Bernardo Kastrup and Rupert Sheldrake: The Nature of the Cosmic Mind, with Jonas Atlas

Both Rupert and Bernardo Kastrup are outspoken critics of mechanical materialism. They share a strong focus on questions about consciousness and its relation to the formation of reality. While their ideas exhibit considerable overlap, there are also apparent divergences. Yet, surprisingly, they have not engaged in a public discussion about some of their core interests. That is why Jonas Atlas thought it would be a good idea to bring them together for a hosted dialogue. He sensed that such an exchange could cast a new light on age-old philosophical debates. For example, Bernardo is a strong proponent of idealism, while Rupert often presents a more trinitarian view of existence. This difference (or is it perhaps similarity?) provided a good starting point for a deep discussion on the nature of the cosmic mind. As the conversation unfolded, exploring the inherent consciousness underlying all reality in its deepest depths and highest heights, they both reinforced and nuanced each other’s perspectives. The result is a thought-provoking dialogue about various insights that philosophy, theology, and science have to offer about the divine essence of existence.
Chapters
00:00:00 Introduction
00:01:32 Part 1: monistic idealism or trinitarian panentheism?
00:16:15 Part 2: what are some good metaphors to describe the conscious ground of existence?
00:20:33 Part 3: approach these questions analytically, allegorically or experimentally?
00:24:08 Part 4: how do the universal consciousness and its expressions interact?
00:34:19 Part 5: if consciousness is all there is, why does matter seem to be unconconscious?
00:40:46 Part 6: are the smallest particles conscious?
00:50:20 Part 7: are large cosmic entities conscious?
01:01:10 Part 8: does the whole cosmos have a mind of its own?
01:03:26 Part 9: why does the unity of the cosmic mind express itself in multiplicity?
01:14:19 Some final words of appreciation
Bernardo Kastrup is the executive director of Essentia Foundation. His work has been leading the modern renaissance of metaphysical idealism, the notion that reality is essentially mental. He has a Ph.D. in philosophy and another Ph.D. in computer engineering. As a scientist, Bernardo has worked for the European Organization for Nuclear Research and the Philips Research Laboratories. He has also had a 25-year career in high-technology, having co-founded parallel processing company Silicon Hive and worked as a technology strategist for the geopolitically significant company ASML, for 15 years. Formulated in detail in many academic papers and books, Bernardo's ideas have been featured on Scientific American, the magazine of The Institute of Art and Ideas, the Blog of the American Philosophical Association and Big Think, among others. Bernardo's 11th book, coming in Octobre 2024, is Analytic Idealism in a Nutshell: A straightforward summary of the 21st-century's only plausible metaphysics.
www.bernardokastrup.com/
kzbin.info/door/eDZ...
/ @essentiafoundation
-
Jonas Atlas is a scholar of religion who writes and lectures on religion, politics, and mysticism. Though rooted within the Christian tradition, Jonas immersed himself into various other traditions, from Hinduism to Islam. After his studies in philosophy, anthropology, and theology at different universities, he became active in various forms of local and international peace work, often with a focus on cultural and religious diversity. Jonas currently teaches classes on ethics and spirituality at the KDG University of Applied Sciences and Arts. He is also an independent researcher at the Radboud University, as a member of the Race, Religion and Secularism network. His latest book is Religion: Reality Behind the Myths: bit.ly/3U40s39
jonasatlas.net/
/ jonasatlas
/ @revisioningreligion5741
podcasters.spotify.com/pod/sh...
-
Dr Rupert Sheldrake, PhD, is a biologist and author best known for his hypothesis of morphic resonance. At Cambridge University he worked in developmental biology as a Fellow of Clare College. He was Principal Plant Physiologist at the International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics and From 2005 to 2010 was Director of the Perrott-Warrick project, Cambridge.
www.sheldrake.org

[@luisortega4991]

The care with which Bernardo talks to and about Rupert is very moving.

