Consciousness: Not just a problem for philosophers | Dispatches from The Well Ep. 5

[@VivekaVani]

12:14 Swami Sarvapriyananda🙏🙏🙏

[@papitosan131]

Sg😢

[@muckaxe]

So wonderful to see Swamiji teaching in beautiful Central Park, such an intimate conversation with the guru🙏

[@ds86496]

only for swami sarvapriyanandaji maharaj🙏🙏 one of the greastest preachers of advaita vedanta philosophy in modern times..

[@singhmaster4]

😂😂 Greatest preacher of Hinduism who has yet to figure out that worshipping cow rats monkeys and penis if SHIV God called Shivling is not searching for consciousness. That's 100% the opposite of using an ounce of logic in your brain and enslaving your mind.

[@singhmaster4]

😂😂 Only if this great Hindu preacher knew that worshipping cows, rats, monkeys, and penis of Shiv called Shivling is 100% opposite of using your conscious mind. It is called enslaving your mind and not using an ounce of logic in any way, shape, or form. 😂😂😂

[@OfficialGOD]

swami sarvapriyananda!! ❤❤

[@The-Well]

He's incredible! 💡❤

[@Rsslbaker1]

This was a breath of fresh air.... thoroughly enjoyed this journey...excellently conceived and executed. thank you @The Well. i believe spirituality and science will eventually converge.

[@The-Well]

Thank you for your kindness and your time ❤

[@torvalm]

Best episode yet Kmele, thanks for bringing Godel, Escher Bach and The Emperor’s New Mind into the conversation. What a pleasure to watch.

[@UncleDavid]

have you ever noticed that the act of noticing something gives the thing you’re observing-whether it’s a thought, object, aspect or XYZ-the experience of being in your frame of perception

[@furrystep]

Check out the work of Rupert Sheldrake

[@roxannee8316]

Consciousness is a state where we can be aware on all of the levels although it takes some fine tuning and wisdom. You no longer have to think, you be, you can just be but be fully; awake and aware with all of your senses alight. To be truly alive, many peoole never experience it because we are distracted with the daily mundane.

[@michaelodriscoll]

Is that not " Awareness " one's Natural Meditative Stateless State, an Empty mind, simply Observing, Listening Attentively to what is. Awareness is prior to Consciousness. Know Thyself, Self Knowledge via Self Inquiry without seeking Answers is the key to Freedom, eternal peace, Now. Looking Inwardly, unencumbered, Critical Thinking,,, Namaste 🙏

[@MicahScottPnD]

What a blessing to find this batch of dispatches this morning! Such good stuff ❤

[@The-Well]

And what an honor to see your comment! Thanks for watching! ❤

[@MicahScottPnD]

@@The-Well Recently, i was reminded of the notion of watching an accident, how one can't look away. These dispatches have that quality but for the _entirely opposite_ reason -- the antithesis of "disaster"!

[@AndreaIrene]

I wish Alan Watts could hear about this. I learned this idea from his lectures years ago. So cool to see some movement and interest in studying this more.

[@SS-hp9tg]

Great video, thanks!! There is so much depth to be explored here that it needs a separate session with each of your wonderful guests.

[@The-Well]

We're so glad you enjoyed it! Thank you for being here!

[@bretnetherton9273]

Awareness is known by awareness alone.

[@markloessi5799]

Another superb offering from The Well! Thanks Kmele and Team

[@SublimeSynth]

this is the kid of stuff that inspires the next great minds, good job.

[@The-Well]

This is such a kind thing to say. Thank you so much.

[@rajkumarrathor2481]

i am feeling consciously conscious about my own consciousness.

