of consciousness. You can’t even begin to think of consciousness in terms of equations.
Many prominent materialists have been aware of the problem such as Darwin’s bulldog Thomas Huxley who recognized consciousness can’t be explained in material terms. He stated, “I understand the main tenet of materialism to be that there is nothing in the unirerse but matter and force: and that all the phenomena of nature are explicable by deduction from the properties assignable to these two primitive factors. . . . It seems to me pretty plain that there is a third thing in the universe, to wit, consciousness, which . . . I cannot see to be matter or force, or any conceivable modification of either."
He thought everything matter does can be explained in terms of Newtonian physics (the 19th century scientific view versus the modern theory of quantum mechanics, etc). Yet he was convinced consciousness was real and unexplainable by the laws of physics. He also thought that the latter could influence our state of consciousness but not vice versa. He concluded that if consciousness affects matter, then a materially indescribable thing can affect physical objects, meaning Newton’s equations can’t be the last word.
Noble prizewinning physicist Eugene Wigner said we don’t know of anything in nature where A influences B but B doesn’t influence A in some manner. Therefore he reasoned consciousness can influence matter and that our equations of physics can never be complete. They can only be approximate-not complete. This would mean physical science is fundamentally limited.
A common man by careful thought and introspection can come to this conclusion-that I am a non-physical conscious entity. He can also recognize he’s not in control of matter or material energy. He can realize that as matter goes on automatically there is also a link between my desires and the world. (Will power; moving one’s arms etc.) One can understand there is a higher guiding intelligence that provides for our needs and arranging the actions of matter so we are able to function.
The real question is: why am I aware of all the disparate interactions of matter going on in the body? A popular current theory known as functionalism, which provides a framework for research in artificial intelligence, relegates the activities of the mind to computer-like responses to external stimuli. The concept of consciousness is dismissed, and all human feelings and sensations are reduced to mathematical constructs.
For example, in the case of a headache, the experience of pain (which we naturally consider to be the headache) is not referred to at all. What then is a headache? Hard as this may be to believe, MIT artificial intelligence researcher Jerry A. Fodor, one of functionalism’s main proponents, states, “To have a headache is to be disposed to exhibit a certain pattern of relations between the stimuli one encounters and the responses one exhibits." In other words, what he calls a headache is defined to be some brain software that makes us behave as if we have a headache. But pain itself is left out of the picture, because pain cannot be written into a computer program.
Due to this obvious failure to explain personal experiences, even Fodor, who is fully committed to a physical explanation of consciousness, admits that mechanistic theories such as functionalism are incomplete. He states, “Many psychologists who are inclined to accept the functionalistic framework are nonetheless worried about the failure of functionalism to reveal much about the nature of consciousness. Functionalists have made a few ingenious attempts to talk themselves and their colleagues out of this worry, but they have not, in my view, done so with much success. As matters stand, the problem of qualitative content [of consciousness] poses a serious threat to the assertion that functionalism can provide a general theory of the mental."
Because the issue of consciousness has
raised a fundamental impasse in all mechanistic attempts to explain human existence, some scientists have rejected the widely accepted mechanistic viewpoint. Among the dissenters is renowned Nobel laureate physicist Eugene Wigner. "There are two kinds of reality or existence: the existence of my consciousness and the reality or existence of everything else,” states Wigner. "The latter reality is not absolute but only relative." Wigner observed that external, measurable phenomena are known to him only by virtue of his consciousness, and thus consciousness is, if anything, more real than these phenomena. After extensive research in this area, Alan Gevins of EEG Systems Laboratory in San Francisco concluded that the mind may have transcendent qualities. Gevins says, “when it comes to creativity, inspiration, the more ethereal aspects of the mind-well, they might ultimately be mysterious. l’m not as firm as some of my colleagues in the belief that the mind can be reduced to the flow of a few electrons.”
One would have to demonstrate at what point consciousness arises from disparate insentient atoms. Materialists like the Functionalists convinced themselves into denying the most objective reality they experience-their own conscious awareness. One of the best analogies is Leibnitz’ grain mill analogy to the inside of the brain. We could see the mechanics of the hardware or Brian, the c-fibers that fire when we hurt ourselves, but the wetware of the brain won’t explain the experience of pain. That’s can’t be programmed into a computer. In other words you could explain the workings of such a computer or machine that mimicked humans without ever referring to the notion of pain. Conscious awareness is something totally different qualitatively from the body.
There are many clear and direct examples showing how conscious awareness is entirely different from the physical behavior associated with it. For instance, what happens when a person accidentally strikes his thumb with a hammer? Certain characteristic patterns of behavior result-the person may shout, wave his hand, grimace, etc.
Nobel-laureate neurobiologist John C. Eccles, who wrote, "Hitherto it has been impossible to develop any neurophysiological theory that explains how a diversity of brain events comes to be synthesized so that there is a unified conscious experience of a global or gestalt character. The brain events remain disparate, being essentially the individual actions of countless neurons that are built into complex circuits."
Scientists such as Bernard Rensch, attempting to overcome this problem, have offered the explanation that patterns of matter also have consciousness, and that we are merely one set of these patterns. But if this is so, then two conclusions follow. First, there must exist complex metaphysical laws governing the production of consciousness in response to the presence of certain patterns. Second, the consciousness of the pattern must be-in comparison with the individual consciousness of each element of the pattern-an entirely new metaphysical entity, a "higher" consciousness capable of accounting for our unified human experience. At this point we would have within the human body a rather complicated metaphysical apparatus consisting of varieties of conscious entities [trillions of semiconscious atoms, patterns possessing higher unifying consciousness) and laws governing their appearance. It would be simpier, however, to revive the concept of the soul-a single irreducible unit of consciousness capable of functioning as the integrator of experience with the body.
John C Eccles and philosopher Karl R. Popper propose something like this in their book The Self and Its Brain. Recognizing the short comings of monistic theories, they formulate a version of interactionism between the mind and brain. Eccles states, “The experienced unity of consciousness comes, not from a neurophysiological synthesis, but from the proposed integrating character of the self-conscious mind."
Sheldrake is a LIVING LEGEND !!
The problem with using anesthesia as evidence of oblivion, is that there is no way to rule out the possibility of a rich experience during anesthesia that is not stored in the memory of the brain. It could be that anesthesia shuts off biological memory, such that when one comes to it seems as if there was only oblivion. Imagine a computer running but nothing gets saved, the computer will by definition not recognize any of the states it was in when the memory was shut off, but it was still running.
I agree and thought his response on this question was very unscientific- and yet no one debated the point
That one might be conscious when anesthetized is as difficult to know as
whether anyone but one's self is conscious.
@@REDPUMPERNICKEL Exactly - both are subjective - and I use that word carefully- so impossible for a system to reliably assess itself - because the act of assessment changes the system. Besides we know that we “lose” consciousness every night - what does it mean to lose consciousness? It means that although we are conscious of some aspects of our existence, like heart and liver etc, we are not aware of our existence. Awareness of existence is not needed for existence. People say they can feel what deep sleep is like as opposed to anaesthesia - but I don’t believe that. It’s a projection. Both are states of non-existence. You might call that death- and that we die every night, and then finally we stop waking up. But all we are doing is returning to the darkness from where we sprang.
We were obviously 'there' (before we were born) before we were 'here' (in a physical body)
...... so what's there to be scared of - absolutely nothing.
Everything is nothing & nothing is everything!
In 'living' we die
And in 'dying' - we live!
As above so below
I fell asleep while watching this. I then dreamed I was in a house talking with these guys. I got rather upset because they wouldn't let me talk! Eventually I woke up to realize the voices weren't the people in my dream, but these guys having a debate. I laughed.
that is hilarious lol
That is so funny! I just woke up 45 minutes in and was arguing with the woman in my dream.
That's happened to me before lol!
In my dream god successfully argued that he does not exist, and is really just a figment of peoples' consciousnesses.
Ah, yes: I "appear" on all sorts shows and videos during my sleep! I've whiled away perhaps a quarter of my life sitting there mute, sleep-chatting with the lads on the Ricky Gervais Show (ft. Karl Piklington).
I always found that one's own inner determination could do more to answer this question then an outwards studying of the scientific properties within it
Me too.
Except that one's inner determination is not without cause. That we are all born with separate genetics and life happened to us in differing ways to cause that certain inner determination. That the so called inner determination still can't escape from being an hallucination of the brain.
Their mention of the self organizing system, I find the most intriguing. Consciousness could possibly be the separate self organizing systems having literal effects on all other self organizing systems. I find interesting how the fungal growth in the soil has affect whether or not the forest lives or dies. This is some proof of self organizing system (the fungi) having an effect on all other plant life (the forest) Of coarse the forest also keeps the humans and animals alive. So some self organized consciousness?
@ well that’s actually really interesting. Thanks for the reply.
What a pleasure to listen to humans that actually think deeply and can articulate such complex matters
An aside observation: I have watched this "discussion"/debate, and subsequently been forced back to it though auto-play at least a few dozen times.
Not blaming you, not even necessarily blaming a potential ad/video sponsor by 'Holberg Prize' to promote the video...just making an observation. How about this, Im just noticing an interest spice in the ingredients to the 'cake' of a sentence you constructed.
Hmmm, is youtube algo trying to tell/influence me on something? Maybe I can delusional-ly inflate my ego and believe Holberg people want me on their side? Nah, minimum, can I say, "wtf is going on here?"...accidentally auto-playing this discussion dozens of times to me...ah, with MILLIONS of videos uploaded daily; from what I understand?
He is not a humen, he is a Son of God.
@@FrancesE.DekEsquire by the same logic we are all the children of god...pssst, using your THEOLOGICAL labeling...you are a son of god...Religious people are so dumb most of the time. They seem to have a thought with no clue where words came from or how different cultures used them...and then their thought is now truth...Literally, they have a thought, and they just assume they are right about it. Yeah?
@fredm.7145 Evangelicals? as in, the christian groups that evangelize...since...at least a few years ago, right? You get sarcasm, yeah?
To me, superficial is 72% of the US population self proclaims christianity as their faith system, yet I don't see anything near a 28% of political representation of non-christians...superficial, representation? Control?
In other words, I guess I am asking you to understand where your position really is, verses your feelings of "push back"...as the "other" non-evangelicals have FELT the "push back" for quit some time now. Dont get me wrong, to appeal to apposing views is quit the task, from my position I request you walk in some none-evangelicals shoes...and please keep in mind the trappings of exaggerated stereotypes predominating "others"...we, regardless of personal positioning, are all feeling/ignoring "push back". Coming to the table of health conversation does require each at the table to accept "push back" and some ability of compromise...generally speaking, the evangelicals are another group among other groups that are...pushing back, compromising, preaching, etc. The image of being "reasonable" while a VERY non-compromising weird BILLIONAIRE pushes people around with name calling and hand shaking with LITERAL dictators and authoritarians...doesn't help your cause.
@fredm.7145 You seem to know nothing about evangelicals beyond the dogma of your particular political persuasion. A persuasion that seems to rely extensively on emotionally charged falsehoods to conjure the cult like behaviour of it's adherents. And I might add that it seems, quite ironically, to be lead by the type of people who are obsessed with controlling other people's lives and wish to bring about the destruction of humanity as we know it and succeeded in the Soviet Union, Communist China et al.
A year ago I went 5 times. to a pain management clinic for my multiple sclerosis’ pain and depression. I was given ketamine for 5 sessions. It was unfortunately a temporary success for pain and depression but I had the most worthwhile spiritual experience! I was comforted to understand the various dimensions of life and consciousness.
Reproduction is a sin
I'd love to hear your experience with spiritual healing, Christian Science, L Mehl Madrona MD, etc...
would you consider posting g some of the highlights of that experience ?
Vitamin D - investigate. Omega 3s DHA/EPA - investigate. Mg--> DNA repair - investigate.
@@norsangkelsang7939 The correct term is "research"
“Wisdom tells me I am nothing. Love tells me I am everything. Between the two my life flows” - Nisargadatta Maharaj
❤
one of my favourite quotes
I never heard that one, that's a great quote.
it is all a matter of how far they are apart? The flow I mean, slow or fast.
that's a lie, because both the wise and fool die
Even though it's a debate I find it really relaxing which seems counter intuitive to what I'd expect from a debate. Goes to show how todays program always makes us think people have to be loud and yell at each other. Thank goodness we can hear everyone speak and find each point of view interesting enough to give it some air to ponder.
What most people call debates are actually arguments. Arguments are about protecting positions where debates are intended to find common ground.
The purpose of argument is not to win but to learn. Some learn this early. Some never learn it at all.
@@MusicPLUSBusiness So true I wish I'd explored debating whilst in school As the arts are often compartmentalized to one side of the school where I was. But I still found talking to the physics students fascinating. Probably because now I know there's a lot more connection. Sound waves, math, geometry have a lot more in common than I realized back then.
@@aubreylegendre8174 Ok. But the culture that values learning above winning is a better culture than one that values winning over learning. In the latter, people present all kinds of misconduct - ad hominem attacks, shouting people down, false equivalence, and a wide range of biases. The former culture becomes aware of these problems and works to identify and correct them. It does not excuse these errors as "different strokes for different folks." In this way, learning persists through humility and wisdom. By contrast, triumphalism in argument leads to arrogance and self-aggrandizement. Finally, learning contains the lessons of winning and failing, but the desire to win excludes the lessons taught by failure. For all these reasons, the desire for learning is better that the desire for winning. Those 500 people who are screaming at each other are engaged in a activity that is less effective than the people who humbly desire to learn.
