SPONSOR: As a listener of TOE, you can now enjoy full digital access to The Economist. Get a 20% off discount by visiting: www.economist.com/toe Timestamps: 00:00 - Intro 00:24 - Raphael’s Background 06:10 - Meditation 15:35 - Materialism 28:57 - Future of Humanity 36:30 - Beauty and Love 43:39 - Transcendence 46:58 - Main Challenge of Our Time 50:18 - Transcendence (continued) 53:33 - Modernity 01:03:58 - Schopenhauer and the Jesuits 01:11:51 - Mystics and Alchemy 01:21:34 - Reaching ‘God’ 01:26:18 - Zeno’s Paradox 01:31:22 - Raphael’s Current Work 01:35:03 - Outro / Support TOE 01:37:44 - Bonus Footage
I was an uncompromising materialist for so so long, but as I've gotten older, and follow what really seems like a growing consensus among today's thinkers, I starting to accept that materialism is at a dead end, and there's growing evidence that we exist beyond the material world. Or maybe the youtube algorithm has totally duped me into thinking this is a real trend.
seems like humanity is just taking a side path thru hyper financialization n ego attention b4 realizing that. while war mongering boomers r stuck in the past. luckily “time” is speeding up. when everything n everybody’s attention is drawn to 1 single place n point in time, balance is met. or maybe imbalance. not sure about that. could be manifestation of love n under/over/innerstanding or the extinction of humanity - “materialism” has no place there.
I totally get where you're coming from lol, so many topics I'm interested in seem to meet back up "here" (immaterialism). My interests in psychedelics, philosophy, psychology, consciousness, spirituality, etc. Maybe everything seems to be following a logic because it's all that I see and everyone is borrowing from the same source material lol...
I disagree that anguish is the only emotion that does not lie. The unconditional love of spirit is the only truly authentic state because it is pure knowing with no concept of perception, and it is the only state that is perfectly shared without conflict. Anxiety is inherently a conflicted state of doubt - some part of the mind fighting against what is. Emptiness of perception is not emptiness of knowing. There can BE no emptiness in that which IS! This is, interestingly, what most people experience when they leave their body in an NDE and come back to speak of it. They often experience the void as an initial phase, but this almost always transformed into an extremely overpowering experience of immense unconditional love.
@@portiagestos5585In todays madness the blind men argue and fight over what the think the Elephant is. He is one of many wise people, alive and passed on, who can help us to see the Elephant and free us from the suffering our blindness i inflicting on eachother.
@@gerardmoloney9979 I suggest you look up Rupert Spira, Ramdas, Erchart Tolle and Allan Watts. I would say all these guys are very good at using their intelligence language skills to articulate what is very difficult to do. This guy has that knowing that trancends the intellectual egoistic mind and it often comes across as wowo or seems confusing.
Amazing discussion, especially the surprise ending! Thank you both for the thoughts. Alchemy was my escape from Inertialism, but the weird thing is that I wasn’t searching for the “experience”; the experience had to show itself for me to snap out of it. Finding the Void may be easier to attain by staring at the night sky in meditation, possibly because we know it is not EMPTY! 😊🤙🏼
A person who has been brought up & grown into adulthood with nothing but neglect, condemnation, hate, unequal marginalization existing in a life whereby they are constantly being looked down upon will not find pure love if they were able to see beyond the mind. This is reserved for the fortunate.
TRANSCENDING DETERMINISTIC INDUSTRIALISM INTO SYNTROPIC ABUNDANCE - While deterministic causation does seem to exist, and is the basis of Western science and technology (and other aspect dominant culture), it is not the ONLY pattern of causation. It is insufficient to explain the cosmos, particulary its pervasive complexification into beautiful and intelligent living systems, as Raphael points out. I view this deterministic causation as an coercive process from the outside>in or from top>down, involving an increase of entropy. Because it is realtively "easy" to break things apart (from chemical bonds to the voluntary agency of living things), the application of concentrated (focused) entropic force is "deterministic". It also has objectified, de-vitalized, characterised by a Win-lose, zero sum, scarcity, fearful mindset, and by Us-them, I-it relations. AND this "entropic causation" involves a self-fulfilling dynamic since acting in accord to this coercive, deterministic worldview will increase entropy, setting into motion a positive-feedback loop of degradation, with ever-increasing difficulties as things fall apart. BTW, our capacity to wield such deterministic force is located in our Left-brain, and its strategy for minimizing information entropy ("surprisal" according to Friston's FEP) is to force the world to fit what we expect, our model, our ego-desires. On the other hand, our Right-brain has capacity for non-coercive, loving, relational, I-thou, We-are-them and They-are-us kinship relations, and for un-coerced (freely chosen) participation in the unpredictable co-creation of Win-win abundance. It provides an awareness of "syntropic causation" that is not, and CAN NOT BE, deterministic, but allows surprising emergence of vitality, beauty and complexification. This involves reducing surprisal by developing awareness and understanding of the world as-it-is, and of its potentiality for entropic and syntropic causation/outcomes/flows. Generally, this mindset is required for the enlightened pursuit of truth, beauty and goodness. It is the necessary foundation for the discipline, empathy, skill and restraint required to transcend the perilous paradoxes and positive-feedbacks of power, control, and entropic causation. Only cultures based on a common understanding of the risks, benefits and potentialities of syntropic and entropic causation, and the coincidence of opposites (coincidentia oppositorum) required, are able to carefully deploy power, control, technology, deception, etc... in service of sacred syntropic values and ideals rather than tragic ego-driven pursuits (wealth, power, status). There are many successful examples of this syntropic mindset and its many healthy fruits, including healthy spiritual communities and especially indigenous cultures around the world. These cultures demonstrate that all of us are capable of enabling our planetary civilization to flow from the entropic anthropocene into an age of abundance with individual, collective, and ecological regeneration-healing and of syntropic flourishing. We can do this! And yes, Raphael and Ian McGilchrist have kindred spirits destined meet in beauty. May it be so. I am loving what you are sharing with all of us, Curt, and suppose this means I love you too! Thank you for another brilliant dialogue.
This was very interesting. It might seem vague in some parts, but grasping concepts that have not been clearly named and concepcionalized by our culture is usually pretty hard. It’s part of bringing about metaphysical concepts. Materialism seems to be the only straightforward metaphysical theory, but it is in my opinion a bit of an illusion because it somewhat simplifies experience and the philosophical work to fully understand is usually focused on trying shut out any other categories of ontology that might exist in reality. Even the epistemological aspects of materialism is simplified and non unifying (measurement problem, incompleteness theorem, the reality of irreducible complexity, etc).
True, Buddhism was adopted/endorsed by the whole of the civilized world and was accepted voluntarily without applying force, because of Bodhisattva the Buddhist mindset that understood the need for nonviolence, rule of law, freedom, liberty, human rights etc. and create the modern civilized world in continuation of Krishna's Sanatan religion, as if everyone were waiting for Boddhisattva. Maybe, this guy gives the correct interpretation of Nagarjuna's emptiness.
Examples contrasting contradictory formulations from classical theories with their potential non-contradictory counterparts using infinitesimal/monadological frameworks: 1) The Measurement Problem in Quantum Mechanics Contradictory: Standard Copenhagen Interpretation If a system interacts with a measurement device, the quantum state undergoes wave function collapse into an eigenstate of the measured observable. This introduces an ad-hoc, unphysical process that is inconsistent with the deterministic Schrödinger evolution. Non-Contradictory Possibility: Relational Quantum Mechanics |Ψ>total = Σn cn |Un>system |Vn>apparatus Measurement = Modulation of relations between |Un>, |Vn> By treating measurements as interactions modulating relational correlations between monadic system and apparatus states |Un>, |Vn>, collapse can be avoided while preserving definite records. 2) Renormalization Issues in Quantum Field Theory Contradictory: Renormalization via infinite subtractions Feynman diagrams contain divergences like ∫d4k/k2 = ∞ which must be absorbed by redefining parameters. This ad-hoc renormalization procedure lacks physical justification and does not converge in realistic models. Non-Contradictory Possibility: Infinitesimal Regulator Approach ∫d4k/[k2 + ρ2]1/2 < ∞ (ρ is infinitesimal regulator) All calculations manifestly finite using infinitesimals ρ Introducing infinitesimals avoids true mathematical infinities from the start, removing the need for unmotivated subtractions. 3) Paradoxes in Set Theory Contradictory: Naive Set Theory Russell's Paradox, Burali-Forti Paradox arise from unrestricted set comprehension axioms. These paradoxes undermined early attempts at formalizing abstract set theory foundations. Non-Contradictory Possibility: Topos Theory / Categorical Set Theory X ≃ Y ⇐⇒ ∃n, IsEquivalent(X,Y) in (∞,1)-Category(n) U: ∞-Topos → ∞-Groupoids (univalent universes) Representing sets/classes as higher identifications up to homotopy equivalence in (∞,1)-categories avoids the self-referential paradoxes. 4) The Problem of Mental Causation Contradictory: Classical Property Dualism Mental properties and physical properties are distinct. But how can the mental cause any physical effects/behavior? This is the core paradox of the mind-body problem - mental causation seems impossible on dualist premises. Non-Contradictory Possibility: Monadic Neutral Monism Qsystem = Usystem|0> (mental state from monad perspective) Physical = RelativeState(Qsystem, Qenv) If mental states are monadic perspectives and physics arises relationally between monads, mental causation is simply the modulation of physical relative states via monadic perspectival transitions. 5) The Continuum Hypothesis in Set Theory Contradictory: Zermelo-Fraenkel Axioms CH: There are no sets whose cardinality is strictly between that of the integers and the real numbers. However, CH is logically independent of ZFC, and leads to paradoxes like the Banach-Tarski paradox of measure. Non-Contradictory Possibility: Non-standard Analysis Cardinality(*R) = Cardinality(R) + 1 *R contains infinitesimal and infinite elements Treating the real continuum *R as derived from ordered infinitesimal monadic extensions resolves CH by assigning a higher cardinality, avoiding paradoxes. 6) Paradoxes of Spacetime Singularities Contradictory: General Relativity Gμν = 8πTμν Solutions contain spacetime singularities where geometric description breaks down. The presence of singularities where physics becomes transcendentally ill-defined represents a fatal flaw. Non-Contradictory Possibility: Combinatorial Algebraic Quantum Gravity ds2 = Σx,y Γxy dxdy (metric from monadic charge relations) Gμν = f(Γxy, mx, qx, ...) (monadic gravitational dynamics) Representing spacetime/gravity algebraically from relations Γxy among discrete quantized monadic charges/masses avoids singular infinities entirely. 7) The Liar's Paradox in Logic Contradictory: "This statement is false." If true, it is false. If false, it is true. This simple self-referential statement leads to a paradox that undermines classical bivalent logic. Non-Contradictory Possibility: Pluriverse-Valued Realizability Logic ⌈A⌉ = {Vn(A) | n∈N} (truth value as monadic realization projections) A ↔ B ⇐⇒ ⌈A⌉ = ⌈B⌉ (equivalence between realization pluriverses) Representing statements as pluriverses of realizability projections Vn(A) across monads, rather than binary truth values, avoids self-referential paradoxes. 8 ) The Black Hole Information Paradox Contradictory: Classical Black Hole Models As matter crosses the event horizon, information about its initial state is irretrievably lost to external observers. This seems to violate unitarity and entropy increase principles of quantum theory. Non-Contradictory Possibility: Monadic Black Hole Complementarity |Ψ>exterior = Σn cn |Un>horizon |Ψ>interior = Σn cn |Vn>trans-pit Treating the exterior/interior as distinct monadic realizations |Un>, |Vn> of the same superposition allows information to be holographically distributed across all perspectives.