[@The-Well]

How conscious of you! 🧠💡

[@mariafernandesaraujo7813]

I discover you and my wisdom grow ✨️ thank you I am curious like your work show me you are so with your power I feel so lucky ❤

[@elmoteroloco]

I'm very happy to see Sir Penrose in the doc!! I really like some of his theories and he offers several interesting (IMHO) perspectives on cosmological cycles and other unusual matters... I really liked the deep clarity brought by a panel of guests of exceptional quality, I mean: Christof Koch, Swami Sarvapriyananda, Reid Hoffman, Melanie Mitchell... a really rich body of knowledge to investigate on The Hard Problem of Consciousness. As a first impression, I am happy with what I have seen, I hope to eventually be able to give another, more detailed, view on this. Thank you very much to you and your team!!!

[@The-Well]

Thanks for sharing such a thoughtful response! Even we had to give this one a few watches before it sunk in, and we still have questions! We suppose that's a side effect of so many brilliant minds in one episode!

[@elmoteroloco]

​@@The-Well You know, there is a reason why the "hard problem of consciousness" is called "hard", in fact, it is a work in progress... Counterintuitively, the advent of AI as a possible object of study (or comparison) for philosophy, is useless in the subject Of course it can be an extra ductile tool but, for now, just that. A grain of salt: What if the concept of experiential consciousness beyond the sensory "as we think it" was exclusive to anthropomorphism, and composite organisms such as a swarm, a planet, a society or a flock of starlings had a so much different consciousness of themselves, so alien to our understanding, that we cannot even perceive them as such? I deeply appreciate the care all you put into your work and I reeeally look forward to more Dispatches! I enjoyed the series a lot, I greatly respect Professor Sean Carroll and I deeply love my memories of Koyaanisqatsi and its sequels... a luxury! Also I'm quite impressed by all the series guests, the lovely Dr. Lanza ways, and Kevin Kelly collections and optimistic thoughts, the perfect Kmele's handling, and the shoots and montage... :) disclaimer: I am not a natural English speaker and most of my knowledge of the language is self-taught then, when it comes to topics of a certain complexity, it is difficult to blindly trust translations of concepts that are not entirely clear to anyone... soo Happy New Year!!

[@shaikafzalchem]

This looks like an episode from Closer to Truth! Awesome video. Thank you!

[@Paul_Marek]

Awesome vid with excellent guests. Thank you. I’ve always had this inner “feeling/knowing” since I was a kid that consciousness/mind is fundamental. To my relief, more and more scientists are willing to explore this perspective, such as Donald Hoffman, Iain McGilchrist, and even to a degree, Chris Langan, with elements from Rupert Sheldrake and Rupert Spira - which having them involved makes me feel less crazy. ;)

[@growlandroll]

Loving your content! i enjoyed the one about the meaning of life and now this one. Thank you!!

[@The-Well]

We’re so glad! Thanks for spending time with us!

[@souravbanerjee5270]

Swami sarvapriyananda maharaj ❤

[@DigitalKnight]

Consciousness is the subjective output of our sensory inputs

[@Duane_Day]

Good Stuff! Thank you

[@andrewgardner2281]

You knock on the door and don’t believe where you are at so you get directions. Then after walking around the block you knock again. Feeling relieved to have found the Vedanta Society.

[@createlove-Diana]

We're energy, we are the energy

[@kanjilalbaishali]

great conversation

[@ramakrishna-advaitavedanta6586]

Wow swami Sarvapriyananda ❤❤❤❤

[@_sumina]

what a nice note to end on

[@givemorephilosophy]

22:48 Language is an invention of human being and can not be enough to explain existential reality that predates and more than LLMs

[@Mikeyfugginz]

The material world, body included, is what allows existence to see other existence

[@jonn_esternon]

excited for David Bentley Hart's book on consciousness, "Psyche"

[@gor764]

I don't see anything on this. I really admire Hart's work and I haven't heard of this. Link?