@@MusicPLUSBusiness debates are every bit about defending a position, not about finding common ground. that said, they aren't fighting, and the only debates we see today, political debates, aren't really debates
rarely do i find such satisfying content on youtube, genuinely educational
28:10
Consciousness I'll leave my last words for the poet Emily Dickinson who in a
28:15
beautiful 1862 poem wrote the brain is wider than the sky for put them side by
28:24
side the one the other will contain with ease and you
28:29
besides
I had dreams of being in a building or outside of one, and in my mind I am familiar with interior and what is on each floor, and even behind the building, and around the corner down the street. I have visual recall of these aspects and details of the environment. I also know the people, their names and remember what we talked about two or three days ago, but when I wake up, I have no idea of who and where I was. In the dream, I knew specifics like room #s, and locker key combinations, and I also know if I have 2 minutes or 10 minutes to get where I am going and I feel the urgency to get there. When I wake up, just 2 seconds later, there is no reference for anything I was just deeply involved in. I try to recall the place, people and details, but nothing. I think I am living a different life in my sleep. I feel that I am the same person in the dream, but recalling memories from a different life. When I am thinking in the dream, the relevant ideas and information to the present moment or circumstance are fresh and readily available in memory, as if I am accessing an established way of thinking and believing, I am not familiar with when I awaken.
brilliantly stated
I think the phrase "state dependent" is germane to your comment
although "mode dependent" might be a more accurate way to say it.
Differences in the awake mode being-conscious-process and
the sleep mode being-conscious-process (i.e. dreaming)
have been discovered by researchers.
Speculatively speaking,
perhaps memories 'captured' while these different processes run,
have something subtly different in their neural discharge timing patterns thereby
rendering them inaccessible to any other mode of being conscious,
something analogous to the radio spectrum, channels and tuning.
In retrospect, rather than "radio spectrum, channels and tuning",
the concept of 'resonance' may have been the better analogy.
This one minute video illustrates the resonance concept very clearly...
th-cam.com/users/shortsPagl1zg0j4A
I *have* noticed several themes currently, among my fairly rare dreams.
For 50 years I spent almost every winter weekend skiing down hills or mountains.
One of my dream themes involves skiing (understandably, eh).
The question I have is,
why do my skiing dreams not all take place on perfect powder snow
under perfect lighting conditions, after all, they are my dreams?
Or is it that my unconscious brain processes simply
don't, or can't, give a fig about my preferences?
(Which would very much reflect the world in general
(except in socialist leaning democracies, eh
(it is just good luck I live in one))).
Edit: 9 months later...
Sleep refers to a particular mode of brain activity.
In this mode,
all the billions of representations being encoded and maintained by
neural-discharge-timing-patterns throughout one's brain
are being adjusted by the intermodulation of these timing patterns
as mediated by the synapses which impose a kind of analog logic
on the process.
All of that in the interests of achieving a representation of the world
in which everything makes sense and is without contradictions.
Thus, upon awakening in the morning one begins experiencing
a clear headed feeling and that all confusion has evaporated.
Thus the civilized human animal's ability to function well,
in its almost entirely cultural habitat,
contributes to survival,
both his and his group's survival made more likely.
All nicely in accord with the evolutionary process.
Psychic abilities ~ aka visions so continue exploring and you may end up having a message for someone or saving some one s life or confirming something for yourself or someone else _ namaste
@@Soma_3046
"Parallel worlds" is most likely a phrase synonymous with 'imagination'.
Very lively debate and a very diverse field of study. I spent a few years of my life trying to quantify consciousness for the purposes of determining how much anaesthetic should be given to a patient in order to safely keep them unconscious. This debate touched on this subject and a few other related subjects. Anil Seth very skillfully side stepped how consciousness originates and assumed that consciousness only resides within the physical confines of the human brain (Tanya Luhrmann was a little more philosophical about this). Instead they both focused on the physical aspects of consciousness, which are all that any scientist can measure. This is a totally rational way to think, based on the scant information we currently poses on this topic. These physical aspects, give us absolutely no clues as to the nature of human consciousness and its origins. Debates of this kind tend to become very philosophical and go around in circles as one is left to speculate because of the fundamental lack of information. Rupert Sheldrake seemed to me to be a lot more open minded on whether consciousness can extend outside of the human brain and even though he's considered as something of a maverick and heretic by many of his (biologically minded) peers, I like his open mindedness and some of his ideas, which leaves the door open for new ideas.
Work on machine consciousness has been progressing for many years. There are various schools of thought on how to give machines self awareness. The problem has been that the predominant school of thought was that consciousness would be achieved by increasing the complexity of the artificial neural networks used to build AI. But with gigantic leaps in the computing power of these artificial neural networks, self awareness akin to human consciousness has not been achieved. So most probably, brain complexity is not the origin of human consciousness.
The work of Physicist Roger Penrose and Neuroscientist Stuart Hameroff on human consciousness adds a quantum component to the workings of the human brain, by way of the nano-tubules found within brain cells. This seems to suggest that consciousness could originate from quantum interactions within brain cells. Quantum entanglement of subatomic particles has shown us that space-time is non-local. If this hypothesis of consciousness holds true, it could also lead us to the conclusion that consciousness can reside outside of the human brain. Again, this is hypothetical.
There are many other schools of thought on this issue. One hypothesis pointed to by string theory is that we could be living inside a black hole, in which case we could be living inside a 2D hologram which feels and looks like a 3D universe. The interesting thing about holograms is that each element which makes up the hologram contains all of the information contained in the entire hologram. If that's the case then our consciousness might be contained in the tiniest elements which make up this universe ......... pure speculation, but again, we're in the realms of pure philosophy here.
The simulation hypothesis is another, where we could be living inside a huge computer simulation, in which case non of what we experience is real and that anything is possible within the bounds of the computer simulation.
Or, we could all be parts of some massive universal consciousness which connects everything and could mean that our consciousness does not reside within our physical brain. Such a theory of mind could also tie in with emerging physics hypotheses of consciousness and information theory, where information itself has mass and therefore energy, and that consciousness could be more fundamental than either energy or matter. Again hypothetical, but possibly mathematically provable ? or disprovable .....
The questions these scientists and others are asking are as fundamental as the questions about creation of the universe and life itself. These are the deep questions we have asked for thousands of years, and could take thousands more years to truly answer, if at all..... They will not be answered by biologists. The answers will come by integrating fields such as physics, mathematics, biology and chemistry. Each science describes one small piece of the puzzle.
We’re is Jordan Person 10:31
Reproduction is a sin
I'm thinking of consciousness of refined to the individual's brain, but maybe capable of emitting and receiving information with a quantum-level method, i.e. entanglement.
Just like a radio which does not exist 'outside' the radio itself, but emitting and receiving radio waves.
I NEVER STAY OUT AND ALWAYS BECOME CONSCIOUS FOR A FEW SECONDS DURING SURGERY....WIERD.....AND I GET A BONER AS WELL..LOL SO GOOD DREAM I GUESS. AND WHEN ON ACID WHICH ONLY HAPPENED A FEW TIMES I CAN DO PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE THNGS. FOR EXAMPLE I FLIPPED A CIGARETTE PACKAGE IN THE AIR AND LANDED IT ON THE SMALL EDGE OVER 30 TIMES IN A ROW.
Nice
The difference between an optimistic person and a pessimistic person is that an optimistic person thinks the world could not be a better place; and the pessimist person fears the optimistic may possibly be correct.
“How things seem is not a good explanation of how things are”
it depends
it depends is not a good explanation@@PazLeBon
@@raystone1105 it isnt the explanation, thats kinda the point isn't it
it's actually pretty good, but at least is on the path toward truth. on the other hand, relying on dreams, fantasies, and drug induced delusions is a pretty sure way of getting absolutely terrible explanations.
The second speaker just waffled on about how things seem to superstitious people.
The mind can deceive you. Even a modicum of caution should prevent someone from assuming these religious experiences are real. Funny how such experiences overwhelmingly map to the religion one is exposed to.
Thank you Tanya for the tone and empathy in your delivery. It was like a meditative experience.
👹💯
Especially tulpas..
their diversity created a very nice symbiotic environment. respect to everyone on the panel. i liked how they exchanged their diverse ideas in very respectful manner, and no one seemed to outsmart others rather they showed an excellent listening attitude without causing any interruption whatsoever!
I went under anesthesia for a colonoscopy, when I had awakened I was loudly saying “woo hoo”! I remembered skiing with one ski down a mountain. I’ve never gone skiing before.
I went under general anesthesia for surgery, my experience didn't stop. one moment I'm on the operating table, the next I'm on the beach in China at night time watching the waves. It was very peaceful, but I didn't disappear. Maybe some people just don't remember what they do under anesthesia
Opium does that.
This is true, it is not anesthesia itself, it is deepness of anesthesia. I am anesthesiologist and I experienced many patients telling me what they had dreamed during anesthesia. Anesthetics like Morphine or Ketamine produce halucinations. It is possible to put body narrow to death with anesthetics and then thgere is total black out. But this is not the aim of anesthesia.
Not me, I started counting back from ten, got as far as nine and then I was back in the ward hours later with no sense of time passing. I was one place and then I was somewhere else, it was weird.
@@moriahgamesdev Good anesthesia.
you can remember with practice, its because the memory can seem like a glitch so its discarded like a dream memory but yeah u must be a natural :)
Many years ago i had access to pure medical grade K and we studied its effects in some depth, we kinda found that my best friend has a great memory and would remember 90% of the time id have a clearer recall but only remembered 50% the time due to my disorganized memory but you find over time you are able to remember more easily, taking too much can give you amnesia tho!
its not a guarenteed effect like hitting a switch but it enables you to use your mind in ways that might otherwise require a vow of silence and lifetime of meditation to reach and unlock its kinda like a shortcut..
Look into the "cia gateway method" its not hallucination i can assure you as multiple people are able to travel together and i was doing this kind of projecting with my friend 15 years before I found out it was a known possibility, i found out n was like omg they know we have powers and hide it from us instead of teaching us to be self aware we are conditioned into obedience its disgusting..
Its as if theres a place we can go but theres many methods to reach it some convenient others heavily taxing like going to LA by luxury car, walking, or using your front teeth to drag urself along the road lol many routes to the same ends..
i recommend K personally and most importantly it must be clean pure or cut with inactives and pharma grade genuine stuff tho the RCs and methoxetamine arent the same at all and any weird extra additives will increase your chance of hallucination and loss of control..
Robitussin dxm actually is an option but heavily taxing on the body and long after effects its really for emergency exit of dimensions only as it cannot be used frequent enough for research or recreation.. The shamans and old communities know, cia knows, i expect the vatican secret archives and all the knowledge lost during the cruscades, witch hunts and all the other atrocities attempting to hide our true power from us would likely cover much of these topics but obviously those in power tried to wipe them all out and burn any records so we are left with a quite badly broken record of history and things considered heretical ✌❤️
This was my first experience of Luhrman, and I much appreciated her summary that the essence of consciousness lies in our relationship with external 'others', which seems to fit well with Sheldrake's emphasis on the interconnectedness of self-organising systems and also Anil's refutation of the idea the brain is 'merely' an information-processing system. However, I found the discussion on information-processing moved on a bit too quickly and dismissively; there is much explanatory power in Karl Friston's work that seems to me to have great value, even though I agree that information processing is not the whole story.
Malone did a fabulous job of holding the space for a creative tension in the debate, and it was a pleasure to experience his style of inquiry again (I hope he will be making another of his wonderful films soon). My own curiosity has settled recently on the related and emerging area of inquiry labeled as "enactive cognition" and it would be wonderful to see a future debate bringing these ideas into tension with those of enactivists like Di Paolo and Thompson, plus phenomenological insights from the likes of Maclaren and Callard.
I share Anil's frustration with Silicon Valley's pursuit of technology such as AI regardless of the ethics, also seemingly with scant regard for the dangers of their move-fast-and-break-things approach. On a positive note, my limited exposure to the AI community at least comforts me that they are an extremely curious and deep-thinking community. The problem, it seems to me, is the lack of transparency on the part of tech firms that don't share their research data with public academics; more patient science is needed to inform the work of these clever engineers and developers. My fear is not of the technology so much as its financial backers, and the profit- and power-oriented goals that most tech leaders are pursuing. For all the early talk of not wanting to repeat the mistakes of social media platforms, some vocal segments of AI culture seem to have confabulated their way towards justifying any innovation on the grounds of its 'great potential' for humanity - here we go again...
Leave your fears behind a d embrace the tech and the future or you can live somewhere where you can relax without the pressure
@@nycgweed That reads very much like an AI hallucinatory response prior to human editing. Emotions are the essence of being human, not something to be rid of.
Side note: for anyone reading this not aware of AI "hallucination" it is a well-documented phenomenon of the current so-called "transformer" type of AI such as ChatGPT. Essentially, an AI is a predictive text-based auto-responder, and so when it responds to a question on which it's learning data has limited or no information, it "hallucinates" or in other words makes things up rather than responding "I don't know the answer to that". In other words, it will attempt a prediction regardless of predictive accuracy because it is a machine and has no understanding of the things it is responding about.
There's a kind of "encounter in the liminal zone" - have a look for the work concerning dreams done by Henry Reed from Atlantic University and for writings by Edgar Cayce, too.
@@drdolittle1085 Many thanks for those recommendations, I look forward to reading some of their work. I've been studying Jung's work for a long time, and that of people like Hillman, Corbin and Donaldson around the imaginal mind - and more recent academics like Vervaeke (on wisdom and types of knowing). The experience of liminal 'space' is indeed a fascinating phenomenon.
Indeed, most worrisome,
fierce grip of the meme, 'profit uber alles'.
Too many depraved slurpers to
Mammon's jizm utterly addicted.
Thank you. Very interesting and cordial discussion. Can you do one on ghosts and spirits (things that go bang in the middle of the night)?
oh, i solved that one too. yeah ghosts are bullshit also.
@@rsmonge I think your research is Bull crp too ... Ignorance at its peak
@@majorjps1jadeja878 well, all you need to do is detect one of these ghosts, reliably. absent that well, you believe in ghosts, so you'll believe almost anything. so uh, give me $500 and help u talk to your a, great gramma.
@@rsmonge I don't know, regardless of what religion one follows or not, everyone believes in such things. It's not something humans disagree on
@@LondongirlMaryam first of all, i don't believe in "such things". second, religion itself is the cause of the confusion. 3rd, the fact that so many people can believe so many things, with such fervor, yet disagree, shows you that humans are not terribly good at scientific thinking, and, that the vast majority of them are totally wrong.
I've been using your strategy for a few weeks now and it's been working great. Thank you so much!
