Beyond Us: Competition with Donald Hoffman | Bernardo Kastrup & Fred Matser

[@realcygnus]

Superb content. BK & Hoffman are among the most interesting cats out there today IMO.

[@dogsbollox4335]

I agree.

[@JA-gz6cj]

lol I always see your cat comment under Kastrup's videos. he certainly is tho

[@elecsomify]

I absolutely agree

[@saritajoshi1737]

You just love using the words "cool" and "cat" don't you lol

[@realcygnus]

@@saritajoshi1737 Well, when & where applicable anyway. 🤣

[@b0ondockz838]

Ohhh I've been waiting for Hoffman and BK to get together. Thank you! Thank you! Thank you!

[@S.G.Wallner]

Wish we could have seen Bernardo's face when Hoffman says, "I'm looking for a theory in which consciousness is fundamental."

[@clivejenkins4033]

He said a deeper theory, pay attention

[@isitreallyso1897]

How on Earth does this not have tens of millions of views. Extraordinary discussion!

[@TheFrenchNanny]

Because most people are not asking these questions ….

[@kaviartin]

22:30 - 23:35 - Hoffman's scientific humility always on display. Thanks for the video!

[@citizenschallengeYT]

Just cause he talks softly doesn't mean he's humble. A guy marching in front of every crowd that will have him, proclaiming "space-time as we know it is doomed" is anything but scientifically humble. (Science By Rhetoric is pseudo-science)

[@SEJay-gj2cv]

@@citizenschallengeYT He is humble in the sense that he straight up says his theory could be flawed, but welcomes that criticism because he is interested in finding the truth, and being proven wrong means getting closer to it. How many scientific papers have you published? How many university courses have you taught? You shame yourself by insinuating that Prof.Hoffman is a pseudo-scientist.

[@citizenschallengeYT]

@@SEJay-gj2cv He's preaching to innocents that "Spacetime as we know it is Doomed" - doesn't sound very humble to me. Nuff said. Please understand my distaste for Hoffman and his Theater, is not based on this video - but on a half year+ studying and critiquing his book "Case Against Reality". What I know is, he's the last guy I'd go to for solid information and advice, the man is lost within his Mindscape and has no appreciation for Physical Reality. But he's got a great profitable schtick going, so, run with it, since self-delusion seems to have become America's past time anyways. Too much is never enough and Me First. The sad degrading state of our global biosphere, (you know our life support system!!!), totally supports the contention that most humans are self-serving and delusional when it comes to recognizing reality and it's Way And Means - so he fits right in. Let the day dreams continue. Or, if Physical Reality itself interests anyone reading this, try googling "confrontingsciencecontrarians.blogsot. case-for-reality. html" for a critical look at Hoffman's Game and a more realistic down to Earth appreciation.

[@apzzpa]

@@citizenschallengeYT Donald Hoffman didn't say that Arkani-Hamed said it. Hoffman is quoting him

[@apzzpa]

@@citizenschallengeYT "and has no appreciation for Physical Reality" - I think your misconstruing his ideas here a little. Where does Hoffman say he has a distaste or no appreciation for physical reality? He's just suggesting we are looking at physical reality the wrong way. Perhaps that is comforting for you or cannot let go of the possibility without one but what Hoffman is putting forth is a new perspective on how to tackle one of the biggest problems in science. Every scientist with a book out could equally be called to be having 'a great profitable shtick'. It's a book. He makes money from it. Get over it.

[@gerardoquirogagoode8152]

a very simple maxima from ancient wisdom "I see reality as I am, not as it is"

[@bryanguilford6145]

Ive been wanting a conversation between bernardo kastrup and donald hoffman for a while.

[@nickolasgaspar9660]

I guess the question is why? Why wasting your time on pseudo Philosophy/science when you can study Neuroscience?

[@gkannon77]

​​@@nickolasgaspar9660is this a real question? Ask Lex and Curt. No need to respond. My guess is your comment will age horribly. Time will tell.