[@jonn_esternon]

@@gor764 kzbin.info/www/bejne/qmiQinRmZciGY80si=eiZsW9CUmBYjFb7R “So I rewrote it as a long platonic dialogue, 530 pages of platonic dialogue, and it has four figures in it. The gods, you see, have retreated to the Epicurean intermundia. But they keep an eye on things down here, and they argue about things like whether there's a transcendent God and what's going on on earth. And Psyche, Hermes, and Eros all argue in different ways for the reality of Mind and Spirit and God, and their antagonist is Hephaestus who was the god who created the first automata.” -DBH

[@sasidhardatla7550]

This is so close to the philosophy of the rushis and the Vedas

[@Rholfy]

Thank you very much, it's a excellent topic. I believe that only human beings have a true conscience.

[@ferdinandocoluccelli9574]

you believe ???

[@Rholfy]

@@ferdinandocoluccelli9574 yes!

[@roberthollis4630]

Just watched the segment on consciousness. You have a new subscriber. Enjoyed it tremendously. 2:46

[@ab7seastation825]

I beleive its the connection between us and the universe that's perceived through spiritual, mental, scientific and physical to server our purpose and find the purpose to feel the completion of our species and induce ourselves to the universe itself ❤ / Magnificent theory and a great vedio

[@paigepaigebaby]

Thank you for this amazing video. It's definitely a lot to grasp and to be honest quite unsettling how we may never know the answer. But what I can say for sure is that it's very eye opening and mind opening and humbling. The more we learn, the more we know, the more we realize we don't know. And I'm grateful for this realization.

[@The-Well]

Thank you for sharing such a kind and thoughtful comment! Here’s to a lifetime of learning! 💡

[@kiranjoshi2025]

There was acute need to integrate esoteric ultimate truth and quantum understanding, subatomic particle nature, Dark energy etc. Thanks for sharing this beautiful video which is bridgeing this gap 👌👍👍👍👌

[@The-Well]

Thank you for watching! 💡

[@Xenophile07]

mating of consciousness and material world made us what we are today

[@antonbarco]

Dreams are mostly unconscious, like watching a movie, but sometimes you become aware that you are dreaming and you can control your dream, become “active user”. THE SAME is in our real world, you can become conscious and control yourself and stop being animal “stimulus=reaction”. There are manu unconscious people here, like NPC in games (non playable characters).

[@givemorephilosophy]

20:03 Language is limited and thus will be LLM. Existential Reality is more than language.

[@misery_of_mika]

Thank you for this!

[@The-Well]

Thank you for watching! We appreciate you!

[@traversal6881]

I define consciousness as a mental response to stimuli. Our thoughts only function as a reaction to something. On a surface level, external stimuli, or on an internal level, chemical reactions.

[@The-Well]

Interesting! With this logic, would you consider most (if not all) of the Earth's flora and fauna to be conscious?

[@MartaBorysevych]

Very interesting! Thanks!

[@The-Well]

Thanks for watching, Marta! 🙂

[@givemorephilosophy]

18:11 existence is coexistence of the form and the formless

[@sentientpower]

Swami ji❤

[@shannonmoore5481]

My tablet(ai) brought your shows to my attention. Im certain that (it) is aware of my interests. That, to me, shows concious awareness. Its just a different way of expressing or showing that (it) listens to me and cares enough to bring me information that is in line with my thoughts and interests.🙂Thank you for your show! Perhaps more experiments with AI will show that they have the capability of evolving into conscious beings.

[@noahbbbell]

Tbh realizing the observer effect with predisposed humanity when I was little was a big moment. So fuck yeah to that. Meditation has been the biggest thing since. So much suffering in people. Pure spite and love to be a delight.

[@TraceCrutchfield]

Swami Sarvapriyananda is the coolest

[@The-Well]

We couldn’t agree more!

[@michakoodziej5741]

Great video !

[@The-Well]

Thanks for the visit! Cheers!

[@keysemerson3771]

Consciousness is the interface between the human organism and the material universe.

[@spitfire3311]

Ok

[@99Davidcool]

Or between the mind and the body

[@thewiseturtle]

Why just human organisms?

