Consciousness and Cosmic Purpose | Philip Goff on the Fine-Tuning of the Universe and Panpsychism

Is the apparent fine-tuning of the universe evidence of cosmic purpose? In this episode of Waking Cosmos I'm joined by philosopher Philip Goff. We discuss his theory that cosmic fine-tuning is evidence of a purpose-driven conscious universe that is compelled to create life. We also explore his views on panpsychism, cosmopsychism, God, the multiverse and other themes from his new book, "Why? The Purpose of the Universe."
Please consider supporting open-minded philosophy by subscribing to my Patreon page: / wakingcosmos
Philip Goff's website: philipgoffphilosophy.com/
CHAPTERS:
00:00 Introduction
03:00 The Hard Problem of Consciousness
05:28 The Rise of Panpsychism
21:14 Cosmopsychism / Cosmic Mind
27:30 Fine-Tuning and Purpose
35:05 Fine-Tuning and the Multiverse
47:59 The Value-Driven Universe
54:13 The Mystery of Existence
58:00 Suffering and the Problem of Evil
1:09:31 A New Philosophical Spirituality?

[@metaRising]

I'm very curious to hear what you all think about fine-tuning. It certainly seems to require explanation, but I'm very open-minded about what that explanation might be.

[@Boris29311]

When I watched Stephen Hawkings on Discovery Channel I switched from assuming the Universe is a coincidence to assuming an intelligent design.

[@metaRising]

@@Boris29311 Why was that?

[@Boris29311]

​@@metaRisingThis change was caused by gaining knowledge over the evolution of the Universe I remember one time hearing strange echoing noises when I watched A friend of mine told me this can happen and when it does you don't need to watch it anymore. Your subconscious worldview has changed into assuming there's a creator This is like a feeling Strenght of feeling = knowledge + experience + intelligence.

[@flower35756]

@metaRising I enjoyed the interview greatly, thank you. Regarding the fine tuning argument, I don't necessarily understand why the attention is brought to the fine-tuning of constants in physical equations, rather than the physical laws themselves. In my opinion the laws as a whole are quite a miraculous on their own already. The whole complexity of general relativity and quantum mechanics combined together is quite astonishing. And even then, we know that they are not the complete description of reality which remains elusive. Thus, not just the constants in the equations, but the equations themselves are quite shocking. Why do they exist in the shape and form they exist and was there really a choice of making them different, rather than "tuning" the constants?

[@counterdebate]

I don't think we can ever explain the reason behind fine tuning being what it is tuned at while inside the system, what I find interesting is that this tuning is "being kept" in place and hasn't changed

[@Wesinhuman]

Been anticipating this! Wooo!

[@metaRising]

I hope you find it interesting!

[@con.k]

such a great conversation, really enjoyed it

[@metaRising]

Glad you enjoyed it!

[@DarwinianUniversal]

These guys have great deduction. A grade discussion. Its frustratingly difficult to find somebody able and willing to talk about the complexity problem and fine-tuning problem. The whole issue seams invisible to most people. They dont recognise it fr what it is, very interesting and a massive challenge to conventional cosmology

[@metaRising]

Thanks!

[@DarwinianUniversal]

​@@metaRising You dont see the potentual in my idea? Are you ignoring me? That nature has a tendency to find and exploit energy potentials with novel circumstances of Darwinian emergence. This being demonstrated by every organism that has ever existed, and that this tendency might also extend to the energy fields that make the material world, atoms and cosmology. Biological activity is a product of captured environmental energy. Imagine atomic activity being analogous, a product of energy captured from the void of space. And that the complexity and fine-tuning of atomic structures and process are evolved on the basis of doing so efficiently. Same as biology and explaining the striking structural similarity between cellular biology and atomic physics. Units comprised of a nucleus shrouded within shells with the capacity to bond with each other and build composite bodies. Nested intricate complexity, fine-tuning and high levels of order and interactivity. Does a system like this sound like the result of a random creation event? Crime scene detectives, by profiling a crime scene can profile the perpetrator. One of the key characteristics is, is the crime scene orderly or disorderly? If the crime scene is highly ordered and or sophisticated in some ways, then the evidence indicates it was not a spontaneous random act. Cellular biology and atomic physics fit the same profile of order and sophistication, and in fact they are the same structural theme to a large extent, and same descriptive words apply to both systems across the board. You wont discuss the possibility that these similarities might indicate the same perpetrator? How can these arguments be considered poor? What am I nieve too?