"True consciousness is achieved when the act of causing harm, even to the smallest creature, pains you."
tell that to pro-ab0rts and Planned Parenthood
It may be true, but history is more inclined to show that the opposite is the path more travelled... ever since our ancestors picked up a jawbone. There will be some that would use such a thing for personal gain, but true consciousness and everything within is without a doubt not a journey for the faint of heart. Try astral, and wind the window down... it's freaky. ✌
Nice metric for AI. I suppose there are holes in the idea, but I like it.
Conscientiousness ?
I understand your point of view but, sorry, I have never experienced any pain when I killed a cockroach, or an ant colony, esp., not when it decided to move into my home, and I am sure I never will.
"Life will offer you a diminishing number of opportunities to show how smart you are. It will offer an infinite number of occasions that require kindness, mercy, grace, sensitivity, sympathy, generosity and love. Life will require that you widen your repertoire of emotions, that you throw yourself headlong into other people. That you take the curriculum of intimacy. If you haven't mastered it yet, I ask you to turn to this task intentionally now."
- David Brooks
so by default we will also have he opposites of al those traits and we should practice hate etc?
Beautiful!
@@PazLeBonsure yes go practice hate . It’s questions like these that are pretty silly and impractical. In practice what would be effective about practicing hate.
@@MsBlackIntrovert dont be so shallow minded,life is literally yin an yang, positive and negative. Thats just the way it works
Hello ! May Allah protect and guide you to his light and happiness in this life and the hereafter, God bless, Ameen. Excuse me for giving a little presentation of Islam, because it is very misunderstood nowadays, especially on those « Antichrist's » times, where media and politics are mixed to distort history and truth. And terrorists (puppets of the Antichrist) who misinterpret verses, out of ignorance and political motivations, and take them out of historical context (just like radical atheists do by the way) don't help either. Thank you very much for your time.
First of all, if you have any questions regarding Islam and yourself, just open the Quran randomly, and you will find the answer in front of you, like a miracle and a sign from God.
Islam is an arabic word that means the Surrender to the One and Only God, our Creator, Protector, Provider, who gives us life and all that we have, we are safe and sound by his will and grace, we are His and to Him we return, and we have to thank him in this trial life by submitting to him by our free will, or later in the Day of judgment when it's too late to save our own skin. Islam was the original Religion descended to earth from heaven with Adam and Eve (peace and blessing be upon them) in the beginning of humanity. and was passed to people with the succession of the 124 000 prophets and 315 messengers of God to all nations and civilizations since, passing by Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Ismaël, Joseph, Moses, Aaron, Joshua, David, Solomon and Jesus (Peace and blessing be upon them) during the history of mankind, the last replaces and completes the previous, until the succession of the last messenger of God fourteen centuries ago, Muhammad (Peace and blessing be upon him) to complete the noble morals of all mankind, to bring humans and jinns out of darkness into light, and to purify people's religion and belief from corruption and polytheism, and return it to purity and true monotheism, like it was in the times of the prophets (Peace and blessing be upon them).
Many Religions that we know nowadays, at their beginning were true and under Islam, initiated by one of the prophets of God, but their original teachings, history and scriptures have been corrupted over time with falsification and polytheism, or lost and replaced with false ones. That's why Islam is the only Religion accepted by God nowadays, which consists in bearing witness that there is no god besides Allah (God in Aramaic, the original language of Jesus and the Gospel), and that Muhammad is His servant and messenger, just like Jesus and Moses and others are His servants and messengers. Never a messenger of God said he was God or literally son of God, it was the people after him who changed the words of God and corrupted the Religion. God is unique and absolute, He does not need to have a family and sons or to associate anyone else with His kingdom, He can simply create whatever He wants, everything belongs to Him, and to Him everything will return. Allah said in Surah Al-Mu’minun : “God has never begotten a son, nor is there any god besides Him. Otherwise, each god would have taken away what it has created, and some of them would have gained supremacy over others. Glory be to God, far beyond what they describe. The Knower of the hidden and the manifest. He is exalted, far above what they associate. (91-92 / Translated by ITANI).
Allah means the one and only God, the God of all prophets and creatures, the creator of the universe and mankind, and the Master of the Day of judgment, where our destiny, Hell or Paradise, is decided based on our faith and deeds in this trial life, and above all, Allah's mercy.
Allah said in Surah Al-Ikhlas : In the name of God, the Gracious, the Merciful.
Say, “He is God, the One. God, the Absolute. He begets not, nor was He begotten. And there is none comparable to Him.” (1-4 / Translated by ITANI).
Allah said in Surah An-Nisa : O FOLLOWERS of the Gospel! Do not overstep the bounds [of truth] in your religious beliefs, and do not say of God anything but the truth. The Christ Jesus, son of Mary, was but God's Apostle - [the fulfilment of] His promise which He had conveyed unto Mary - and a soul created by Him. Believe, then, in God and His apostles, and do not say, "[God is] a trinity". Desist [from this assertion] for your own good. God is but One God; utterly remote is He, in His glory, from having a son: unto Him belongs all that is in the heavens and all that is on earth; and none is as worthy of trust as God. Never did the Christ feel too proud to be God's servant, nor do the angels who are near unto Him. And those who feel too proud to serve Him and glory in their arrogance [should know that on Judgment Day] He will gather them all unto Himself: (171-172 / Translated by Muhammad Asad).
Allah the Most Merciful said in Surah Ali-Imran : Behold, the only [true] religion in the sight of God is [man's] self-surrender unto Him; and those who were vouchsafed revelation aforetime took, out of mutual jealousy, to divergent views [on this point] only after knowledge [thereof] had come unto them. But as for him who denies the truth of God's messages - behold, God is swift in reckoning!
Thus, [O Prophet,] if they argue with thee, say, "I have surrendered my whole being unto God, and [so have] all who follow me!" - and ask those who have been vouchsafed revelation aforetime, as well as all unlettered people, "Have you [too] surrendered yourselves unto Him?" And if they surrender themselves unto Him, they are on the right path; but if they turn away - behold, thy duty is no more than to deliver the message: for God sees all that is in [the hearts of] His creatures.
Verily, as for those who deny the truth of God's messages, and slay the prophets against all right, and slay people who enjoin equity - announce unto them a grievous chastisement.
It is they whose works shall come to nought both in this world and in the life to come; and they shall have none to succour them.
(19-22 / Translated by Muhammad Asad)..
God said : Say, “We believe in Allah, and in what was revealed to us, and in what was revealed to Abraham, and Ishmael, and Isaac, and Jacob, and the Patriarchs, and in what was given to Moses and Jesus, and in what was given to the prophets from their Lord. We do not differentiate between any of them. And to Him, we surrender.”
(2:136 / Translated by Community)
Salam (Peace) -----------------
Short answer: yes, of course it does. Even unicellular organisms have some modicum of consciousness to them. The more complex the organism's biological structure, the more complex the degree of conscious expression in the material.
note that only expression requires biologic complexity. there is no way to tell how much subjectivity is being experiened by anything, or if it is at all.
Quantum mechanics, through experimentations, has shown, again and again - the "material" world is an illusion and that everything, on it's basic levels, are nothing more than energy, vibrations and electromagnetism...
The linear time and the physical is an illusion. Consciousness creates reality.
THE "ALL" IS MIND.
Anil's argument relies on Rupert's argument but his solution does not. What a wordsmith.
I'm reading Being You, and have added Sheldrake and Lurhman to my reading list as well. Just wanted to stop by to say how much I loved this video, that I have it on repeat. I feel so many people would benefit from hearing more about the areas where these three perspectives, come close to meeting or overlapping. Please do more!
Thanks so much. I found this fascinating. It makes me think about quantum entanglement.
I am fascinated by quantum entanglement as well. Politely subscribed to you in support!
Quantum entanglement suggests we are living in The Matrix.
Photons and electrons separated still interact with each other.
@@REDPUMPERNICKEL your quote "Quantum entanglement suggests we are living in The Matrix." My comment: I experienced something that makes the matrix real to me. When a part of my arm went through the arm rest of a couch, and I mean a couch from the 70's where the wood inside is thick and is made of real wood. I pulled it out and it was solid again.
@@ExperiencedGhost
I have been conscious of hallucinations indistinguishable from what I am usually conscious of with the exception that I could move my hand through them.
Most often these hallucinations occur after swallowing LSD but occasionally I experience a vivid dream that fools me completely (because the critical thinking ability is much disabled during the dreaming mode of being conscious).
Because I have a pretty good understanding of how neurons and synapses work, it never occurs to me that I am in a matrix other than the one which is my brain.
If quantum entanglement is an actual fact and scientists are not being fooled by something hiding in left field,
then there may still be explanations awaiting discovery that have nothing to do with a matrix.
Still, if I am in a matrix and am a virtual person, an NPC, then I would be concerned that a power glitch might end me.
But if that should happen I wouldn't know it so no different from dying conscious in the top non matrix level.
lol
Regarding dreams:
“Tell me one last thing,” said Harry. “Is this real? Or has this been happening inside my head?”
“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?”
After dreaming that I've spent time with my dad, who died six months ago, I wake up having spent time with my dad. Whether or not it happened in a physical sense and whether or not his consciousness was involved are almost irrelevant factors to me.
Hello ! May Allah protect and guide you to his light and happiness in this life and the hereafter, God bless, Ameen. Excuse me for giving a little presentation of Islam, because it is very misunderstood nowadays, especially on those « Antichrist's » times, where media and politics are mixed to distort history and truth. And terrorists (puppets of the Antichrist) who misinterpret verses, out of ignorance and political motivations, and take them out of historical context (just like radical atheists do by the way) don't help either. Thank you very much for your time.
First of all, if you have any questions regarding Islam and yourself, just open the Quran randomly, and you will find the answer in front of you, like a miracle and a sign from God.
Islam is an arabic word that means the Surrender to the One and Only God, our Creator, Protector, Provider, who gives us life and all that we have, we are safe and sound by his will and grace, we are His and to Him we return, and we have to thank him in this trial life by submitting to him by our free will, or later in the Day of judgment when it's too late to save our own skin. Islam was the original Religion descended to earth from heaven with Adam and Eve (peace and blessing be upon them) in the beginning of humanity. and was passed to people with the succession of the 124 000 prophets and 315 messengers of God to all nations and civilizations since, passing by Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Ismaël, Joseph, Moses, Aaron, Joshua, David, Solomon and Jesus (Peace and blessing be upon them) during the history of mankind, the last replaces and completes the previous, until the succession of the last messenger of God fourteen centuries ago, Muhammad (Peace and blessing be upon him) to complete the noble morals of all mankind, to bring humans and jinns out of darkness into light, and to purify people's religion and belief from corruption and polytheism, and return it to purity and true monotheism, like it was in the times of the prophets (Peace and blessing be upon them).
Many Religions that we know nowadays, at their beginning were true and under Islam, initiated by one of the prophets of God, but their original teachings, history and scriptures have been corrupted over time with falsification and polytheism, or lost and replaced with false ones. That's why Islam is the only Religion accepted by God nowadays, which consists in bearing witness that there is no god besides Allah (God in Aramaic, the original language of Jesus and the Gospel), and that Muhammad is His servant and messenger, just like Jesus and Moses and others are His servants and messengers. Never a messenger of God said he was God or literally son of God, it was the people after him who changed the words of God and corrupted the Religion. God is unique and absolute, He does not need to have a family and sons or to associate anyone else with His kingdom, He can simply create whatever He wants, everything belongs to Him, and to Him everything will return. Allah said in Surah Al-Mu’minun : “God has never begotten a son, nor is there any god besides Him. Otherwise, each god would have taken away what it has created, and some of them would have gained supremacy over others. Glory be to God, far beyond what they describe. The Knower of the hidden and the manifest. He is exalted, far above what they associate. (91-92 / Translated by ITANI).
Allah means the one and only God, the God of all prophets and creatures, the creator of the universe and mankind, and the Master of the Day of judgment, where our destiny, Hell or Paradise, is decided based on our faith and deeds in this trial life, and above all, Allah's mercy.
Allah said in Surah Al-Ikhlas : In the name of God, the Gracious, the Merciful.
Say, “He is God, the One. God, the Absolute. He begets not, nor was He begotten. And there is none comparable to Him.” (1-4 / Translated by ITANI).
Allah said in Surah An-Nisa : O FOLLOWERS of the Gospel! Do not overstep the bounds [of truth] in your religious beliefs, and do not say of God anything but the truth. The Christ Jesus, son of Mary, was but God's Apostle - [the fulfilment of] His promise which He had conveyed unto Mary - and a soul created by Him. Believe, then, in God and His apostles, and do not say, "[God is] a trinity". Desist [from this assertion] for your own good. God is but One God; utterly remote is He, in His glory, from having a son: unto Him belongs all that is in the heavens and all that is on earth; and none is as worthy of trust as God. Never did the Christ feel too proud to be God's servant, nor do the angels who are near unto Him. And those who feel too proud to serve Him and glory in their arrogance [should know that on Judgment Day] He will gather them all unto Himself: (171-172 / Translated by Muhammad Asad).
Allah the Most Merciful said in Surah Ali-Imran : Behold, the only [true] religion in the sight of God is [man's] self-surrender unto Him; and those who were vouchsafed revelation aforetime took, out of mutual jealousy, to divergent views [on this point] only after knowledge [thereof] had come unto them. But as for him who denies the truth of God's messages - behold, God is swift in reckoning!
Thus, [O Prophet,] if they argue with thee, say, "I have surrendered my whole being unto God, and [so have] all who follow me!" - and ask those who have been vouchsafed revelation aforetime, as well as all unlettered people, "Have you [too] surrendered yourselves unto Him?" And if they surrender themselves unto Him, they are on the right path; but if they turn away - behold, thy duty is no more than to deliver the message: for God sees all that is in [the hearts of] His creatures.
Verily, as for those who deny the truth of God's messages, and slay the prophets against all right, and slay people who enjoin equity - announce unto them a grievous chastisement.
It is they whose works shall come to nought both in this world and in the life to come; and they shall have none to succour them.
(19-22 / Translated by Muhammad Asad)..
