What Exists? | Episode 1710 | Closer To Truth
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 28 ก.ย. 2024
- What exists? Lots of things exist. But what’s truly fundamental? The challenge is to discern the minimum number of basic categories that explains the entirety of existence. Featuring interviews with Sean Carroll, David Wallace, David Chalmers, and Don Page.
Season 17, Episode 10 - #CloserToTruth
▶Register for free at CTT.com for subscriber-only exclusives: bit.ly/2GXmFsP
Closer To Truth host Robert Lawrence Kuhn takes viewers on an intriguing global journey into cutting-edge labs, magnificent libraries, hidden gardens, and revered sanctuaries in order to discover state-of-the-art ideas and make them real and relevant.
▶Free access to Closer to Truth's library of 5,000 videos: bit.ly/376lkKN
Closer to Truth 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.
#Existence #Cosmos
Love this. Love this series. Love the open-mindedness combined with intellectual honesty and rigor. Most refreshing!
Yawn.
This series is what I had hoped the internet would be collectively
Back in the 90's when it was first launching.
But instead it became the comment
Above mine.
@@Peakfreud ^
"Am I allowing hope to distort reason?"-Robert Lawrence Kuhn
What a great question to ask yourself when approaching the big questions in life.
Lest thou shouldest ponder the paths of life, her ways are moveable that ye may not know them" - Proverbs 5:6.Hiope is a form of dreaming.
This is my third day in a row binging off the channel all day past 3 days. I’m hooked
I am totally flabbergasted by the quality of production, topic selection and especially the content of the talk. Nothing but respect.
“When we talk about reasons, causes and explanations, these are again ancient words that we repurpose, and maybe these don’t apply in modern quantum physics” - Sean Carrol
Reason and causality simply mean (logic) , how can one denies logic and at the same time calls for logical interpretation!!
@@adamsno6761 Reason and causality does not equate to logic. The concepts are different at least in technical discussions.
@Reckless Abandon Could you elaborate a bit? I.e why do you think it’s a “twaddle”?
Humans and human contiousness is the catalyst we are the bridge between existence and reality
When pain hits you you know it exists. It takes all the space and energy you got.
Can I like this twice!!! Great video 👍
Thank you and thank you for amazing series and inquiries about ultimate truths!
Something is all there is; nothing by definition can’t exist.
In the 1780s Immanuel Kant, in his Critique of Pure Reason, noted that the human mind, via it's faculty or reason, has the ability to ask questions that it is unsuited to answer because the faculty of reason has it's limitations. Reason, he noted, does, as it probes, require cause and effect all the way down which will most likely wind up at a dead end.
So I say it is worthwhile to probe as far as one can go but don't be surprised by reacing a dead end....a point of inconclusiveness. Beyond that point nothing is possible except wild speculation.
16:20 I like David's self-check here. It's important to pump the proverbial brakes now and again; It is doubly so when you are predicting anything.
Go Bluejays!
This is simply a great programme
Existence exists and consciousness is conscience. Ayn Rand. From the perspective of experience, they raise mutually. Philosophically one is primary and one is derivative.
We are all the same soul, we just expirence diffrent things creating ourselves
God, He is the conciousness, that lives, moving in all creatures, weather matter or antimatter good & evil. Paradise, Heaven it's right here, and so is hell, try living with insufficient funds, everyday of your stinking life.
I think that existence can be reduced to two components. Positive and negative space. First of all we can observe that the universe in energetic. To be energetic means that there needs to be a fundamental imbalance. The minimum number to create an imbalance is at least two. Therefore logically if we are trying use a reductionist method the best guess is two things. What exactly positive and negative entails I do not know -I am not referring to electron flow. It is some underlying property of space. Where it does not want to be in a rest state.
Sorry, I can't watch any more of your videos until you prove to me that I exist 😘
A single and simple entity can create all the complexity of what we see around us. There is an example for it. Mathematics starts with a number one and nothing else. To find out what it leads to you may try to get acquainted with any branch of modern mathematics. Beyond the slightest doubt, you might be amazed. As well, beyond the slightest doubt, a single and simple entity underlies the existence of the physical world. And it is obvious what this entity is. I leave it as a homework, for everyone interested, to name it!