[@leandrosilvagoncalves1939]

You guys are doing a wonderful job! If feel grateful to have the chance to hear your wisdom

[@ISellSigals]

Please, please have another discussion between Donald and Bernardo.

[@dianetemple5608]

Everyone looking for bridge between science and consciousness should be aware of this excellent dialogue between Kastrup and Hoffman.

[@pedrojorge8942]

Pra mim esta foi a melhor conversa com Bernardo que eu tenha assistido. Ambos são pessoas de uma capacidade de insight brilhante e algumas passagens me deram uma sensação incrivel de estar presenciando o nascimento de algo fantástico e de extrema relevancia para ambos. Dá pra notar no olhar dos caras a verdadeira comunicação quando acontece e fertiliza a mente de cada participante com angulos ainda não explorados e retrabalhamentos, otimizações... Maravilha! Agradeço de coração essa oportunidade que ambos trazem para a sociedade atraves desta conversa.

[@gerardoquirogagoode8152]

it's obvious that we can never come to see the end of exploration as knowledge is infinite

[@Meditation409]

That was an awesome conversation!!! Made me really take a super deep think. I try my deepest to be open minded!! These 3 men are absolute icons in the field of Reality and Consciousness. 💕💖

[@phantomhawk01]

Ugh Gyyu

[@rustybolts8953]

Much of this so far reminds me of dealing with would be bullies in my youth. Not enough time to plan conscious strategies but instinct came to my rescue, sometimes in very interesting chess game type ways, other times very direct. Explaining such specific instincts is to this day still a challenge to me... We are far more complex than can be simply explained and so we have so much more to discover about infinite reality and thus our own identity in reality. I think...

[@natashapope3785]

Breath of fresh air.

[@zerbel]

Thanks for this angle provided to Hoffman's hypothesis. I find it inviting how he will move the line back on assumptions of conversation. For example he brings up Belding's squirrell and how where competition/cooperation and payoff/fitness are normally addressed to are our (humans) projected individuals. I'd be curous how he would address a quatnum difference in concept, instead of just moving the line within the same concept of a distinct unit of organism. In the squirrell's case, it was moved to a gene. But similarly, that gene could be backed up to an ecological niche where the gene changes because it benefits more life forms morphing with a changing niche than staying that gene. So the discussion of why cells die aptotically was great, why would any concept of individuals having a cooperation/competition duality need to be perpetuated? There would be specialization explored but by the "unitary" clay (Gaian ecosphere, whole universe, from current human language we have to pick "one" more representative model that still is separate from somehting else!). A morphing within that clay would not see its inner dividings as requiring strife, and self-form preservation that infers it. That one species becomes another IS that "same" species in that new form. That the idea of individual consciousness could participate and even preempt unitary evolvement of the Clay, is simply a playful idea within the unitary clay. It HAS to grow up and realize it was a limited local spacetime perspective playing at directing life from that perspective. That perspective is essentially meaningless, and meant to learn to give its "life" as the separate perspective comes to "wake up" to the joy that giving it up is an incredible playful experience for unitary Clay to experience in (and AS) spacetime. So the ending conversation was great. It is the expansiveness, illustrated by the Godel "incompleteness" that is the "waking up" invitation. It's not by managing what we've known, wanting to retain it as a relic of self-form wanting to preserve itself. It's fascinating to have Donald broaching a quantum leap that questions the temporary glitch of limitation hiding the game of self-form static maintenance. Electricity could have been enough of a metaphor to wake up humantiy to its attachment to self, when we saw how something so expansive was harnessed to the blinders of limitation and suffering for the sake of continued self direction in the illusion of its "preservation". Maybe Hoffman's emergence is the simultaneous readiness of consciousness to out itself, and for humanity to let go of what it "knew". Thanks again for this video of cooperation :)

[@Mo-sj4rr]

Simply brilliant! Bravo gentlemen!

[@zetristan4525]

Beautiful conversation. Inspiring me/you to formulate an (accurate) understanding of that deeper paradigm.

