Dr Iain McGilchrist & Dr Rupert Sheldrake - Intersection of Consciousness and Matter

[@JJRed888]

Rupert does not lecture us, he speaks to us as if we are close friends. What a wonderful way to communicate. You may or may not agree with him, but his respectful and calm voice and the effort he puts in to explain things is the gold standard for other scientific commentators to emulate. This is what communication and sharing means. In terms of style, I would consider him the most competent scientific communicator.

[@gillcoombs9855]

Yes, wonderful. I suspect that when I don't agree with him, I'm usually not quite understanding him.

[@gillcoombs9855]

He's also a very good listener 🙂

[@greg1mcintosh844]

His voice has put me to sleep at night for 14 years

[@2msvalkyrie529]

Unfortunately , what he has to communicate is complete drivel . But ,yes , his delivery is excellent !

[@misspy1153]

Mcgilchrist is a gift to humankind. Please don’t give up. Even though it’s all so hopelessly frustrating at times, usually because he’s head and shoulders farther along than any of his ‘peers’

[@tomgreene1843]

Well said ...he should come to Ireland and experience the intellectual landscape !

[@charlesnurse4748]

⅞x

[@theopenmindtherapist]

I agree with Rupert. There are many different forms of prayer. To have a prayer or a request answered, you have to commit your heart to the endeavour. That itself, is a prayer to the universe whether you've uttered what we would call a 'prayer' or not. However, there are times when you just have to relax and let the universe deliver what it wants for your life. In this case, you create the space, open the heart, and align yourself with the divine. This is a feeling of reverence for all that is wonderous about life. This is how we let go of illusion, open up to the cosmos, and dreams and hopes then follow.

[@ezza88ster]

The modern scientific community has so much to learn from these two; including their humility in the face of the mystery.

[@gordonmeeks2447]

Two of the most brilliant thinkers of our time.

[@artlein]

Gentlemen, thank you for a fine, stimulating conversation.🌻

[@SM-oz4jy]

Wonderful conversation, thankyou all.

[@pushpindersyal1888]

I have always loved Rupert. From the time i read his explanation of morphic fields and understood 'how dogs always know when their owners are coming home', i was convinced he was on the verge of understanding something quite fantastic. And I love Dr McGilchrist's openness towards ideas, and willingness to think expansively, which triggers dialogue.

[@2msvalkyrie529]

er.......dogs knowing when their owners are coming home has been debunked many times. ! In multiple experiments . Yet people still believe it..?? Now , there IS a mystery..

[@andydufresne299]

My mind has been nourished by this wonderful dialogue. Thank you.

[@craigshelton5903]

Dr. McGilchrist is at the center of many of the world’s most important conversations going on today

[@Mercurial-flip-flop]

Thank God ey. He needs to be. 🙏

[@2msvalkyrie529]

In his own kitchen after dinner parties probably yes. ? Not sure about the wider world.?

[@christinearcher3946]

I love it when they relax and laugh together… engaging with these huge concepts with such wisdoms and knowledge, and have fun in so doing

[@theobservereffectexplained1102]

Yes I agree Dr McGilchrist’s work is a gift for humanity. When we know we have a divided brain it will be easier to self control and self manage. His attention and intentions may lead towards peace on Earth. His books are good, true and honest 🎉

[@californiaraisins8532]

Our brain's are not divided, they are one, albeit rendered partly dormant by a combination of malevolent design further compounded by the apathy & sloth borne from the conveniences of modernity & the sating of base appetites.

[@grantfrith9589]

​@@californiaraisins8532 The inclination to make that distinction looks to me to be the manifestation of left hemisphere thinking... Not entirely though. The need to speak precisely is important to the utilitarian side of us is a vital part of communicating. Intuitively we might understand the distinction you were pointing to was already understood by the person you were addressing. While the correction was a valid one it doesn't take much to see the conflict between the hemispheres in your reaction...

[@californiaraisins8532]

@@grantfrith9589 thank you for your response, which provides evidence of your possessing a third hemisphere located in your anus which appears to carry out your communication functions.