Sean Carroll
09:17: David Chalmers ( Philosophy of Mind)
15:09: David Wallace (Philosopher Of Quantum Physics )
21:47: Don Page ( Quantum Physicist)
Sean carroll sees the physicals things, in their simplest forms. But in it’s present form the yanassi theorem led me to think that fundamentally two things were created in the big bang. Those two became the categories of all that exists.
That the wave function evolves in time, does that mean either time develops from the wave function, that the wave function comes out of time, that time and the wave function are two different things, or maybe something else yet?
Incredible.
Do we exist because there are empty space within us? Or, do we exist because there are stuff within us? It's like if you are using tiles to shape a dog. You can do it in two ways. One way is obvious, you lay out the tiles to shape a dog. Other way is, you layout all the tiles in a square and then start removing tiles until the empty space shape a dog. Now, you can recognize both as a dog shape but one is with material and one is with lacking of material. Back to the original question, do the world exist because there are fundamental physical substance or do the world exist because there are lacking of fundamental physical substance? The answer is you need both tiles and empty space to shape the dog.
Have you done an episode where you talk about Conway's game of life?
Sorry sir I want to join this discussions ,how do I join this club or gathering
WV Quine answered this question in 1951; the answer is: everything. There only remains room for debate over cases.
Same questions from ages but no progress...
I think they forget that Quantum mechanics also has a dynamics to it that means there are no alternative universe because the wave must eventually collapse (they just have surface knowledge and don't look into this in any real depth to check the actual experimental data - I call them maths's obsessives!) That means the cat will either be dead or alive at some point without an observer to see it. The undecided part over time is inconsequential because it does not matter. It's like not being able to see a tree fall in a forest. Arrive their later and you see a tree has fallen. It still happened without you seeing it. That means there's one universe. The wave function is not that important to the outcomes as we think. That in turn effects consciousness, because any theory that postulates it is related to quantum mechanics is barking up the wrong tree on a dark night in the rain!
I think consciousness is a lot simpler. Firstly I don't know if you any of you have it. It's not a science problem. However, let's assume for sake of argument you do, then surely evolutionary biologists are the people to talk to, as to 'why' it evolved and how it evolved? Then we would know what it's function is. With that knowledge we can then know that it is probably - my guess - a result of environmental survival - a function that allows us survive as a species. Pain, tears and joy all have a purpose. The purpose is surely to promote the survival of the next generation in a way that will result in more production of the lineage. Knowing this makes me think consciousness is not a myth, illusion or such like or part of the general universe, but rather a functional necessity.
That’s the miracle 😂😂😂 3:53
Abstract objects, ideas and mathematics part of infinite regression / infinitesimal?
Sounds mystical to me.
Damn it I just ate 3 100 grand bars I'm going to have heart burn tonight
😄 it's good to laugh now and then and step out from rigid absolutes
We cling to the math or at least to what those say who best understand the math and then pray to God he's right while looking for things that go bump in the night.
I think that duality permeates all of reality. There is wave particle duality, Gravity is described in two different ways by Newton and Einstein. Duality applies right across science, therefore I would say that there can be no Grand Unified Theory and that this destroys String Theory as it follows the Grand Unified Theory scenario. Also the Multiverse goes as a consequence. There can be no mono pole for example, there has to be two poles in magnetism for example.
I have the inkling Sean is right and that the universal wave function is the only fundamental. Keep in mind though we don't yet have a clear description of what it is, nor how it relates to consciousness.
Hi, I'm he Universe and so are you.
We are both conscious.
Clearly we are the wavefunction.
Close and gently poke your eye.
That's how your eye displays perception, it doesn't necessarily have to have anything to do with what light is actually doing.
It's just how we perceive through the eye.
@@ZeroOskul It could be phrased the opposite way as well: How does the universal wave function relate to physical reality? How did we go from a fundamental of consciousness to what appears to us at least as material reality?