God said : Say, “We believe in Allah, and in what was revealed to us, and in what was revealed to Abraham, and Ishmael, and Isaac, and Jacob, and the Patriarchs, and in what was given to Moses and Jesus, and in what was given to the prophets from their Lord. We do not differentiate between any of them. And to Him, we surrender.”
(2:136 / Translated by Community)
Salam (Peace) -----------------
@@islamisthetruewaytogod6812 Hello, and thank you for making the effort to educate me about Islam. However, I knew a lot about Islam already, having had Muslims in my family for many years and having read the Qur'an - and unfortunately, it's not for me. I found no answers as such in the Qur'an, although there is some wisdom in it. I have found no religion that could make me believe. But I'm glad you have, because it must be a great comfort in life. Salaam.
yes of course, the dreams may also have been planted by a third party.
@@jonraimbach8137 That's an odd thought.
@@islamisthetruewaytogod6812 with my limited knowledge my thoughts race to the question of how this place was created, also why so many different religions have also been created ?
So interesting. I can honestly state that there’s NEVER been a time, when I KNOW that I’m being watched/stared at ; where I turn around to no one looking my way.
There’s someone staring right back at me, and the directionality is spot on, EVERY time!
E= mc^2= Q(sentience), I learned also that thought is faster than the speed of light. I learned that this reality we experience as a human is an illusion - I was shown a halographic universe held by the intention of LOVE, which again, as I have stated, love is a force, not just a feeling. - CR
Thank you for articulating my similar experience during ketamine treatment. I’ve tried to explain it but have found it difficult.
Bravo
HARD TO RAP YOUR HEAD AROUND OUR REALITY IS NOT BASED IN REALITY.
for an intention of love, this plane is a horror show.
@@kellychubaborn in a diamond mine, it’s all around you but you can’t see it.
A segment from 'Saved by the Light of the Buddha Within'...
My new understandings of what many call 'God -The Holy Spirit' - resulting from some of the extraordinary ongoing after-effects relating to my NDE...
Myoho-Renge-Kyo represents the identity of what some scientists are now referring to as the unified field of consciousnesses. In other words, it’s the essence of all existence and non-existence - the ultimate creative force behind planets, stars, nebulae, people, animals, trees, fish, birds, and all phenomena, manifest or latent. All matter and intelligence are simply waves or ripples manifesting to and from this core source. Consciousness (enlightenment) is itself the actual creator of everything that exists now, ever existed in the past, or will exist in the future - right down to the minutest particles of dust - each being an individual ripple or wave.
The big difference between chanting Nam-Myoho-Renge-Kyo and most other conventional prayers is that instead of depending on a ‘middleman’ to connect us to our state of inner enlightenment, we’re able to do it ourselves. That’s because chanting Nam-Myoho-Renge-Kyo allows us to tap directly into our enlightened state by way of this self-produced sound vibration. ‘Who or What Is God?’ If we compare the concept of God being a separate entity that is forever watching down on us, to the teachings of Nichiren, it makes more sense to me that the true omnipotence, omniscience and omnipresence of what most people perceive to be God, is the fantastic state of enlightenment that exists within each of us. Some say that God is an entity that’s beyond physical matter - I think that the vast amount of information continuously being conveyed via electromagnetic waves in today’s world gives us proof of how an invisible state of God could indeed exist.
For example, it’s now widely known that specific data relayed by way of electromagnetic waves has the potential to help bring about extraordinary and powerful effects - including an instant global awareness of something or a mass emotional reaction. It’s also common knowledge that these invisible waves can easily be used to detonate a bomb or to enable NASA to control the movements of a robot as far away as the Moon or Mars - none of which is possible without a receiver to decode the information that’s being transmitted. Without the receiver, the data would remain impotent. In a very similar way, we need to have our own ‘receiver’ switched on so that we can activate a clear and precise understanding of our own life, all other life and what everything else in existence is.
Chanting Nam-Myoho-Renge-Kyo each day helps us to achieve this because it allows us to reach the core of our enlightenment and keep it switched on. That’s because Myoho-Renge-Kyo represents the identity of what scientists now refer to as the unified field of consciousnesses. To break it down - Myoho represents the Law of manifestation and latency (Nature) and consists of two alternating states. For example, the state of Myo is where everything in life that’s not obvious to us exists - including our stored memories when we’re not thinking about them - our hidden potential and inner emotions whenever they’re dormant - our desires, our fears, our wisdom, happiness, karma - and more importantly, our enlightenment.
The other state, ho, is where everything in Life exists whenever it becomes evident to us, such as when a thought pops up from within our memory - whenever we experience or express our emotions - or whenever a good or bad cause manifests as an effect from our karma. When anything becomes apparent, it merely means that it’s come out of the state of Myo (dormancy/latency) and into a state of ho (manifestation). It’s the difference between consciousness and unconsciousness, being awake or asleep, or knowing and not knowing.
The second law - Renge - Ren meaning cause and ge meaning effect, governs and controls the functions of Myoho - these two laws of Myoho and Renge, not only function together simultaneously but also underlies all spiritual and physical existence.
The final and third part of the tri-combination - Kyo, is the Law that allows Myoho to integrate with Renge - or vice versa. It’s the great, invisible thread of energy that fuses and connects all Life and matter - as well as the past, present and future. It’s also sometimes termed the Universal Law of Communication - perhaps it could even be compared with the string theory that many scientists now suspect exists.
Just as the cells in our body, our thoughts, feelings and everything else is continually fluctuating within us - all that exists in the world around us and beyond is also in a constant state of flux - constantly controlled by these three fundamental laws. In fact, more things are going back and forth between the two states of Myo and ho in a single moment than it would ever be possible to calculate or describe. And it doesn’t matter how big or small, famous or trivial anything or anyone may appear to be, everything that’s ever existed in the past, exists now or will exist in the future, exists only because of the workings of the Laws ‘Myoho-Renge-Kyo’ - the basis of the four fundamental forces, and if they didn’t function, neither we nor anything else could go on existing. That’s because all forms of existence, including the seasons, day, night, birth, death and so on, are moving forward in an ongoing flow of continuation - rhythmically reverting back and forth between the two fundamental states of Myo and ho in absolute accordance with Renge - and by way of Kyo. Even stars are dying and being reborn under the workings of what the combination ‘Myoho-Renge-Kyo’ represents. Nam, or Namu - which mean the same thing, are vibrational passwords or keys that allow us to reach deep into our life and fuse with or become one with ‘Myoho-Renge-Kyo’.
On a more personal level, nothing ever happens by chance or coincidence, it’s the causes that we’ve made in our past, or are presently making, that determine how these laws function uniquely in each of our lives - as well as the environment from moment to moment. By facing east, in harmony with the direction that the Earth is spinning, and chanting Nam-Myoho-Renge-Kyo for a minimum of, let’s say, ten minutes daily to start with, any of us can experience actual proof of its positive effects in our lives - even if it only makes us feel good on the inside, there will be a definite positive effect. That’s because we’re able to pierce through the thickest layers of our karma and activate our inherent Buddha Nature (our enlightened state). By so doing, we’re then able to bring forth the wisdom and good fortune that we need to challenge, overcome and change our adverse circumstances - turn them into positive ones - or manifest and gain even greater fulfilment in our daily lives from our accumulated good karma. This also allows us to bring forth the wisdom that can free us from the ignorance and stupidity that’s preventing us from accepting and being proud of the person that we indeed are - regardless of our race, colour, gender or sexuality. We’re also able to see and understand our circumstances and the environment far more clearly, as well as attract and connect with any needed external beneficial forces and situations. As I’ve already mentioned, everything is subject to the law of Cause and Effect - the ‘actual-proof-strength’ resulting from chanting Nam-Myoho-Renge-Kyo always depends on our determination, sincerity and dedication.
For example, the levels of difference could be compared to making a sound on a piano, creating a melody, producing a great song, and so on. Something else that’s very important to always respect and acknowledge is that the Law (or if you prefer God) is in everyone and everything.
NB: There are frightening and disturbing sounds, and there are tranquil and relaxing sounds. It’s the emotional result of any noise or sound that can trigger off a mood or even instantly change one. When chanting Nam-Myoho-Renge-Kyo each day, we are producing a sound vibration that’s the password to our true inner-self - this soon becomes apparent when you start reassessing your views on various things - such as your fears and desires etc. The best way to get the desired result when chanting is not to view things conventionally - rather than reaching out to an external source, we need to reach into our own lives and bring our needs and desires to fruition from within - including the good fortune and strength to achieve any help that we may need. Chanting Nam-Myoho-Renge-Kyo also reaches out externally and draws us towards, or draws towards us, what we need to make us happy from our environment. For example, it helps us to be in the right place at the right time - to make better choices and decisions and so forth. We need to think of it as a seed within us that we’re watering and bringing sunshine to for it to grow, blossom and bring forth fruit or flowers. It’s also important to understand that everything we need in life, including the answer to every question and the potential to achieve every dream, already exists within us.
I think you have pretty much covered IT
I've met people who have had NDE's
I dedicate my life to the Mystic Law of cause and effect through the sound of the Buddha voice.
The fusion of my life with the infinite potential of the universe and the temporary manifestation of all phenomena throughout the infinite space and time within vibrational interrelationships.
Nam-MyoHo-RenGe-Kyo.
You lost me at NASA and the moon. There is no outer space, only inner space. All is consciousness.
@@letsgococo288 Oh I did not
Tanya is impressive. She is taking this all in and is not concluding anything beyond what she can confirm. And yet does not claim to know everything. This is the true scientist brain. We need more of her.
period
It actually seems like cowardice. It's a safe position. She'll go far.
that's not science. her evidence is anecdotal. subjective. and actually nosenscical. if consciousness is somehow connected to an outer spiritual experience, then why the hell is everyone having such a different experience? and yet, why are people who share culture have experiences that are more similar? the best explanation is that each culture invents their own, and none of them are real.
@@rsmonge I agree completely
I simply can't find that impressive.
I am playing in loop, great sleep!
What a beautiful conversation. I like the respect shown by all three participants, despite their differing, but very studied, points of view. All three speakers have given me a lot to reflect on in this matter. Thank you.
Yes! Healthy respectful debates are so important to develop well rounded concepts. I so enjoy proper debates. Many debates these days are simply defensive and many participants are only interested in aggressively shutting down points of view that differ from their own. There is no progress here. If you have an idea, welcome debate and challenges . It's how concepts become refined and more accurate, in my humble opinion.
Currently half way through, what an incredible discussion. I really wish I could ask Rupert Sheldrake if the theory about the mirror isn’t directly contradicting the gaze experiment. Because if the person A having the gaze is looking towards a person B in a mirror and to A it will be the case that B is behind the mirror, then A will send his “gaze force” behind the mirror. But can B feel that, since B is on a physical location that differs from the location in the field where A has the energy of the gaze directed to. The easier explanation still may be that feeling a gaze is realizing the social /physical importance of someone looking at us rather than receiving energy from a field. The fact that we suddenly know that someone is gazing at us doesn’t strike me as very convincing because there are also enough reports of people not noticing that someone is intently looking at them. How often do you hear about someone having a crush on someone else and the receiver of the affection being the last one to notice it. Seems hard to explain if things like gazes and crushes directly are sent through a field. We may only “feel” the gaze once we turn around and discover that we have been gazed at, and if we turn around because we think we feel a gaze but there is nobody there, we may easily forget our earlier thought. This would make us biased to associate gaze feelings with situations where there was really a gaze.
Great comment. Interesting! (I cannot venture a hypothesis myself but understand you.)
Some people can hide their crush, better to look at people staring behind/through a lens, or those who feel their attention can't be noticed I think.
Exactly. It's not compelling evidence whatsoever
@@tysyzygy i don’t find anything in what you say particularly in need of “fields” in the explanation of how gazes are picked up. For example: the animals that are hunted because they are too focused on an activity like eating or drinking, instead of not being tuned in to a field the more simpler explanation could be that they do ignore making a visual scan using head turning movements, because they prioritize eating or drinking instead of raising their head long enough to perform such a visual scan. And since you yourself indicate that the example of the woman detecting that she was stalked probably involves interpreting a lot of subtle behaviors from the stalker, I see no reason why these lots of factors would then exclude visual observing how often the stalker looks at you and how long before he looks at some other thing again. Which means a field is not per se necessary to explain how this woman might have inferred that the person was stalking her.
I talked to my mum about the nature of fish just the other day, explaining how I view it. I've never understood why people in general consider fish - or ticks and ants etc. - less valid (for lack of a better word) than animals like dogs and horses. I've often thought about fish in particular because I was told from a young age that they didn't experience pain. I've never accepted that claim as a fact... and at some point that led me to think about whether they had emotions as well, and I soon realised that I believed that they do.
When I saw a video of a wild fish returning again and again to a man to be petted and even to be lifted out of the water and thrown back in, my conviction grew even stronger. Why would it do that unless it enjoyed it? And doesn't the feeling of enjoyment require a consciousness? Can you have feelings without a consciousness? It's hard for me to imagine that you can.
Playful fish: th-cam.com/video/6at5gBa4ZbI/w-d-xo.html
Because dogs aid with hunting and herding animals and are a source of companionship. Horses aid with transportation, farming and warfare. They provide a utility that fish and ants do not, thus they are valued higher. Fish are deemed mere food and ants inconsequential at best and a pest at worse. Not all creatures are going to be on an equal footing.
In terms of fish feeling pain;
"the idea that fish flee noxious stimuli because they experience phenomenal consciousness (feel pain) is not the best explanation for this behaviour. It is more probable that fish demonstrate these behaviours because they have evolved innate reflexes associated with specific spinal and sub-telencephalic neural circuits" - www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4356734/
In terms of your fish video, you are just assuming it's returning to be petted. It could be doing so for any number of reasons & the assumption that its enjoying it is an unwarranted leap. Whereas a cat may make a gesture or prod the stroking hand to continue, the fish isn't given any signals to that end. It is merely returning to a spot where a guy happens to pet him. That it's being petted, could be incidental to the fish's choice to return. For all we know, it could be tolerating that behaviour in pursuit of something else. In addition, merely because a creature responds with what appears to be enjoyment, does not imply there is a consciousness there.