My Perspective on Arrow Paradox: Force can never be at Rest. Effects of Forces can give illusion of Rest but Force itself cannot be at Rest Ever. The Arrow Paradox is thus arises because our instantaneous measurement is only looking at the effects of Forces but not the ever present dynamic Force acting on the Arrow.
The idea that aesthetics precede ethics is interesting, but isn't aesthetics even more intractable and difficult to agree upon than ethics? The word is more subjective imo. I like a lot of these ideas, great interview as always!
I can hardly follow physics beyond the ontological, so I loved this ep. Btw, I think the Tao Te Ching is the masterclass in paradox, which is "solved" not by grasping, but by simply accepting its existence.
This one was pretty meh: Very Vague. Ideas were not clearly explained. Topics and line of reasoning were erratic. Word salad in many moments. To many generalizations without a) sound reasoning/clarity of concepts b) evidence presented or mentioned to back it up.
It seems he's just saying for meditation. accepting the void is that: if you accept the void you gain Zen; or a flow state where you feel like you become the process itself. So imagine the process being the very thing of living, of being a person; being yourself without baggage, without preamble- without expectation of what you should be or what you can be or what you ought to be. to simply be "to be". To be yourself, assuming the self is such a thing that is beyond the appearance and beyond the physical nature of your neurons and the deterministic cultural implications, that make you so as you are. In hopes essentially, one will be who they really are without all that. raw intuitive emotion that is emergent out of the laws of the universe but not necessarily restricted by it. Perhaps it's stochasticity?
Hey Curt, have you ever considered or tried to get in touch with Douglas Hofstadter for an interview? I think that would be a very interesting one. He's the author of Godel, Escher, Bach and coined the idea of strange loops
"Pure transcendence" is not an original concept of Modernity in the Western World. Two hundred years prior, Saint John of the Cross, a Catholic Mystic, called it the Dark Night of the Soul. But he did not see Beauty in the "void", instead he saw God's Love, which seems much more the Truth. And your notion that "The people that we call mystics are so free, because they are mystics, and it's not easy for, I mean, to be a mystic, you need to accept everything around. You're very active, but you can't be controlled. So they were the principle, the main enemies of religion, of the religious hierarchy and the priest and all that" is totally incorrect. Saint John of the Cross, along with many other mystics, are Doctors of the Catholic Church and hardly enemies of religion or the religious hierarchy.
Consider this item of mine from my files: THOUGHT ABOUT THOUGHTS: Question: Where do thoughts actually come from? For example: Modern science claims that we have billions of brain cells with trillions of brain cell connections. How exactly does the energy signal 'know' where and when to start, what path to take, and where and when to stop to form a single coherent thought? An analogy I utilize is to spread a brain out like a map. Brain cells are represented by towns and cities, brain cell interconnections are represented by roads and highways, and the energy signal is represented by a vehicle traveling between one or more towns and/or cities. A coherent thought is a coherent trip. How exactly does the vehicle 'know' where and when to start, what path to take, and where and when to stop to form a single coherent trip? A higher intelligence has to tell it those things. But, that is a coherent 'trip' (thought) in and of itself. So, how exactly does our brain think a thought before it consciously thinks that thought? And if thoughts can be thought without consciously thinking thoughts, then what do we need to consciously think thoughts for? Just to consciously think thoughts that are already thought? What then of 'freewill' if we don't even consciously think our own thoughts? And then to further that situation, modern science claims that many different energy signals are starting at various places in the brain, take various pathways, and stop at different places, just to form a single coherent thought. (With the analogy, many vehicles are starting at various places on the map, taking various routes, and stopping at various places, all together forming a single coherent 'trip'.) And somehow it's all coordinated and can happen very quickly and very often. So, where do thoughts actually come from? Who and/or what is thinking the thoughts before I consciously think those thoughts? Do "I" even have freewill to even think these thoughts "I" am thinking about thoughts and type these thoughts to you here on this internet? Modern science also claims we have at least 3 brains: The early or reptilian brain, the mid brain, and the later more developed brain. So, are early parts of the brain thinking thoughts before the later parts of the brain consciously think those thoughts? If reptiles can think thoughts, then couldn't the early part of our brain think thoughts, and somehow pass those thoughts on to later more developed parts of later brains? Is our 'inner self' really just our reptilian brain thinking the thoughts that we think we are thinking? Are we all just later more evolved reptiles? Who don't even consciously think our own thoughts? If not, then how exactly does the brain think thoughts? Where exactly do thoughts originally come from so our brain can consciously think those thoughts? So "I" am thinking about thoughts, if it is even "I" thinking the thoughts that "I" believe "I" am thinking about thoughts. Or so "I" currently think, here again, if it is even "I" doing the thinking. "My" thinking is imploding as "I" think about thoughts. But then again, is it even 'me' that is imploding? I will have to think about it some more. Poof, I'm gone. Is just energy interacting with itself the lowest form of sub-consciousness? Is it even consciousness itself?
@@charlesbrightman4237I think you missed the point. If we focus on every random thought, which is infinite, we can ignore the infinite thought process and think of nothing, which is equivalent to everything all at once. However, meditation into thinking of nothing is much easier than solving every random thought at once, which is what the brain wants to try and do.
Highly recommend anyone interested in meditation reads the Progressive Stages of Meditation on Emptiness. Just when you think you've "got it" it shows how you still have attachments and delusion
@@briantaylor909its definitely a book to take slowly if you get it. Even the first stage can be something that takes months or years to meditate on before reading further.
Of course casting aside traditions and inherited wisdom is foolish. They are a gift of immeasurable value. Language, writing, math, science-all of these are inherited traditions too. The more we cast aside traditions the more we have to relearn the hard way. Of course-like math, physics, and electrical engineering- societal and spiritual engineering is a multi-generation project.
The Buddhist meditation trains the mind. Yoga meditation is not facing a void it is uniting with all there is which is Cosmic consciousness. Both approaches are good; it just depends on where a person is at.
That’s not accurate. Plenty of yogis and mystics from India speak about the sheer fear that washes over you when you enter the void. They even sacral chanting to help prevent the fear and face it.
@@BrendanTietz I am Indian and closely associated with the Tantra tradition. Void and scared of the void? This phenomenon is not really a part of the sadhana experience. The void is more a buddhist idea than the Hindu one. In Hindu tantra , its about merger with the deity central to the sadhana. That merger involves huge bursts of energy in the nervous system, heat, movement and various auditory, visual phenomenon. ( like visions, more subtle less gross). More like experiences on psychoactive drugs. Not much of a void. Not accurate
Curt, re: your quote from interview on people's unhappiness lacking sense of animated splendor/blind to wonder.... I agree that would change a lot of people's lives to get back to, because I do walk the world in wonder and frequent amazement. But the human drive to share/find the others also comes into play. So to find the wonder is step 1, but the desire to share that wonder with another/others may be a stronger drive and result in more completeness and fulfillment than to walk alone in wonder. Even Buddha returned from the tree to teach others; we're communal, at base; no man is an island, and all that. I think finding connection is what we really suffer from, and that can become spiritual (or religious) really quickly as connections are all temporary, regardless of the length. So even if you find connections w/others, loss will come, and to convince ourselves of a reality where our connections are still there, or are everlasting/eternal, gives us some relief of the potential alternatives that leave us suffering. Even if everything is alive and amazing, there's still a desire to share that in some way with others, especially of your species, who might understand/commiserate/sense it similarly. Just some thoughts, and oddly inspired by my impression of people's true desires in the comment section...
When people start talking about an evaluation in human behavior, I get worried. It has and will be a disaster. Learning from the past is the best way to understand that this is ignorance 😂
Really great work! It's so inspiring and refreshing for me that I derived a work inspired by Raphael Liogier. I made a free listening audiobook and posted it on my channel. Thanks again!
Buddhism is not the religion of nothingness. It is the religion of no-thing-ness, and there is a difference. Beneath matter is the substrate of consciousness, beneath that is awareness, and at the base is the substrate of being.
If consciousness isn't a consequence of matter/energy, then what's the point of neuroscience? This is the problem - if you want simple, succinct answers that are easy to come up with, you'll take the subjective answer. If you want to study the topic scientifically, and provide complex, contingent answers that evolve and are refined, you'll take the objective path. Ideally, both conceptions, subjective and objective, should be complimentary, even if it takes 10 PhDs to understand the state of the art scientific answer!
@@noam65 Sure. When discussing consciousness, I prefer to constrain the word to what Freud was describing. I think of consciousness as existing in relationship with unconsciousness. If we cannot differentiate between the two, I'm not sure how you're going to experimentally verify your proposition on a subject! In my way, we can at least agree on some cases where the differences between consciousness and unconsciousness are apparent. In your way, everything and nothing are not differentiable experimentally! Having said that, I think there's a broader class of temporal and energetic systems that do logic, problem solving, and communication tasks. I wouldn't say that's consciousness, though. I don't think adopting that intellectual baggage leads to experimental verification.
@@ywtcc I'm a mediator, not an academic, though I do hold bachelor and accociate degrees in different fields. I've done that work. You are not a meditator, and have not done that work, neither was Freud. We have no common framework for discussion.
@@noam65 I'll give you a compromise proposal, it's just not so easy to accept for some. This notion of consciousness everywhere does have its use, it's just that it needs context. When you don't have a simple logical answer, sometimes you need to guess, then check, and iterate. Consciousness everywhere is actually a really good first guess! What you do is assume whatever it is you're looking at has a mind, just like yours, and in so doing you focus your entire mind on the problem. It's a way to justify theorizing. It's the set of possibilities that can be imagined. However, it works better when you admit to yourself that the first guess was almost certainly wrong!
Seemed to start to well but came across as very confused. He needs to refine his thoughts or his communication or both. I stopped listening when he said that “desire to become” is a positive way to progress either scientifically or philosophically (may be both). But he should listen to and read J Krishnamurthy who has categorically concluded how the “desire to become” has been the biggest reason for all the human problems. You should listen to The future of humanity series with Dr. Bohm to understand. They talk about how humans created psychological time which is at the root of all the problems that arise out of the “desire of becoming”. Also, Buddhism is an offshoot of Hinduism. Buddha himself was a Hindu who was trained in Hindu philosophy and practices. Hinduism was prevalent in a lot of Asian countries as well, may be not all. Finally, it was Buddhists from India actually who brought Buddhism to a lot of south East Asian countries and China. So, yeah, this guy is just bonkers. May be he is just bad at communicating his ideas - which would also be an exception for a philosopher, btw.