@@phi1394 We are the experiencers of physical reality, so by us.
Ask the side of your brain that terrifies you, your Jungian Shadow, how it got so disparate from the rest of your mind.
Distance is the measure of space and can only be traversed over time.
That'll give you differentiation over time.
@Jim And what, other than s physical description, would it have?
You presuppose no physical state.
What other kind of state, than phsical, would it be in?
What exists? I am not quite sure what you want to know. Can you elaborate a little?
Wave function of the Aether. Everything is Dielectric Hyperboloids, Electron/Positron Vortexes and Magnetic Toruses of Aether, connected to the Inertial plane.
The condition of infinity applies pressure to all infinite points in space through lines of force. This is how the "inertial plane" gets its force or inertia. Though I haven't heard that term before. But lines of force in a row would certainly make a plane.
Again imho Bernardo Kastrup's flavor of idealism is thE superb alt to physical realism.
Looks like just a really good excuse to go visit Banff National Park Canada
Minimum number 1. Waves.
I always enjoy listening to Chalmers. Of course, everything he’s saying is bullshit, but it’s entertaining
Q. Why is there something rather than nothing?
A. Why not?
Reality = That which is.
What appears as separate is in Reality, Continuum of Being.
Contingent = Interrelated Continuum
God = Creative Intelligence.
Creative Intelligence is omnipresent
Creative Intelligence functions consciously and unconsciously simultaneously, and thus is fundamental and prior to consciousness, which then is a way of functioning, not that which functions; what something does, not what something is.
A wave is what something does, not what something is.
The classical world is the Whole that is ever greater than the sum of it's quantum elements. Water is greater than the sum of hydrogen and oxygen.
That which is nothing in particular (actual), is by definition everything in general (potential).
The abstract called Love can be expressed concretely as a hug, etc.
Love is the recognition of our shared Being.
Love = For(ce). May the For(ce) be with you.
Namaste'.
matter contemplating itself
What exist? this question can only be asked to people with visual experience. A blind person for example, depends on information, and the more details he gets informed with, the more exacter he will be able to shape the information. Reality is the world of the 5 senses. Consciousness is the constructed manual out of the 5 senses, that has a recurring task of all eventualities experienced and instructs the actions and possibilities required, before, present, and after.
Too many definitions for searched matters might sound interesting but its just filling more the path we want to pass through. We spent decades with gravity and relativity, followed by the big bang and black holes, getting deeper into particles, ending with quantum mechanics, and strings. That our whole existenz including the universe and all we know, was created by someone or something is, I would say, evidently for all eyes to see. Now the understanding, is the influenced information of each individual responsible for his belief, his behaviour and his knowledges.
Once we clear all barriers and intellectuality out of the way, we'll get to more precise answers.
21:30 I just can’t fathom a scientist that can talk about multiverses and at the same time talk about the father, the son and the holly ghost. When I was 9 YO I was already wondering why it wasn’t a mother, a daughter and a holly ghostess.
very good questioning, sean was backed into a corner trying to explain his religion, i mean worldview!
james devine it’s the opposite of religion. He’s open about it being that way, or not. He just believes it is that way. There’s nothing dogmatic about. It. Religion is a take it or leave it sort of thing, for that particular religion, but it’s take it, like it or not, for metaphysical reasons, usually resulting in some kind of life after death result. You choose which path to that life after death scenario you want, but the end result is the same.
Physics is study of phenomena with experimenting, and so conclusions change over time. You can choose which school of thought you follow, but everything is subject to change. You’re not forced into a path. It’s really a big difference. Religion is all faith, nothing else, really.
@@melgross did you read what you wrote....you don't understand what you are saying...and then, because of my comment, you jump to conclusions on what i believe....you are a total dumbshit, stop replying to people with your nonsense
Jumping Jack Flash is a gas gas gas!