[@RobertBowerNexus]

How a discussion with two of the finest minds on the most important subject of our time should be conducted. Gratitude to each involved!

[@adamstephens9043]

I've waited ten years for this. It did not disappoint.

[@sveinreinr4606]

This is great! For two days ago I thought it would be interesting to hear Rupert Sheldrake in conversation with Bernardo Kastrup. I searched on KZbin, but unfortunaly couldnt find any. And voila, here it is. ❤🙏😀

[@nigelericogden3200]

Same for me.

[@gmk2222]

Your in sync mate

[@miguelangelous]

The logos at work 🙌🏼

[@hydrorix1]

Enjoy the synchronicity!😊

[@LoneRanger.801]

Two days ago I had the exact same thought. It would be interesting to know if it was recorded around that time or not. Did we intuitively feel that BEFORE the actual event or AFTER? 🤔

[@neilrushton7169]

Wonderful, respectful and deep conversation between two fantastic thinkers. Thanks to Jonas for bringing them together.

[@evoloveable]

Don't know who stated this - "God doesn't care who does the flying - as long as flying takes place". Many come to the same insight at the same time. And one being is credited with the totality of its coming into being - when it came into consciousness for many. I see 'movement' as that which brings into being (consciousness manifest) - water is that which facilitates that - a rock becomes soil - earth brings forth plant form - hence animal form. Rudolph Steiner's insights points out how we study and see things - without questioning the movement of the 'finger' that 'moves' all things in the first place. LOVE this sharing of insights shared here THANK YOU all.

[@WhiteStoneName]

Rupert's answer about "Is he an idealist or how does he position himself?" from 2:45 - 9:22 is great. I need to timestamp this to send to all my friends. What a great little summary of my own view but more clearly and articulately summarized (or just in another's voice). Beautiful laying out of a trinitarian ontology (panentheism). Although the lines btw that and pantheism become difficult to draw...

[@CosmicConsciousness594]

This is by far one of the greatest discussions I have ever watched if not the greatest..

[@duncanmckeown1292]

Fascinating discussion! Two of my favourite thinkers talking together! I'm glad they see eye to eye with each other on so much...since I find myself agreeing with both of them most of the time.

[@oliviergoethals4137]

Finally a talk between these two.

[@chrisallard1819]

Magnificent to finally hear these two together. I’ve spent many hours reading and listening to both Rupert and Bernardo - joyous to hear this - and excellent interviewing… Many thanks

[@jcinaz]

The focus of any philosophy is about what is regarded as reality. To the Materialist, matter is reality. To the Idealist, consciousness is reality. From Sheldrake's perspective, he seems to identify reality as energy where the source or cause of energy is a trinity of consciousness. But that to me is still an idealist perspective where consciousness is fundamental.

[@morphixnm]

That was a wonderful conversation, especially for myself and othrrs who have been following Rupert and Bernardo closely for years. Much appreciated!

[@nicolesawyer-jm6ir]

Holy crap - this is awesome!!!!!! Thank you for bring this 2 all of us!!! Love each other folks !

[@BigJack512]

Been waiting for this conversation between Rupert and Bernardo and wow is right.

[@WhiteStoneName]

One of my favorite intellectual conversations in a while. Thank you very much. ❤

[@olbluelips]

This conversation was actually better than I expected. Really good listening! Thanks to the moderator and both guests!

[@HighCountryStudio]

Thank you for bringing these two thinkers together! I’ve been studying them both ( Rupert for a long time, Bernardo recently ) and trying to work out how their ideas are alike and different, so this is perfect for that project.Thanks again.🙏

[@SimoneMancini1]

❤❤❤ Dois grandes pensadores trocando ideias extremamente profundas de forma respeitosa. Muito obrigada ao canal por essa oportunidade!!

[@Narsufin]

What absolute joy to have listened to such incredible minds in thought provoking conversation.