[@voodoujr]

Why on earth did that have to end?! Magnificent interchange ❤

[@sue9481]

What a gift to have these two towering figures of illumination and intellect partaking in this conversation. So fascinating to see them playing at such a high level with bringing understanding to these dimly lit subjects. Im most grateful. 🙏

[@groznyentertainment]

Rupert's voice has a soothing, hypnotic effect, gently lulling me into a state of relaxation and making me feel like drifting off to sleep

[@mvc4121]

His perspective is amazing

[@andrewmckenzie278]

You guys have expanded the right side of my brain. I’ll be forever grateful.

[@pauleagle2856]

What a wonderfully stimulating conversation, thank you both so much!

[@midi510]

I really didn't want this to end.

[@gettingtogiveproject]

Simply wonderful. Thanks to everyone who made this happen 🙏

[@jonathans.bragdon5934]

Expressing differences and agreements peacefully (without defensiveness), is healthful….. and healing in effect.

[@starxcrossed]

Oh god I love these two!!! How wonderful! And everyone loves Michael Levin- this is the best time to be alive ❤

[@Esveronicanv]

This conversation was wonderful. Thank you all

[@wehsee912]

So happy to see this conversation

[@awb503]

fantastic conversation. feels like there's a part two to this?

[@StevenLeMieux]

Two of my favorite minds at once oh how wonderful!

[@gillcoombs9855]

30:00 to 35:00 I enjoyed this discussion about knowing: Iain a confessed sceptic and devil's advocate, Rupert with his sense of Knowing. Both of course are right: such experiences cannot but be highly personal and subjective, and yes, hard to convey in words. This is a lovely, living example of Iain's paradox-and-no-paradox from his book.

[@venkatramangopalakrishnan1989]

Wonderful narrative and totally agree about spiritual development. I am amazed to see the similarity of Advitha Vedantha in a different perspective.

[@clivejenkins4033]

Let's hope all the suffering in this world is not in vain

[@gnupf]

Am I the only one who is constantly waiting for Colin Wilson to be mentioned?

[@gillcoombs9855]

17:44 'we are nourishing or stunting the soul by the way in which we live'. And if we don't nourish soulful experience it atrophies, and we no longer have access to it, or even imagine it possible. Such a profound point; tragic, and yet full of possibility.

[@2msvalkyrie529]

Yes ,McGilchrist does look " well nourished " !!

[@diycraftq8658]

This is as close to the purest highest levels of humanity speaking to us thru these fine men amongst men

[@wagfinpis]

17:30 I still have memories of my so-called imaginary friend, flying around out of body at infant years and have maintained some connections and have had numerous metaphysical experiences throughout my life...

[@janethomson4003]

Perhaps things are neither right nor wrong , Rumi wrote " beyond all thoughts of right or wrong there is a luminous field I'll meet you there" . Also Yeshua said " ask and you will receive" asking seems fine. The luminous field seems to resonate with the discoveries of physics to me. Relationship with the Divine is surely not prescriptive or dogmatic, just be in relationship, that is dynamic and fluid, like with your great Beloved. Sometimes you ask, sometimes you don't, sometimes you just dissolve into the love.

[@ekoe5484]

excellent dicsussion. My only complaint is that is was too short. So much to be learned from both of you :)

[@Mercurial-flip-flop]

Fantastic conversation. 👍🏼

[@D.E.Saccone-no4og]

The Trinity, going beyond the binary, with the third part being 'the holy ghost', if you like, implies much more than three, but a transcendence implying a multidimensionality without, perhaps, limit.

[@jamesboswell9324]

Great discussion. It seems to me that both Iain and Rupert are on the same page but whereas Rupert looks at it as an extrovert, Iain's take is generally more introverted which actually creates additional balance.

[@gillcoombs9855]

I'm not sure who is the more extroverted or introverted, but I did notice Rupert expressing intuitively and emotionally, and Iain bringing rational and factual balance. They complement each other wonderfully.