The “desire to become” has been the biggest reason for all the human problems pointed by Krishnamurthy is (relative) true but we live in a reality of duality, of contrast, no? thus the other side of the coin, with problems we create more possible solutions aka expansion, new purposes, new meanings out of the Void the full potentiality. As Liogier Beautifully pointed let's follow the positive, at least as long we are in this reality, this dimension of mind. However keep an open mind as much as possible to not get "calcified" as an alchemist would say, which is the root of problems, the fixed mind in general, not just the psychological time creation but the attachment that unable us to think and feel beyond.
@@uranusterra579 - You're right that a positive approach to the "desire to become" is probably our best option, given the constraints of reality. It's true that we can't reverse time or entirely change society's perception of psychological time. However, Liogier seems to suggest that "desire to become" itself is a more positive approach to progress. I have an objection to this "unqualified" view on the "desire to become". I agree with your more "qualified" view on the same.
Can you try to get Grandmaster Wolf on? Someone who has, or at least claims to have developed actual psychic abilities rather than just someone who’s had some interesting visions or feelings.
Buddhism is not about voids. It’s about one’s true nature. Empty of essence, cognisant in nature and unimpeded, or unconfined. When you look for mind, the self, the I, you can’t find it but at the same time it is the nature of mind to be cognisant, to know. And when its essence is known there is no impeding it. It is unconfined and spontaneous. Any response is right in thought, speech and action. There is no void. Everything exists, a cup, a saucer, a name, a person, it’s just these things don’t exist the way you think they do. It is not that they are all an illusion but rather like an illusion…which is different. The relative and absolute exist together as do the three qualities of mind above. “In Japan in the Spring we eat cucumbers.”
I think the only thing I disagree with, is his opinion that only the spiritual are wise, though we agree on their defining fact. Religion is nothing but shared spirituality, in other words it confirms you aren't insane, as all spiritual who don't agree, are. but I like how he concludes, it's a matter of us all understanding all faiths - the eldest sciences
The solution to Zenoes paradoxes is in the quantization of time.. time is discrete because it is created by a circular or vibratory motion. The smallest of which is one cycle from the zitterbewegung clock of the electron and no less becase the electron is the smallest stable mass. Thus while you can divide space indefinitely, time can be divided up to a one small interval and nothing less. The proof using limits of Zenoe paradoxes is not correct.. because in the proof, one variable is made proportional to another and the limit is performed. This proof breaks down if you insist on the variables going to zero independently. Then only the discreteness of time can solve the paradox,
Void isn’t a great word for this, In fact emptiness is better because the “ness” signals that it’s not neutral and blank. To index into an understanding that’s aligned well with Buddhism look at the heart sutra.
"The death of materialism" - a little too over the top - don't you think. In any case this is the last gasp of breathtakingly ungrateful anti-materialists (more current anti-physicalists), while enjoying and accessing all the very benefits of the technology, which derives from science, which is also a stand-in for physicalism. In any case, physics is not a finished project, but what we know so far has given us modern technology. Of course there are sociological aspect that have to be dealt with. Not sure where he gets the idea that science says things are dead. The science that deals with living things talks about what it means to be living. Science of consciousness talks about what this phenomenon is, we call consciousness and how it is generated from the brain. The science of non-living does not talk about living. When sodium and chlorine come in contact, they react and create salt. Does bot sound passive to me. They are determined to do that because of the electron valencies. The valencies are their own properties. Duh. Total setting up of straw man to then shoot it down. Ungrateful is the word that comes to mind.
You're a materialist? Are you stupid? You think divisibility is fundamental? Please learn geometry. Indivisibility is fundamental, please educate yourself.
Materialism/Empiricism: 0D (indivisible) = not fundamental, not absolute and not locally real. Non-zero dimensions (divisible) = fundamental, absolute and locally real (we proved they aren't any of these things with the Nobel Prize proving quantum entanglement). Realism: 0D (indivisible) = fundamental, absolute and locally real. Non-zero dimensions (divisible) = not fundamental, not absolute and not locally real. Recall how in geometry "any new dimension has to contain within it all previous dimensions". If you're a materialist/empiricist then your logic, math and physics is incoherent from first-principles. You're the reason why we need a theory of everything. It's ok, there's intelligent people still on Earth. We will teach the uneducated like you.
This guy's got no idea folks. A deluded idealist. . . . divorced from reality and Divinity. VAST multitudes seeking truth *fail to find* because they're easily *led astray* by worldly logic, sensuality, vain esoterism or specious mysticisms. *I know I was.* I'm an ex neo-vedantic (hindu roots) new ager. I used to be into so much "cosmic/spiritual" stuff: trance channelings, ancient wisdom, gnosticism, psychedelic drugs, hindu gurus and buddhist variants. I was illuminated by the *kundalini (serpent) spirit* then 8 years ago I got rightly enlightened by the *Holy Spirit* - which proceeded to show me what a *fool* I was before..... Spirit led to the REAL *Yahusha/Jesus Christ* and everything changed - *Paradigm Shifted* ..... This is being *BORN AGAIN* (John 3) and it's an ongoing surprise to me 😁 Turns out Spirituality is a *soul serious* business taken way too lightly by *far too many* .... The End-Times are clearly *dead ahead,* a time of Antichrist is near. It escapes the notice of our self-absorbed, glamour-saturated world that we're in a spiritual WAR for souls. The immensity of *ignorance* is astonishing: supernal powers are BEDAZZLING the minds of the masses (Ephesians 6:12). We've inherited ancient spiritual subversion: *the Earth is fallen* ..... the holistic fields of nature are fallen state; *"Morphic Resonance"* is OUT of affinity with DIVINITY; *Death is all too familiar;* Natural life hunts, KILLS and *feeds* on itself. Humanity is a spiritually *fallen race* highly prone to *deceit and delusion.* FRANKLY, we need a SAVIOUR and by Jesus Christ we have a GREAT ONE As a new ager I couldn't believe (I was *damn sure* I knew better) but in the *Light of Spirit* Jesus really is the *Way, the truth and the Life* just like He said: no one comes to GOD except through Jesus, there's no other way (Matthew 7:13-14). Being a neo-vedantist I wasn't convinced, yet the Bible is Spirit breathed, written by men inspired by the *Holy Spirit.* Jesus is vividly portrayed and endorsed in the new testament, in fact he's apparent in the old testament too (Luke 24:27 & 44) and by *His LIGHT* we're allowed to *see* that and *know Him.* Any intellectual concerns or previously perceived discrepancies/contradictions are ironed out and the supernatural narrative flows most beautifully..... The Bible is the Revelation of *Jesus Christ* (Isaiah 2:2-4; 9:6-7, 11:1-10 & 45:23, Daniel 7:13-14, Matthew 28:18, Mark 14:61-62, Revelation 1:7-8 & 18, Rev 19:11-21)
15 min in and I am surprised by the clarity of understanding this man has around the void and anxiety it induces. I noticed dumb comments by ill-informed noobes and found them quite funny. Ignorance surely must be blissful.
We are the eternal witness. Reality is a mental construct shared by many conscious observers. On my channel, I explain why metaphysical idealism should be the default position-not materialism, as such a view suffers from the hard problem of consciousness, which is an impasse, and physicalist metaphysics itself violates Occam's razor.
Curt, Where did you find this guy? An intellectual without authentic experience -lacking in true enlightenment Just a lot of words. Talks a good story. But like your show so much and enjoying the way you are handling him.
it's fine; some comprehension of the topics comes with life experience. How do You define true enlightenment as opposed to false enlightenment? Please share
It might need to be made clear that he is associated not with the Princeton based Institute for Advanced Study where the smartest people in the world basically work but a different and entirely unrelated one that is full of less impressive people.😂
@TheoriesofEverything Time is a compactified dimension one single Planck second in size. Space< exists so that everything doesn't happen at the same place. Because of compactification, limits ARE CREATED. There don't have to be limits. Space is the media so limits means limits of density. Limits of density of metric. Gravity. The flow from minimal to maximal density. And as per limit theorem, the limits join. The closure< is at the limits. They are contiguous. Neutron decay cosmology. Neutrons in at event horizons. Take EinsteinRosen bridge Neutrons out in deep voids decay into amorphous monatomic hydrogen, proton electron soup, Rydberg, dark matter. Which then falls. The decay from neutron 0.6fm³ to 1m³ of amorphous hydrogen gas is a volume increase, expansion, of around 10⁴⁵
Lots of words but what to make of it all? Is there a direction to be discovered in such a flood words? Where are all the followers and what is life like where they are living? Questions without answers as far as I can tell. Too muddled for my smsll mind.
15:00 Curt: *drops a quote that could easily be repeated for hundreds of years as a representation of the effects of this materialism era* followed by a humble "what do you think about that?" lmao
QUESTIONS: a. Next jump in evolution: Will the advanced species treat 'lower' evolved humans like humans have treated 'lower' evolved species and even other humans? Why wouldn't they if it were in their agenda to do so? b. Advanced species or not, either a species truly survives beyond this Earth, eternally, OR they will not. How exactly will advanced species survive literally throughout all of future eternity? (Future eternity being a really, really long time, endless even).
Advanced avatars view their left behind earthly neighbors as brothers. We have nothing to fear from them. The only ones we have to watch out for are our fellow unenlightened cohorts who can be malevolent.
@@ALavin-en1kr Consider though: Nature is our greatest ally in so far as Nature gives us life and a place to live it, AND Nature is also our greatest enemy that is going to take it all away. (OSICA)
@@charlesbrightman4237 Nature is a stage on which we play; when the drama is over, from the perspective that we are more than our physical or elemental selves, we will go on. Even from an atheistic perspective energy is conserved, so nothing is ever lost unless we think that joining the whole is being lost. From a religious perspective of an individualized immortal soul we go on individually, even after we shed our physical or elemental bodies. We go on asleep or consciously. if we are not spiritually advanced we go on unconsciously. If we are spiritually advanced we should still be consciously aware of ourselves as entities; more than the sum of our physical or elemental selves.
@@ALavin-en1kr a. "...from the perspective that we are more than our physical or elemental selves, we will go on." Please prove that to be really true. Just saying something as true does not automatically make that something true. b. "Even from an atheistic perspective energy is conserved, so nothing is ever lost unless we think that joining the whole is being lost." While energy might be truly eternally existent, it currently appears that it does not stay in the form of 'us' after we physically die. c. "From a religious perspective of an individualized immortal soul we go on individually, even after we shed our physical or elemental bodies." There is no actual evidence that we have a 'soul', certainly not an immortal soul. At best all I can currently find is our DNA, and DNA does not last forever. Plus, consider immortality. What if one were trapped somehow, someway in something. Trapped for literally all of future eternity? Plus, existing for a trillion years, with trillions of years after that to go, endless trillions of years of existence. Really? Seems that 'blessing' might turn out to be a curse one day in future eternity. d. "We go on asleep or consciously." Do you even know what 'consciousness' actually is so that it can go on throughout all of future eternity? And a correctly functioning physical brain is required to have memories and thoughts. How is one going to have memories and thoughts without a correctly functioning physical brain? e. " If we are spiritually advanced we should still be consciously aware of ourselves as entities; more than the sum of our physical or elemental selves." See 'c' and 'd' above.