[@Studio-pg4sq]

A fantastic conversation - thank you Jonas Atlas for organizing this video.

[@greensleeves7165]

That was a terrific conversation gentlemen. More similarities than differences and each was respectful of the other. The moderator also did well by not asserting himself too strongly into the mix. Hopefully there will be future episodes with this same pairing!

[@workerselite479]

What a great podcast!!! Beautiful minds talking about layers of existence we could term as consciousness of the whole! Profoundly Beautiful, Indeed!! Rupert, whom we have been following since the amusing and thought provoking discussions with Terence McKenna about the reality we perceive as existence, to us represents the holistic whilst empirical approach of the 70/80ies and beautifully mingles with Bernardo's vision and perception of the current limits of the quantistic reality proposed by the scientistic approach of the academia to the nature of existence. This dialectic virtuoso is a real quest for a language able to express in a very detailed manner an intellectually updated neorama of consciousness for the 21st century based on the osmotic relationship between content and form of the Implicate Order David Bohm referred to. Blessings to Mankind Empowerment. Kudos from Japan ❤

[@WhiteStoneName]

21:45 "We live in a culture today where people mistake nuanced layers of meaning for vagueness and imprecision." Amen. Glory. Could not have said it better.

[@tonyscholes9664]

The world at large (but most especially the materialst scientific community) should carefully listen to and value these two intellectual giants. The importance of their ideas is paramount if we as a species are to survive the current turmoils. It seems to me that the further we progress scientific knowledge, particularly in the field of high energy particle physics, the more credence Rupert and Bernardo's ideas gain. Thank you to both (and Jonas) for a wonderful, respectful, insightful and illuminating discussion. I'm left wanting more!

[@marcio-duarte]

22:00 Our analytic minds tend to search for structures to explain things, which is quite useful in many cases (even for survival). However, inevitably, words reduce reality, no matter how precise they seem to be. They are actually checkpoints, applicable only until our understanding matures - and then new words are created. This is why we also need other ways of expressing those very concepts that are not bound by explicit definitions. Myths and art, in general, are indispensable for this. Bernardo and Rupert are well aware of this, as the conversation implies.

[@benbrill3617]

Great time to be alive, to be able to see two intellectual giants having a casual philosophical discussion. Thank you KZbin.

[@cheri238]

Thank you, all of you!! I am fortunate again to be able to listen to this enlightening discussion. I have been aware of Krishnamurti for years. Mr. Sheldrake, was that you and David Bohm and many others speaking with Krishnamurti many years ago? Plus, I found through gaining books by Sonu Shamdasani, "The Redbook," Libra Novus edited and with an Introduction by Sonu Shamdasani and other Jungian analysts informative. I love philosophy, history, science, religions, literature, art, and creativity. I have bought both books, also by Dr. Iian McGilchrist and have been fortunate to have listened to others with various backgrounds in many different fields, discussing with each other how we all may work together towards the betterment of humanity. I was fortunate enough to watch Mr. Sheldrake and Bernardo Kastrup,in some of these conversations with Dr. Iain McGilchrist. Heraclitus stated that one may never step into the same river twice. A general definition of civilization: a civilized society exhibiting the fine qualities of truth, beauty, adventure, art, and peace. Alfred North Whitehead 🙏❤️🌏🌿🕊🎵🎶🎵

[@jennyrook]

A lovely and deep conversation.... Definitely the Sun is conscious, and came to me (with a strongly atheistic background) because its contact with us before has so often led to religions, in Egypt, Southern and Central Americas, countless indiginous peoples, Hinduism etc. The Sun acts in our lives and blesses us. Just move from shadow out into the Sun. In the UK, here, it always feels wonderful. In warmer climes, the power is overwhelming. What is more beautiful than the dawn, and our depictions of it (Ravel, Strauss, Turner, photographs in anyone's facebook feed etc). Much sunny love to all.