You are urged to become VEGAN, since carnism (the destructive ideology that supports the use and consumption of animal products, especially for “food”) is arguably the foremost existential crisis.🌱
@@dmc6262no, just because an organism _looks_ like it's conscious doesn't necessarily imply that it _is_ conscious... but then you have to explain _why_ it would be evolutionarily beneficial for an organism to look conscious when in fact it isn't. And, given that we know that _we_ are conscious, and given that we _know_ that we evolved directly from the same organism in question (we share 97% of the same DNA with even the common fly), well... it's just more parsimonious to invoke Occam's Razor and assume the simplest explanation. Which is that if an organism _looks_ conscious then it probably _is_ conscious.
To assume the alternate hypothesis is just revealing that tired old bias of human exceptionality. _Homo sapiens sapiens_ may be the smartest organisms on the planet, but we're not _that_ exceptional, and we're definitely not the only creatures that are conscious...
@@simesaid You might not need to necessarily explain that as not all cases of evolution are advantageous. Also just because you can come up with some explanation as to why it would be beneficial for it look conscious when it isn't, doesn't tell us if it's in fact the case. Just because we share heaps of dna, it doesn't mean that quality A found in animal A is therefore found in animal B. You don't get to down tools and just invoke occam's razor to settle on an explanation. "If it looks conscious then it probably is" - Not very scientific at all.
I'm not assuming the alternative hypothesis either. Rejection of one claim doesn't mean acceptance of its alternative. My position is neutral. I neither claim they are conscious nor that they aren't.
Well you may not think we're exceptional, that is subjective. But compared to other animals? I don't know. When they develop a civilisation capable of reaching the moon, and put a probe into deep space then i'd consider it.
I suspect the difference is that humans experience pain through resistance, and animals don't - they just experience as it is, with no thoughts, story, anxiety or evaluation, saying "this is bad" "this shouldn't be" "I am a poor suffering individual" "oh dear, what can I do, this is too much" etc. etc. With the mind in the way, humans experience a torment that animals don't - the torment of resistance, anxiety, anticipation and fear. When pain is experienced without those filters, it transforms, passes much more quickly, and is far less hard to endure.
It’s amazing hearing this level of discussion while maintaining such respect and humility. I hope we never lose this as a society!
These,discussions are crucial ! As even tthough it is taught by academia the mind is simply a machine that can be quantified the true state of science reveals thought is( at this time) a unquantifiable manifestation.
The only one who had certain experiences is Rupert Sheldrake and talks differently. Anil Seth talks nonsense, he doesn't believe that an energy in us will remain to exist when the body dies, while SCIENTISTS have already in 1967 proven that this energy really exist. It's measurable and even visual with right electronic devices. It's all about energies and frequencies. The Furhmann woman talks more religious, so totally on the wrong track about this subject.
@@ExperiencedGhost
To exactly what are you referring when you speak of energy?
@@REDPUMPERNICKEL What religious people call the "soul", scientists call that "consciousness", someone else might call that the "chi" or "lifeforce". All names for the same energy. It's not 110 volts. It's not that kind of energy. Not even that electromagnetic field that is generated when we move, do sport.
When we speak of an energy, then it has a frequency. No matter what kind of energy.
That energy is measurable with an electronic device, to know its frequency. What scientist know these days is not talked about in general, you need to look that up for yourself. So, that energy in our body is proven by many scientist. The many experiments of different kind about that "energy" in our body that has been conducted for decades, show/proof at least one thing: it exist.
I've had since I was a child many experiences of what people call paranormal and supernatural. An apparition is that same energy that we all have in our body. A body cannot function without. The consciousness, memories and emotions are in that energy. A body would become instantly a pile of fles/blood/body if that energy would be out of the body. The body will not move at all. For example when someone has an out-of-body experience.
I'm not even religious. That energy is scientific, not the twilight zone of religion.
Where has my answer to Redpumpernickel request gone?
@@ExperiencedGhost
Just so you know, your answer has not appeared on my screen either.
I have also been experiencing this same 'disappearing comment' problem lately.
All my comments are present in my TH-cam archive but do not show up in the threads where they were made.
Curious.
Is TH-cam overwhelmed with data or their censoring algorithms run amok or have they hit some mysterious incompetence level that's starting to degrade the system?
I don't know.
Hope they can fix it.
Do radio shows extend beyond transistor boxes?
Right, so much of nature has scaler/vector dichotomies but in truth and reality you can't easily separate one from the other. It's unfortunate that Science tends to choose the path that it can more easily study.
It's always a good day when Rupert Sheldrake pops up in your playlist
Me too his voice is a meditation :)
Hes the only one up there on the right track imo
@@skyedge3407 how so? he doesn't have any evidence for the things he says
Rupert Sheldrake is a pseudo-scientist and a charlatan! He has no standing in the scientific community!
@@romaint6624 he does he has alot of research of it
great video! really enjoyed the insights from all the speakers. but i can't help but wonder if we're overcomplicating the idea of consciousness. maybe it’s simpler than we think, and trying to link it to something beyond our brains could lead us astray. just a thought!
Its so weird I woke up from a nap to this video.this is something i think about every morning,my dreams try to keep me sometime when I'm dreaming it feels like I can remember being in my dream for 20 years and when I go back to sleep my dreams continue from where they left off.the only way I wake up from my dreams is by having a nightmare I wake up with my heart beating super fast and trying to ketch my breathe because by that point i can feel pain and I'm telling myself to open my eyes it takes awhile but eventually I can bring my consciousness back to reality and out of sleep its a scarry experience when I can't find your myself I think I get lost in the dream world and it feels like I'm dead like I have to connection to my body and I have to try so hard to get back to myself and make myself open my eyes ..sometimes I wake up and for a second forget where I'm at or who I am or who's with me . I had a dream I got murdered in this house and it was on repeat the dream and I remember what the house looked like what the mom looked like and I would walk out of. The room I was in there was my murders in that room and i had this feeling like I was gonna shit myself or my bowls were going to completely release so I run to the restroom and passing by a room is a dog that startles me and the mom is in the room in the background and she has burgendy fluffy wavy long hair she's old and gives me a dirty look and it felt like I did that three times untell i finally reached the restroom and I'm in the restroom its dark and something popes up in front of me and it seems like it yells at me I'm dead and I look in the mirror and my stomach drops and I feel like I'm falling and my whole life flashes before me then woosh I'm back in front of the mirror and that when I realise that its not me I'm looking aat its someone I've never seen before but I'm looking three her eyes and covered in black shit like oil or dirt all over me and I'm saying i don't want to dye this isn't my body and I fall to oblivion and wake up in a sweat breathing heavily ...and thats just one dream there all so vivid ..scary..most of the time
Yep, you’re crazy.
@Bad.az.barbie Whoa..! I love hearing other people's crazy, scary dreams. My sister and I talk together about our dreams all the time; no one else wants to hear it 😆. Your dream sounds intense as hell and very frightening. I hope you're okay and can just take it in stride. I have grown to find my 'scary' dreams just as interesting and intriguing as the fun ones. Stay well x
Reproduction is a sin. Your parents are Satan
LOOK UP SLEEP PARALYSIS..I HAVE THAT CONDITION
ALSO SOME STREET DRUGS
AND PRESCRIBED MEDICATIONS AND EVEN SUPPLEMNTS CAN CAUSE NIGHT TERRORS
EVEN BLOOD PRESSURE MEDS SLEEP MEDS ANTIDEPRESSANTS ETC
LOOK UP ANY MEDS YOU MIGHT TAKE SIDE EFFECTS-
ALSO DONT WATCH SCARY MOVIES
YOUR BRAIN WILL REMEBER AND MIX IN STUFF TO YOUR DREAMS RANDOMLY AND YOU WONT REALISE ITS EVEN FROM A MOVIE OR BOOK ETC THJAT YOU WATCHED OR READ OR EVEN A VIDEO OR SONG YOU HEARD
GOOD LUCK
Wow this video is popping off. I would've never thought that when I sat in the live audience :D This debate is the first of its kind hosted by a mainstream university (as far as I know and as said by Rupert), which could be a sign that times are changing. I recommend videos from the Essentia Foundation if you're interested in these kinds of topics.
Same here. And this is not the first time, I remember some of the comments, I have read this before, recently. TH-cam has some kind of brainwashing formula going here.
I wish there was a debate with consciousness and Dementia…..
Me too. A tough, cruel illness to watch a person lose all their life's work of memories. Coconut oil seems to help with the clock drawing test. Recent research in Aust pointing to higher clusters in areas prone to blue/green algae - stagnet dead water. More side effects of unhealthy eco systems perhaps? Not a scientist.
They still know that they am. They just don't know WHO they am.
Dimensionia. They get a window into another dimension and we think they are going crazy.
What would the debate proposition in that debate?
@@highvalence7649 it might be on 'if Dementia patients have consciousness', which in my opinion they do, but in full alzheimers its a bit more debatable, as they literally stop thinking, knowing who they are, and much else
Wonderful!
Too often, academics in the public space give categorical statements which encourage ridicule of anyone who doesn't hold to conventional wisdom. This debate was a fantastic antidote.
I've no idea who is right, or if any of the speakers are right, but I'm so glad to hear their views being seriously considered.
Although I am not a materialist, my favourite was Anil Seth. This is because of his intellectual humility and respect for those with different views.
Hello ! May Allah protect and guide you to his light and happiness in this life and the hereafter, God bless, Ameen. Excuse me for giving a little presentation of Islam, because it is very misunderstood nowadays, especially on those « Antichrist's » times, where media and politics are mixed to distort history and truth. And terrorists (puppets of the Antichrist) who misinterpret verses, out of ignorance and political motivations, and take them out of historical context (just like radical atheists do by the way) don't help either. Thank you very much for your time.
First of all, if you have any questions regarding Islam and yourself, just open the Quran randomly, and you will find the answer in front of you, like a miracle and a sign from God.
Islam is an arabic word that means the Surrender to the One and Only God, our Creator, Protector, Provider, who gives us life and all that we have, we are safe and sound by his will and grace, we are His and to Him we return, and we have to thank him in this trial life by submitting to him by our free will, or later in the Day of judgment when it's too late to save our own skin. Islam was the original Religion descended to earth from heaven with Adam and Eve (peace and blessing be upon them) in the beginning of humanity. and was passed to people with the succession of the 124 000 prophets and 315 messengers of God to all nations and civilizations since, passing by Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Ismaël, Joseph, Moses, Aaron, Joshua, David, Solomon and Jesus (Peace and blessing be upon them) during the history of mankind, the last replaces and completes the previous, until the succession of the last messenger of God fourteen centuries ago, Muhammad (Peace and blessing be upon him) to complete the noble morals of all mankind, to bring humans and jinns out of darkness into light, and to purify people's religion and belief from corruption and polytheism, and return it to purity and true monotheism, like it was in the times of the prophets (Peace and blessing be upon them).
Many Religions that we know nowadays, at their beginning were true and under Islam, initiated by one of the prophets of God, but their original teachings, history and scriptures have been corrupted over time with falsification and polytheism, or lost and replaced with false ones. That's why Islam is the only Religion accepted by God nowadays, which consists in bearing witness that there is no god besides Allah (God in Aramaic, the original language of Jesus and the Gospel), and that Muhammad is His servant and messenger, just like Jesus and Moses and others are His servants and messengers. Never a messenger of God said he was God or literally son of God, it was the people after him who changed the words of God and corrupted the Religion. God is unique and absolute, He does not need to have a family and sons or to associate anyone else with His kingdom, He can simply create whatever He wants, everything belongs to Him, and to Him everything will return. Allah said in Surah Al-Mu’minun : “God has never begotten a son, nor is there any god besides Him. Otherwise, each god would have taken away what it has created, and some of them would have gained supremacy over others. Glory be to God, far beyond what they describe. The Knower of the hidden and the manifest. He is exalted, far above what they associate. (91-92 / Translated by ITANI).
Allah means the one and only God, the God of all prophets and creatures, the creator of the universe and mankind, and the Master of the Day of judgment, where our destiny, Hell or Paradise, is decided based on our faith and deeds in this trial life, and above all, Allah's mercy.
Allah said in Surah Al-Ikhlas : In the name of God, the Gracious, the Merciful.
Say, “He is God, the One. God, the Absolute. He begets not, nor was He begotten. And there is none comparable to Him.” (1-4 / Translated by ITANI).
Allah said in Surah An-Nisa : O FOLLOWERS of the Gospel! Do not overstep the bounds [of truth] in your religious beliefs, and do not say of God anything but the truth. The Christ Jesus, son of Mary, was but God's Apostle - [the fulfilment of] His promise which He had conveyed unto Mary - and a soul created by Him. Believe, then, in God and His apostles, and do not say, "[God is] a trinity". Desist [from this assertion] for your own good. God is but One God; utterly remote is He, in His glory, from having a son: unto Him belongs all that is in the heavens and all that is on earth; and none is as worthy of trust as God. Never did the Christ feel too proud to be God's servant, nor do the angels who are near unto Him. And those who feel too proud to serve Him and glory in their arrogance [should know that on Judgment Day] He will gather them all unto Himself: (171-172 / Translated by Muhammad Asad).
Allah the Most Merciful said in Surah Ali-Imran : Behold, the only [true] religion in the sight of God is [man's] self-surrender unto Him; and those who were vouchsafed revelation aforetime took, out of mutual jealousy, to divergent views [on this point] only after knowledge [thereof] had come unto them. But as for him who denies the truth of God's messages - behold, God is swift in reckoning!
Thus, [O Prophet,] if they argue with thee, say, "I have surrendered my whole being unto God, and [so have] all who follow me!" - and ask those who have been vouchsafed revelation aforetime, as well as all unlettered people, "Have you [too] surrendered yourselves unto Him?" And if they surrender themselves unto Him, they are on the right path; but if they turn away - behold, thy duty is no more than to deliver the message: for God sees all that is in [the hearts of] His creatures.
Verily, as for those who deny the truth of God's messages, and slay the prophets against all right, and slay people who enjoin equity - announce unto them a grievous chastisement.
It is they whose works shall come to nought both in this world and in the life to come; and they shall have none to succour them.