[@Revalanga]

Huge. Enoooorme!!! Great people, bright content!!!

[@znariznotsj6533]

Very good questions for a very deep minded scientist. Goed gedaan!

[@Meditation409]

Wow!! I found this while looking at Donald Hoffman interviews!! This is absolutely a great 3 way collaboration 😀❤

[@dungteller367]

Thank you looking forward to the next talk.

[@VenusLover17]

Thanks so much for this 💎 gem!! I thanks and salute you three guys for your wonderful work! So inspiring!

[@jmshe43]

Fascinating and intellectuality stimulating content wonderful job gentlemen!

[@sylvainbougie7269]

What a discussion. Don’t like all IAI posts but this was out of the park.

[@aproperhooligan5950]

Really great discussion. Thank you for this.

[@seanmellows1348]

Fantastic discussion

[@andrewjemmett4855]

Godels candy store. What a beautiful thought. The universe is just a giant self conscious exasketch playing with form. I love these conversations ❤

[@dianetemple5608]

Been waiting for this dialogue. Keep talking , exploring how to solve the hard problem of consciousness. Big thank you from all of us.

[@alalohwhydee]

I'm in no way a physicist, but if Donald Hoffman is accurate in his proposals on the alarming subjectivity of human obsrevation accuracy does this not cast dark shadows of disturbing doubt over all the physicists data that has been gathered up till now? I wonder what present and past physicists have to say about this?

[@johnkeane5619]

WOW

[@jlmer616]

Two of the leading thinkers in consciousness get together and what do they discuss? competition!. Missed opportunity.

[@rileyhoffman6629]

Would love to eavesdrop on a convo between Hoffman and Chalmers. Competition has evolved into conscious aggression in our species and will probably kill us, a species that (aside from Beethoven and Leonardo) has earned extinction.

[@awesomeant9509]

Before watching the video, I have a bias towards competition. My, similar to that of Ludwig Von Mises, is that in the process of competition, you are cooperating. In a hockey game, people compete while staying in the bounds of the rules. When businesses compete, they stay within the bounds of the law (assuming no political corruption). The reason is because of reputation and repetition. In order to keep playing the game and be accepted by the other players, you need to abide by their standards. If you are still accepted but cheat, they'll reciprocate. If you still cheat, that'll damage your reputation of viewer's/consumers. Then also, in the sane vein, in order to compete, you need to cooperate the most efficiently with the consumer. Lastly, to effectively outcompete or maximize efficiency, you need to cooperate with other industries. Pencil: the graphite needs to come from minerals that needed to be mined, the wood needs to be chopped down by chain saws that need oil from oil refineries, the eraser from South American and Asian factories mixing chemicals to make rubber, tin, etc. Not one person know how's to make a pencil. This happens because people compete for efficiency.

[@dogsbollox4335]

Awesome ant ,and could we use that theory right through every single thing in the universe ,it fits very well through nature.

[@citizenschallengeYT]

Curious,

[@projectmalus]

Offhand there's two problems with that outlook, the first is when a person sees something working in a small group and extrapolates the result onto a much larger group. If it works for my small business/family, it will work for a nation or global economy. The second problem has to do with efficiency. It tends to marginalize. So, when the dream of one big competitive family requires too much money then marginalization happens, and when this problem becomes evident (as now) the costs rise which is another form of oppression. Great idea though and it works well in the right context.

[@mac1414]

Competition is good because without it there is not much progress. Some people need to get into each other's way to win the argument, or to break someone's theory. Competition for the best vaccine, competition for the best technology to solve the energy crisis. Darwinism is universal; inequalities and competition create good incentives, they are necessary. Winner takes all, but also winner inspires all. They inspire all the generations of next winners that are even more fit than the previous ones.