[@wardygrub]

What a lovely, sunny paragraph! I’m from the UK and completely agree. It’s more than just appreciation when the sun shines. It’s sublime. Beyond words. Spiritual. When that immense ball of energy bestows it’s presence upon us, we talk about it non stop! And when it’s gone oh how we wail and lament! There seems to be a clear correlation between light, energy and consciousness imo. Repeatedly mentioned in holy scriptures (Christian, Zoroastrian, Buddhism, Hinduism etc) I feel a massive rant coming on so I’d better stop here. Just THANKS for highlighting the idea of a conscious sun. Bless you. Love Grub 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿❤️🐛

[@jamesridener3573]

A fine example of dialogue over debate. This is the way we grow together.

[@itslightanddark]

Excellent, Jonas. I’m usually so frustrated with most who host these two, and you did it better than I ever could have imagined. Peace

[@fadi-hs9fz]

Thank you for your sharing this video. Undoubtedly both Rupert Sheldrake and Bernardo and their mind are complementary of one consciousness. What Rupert knows is the vision of Bernardo and Bernardos insight of nature is known by Rupert. In other words of analogy about these philosopher and scientist could be expressed as: the observer is the observed.

[@BlissBlessHappiness]

beautiful !

[@barbharwood3834]

Thanks so much for this. I'd like to see more of these two together. This has given me a fuller understanding of how things work, which will assist me with my energy work with people. I feel very privileged to have access to these great minds, it feeds my lifelong desire to understand and integrate science and spirituality. I felt like I was in sacred space all the way through the video.

[@frankdr.steinhoff6670]

Extraordinary how these two minds were sharing their different perspectives, peacefully and respectfully

[@susanj5591]

I believe archetypes are actually a collective tendency based on the overlapping patterns in cosmos Like the waves in the ocean.

[@susanj5591]

The waves determine the movement of the boats on the ocean. Just as the cultural mindset is determined by the overlapping patterns that are exist in a particular time and place. 🎉 Isn't it true that Jesus's birth was called a birth of peculiarity? It seems to me that everything is exactly that.

[@Lioness_of_Gaia]

Very refreshing!

[@lousialb8962]

Why consider a peaceful and respectful discussion extraordinary? It's quite normal. It's important to remember that.

[@datavismo]

We need another one with these two - 🌞

[@tzmythos]

TRuly enjoyed this discussion and much appreciated your arguments for the a fundamental ground of consciousness, which to me is the only explanation for consciousness in any species. And thank you both including the topic of divinity. I am so glad to have come across this.. I have admired Rupert Sheldrake's work and thinking for quite some time, but while I have read Bernardo Kastrup, I have gained new respect for him, Thank you, and many thanks to Jason for bringing you together and moderating this conversation with intelligence and graciousness.

[@soumyabanerjee8879]

Fascinating. Next time please do one with Rupert Sheldrake and Swami Sarvapriyananda.

[@Pretaviana0137]

What a wonderful conversation! I have enjoyed it so much. Thank you 🙏🏼

[@nino834]

Very enlightening! Especially part 5 and part 9 elucidated some aspects of your thinking I could not grasp before.

[@ghostrecon3214]

I am so stoked I came across this, props to this gentleman for getting you two together!

[@dorrijones7495]

Yes! And we metaconscious beings can experience this. So we'll presented by you all, as well. What an existence - beyond words...

[@christinearcher3946]

I’m moved! There are many things I don’t quite understand, but then I just relax into the pleasure of listening to what transverses from philosophy and science into poetry, art and love.