(19-22 / Translated by Muhammad Asad)..
God said : Say, “We believe in Allah, and in what was revealed to us, and in what was revealed to Abraham, and Ishmael, and Isaac, and Jacob, and the Patriarchs, and in what was given to Moses and Jesus, and in what was given to the prophets from their Lord. We do not differentiate between any of them. And to Him, we surrender.”
(2:136 / Translated by Community)
Salam (Peace) -----------------
doctors aren't research scientists trained in research. that's why quackery is a common problem. money is another factor. imo
For any one interested in these conversations, I would encourage you to seek out some discussions with Bernardo Kastrup and with Donald Hoffman. They seem to me to be a step further on.
Absolutely 💯
Hoffman’s book, ‘The case against reality’, is a gem.
I agree he's very smart
tHANK YOU PHENOMENICAL WEBINAR!
I may change the question slightly! "Can consciousness extent beyond Biological beings?"
No I don't a difference. Brain or biological being, it's the same. Both tells us about the body that exist in one frequency, while the energy in us is of an energy of a higher frequency. When the body dies, the energy remains - that's the one of a higher frequency.
What a great video! It all comes together for me with Rupert Sheldrakes commentary in the last 30 minutes.
I think consciousness could be the signal to which our antenna (Brain) receives. I think our brain, (the signal capturer), like our Wi-Fi or cable boxes, lack the complexity and comprehension to understand the signal. Our brains are simply the transmitter, the messenger if you will, to which the message is outside of our feeble grasp. Invoking a higher mind here responsible for this all. A God if you will, but not a God of the thousands of beliefs systems, but a God vastly far difficult to know and understand.
we KNOW the neurons are the ones that CREATE the consciousness , groups of them actually ,
one group sending signals to another group of neurons , that ''contrast'' between the two ... IS the consciousness ...
we just don't know WHY it does this , but we know HOW it happens ...
it's ALL physical , even the connection between the groups ... is physical / material
and by fiat , so is the consciousness itself , PHYSICAL
I think the answer of consciousness lies in the why and not the how. The how could merely be the a painter brushstrokes on a canvas but negate the painter emotion and vision to create it. It's crazy to think that with out some sort of conscious observer anything would exist. Existing in itself is an observation.
@@ThermaL-ty7bw do some LSD then say that
@@ThermaL-ty7bw If the brain is indeed an antenna, dementia or a brain injury damages the antenna and what is received will be corrupted information.
@@ThermaL-ty7bwyea precisely, what caused the group of neuron to even fire in the first place? That is exactly what OP is saying. The brain is a transmitter.
Can anyone recommend any youtube videos on the latest research in anesthesia?
1:25:28 - If it turns out that space-time is a brain made UI the inside-outside distinction might be a lot more complicated and at that point you'd need to consider more that a conscious being is, with Karl Friston's theory, a bundle of Markov blanketed sectors where what we experience as 'us' is a particularly Markov bundle that distinguishes our subjectivity from our experience of the outside / objective world, but the question is whether that Markov blanket exists within us and whether we're ultimately rendering (ourselves) something really complicated into the appearance of Baryonic matter.
1:36:49 Inspiration: "spooky action at a distance", Quantum Entanglement; Wave-particle duality of C60 molecules; Carbon based lifeforms such as humans, unpacking thought inperiments
Consciousness: I was run over by a car as a teenager. Next thing I knew I was floating above my body looking down at myself lying in the road. Our bodies are like a car in that we get in it, and it's an extension of ourselves that allows us to maneuver in the environment. Our souls live in or out of the body.
that is only a concept. who were you 10 months before you were born?
You’re literally just inserting “soul”
So let’s run that back.
For some reason “consciousness” is talking to us and telling us about a car crash that it experienced when it was a teenager.
So apparently, consciousness, they’re actually just a person, has a memory in real time from neurons that fire in their localized system.
In this memory they’re visualizing what it would be like to experience floating above ones own body as a ghost like entity after a lifetime of experiencing POV in current media Via the concept of VR, any given movie or television series, and video games in general.
Even without these experiences the concept of single perspective or limited perspective exists on its own.
So forget about the details or the intricate argument.
What is the overall encompassing motive in the suggestion behind this comment.
The vibe I’m getting is, “Souls do exist”, “therefore God”
If not, then, OK souls exist, so what…?
If so, then who cares about another imperfect being made of a compilation and processor, Especially one that’s impossibly difficult to work with.
And don’t even try to suggest that perfection in any form exist in the slightest because you’re talking to a wall at that point.
@@estona_spinoza64 Who is to decide what perfection is? Good/bad , happy/sad… it’s all an experience for no one. The experiencer is contained within the experience. Nothing is.
That analogy breaks down when you look at it closer. A car is built to have a person crawl inside it and control it. It has a steering wheel, brakes, gas pedal, seatbelt, gear shifter, etc. It's obvious that a car is entirely designed for something to exist in it and control it.
The brain doesn't look anything like that. Nearly everything that one might ascribe to consciousness has at the very least a physical explanation based on changes in gene expression, post-translational modifications of proteins, changes in receptor composition or density in the synapse, changes in numbers and/or morphology of synapses, or changes in neural networks. But all of these changes are autonomous and have no evidence that they can be meddled with by a non-physical ghost.
A better analogy is that the brain is more like a Roomba. Fully autonomous, following rule sets that are determined by the structure of the controlling devices based on sensory input.
@@Koort1008 No offense but I can’t tell if you’re adding to my comment or if you’re trying to make the case that perfection does exist? L O L
Silmutaneous lives and or bi location needs to be discussed. Also along with this Dream Time and visiting other timelines and potential futures.
This discussion is based on astrophysics. Having the ability to tap into your consciousness is not tapping into your memories. As mankind is not capable of controlling the subconscious mind the memories stored in the brain is not chronological. Memory is association based. Even the subconscious mind associates' memories to store them more accurately. To astro project is to tap into the subconscious mind while conscious. At this point in reality, you are complete energy. Which allows you to travel to where energy travels. Energy is not binding to time and space. Even time itself is not binding to reality and space. However, energy is both in the past and currently lol in the present. There is no future. Tomorrow has not happened. No energy has made it there yet.
You give the impression that you conceive of energy as something like a ghost.
Energy is not at all like that.
Energy is simply the way we think about material behavior.
@@rafaelgonzalez4175
@@rafaelgonzalez4175 mmm yummy word salad
@@shortyrags needs a touch of olive oil
@@rafaelgonzalez4175 if there's no future, why would there be a past? Energy is just in the present
I visualize this as the ability to tap into a river of light and energy from our universes creation like a stream, being able to jump like a small fish, from person to person, and forward and backward in time.
I saw this in a vision. Except rather than jumping like a fish....a life is more like a rivulet that splits from the main stream and flows alone for a time, before rejoining the main stream.
ya bud it takes many forms , some scare the hell out of me, i have been found levitating by my brother.
@@davidmccue3591
Reproduction is a sin
Consciousness runs off an electrical charge....
TOTALLY AGREE, I USED TO WEAR AND ELECTRICAL WATCH WITH AN ELECTRICAL DISPLAY, WHEN I WAS PARTYING HARD IT WOULD ACTUALLY FLASH.....LOL
@@Miodrag.Vukomanovic
Interesting. Thank you for your input and time..
My favorite phenomena is when I worked retail and I would observe people behaving like herd animals.
Say it was a tuesday morning, maybe 10 people in the store. You are at the cash register with no customers just twiddling your thumbs. Then all of a sudden people would make their final decision and converge on the register practically as one from all over the store and you'd have to call for backup. I swear there is some trigger that caused all of them to move together, they couldn't see each other, hear each other, and were not in communication.
I saw this happen a hundred times at least.
It is same in restaurants, it can be dead and you get 1 customer and majority of times it will be that "herd" you talk about. It will rarely be just that 1, it is almost always followed by at least 1 more behind them or more. and then it will be dead again. Sometiems it is due to the time of day, like when most places let out for lunch, or shift change then at least the "herd" is caused by a known factor... or when the bars close, you get the predictable "herds" but I'm talking about the dead times like 3-4am... even then when 1 pulls in, usually 1 or more will be right behind them then go back to being dead.
I see this herd mentality every Saturday, shop frenzy , like its last day in their life ,or shop will never be open again.(I work in supermarket)
@@nickgray8072 what truth , that we ARE pack animals ? which we are ...
or that people are pattern seeking machines ... that like to stick to ... patterns ...
whoop de do , you figured us out , we like patterns , our brain likes patterns ,
we behave IN patterns , job done ...
that was hard to figure out , wasn't it ... ?
we all have the same brain , with the same pattern recognition machines in them ,
most of them use the same register , if they can , so most of them ARE going to walk to the same place , every time they come there , so are the rest of the people shopping there , so Yes , they are going to ALL come to the same pattern to follow they did the previous YEARS
May be confirmation bias. You might have only noticed the herd of customers becaue one or two customers coming to the register isnt memorable, definitely not as memorable as being swamped all of a sudden and wondering why.
Modern research on Near Death Experience by Raymond moody, reincarnation memories by Ian Stevenson/Jim trucker and past lives regression by Brian Weiss all independently but coincidentally show that our consciousness survive death, we live many lives and our thoughts and actions matter in the hereafter.
So be kind and helpful to others, be virtuous, meditate and cultivate ourselves to higher spiritual levels. Cheers.
On reincarnation I would humbly say it is not conclusive because non-human intelligences like démons can induce false memories since they exist perpetually.
So I agree we must be kind and good, but only because God the highest intelligence will judge us all.
NDE is not different from a dream, meaning it's like a subconscious mind at work.
@@DavidMorudu There is a massive difference between an NDE and a dream. That is that during an NDE one is brain dead, there is no blood circulation, no oxygen to the brain, and no neural activity as a result. Yet many people report that during this time they have experiences, and that should not be possible.
Anecdotal at best
@@kaibuchan
When many people all over the world have the same anecdotal experiences, intelligent people will understand it differently from you.
I'd love to have a solid understanding of how things like this happen - I've had many (sleeping) dreams that showed me future events and people that I would come in contact with. For example, I had a dream of sitting in a circle of people in chairs and we were talking. I saw the room and specific people - their faces, clothes, body positions, etc. Many years later, my uncle killed himself and I went to a support group for counseling. A few sessions in, I realized these were the people in that dream.
I don't know what the term is but something like randomization. Think of all the people in the world having multiple dreams every night, Someone is going to think/dream of something that will be similar to it in real life at some point.
Other than that, no one in history has been able to consistently dream the actual future accurately besides in fables and tall tales.
@Charles-ij1ow that's a very certain assessment. Methinks it's a bit beyond your experience. No offense is intended, of course, but I'm just struck by how facile you are with your dismissal, despite millenia of testimonials attesting to the opposite of your claim.
@@shanartisan It's cute to come across people who believe in real oracles. What other conspiracies are you into?
Uncanny isn’t it
I need 6 numbers between 1 and 50. I'll cut you in 10% if they win.
Very interesting. At about 1:50 min they spoke about phantom limb pain? Loved it! I had a radical mastectomy at 43, now 68 and still have this itchy nipple that isn't there along with other pain from that surgery (but that was nerve damage that won't get better). I would think there's a large cohort of women who could be part of a trial or something about this when it comes to phantom pain/nipple itch, ya know? I LOVE Rupert- and believe his idea of the morphic field, his first (I think, 1988) book "Presence of the Past:" really changed how I think, opened my eyes and he keeps it up. At last I see he's making a difference. This group of egg heads were all very smart and interesting, I loved this discussion, thank you.
As a (rather mild) and thankfully cured (Aripiprazole 400mg) schizophrenic, I wont say former but the meds are good long term. I took the opportunity to have dialogues of many whispered discussions with whatever was listening. Apart from some overtly exterior voices and some inner voices, I at times had stomach grumbles that formed sentences, a bit muted for my hearing (I remember asking for a repetition of sentences several times which would rumble a response) but otherwise plain as day, I also had them rapping on windows and 'Gaussing' CRT screens once for yes, twice for no on several memorable occasions and had my matress shaken quite wildly during one or two of these sessions too. That's about the extent of it but the entities/voices would suggest and perform mental feats too. I don't know what state I was in but it was very receptive.
Glad you are well and thanks for sharing your experience. My best friend got that as well a handful of years back, if not maybe a bit more of a severe case, but the aripiprazole helps him a ton too!
@@thesayerofing Been feeling mentally well for years now, thanks and good to know that your best friend is benefitting. I find the meds subtle, you can't really feel any present effect which I find is a lot better than being constantly drowsy (Olanzapine) or zonked right out (Stelazine). The psychiatrist ttried to explain how Aripiprazole works to me, to the effect of "you can still get bad days and events but you'll bounce back rather than stay down and get worse". The same psychiatrist that swore his meds made you live 10 years longer though lol, so who knows.
After such experiences I still don't know what to personally believe, the only thing I'm sure of is that if we can't get hold of the elixir of life before we die, cryonics are the best chance to be brought back, eventually. At least you'll be preserved as well as possible on the offchance of revival, I'll take it.
Incredible, after all this time this is it, really. Biology doesn't have consciousness, people other than this single point. All of the 3 dimensional universe is held together by consciousness and sits in the divine mind
@@RobMaskell-r4v that isnrt a fact
Sounds like you where possessed
It is extremely important to ask what general anasthesia and surgery do to the nature of consciousness in the body. There is a definite effect that causes people who've had surgery to be extremely objective, even when they dont want to be so objective
Should i get some surgery to experience it?
The argument would be that consciousness is a physical attribute, not a spiritual one.
@@dawud7791 every thing is physical, even if consciousness exists without the body, its still a physical phenomenon. Do we call the wind or radio waves or light waves spiritual?
@@curtis-dj5bp I don’t know how to explain wind, or radio waves or photons, aside from energy.
I don’t think they would be considered physical, even though they can cause a physical experience, And be measured.
Interesting, never thought about it.
I was refereing to the physical tangible body vs. consciousness, which to my thought would be more like elements you mentioned, but impossible to measure.
@@curtis-dj5bp "its still a physical phenomenon." -- That is very doubtful. You do not understand what consciousness is.