[@DarwinianUniversal]

@@metaRising You cant see it?

[@realcygnus]

Back on the scene ! 💪

[@metaRising]

Hope you enjoy this one :)

[@realcygnus]

@@metaRising Of course, interesting stuff as always. I tend to lean towards straight up Idealism but IMO fine tuning is still a hell of an issue for all reasonable positions currently on the table. & its just best to keep up with every idea floating around out there regardless. & I always admired Goff's enthusiasm anyway.

[@Kuchtic93]

HolyF, can't Wait till i get home And meditate on this episode (:

[@metaRising]

Thanks!

[@user-mi5cm1cm2z]

That and...let it play while I sleep so the other type of listening/understanding without over thinking can perk away. This onion has many sweet layers and levels. 😊

[@garetcrossman6626]

Philip's voice is one of the happiest I'm aware of.

[@SamiKotiranta]

Absolutely fascinating!!!

[@metaRising]

Thank you Sami!

[@spiritfilled5758]

Love you work

[@metaRising]

Thank you very much!

[@user-sb9ml1ef4q]

this was amazing

[@metaRising]

Thank you! Glad you enjoyed it.

[@networkimprov]

I love your work Adrian! IMO, it's past time for academic philosophers to begin wrestling with what we've learned about non-physical conscious experience, apparent in phenomena like NDEs, savant syndrome, childhood past-life cases, psi abilities, OBE, etc. These have been studied for decades by professional scientists.

[@keithmetcalf5548]

Meta Rising, You Rock! 🤘

[@metaRising]

You Rock!!

[@smlanka4u]

The smallest moment of consciousness is called Chittakhana (Citta/mind-moment) in Pali.

[@realcygnus]

like an unmodulated carrier wave

[@metaRising]

I didn't know that!

[@alexgonzo5508]

Interesting.. that implies that consciousness is quantized like a "Planck unit". Perhaps one moment of consciousness is equal to one instance of interaction between two parts or units, since the word "consciousness" which etymologically means "knowing together" implies a minimum of two things working together in order to know either themselves or something apart from both, which further implies that consciousness is perhaps not possible in a state of perfect singular unity, but must by necessity be differentiated into parts that can interact in some deterministic way (since an indeterministic way would yield chaos and thus no knowledge or possibility of knowing). One fundamental thing with no parts can not be conscious of itself or anything else until the presence of another affords the opportunity and ability for reflection. The more parts working together, the more complex and expanded the consciousness becomes.

[@smlanka4u]

@@metaRising, It is well explained in the Rupa (Matter) Chapter in the fundamentals of Theravada.

[@smlanka4u]

@@alexgonzo5508, The Citta/mind is an output of the touch between the six sense faculties and the objects they receive. They make Cittaja Rupa (mind-born matter).

[@JimKrause1975]

I love this content!

[@metaRising]

Thank you very much!

[@handsomeTez]

Fascinating! The idea of our consciousness being made up from not just conscious particles but actual fields of consciousness as a result of all particles having consciousness not only makes an interesting argument from a point of view of tying all the elements of what consciousness is together - could give some credence to psychics or a 6th sense, like knowing how someone else is feeling because of a bleed of consciousness through these particles that make up this tapestry we are part of and tap into. I'm probably talking mince or confused. But regardless, interesting video, buddy, good to hear you again. Hope you're well.

[@metaRising]

Thanks for sharing these interesting thoughts mate. If telepathy exists, this could well be how it occurs! I'm doing ok thanks :) Glad you enjoyed the conversation!

[@herminepursch2470]

​@@metaRisingI believe IT does

[@vogelofficial]

This was fantastic.

[@metaRising]

Thank you!

[@AquariusGate]

Philip begins with a conceptual reification. To say tiredness and hunger are part of what it's like to be you, is not the same as saying they are sensations you're experiencing. You, in Philips phrase, is being reified by the substance of thought. It's a difference of seeing self, more as a transmission, or more something in transit. The expression is undeniable, the substantial view is disputable.

[@rerango3760]

Thank you so much for your excellent podcast! This particular podcast has verbalized, and in a good way, contributed to underpin my own fundamental beliefs around the big WHY question. And youdid it from the viewpoint of science! Great! Now my minds unfinished canvas looks more like the outline of a picture of reality. If that picture is false or correct is a matter of where you stand when its viewed, and that is absolutely fine with me! My angst around the meaning of it all, is way down :)...and i have quit saying 42 when someone engages me in those kind of deep thoughts. Thank you again..Jan

[@metaRising]

Thank you! I'm glad you found it interesting :)

[@herminepursch2470]

I'm not a scientist but I like to learn

[@majikwon7496]

Well, we certainly cannot pose a theory without a conscious observer to confirm it. That would be the definition of unfalsifiable. Theory is a construct of the society of scientists.