[@projectmalus]

@@mac1414 We're really talking about 'might is right' and how it can be right and wrong. Three things, which are context, efficiency, and ideas. The individual or group applies an idea and when it drops out of context then 'might is right' is wrong, because the context has an efficiency to it, and this overrides the application of the idea. In spite of an idea being right in one context, the inefficiency of that other context will always try to correct itself, and so civilizations rise and fall. They devolve back to the smaller more efficient groups. Competitiveness works at relatively small group size levels and not at the country size it seems. The closest it came to efficiency was the stalemate of the cold war. Same idea - competitiveness - with the small group being the most efficient and surprise! that's where the idea's work best. I think NASA is a good model with an altruistic goal. Cheers.

[@lesegoramokgaba9577]

Here's what is going on here Bernardo: So are we in a competition here? Donald: No, we can cooperate. But in order to be taken seriously by the scientific community we need to approach this problem mathematically and not purely ontologically as you have. Bernardo: Ok

[@royalton2166]

On where are memories stored, related to other videos / writings of Bernardo,s. Using B.K,s analogy of a whirlpool where memories whirl around the perimeter and are at every moment in consciousness but not necessarily meta conscious, wouldn't that suggests the more memory acquired the greater the space necessary for it to whirl around in? Extrapolated out to mind at large, could suggest the expansion of the universe is equal to or in part do to the information / memory being accumulated.

[@JRichardson711]

Crazy neat thought. I’ve had a similar feeling before but was unable to articulate it. Thank you.

[@sergioo3135]

The strange configuration of cancer cells having 18 glucose receptors could be an index that a pathway is activated that we don’t understand. Stephanie Seneff has proposed that possibly cancer cells are sequestering glucose because particular cells have failed to metabolize glucose and it is piling up which is toxic for the cell. It seems plausible to me. Many of the symptoms that humans regard as uncomfortable and we want to get rid of when we get sick are essential actions for us to heal (e.g. fever, mucus accumulation, weakness [energy conservation], etc.) cancer could be a similar process, IMHO.

[@TheArjulaad]

☯️🦋

[@NakedDeparture1]

playing in the invisible realm will be awesome!!!!

[@donato2927]

Mind blowing!

[@amylee9]

I would like to hear how greed plays into competition and the human thirst for more more more….more houses, more of everything.

[@samrowbotham8914]

It is pathological and only ten per cent of people are like that, the problem is they control the world system to our detriment.

[@anniyule1295]

Yes more please.

[@matthewhewitt9249]

Hi Bernardo, I have one query I hope you can answer if you happen to see this ... 1) Consciousness is the one reality but it is confusing me how the planet earth was here prior to any localised finite minds/life. Can you explain how this was and speak to me like i'm a child please haha ?

[@MrSanford65]

I think one question would be, how does the selfish gene have an awareness that it’s part of a species ? How can it be aware of the borders of it genus

[@conscious_being]

The need to dominate that some feel has little to do with scarcity of resources.

[@JRichardson711]

Resources are no longer scarce for us, but the need to dominate could be built in from millions or years of dealing with scarcity and we haven’t had enough time to adapt yet. Could be. I’m no expert.

[@conscious_being]

@@JRichardson711 Scarcity of resources, evolution in the times of scarcity of resources etc. Anything to justify psychopathic behaviour. Whatever the reasons, I am not eager to be dominated by psychopaths.

[@citizenschallengeYT]

Seems to me humans are so desperate for answers, that we skip right over simply observing, absorbing, allowing connections to happen as your awareness and appreciation increases. Allow the simple honest knowable facts to drive one's faith.

[@citizenschallengeYT]

Our cosmos, the universe that made our Solar System Possible that made Earth possible. Where an incredible amount of folds within folds of constructive harmonic complexity lined up just right, for life to evolve into complex creatures, which eventually evolved into all we see around us, and ourselves. {if you want to be poetic, Humanity, the most exquisite example of god's need and desire to understand herself. Appreciate it as poetry echoing reality}

[@citizenschallengeYT]

Consider: Physical Reality ~ Human Mindscape There is no body-mind problem, it's a ego~god problem that people are afflicted with. cheers, :-).

[@martam4142]

What a load of bollocks.