[@jamesboswell9324]

@@gillcoombs9855 That's also true. But I guess I'm saying Rupert's path frequently involves collective engagement with others (forms of communion) whereas Iain's quest for truth appears to remain more solitary and introspective and this in turn flavours their personal outlooks and is likewise complementary. Obviously I don't know them personally so my extrovert/introvert labels are hunches at best.

[@gillcoombs9855]

@@jamesboswell9324 yes, I think perhaps you're right. I hadn't seen that.

[@mvc4121]

29:30 points is most important for a good life you must balance these perspectives and then contemplate the path forward the less importance can easily go forward with intuition The most important must be examined exhaustively, obtaining every aspect of knowledge available.

[@petervandenengel1208]

28:21 Yes. Meditation is a good antidote for anxiety. It is a relief delivered by ritual. Which does not mean one or the other represents a true and a false world. Both are true. It depends on the kind of attention it is given. The Japanese culture in general has understood this the best. A full mind cannot be empty.

[@tomthumb2361]

Glad to find that other people have thoughts and experiences I recognise. Great to have a defensible position in relation to them so well articulated. Exclusion of such thoughts and experiences is another regrettable feature of our media and education system(s?). Polanyi: tacit knowledge? Peirce Firstness and creative evolution (earlier version than Whitehead's, and inclusive of semiosis [i.e. meaning-making] as a feature of the whole universe)

[@hglatGAIA]

There are plenty of people who speak of life before birth actually. That is a good topic. As is Anthroposophy and so many others. Iain has to be my favorite speaker at the moment and I like Ruperts work also which I knew about in the 80's when I was in my twenties. Thank you both so much. Oh and it made me laugh when you mentioned Trump. I read a book by a guy called Harvey Eck who said in it that Trump's Success Thermometer was set on High! Ha.

[@Esveronicanv]

Some Christian mystics advocate for the type of prayer Iain McGilchrist is talking about: contemplative prayer, interior silence. It is the most nourishing form of connection with the Divine. See father Thomas Keating and father Richard Rohr.

[@allonesame6467]

Ah! I've found my happy place! Thank You for outlining some of the ineffable.

[@sebastiangaete7479]

So much resonance!

[@bhajandaniel9771]

Sheldrake's thought is quite iinteresting as always but he doesn't understand the Indian description of God, (as the Ground), as Satchitananda. Translated as if it was a sentence, Satchitananda would read this way: Existence, (at the most fundamental level, Sat), is Consciousness (Chit), which is of the nature of Bliss (Ananda).

[@2msvalkyrie529]

Thanks ! That's crystal clear now.....🤔

[@BothSidesNow52]

When you mentioned, Iain, mindfulness and meditation as ways to open oneself to the right hemisphere, you did not also mention the practice of "reflection" that is used in the East. It struck me when I was reading The Master and His Emissary, that the technique of reflection that involves " embedding (a mantra or idea in Sanskrit) into the being", is using the left hemisphere to somehow transmit new information (the idea) across to the right brain. It does this through repetition and a kind of brain washing (I thought). It seems to me to be paradoxical ,in that the left brain is being used to fool itself. I know you mention the frontal lobes have a part in this transmission to the right brain, but the left side is still being fooled (I thought). I think the benefit of knowing how the process of reflection works is that once the western mind UNDERSTANDS the neuroscience, then the left brain kind of surrenders to the practice (instead of being skeptical), and so the process is enhanced, the process being the expansion of consciousness, horizontally, in the right hemisphere, so that we are able to access the Divine more easily, and to, in fact, it would seem, open the door to Eternity. What do you think?

[@2msvalkyrie529]

What do I think..? Your medication is wearing off..!

[@petervandenengel1208]

26:22 When left and right are there. Observing them creates consciouness. So, the consciousness was there already. In the matter of things.