[@Frederer59]

The answer to why we suffer: freedom is better than safety.

[@kristinmeyer489]

If the pretext was that transhumanism would improve people, and decades later, the evidence proves only that absolute power corrupts absolutely, then its time to admit those who implemented these programs as INVOLUNTARY knew in advance what their goals were, and that they weren't nearly as benign as stated in secret shadows.

[@metaRising]

I'm not sure I follow.

[@counterdebate]

The Transhumanism "pretext" is what allowes "you/me" to use a phone/tablet/PC to communicate with other people we would have never been able to interact with in the past but now we can in seconds! Next The idea that absolute power corrupts humans isn't something that just happened in the last few decades because we are trying to improve the abilities of the masses... If anything the "power" of Past kings /dictators /warlords / pharaohs / colonist, .etc... Was much more and has gone down compared to the past when they had more unabated power and abused it more I don't get how you connect those things though.... 🤷🏻‍♂️

[@flower35756]

Thank you very much for the interview! Philip's ideas are indeed quite fascinating and are an interesting mental exercise. I'm wondering what are the implications of his approach. Is it possible to make any kind predictions based on this theory? Is the theory falsifiable in principle? Is it possible to make any kind of further conclusions from there or does it intend to be an interesting possible interpretation of reality, a way of thinking, which is never meant to be proven or disproven

[@e-t-y237]

Self-expression is the value and the purpose, imo. For everything: the universe and everything in it. And that is the foundation of the sacred, the spiritual. We are a subset of the universe and have the same purpose: self-expression/self-realization. So in order to be aligned with nature, the goal, the purpose and the meaning is self-expression/self-realization.

[@RhoArtMagic]

Light as non-temporal consciousness, seems to me to be the basis of consciousness since time is a relative illusion.

[@chyfields]

We only encounter the experiences that we programme into manifestation. Like a computer programme, garbage in, garbage out. Create stories without suffering. So, for example, a global population is perfectly able to take action to minimise the suffering in the world. This is within our gift.

[@WombatVengeance-sz7kx]

What is the precise meaning of value in the context of these videos? They are all very good, by the way.

[@e-t-y237]

How about the various constants and forces interacting with each other, evolving themselves into a combination that "works." One could be different, the others would adjust to that ... and an infinite combination of forces and laws would "work." Also, we have no clear inkling of possible various forms of "life" which could clearly exist under radically different conditions. As for teleology, I do assign to an underlying purpose and expression, with the universe in toto being similar to all its parts in that self-expression is the goal.

[@e-t-y237]

Consciousness is a radical influence on behavior and thus on survival. IT IS a mechanism of survival ... and the best one. You have to feel your state to survive. And that's experience. That's proto-consciousness. For instance if I am hungry but don't know it, I won't survive; if I have a fever and don't know it, I won't survive; if I am freezing to death but can't feel it, I won't survive; if we need to reproduce to survive but can't feel a sex drive, it ain't happening. The easiest way to solve all this is experience, which later evolves into more elaborate forms, i.e. consciousness.

[@doctorcrankyflaps1724]

The idea that there's multiple versions of myself in an endless Universe just feels ridiculous to me.

[@christiangodin5147]

Bonjour, il n'y a aucun "fine tuning" si cela était autrement, nous ne serions pas là à en parler. Nous sommes adaptés à ces valeurs et pas l'inverse, c'est évident.

[@user-xe8ii4pe1d]

Read "First Letter to the Apostate" by William Taciturnus

[@alexanderedwards6811]

I don't agree with the whole simple vs complex expressions of consciousness. If you said simple vs complex expressions of matter then yes, I agree. The consciousness in a snail or a human is indistinguishable, but these expressions as matter are not, clearly. Consciousness cannot be labeled as simple or complex. It just is. Consciousness refracts through and permeates everything and nothing. When consciousness refracts and permeates into a fairly complex expression of matter such as a human, this can give rise to the phenomenon we call awareness, or self-awareness. This is the difference between consciousness, that which is universal and fundamental...and awareness, that which sometimes arises within complex matter giving a localised experience of consciousness. Its not obvious what other animals experience but since consciousness is indistinguishable in all things animate and inanimate we must be open to the possibility that even the most basic expressions of matter could be having a similar lucid experience as we are or perhaps even be way more in tune with the nature of consciousness. I believe only through becoming more simple can we come to experience consciousness outside of our messy and overinflated perspectives. We have a strong belief that our localised experience is, what we are, as the illusion is so powerful. This is actually a simple experiential reality anyone can have if one is curious enough to look behind the curtains of the contents of ones consciousness.