I feel seth took up way too much time talking, he didn't really give anyone else a chance to speak, I would have rather listened to Luhrmann and Sheldrake speak more...
After hearing this for the 3rd time, watching it now was real thought-provoking and clarifying as well. Very good to see different perspectives on the topic.
The ideas of mind x consciousness and body x disembodiment are extremely interesting.
Also, how it changes from just listening to actually looking at how each person presents itself on a debate. How to interpret what you said by sight and by hearing & how our brains receive an unprecedented amount of unconscious stimuli - but only what is conscious comes to surface... maybe?
Thanks for putting this together. 👀🙌🏼
the lady is speaking all about what I used to call being a sensitive, just focusing your mind a little you can see people heath by the color of their aura. I now try and avoid this stuff as it never seems to end well, but i have been everywhere. today I visualize consciousness as two journeys, one to life until birth then a journey to death. this all begins with the first journey.
She's also talking about what is originally known as the witch's familiar. And today I guess they're calling them Tulpa's. Same thing, same practice, with a different title for the kiddos.
I genuinely believe that this subject cannot be fully investigated without seeing the problem from alternate angles.
So - in the way that neurologists mapped functions within areas of the brain by studying brain damaged individuals than then lose very specific abilities based on the area that was damaged. It was very surprising to see that things we take for granted as part of the human experience that you wouldn't realise had a specific area for - such as face recognition, seeing edges - even detecting movement changes within a scene (if you lose this ability and you're at a train station, the train would just 'appear', you wouldn't see it pull into the station).
Also, in a similar way that the structure of DNA was discovered by shining X-Rays through it and observing the shadow - what I'm trying to say, is that, by altering your consciousness, it could cast a 'shadow' of the shape and workings of it. Therefore, drugs that affect consciousness, especially psychedelics - would make a huge impact in learning about the workings of the self, the ego and consciousness and awareness. Designing specific drugs for altering the consciousness in specific ways could be used for investigative purposes.
If you're aware of Alexander Shulgin and his books - 'PIHKAL' and 'TIHKAL' (amazing story and person) over the course of 20-30 years, he *legally* invented thousands of new psychedelic drugs and tested them all on himself.
In support of this approach, I can say that anyone who has experienced the true 'mystical' or an extreme result from a psychedelic experience have experienced states that defy words and logic. We are not seeing the universe as it truly is, we have only evolved to cope with the model we are given. But there is so much more going on than we will ever be aware of. If you have experienced true 'ego death' - having your sense of self completely dissolved.
You don't even need drugs. Long term meditation/Buddhists strive for those moments. You become one with everything and the walls or the bubble that 'you' live inside, disappears. The psychedelic experience is very similar to a deep meditative state.
Great train of thought! But it is not true that Alexander Shulgin created 'thousands' of new psychedelic drugs.
Yes! I always felt that Niel Degrasee Tyson and what has become the "modernist" scientific community. Many of these characters want intentionally disconnect our souls from our bodies. Degrasse Tyson is such a dark, creaking, creep!
The problem with death might be is that with anesthesia consciousness goes first but with death other brain processes might go first that are relevant for perceiving the passage of time.
So it might happen that you don't experience time passing and you are still conscious. And that might mean, that your last conscious moment is there "forever", at least forever for you. That might be what is considered eternal life. From the outside it's a glimpse, from the inside it never ends.
Wow well said
I would call that hell.
Yeah, maybe.
Maybe the quality of that experience depends on the memories, emotions etc that you accumulate during your life. That sounds almost religious...
Maybe you experience all of them at once without the time-like sequence.
This can be something like what people call "life review" in near-death experiences.@@mikeh3559
@@mikeh3559Yes and no, I’ve experienced and do have a overwhelming sense that I’ve died before , I also have memories of living before, certain things change up, even if it’s just a little bit. But it’s more of a timeline thing. But think of it this way though, if some of this stuff weren’t a little bit true, none of us wouldn’t be here. This is what sparked my interest, apparently that’s the power of the internet, and its algorithms, it attracts people with a sense for what it is.
When the body dies there’s no longer a “house” to hold the consciousness/soul (awareness of one’s soul). Our Consciousness goes on to another plane of existence, it can’t stay on the flesh & blood plane.
I feel like you could make the most scientifically sound paper hinting at the possibility that conciousness extends beyond the brain and it wouldnt pass peer review just because of the premise
Consciousness is infused within the material universe and we happen to be a concentrated center of consciousness, less concentrated in a dog, and still less concentrated in a rock. Through Sartori we are able to experience this, which is beyond thought and conceptualization, therefore any intellectual discussion will always fall short. We are an eyeball of the conscious universe “seeing” itself.
While I would agree that we are the universe observing itself in a certain sense, this notion that consciousness is "infused within the material universe" seems, at the very least, deeply misleading and preassuming that what we term "physicality" actually exists as a fundamental aspect of the World itself.
However, all that we know about what we term the "physical universe" comes from our own qualitative experience of it, which is intrinsically non-physical in nature - therefore why should we then take the leap beyond our own primary experience of the World to say that the reality outside of our individual minds (which I do believe exists) is physical in nature?
It seems far more likely (and, indeed, converging scientific arguments from the like of Donald Hoffman and Karl Friston would support this) that physical reality is more akin to an interface that we use to interact w/ reality. It's a tool that we use, not a thing that actually exists fundamentally.
Earth a giant eyeball
Within? How did you test this? How do you know consciousness is in matter and not matter in consciousness seeing as it takes a leap to say matter exists outside of consciousness when you can never get out of consciousness to prove that assumption. How do you know about “quantities” of consciousness and how much each animal has? Your thoughts are just thoughts, and the you that has thoughts is also just a thought too, another model you’ve made up and assumed to actually exist, along with this apparent “universe”. Reality only experiences itself of course but this universe and you are mere models, assumptions, imaginings.
Only I am conscious. Everyone and thing else are just drones, bots and npcs meanering in the world
Only I am conscious. Everyone and thing else are just drones, bots and npcs meanering in the world
Rather than extending the mind,I prefer considering that we have more than the most obvious 5 senses. In the days of telegrams, my prorperty was farmed by a woman (with husband) whose identical sister lived in another province. She felt her sister's death before receiving a telegram. The direct gaze is stronger than the periferal gaze. I once accidentally established a line of force with a direct look at a lady. I was able to break it by looking away. On looking back, it reset and I could see that she had no control was terrified. So,I looked away.
On topic, that initially, within the biological realm, plasma was assumed to be irrelevant to the inner biomechanics of mitochondrial development❗️
Now it’s known to be the forefront of Epigenetics✅
So, 🦋🙌🏽🍸 🐉🧭🌴that the instinctive response to coping mechanisms of an evolving biological process/entity, is the Epidemiology of self preservation 🎶☂️ 0:47
I just wonder what Seth means when he says that the question what life is has been solved or dissolved. Do we really know what life is in a better or deeper way than what consciousness is? Can anyone point to the science or understanding of what life is?
On order for me to see, touch, and feel this cup of tea in front of me requires a lot of quantum entanglement
Hm....but could you prove to us that the cup of tea exists in our realities without our observation of that cup of tea?
The extended question is; does or can consciousness exist if matter is absent?
Can matter exist if consciousness is absent?
Yes, the NDEs suggest it moves to another plane of existence beyond the flesh & blood plane.
I wished I head been there!!!! Superb!!!!
I have been under general anesthesia twice. The first time, I went under speaking and terrified and came out laughing. Coming out of anesthesia laughing even shocked the nurse, but I felt really expanded and deeply happy. It was a very odd experience.
I can remote view, I'm willing to volunteer for a scientific blind study involving this ability using eeg, or artificial intelligence that can visually see what the mind is seeing and represent it digitally.
The universe and consciousness is porous to me also.
I enjoyed this conversation. Having said that, I wish the panelists would have included someone like Bernardo Kastrup. With all due respect to Tanya Luhrmann and Rupert Sheldrake, the panel needed someone who would have pushed back more aggressively to the myopic perspective and logical fallacies inherent in Anil Seth's reductive materialism.
Sheldrake is far too experienced to be combative with people whose position is: "We know what's true know, so the question is what should we do with what we know isn't true? "
@@andrewjohnson8232 ignore it
@@PazLeBon
It's a false proposition friend.
The current standard secular model of the universe is every bit as willful as those of the past filled with gods and cosmic dragons.
@@andrewjohnson8232 i dont disagree, i dont look for unicorms in science not religion :)
@nietztsuki What are the "logical fallacies" inherent to Seth's view?
It's rational and pragmatic to study the potential materialist foundations of consciousness first, and to preference that approach since brains do exist and changes in brain states do nominally appear to correlate with changes in conscious states, rather than opening up the discipline to anyone with a pet theory that relies upon their personal "intuition" or self styled metaphysical woo woo..which is more often than not just a cover for their religious bias.
Rupert has always been a favorite of mine. So much to learn from him. He is the definition of humility. Such a kind soul, such a gentleman. I continue to strive to be more like this man. Just in general. What a brilliant gift to this world.
Sings: “It ain’t necessarily so...” 🎤
Wow! This is my first time watching this so I will do more research on Rupert 🤓
seth, on the other hand, is a demon or has calcified pineal gland.
He is so deeply biased and presents "evidence" with confidence which has either been falsified or is unfalsifiable (pure speculation with no experimental support). I would gladly accept the psychic staring effect is real, but it's so easy to test and has never been conclusively demonstrated. Go ahead and test it with yourself and a group of friends. Look at any one of his popular theories (e.g. Morphic Resonance). He claims it is easily observed in crystals, yet there is no evidence for this effect.
I really gravitate towards Luhrmann's view of consciousness, as a creative and (more or less) open space (or field - same thing) where different egos develop - depending on the cultural tribal metanarrative. Just as we learn to associate symbols with ideas (call them reality) and dissociate self from other (through comparison, dreams, memory) - a god story can impart a benevolent wise figure in my internal communion of beings. I have an 8yo Pomeranian who is attracted to all other Pomeranians, but hates all French Bulldogs. Last night he stopped a woman walking past and started sniffing her entire leg, standing on his heels - which never happened before. She smiled and told me she has a Pomeranian at home. So there is proof that the mind of Pomeranians is not limited to their small craniums. The mind is definitely outside! Mental health could be revamped with positive stories and selftalk. Last point: bring on the real sharman, someone from the Amazon who timetravels on ayahuasca to a state of atomised non-existence (call it death). Intellectualising in ever increasing academic orbits around the hard problem is futile without asking the seer who has returned from his astral travels.
I will never forget the last time I had anesthesia. I woke up smiling. I was mad that I was interrupted and felt great. I couldn’t remember anything but I knew that it was wonderful….
this was my experience also, and i had an ostomy done (thankfully temporary-its been reversed now) so it wasnt good times lol. i also noted the stark difference between normal sleep and the anesthesia, i have a sense of time passed when i awake from sleep, but i literally had no timeframe of how long i had been under the anesthesia. i was amazed when they told me id been out for hours, in my mind it could have been seconds or days for all i knew. i awoke literally smiling and cheerful, i joked with the surgeon
I also had no concept of time. Nor dreams. Just absolute nothing. I wonder if that is what death is like@@SeanHH1986
@@SeanHH1986 Maybe it's enjoyable because you are getting a deep sleep that you normally don't get and it feels good. On another note, my father had heart surgery back in the day when they had to open up his rib cage to perform the operation. Right in the middle he woke up, horrified. They put him right back to sleep but OMG how horrible!!!
I experience a shift in conscientiousness when I became emotional about an answer to a question I needed and the person I needed to ask physically emerged in my surrounding, even though he was in a different state, after I experienced that, I called him and I asked him if he gave me the answer to the question I was thinking about when we were together, in person, and he hesitated before saying no, so I didn't bring up the experience I just encountered but later in that day I wondered why he hesitated before answering the question, maybe he also had an experience in that moment but even if he did I don't think he would have excepted it because he practice ministry
Consciousness originated before matter. Brain filters info for survival purposes. Mind universal. Brain recieves input, thinking it originates thought, whereas it recieves& interprets. Mind not in brain but vice versa. Latter like bucket. Former like sea. Mind exists before & beyond brain. Plants live react move eat grow but no brain. Yet has awareness of sunlight, joy, stress.
Consciousness is everywhere - your body is comparable to a radio receiver dialing in and reducing it to a specific channel.
Exactly, it explains all the errors in their arguments. The brain is more like an antenna. I have met people who were missing as much as half of their brains missing, and they were still able to hold a normal conversation. Some months later they passed away from the injury. But some can continue with their lives if the injuries are not too bad.
This is a beautiful description of consciousness. Although personally i don't think it's 'everywhere', but instead that it exists as a global property of a group of conscious, connected humans.
To say that’s what it is as a factual statement is a bit rich. That’s what you think it is.
@@gazh2166 damn bruh who pooped in ur oreos dawg
@@manuelmorales6084 Your skull is an antenna.
"THE BEAUTY OF SCIENCE IS THE ABILITY TO BE PRODUCTIVELY WRONG" goes so hard I LOVE THAT WOW
It seems that before consciousness can be “found” it must be adequately “defined”which all can agree on. I don’t think we are there yet.
This is probably going to sound silly, but Bob Marley sang off a natural mystic flowing through the air, and he certainly wasn't the only one to think in those terms, there's nothing scientific about that song but it certainly has always made me wonder..... For what it is worth I think that consciousness itself is one phenomenon but with different flavours, a bit like I think physics is one thing but also with different flavours, I am obviously no expert but plasma physics seems to be opening up new exiting doors, and so too are studies into consciousness and while in my opinion there always will be more questions than answers we do seem to be on the precipice of a exiting (yet scary) new age
No it doesn't need to be 'defined' neccesarily. You have it - a subjective experience.
This is why spirituality focuses on engaging with it experiential.
Definitions are more abstractions within consciousness.