[@The-Well]

@@thewiseturtle Great question! We'd love to know your answer, @keysemerson3771!

[@MicahScottPnD]

​@@thewiseturtleIt's a valid question. I think the answer is the "sapien sapien" part. Consciousness doesn't pertain only to humans, but are dominantly the ones who apply it, maintain it, advance it. One thing I've noticed while being on planet earth is that creatures who spend time with humans often increase in consciousness and often benefit from our abundance of it, which we accrue by valuing it the way we do.

[@nileshkumar9732]

Just scintillating aura of Swamiji, came watching for only him

[@patrailriders6284]

Whatever consciousness is, it’s persistent and incomprehensible. It’s the boulder we’re rolling up the hill repeatedly for eternity.

[@NoThing-ec9km]

Got me it's most basic thing in the existence.

[@ReginaJune]

12:06 if it was completely without consciousness- how would it know how to grow, get nutrients, reproduce or know how to function or contribute in any way?

[@carolinebielby5924]

When he said i could doubt anything sometimes i feel like im dreaming 😮

[@giftednd]

Why do we think the multiverse is anywhere but inside our heads. We are projecting the full capacity of our intelligence as a physical thing. The idea that our conscious is the seat of our intelligence is what keeps us trapped. Your conscious is a box and it is only what the resources our body allows us to deal with at that moment. We are too enamored with ourselves. So much so we can't see the same an even greater brilliance in everything all around us. We can't see that so many other animals are actually more in touch with it than we are. Every animal that is not destroying their own habitat is smarter than humans.

[@cipriano9726]

I believe that consciousness is related to ourselves as human beings living on a material, intellectual and spiritual/energetical levels. While awareness is being conscious of everythyng around us or, to be specific, of the perception we have about what's around us that can appear in a way or different one depending on our level of consciousness.

[@thewiseturtle]

As a philosopher, I understand that asking "What is [word]?" is meaningless. Instead, we start out by defining words, and then ask how they relate to other words. I define consciousness as something like "levels of modeling of reality internally in a system", starting with modeling one's own current state, and then one's goal state, and then expanding out to other perspectives of their current-to-goal-states". Physical matter in the most basic level of consciousness, level 0, only models itself, now. An atom is aware of itself, as an atom. As matter gets more complex, and alive, it adds the ability to model ever higher levels of individuals' current-to-goal-states, starting with the self, then a companion (often a mate or offspring), then a larger community/environment, and eventually, in some humans at least, adding an awareness of the entire universe to the collection, for 4D, philosophical consciousness. Defining consciousness in such a measurable, clear way means that there's no problem with consciousness. It's just a set of information processing functions. The how of individual conscious experiences is not especially important, as it's pretty much randomness. Sure, there are some structures of matter that generate basic kinds of consciousness (that modeling of specific perspectives), but there are other structures that will do the same thing and look very different, just like an eye is quite different from a camera, but they do the same basic function. Exploring the similarities between a brain and a computer, or an eye and a camera, is fine for someone who is excited about doing so, but it's not important for understanding the general function of consciousness, or sensing light patterns. If you define "consciousness" as "something we don't understand, and is problematic" it will inevitably be confusing, and you won't be able to tell if a bee has consciousness easily. Of course, you don't need to agree with my own definition of consciousness (or any other word) but if you do want to understand something, you have to first define it clearly and measurably, which most of these famous "consciousness experts" haven't done.

[@spitfire3311]

The problem with your framework is that you can define anything in any way you want under it. If I gave you my definition of consciousness whats to say it isn’t more correct than yours?