I am dismayed that anyone who understands human nature would think that our consciousness is so fancy or complex that it cannot be a function of material acting elector-chemically. You can easily make list of continuously gradated intelligences, with some super genius on one end and a brain dead hospital patient on the other. You can do the same for music skills, eyesight, any human property runs a gamut that can be demonstrated, but still all falls within remarkably repetitive and closed span. Mozart was as smart as Einstein, but neither was so smart as to be trans human. It's moderately clear that our sameness demonstrates our physical foundation, because we are also very much the same physically.
PS 14:30 David Chalmers does not suggest that consciousness stands alone aside from the physical, he says whether it does is an open question.
You seem to have consciousness confused with intelligence. Consciousness might be defined as experience or the capacity for experience. There is no evidence that it requires intelligence. Nor is there any evidence that intelligence requires consciousness. As far as we can tell, a chess computer has no inner experience yet the best chess computers challenge and beat the best grand masters more often than not.
Re. the Chalmers suggestion. The open question is whether the physical stands alone from consciousness not the other way round. You can't get behind experience to separate a thing from the experience of it or show that they are two separate things.
@@neilcreamer8207 - I suggest you read more carefully, for content, without making simplifying presumptions as though you wrote my post.
And I suggest you review both consciousness and intelligence because you are all over the road. One does not need to "get behind experience" one simply needs to read up on experiments in neuroscience and evolution and this was my point - to understand human nature.
This is particularly annoying unlearned babble, "As far as we can tell, a chess computer has no inner experience yet the best chess computers challenge and beat the best grand masters more often than not." Well thanks for that brilliant non-insight followed by a non sequitur! You do bring to mind that if you could bring a computer back to the year 200AD, any human would insist it cannot be just a device and must have a soul or spirit.
Perhaps you believe in angels, sprites, and other mystical spirit world entities that do not operate from matter. This is fine, but you have no evidence for those ideas. Conversely neuroscience has endless evidence for every quality we display as mammals and strong inference where it does not yet have evidence.
that is what killing me with These sheep, you think you and your Scientists has figure it all out but with all your Sciences you still dont have a clue ,best example is this small virus , let alone consciousness , the Scientists among ther community and in the acdemia still have contradictions and still making thearies and speculation , and by yourself figure it all out .
Materialism has been crushed by neurologists , and to do sciences you have to go beyond Materialism other way you just contradicted yourself.
@Language and Programming Channel - Jesus fucking Christ what a stupid statement. Making a stupid statement like that that flies in the face of scientific fact, they enforcing it with, "and never will" is exactly like a kid making an excuse for stealing or not doing his homework. It's acting.
@@johnsmith1474 - the fact that every sentence you write has ridicule as it's main intent, shows that you are more of an emotionally dominated person than you can ever admit. You hide behind what you pretend is "logic" but it's all too obvious what's really got your tongue.
Now be a good passion robot and reply with more disgust, ridicule, and especially condescension. And don't you dare use any honest logic devoid of bitterness with it either. It MUST be primarily snooty, peevish and patronizing, containing only small bitty hints that you know advanced stuff that all the dummies [i.e. anybody but you] are ignorant of.
If it is REQUIRED that universe (matter, energy, space and time) MUST have something to create it, then the same requirement SHOULD apply to whatever is claimed to have created the universe. Just asserting that "it always existed" is not enough, and in fact is a non-explanation. The correct answer at this time is "we do not know" and no one actually knows. If someone says they know they have to explain how do they know it. We are trying to figure out. Alternatively we can assert "universe always existed". No?
Perfect blackbody, reverse Bose-Einstein Condensate expands into superfluid and has no way to stop expanding.
New research suggests Dark Energy may be residual of ancient Bose-Einstein Condensates.
> The correct answer at this time is "we do not know" and no one actually knows
The trick is, many people don't claim they know, they just shove their privileged hypothesis into the discourse for everyone to wrestle with. From a rationalist's perspective it's almost the same thing - "this hypothesis is worth considering" is only a few bits of evidence away from "I'm pretty confident it is true" - but, apparently, very few people feel this on a gut level.
@@ZeroOskul intended to repond to a different comment ?
Read your comment.
Notice my reply.
A perfect Blackbody (absolute zero K existing with no space or distance,) spontaneously converted to a reverse Bose-Einstein condensate which distended into a superfluid, expanding out to infinity, and created the universe.