[@bernardstachman3507]

Scarcity is just an illusion from the pleasure of competition. Or at least it was something among these lines in Frankfurt School's critic.

[@farhadfaisal9410]

Excellent !

[@dr.satishsharma9794]

Excellent..... thanks.

[@1SpudderR]

Donald....At the 3:00 minute point I started to realise that your “image” appears as if it is imposed separately on the final visual!? I also noticed it on another of your videos!? Am I correct or is this just a hiccup in productions!? Avatar effect one is left wondering?

[@doctorajwright8437]

I really enjoyed this...but agree with Bernado that using a Goedel approach to mathematically explain consciousness may not be possible..you may not be able to explain the Superset from the Subset....i.e. individuated units of consciousness in Markov bodies will not be able to describe the bigger Consciousness.Personally I believe we can only get an insight into that when the filtering of the brain is removed through for example psychedelics or as described in near death experiences etc

[@markanthonymuya6258]

Wonderful content

[@jeffhiggs3830]

Laymens terms: Choose your battles

[@muneshchauhan]

Is it necessary to have mathematics to prove consciousness? I think consciousness that is a substratum and all else unfolds in it shall elude detection forever. In that way, it will only be available for the experiencer but in an esoteric way.

[@garykezar5553]

Has Donald considered Tom Campbells Big TOE - it would be interesting to hear his comments on it.

[@robertflynn6686]

Just a simple thought for you guys: If things in reality are all simulated(which I accept) the programming underlying simulation is about laws(logics) of that reality we observe which are also simulated. If however the simulation programming itself is or potentially can itself be simulated within itself, that physics or thought is consciousness. A kind of fractalization of the simulation. Which has basic fractal programming underlying consciousness .. gives it geometry, logics, and valuations. Nature just must have accidentally evolved its own simulation reality process. Does this make sense to base your new theory upon??

[@TheUnknownDepths]

The mystics say and to paraphrase.... "when you know all questions cease to exist". Us normies can only relate at a really superfical level where one asks a question about something and you know from the nature of the question that the questioners entire mental model/framework makes no sense so you don't even know where to begin when trying to answer.

[@glynemartin]

Call me an idiot-diplomat but I think that "adapting to challenges" and "seeking the most efficient path to progress" is a more skillful view than the view of "competition".

[@katherinecannon9264]

Why does DH assume he can model consciousness with mathematics when mathematics was developed by the mind? Is this the same as a poet saying that poetry with adequate development can model consciousness? At best mathematics it would seem can point in the direction of consciousness as does poetry. Both poetry and math can do that - point - what then? How have we advanced in this conversation of consciousness with math as the pointer? In fact a broader audience can benefit from poetry of nicely crafted words than from a mathematical model?

[@thomvogan3397]

I didn't hear him assume anything

[@citizenschallengeYT]

@@thomvogan3397 Demanding that Consciousness is a fundamental element of the big bang and the universe's evolution? But you say Hoffman isn't making assumptions. Have you read Hoffman's Case Against Reality,? It's nothing but one big assumption and an amazing amount of self-certitude. Not to mention misrepresenting physics and logic. confrontingsciencecontrarians _ blogspot _ com. /p/case-for-reality_html

[@maurylee5239]

I find it an assumption to say mathematics has to explain consciousness. I do believe that the principles of mathematics are pointers to something more fundamental, a sensible harmonic underpinning. But just like the finger pointing at the moon, math is a pointer, not the thing in itself.

[@citizenschallengeYT]

@@maurylee5239 Not even sure what your analogy is. Sure math is the key to scientific explanations, but it requires more than math. If you're curious google a video by Arvin Ash on KZbin: "Do all living things have free will? Or are they controlled by DNA and other forces?" Fascinating video that will explain things that math alone can never do. If you find that interesting you owe it to yourself to become familiar with the talks by Dr.Mark Solms, amazing man who will leave you with something to work with in a way Hoffman's babble is incapable of doing. cheers and good luck.