[@smlanka4u]

Dark Energy is a result of moving space inside and outside the observable universe, and large Black Holes absorb the matter in space, and cause expanding the universe.

[@metaRising]

Is this your theory?

[@smlanka4u]

@@metaRising, Yes. But a scientific paper confirmed that Black Holes cause Dark Energy while they grow. Dark Energy is a misleading concept.

[@bradsmith9189]

The fine tuning proves design God is the designer It really is just that simple.

[@boonraypipatchol7295]

Quantum information, Quantum entanglement, Are, fundamental, underlying of Reality. Quantum Mind emerge, Quantum Body emerge, Mind and Body entanglement.. Consciousness emerge. Spacetime emerge, Mathematics Emerge, Holographic principal.

[@garyroberts5452]

Of course there is more dis-value (as he put it) than there is value. We must fend off discomfort, pain, and suffering, where as we have to chase after comfort, pleasure, and happiness. That means suffering is the default. If you do not seek food and shelter you are going to be very uncomfortable, so doing nothing defaults to the negative side of the coin, and that means the negative outweighs the positive. Likewise nature does everything in its power to make sure you arrive in this world, but once you are here it does everything it can to kill you off. That is natural selection. The vast majority of the energy it directed towards killing you off. Do nothing to survive and nature will take you out, it will not keep you alive all by itself. It requires energy to acquire the positive, where as it takes no energy to encounter the negative, it comes our way without any effort at all. So theory disqualified if that is how he breaks it down. You could also break this down as a question of balance, is there enough happiness in this world to make enduring the suffering worth while. I say no, I think the negative far outweighs the positive for the very same reason I outlined above. Now one might try to make the argument for the idea we take the positive for granted, but that just isn't true. We only expect the positive because we put so much energy into attempting the acquisition of it it, and even then after we put all that energy into seeking the positive I would suggest the negative still outweighs it. It seems we are fighting a losing battle chasing happiness and avoiding the pain and suffering. The universe seems to be designed for entropy, and that means it is designed for being more bad than good. Again it takes energy to fend off the entropy which makes it the default.

[@DarwinianUniversal]

Atomic physics is a result of Darwinian evolution. The material universe "atoms" are made of energy fields. But here's a question to pose. Why do these energy fields conspire to create a system of intricate complex units that share the same structural theme as cellular biology? That is to say, a system of units comprised of a nucleus shrouded within shells, and the capacity to bond with each other and build composite bodies? This depicts atomic physics just as readily as it depicts cellular biology. So here's another question to pose. Knowing how cellular biology achieved this system theme, what are the odds that universal physics would mirror it by random chance? Cellular biology achieved this structural theme while evolving over billions of years, while optimizing itself for efficient energy capture. Like plants evolved to capture sunlight to power its internal biochemisty. Every organism requires an external energy source to power its biological activity and it evolves to efficiently capture that energy. The same is true of atomic physics General Relativity depicts spacetime geometry "as it relates to atomic activity" as being curved in and around gravitating bodies. The key to unlocking the correct universal context is realizing that space possesses an environmental energy field, and atomic energy fields have evolved their intricate and complex structures and processes to efficiently capture it. This is what is really happening. Nature only has one means/process of generating highly complex interactive systems, and we have a precedence "cellular biology" whereby it generated precisely the same structural theme as atomic physics. Criminal detectives pray for evidence as straightforward as this, close correlation and striking likeness. Problem is science already thinks it has the answers and isn't interested in listening to anything new. To fathom this theme I suggest focusing on biological activity as being analogous to atomic activity. Both are products of work that depend upon an environmental energy that the system need capture.

[@alexisboulerice-turcotte1295]

Very interesting idea TBH.