The wold doesnt need more succesful people, it needs more heart followers. I get it and and am, since 10 yrs back, getting their. Materialism is hard to leave. Following the heart, being free is honorable but seems to me to be a little rich western spoiled somethimes...
im not gonna lie this sounded like if your philosophy major roommate got way too high. he jumped from topic to topic without giving any deeper understanding of any of them
It seems like he characterizes "transcendence" as "enlightenment". People characterize it in different ways, but Im inclined to believe that he is conceiving of the ancient hebrew concept of Bitul, or self nullification. The phrase "transcendence" conotes some kind of ascension. In contrast, bitul denotes "self invalidation". So Bitul is kind of like melting away to merge with the Universe, sometimes called "ego death." This kind of seems to be the spiritual underpinning of most religions, Ive heard that some force induce this experience with D'M,T. I'm pretty sure this is what he is referring to when he mentions "transcendence" Of course, recognizing our nothingness relative to (and subordination to) the totality is not the climax of the hebrew philosophy/traditions-rather there is a next step which is being a well formed conduit in motion for the totality. (Not just sitting around staring at your hand, as my brother once joked) Some take the transcendence angle in the opposite direction of the bitul angle, though the experiential underpinning might be the same----and they basically deify themselves. Other can deify someone who talks with this kind of jargon, like when jesus says 'I and the father are one'... Well ok jesus, thats true.
However trying to conceive of ourselves as masters of the Universe, rather than the master of the universe being the totality whom we are subject under. basically satanism. This is where the reprobate ditch all ptetenses of logic and realism for satanism, usually under the guise of indeterminancy in the quantum mechanics of consciousness.. This could be characterized as the hebrew concept of Karet, or being cut off from the totality. Thats how I conceive of folks who take the self deification of "free will" to its logical conclusion where they will basically gaslight themselves, preferring their preferences over realism. As for the casting down of traditions. Its always really shocking when a greyhaired says something like that... Its like, you havent learned enough things the hard way yet!!!? Just one or two cycles of casting aside all tradition and we'll be back at flat earth pitch fork mobs in no time. His thinking doesn't seem to be well reasoned, to me. Language, writing, math, science, historical anecdotes, all of the traditions we inherit are GIFTS. And we should be grateful for them, they are a privilege, a leverage, and a huge advantage. Those without them wind up lured into pedo vans.
However trying to conceive of ourselves as masters of the Universe (rather than the master of the universe being the totality whom we are subject under) is basically satanism. This is where the reprobate ditch all pretenses of logic and realism in favor of satanism, usually under the guise of indeterminancy in the quantum mechanics of consciousness.. This could be characterized as the hebrew concept of Karet, or being cut off from the totality. That's how I conceive of folks who take the self deification of "free will" to its logical conclusion where they will basically gaslight themselves, preferring their preferences over realism. As for the casting down of traditions. Its always really shocking when a greyhaired says something like that... Its like, you havent learned enough things the hard way yet!!!? Just one or two cycles of casting aside all tradition and we'll be back at flat earth pitch fork mobs in no time. His thinking doesn't seem to be well reasoned, to me. Language, writing, math, science, historical anecdotes, all of the traditions we inherit are GIFTS. And we should be grateful for them, they are a privilege, a leverage, and a huge advantage. Those without them wind up lured into pedo vans.
However trying to conceive of ourselves as masters of the Universe (rather than the master of the universe being the totality whom we are subject under) is basically satanism. This is where the reprobate ditch all pretense of logic and realism in favor of satan¡sm, usually under the guise of indeterminancy in the quantum mechanics of consciousness.. This could be characterized as the hebrew concept of Karet, or being cut off from the totality. That's how I conceive of folks who take the self deification of "free will" to its logical conclusion where they will basically gaslight themselves, preferring their preferences over realism. As for the casting down of traditions. Its always really shocking when a greyhaired says something like that... Its like, you havent learned enough things the hard way yet!!!? Just one or two cycles of casting aside all tradition and we'll be back at flat earth pitch fork mobs in no time. His thinking doesn't seem to be well reasoned, to me. Language, writing, math, science, historical anecdotes, all of the traditions we inherit are GIFTS. And we should be grateful for them, they are a privilege, a leverage, and a huge advantage. Those without them wind up lured into pedo vans.
However trying to conceive of ourselves as masters of the Universe (rather than the master of the universe being the totality whom we are subject under) is basically satanism. This is where the reprobate ditch all pretense of logic and realism in favor of satan¡sm, usually under the guise of indeterminancy in the quantum mechanics of consciousness.. This could be characterized as the hebrew concept of Karet, or being cut off from the totality. That's how I conceive of folks who take the self deification of "free will" to its logical conclusion where they will basically gaslight themselves, preferring their preferences over realism. As for the casting down of traditions. Its always really shocking when a greyhaired says something like that... Its like, you havent learned enough things the hard way yet!!!? Just one or two cycles of casting aside all tradition and we'll be back at flat earth pitch fork mobs in no time. His thinking doesn't seem to be well reasoned, to me. Language, writing, math, science, historical anecdotes, all of the traditions we inherit are GIFTS. And we should be grateful for them, they are a privilege, a leverage, and a huge advantage. Those without them wind up lured into pedo vans..
So much nonsense and dogmatic claims made by this person that I can't listen to it anymore (I got to past half an hour). Yes, he makes some points, but then posits some strange alternatives each time, without any reason or logic behind it.
You were the kid in the 4th grade who liked to tell the kindergarteners there was no santa to watch them cry weren't you? Now you want to go a step further and claim the presents appeared under the tree from out of nowwhere.
@@yanwain9454well, their point is relevant because if there actually is an omnipotent God, then there will never be a new experience because you are omnipotent.
What denomination are you talking about? If not for the 1st 5 books & st. Paul we wouldn't have cosmology or math mapping formalism that unveiled or improved the human condition.
dude has a lovely attitude but his thinking is an scrambled mess unencumbered by evidence. self-help and self delusion masquerading as science. clickbait. disappointing. toe--
This guy says Real meditation is to put yourself in the void and accept the void and feel nothing at all. Then you become a human. If you that all your life, it seems like you become an idiot. 😂😂
There is no death to materialism (physcialism) because that is what is true in nature. There is nothing immaterial that exists on its own, detaching from something material that created it. Mind, self, abstract thoughts, mathematics, logic, subjective experiences, creativity, and so, are all physical-based.
@@eunoiaeudaimonia6829 Honestly, this vid is just painful to watch. I'm on the 21st minute, and I'll probably stop here becuase I'm not a particularly patient person. This doesn't sound like philosophy, it sounds like incoherent bullshit. And speaking of strawman, I've heard him strawman the physicalist position several times already, usually in the form of these annoying fake self-deprecating claims. Like "we pretend to know blah blah blah". Who pretends to know? I don't, and neither do lots of intellectuals I've listened to, so speak for yourself.
@@AlexanderShamov Just go out some more, and interact with the common people who are not intellectually trained, people dealing with day to day life, not a dig on people whatsoever, but just by observation an educated person can pretty much encapsulate behavior or mindsets. And that is called a hypothesis, which you can either choose to investigate or not, so it's not purely a strawman. What this original poster did here on a specific vid, not having watched the full length is a true strawman. From mark 16:06 Raphaël Liogier explains his view of materialism. haha my man George didn't even got that far and already misrepresented the vid. Be careful people with what you read. Observe the facts for yourselves.
I've had dreams about events that would occur the next day...and sometimes months in advance...my personal experience shook my worldview of materialism because materialism can only explain so much.
bruh he's just rambling incoherently w/ not great english. like wtf is he on about w/ materialism entailing that reality is outside of itself?? who thinks that? it'd be great to maintain quality control & not invite goofy guests who can't even communicate clearly and says bizarre things.
SPONSOR: As a listener of TOE, you can now enjoy full digital access to The Economist. Get a 20% off discount by visiting: www.economist.com/toe
Timestamps:
00:00 - Intro
00:24 - Raphael’s Background
06:10 - Meditation
15:35 - Materialism
28:57 - Future of Humanity
36:30 - Beauty and Love
43:39 - Transcendence
46:58 - Main Challenge of Our Time
50:18 - Transcendence (continued)
53:33 - Modernity
01:03:58 - Schopenhauer and the Jesuits
01:11:51 - Mystics and Alchemy
01:21:34 - Reaching ‘God’
01:26:18 - Zeno’s Paradox
01:31:22 - Raphael’s Current Work
01:35:03 - Outro / Support TOE
01:37:44 - Bonus Footage
It is very smart and wise to study law and then learn whatever else you want to learn... Law like math is at the heart of everything...
I was an uncompromising materialist for so so long, but as I've gotten older, and follow what really seems like a growing consensus among today's thinkers, I starting to accept that materialism is at a dead end, and there's growing evidence that we exist beyond the material world. Or maybe the youtube algorithm has totally duped me into thinking this is a real trend.
I was firmly materialist from a young adult up until 2012, which is when I saw (a) a UAP and (b) the hat man. Crazy times for sure ..
Hindus (and many others) figured this out a long time ago.
seems like humanity is just taking a side path thru hyper financialization n ego attention b4 realizing that. while war mongering boomers r stuck in the past. luckily “time” is speeding up. when everything n everybody’s attention is drawn to 1 single place n point in time, balance is met. or maybe imbalance. not sure about that. could be manifestation of love n under/over/innerstanding or the extinction of humanity - “materialism” has no place there.
I totally get where you're coming from lol, so many topics I'm interested in seem to meet back up "here" (immaterialism). My interests in psychedelics, philosophy, psychology, consciousness, spirituality, etc. Maybe everything seems to be following a logic because it's all that I see and everyone is borrowing from the same source material lol...
@@grahamhenry9368 loooooooool
I disagree that anguish is the only emotion that does not lie.
The unconditional love of spirit is the only truly authentic state because it is pure knowing with no concept of perception, and it is the only state that is perfectly shared without conflict.
Anxiety is inherently a conflicted state of doubt - some part of the mind fighting against what is.
Emptiness of perception is not emptiness of knowing.
There can BE no emptiness in that which IS!
This is, interestingly, what most people experience when they leave their body in an NDE and come back to speak of it. They often experience the void as an initial phase, but this almost always transformed into an extremely overpowering experience of immense unconditional love.
I totally and deeply understand what this very authentic man is trying to articulate ❤
Me too. I couldn't stop thinking about the first talk he gave on this channel. His passion is infectious and wonderful.
@@portiagestos5585In todays madness the blind men argue and fight over what the think the Elephant is. He is one of many wise people, alive and passed on, who can help us to see the Elephant and free us from the suffering our blindness i inflicting on eachother.