[@janklaas6885]

📍25:40

[@vaga427]

Space is unlimited but it's time that is a constraint. If only the vast useless expanse that we call universe (and muse about habitable planets/mineral sources,etc. in it ) could be transformed into useful time, a lot of time dependent/ decaying energy sources will just become perennial.

[@vaga427]

For that time will also need to be defined in terms of some packets like photons and a classical unit of time could be made to dilate in terms of the number of those quanta it holds by transforming space into time.

[@marxxthespot]

🎯

[@frankfeldman6657]

Is Kastrup listening at 23:00 ff? hahaha

[@mcmg-museudacriacao.melind405]

The Unified Theory , Holomovimento : Espelho d ‘Alma , La Chair de L’Univers all books about mind’s first published

[@sonnycorbi4316]

Approaching CONSCIOUSNESS as tho it were an element - is like your right hand arm wrestling with your left hand - CONSCIOUSNESS is the UNIFIED FIELD - physical science has no business addressing or researching CONSCIOUSNESS - theoretical physics is in a heavy mire - I believe “science” should spend all its time dealing with - GRAVITY - SOME HOW SCIENCE HAS TO FIND A WAY OF UNDERSTANDING AND UTILIZING TWO NORTH ENDS OF THE MAGNET; CONFINED TO A SINGLE (for lack of a better word), ELEMENT - FOSSIL-FUEL THRUST IS SO ANTIQUATED ITS BOARDING ARCHAIC - FORGET ABOUT “A-I” AND WETHER IT CAN JACK ITSELF OFF - NOTHING CARVED IN STONE HERE - I’M A VISUAL ARTIST - THE ABOVE IS A MUSE SORT OF LIKE HAIKU POETRY

[@2msvalkyrie529]

DON'T GIVE UP THE DAY JOB .!

[@rusty1here]

Gentlemen you’re not seeing larger picture the reason that we have competition here on this earth is because of our orbit around the sun if we were to move to the orbit of Pluto there would be fierce competition because there’s less light it’s also the reason why the mathematics of the Nash equilibrium/negotiated peace Work the way that they do here on this Earth

[@HouseJawn]

Donald actually has alot of great one liners 🤣

[@Johnnyredtail]

Donald kind of gives me an idea of what Michael Faraday would have said about Maxwell.

[@Johnnyredtail]

Hoffman appears to be after the origin of space and time via axiomatic mathematics. Axioms can not be proved. Sounds like Baron von Munchausen's trilemma to me?

[@rustybolts8953]

Physical stuff is easy to identify. Stuff is made of energy if E=MC2 is true. So what is conscious energy? Is the fundamental source of physicality actually conscious energy? If true then we should be able to detect such energy should we not? Since I know I exist and I am for now conscious then I can conclude that I am conscious energy but unless I can reverse the ageing process this state is not a constant. I think we could use quantum based AI computing to build a conscious energy detector which would begin to explain what and who we are... If not then its back to the drawing board... Sorry...

[@fukpoeslaw3613]

They're in cahoots

[@cyberprofessor6008]

Fascinating but annoying commercials

[@StephenPaulKing]

Gregg Zuckerman has a neat mathematical theory of consciousness!

[@nickolasgaspar9660]

Neuroscience studies properties of the brain...not mathematics.

[@gerardoquirogagoode8152]

we can think of cells as little souls .... so cells are field perturbations that manifest physically but their core is beyond the physical .... the physical body may die but they don't die ... same with all organisms

[@JRichardson711]

I like where you’re going in a broad context but did you suggest cells don’t die when the body dies?

[@lawrencemichael663]

One thus comes to the realm of the civil & the uncivil. Say esprit de corps and state of nature of Thomas Hobbes. The two change the very dynamics of the discussion (unless you prefer the term debate) because the reality dynamics are changed as well. Rest, within the civil, we do away with the words of natural selection/evolution. Games and competitions. Now check the uncivil (basic might is right as ostensibly applicable to Hobbes' State of Nature). It never gets to compete but gets to struggle & fight (often barely managing to wipe its bumhole after excreting). The semantics are crucial. Because the realities are. Analogies often can not only be misunderstood but also misapplied. Bringing us to back to the critical civil-uncivil neccesary divide. ✓ Or the normal, acceptable & the desirable! How do we physically survive in our day to day lives (counting the penal or penalties/penible out as well as garbage dump places)? Around the three conditions. Intriguing because the discussion takes the whole analogy and imaginations outside precisely those basics - of human existence.