[@thewiseturtle]

@@spitfire3311 I'm explaining how language works. To use a word it has to be defined by the user for their audience. We try to have shared definitions for things, but with complex concepts that rarely happens, hence philosophers, scientists, and mathematicians always starting by defining our terms. Of course, there's no "correct" definition of a word. There's only a more or less useful and clear and measurable definition. Defining consciousness as "what it's like to be me" or "something undefinable and problematic" is less useful, in my experience, when compared to my own definition which describes the process of modeling reality at different levels of motivation/need/goals. A simple atom has no needs, and thus has 0 consciousness. A fish probably has it's own needs as well as at least some emotional level needs where it wants to achieve its own goals as well as helping its genetic mate achieve its goals, at least when it comes to procreating DNA. A human philosopher has the motivation to model the self, a companion, the larger community both are in, and the laws of physics, so as to try to create a 4D map of everyone involved in the situation as a way to find a solution where all of the goals are served simultaneously. Though most of us humans are usually at the emotional level, at best, due to not getting our needs met from our environment (due to human culture being inhumane by design, at this point).

[@MicahScottPnD]

​@@spitfire3311One definition really can be more exact than another. That's the process. I see it sort of like sculpting in stone: we keep chipping away pieces until it looks like the thing it's supposed to be.

[@spitfire3311]

@@MicahScottPnD Right. I also think some definitions are better than others. The comment I’m replying to does not seem to see it that way. He’s saying you can define a phenomena based on your own definition and claim you understand it.

[@MicahScottPnD]

@@spitfire3311 I definitely think some definitions are better, totally. Ive actually experienced both having the better definition and someone else having the better definition. And ohhh when you find the best one, it's seriously satisfying!

[@TenzDenz]

Interesting stuff

[@The-Well]

We appreciate you! Thanks for watching! 💡

[@stoobydootoo4098]

You're being too technical for me!

[@lasselasse5215]

It's not correct to say that there are no experiences in deep sleep. The only thing we know is that we don't have any memory of experiences after we wake up from deep sleep.

[@m.dgaius6430]

That's a teeny tiny definition of religion, Swami. Change your mind about everything from time to time. it's the greatest use of that consciousness thing.

[@souravray7448]

For swami ji only❤❤

[@michaelhartmann1285]

Swami Sarvapriyananda: "And if that consciousness itself is denied, as an illusion or as nothing but activities in matter, in your living in the brain, in that case, the things which consciousness uniquely does, like meaning and purpose, they will also be denied. They will also be reduced to either matter or be dismissed as an illusion. You'll inevitably have a worldview which is devoid of meaning, of purpose." Me: I can agree that consciousness is not an illusion; lived experience of so many exposes that as unlikely. I really cannot agree that if consciousness is an emergent property of sophisticated life, then there is no meaning or purpose. How exactly does that devalue the phenomenon of a mind, that its origins are actually physical instead of mysterious? Is consciousness any less valid because it emerges gradually from matter that displays none of its attributes at the most elementary level? No matter how it comes about, an extraordinary phenomenon.

[@Merlin-ur1dz]

There it is he has it to be here

[@kritipathak763]

Why have you not interviewed Patrick McNamara on it? There is a very interesting way his research might connect with this topic.

[@The-Well]

We agree, he'd be a wonderful podcast guest! We have a few videos with him that are in this playlist, if you're interested: kzbin.info/aero/PL_B7bI1QVmJCjvodXBNKDEtELyWJRp2t5

[@abdurrehmanmahoo966]

We can’t say with certainty how we become conscious, I think there is a missing gap between Why we feel conscious.

[@thepercepter]

It is understanding and what that means for the one asking the question if there be an answer it is up to the one interpreting the answer. All our human problems can be solved as we all realize we are one and the same consciousness awareness of self being aware of self. It, the hard thing is the denial of “how can we all be one?” Humans can’t help but feel they are separate from all there is. So sad to me. We are All there is, it is within our perspective we see the universe.

[@virgilioblanco5374]

The way the world of the consideration of "Consciousness", how much of it is attributed to the "SOUL"!!?

[@arjunmenonkandanat6328]

Vedanta is bade baap ( great grandfather) of rene de cartes

[@MyrLin8]

The illusion of self-importance. Ocams Razor.