Great! So can you explain it to me.
@@Killane10 if you do, let me know what he meant hahhaha
@@gerardmoloney9979
I suggest you look up Rupert Spira, Ramdas, Erchart Tolle and Allan Watts. I would say all these guys are very good at using their intelligence language skills to articulate what is very difficult to do.
This guy has that knowing that trancends the intellectual egoistic mind and it often comes across as wowo or seems confusing.
Amazing discussion, especially the surprise ending! Thank you both for the thoughts.
Alchemy was my escape from Inertialism, but the weird thing is that I wasn’t searching for the “experience”; the experience had to show itself for me to snap out of it.
Finding the Void may be easier to attain by staring at the night sky in meditation, possibly because we know it is not EMPTY! 😊🤙🏼
This guy has more degrees than a thermometer!
When you see beyond the mind you realize you are pure love.
Exactly.
A person who has been brought up & grown into adulthood with nothing but neglect, condemnation, hate, unequal marginalization existing in a life whereby they are constantly being looked down upon will not find pure love if they were able to see beyond the mind. This is reserved for the fortunate.
@@MrVaypour most people
@@MrVaypour I didn't say find love, I said you are love.
@@ricochetsixtyten In themselves.
TRANSCENDING DETERMINISTIC INDUSTRIALISM INTO SYNTROPIC ABUNDANCE - While deterministic causation does seem to exist, and is the basis of Western science and technology (and other aspect dominant culture), it is not the ONLY pattern of causation. It is insufficient to explain the cosmos, particulary its pervasive complexification into beautiful and intelligent living systems, as Raphael points out. I view this deterministic causation as an coercive process from the outside>in or from top>down, involving an increase of entropy. Because it is realtively "easy" to break things apart (from chemical bonds to the voluntary agency of living things), the application of concentrated (focused) entropic force is "deterministic". It also has objectified, de-vitalized, characterised by a Win-lose, zero sum, scarcity, fearful mindset, and by Us-them, I-it relations. AND this "entropic causation" involves a self-fulfilling dynamic since acting in accord to this coercive, deterministic worldview will increase entropy, setting into motion a positive-feedback loop of degradation, with ever-increasing difficulties as things fall apart. BTW, our capacity to wield such deterministic force is located in our Left-brain, and its strategy for minimizing information entropy ("surprisal" according to Friston's FEP) is to force the world to fit what we expect, our model, our ego-desires.
On the other hand, our Right-brain has capacity for non-coercive, loving, relational, I-thou, We-are-them and They-are-us kinship relations, and for un-coerced (freely chosen) participation in the unpredictable co-creation of Win-win abundance. It provides an awareness of "syntropic causation" that is not, and CAN NOT BE, deterministic, but allows surprising emergence of vitality, beauty and complexification. This involves reducing surprisal by developing awareness and understanding of the world as-it-is, and of its potentiality for entropic and syntropic causation/outcomes/flows. Generally, this mindset is required for the enlightened pursuit of truth, beauty and goodness. It is the necessary foundation for the discipline, empathy, skill and restraint required to transcend the perilous paradoxes and positive-feedbacks of power, control, and entropic causation. Only cultures based on a common understanding of the risks, benefits and potentialities of syntropic and entropic causation, and the coincidence of opposites (coincidentia oppositorum) required, are able to carefully deploy power, control, technology, deception, etc... in service of sacred syntropic values and ideals rather than tragic ego-driven pursuits (wealth, power, status). There are many successful examples of this syntropic mindset and its many healthy fruits, including healthy spiritual communities and especially indigenous cultures around the world. These cultures demonstrate that all of us are capable of enabling our planetary civilization to flow from the entropic anthropocene into an age of abundance with individual, collective, and ecological regeneration-healing and of syntropic flourishing. We can do this!
And yes, Raphael and Ian McGilchrist have kindred spirits destined meet in beauty. May it be so.
I am loving what you are sharing with all of us, Curt, and suppose this means I love you too! Thank you for another brilliant dialogue.
It feels like the perfect time to invite Andrés Gomez Emilsson 🔥
This was very interesting. It might seem vague in some parts, but grasping concepts that have not been clearly named and concepcionalized by our culture is usually pretty hard. It’s part of bringing about metaphysical concepts. Materialism seems to be the only straightforward metaphysical theory, but it is in my opinion a bit of an illusion because it somewhat simplifies experience and the philosophical work to fully understand is usually focused on trying shut out any other categories of ontology that might exist in reality. Even the epistemological aspects of materialism is simplified and non unifying (measurement problem, incompleteness theorem, the reality of irreducible complexity, etc).
Anyone who cannot work out that materialism is absurd is under-qualified to be a philosopher. It ain't rocket science.
True, Buddhism was adopted/endorsed by the whole of the civilized world and was accepted voluntarily without applying force, because of Bodhisattva the Buddhist mindset that understood the need for nonviolence, rule of law, freedom, liberty, human rights etc. and create the modern civilized world in continuation of Krishna's Sanatan religion, as if everyone were waiting for Boddhisattva. Maybe, this guy gives the correct interpretation of Nagarjuna's emptiness.
This has been my lifes work. So refreshing to hear it hear. Thank you. 🙏🏼
Examples contrasting contradictory formulations from classical theories with their potential non-contradictory counterparts using infinitesimal/monadological frameworks:
1) The Measurement Problem in Quantum Mechanics
Contradictory:
Standard Copenhagen Interpretation
If a system interacts with a measurement device, the quantum state undergoes wave function collapse into an eigenstate of the measured observable.
This introduces an ad-hoc, unphysical process that is inconsistent with the deterministic Schrödinger evolution.
Non-Contradictory Possibility:
Relational Quantum Mechanics
|Ψ>total = Σn cn |Un>system |Vn>apparatus
Measurement = Modulation of relations between |Un>, |Vn>
By treating measurements as interactions modulating relational correlations between monadic system and apparatus states |Un>, |Vn>, collapse can be avoided while preserving definite records.
2) Renormalization Issues in Quantum Field Theory
Contradictory:
Renormalization via infinite subtractions
Feynman diagrams contain divergences like ∫d4k/k2 = ∞ which must be absorbed by redefining parameters.
This ad-hoc renormalization procedure lacks physical justification and does not converge in realistic models.
Non-Contradictory Possibility:
Infinitesimal Regulator Approach
∫d4k/[k2 + ρ2]1/2 < ∞ (ρ is infinitesimal regulator)
All calculations manifestly finite using infinitesimals ρ
Introducing infinitesimals avoids true mathematical infinities from the start, removing the need for unmotivated subtractions.
3) Paradoxes in Set Theory
Contradictory:
Naive Set Theory
Russell's Paradox, Burali-Forti Paradox arise from unrestricted set comprehension axioms.
These paradoxes undermined early attempts at formalizing abstract set theory foundations.
Non-Contradictory Possibility:
Topos Theory / Categorical Set Theory
X ≃ Y ⇐⇒ ∃n, IsEquivalent(X,Y) in (∞,1)-Category(n)
U: ∞-Topos → ∞-Groupoids (univalent universes)
Representing sets/classes as higher identifications up to homotopy equivalence in (∞,1)-categories avoids the self-referential paradoxes.
4) The Problem of Mental Causation
Contradictory:
Classical Property Dualism
Mental properties and physical properties are distinct.
But how can the mental cause any physical effects/behavior?
This is the core paradox of the mind-body problem - mental causation seems impossible on dualist premises.
Non-Contradictory Possibility:
Monadic Neutral Monism
Qsystem = Usystem|0> (mental state from monad perspective)
Physical = RelativeState(Qsystem, Qenv)
If mental states are monadic perspectives and physics arises relationally between monads, mental causation is simply the modulation of physical relative states via monadic perspectival transitions.
5) The Continuum Hypothesis in Set Theory
Contradictory:
Zermelo-Fraenkel Axioms
CH: There are no sets whose cardinality is strictly between that of the integers and the real numbers.
However, CH is logically independent of ZFC, and leads to paradoxes like the Banach-Tarski paradox of measure.
Non-Contradictory Possibility:
Non-standard Analysis
Cardinality(*R) = Cardinality(R) + 1
*R contains infinitesimal and infinite elements
Treating the real continuum *R as derived from ordered infinitesimal monadic extensions resolves CH by assigning a higher cardinality, avoiding paradoxes.
6) Paradoxes of Spacetime Singularities
Contradictory:
General Relativity
Gμν = 8πTμν
Solutions contain spacetime singularities where geometric description breaks down.
The presence of singularities where physics becomes transcendentally ill-defined represents a fatal flaw.
Non-Contradictory Possibility:
Combinatorial Algebraic Quantum Gravity
ds2 = Σx,y Γxy dxdy (metric from monadic charge relations)
Gμν = f(Γxy, mx, qx, ...) (monadic gravitational dynamics)
Representing spacetime/gravity algebraically from relations Γxy among discrete quantized monadic charges/masses avoids singular infinities entirely.
7) The Liar's Paradox in Logic
Contradictory:
"This statement is false."
If true, it is false. If false, it is true.
This simple self-referential statement leads to a paradox that undermines classical bivalent logic.
Non-Contradictory Possibility:
Pluriverse-Valued Realizability Logic
⌈A⌉ = {Vn(A) | n∈N} (truth value as monadic realization projections)
A ↔ B ⇐⇒ ⌈A⌉ = ⌈B⌉ (equivalence between realization pluriverses)
Representing statements as pluriverses of realizability projections Vn(A) across monads, rather than binary truth values, avoids self-referential paradoxes.
8 ) The Black Hole Information Paradox
Contradictory:
Classical Black Hole Models
As matter crosses the event horizon, information about its initial state is irretrievably lost to external observers.
This seems to violate unitarity and entropy increase principles of quantum theory.
Non-Contradictory Possibility:
Monadic Black Hole Complementarity
|Ψ>exterior = Σn cn |Un>horizon
|Ψ>interior = Σn cn |Vn>trans-pit
Treating the exterior/interior as distinct monadic realizations |Un>, |Vn> of the same superposition allows information to be holographically distributed across all perspectives.
My Perspective on Arrow Paradox:
Force can never be at Rest. Effects of Forces can give illusion of Rest but Force itself cannot be at Rest Ever.
The Arrow Paradox is thus arises because our instantaneous measurement is only looking at the effects of Forces but not the ever present dynamic Force acting on the Arrow.
The idea that aesthetics precede ethics is interesting, but isn't aesthetics even more intractable and difficult to agree upon than ethics? The word is more subjective imo.
I like a lot of these ideas, great interview as always!
Curt, I like the vibrations between you and Raphael!
I can hardly follow physics beyond the ontological, so I loved this ep. Btw, I think the Tao Te Ching is the masterclass in paradox, which is "solved" not by grasping, but by simply accepting its existence.
This one was pretty meh: Very Vague. Ideas were not clearly explained. Topics and line of reasoning were erratic. Word salad in many moments. To many generalizations without a) sound reasoning/clarity of concepts b) evidence presented or mentioned to back it up.