[@The.Zen.Cyn1c]

Short version: Both Bernardo and Rupert bought the same type of car. When asked what they bought, they answer: Bernardo: I bought a car Rupert: I bought a Black Mercedes CLS

[@VitorSantos-ib5dn]

Bernardo and Rupert are undeniably two brilliant minds. I don't consider myself up to the task of refuting what they say. What I ask myself is how useful what they say is in reducing my suffering and the suffering of humanity in general. Refuting metaphysical materialism is interesting, but, in practice, people who call themselves materialists or physicalists do not behave in a way that is consistent with what they defend. Neither people who defend metaphysical idealism nor spiritualists behave in a manner consistent with what they defend, with rare exceptions. Descartes said: I think, therefore I am. I say: I suffer, therefore I exist. Materialists had an answer to definitively end suffering: death. The total annihilation of the conscious being, although it had the consequence that, for the dead person, it didn't matter whether he lived or not, since mortal remains were not conscious beings, who could remember the life that ended. Neither Rupert nor Bernardo leave an answer to the problem of human suffering. Bernardo goes so far as to say that we are monkeys. What difference does this make to what those who defend metaphysical materialism claim? On the other hand he says that we are a dissociation from the mind of God. If we suffer, does God suffer with us? If he suffers, what hope do we have of stopping suffering? If we are just a wave in the ocean, which dissolves with death, what is the point of knowing that we are part of the ocean? They're just words. If I am the ocean then I am a solipsist. Either I am a part of God and the dissolution of the dissociation that death brings allows me to maintain a kind of individuality, or else I am like a sand castle, which falls apart when the ocean covers the sand. Do I suffer and not exist individually? What does it mean to be someone who suffers? Is it God who suffers through me?

[@CJ-cd5cd]

These are good questions. My understanding is that God, from Kastrup’s point of view, is not a self conscious agent. Suffering is a result of becoming self aware. I think a deep ontological shift can cause people to gradually shift their values and what they prioritize in life. There are many reports of people who have experienced Near Death Experiences (NDEs) who become more empathic, less materialistic, and less afraid of death as they were exposed to so called universal consciousness

[@Sinekyre14]

Yes, your individual identity is a temporary illusion, and dissolves like a sand castle when you die. Suffering is a reflexive mental construct to cognize and motivate you to end the pain, so you can reproduce. Pain is an evolutionary function for survival, like a clam locking up or a snail retreating into its shell. As profound as pain and suffering may seem, they are functions within this illusory and temporary dissociation, though they can be useful for waking up. Mind at large, or God, is perfectly still and does not suffer or feel pain. The "me" who "suffers" is not real in any sense other than a construct of your mind, like any story. Pain is real, and ultimately we will all feel enormous pain until we die and awaken from this dream.

[@janhradecky3141]

You won't find an answer to the question of how to stop suffering in philosophy. Physicalists will tell you that you are just a bunch of atoms put together, idealists will tell you that you are consciousness, dualists will tell you that you are both and none of these philosophers will help you stop suffering, unless your suffering is caused by not knowing what the world is, only in that case could philosophers help you. You need to combine philosophy with science if you want to have a plan on how to stop suffering. Philosophy gives abstract knowledge about the world in general and science gives practical knowledge that can be used to build a computer, fix a clogged toilet or perform a surgery on a failing heart. This means that if you only understand philosophy, you are doing it wrong, and if you only understand science, you are also doing it wrong. You need to use a dual approach when it comes to something as complex and important as suffering.

[@denofpigs2575]

Become a flagellant and the question of suffering becomes irrelevant 😂

[@footballfactory8797]

What a pairing! Cant wait to listen to these two great minds!

[@obscurefamous9124]

Kudos for bringing these two together. That was a treat:)

[@FlorisVerbeij]

Thank you for this. I would love to see a conversation about the consequential “and therefore the way to implement this in our lives is…”

[@paulorrmorais3697]

Please Rupert, read "The Great Synthesis " of Pietro Ubaldi. Remarkable work for the human mind of 3th millenium.