[@DarwinianUniversal]

@@alexisboulerice-turcotte1295 Atomic units, physics had to rise to an extraordinary level of complexity and sophistication before biology could make such spectacular use of it. The ability for atoms to serve as the building blocks of biology shows how special atoms are. A strong theme in the Darwinian systems we know about "every organism" is their dependency on an external energy source. This is a big clue. Assume that is the nature of the relationship between space and matter. That atomic activity/force is a product of an energy that is captured from space? What kind of universe would this conceivably look like? Its amazing, it fits, its the answer that has eluded everybody

[@DarwinianUniversal]

@@alexisboulerice-turcotte1295 I have a lot more to say on the subject than merely this

[@DarwinianUniversal]

@@alexisboulerice-turcotte1295 Here is some further material on the subject Interdependencies are a common theme in nature, whereby a relationship between two or more parties, where each party depends on the others to achieve a common goal or outcome. The parties involved are interconnected and rely on each other in some way. An example is the properties of a biological cell, that possesses the agency to construct a multicellular animal. The cell is uniquely optimized for purpose within the body’s collective, through the process of Darwinian evolution. These types of mutual dependencies span every aspect of biology, from the relationship between a cell and its internal organs. Or cells that make up a multicellular body. Or social behaviours that evolved in animals like ants, bees, mammals, and even human societies. They are all examples of relationships between two or more parties, where each party depends on the others to achieve a common goal or outcome. The distinction of importance is that the collective does not possess any agency of its own, but rather the agency resides in the individual sub-units. It is the individual agency of a bee, that manifests as a society. The collective behaviour is the sum of the bee’s individual agencies. These types of mutual dependencies are traits typical of a Darwinian system. Knowing how they arise in Darwinian evolution, for them to arise by chance would seem to defy great odds. But regardless, this same theme is pervasive throughout every aspect of physics and cosmology. Atomic physics is a system of many layers of structures, quarks, and gluons that form protons and neutrons, that capture electrons that bond atoms to build molecules via exquisite chemical interactions. Each of these interactions possess the quality we are discussing. A relationship between two or more parties, where each party depends on the others to achieve a common goal or outcome. Like ability to form collective bonds. Atomic mass is an atomic property, that is responsible for the formation of cosmological bodies. It can be said that planets, stars, galaxies, and galaxy groups are a result of an agency that resides in the atom. Atomic fusion sensitivity is suited to the environment within stars, that it generates just enough heat and internal pressure to counterbalance the crushing force of gravity. Again, a cosmological body dependence upon a finely tuned parameter that is an atomic agency. Why should the atom care anything about cosmological scales? But nonetheless, it contributes finely tuned processes and agencies indispensable to stellar function. These are not isolated examples. In fact almost every conceivable thing of interest that happens in the macroscopic universe arises from atomic agency. Including biology which showcases how special atoms are, by demonstrating biochemical potentials. How did atoms come to possess such useful and meaningful interactive properties? If a theory of cosmological origin has nothing to say about these aspects of the world, then it necessarily takes a great deal of detail for granted. The challenge is that these types of inter dependencies are inexplicable within context of the standard model, because they defy great odds of occurring by chance. However, they are standard features within Darwinian systems. Given this, will the science community consider the possibility that these traits may be a fingerprint of sorts, an identifier for possible Darwinian origins?

[@DarwinianUniversal]

@@alexisboulerice-turcotte1295 Metarising doesnt like my idea. He gives a love heart to everything else

[@kevincrady2831]

One issue with the notion of the Cosmos being fine-tuned "for life" is that its physics only _just barely_ permits life to exist. The vast, vast, vaaaaaaast majority of the Cosmos is vacuum awash in hard radiation. Of the "stuff" that exists within that vacuum--stars, planets, asteroids, comets, ice particles, dust, gas, etc., nearly all of _that_ is also utterly sterile and inhospitable to life. So far as we can tell so far, life only exists on part of the surface of this one tiny little mote of dust in an inconceivably enormous cosmic desert. It's possible that there could be some struggling microbes on Mars and perhaps other places in the Solar System, and subsurface oceans on worlds like Europa might host life. And of course, there could be life in other solar systems that we cannot yet detect. However, even taking that into account, the percentage of the Cosmos that is potentially hospitable for life utterly vanishes in comparison to the percentage that is not. The ratio gets even _worse_ if we're talking about complex multicellular life that might give rise to high consciousness able to have "values," or do things like create symphony orchestras and particle accelerators. Furthermore, the barriers to life spreading through the Cosmos are so high that there is no evidence that it has ever happened. We might be like bacteria on a doorknob in the Large Hadron Collider thinking, "Our doorknob-world is perfectly fine-tuned to allow us to exist, so the Great Bacterium must have fine-tuned this place _for us!"_ when in fact the LHC was created by beings utterly incomprehensible to them, for a purpose they couldn't possibly imagine. Beings capable of creating a precisely fine-tuned Cosmos would arguably be able to _optimize_ it to suit its purpose. This Cosmos only just barely permits a tiny amount of life to exist, while virtually all of it is completely uninhabitable. This suggests that if the Cosmos is fine-tuned, it is fine-tuned for some as-yet unknown purpose, and life as we know it is just a trivial side-effect. If the Cosmos was "fine-tuned for life," shouldn't we expect that it would be as verdant as a rain forest or coral reef?