All evidence can be obtained through meditation and mystical practices, if you dare
@@NekiyMixail Counter argument - all delusions can be obtained through meditation and mystical practises, if you dare.
Very similar to Mcgilchrist. You’ve got to get them together they would love each other!
To live is to suffer;
to survive is to -find meaning in the suffering.-
_suffer comfortably_
It seems he's just saying for meditation. accepting the void is that: if you accept the void you gain Zen; or a flow state where you feel like you become the process itself. So imagine the process being the very thing of living, of being a person; being yourself without baggage, without preamble- without expectation of what you should be or what you can be or what you ought to be. to simply be "to be". To be yourself, assuming the self is such a thing that is beyond the appearance and beyond the physical nature of your neurons and the deterministic cultural implications, that make you so as you are. In hopes essentially, one will be who they really are without all that. raw intuitive emotion that is emergent out of the laws of the universe but not necessarily restricted by it. Perhaps it's stochasticity?
He’s not a physicist, but I would like to know what he thinks about time and spacetime including the universe.
Hey Curt, have you ever considered or tried to get in touch with Douglas Hofstadter for an interview? I think that would be a very interesting one. He's the author of Godel, Escher, Bach and coined the idea of strange loops
If you are interested in this subject I suggest reading Living Realization,it focuses on non duality. It helps release you from some mental binds
"Pure transcendence" is not an original concept of Modernity in the Western World. Two hundred years prior, Saint John of the Cross, a Catholic Mystic, called it the Dark Night of the Soul. But he did not see Beauty in the "void", instead he saw God's Love, which seems much more the Truth. And your notion that "The people that we call mystics are so free, because they are mystics, and it's not easy for, I mean, to be a mystic, you need to accept everything around. You're very active, but you can't be controlled. So they were the principle, the main enemies of religion, of the religious hierarchy and the priest and all that" is totally incorrect. Saint John of the Cross, along with many other mystics, are Doctors of the Catholic Church and hardly enemies of religion or the religious hierarchy.
Meditation gives consciousness a rest while the brain continues to spew out random thoughts that beg to be addressed.
Consider this item of mine from my files:
THOUGHT ABOUT THOUGHTS:
Question: Where do thoughts actually come from?
For example: Modern science claims that we have billions of brain cells with trillions of brain cell connections. How exactly does the energy signal 'know' where and when to start, what path to take, and where and when to stop to form a single coherent thought?
An analogy I utilize is to spread a brain out like a map. Brain cells are represented by towns and cities, brain cell interconnections are represented by roads and highways, and the energy signal is represented by a vehicle traveling between one or more towns and/or cities. A coherent thought is a coherent trip.
How exactly does the vehicle 'know' where and when to start, what path to take, and where and when to stop to form a single coherent trip? A higher intelligence has to tell it those things. But, that is a coherent 'trip' (thought) in and of itself.
So, how exactly does our brain think a thought before it consciously thinks that thought? And if thoughts can be thought without consciously thinking thoughts, then what do we need to consciously think thoughts for? Just to consciously think thoughts that are already thought? What then of 'freewill' if we don't even consciously think our own thoughts?
And then to further that situation, modern science claims that many different energy signals are starting at various places in the brain, take various pathways, and stop at different places, just to form a single coherent thought. (With the analogy, many vehicles are starting at various places on the map, taking various routes, and stopping at various places, all together forming a single coherent 'trip'.) And somehow it's all coordinated and can happen very quickly and very often.
So, where do thoughts actually come from? Who and/or what is thinking the thoughts before I consciously think those thoughts? Do "I" even have freewill to even think these thoughts "I" am thinking about thoughts and type these thoughts to you here on this internet?
Modern science also claims we have at least 3 brains: The early or reptilian brain, the mid brain, and the later more developed brain. So, are early parts of the brain thinking thoughts before the later parts of the brain consciously think those thoughts? If reptiles can think thoughts, then couldn't the early part of our brain think thoughts, and somehow pass those thoughts on to later more developed parts of later brains? Is our 'inner self' really just our reptilian brain thinking the thoughts that we think we are thinking? Are we all just later more evolved reptiles? Who don't even consciously think our own thoughts?
If not, then how exactly does the brain think thoughts? Where exactly do thoughts originally come from so our brain can consciously think those thoughts?
So "I" am thinking about thoughts, if it is even "I" thinking the thoughts that "I" believe "I" am thinking about thoughts. Or so "I" currently think, here again, if it is even "I" doing the thinking. "My" thinking is imploding as "I" think about thoughts. But then again, is it even 'me' that is imploding? I will have to think about it some more. Poof, I'm gone.
Is just energy interacting with itself the lowest form of sub-consciousness? Is it even consciousness itself?
@@charlesbrightman4237dunno.
@@charlesbrightman4237I think you missed the point. If we focus on every random thought, which is infinite, we can ignore the infinite thought process and think of nothing, which is equivalent to everything all at once. However, meditation into thinking of nothing is much easier than solving every random thought at once, which is what the brain wants to try and do.
@@charlesbrightman4237I gave you a thumbs up, by the way, because your comment was very thought-provoking.
Not if you're doing it right. That is eventually nullified.
Highly recommend anyone interested in meditation reads the Progressive Stages of Meditation on Emptiness. Just when you think you've "got it" it shows how you still have attachments and delusion
@@gloaming4247 thanks for the tip. I need to clear the decks but don't know where to start.
@@briantaylor909its definitely a book to take slowly if you get it. Even the first stage can be something that takes months or years to meditate on before reading further.
A podcast on cause and effect would be outstanding!
Thinking!? +Observing that Thinking!? The Ultimate Trilogy “1, . , O” !? Which are You!? You Are “The Vibrational Trilogy”!?
Of course casting aside traditions and inherited wisdom is foolish. They are a gift of immeasurable value. Language, writing, math, science-all of these are inherited traditions too. The more we cast aside traditions the more we have to relearn the hard way. Of course-like math, physics, and electrical engineering- societal and spiritual engineering is a multi-generation project.
The Buddhist meditation trains the mind. Yoga meditation is not facing a void it is uniting with all there is which is Cosmic consciousness. Both approaches are good; it just depends on where a person is at.
That’s not accurate. Plenty of yogis and mystics from India speak about the sheer fear that washes over you when you enter the void. They even sacral chanting to help prevent the fear and face it.
@@BrendanTietz I am Indian and closely associated with the Tantra tradition. Void and scared of the void? This phenomenon is not really a part of the sadhana experience. The void is more a buddhist idea than the Hindu one. In Hindu tantra , its about merger with the deity central to the sadhana. That merger involves huge bursts of energy in the nervous system, heat, movement and various auditory, visual phenomenon. ( like visions, more subtle less gross). More like experiences on psychoactive drugs. Not much of a void. Not accurate
Curt, re: your quote from interview on people's unhappiness lacking sense of animated splendor/blind to wonder.... I agree that would change a lot of people's lives to get back to, because I do walk the world in wonder and frequent amazement. But the human drive to share/find the others also comes into play. So to find the wonder is step 1, but the desire to share that wonder with another/others may be a stronger drive and result in more completeness and fulfillment than to walk alone in wonder. Even Buddha returned from the tree to teach others; we're communal, at base; no man is an island, and all that. I think finding connection is what we really suffer from, and that can become spiritual (or religious) really quickly as connections are all temporary, regardless of the length. So even if you find connections w/others, loss will come, and to convince ourselves of a reality where our connections are still there, or are everlasting/eternal, gives us some relief of the potential alternatives that leave us suffering. Even if everything is alive and amazing, there's still a desire to share that in some way with others, especially of your species, who might understand/commiserate/sense it similarly. Just some thoughts, and oddly inspired by my impression of people's true desires in the comment section...
^ wrote that only 1/3 in or so... def this interview touches more on these ideas as it goes on. Love this man's passion and understanding ❤
If it's evolution then we either get the evolved genes or we don't, so there's no point worrying.
Well said. Thanks.
He could have an interesting conversation with Alexander Bard about his kind of process interpretation of Hegel I think.
This "podcast" would be better suited to media theories or religious category.
When people start talking about an evaluation in human behavior, I get worried. It has and will be a disaster. Learning from the past is the best way to understand that this is ignorance 😂
43:40: You're Master of Summary 🖖
Really great work! It's so inspiring and refreshing for me that I derived a work inspired by Raphael Liogier. I made a free listening audiobook and posted it on my channel. Thanks again!
Are you sure about this? People still want things, a lot of things.
Buddhism is not the religion of nothingness. It is the religion of no-thing-ness, and there is a difference.
Beneath matter is the substrate of consciousness, beneath that is awareness, and at the base is the substrate of being.
If consciousness isn't a consequence of matter/energy, then what's the point of neuroscience?
This is the problem - if you want simple, succinct answers that are easy to come up with, you'll take the subjective answer.
If you want to study the topic scientifically, and provide complex, contingent answers that evolve and are refined, you'll take the objective path.
Ideally, both conceptions, subjective and objective, should be complimentary, even if it takes 10 PhDs to understand the state of the art scientific answer!
@@ywtcc easy to come up with? You do it. I've done it. When you have, then we can speak from a common reference.
@@noam65 Sure.
When discussing consciousness, I prefer to constrain the word to what Freud was describing.
I think of consciousness as existing in relationship with unconsciousness.
If we cannot differentiate between the two, I'm not sure how you're going to experimentally verify your proposition on a subject!
In my way, we can at least agree on some cases where the differences between consciousness and unconsciousness are apparent.
In your way, everything and nothing are not differentiable experimentally!
Having said that, I think there's a broader class of temporal and energetic systems that do logic, problem solving, and communication tasks. I wouldn't say that's consciousness, though. I don't think adopting that intellectual baggage leads to experimental verification.
@@ywtcc I'm a mediator, not an academic, though I do hold bachelor and accociate degrees in different fields. I've done that work. You are not a meditator, and have not done that work, neither was Freud.
We have no common framework for discussion.
@@noam65 I'll give you a compromise proposal, it's just not so easy to accept for some.
This notion of consciousness everywhere does have its use, it's just that it needs context.
When you don't have a simple logical answer, sometimes you need to guess, then check, and iterate.
Consciousness everywhere is actually a really good first guess!
What you do is assume whatever it is you're looking at has a mind, just like yours, and in so doing you focus your entire mind on the problem. It's a way to justify theorizing. It's the set of possibilities that can be imagined.
However, it works better when you admit to yourself that the first guess was almost certainly wrong!
The titel makes me so curious, but the man is so hard to understand for me as german 😒
Maybe you will provide a cut, wich answers my curiosity...?
This is an old video right? I always get confused when you reupload stuff whether I've seen it before.
Seemed to start to well but came across as very confused. He needs to refine his thoughts or his communication or both. I stopped listening when he said that “desire to become” is a positive way to progress either scientifically or philosophically (may be both). But he should listen to and read J Krishnamurthy who has categorically concluded how the “desire to become” has been the biggest reason for all the human problems. You should listen to The future of humanity series with Dr. Bohm to understand. They talk about how humans created psychological time which is at the root of all the problems that arise out of the “desire of becoming”.