[@StefanSchoch]

Wow! Two of my most admired thinkers hostet by an interviewer with such brillant questions. What a delight! Why is it only possible to give one 'Thumbs Up') This one deserves at least 5 or so... If you now could include Iain McGilchrist in the conversation, that would make it even more complete (as if that would be necessary or even possible)! 🙏

[@danielash1704]

Wave converance is the beginning of matter in most cases we wouldn't even exist without the fact of convergence

[@moonlima7]

I was presented to Rupert in an astral projection, and until then, I had no idea who he was... today I Enviromental Science and his work is truly expiring ❤

[@tacmason]

These men clearly exemplify the saying; Iron sharpens iron. The sharpest edge - depends on the fine details !

[@roxannesumners5039]

I love this conversation, and know I will need to listen again. When Bernardo spoke of the door, I saw a floor instead, in that his view builds a stable foundation that some need in order to perceive the nuances that Rupert brings.

[@brianregan5053]

It would be helpful to the discussion if there were some talk about the nature of miracles, religious or not. They amount to very rare expressions of the will of God, it seems to me. The quantum-field-theory “lake” must thrust extraordinary but MEANINGFUL and FORMATIVE energy in a way that can only come from consciousness. Note also the discoveries of Ian Stevenson that the traumatic emotions sometimes associated with a violent death may manifest later as a birthmark or birth defect in a new person - a different kind of “physical” memory independent of matter. This may be related to the process of evolution.

[@davez9796]

Rupert is such an inspiration.. God bless you both and thanks for this incredible interview

[@wardygrub]

Just towards the end, Kastrup hits the gold seam of questioning that I began to tap into many years ago. My quest began when considering the very first division of a living cell and the question was “why”? Why does life want to continue? And the answer, as I believe, comes from the idea of a WILL. There is WILL written inside all of creation and the unfolding expression of will appears to have something to do with a benign force or, as some may call it, love. This video has brought great comfort and happiness to me. Thank you so much. Xxxxx

[@rossriver75yukon27]

Thanks a lot for this! I do a general listen first. Then, because they are too over my head, I come back to it bit by bit over several days.

[@isaaceccles1356]

this was one of the most fascinating discussions i have ever witnessed. thank all of you for this. i appreciate you.

[@susannaemmerich1166]

Gentlemen, thank you x thousands!!!!🙃🙏🙏👏👏🎶🎶

[@pwcrabb5766]

Spectacular conversation

[@fracta1organism]

this was a good discussion that fits well with ken wilber's AQAL model, where the space-time memory of morphic-fields and the habits and rituals of culture and archetypes (soul) are embodied in the LL quadrant, the creative potential of mind and of quantum fields are embodied in the UL quadrant, and where the existence of objects or bodies in the UR quadrant are ultimately the manifestation of the dynamic loop between the LL probabilities and the UL potentialities from moment to moment within the totality of all things (spirit) in the LR quadrant. see the essays "the quantum semiotic kosmos" and "the physics of the hindu and christian trinity" by joe corbett.

[@ZenDJRen]

Awesome!! One of the very best conversations on spirituality, science and consciousness that I've ever watched (and I've watched a lot!) 🙏🏻

[@waynemcmillan5970]

Thank you Jonas for a great discussion.😊❤

[@timbutcher5653]

I managed to get tapes of the trialogues back in the nineties that provided structure to so much of my thinking. Reading Bernardo in the last year has ignited an equivalent energy and given direction. To hear this conversation feels like the young man in myself meeting where my mind is today, with new joy and further discovery. Thank you!

[@Meditation409]

We need a part 2 for this!! 😀💕💯

[@Lindsaayyy]

Just started it… been waiting to be able to focus and watch this tonight!!! Woooo 🎉

[@teslasapple]

A very thought provoking conversation. Enjoyed that very much 👍

[@Lindsaayyy]

Been waiting to focus and listen to this for 2 days now… 🎉 yayyy 👏🏽. Just started video now. Excited

[@valuemastery]

Fantastic discussion, and it came shortly after I wondered how I could not find any event featuring both Bernardo and Rupert. Very grateful for all of you. At the end, I wondered whose phone it was that was ringing permanently, until the end-title revealed that it was just some added music 😅

[@junelew3744]

My two favourite thinkers! Thank you!