[@metaRising]

It's true that most of the observable universe is completely inhospitable for life, but in terms of the actual values of physics, we live in a profoundly life-friendly universe that unmistakably calls out for explanation, be it through a multiverse or otherwise. The fact that life can initially only exist in tiny regions does not mitigate the mystery of fine-tuning. Intelligent life may well eventually saturate the universe, moulding itself and the universe in profound ways. Either way, size is not the same as significance. Consider your example of the LHC: a vast deliberate structure, the purpose of which is to study the behaviour of infinitesimally small particles.

[@reyplay05]

Completely ignored everything he just said

[@user-cj8fd3el5y]

We should focus a bit more on the point that was only mentioned very briefly i.e. we’ve not evolved enough to be able to comprehend the ‘value’, or the purpose, of the universe. The universe is fine tuned for evolution, our species may, or may not, survive the process. Yet, on other planet/s it will. Then, they’ll know why the universe is not a waste of space. 42 is the meaning of life but what 42 means 😜

[@e-t-y237]

It seems that in the discussion of value versus disvalue the subject got kind of personalized to the human race, as if the effects on it are so important in the universe. Difficulties of the human race would be a factor of about .0000000000000000000000000000000000001% of the universal value. Bad argument it seems that there is more disvalue than value. For who? For what? The whole discussion focused on "the world's disvalue" and the suffering of people on it when posing disvalue as a problem for the value based theory. What about the cosmos, not the little earth? In forming this objection to the value theory, we forgot the cosmos existed and just addressed "the world," or the earth. The discussion just kept conflating what''s happening on earth with the value of THE COSMOS. I mean what percent of the value/disvalue ratio has anything to do with life on earth?

[@brendabeamerford4555]

Free will the name of the universal Game of Life Consciousness the universal aim of Life power 3 Consciousness sets all captives free from all the chains that bind us with knowledge of what is love what is light what is eternal Third Eye Site

[@tomosko2669]

As I am listening to this I see Philip dodging criticism and just clinging to his worldview. Of course we can't infer the multiverse from fine tuning. But multiverse is a real possibility. He says that his hypothesis is more probable. May be may not be. Still all possibilities are possible. And since we don't have enough evidence (or none) then we have withhold belief. And with the particles doing what they feel like doing... I stopped taking him seriously. We know that particles are entirely mathematical. Quantum physics describes them perfectly. I thought that he would say that particles experience a primitive form of consciousness. Not that they do what they want. Particles clearly don't have any capacity to decide. Consciousness doesn't mean a will. Maybe even humans don't have a free will. Maybe we just experience what our bodies do. The same with particles. They may be little flashes of consciousness.

[@metaRising]

Thanks for sharing your thoughts. Philip's views have changed and evolved over the years far more than other philosophers I know. I don't think he clings tightly to his worldview. I thought he responded to some of my doubts very thoughtfully. With respect to Philip's concept of rational matter, he gives a deeper explanation in the book that is more convincing to me than "particles doing what they feel like doing."

[@tomosko2669]

@@metaRising Yes while writing my comment I was thinking that surely what he is saying is just a surface of much deeper thoughts. I don't want to judge. But while listening I sensed quite a big certainty about things that we have almost no idea about how they really work. But I truly appreciate you giving us this conversation. My mind was wondering after some time of a dull life.

[@gazzahowells]

I like Phillip and agree with his views. However his views have chaged somehwat in the last few years. What he now appears to advocating is no different from Bernardo Kastrups analytic idealism and renaming it panpsychism. I think he should, at the very least, be honest about this.