[@thevintagemom5455]

Great! Loved Dr. McGilchrist's reference to Keats. Made me think of my favorite excerpt of his from Ode to Psyche - I see, and sing, by my own eyes inspir'd. So let me be thy choir, and make a moan Upon the midnight hours; Thy voice, thy lute, thy pipe, thy incense sweet From swinged censer teeming; Thy shrine, thy grove, thy oracle, thy heat Of pale-mouth'd prophet dreaming. Yes, I will be thy priest, and build a fane In some untrodden region of my mind, Where branched thoughts, new grown with pleasant pain, Instead of pines shall murmur in the wind:

[@jenniferbate9682]

I haven’t got that far yet but…I always thought, well Keats was a doctor anyway, but also he seems to have a very mystical quality too. Thanks for pointing that out as now I will continue listening to him.

[@petervandenengel1208]

9:05 That is right. Singularities do have at the same time different entanglements. That is a matter of fact. Not just a believe set. The observer notices some of them as well. But to conclude it is just a fabric of the mind (not a truth) is a misconception. Although it is also true some of them are overvalued by the observer, or the institution they are embedded in. Dominants may be temporarily. Just as that predators did, not become the ruling species on earth.

[@tanakaren1822]

Human preditors have become the ruling species!

[@petervandenengel1208]

38:40 I see praying as expressing hope. Let it be true. It is a kind of introspection, but adding ritual words to it takes the introspection away. It becomes an artificial vehicle, by the lack of better words for it. Kind of like a trance state.

[@gillcoombs9855]

I find it impossible to know. When I go out and celebrate the living world every morning, and feel and express hope/positive intention, is that an isolated act that simply affects my own inner, and perhaps outer, experience? (It certainly does that.) Or does it have some wider effect that I can't see or measure? My intuition tells me the latter, and brings a glimpsed comprehension that even this isn't a binary question. I have no evidence or proof, yet I continue. I suppose it is a kind of 'faith': not blind or unquestioning belief, rather a deep knowing that remains, depsite the arguments of my rational mind.

[@bipolargamechanger]

I've had many "extraordinary experiences" and I like to understand them precisely because they are actually mundane, common experiences like having any old common emotion or social experience, and reflecting on that. The left brain thinks they are extraorindary experience precisely because it can't access them as it cannot hold both possibilities in mind and must then pre cognitively reject ex. experiences through negation. The right brain negates that they are a big deal. When we are in between worlds, we hyper inflate the ego as it takes on an identity and authorship of these manifestations. Yet, this never can last and it the exact mechanism that ensures the ego cannot use the right brain for its pleasures for long. So understanding them necessitates an "intra-dialogue" between one's left and right brain. The right brain does have a voice, we've just never asked it any questions. Ever wonder why folks get flat affect? Not only have we not dialogued with our right brain, we have not built the neuro-embodied cognition of the right brain body being-gesturer. Those in the right brain have trouble speaking and they are overweight. But we ask them the wrong questions. Information has a mass and when it's not integrated, it adds pounds to the body. In my study this is what I've seen.

[@aminam9201]

5:00 that goes back to about four years ago where human had no other choice to send his messages to future generations except through the irrational thieves, but they worked on stealing, polluting and then erasing human traces (systematic collective theft).

[@mjfbb22]

I know that two experiences I have had, one of a past incarnation and the other which might be called a unity experience, no beginning and end, are infinitely more real than writing this comment. I am a 50 year trial lawyer in the process of writing 5 books all thematically connected to each other involving cases I have litigated, some highly publicized. I respect the insights of both these men as opposed to the narcissistic atheism of Dawkins et al, which I suggest is arrogantly self absorbed. Caroline Elkins book, Legacy of Violence, traces the Oxford connections to Whitehall and British imperialism. I submit that British imperialism and colonialism have inflicted more genocidal atrocities than the “religions” which Dawkins and his Four Horsemen use to justify their atheism. Their atheism to me is just another ism to wreak havoc on other humans.

[@Dan-DJCc]

Matter is certainly converted into consciousness after every meal.

[@brjimbo1]

Depends if one uses Worchester Sauce and the steak is medium rare...

[@DavidGreenwood-nu6dd]

There are one or two great intellectuals left in the UK

[@2msvalkyrie529]

It's a pity none of them were available for this video...?

[@CultLeader-n8z]

What about the blood brain barrier and amniotic fluid?