[@bryanconron9142]

100%

[@felixvandriem1515]

The advertising during this discussion is extremely annoying.

[@pierrebernard5922]

Can humans survives that is the 1 trillion $ questions?????

[@gofai274]

25:30 i don't know how you sell this to unit 731 victims, or neuralink victims....

[@Canonimus]

Wishful thinking… nice. Until we do not have a concrete definition of conciousness this seems more like mysticism than science; back to Marie Curie and company

[@Mandibil]

Competition? There is also parasitism based on threat of murder ... for instance by academics hiding under the skirts of the state, being paid for not pointing out its parasitic nature !

[@nesssayahvibes7078]

☯️🙏🏽🕉

[@repton007]

Flagged

[@budweiser600]

Literally 10%, is telling us we've evolved to see only a reality that allows us to reproduce and not see real reality, and the other 90% is how great his theory is. While the click bate is what answers he might have as to true reality. But there are never any.

[@lookmagazine2667]

Hoffman seems half way there but his slightly maniacal spacetime-bending consciousness technology ideas seem WAAAAAY off and completely misguided to me.....I would have loved to have heard Bernardo's thoughts on this.

[@fourshore502]

the cells commit hairy gary? lol

[@MrM970]

So many holes so little time....

[@mrbwatson8081]

I know another candy 🍬😋you guys need to try, it's fun it's terrifying at the same time and you will be forced to "let go"...... DMT.

[@maxwelldillon4805]

Not to discourage pushing the envelope, but I seriously doubt consciousness is fundamental. That's just my naïve guess though, by all means explore the possibility. Also, the idea of emergent spacetime seems to be rapidly increasing in popularity.

[@plafar7887]

Ok, but what's the alternative? Consciousness emerging spontaneously from "God knows where", if you have some magical configuration of matter? It seems much more implausible.

[@mrroberts9230]

@Simone De Filippo so what’s the point of saying that if no one is aware of it?

[@citizenschallengeYT]

@@plafar7887 Why does that seem implausible? Have you spent any serious time learning about Earth's pageant of evolution? The evidence for emergent consciousness infuses the entire process. The answer are to be found within learning about Earth's Evolution and not in coddling our amazing imaginative minds. Anyone here ever hear about the 'Physical Reality ~ Human Mindscape divide'? Might be a good place to start reassessing our ego driven mental dynamics and the assumptions we hold as dear as a child's teddy bear.

[@citizenschallengeYT]

@Simone De Filippo After death you only have the big sleep because your consciousness is an emergent product of your body, when that dies, so too does your consciousness. Why is that so difficult to appreciate?

[@citizenschallengeYT]

@Simone De Filippo Well, okay, that explains why his stuff makes sense to you. Happy Trails.

[@uvi6344]

Hermeticism. Donald Hoffman is a western Hermeticist and possibly a Martinist

[@Sambasue]

Mind trying to come up with a science congruent with what is understood by a knowing other than mind.

[@RSEFX]

DONALD HOFFMAN always taking stabs at the scientific body....and he sorta looks a little like Norman Bates...m'thinks that be kind of appropriate!!

[@gofai274]

Yeah gay prisoner dillemma whole life is coinflipp

[@l.rongardner2150]

What a hubris-bloated JOKE! No one can possibly find a mathematical model of consciousness. Mathematics, by definition, is the science of measurement, and all that can be measured is that which has been measured out from the Immeasurable, Consciousness Itself. So, it is impossible to measure the Immeasurable, thereby making a mathematical model of Consciousness an impossibility.