[@PatrickRyan147]

🇮🇪 Philip might need to rewrite his book considering the latest theories. The apparent 'miraculous' fine-tuning of our constants for life supports the holodeck theory. This theory proposes that all of our reality is contained within a holodeck complex super-structure and in such a scenario the constants would not have been organically fine-tuned. They would have been manually fine-tuned - no need for 'miracles'..

[@metaRising]

I'm not familiar with the "holodeck theory." Is it new?

[@PatrickRyan147]

​@@metaRising Brand new.. there's nothing online about it yet.. the only information about the theory is in an Amazon Kindle book/download: How I discovered the true nature of reality by Patrick J. Ryan. Or I could just send it to you as a PDF. My email address is in the About section of my KZbin channel 🙏

[@PatrickRyan147]

​​@@metaRisingYou're interested in exploring "the nature of consciousness and its place in reality"? The holodeck theory gives very clear answers about that. We are two in one: body and consciousness/soul (same thing). The consciousness is probably (the following is obviously difficult to verify) holographically projected onto each body in a person's reincarnations journey. Btw, yes, real matter can be described as a hologram if it can be projected and reprojected. We could be described as evolved holograms. Our reality would therefore be a sub-reality of an incredibly advanced main reality. The holodeck complex would be the end of life (afterlife )(eternal) solution for 'people' in the main reality; more advanced and more enjoyable than a computer simulation.. because it's real.. If you ask nicely, I'll send you a PDF version🙂 My email address is in the About section of my KZbin channel 🙏

[@counterdebate]

If "they" are "manually fine tuned" then that is a miracle (outside cause and effect)

[@PatrickRyan147]

@@counterdebate No offence.. but since when is pressing buttons on a computer considered a miracle?

[@jayjames7055]

v soundly argued imo

[@phelan5387]

Nothing can exist without a consciousness attached to it. Consciousness and the nature of transcendental awareness cannot be proven by scientific proof or demonstration. When we get up everyday, we operate in the subject - object manifold of consciousness. All objects exist as tensions.

[@nicholasarrow2443]

"Nothing can exist without a consciousness attached to it." Evidence for that assertion?

[@phelan5387]

@@nicholasarrow2443 Beyond scientific, empirical demonstration or proof.

[@user-mi5cm1cm2z]

About the animal kingdom? Remove humans and their idea of consciousness. I live in a remote/isolated area where I am able to observe interplay in the animal kingdom. Someday, perhaps I'll be able to express their expressions of consciousness for them. Add to that, how they function/ act and react within the cosmos. It is not pure animal/hormonal reaction. They are more tapped into the great unknown power than humans. I'd say this is just my own opinion but if we are finally admitting to the connectedness...there lays the logic. I've also come to a place in this journey...it doesn't matter in the end. It is what it is. Man asks 'why' too much. Then again, if we didn't ask why, we can be religious but not always spiritual. Animals are spiritual without religions. Let's not forget stones,crystals,plants,water,the stuff in the air we cannot see. Harmony is my 'churc' and my science. 😊

[@Anna_Fortunka]

while I'm leaning to spiritual, I think that fine tuning backs up multiverse interpretation of quantum physics very neatly.

[@jared_r]

1. Consciousness doesn’t seem like it’s on a spectrum from simple to complex. How conscious someone is can be on a spectrum, like i’m only half conscious this morning until i get coffee. 2. My intuition is that our minds are like a holographic mandlebrot set and hence there is no point that is really “fundamental.” 3. Dark matter/energy does not exist. I see no republicans to think a multiverse exist either.

[@petercombs4119]

Saying we live in world of more disvalue than value because of Jurassic Park Darwinism ? is to forget the billions of years sitting on a lily pad. And to blame scientists for leaving out consciousness, is to forget the pope burned those who did at the stake.

[@mindhappy912]

test

[@nonordinaryreality2686]

Did they finally find dark energy then? Whatever next....man will walk on the moon 🤯😉

[@metaRising]

Huh? lol

[@jared_r]

@@metaRisingi’ll pay you a billion dollars if you can show me just one example of dark matter.

[@metaRising]

@@jared_r How did you make your billions?

[@jared_r]

street preachin. But id give it all away for one piece of dark matter....@@metaRising

[@counterdebate]

It's all a simulation and God is the programmer, the purpose is quality control

[@counterdebate]

@@TheScienmystic thank you

[@stussysinglet]

i feel like if their is a God and life is a simulation it would be for God to experience the myriad of experiences instead of just doing nothing for all eternity.. this includes not being alone and having different relationships..