Also, Buddhism is an offshoot of Hinduism. Buddha himself was a Hindu who was trained in Hindu philosophy and practices. Hinduism was prevalent in a lot of Asian countries as well, may be not all. Finally, it was Buddhists from India actually who brought Buddhism to a lot of south East Asian countries and China. So, yeah, this guy is just bonkers. May be he is just bad at communicating his ideas - which would also be an exception for a philosopher, btw.
The “desire to become” has been the biggest reason for all the human problems pointed by Krishnamurthy is (relative) true but we live in a reality of duality, of contrast, no? thus the other side of the coin, with problems we create more possible solutions aka expansion, new purposes, new meanings out of the Void the full potentiality. As Liogier Beautifully pointed let's follow the positive, at least as long we are in this reality, this dimension of mind. However keep an open mind as much as possible to not get "calcified" as an alchemist would say, which is the root of problems, the fixed mind in general, not just the psychological time creation but the attachment that unable us to think and feel beyond.
@@uranusterra579 - You're right that a positive approach to the "desire to become" is probably our best option, given the constraints of reality. It's true that we can't reverse time or entirely change society's perception of psychological time. However, Liogier seems to suggest that "desire to become" itself is a more positive approach to progress. I have an objection to this "unqualified" view on the "desire to become". I agree with your more "qualified" view on the same.
Can you try to get Grandmaster Wolf on? Someone who has, or at least claims to have developed actual psychic abilities rather than just someone who’s had some interesting visions or feelings.
Buddhism is not about voids. It’s about one’s true nature. Empty of essence, cognisant in nature and unimpeded, or unconfined. When you look for mind, the self, the I, you can’t find it but at the same time it is the nature of mind to be cognisant, to know. And when its essence is known there is no impeding it. It is unconfined and spontaneous. Any response is right in thought, speech and action. There is no void. Everything exists, a cup, a saucer, a name, a person, it’s just these things don’t exist the way you think they do. It is not that they are all an illusion but rather like an illusion…which is different. The relative and absolute exist together as do the three qualities of mind above.
“In Japan in the Spring we eat cucumbers.”
I don't think geography has anything to do with this topic
I think the only thing I disagree with, is his opinion that only the spiritual are wise, though we agree on their defining fact. Religion is nothing but shared spirituality, in other words it confirms you aren't insane, as all spiritual who don't agree, are.
but I like how he concludes, it's a matter of us all understanding all faiths - the eldest sciences
52:13: Infinite slices of pie 🥧
The solution to Zenoes paradoxes is in the quantization of time.. time is discrete because it is created by a circular or vibratory motion. The smallest of which is one cycle from the zitterbewegung clock of the electron and no less becase the electron is the smallest stable mass. Thus while you can divide space indefinitely, time can be divided up to a one small interval and nothing less. The proof using limits of Zenoe paradoxes is not correct.. because in the proof, one variable is made proportional to another and the limit is performed. This proof breaks down if you insist on the variables going to zero independently. Then only the discreteness of time can solve the paradox,
Void isn’t a great word for this, In fact emptiness is better because the “ness” signals that it’s not neutral and blank. To index into an understanding that’s aligned well with Buddhism look at the heart sutra.
An alarming amount of certainty in the comments, from every quarter.
"The death of materialism" - a little too over the top - don't you think. In any case this is the last gasp of breathtakingly ungrateful anti-materialists (more current anti-physicalists), while enjoying and accessing all the very benefits of the technology, which derives from science, which is also a stand-in for physicalism. In any case, physics is not a finished project, but what we know so far has given us modern technology. Of course there are sociological aspect that have to be dealt with. Not sure where he gets the idea that science says things are dead. The science that deals with living things talks about what it means to be living. Science of consciousness talks about what this phenomenon is, we call consciousness and how it is generated from the brain. The science of non-living does not talk about living. When sodium and chlorine come in contact, they react and create salt. Does bot sound passive to me. They are determined to do that because of the electron valencies. The valencies are their own properties. Duh. Total setting up of straw man to then shoot it down. Ungrateful is the word that comes to mind.
You're a materialist? Are you stupid? You think divisibility is fundamental?
Please learn geometry. Indivisibility is fundamental, please educate yourself.
Materialism/Empiricism:
0D (indivisible) = not fundamental, not absolute and not locally real.
Non-zero dimensions (divisible) = fundamental, absolute and locally real (we proved they aren't any of these things with the Nobel Prize proving quantum entanglement).
Realism:
0D (indivisible) = fundamental, absolute and locally real.
Non-zero dimensions (divisible) = not fundamental, not absolute and not locally real.
Recall how in geometry "any new dimension has to contain within it all previous dimensions".
If you're a materialist/empiricist then your logic, math and physics is incoherent from first-principles. You're the reason why we need a theory of everything.
It's ok, there's intelligent people still on Earth. We will teach the uneducated like you.
This guy's got no idea folks. A deluded idealist. . . . divorced from reality and Divinity.
VAST multitudes seeking truth *fail to find* because they're easily *led astray* by worldly logic, sensuality, vain esoterism or specious mysticisms. *I know I was.*
I'm an ex neo-vedantic (hindu roots) new ager. I used to be into so much "cosmic/spiritual" stuff: trance channelings, ancient wisdom, gnosticism, psychedelic drugs, hindu gurus and buddhist variants. I was illuminated by the *kundalini (serpent) spirit* then 8 years ago I got rightly enlightened by the *Holy Spirit* - which proceeded to show me what a *fool* I was before..... Spirit led to the REAL *Yahusha/Jesus Christ* and everything changed - *Paradigm Shifted* .....
This is being *BORN AGAIN* (John 3) and it's an ongoing surprise to me 😁
Turns out Spirituality is a *soul serious* business taken way too lightly by *far too many* ....
The End-Times are clearly *dead ahead,* a time of Antichrist is near.
It escapes the notice of our self-absorbed, glamour-saturated world that we're in a spiritual WAR for souls. The immensity of *ignorance* is astonishing: supernal powers are BEDAZZLING the minds of the masses (Ephesians 6:12). We've inherited ancient spiritual subversion: *the Earth is fallen* ..... the holistic fields of nature are fallen state; *"Morphic Resonance"* is OUT of affinity with DIVINITY; *Death is all too familiar;* Natural life hunts, KILLS and *feeds* on itself.
Humanity is a spiritually *fallen race* highly prone to *deceit and delusion.*
FRANKLY, we need a SAVIOUR and by Jesus Christ we have a GREAT ONE
As a new ager I couldn't believe (I was *damn sure* I knew better) but in the *Light of Spirit* Jesus really is the *Way, the truth and the Life* just like He said: no one comes to GOD except through Jesus, there's no other way (Matthew 7:13-14). Being a neo-vedantist I wasn't convinced, yet the Bible is Spirit breathed, written by men inspired by the *Holy Spirit.* Jesus is vividly portrayed and endorsed in the new testament, in fact he's apparent in the old testament too (Luke 24:27 & 44) and by *His LIGHT* we're allowed to *see* that and *know Him.* Any intellectual concerns or previously perceived discrepancies/contradictions are ironed out and the supernatural narrative flows most beautifully.....
The Bible is the Revelation of *Jesus Christ* (Isaiah 2:2-4; 9:6-7, 11:1-10 & 45:23, Daniel 7:13-14, Matthew 28:18, Mark 14:61-62, Revelation 1:7-8 & 18, Rev 19:11-21)
15 min in and I am surprised by the clarity of understanding this man has around the void and anxiety it induces.
I noticed dumb comments by ill-informed noobes and found them quite funny. Ignorance surely must be blissful.
We are the eternal witness. Reality is a mental construct shared by many conscious observers. On my channel, I explain why metaphysical idealism should be the default position-not materialism, as such a view suffers from the hard problem of consciousness, which is an impasse, and physicalist metaphysics itself violates Occam's razor.
Curt,
Where did you find this guy? An intellectual without authentic experience -lacking in true enlightenment Just a lot of words. Talks a good story. But like your show so much and enjoying the way you are handling him.
it's fine; some comprehension of the topics comes with life experience. How do You define true enlightenment as opposed to false enlightenment? Please share
It might need to be made clear that he is associated not with the Princeton based Institute for Advanced Study where the smartest people in the world basically work but a different and entirely unrelated one that is full of less impressive people.😂
Buddhist meditation is abiding in Being.
@TheoriesofEverything
Time is a compactified dimension one single Planck second in size.
Space< exists so that everything doesn't happen at the same place.
Because of compactification, limits ARE CREATED. There don't have to be limits.
Space is the media so limits means limits of density. Limits of density of metric.
Gravity.
The flow from minimal to maximal density.
And as per limit theorem, the limits join. The closure< is at the limits. They are contiguous.
Neutron decay cosmology.
Neutrons in at event horizons.
Take EinsteinRosen bridge
Neutrons out in deep voids decay into amorphous monatomic hydrogen, proton electron soup, Rydberg, dark matter.
Which then falls.
The decay from neutron 0.6fm³ to 1m³ of amorphous hydrogen gas is a volume increase, expansion, of around 10⁴⁵
Lots of words but what to make of it all? Is there a direction to be discovered in such a flood words? Where are all the followers and what is life like where they are living? Questions without answers as far as I can tell. Too muddled for my smsll mind.
Try to interview Robert Lanza, proper mannie.
Could you get scott aaronson and stephen wolfram? Scott aaronson disagrees with wolfram's theory so I think it'd be an interesting discussion
The beattles helped reform India & the east more than the east India company following colonialism ever couldve.
ey: as long as ur putting food at the table, thats what matters
But stupidity is not evolutionary helping.
Our destruction of the biosphere will halt our evolution.
Meditation seems yet another attempt at some idealised state so not human at all
If spiritualism is real, then instead of just talking about it they should demonstrate it. But, they never do.
What do you define as spiritualism?
Career student good thing family had money right
15:00 Curt: *drops a quote that could easily be repeated for hundreds of years as a representation of the effects of this materialism era*
followed by a humble "what do you think about that?" lmao
QUESTIONS:
a. Next jump in evolution: Will the advanced species treat 'lower' evolved humans like humans have treated 'lower' evolved species and even other humans? Why wouldn't they if it were in their agenda to do so?
b. Advanced species or not, either a species truly survives beyond this Earth, eternally, OR they will not. How exactly will advanced species survive literally throughout all of future eternity? (Future eternity being a really, really long time, endless even).
Advanced avatars view their left behind earthly neighbors as brothers. We have nothing to fear from them. The only ones we have to watch out for are our fellow unenlightened cohorts who can be malevolent.