Recent research suggests Dark Matter could be residuals of ancient Bose-Einstein condensates.
The correct answer at this time is: A perfect Blackbody (absolute zero K existing with no space or distance, spontaneously converted to a reverse Bose-Einstein condensate which created the universe.
I have, here explained how I know this.
No, Universe cannot always have existed.
that is why I believe that platonic existence is all there is
I am wondering whats "exist" been defined as
Maybe existence is God and fundamental? Everything exists from existence / God? God not just Being that exists, rather Existence from which everything exists?
Chalmers: Consciousness doesn't interact with the physical. What about when we have thoughts, new neurological pathways are created, forged, established ... new synapses created? This is mentation creating the physical.
Quantum wave on (cosmic) consciousness
Smoke and fing mirrors usually. Unless maybe, you can summon the courage to get down to brass tacks philosophically. I can't, so far
Everything exist.
Nothing exist.
外から宇宙を見ると、個人も地球も太陽も存在しません。宇宙のみが存在します。
宇宙は、量子エンタングルメント状態です。
When you look at the universe from outside, there are no individuals, no earth, no sun. Only the universe exists. The universe is in a state of quantum entanglement.
A therm they used all the time
Space and Time!
If they know so much, they should know what Will happening the next second of their life!
Read the 3 or 4 books of the law of one: the ra material and it will explain everything.
In our time, is Philosophy the bordeline between "hard reality" and "consciousness" ?
philosophy is the name of the guy up in the crows nest as the ship separates out the bow waves of hard reality and consciousness, in the ocean of time.
Could spacetime itself be a field? It seems like the universe is made up of fields so why wouldn't spacetime be some kind of field?
Yes.
Einstein replaced the Luminiferous Aether with Spacetime.
Things in SpaceTime are limited to the speed of light but SpaceTime can move faster than light.
I don't know... Apparently they say spacetime emerges from something more fundamental but nobody knows how to get from quantum fields to spacetime. I don't think it has anything to do with consciousness though. I love this stuff even though I don't understand it. I thought space-time was supposed to be fundamental. Sean Carroll doesn't think so lol
@@kzeich The more fundamental thing is a perfect blackbody that spontaneously converted to a reverse Bose-Einstein Condensate, then expanded into a superfuid and continues expanding, now.
New research suggests that Dark Matter is made from ancient Bose-Einstein Condensate.
@@ZeroOskul What do you mean by spacetime "moving faster than light"? I don't think it makes sense to attribute motion to it. It just "is", and at least classically, it has a metric attached to it, and this metric is curved according to Einstein's equation.
@@AlexanderShamov Spacetime i not just as it is.
It is also is expanding.
It can expand (move) faster than light.
Fascinating to see someone, Kuhn in this example, have a publicized existential crisis....
When all you have is a hammer, everything is a nail.
I enjoyed that post.
But these aren't your nails, are they? Because all you have is a hammer...
except the hammer.
_I_ AM THAT *HAMMER*
☺
The brightest minds of humanity still struggle with fundamental existence. And have differing beliefs.
Why?? If there is a question, three must be an answer. Who or what holds that answer? That question actually is the answer.
Sean Carroll comes across as a very nice guy but also as someone who won't admit the limitations of physics and his inability to provide answers to the most fundamental questions. It would be refreshing to hear him say I don't know once in a while. His belief that everything can be explained in terms of a fundamental quantum wave is interesting but ultimately meaningless. It can't be proved. He might as well say the universe was created by God.
Agreed. He’s smart as a whip. But basically he’s saying everything is a universal wave function, it’s a brute fact, don’t ask why, it’s all contingent on who-knows-what, no need to ask further why, I’m good with it all, no further explanation needed or required, shut up and compute. I suspect he’s wrong. Einstein himself suspected the opposite. Quantum theory is incomplete and thus is not the final explanation. There is “something deeply hidden” beyond it. [pun intended]
The intro to this is EXACTLY me all day every day and often even while dreaming at night.
