Nicholas Humphrey on the Invention of Consciousness | Closer To Truth Chats

Neuropsychologist Nicholas Humphrey talks about his new book, Sentience: The Invention of Consciousness. He tackles the hard problem of consciousness, Phenomenal Consciousness vs. Cognitive Consciousness, and Identity Theory, while providing insight into his theory of consciousness and the experiments conducted throughout his career. He also shares his thoughts on if AI will ever be conscious and if consciousness could have evolved somewhere else in the universe.
See more interviews with Nicholas Humphrey: closertotruth.com/contributor...
Nicholas Humphrey is an English psychologist, based in Cambridge, who is known for his work on the evolution of human intelligence and consciousness. His ten books include Consciousness Regained, The Inner Eye, A History of the Mind, Leaps of Faith, The Mind Made Flesh, Seeing Red, and Soul Dust. He has been the recipient of several honours, including the Martin Luther King Memorial Prize, the Pufendorf medal and the British Psychological Society’s book award.
Register for free at closertotruth.com for subscriber-only exclusives: bit.ly/2GXmFsP
Closer To Truth, hosted by Robert Lawrence Kuhn and produced and directed by Peter Getzels, presents the world’s greatest thinkers exploring humanity’s deepest questions. Discover fundamental issues of existence. Engage new and diverse ways of thinking. Appreciate intense debates. Share your own opinions. Seek your own answers.

[@longcastle4863]

The way a lot of scientists are now saying things like

[@heath3546]

I think our perception of consciousness is that. A perspective. Only a small slice of the ocean

[@FishHeadSalad]

Oddly, I am big fan of this channel and Bobby Kuhn. Yet, I never feel closer to any truth after listening to the folks he interviews.

[@jeremyburningham7649]

Didn't scientists prove the universe isn't locally real? So what is matter considering everything is absolutely proven to be a wave frequency until a consciousness perceives it. Also I am not religious.

[@yeti9127]

One of the better explanations of consciousness.

[@longcastle4863]

Excellent interview.

[@ALavin-en1kr]

There is no sensory experience without consciousness. In sleep although our senses are unconscious of the outer world, still we are conscious and aware of our dreams. In deep, dreamless sleep, we are still aware that we exist, that we have consciousness. There is the blankness of anesthesia but we come back to full consciousness and nothing is lost as we know who we are and where we are. Consciousness is more than sentience which depends on the organs of sense and their proper functioning. That it is fundamental is more than likely. The mind functions through the senses as a sort of sixth sense. Consciousness is other and there is no evidence it is a sense or subject to the three forces as the mind is, the mind being material and emerging with quantum events. Consciousness does not emerge. It is. Mr. Humphrey is courageous and realistic than most out there. There should be no conflict between evolution, and consciousness being fundamental.

[@ianrobbins]

Such a great series. Really liked this one. Haven't ever watched one I didn't like. They're all good, and some are mind-blowing.

[@pablodanielaltube]

Thank you so much for such dedication!

[@devil_pls]

Please more of this stuff. Love this stuff

[@SandipChitale]

About

[@ALavin-en1kr]

Language is out there in primorial sounds. The Sanskrit language, the foundation of all languages, is based on these sounds which are a certain number, 49 as I recall. This is the foundation of all languages.

[@tadmorrison]

Yes!

[@dondattaford5593]

We are experiencers developed to experience the world

[@rashenoi]

Consciousness, or Reality or Brahman, was first envisaged about 5000 years ago in the Upanishads.

[@jamesruscheinski8602]

could experience of free will have anything to do with subjective awareness?

[@mediocrates3416]

From symbiosis toward organism; there lies the root of consciousness, the organization of

[@glenrotchin5523]

Important point. Look at something red. Now close your eyes and try to imagine the colour red. You can’t. At least I can’t. Now open your eyes again and look at the red object. You immediately understand how the experience of seeing red is its own unique phenomenological instance. Not something we cognitively ‘know’ and retain.

[@garychartrand7378]

Imagination is of major value in this topic as opposed to fantasy. We use terms such as brain and Mind. My imagination sees an ingenious system in which the physical brain is just a very sophisticated computer/ transceiver. In such a scenario the brain(computer) alone creates only an Ego(who we 'think' we are) and the transceiver part is that which filters through the brain our Minds(who we really are). Of course this model is a major problem for those who insist that there is no God from the get go.

[@theWinterWalker]

Fabulous. This was a delicious interview.