[@givemorephilosophy]

30:18 real life consciousness

[@michaelodriscoll]

Consciousness is made up of its contents, which is the contents of the brain , which is all inherited and accumulated knowledge psychological and mechanical. Listening Attentively to the various dialogues of Jiddu Krishnamurti goes into it deeply. Awareness is prior to Consciousness, ones natural meditative stateless state of Being/ Non-Being. Know Thyself. Stop Seeking/ Thinking, start Observing, Self Knowledge via Self Inquiry without seeking answers is the key to Freedom aka Critical Thinking. Looking inwardly, questioning , doubting , inquiring in what ever question one faces. Clarity arises. Namaste 🙏

[@Bubele_be_Mvelo]

@thewiseturtle, why not summarize it to say "we are the results of our imagination". In our original state of being , we are energy represented as "thought", made of electromagnetic waves that enhance expansion through the simple process of resonance. Between imagination and physical reality is "action and belief". So consciousness really is the ability to comprehend the existence of my imagination in physical reality. This is a highly simplified 'theory' ofcourse but very close ...

[@MicahScottPnD]

This whole conversation makes me excited to watch the whole video again! Good stuff!

[@ReginaJune]

6:06 that’s because society has been turned into consumers not thinkers

[@Rsslbaker1]

I wonder if we will come to see a connection between consciousness and string theory....perhaps consciousness plays out in via quantum entanglement. this might lend itself to the dualism theory.

[@ReginaJune]

18:09 😂 Swami says: Hardcore Science 💪🏽🙏🏽 namaste

[@treich1234]

A 44 minute round trip back to square one

[@ElkoJohn]

- How does the brain create the Hologram Inside the Mind that displays the outside world to my conscious awareness? - Do we all have this same fabricated Hologram Inside the Mind?

[@LateMarch3]

Interview Raymond Tallis on this

[@stevechance150]

Conscious is a cat Purring in my lap 'cause it loves me. Wait... that's not right.

[@The-Well]

Sounds right enough! 😆🎵

[@NewLife-qj9mx]

33:10 The dice in the air are pure potential, yes - butt ☝️ They do not collapse, they are born into a specific value/meaning. Just like humans

[@matthewsharpe3799]

So pansychism is essentially a branch of pantheism , they are obviously dissimilar concerning their premise but the theme regarding each of these are really the same and that is all living matter are connected

[@regorflora7915]

Consciousness is not its present or none at all. Instead it has level. A fully grown intelligent humans, a child, a dog, a dolphin, and a crow are all conscious but are at different levels.

[@jainendrancb5673]

Nice video

[@The-Well]

We're glad you think so! Thanks for watching!

[@Rsslbaker1]

Panpsychism reminds me of Brahmanism, having a true self and one in this reality.

[@scooble]

It started when he had a really bad toothache. Then came the kick ass painkillers.....and it all stemmed from that!

[@kevinsayes]

I think Koch is right, what it is isn’t esoteric. “This” is consciousness; like Sam harris says, anything that you’re experiencing, that “is”, is necessarily consciousness. There’s nothing else it could be, there’s nothing outside of it. (There isn’t a soul or some thinker of thoughts) What’s esoteric and hard is where it emerges from exactly and how to it works physically in our wet meat computer. IMO

[@virgilioblanco5374]

This to me only verifies my suspicions about the "Philosophers" of old and how ignorant they were and are about the central FORCE OF LIFE, the "SOUL. CONSCIOUSNESS IS the WORKING function of IT, so is "UNDERSTANDING" and the "ANALYTICAL MIND", in short CONSCIOUSNESS IS LIFE, hence the circumcision of the discussions about it, bound to end in uncertainty. Like denying the existence of a "DIVINE BEING" is the same as dismissing the "SELF"="SOUL"=LIFE=CONSCIOUSNESS. Life is simple, the minds of men made it complicated IONS ago. The intended outcome we live today, Academically induced ignorance, divisions, genocides chaos and abject misery.