@Lincoln Colt interestingly written work of fiction
Yeah... I looked it up... Not for me... But I appreciate the suggestion 👍
Do they exist? Maybe there's a God and that God is asleep. We are his dream and one day he will awaken and we will just cease to be just like the reality we seem to live in our dreams cease to exist when we get up.
So, enjoy your life and make the best of it while you can.
This has always been such a favorite and fascinating program. He has such respect for ideas and is so open to different views. Thank you for this.👏👏👏
Once again physicists save the day! Nice to see Chalmers so relaxed in this interview. Thanks for this episode!
Thanks for another thought-provoking episode. Here’s my take. Within the observable world and space-time matrix that we humans (at our state of evolution) live in: all the categories mentioned in the episode are parts of our apparent reality or existence in one form or other. If, in our local universe, we ultimately live in a quantum wave reality, then it all emanates from that, including consciousness and abstract entities such as mathematics or morality such as a John-Leslie-style “goodness”. If our local universe is a Wheeler “participatory universe”, then it all emanates from consciousness which brings it into existence; the consciousness itself brought into existence from the evolving universe (a kind of backwards causation). But either way, in a deeper sense, there needs to be another more fundamental explanation. Why the quantum wave function law itself - or why consciousness itself? What’s behind it? And why? Is it even fair and proper to ask “why?” (I happen to think it is.) We need to keep probing, thinking, analyzing, philosophizing . . .
Hinduism > Upanishads > Advaita Vedanta (nonduality) = Only Brahman or pure consciousness exists and this universe is an appearance [in consciousness ]. This pure consciousness is of the nature of Sat, Chita, Ananda or existence consciousness and bliss. You Are That.
I found a great teacher of Vedanta. Look up sarvapriyananda on TH-cam and learn what the Upanishads has to say about our existence. It's deep. 5000 year old wisdom and very relevant in modern times when we are struggling with the hard problem of consciousness.
"It's a free country!" Not now it isn't!
This video is awesome . Thank you for keeping me curious during social isolation 😂
Hi
There was one creator that split itself off into separate pieces of consciousness to experience itself. Duality, positive and negative/good and bad is a way for the creator to know itself. Once our consciousness goes through these 8 densities, we then merge back with the one creator m. We are now in the third density which has a 90,000 year reincarnation cycle. The 3rd density has the veil of forgetting so that in each life we make an honest choice to follow the positive path which is the service to others path or the negative path which is service to self path. Both paths serve the one creator in knowing itself. So at the end of the day experience is the only purpose to anything.
The creator theory despite the self indulgent magical grandiosity doesn't answer the question to begin with, the questions just shifts to what is a creator, where did it come from and why? What's the point or purpose of it and therefore everythings existence? It just raises more questions without actually answering anything.
It seems peculiar to view consciousness as being fundamental when it seems to have arisen from a process billions of years in the making.
This was a beautiful "Question" Thank you for providing these videos and challenging questions.
From a Spiritual believer and Journeymen... 💛💛💛
I love being open-minded I feel bigger then life no matter what. The energy I've always had and still have is amazing. My spirit I feel, will go on I'll never die. This is based in what I've learned by this time from wisdom and knowledge with lifetime everything day by day experiences .. An education would have been the cherry on top but, it was not in the cards for me. Recently, I learned what I never understood ..I was diagnosed with major adhd along with some kind of personality disorder. Yes I suffered. I grew up with a loving family who never knew I was suffering cos I managed to just get through life living by the moment. Someone once put it after handing him my personality test.. He took me aside and gave me my results of that test.. . How puzzled he was he said I'm like a lost spirit wondering just floating around . 15 years later after moving back to that state..I took the same test again.. And got the same reaction... The exact same words to me amazed again.. Wow to begin what he said again..
I think is evident that the rules of physics exist. Which means math exists. For example, would our rules of physics exist in every other universe.? I don’t think so, therefore, it is easy to conclude that it exists in this universe as much as the physical things it governs. What else is existence besides something that is there/is a part of reality ? Not only it is part of reality it has an impact on it.