@@ALavin-en1kr Consider though: Nature is our greatest ally in so far as Nature gives us life and a place to live it, AND Nature is also our greatest enemy that is going to take it all away. (OSICA)
@@charlesbrightman4237 Nature is a stage on which we play; when the drama is over, from the perspective that we are more than our physical or elemental selves, we will go on. Even from an atheistic perspective energy is conserved, so nothing is ever lost unless we think that joining the whole is being lost. From a religious perspective of an individualized immortal soul we go on individually, even after we shed our physical or elemental bodies. We go on asleep or consciously. if we are not spiritually advanced we go on unconsciously. If we are spiritually advanced we should still be consciously aware of ourselves as entities; more than the sum of our physical or elemental selves.
@@ALavin-en1kr a. "...from the perspective that we are more than our physical or elemental selves, we will go on." Please prove that to be really true. Just saying something as true does not automatically make that something true.
b. "Even from an atheistic perspective energy is conserved, so nothing is ever lost unless we think that joining the whole is being lost." While energy might be truly eternally existent, it currently appears that it does not stay in the form of 'us' after we physically die.
c. "From a religious perspective of an individualized immortal soul we go on individually, even after we shed our physical or elemental bodies." There is no actual evidence that we have a 'soul', certainly not an immortal soul. At best all I can currently find is our DNA, and DNA does not last forever. Plus, consider immortality. What if one were trapped somehow, someway in something. Trapped for literally all of future eternity? Plus, existing for a trillion years, with trillions of years after that to go, endless trillions of years of existence. Really? Seems that 'blessing' might turn out to be a curse one day in future eternity.
d. "We go on asleep or consciously." Do you even know what 'consciousness' actually is so that it can go on throughout all of future eternity? And a correctly functioning physical brain is required to have memories and thoughts. How is one going to have memories and thoughts without a correctly functioning physical brain?
e. " If we are spiritually advanced we should still be consciously aware of ourselves as entities; more than the sum of our physical or elemental selves." See 'c' and 'd' above.
The wold doesnt need more succesful people, it needs more heart followers. I get it and and am, since 10 yrs back, getting their. Materialism is hard to leave. Following the heart, being free is honorable but seems to me to be a little rich western spoiled somethimes...
Is this new interview video?
Yes
One untestable assertion tumbling after another. Virging on word salad. He appears to believe it but they all do.
im not gonna lie this sounded like if your philosophy major roommate got way too high. he jumped from topic to topic without giving any deeper understanding of any of them
Smart guy but he needs to relax a bit and lower his voice. Crazy Frenchmen.
C’est vraiment le fou du désert
Im sure there is a language barrier and that his intentions are good.
It seems like he characterizes "transcendence" as "enlightenment". People characterize it in different ways, but Im inclined to believe that he is conceiving of the ancient hebrew concept of Bitul, or self nullification.
The phrase "transcendence" conotes some kind of ascension. In contrast, bitul denotes "self invalidation".
So Bitul is kind of like melting away to merge with the Universe, sometimes called "ego death." This kind of seems to be the spiritual underpinning of most religions, Ive heard that some force induce this experience with D'M,T. I'm pretty sure this is what he is referring to when he mentions "transcendence"
Of course, recognizing our nothingness relative to (and subordination to) the totality is not the climax of the hebrew philosophy/traditions-rather there is a next step which is being a well formed conduit in motion for the totality. (Not just sitting around staring at your hand, as my brother once joked)
Some take the transcendence angle in the opposite direction of the bitul angle, though the experiential underpinning might be the same----and they basically deify themselves.
Other can deify someone who talks with this kind of jargon, like when jesus says 'I and the father are one'... Well ok jesus, thats true.
However trying to conceive of ourselves as masters of the Universe, rather than the master of the universe being the totality whom we are subject under.
basically satanism.
This is where the reprobate ditch all ptetenses of logic and realism for satanism, usually under the guise of indeterminancy in the quantum mechanics of consciousness..
This could be characterized as the hebrew concept of Karet, or being cut off from the totality. Thats how I conceive of folks who take the self deification of "free will" to its logical conclusion where they will basically gaslight themselves, preferring their preferences over realism.
As for the casting down of traditions. Its always really shocking when a greyhaired says something like that...
Its like, you havent learned enough things the hard way yet!!!?
Just one or two cycles of casting aside all tradition and we'll be back at flat earth pitch fork mobs in no time.
His thinking doesn't seem to be well reasoned, to me.
Language, writing, math, science, historical anecdotes, all of the traditions we inherit are GIFTS. And we should be grateful for them, they are a privilege, a leverage, and a huge advantage. Those without them wind up lured into pedo vans.
However trying to conceive of ourselves as masters of the Universe (rather than the master of the universe being the totality whom we are subject under) is basically satanism.
This is where the reprobate ditch all pretenses of logic and realism in favor of satanism, usually under the guise of indeterminancy in the quantum mechanics of consciousness..
This could be characterized as the hebrew concept of Karet, or being cut off from the totality. That's how I conceive of folks who take the self deification of "free will" to its logical conclusion where they will basically gaslight themselves, preferring their preferences over realism.
As for the casting down of traditions. Its always really shocking when a greyhaired says something like that...
Its like, you havent learned enough things the hard way yet!!!?
Just one or two cycles of casting aside all tradition and we'll be back at flat earth pitch fork mobs in no time.
His thinking doesn't seem to be well reasoned, to me.
Language, writing, math, science, historical anecdotes, all of the traditions we inherit are GIFTS. And we should be grateful for them, they are a privilege, a leverage, and a huge advantage. Those without them wind up lured into pedo vans.
However trying to conceive of ourselves as masters of the Universe (rather than the master of the universe being the totality whom we are subject under) is basically satanism.
This is where the reprobate ditch all pretense of logic and realism in favor of satan¡sm, usually under the guise of indeterminancy in the quantum mechanics of consciousness..
This could be characterized as the hebrew concept of Karet, or being cut off from the totality. That's how I conceive of folks who take the self deification of "free will" to its logical conclusion where they will basically gaslight themselves, preferring their preferences over realism.
As for the casting down of traditions. Its always really shocking when a greyhaired says something like that...
Its like, you havent learned enough things the hard way yet!!!?
Just one or two cycles of casting aside all tradition and we'll be back at flat earth pitch fork mobs in no time.
His thinking doesn't seem to be well reasoned, to me.
Language, writing, math, science, historical anecdotes, all of the traditions we inherit are GIFTS. And we should be grateful for them, they are a privilege, a leverage, and a huge advantage. Those without them wind up lured into pedo vans.
However trying to conceive of ourselves as masters of the Universe (rather than the master of the universe being the totality whom we are subject under) is basically satanism.
This is where the reprobate ditch all pretense of logic and realism in favor of satan¡sm, usually under the guise of indeterminancy in the quantum mechanics of consciousness..
This could be characterized as the hebrew concept of Karet, or being cut off from the totality. That's how I conceive of folks who take the self deification of "free will" to its logical conclusion where they will basically gaslight themselves, preferring their preferences over realism.
As for the casting down of traditions. Its always really shocking when a greyhaired says something like that...
Its like, you havent learned enough things the hard way yet!!!?
Just one or two cycles of casting aside all tradition and we'll be back at flat earth pitch fork mobs in no time.
His thinking doesn't seem to be well reasoned, to me.
Language, writing, math, science, historical anecdotes, all of the traditions we inherit are GIFTS. And we should be grateful for them, they are a privilege, a leverage, and a huge advantage. Those without them wind up lured into pedo vans..
I'm not sure this guy is talking about anything
So much nonsense and dogmatic claims made by this person that I can't listen to it anymore (I got to past half an hour).
Yes, he makes some points, but then posits some strange alternatives each time, without any reason or logic behind it.
Simulationists can't handle reality.
Started reasonably, but soon degenerated into psychobable and confused.
👎🏼 weak minded
🎉🤗💞🤗🎉
People use God as a filler for their emptiness instead of accepting the Void.
You were the kid in the 4th grade who liked to tell the kindergarteners there was no santa to watch them cry weren't you? Now you want to go a step further and claim the presents appeared under the tree from out of nowwhere.
@@yanwain9454well, their point is relevant because if there actually is an omnipotent God, then there will never be a new experience because you are omnipotent.
Accepting the Void is indispensable for the direct experience of the Divine. Or Pure Consciousness.
@@gammaraygem exactly. Consciousness must always be expanding.
What denomination are you talking about? If not for the 1st 5 books & st. Paul we wouldn't have cosmology or math mapping formalism that unveiled or improved the human condition.
Meditation is mind training. Slowly developing concentration and steadiness in order to achieve insight. A lot of waffle from this guy.
dude has a lovely attitude but his thinking is an scrambled mess unencumbered by evidence. self-help and self delusion masquerading as science. clickbait. disappointing. toe--
Lots of speculations presented as facts and a bit too much of Iain Banks
This guy says
Real meditation is to put yourself in the void and accept the void and feel nothing at all. Then you become a human.
If you that all your life, it seems like you become an idiot. 😂😂
far from true: he explains why the void isn't nothing, he actually is against nihilism and he talks extensively on beauty and meaning(s) of life.
There is no death to materialism (physcialism) because that is what is true in nature. There is nothing immaterial that exists on its own, detaching from something material that created it. Mind, self, abstract thoughts, mathematics, logic, subjective experiences, creativity, and so, are all physical-based.
strawman argument, you haven't even watched the whole vid yet. That is not what he meant by materialism.
ahhh the smell of a nihilist materialist in the morning !!
@@eunoiaeudaimonia6829 Honestly, this vid is just painful to watch. I'm on the 21st minute, and I'll probably stop here becuase I'm not a particularly patient person. This doesn't sound like philosophy, it sounds like incoherent bullshit. And speaking of strawman, I've heard him strawman the physicalist position several times already, usually in the form of these annoying fake self-deprecating claims. Like "we pretend to know blah blah blah". Who pretends to know? I don't, and neither do lots of intellectuals I've listened to, so speak for yourself.
@@AlexanderShamov Just go out some more, and interact with the common people who are not intellectually trained, people dealing with day to day life, not a dig on people whatsoever, but just by observation an educated person can pretty much encapsulate behavior or mindsets. And that is called a hypothesis, which you can either choose to investigate or not, so it's not purely a strawman. What this original poster did here on a specific vid, not having watched the full length is a true strawman. From mark 16:06 Raphaël Liogier explains his view of materialism. haha my man George didn't even got that far and already misrepresented the vid. Be careful people with what you read. Observe the facts for yourselves.
I've had dreams about events that would occur the next day...and sometimes months in advance...my personal experience shook my worldview of materialism because materialism can only explain so much.
What a scam artist 😂
This guy doesn't know basics of meditation. Western blah, blah blah
Well this guy is lost
BS
this is your brain on atheism.
All glory is due to Allah for giving us clear guidance and avoiding all this scrambling.
bruh he's just rambling incoherently w/ not great english. like wtf is he on about w/ materialism entailing that reality is outside of itself?? who thinks that? it'd be great to maintain quality control & not invite goofy guests who can't even communicate clearly and says bizarre things.
too late. i am the next evolution of man.
This actor reminds me me of "Borat" and Peter Sellers playing In specter Cluseu. Great job playing a French intellectual full of himself!