[@fbalvim]

I love how McGilchrist make easy to the "left hemisphere attention" to understand it's limits, but I think is important to point that the old masters found a language that make the bridge between "two worlds". Yes the "descritive language" is reductionist, what is not bad when used for what is best for, for science for example, is bad when us, people of the spirit of this time, trapped on the "left hemisphere", try to engage in spirituality with this reductionist language. The old masters used another language like metaphors and "narrative language" and mith and although this is not entirely "right hemisphere" what would be impossible is as I said before a bridge between worlds and invite us the listeners to listen the music.

[@fbalvim]

To illustrate the reductionist power of the "descritive language" and at the same time it's false belief that it can somehow touch the "misterium", we can see at 31:55 the exchange between this two gentleman... McGilchrist after explain that he never had a mystic experience himself, try to put it in a box, as if this is possible. Sheldrake for the other side seens to be a little more free and mabe even less afraid to speak what the "left hemisphere" would listen as non sense.

[@sarahbarker1637]

lovely chat

[@jeffsalat9775]

48:30 "Its power to deny reality in order to fit in with its theory about reality is the defining feature of [the left hemisphere]."

[@rramasubbu0424]

I may agree that anything that is alive and growing has consciousness including plants. Not sure about inanimate matter.

[@klar7946]

"None of it will add up to a hill of beans". - he's got that right.

[@2msvalkyrie529]

Certainly applies to this " chat "...!

[@isaklytting5795]

28:21 Well put!

[@idrearamacirmtamta1293]

dr McGilchrist I like to play devil's advocate too. My partner thinks I have oppositional defiant disorder lol 😂

[@normaodenthal8009]

Schopenhauer got it wrong: reading books is not for people who have no ideas of their own; the possibility of new ideas that are worthy of consideration would not be possible without reading books. Books are the fertile soil from which ideas grow.

[@wagfinpis]

32:00 Trying to be asymptotically certain about experiencing the other side is kinda like trying to turn Einsteins' space-time gravitational theory into a grand unified theory. It is a nonstatement; It's not even wrong. The ways that you know and experience things on the other side cannot even be transduced into metaphor. Physicists don't even know what to comprehensively say about time and when you're on the other side you're having an experience that is beyond time altogether. I could easily write a thousand words on the smallest of examples of how different time is experienced on the other side... To experience what is "more real" is to experience the predictive nature of the mind in a way that you are not capable of falsely entertaining impossibilities. Science is based on assumptions and can later be proven false, but on the other side you directly experience what is or is possible, you know the answer to any question that you are capable of formulating; there are no assumptions just what is or what can be. On the other side no one says to theirself "If the earth was round the water of the ocean would fall off the bottom" the only way you could convince yourself of the earth being flat, when you're on the other side, is by creating the possibility, but if it was not a possibility your mind would simply be filled with the labrythian lattices of knowledge that insist that the earth be round. It is proof positive; there is nothing to disprove on the otherside. Matters of the will are another medium all together though. You might possess the will power of a monk who remains seated while emulsifing himself in protest of war and violence, but this knowledge is only a creative possibility until the lifetime that you a actually do it and it may take many more or many fewer lifetimes to do it than you imagined while on the otherside, but even if you jump up and start running around on fire before you are burned to death nothing has been disproven of the will of the soul beyond time... As someone who has a relatively extreme level of experience with the otherside, for me to be asymptotically certain that the other side is more real and relatively prime to the "physical universe" would be akin to you spending 20 minutes cutting off your forearm with a steak knife in order to proof my theory that it is not impossible to do. There are no benefits to this pursuit and there is quite a bit that you would need to ignore to achieve this remedial insight. It is question of values and reason first. The NDE premise is very reasonable and the values are in love, light, and spirit. The question is not "Are NDE's real?"; the question is "What are we as a species doing in this world?". This world is patently insane; there is no asymtotic findings or knowledge that will ever do anything to charge the will of our species to be truthful or honest, to shine the light of your soul more brightly in this world before you die. We already have enough knowledge, what we need is more spirited will power making a way for our light in this world together.