[@chrisjudd-uc7sh]

Certainly one of the most interesting discussions I have listened to albeit one could be forgiven for saying more intellectual / philosophical than grounded but that is the nature of the beast here. A dog does not understand a television and human beings to date do not understand consciousness. Whilst I think it entirely plausible and even probable that consciousness is fundamental a little reticence should be employed. Who can image what it is to be an atom, molecule or cell in our body or brain. What effect do the electrical and chemical changes have and at what point is the reaction holistic, local or non local. Surely the hard problem of consciousness is a self inflicting wound compounded by ill defined terms. Point is even if consciousness is not fundamental god (the cause or enabler) will still exist in another way not yet envisaged. I would remind you all of the immutability of mankind, I remind you so you can reflect how slow is the transition from one paradigm to another each time fooling ourselves as the Avon Garde look to their more esteemed contemporaries for inspiration and consolidation. Darwin's theory of evolution is a good case in point. In 1858 the theory of evolution came into being by Charles Darwin and Alfred Wallace presenting their joint theory of evolution by natural selection at a meeting of the Linnean Society of London in 1858. The theory is usually only identified with Darwin and is understood to do away with any supernatural explanation of evolution by way of random mutation and natural selection. In reality it is contentious to remove god as the associated implied drive mechanism, random mutation mathematically is flawed. You can replace god with consciousness or Rupert's morphic resonance but that's just playing with god associated metaphors. Alfred Wallace who not only shunned publicity believed there was a spiritual impetus to evolution, Darwin funded by his father in law Josiah Wedgewood was also a better self publicist. Of course Christianity as stated in the bible is not true. That is not to say there is no god to which man if he so wishes can offer a good case for and indeed has, nothing wrong with that in principle. There are many such cases made for various religions / ideologies and by their works they can be judged. If you can with integrity define god you are a better man than me. This problem of definition also largely applies to the separation of idealism, materialism and dualism where such boundaries are for the more playful amongst our ranks, yet science and the physical will always interface with the spiritual as they are but entwined. I really feel the discussion in so far as it discussed the church misses the obvious target and that is if we changed this material world to be more in line with the sentiment of the gospels which is also common to nearly all religions then we would all foster more of a mystical experience and be happier at the same time. In a real way we collectively make our own reality. We can make huge changes for the better in our eco /social / economic / political systems. The church, certainly in the western world has been part of an oppressive state machine since Constantine saw its political value. Today it is largely patronised by the conservative right who have little motivation for progressive change. The suggestion of suppressing moral pronouncements and keeping symbology says it all. A church should be a collective of people for both spiritual and moral guidance, a re-energising coming together to make the world better. The question should be asked why this discussion does not link a spiritual awakening with a political crusade towards a more caring socialist world . It seems many of the historical gurus as judged by their words recognised this. Both Rupert and Bernado are intellectually gifted but both understandably tip toe like lost children around the concept of god.There almost certainly is one and we are IMO part of it. But this is effectively a material world as we experience it and we need to improve this material world for the better not only for all its current inhabitants but for those that will hopefully follow. In order to change our world it requires the few that lead us with their inspired thinking and new models to stand tall and transcend the ego's trap, the natural embrace of celebrity status. Such new thinking once it resonates with the collective truth so desperately needed will be recognised by the masses and grow exponentially. We can but hope. God bless all of you

[@mo_philosophyw5414]

Absolutely wonderful discussions with these two marvelous thinker's 👏

[@JohnLoty]

Thanks Jonas Atlas --refreshing to hear and witness this marvellous in-depth conversation and explanation of their respective views by 2 great thinkers.

[@anibaldossantos8214]

I would like to start by thank you both Rupert and Bernardo for your incredible argumentative clarity and effort on taking us all out from the dark ages of the mechanistic materialist paradigm. On the relationship field/energy: would it be possible to consider a parallelism of that principle with the time/space principle? Thank you both for the attention.