42
What is a wave function, if we take a grain of salt and keep on dividing it into half's, it will split into nothing at certain level. When we probe space where last molecules of salt were, we can find some debris there. So salt has not vanish from existence, just became to small to be seen by a microscope or touched by anything material. But then comes a problem, salt doesn't split only to molecules and those into atoms, it became quarks and energetic particles. Further more, when we probe energy of those particles, machine itself can change, transmute those energies into particles that were not in a box before. And there's no clear border, those signals are indistinguishable from energy of a box and probing machine. So salt does disintegrate into nothing, it's just nothing is full of energy pulses, with distinctive properties. This is why professor Carroll said it's all a wave function deep down, every atom is part of this energetic thing we call reality. And energy is just a difference between potentials, it's not stuff, it's not here and now, it doesn't have defined shape.
We can go backwards also, create a box with bunch of potentials and material things will start to pop into existence. If we want to build an atom or a molecule, machine will use ever more energy and became larger and more complex, but in principle, we could another universe from nothing. It would be awful, very chaotic, unstable space, but still a sort of material reality. What nobody knows how to do is a real, stable space with all this features we know, not everything could be created by our simple, flawed mechanical constructs, just a part of what we know is materially real.
This is important because there are two known kinds of reality, ordinary material and a live one. Everything would be OK, if universe would be just matter, doesn't matter what kind or how much, nobody would notice anyway.
Science constructed a good, detailed model how life came to be. It was a puddle, a soup of organic chemicals, those started to bind in stable ways and begin to replicate. Why and why only than and here, nobody knows, it just basic logic according to what was preserved on this world. We also know what makes human special, nobody is born as an animal, world is not a jungle anymore, we grow up in artificial environment and are thought in symbolic language. Words enable us to think, create, use and most of all, we can remember, we can describe ourselves and the world. Forget words, destroy all universal symbols and art, human would became just another animal again. But does this mean consciousness would also be gone? Not really, human animal would still think, imagine, meditate and dream, only civilization will exist no more, at least for a long period of time before some human animal tribe would reinvent universal symbols and art again.
So we have at least 3 things at play, physical space, material life and consciousness. Why is consciousness so special, it's because conscious creatures can build worlds.
Also creativity is unique to humans.
When Sean says he sees existence as a quantum mechanical wave function it seems like he chooses to leave measurement out of it. No particle brought on by conscious acknowledgement just a quasi state of being in all forms at all times. In other words, Sean is not choosing a rational form of existence based on observable known phenomenon rather he is proposing an unquantifiable new world not connected to anything in our universe. "We don't know but this is just what I believe "..... How is this not a faith based argument for The Religion of Science? Your God explanation is wrong but my all encompassing quantum wave function is the only truth, trust me. This is self delusion at it's best!
The problem I have with materialism and physicalist is simply that a universe comprised entirely from non-conscious matter is essentially nothing in the complete absense of consciousness ..it knows not of it’s own existence..were it not for what materialists consider the “accidental weak emergence “ of consciousness…the whole thing would not be experienced…it essentially would not exist…It can Only exist if it is experienced and witnessed buy an observer….I believe it is emergent from consciousness….not the other way around… It’s conceivable that consciousness could exist without matter as it would be the observer of itself…non-conscious matter cannot do the same for itself…In life we conceive an idea then make it material…not the other way around.
Notice that these discussions contain absolutely no philosophical reflection about, you know, existence. As for mind, it's nothing more than some dude's subjective perceptual consciousness, as with Chalmers. It's as if Heraclitus, Plato, Plotinus, Bruno, Spinoza, Hegel, Heidegger, etc. never lived. Philosophical culture in the English-speaking world is such a wasteland.
What exists? - is an oxymoron.
Who exists? is the question.
Father and Son Exist.
Anything less is of the father of lies; darkness - which ultimately has no substance in Reality. Repent.
Experience exists, and gives meaning to reality; although not know how this might evidence physically?
Sean Carrol is very smart but not conscious beyond his ego. Therefore, he is not wise.