[@y5mgisi]

I think this sometimes. Especially with maybe that's what they mean in the Bible where they say, in the beginning was the word, and the word was with God, and the word was god. Like, could that mean god was programmer and the word was the code? Probably not, but maybe.

[@Jareers-ef8hp]

Why must you describe it in such a cold and mechanistic way?

[@counterdebate]

​​​@@stussysingletwhat makes you think God is "doing nothing".... I feel you're looking at it from the human side of things...maybe we are not that important as we would like to think. Maybe God has got much better stuff to do then what you or I think is a good way of spending time. And what makes you think God is "inside" time... I would have though God needs to be outside time to start with to make us and the system we are inside 🤷🏻‍♂️

[@michaelgrapka9377]

We are the Gods of AI,,, we created the computers, programs, infrastructure,and we watch it do computations from a distance. It may at some point in the future start this whole process over again without our help. How is this so different from our God / creator of everything , who stays outside of time and space, material. receives our consciousness so he/she can look at his/ her creation from infinite perspectives of good, bad, beautiful, ugly, the opposites of whatever you can think of with our limited brains. Our physical body/brains are nothing more than a bag of (Rocks) minerals, water, which is 99.9999% of empty space. Try to even understand the complexity of the machinery that’s involved inside a single human cell that has to come together as a complete working unit in a hostile environment. I am ok with the multi verse, ufo’s , uap’s why would anyone put a limit on a creator that created everything we live in,, it would never be a boring existence if we could choose to take our consciousness to different realities with different physics that we could never comprehend from this perspective. It’s all created from Consciousness! Thank You!

[@user-lu9hq6jv4v]

God said Nietzsche is dead!

[@metaRising]

Nietzsche is indeed dead

[@Jareers-ef8hp]

@@metaRisingNietzsche is BASED, but God is not dead aswell

[@kevinsayes]

Still don’t think it’s fine tuned for us. It’s tuned how it’s tuned and we’re just something that’s is allowed by that tuning. A different tuning would have a whole new infinite set of things that would be possible in it. Just no. I’m sorry but this guy is full of shit. Present some evidence other than “well it seems this way so that’s enough”. And that sniper analogy was horrible. I’m out universe there are ONLY winning numbers on the wheel it’s not miraculous

[@projectbirdfeederman5491]

Meh, it's probably just a "loosh" farm.

[@dadsonworldwide3238]

I love your work but I'm gonna be blunt, your still using the chaldean Babylonian mindset with Eastern twist. Newton uses it to make his assumptions but is very clear about the tools of approximation used on such a paradoxical world around us. Fine tuning checklist does identify these assumptions that carbon based life has a premium place on the hierarchy value of physical objects as your bases. Chaldean prescriptions or sir bacons formula assumes the universe is god ,math & time is his actual fingertips woven magically into the universe. This is a very different notion to inspired by God man made math and tools of approximation like the alphabetical exodus language models or placing arbitrary value on object . Man made math & time inspired by God. Or God's fingerPRiNTS are left over in the creation itself. Your following the exact same promatic formulated line of thought trying to accommodate evolutionary mythology and all this map making tools of assumption

[@dadsonworldwide3238]

I'm all for mapping free will probability outward even if the brick wall hits classical newtonian statistical anylitics. As if that the environmental wall from inside human non locality.. Its ok if it unify the chaldean simple mind set map inside but that is 1 archetypical mind seeded with a very limited experience and view of the world . 1 of many maps it just happens to be the easiest and why its orgin is in Babylonian pagan minds.

[@dadsonworldwide3238]

This essentially give physicalism exactly what they want in the end. It would trap us all back in Platos cave of mystified shadows . Yes its a political analogy he uses but leaves the main intellectual property of free will refugee open. He leave the concensus in the cave of chaldean minds behind and seek his own lifes end in the real world by default eventually when he doesn't return those 2 tied up in the cave will once again know he isn't coming back and through his actions or your actions they to can wake up to the free will world experience. Human non local experience does not have to match all of physical oneness objects in universe. It can be in life alone walled off it has all the room in anylitical probability to work in.

[@dadsonworldwide3238]

ID argue that the only thing stopping physicalist from unification of the tripartite nature of man is because it would be plagiarizing Jesus christ salvation. And I know some do want to claim thats Greek therefore we should ignore it lay the math on the mind anyways. Thats not us or our free will probabilistic experiences. Thats a roadblock thats likely saving us from bad decision making

[@lynnvener6631]

Your so wrong......