[@susanj5591]

Mind is what it is because of the patterns of the universe in place when it started to become

[@abztraction]

This. This right here is the most enlightening conversation I have ever witnessed in my life. PROFOUND on so many levels. Surreal how this has allowed me to connect the dots all the dots to life religion creation spirituality materials existence reality the all the one.

[@r34ct4]

Hey Rupert i just watched the video you did with Terence McKenna and now this and i feel like we've achieved an analog of time travel

[@jupiterthesun3217]

Mr Kastrup’s last statement about the conversation of Job with Yahweh was so interesting :)

[@olgasuppers]

Thank you, such a rich, inspiring and heartwarming conversation! I really hope that it (and talks like this) will also inspire (more) scientists and reach the mainstream not too long from now. The world needs it, I think.

[@JimmyMarquardsen]

And in the end they had come full circle: from magic to materialism and from materialism back to magic again. And then the magic materialized. 😊

[@normaodenthal8009]

Wonderful discussion which really got this bird brain into a flap to dizzying heights. 🦅 The issue of living versus non-living systems brought to mind a comment made by David Bentley Hart at a recent conference. You can take a computer apart and put it back together and it will work again, but don’t try doing the same thing with your brother. It would be great to see Bernardo in a discussion with David Bentley Hart. That would be fabulously fascinating 🧐

[@traceler]

Rupert Sheldrake has a soothing voice.

[@mfr58]

Yes! Bernado takes apart the cult of bumping particles....there are no material entities as we conceptualise them....there are no waves, rather there is waving of the fundamental field. Everything is a pressure modality or modulation of the ether. The geometry for this is modeled by the torus and its inverse or complement, the hyperboloid.....the plane of inertia transects the centre of this form and is the quintessential realm between counterspace and the manifest world and is thus the seat of potential and creativity..... I think Bernado is right, the meaning comes through a will to knowledge...."Through the eyes of humans god evolves"..brilliant! Lovely to listen to a co-creative exploration of ideas, done with warmth and calm.....

[@hanskallafrasonen]

Just wow . As others have said this did not disappoint one bit - gonna have to rewatch this.

[@jonpratt7510]

A timeless classic!! TY!!

[@martin92177]

I feel very enlightened, by all three of them 😊

[@leahlincoln7287]

I just got introduced to Rupert Sheldrake in a recent video on psychedelics from the University and I have been watching several of Ketsrup's videos recently so this video with the two of them is a real delightful surprise thank you very much for this very very cool the only thing that would be better if you could do the same adding Michael Levine❤GEM❤

[@susanj5591]

Wonderful amazing well said so happy to have heard this and metacognized with you!

[@Liz-eq4kp]

Kastrup and Sheldrake have incredible minds. I do, however, fall into Kastrup's way of thinking. I need a more detail oriented conversation. That being said, the actual experience, not words, is the best teaching.

[@JaseboMonkeyRex]

Fabulously rich conversation with amazing insights...i feel this is an example of the highest form of humanity...a wonderful honest egoless exploration into what this whole reality is about! Full respect to you all...

[@VanEazy]

Bravo!!!!! Thoroughly enjoyed conversation from absolute brilliant minds! ❤

[@holycannoli64]

Fascinating discourse. Thank you.

[@beniscatus4917]

A truly wonderful discussion. Thank you.

[@coreyhingley6196]

Thanks so much! Great talk!!!

[@astanarcho8651]

this nearly brought me to tears :)

[@Meditation409]

I just found this!! I already know this will be an excellent discussion ❤️💯

[@VenusLover17]

This is fantastic !! Love it so much ❤❤❤

[@karalough4402]

Thank you!!!

[@X11bl]

“The physics of the cosmic mind.” 🚀🚀🚀

[@MartinHomberger]

So great, thank you!