I am so much blessed to have this channel in my list of subscription, Thank You.
We talk about "fields" like the "Unified Field". Recently, we found the Higg's Field which gives mass to particles. Why not a "Field of Consciousness" where complex systems, once they meet the criteria, can connect to a variety of levels within the conscious field itself? It can be a rock at one level, a butterfly at another, while an infant child at another, and so on. As each system evolves to meet a greater level within the realm of criteria, the connection is made stronger and consciousness grows accordingly. The criteria can be as simple, or as complex, as increasing the neuron-network within our brains. This happens when an infant develops into a small child and on to an adult. In light of quantum mechanical systems, such as the uncertainty principle, entanglement or the measurement problem as seen in the double slit experiment where consciousness gives rise to reality, I can't see where the existence of such a field would be implausible. In the case of entities who are self aware, for instance, we grow and develop while, over time, through the aging process we decline, leaving the connection to consciousness to also decline. This can be a long and drawn out process, or it can come quickly until, at either case, the connection is dissolved and the complex system returns to the elements, which, of course, is a construct of consciousness itself. This is also true of "things" that exist at lower levels of consciousness within the field. While things come and go, consciousness continues.
Is this Pan Psychism (I made that word up) or just the abstract thinking of a man who doesn't have much to do. If you should ask, "Where does consciousness come from?" well, that another discussion for another time. Just something to think about.
Most important thing I learned from this video. I need to visit Banff atleast once.
Have you ever seen such pretentiousness in your life?????
Can God have curiousity?
Awareness. Everything else is a subset to awareness.
Thank you for taking us along to this conference!
I watch this stuff for the complete comedy of it.
How can something exist, if everything is changing every microscopic fractions of a second? On the other hand, Change is only a transformation from one form to another and in total it sums up to the same. Does it exist? Is it relative?
You don't investigate things there's no suggestion for. Work with what we know please. There is zero evidence for any gods.
Here's an idea for a show: What is knowing? Does it involve only objective reality or do we account for subjective experience?
We are swallowing ourselves
Maybe anything conscious had to come buy/thru the unconscious is which it’s input is from conception to death while taking information in thru all our senses in to the unconscious, made conscious thru our first and many experience, we have the knowledge before we actually evolve it to conscious
How can consciousness be fundamental if it only appeared (or, should I say, emerged) at such a late stage of the cosmological evolution, namely, after brains evolved?
On planet Earth, yes. But we're not talking only about levels of consciousness here, it's about what exist, what was before matter could form. Universe might be a dream come true, since before Big bang energy was in a similar state than our mind is today, but who was the dreamer? I'm not saying some form of singularity was conscious, it's just our mind could be product of same illusive stuff, just shaped differently than something we can't even imagine, but same kind of fields.
no take into account the dinosaurs with thier emence size but yet small brains with cognitively functioning processes and basic primitive instincts to kill, protect,etc., so here we know by trusted scientific fact even before the first period of evolved Ecological biodiversitys
@@Daysdontexist Does wheals dream about electric dolphins?
About dinosaur brain, they might have small skull volume, but we don't know if brains were located only inside their head. Imagine how heavy that animals were, no small processing unit could move so many living cells and not burn out from excess of energy. On other side, wheals did evolve together with rest of mammals, but they didn't became any smarter obviously. Millions of years of evolution must go somewhere else. Mental field is a thing, all living beings can pull rabbits from an empty hat, therefore some sort of potential mentality could exist before material life, like i described in a comment below.
@Jim My notion is, where there's nothing at all, even most simple and weak thought could mean everything.
It's like virtual reality. Everything is construct of consciousness in order to consciousness experience. Consciousness can't experience nothing. So it has to create stories and causality in order to experience a world. If you think like that it solves alot of mysteries.
The more you want a certain outcome to be true, the harder you must scrutinize it. Thus why I have a hard time dealing with religion. Its immovable and disprovable,and cannot be verified.
It must be taken on faith alone.
Religion goes to great lengths to acount for all the discrepancies,when in fact you should look at it objectively and be willing to drop the theory if it’s unlikely to be true.