They're not 'wrong' but they won't neccesarily do what people hope
@@simonsharp3319I agree with you that if the knowledge is experiential, and therefore self-evident, you don’t need a definition. However, if you want to discuss it with others, to compare different perspectives, you do need a definition as others’ ideas of consciousness may be quite different from yours. For example, Hindu philosophy considers consciousness to be the Subject of any search, be it for Consciousness or a lost watch. Therefore, just as the eyes cannot see themselves, Consciousness cannot be revealed by any search. It is the “field of all experiences” but cannot, itself be experienced as the Object of a search.
When all experience of thought is taken to be self only, one's experience is entirely selfish. One becomes prone to addictions. Worse, a person has nothing truly creative or original to share. Just pure, narcissistic opinion and self centred fear. Religion can open the door. So can magic mushrooms. So can music, mathematics, and falling in love. As long as it is not just merely one's own thoughts.
In the universe us animals eat each other to survive mostly. It is not beautiful. The universe does not owe you beauty or need it. It doesn't matter how selfish or how anything that makes one, or how bad or amazing it makes them become, anecdotal to truth, it just is.
@@paulrussell1207
Baffling how a comment can go so far over the head of someone so well acquainted with the universe.
@@paulrussell1207Animals eating each other is very beautiful. You just don't have the aesthetic capacity to see it. Truth and Beauty are bigger than you.
I agree with Rupert.with regards to Extramission
I believe, based on a universal observation called 'Atomic Spectroscopy' which is the study of the electromagnetic radiation absorbed and emitted by atoms.
That the electromagnetic radiation our eyes obsorb are then re-emitted back out into the world when the electron returns from its energised excited state, to its rest state.
That electromagnetic energy would shoot back in the same direction and angle it was received by.
So if someone was staring at you, you would theoretically would be able to feel the electromagnetic radiation being projected from yourself, to the person's eyes looking at you and then back to yourself from their eyes.
Which is why it's frequency feels so familiar creating the feeling a that someone is staring at you.
I have my doubts that an electron would be able to re-emit at the exact angle of incident. From my understanding an electron's energy decides the electron shell it falls into and thus the shape of its 'orbit'. So it seems very unlikely.
However, I have an alternative crank theory which I've derived from 3 things. 1) entanglement 2) "photons don't experience time" 3) the quantum eraser experiment.
You feel it, because the photons communicating your shape and colours are entangled with you and any fields surrounding you and your brain.. now perhaps unrelatedly since these photons don't experience time it is as if their birth and death are the same instance.. so now upon death when they hit someone else's retina their entanglement to you transfers to another person and you feel their consciousness touch yours.
Like I said, crank theory.. but maybe it is closer to reality than the alternatives.
@@joshua-c44 great concept. I like it. That feeling like someone is watching is the feeling of spooky action at a distance.
From my brain storming on entanglement, I when I was asking the question:
Is there an objective and local reality.
An entangled particles spin is set at the point of entanglement. They are not in a super position (2 realities simultaneously)
The reality of their spin direction is unknown until measured. Measuring it does not manifest reality, it manifests Information about an objective reality that was created at the point of entanglement. They are 1 or the other.
Conservation of angular momentum forces the particles to be opposite at the point of entanglement, as the interaction between the two particles causes them to bounce off In Opposing forces. Like 2 billardballs rolling into each other. At the point they collide, one spins up, the other spins down and the move apart in opposite directions. If we call that entangled, the moment you measure one ball, you immediately know the spin of the other.
Things have to be objectively real whether we observe them or not, as 2 people observing the wave functuons of matter at different times experience the same reality and describe it identically. One person didn't see it first and manifest it into reality and make everyone else see it that way. It is the way it is and always has been due to the nature of the fundamental particles it's composed of.
So I do t believe entanglement is an actual thing. Just our best guess in an unexplainable phenomenon that we don't have the technology to test yet.
I could understand how this concept could hold water. Electromagnetic energy is limited to its range. Depth of field. Then if my aura is not reaching the peering eyes, it would be the energy that is disturbed by the energy of the peering eyes that attract my attention. The particle is photon. I would argue the photon has the unlimited range and line of sight. When another photon comes in the line of sight, they exchange energy and velocity to match and move on. However, if the energy is more neutrons than protons then it would be negative energy. That could interfere with absorbing positive energy, leaving a feeling of negativity from a specific direction.
Then explain me why I can make someone turn around because I am looking at him/her with my eyes closed! Your explanation falls apart with this.
@@ExperiencedGhostwell for starters id like to see your double blind experimental evidence to verify that claim. secondly, your eyelid skin is not solid. Light can travel through your eye lids, they are translucent. electromagnetic radiation can penetrate a lot of "solid" matter, as 99.99% of matter is generally unused space. Maybe if your eye lids were made of lead, then i would agree my theory falls apart.
Its amazing that science in the light is catching up to the fact that human consciousness resides within the Noosphere (it has a little - above one of the o's but I don't know how to write that here)
Thank you Bergen/Holberg Prize, Seth, Luhrman & Sheldrake, for this excellent and fascinating discussion; that for me among other things, serves to confirm Thomas Berry's 7th principle for a functional cosmology ie; 'The human is that being in whom the universe activates, reflects upon, and celebrates itself in conscious self awareness'.
The question I have is: and how does that definition not apply to other living things? Can we be sure those other organisms don’t do that in their own way? Does the evidence need to satisfy human criteria for self-awareness? How long have humans been here compared to fungi? How do fungi interact with their environment, solve problems, seek and allocate resources, etc. Do you see the species-centric assumptions in that definition?
Interesting points you raise here about being 'species-centric'. What we can be sure of is that the human is the only species we know of that deliberately reflects upon and celebrates the universe using story, ceremony and ritual. One needs to read all 12 of Thomas Berry's principles to realize that his overall cosmology is not 'species-centric'. Principle 12 for example refers to 'our immediate need to assist in activating the inter-communion of all the living and non living components of the Earth community'.. @@Kormac80
Berry's principle #7 could be loosely interpreted as being 'species centric' in that as far as we know, it is only the human that deliberately reflects upon and celebrates the universe using story, ceremony and ritual. However, one would need to consider all 12 of Berry's principles to realize that his overall cosmology is not 'species centric'; on the contrary, it strongly advocates the inter-communion of all the living and non living components of the Earth's community. @@Kormac80
@@Kormac80 I think it's just self awareness, just not many other animals are self aware, but it would hold true for a crow perhaps, and definitely AI when it becomes self aware.
@@CorTec Self-aware on whose terms? Ours? If you aren't familiar with the work of Stephen Buhner I'd recommend starting with The Secret Teachings of Plants. Also, consider the work of Marko Pogacnik who writes about Nature Spirits. I've also investigated Shamanism deeply, via my own plant medicine work, and reading the memoirs of Shaman and the academic take via Michael Winkelman. The upshot of it all is it's very easy in this culture to have a human-centric bias. But to assume other living beings lack self-awareness is questionable. Black Elk speaks is another useful resource to understand the wisdom of nature as it perceives us, which is a form of self-awareness.
Seth presented himself as an entirely banal product of his time, and apart from a certain cautious sensitivity to that fact, Luhmann really wasn't that much different.
Sheldrake emerged as the only person worth listening to.
At 1:47:13 when Seth starts talking about not having a "need" for consciousness outside of the brain, he gives the game away that he is not a genuine truth-seeker but rather a scientistic worshipper of the kind of debunked 18th century materialism Sheldrake mentioned in his talk. In any case, the truth doesn't have anything to do with what you "need" or what you don't. It just is what it is. But because his ego leans so heavily on archaic materialist assumptions, Seth makes a kind of sideways appeal to Occam's Razor by pretending that an inside-only explanation of consciousness would be the "simpler" one. Really, it isn't simpler at all, because as Sheldrake pointed out, fields are a fundamental part of physical reality. You can see the kind of person Seth is just by looking at his aggressively-shaven bald head.
@Margatroid
Haha - the last comment got me.
Yes - couldn't agree more.
It took me years of arguing with characters like Seth before I realised what was goimg on. It's simply a limitation. Talking to people like Dawkins or Seth about anything other than what they consider tangible, is like talking about unsolved problems in mathematics to someone with dyscalculia, about harmonics to someone who is tone-inaudible, about the spectrum to someone with colour-insensitivity or about empathy to the so. cio. path. ic.
It's attempting to discuss qualities with people to whom those qualities have no reality.
Only once you've worked that out, does their baffling inability to understand what is being said, make sense.
As someone who’s been fully conscious outside of my body, I say yes. However I have no evidence, aside from the witness with me who I told what we would see ahead, where we would see it, and how we would see it.
like in dreams ur brain can generate a illusion of a room and ur body and u being out of it , obe are nonsense
@@killerkamali how can u say this.... there are stories after stories of people who experienced them and/or NDEs. I believe them..
There are millions of you people everywhere. Out of such a large number I would expect at least a little bit of evidence would be available from at least one of you.
I’ve had hallucinations so I know they can happen. I’m sure you have had realistic dreams.
The truth is that no one even has the ability to be able to prove to themselves whether something was real or an hallucination.
no you were not
I know what you mean. I’ve been to space. I know I have. People dispute it with me. I have no way of proving it but it’s a fact.
I walked on the moon.
I walked in Mars.
I actually left the solar system. No one believes me though.
I saw cows when I was on Mars. Nobody believes that either.
There is a McDonalds on the side of the moon that we can’t see from earth.
I can’t prove or demonstrate any of this and never ever will be able to but this doesn’t mean it’s not true right?
I’ll be totally honest though and tell you that the burgers on the moon are a bit different from the ones here on earth.
There are just so many skeptics these days.
How do people from all cultures around the world experience UAPs, energy beings and other things in very similar way if they have never experienced it before and their definitions and understanding of those significantly vary across cultures, and yet the experiences and descriptions of experiences are so similar.
What we experience directly is an illusion, but not in a way that it doesn't exist, but in a way that we only get but a tiny fraction of the actual essence of anything. We get a shadow of it. The light that reaches our eyes, or the sound waves that reflect to our ears, at the same time we do change the reality by consuming and converting those signals, we absorb them from the world. The photons that end up in your eyes, won't end up in anyone else, effectively all our senses consume and transmute energy, and from this consumption we inquire about what that energy was in contact with before, what it was changed by.
Everything around us could be an infinitely complex multidimensional entity of which we only see an electromagnetic shadow. This is the illusion part, but the illusion is itself real.
The distinction we should make is that when we're looking at something we're not seeing the object, but the light it didn't absorb. Everything is real. Both in and out. And everything ultimately is subjective, as it's not possible for two people to see the same photon (as it gets consumed) nor for two measuring instruments to measure the same system without affecting or changing it in some way. There's no objective perception, there's no separation, there's no chierarchism. Everything is entangled and intimately bound to everything else.
It's a huge quantum soup, without any clear borders, there's no fundamental difference from the place your body ends and air begins, it's part of the same soup of existence. I believe with consciousness is the same, the fact that we don't 'feel like the rest of things' doesn't mean there's no feeling there, just like the fact that we don't feel past our body, doesn't mean there's nothing to be felt there.
im so sick of youtube recommending this video to me and autoplaying it when i have my headphones on and am lying in bed or working around my room.
it keeps playing this.
I was just wondering "how the hell did it get to this??!!."
lol I got here the same way. Fell asleep watching a murder interrogation and this was playing when I woke up.
Maybe is God calling... 😅
Crying? No way😅
??!noitativarG
Hooray for Rupert Sheldrake.
The issue of the gaze (1:00:01) is interesting. People sometimes can sense when somebody out of field of vision is looking at them. I am writing this, and then the speaker confirms it!
Electric pulses from thought waves picked up by senses
While driving, I constantly see somebody facing away from me turn and look right at me if I happen to be focusing my attention on them
it's mosty because you only remember the times when it happens. you forgot the other 10 times when it didn't.
@@rsmonge you’re right.
I noticed too, that 9 times out of 10 having sex has no lasting effects, so the other times when a child was born didn’t happen.
Confirmed sex does not sometimes create extraordinary results, and you can’t detect someone staring at you, because it only does so 10% or less of the time, which is the same as never.
@Joely7-vr7oh o no, dumass. if winning the lottery 1 in a million happens, it doesn't mean the winner had a miracle. it means statistics.
I cannot count the times I've fallen asleep watching a TH-cam video with AutoPlay turned on, so that several videos play to my subconscious mind... there are few things as frustrating as trying to participate in a conversation and being completely ignored. Reminds me of a girlfriend I had who could talk nonstop, endlessly; once, after attempting to participate in her dialog and realizing she wasn't allowing an opening for me, I quit trying and set the timer on my phone. About 12 minutes in, with not a word escaping from my lips, I gave up, grabbed my things, and left. Never went back.
"Character IS destiny," Aristotle. E.g. the play "Oedipus Rex" that he so admired as exemplifying that observation.
Without a doubt. I see the brain as a communication trans/rcv, and anitimocal control center. Reasoning is completed outside the brain to an as yet identified metaphysical center.
You are slave. Reproduction is a sin
Not only that but you should look into the recent planaria study done by biologist Michael Levin. It showed that memories do not exist in a brain but rather, the brain is more of a conduit for memories. They trained planaria to find food through a maze, then cut off their heads. When they grew back the new brains, they had the same memories from their past brains. So basically the brain contains nothing, The brain is literally just a representation from a finite sense perception point of view.
Yeah, and my religion (Quackology) says this universe is really a minuscule pimple on the cosmic posterior of the illustrious Daffy Duck.
Would an AI looking at something constitute an observer in the quantum realm? (double slit experiment).
I'm not sure i believe in observation collapsing the wave function (Sean Carrol's views on this have been very convincing), but if observation DOES collapse the wave function, wouldn't AI be just as valid an observer? obviously, I have no clue but what an awesome question you posed!!
I think you have a misunderstanding of what it means to observe something, it's a common misconception. Quantum superpositions like in the double slit experiment exist when not being observed because the physical process of observing them causes their wave function to collapse. You can't measure them without observing/interacting with the superposition, and superpositions always collapse when interacted with. So yes, if the AI has a physical eye of some kind, the process of bouncing photons off the experiment and into the AIs "eye" will collapse the wave function. That doesn't tell us anything about whether the AI is sentient though, the "observer" could be a manufactured tool or literally anything else and it would still collapse the wave function if it interacted with it.