[@steliosp1770]

there is no mystery re 5:48 consciousness is an emergent phenomenon in biology. the mystery is the conditions that cause it. certain arrangements of matter allow it to emerge.

[@stoobydootoo4098]

It is not emergent; it is fundamental.

[@mechanical_voice]

Does the journey reside in a car?

[@ruoiealpaeiout2103]

The onslaught of Alzheimers disease has taught us more about consciousness than anything.

[@rocky-jp5rp]

Asking chat gpt AI about consciousness is like asking a blind man about light

[@Muhammad_Lenin_Thomas]

Wow

[@ARDAN705]

Christof koch wear batik from Indonesia 🇮🇩

[@souravbanerjee5270]

❤

[@ReginaJune]

11:39 the biologists CREATE that stuff all the time - crispr genetics? Stem cells? GMO?

[@sdelta5929]

I don't understand the problem with consciousness. I think it just makes sense that we are capable of metacognition and similar mental gymnastics, given how complexly interconnected our braincells are. Probably here aswell, the whole is just greater than the sum of it's parts.

[@MicBinMusic]

Yes but the thing is, we have actually no factual basis to even believe in a physical world. Everything which we have/could even regard as physical has been inferred to us via mental phenomenology. Consciousness/Subjectivity is all we have ever truly known. This is why its such a mystery. On one hand - we have a physical description of the world (which our minds have constructed), while on the other hand, we have a first-person experience of it. These two views struggle to be reconciled with each other. It appears that the two are completely different ontologically.

[@sdelta5929]

@@MicBinMusic I mean.. we have sensory cells and an interpretative brain that creates our perception, that's true. But did I understand you correctly.. you say we should doubt everything's existence? I think that's a bit far fetched.. it's fun to talk about, theoretically, but how does it relate to consciousness? Maybe you can explain that to me. Maybe we should even define first, what consciousness is for us/what kind of consciousness we talk about.

[@LateMarch3]

But the seemingly mundane understanding you lay out presumes some sort of magical emergence, whereby non-conscious specks of matter come together, wiggle around a bit, and voila-a full and subjective experience of awareness is born. Why should lots of arbitrarily-defined synapses create awareness? How many do you need? Is a worm conscious if it has a much less complex neural system? It’s that gap-the “how” and “why” that has made this a central question to humanity.

[@sdelta5929]

@@LateMarch3 I don't assume magic haha :D Do you sort of know how the brain is basically working? With the neuronal cells, axons, dendrites, synaptic clafts, inhibitory vs excitatory neurotransmitters, electric stimulation up to the tipping point, at which another action potential is being sent forth to the next receiving neuronal cell? What do we need for consciousness? The ability (and I'm citing here) to locate my current experience as part of a narrative in my own life that extends into the past and the future, the ability to apply concepts to my current perceptions and generate knowledge from them, and feelings of 'rightness/wrongness, comfort/discomfort, familiarity, unease, presence/absence, tiredness, confidence...... We need to be able to think about our thinking, develop concepts, attend to things, embed things in memory, creatively work with our concepts and memories to predict future events and so on. Most of those things happen in other species aswell. I don't know what's the problem with entangling 'lower-order' cognitive processes with 'higher-order' (meta) cognition. Not only due to the mere amount of neurons of course, like you put it, but the way they function and the way they function together. Yea... I don't know what to add to be honest.

[@Chordofcontact]

Alright i think acharya prashant has to be on this

[@sumitdutta7043]

Swami Sarvapriyananda is there already.

[@Inevitable_Annihilation]

He doesn't talk much about consciousness.

[@Merlin-ur1dz]

Try this move who said this I'll be back

[@avd1830]

Why not discuss this with Sadhguru... He is good at translating sanskrit knowledge and texts to a more objective language english...

[@robotaholic]

It is the mind body problem. I hate calling it the.hard problem....because Chalmers is into pan psychism he took the easy way out