[@ElenaRoche]

I hope everyone understands that there is no one way to pray that works for all. Be clear about where you are on a spiritual path and adjust your prayers accordingly, consult your spiritual director, don't do it on your own.

[@tehdii]

Orwell thought about Eliot: If one wants to deal in antitheses, one might say that the later poems express a melancholy faith and the earlier ones a glowing despair. … Sooner or later one is obliged to adopt a positive attitude towards life and society. It would be putting it too crudely to say that every poet in our time must either die young, enter the Catholic Church, or join the Communist Party, but in fact the escape from the consciousness of futility is along those general lines. … Eliot’s escape from individualism was into the Church, the Anglican Church as it happened. … It is at least imaginable that if Eliot had followed wholeheartedly the anti-democratic, anti-perfectionist strain in himself he might have struck a new vein comparable to his earlier one. But the negative Pétainism which turns its eyes to the past, accepts defeat, writes off earthly happiness as impossible, mumbles about prayer and repentance and thinks it a spiritual advance to see life as ‘a pattern of living worms in the guts of the women of Canterbury’ - that, surely, is the least hopeful road a poet could take. I had some experiences but as dr Iain said on Alex's podcast about his encounter with psychadelics and how they do not work on him, I have similar "problem" with those types of experiences. While edifying and deep are not mapping in me on the ONE religion that happens to be around at given time in culture... I am so dog tired of all this condescending attitude of everyone that shift language to religious gear. It is a misfortune that we have such ossified religious language that separates the whole life on two domains. As if people denying ( 00:20:36 ) the process of grabbing those phenomena by only one religion is something irrational on our ( secular ) side. I hear you all but those attitudes of early Galileo/Bruno killers are now weaseling its head to every sphere of life as it is a good thing. Organized religion and the people that are representing it in media, churches and other corrupted institutions are making much more harm than good to the picture of religion. I am rather secular and by no means no anti spiritual but attitudes of deep right is a position not worthy of XXI century that gave us such miriad of discoveries and languages to talk about it without a fear of Christian sensitivity...

[@thomassoliton1482]

11:16: (IMcG): you ask how a cell can “inventively repair it’s own form although it’s not programmed anywere in it’s own genome to do so …” How on earth can you say that? How do you think that you grew up from a single sperm and egg fusing into 1 then 2 cells and so on, differentiating along the way to produce all your body parts including your brain? The genome directs cell growth and replication! Specific mutations have specific and reproducible effects on development. If a cell can divide and produce two new duplicate cells that is essentilally repairing itself! If you think “morphic forms” are carried in electromagnitic fields, how can you walk into and out of a subway station and not be completely scrambled by the enormous EM fields that dwarf those of your brain! And you don’t even notice! If you cut off the limb of an axolotl, it will grow back. If you keep the axolotl in a steel box with food and water, the limb will still grow back. Whatever kind of fields you think mediate morphic resonance, please explain how they could get through shielding that blocks 100% or EM fields.

[@markraffety3471]

Iain why are you breaking this up with ads? It’s BS. Breaks the conversation and trains of thought completely. Disappointing mate

[@tanakaren1822]

Oh good, I gather that your questions implies that you are offering to fund the talks?!

[@truepatriot6388]

a suggestion for Iain on Awareness: I have commented on this niggling objection with Iain, and now with Rupert as well. Perhaps it is a British v American thing, but their use of the terms "attention" and "consciousness" may be old remnants of the very mechanistic/deterministic/reductionist European worldview they were raised in and now seek to transcend. These terms have divided our mind into L-brain categories. Others include: "behavior", "cognition", "emotion", attention", "perception", "sensation", "conscious", "unconscious", "Id", "Ego", "Superego", "Archetypes", "limbic system", and it goes on. These limiting categories become more problematic when considering the pancychism these boys espouse. In most cases, the challenge to describe a universal capacity for "responding" to the world in our own ways, we rocks and we Shakespeares, may best be met with the word "Awareness". As Iain would put it, attention is the limit case of Awareness, which is the fundamental is-ness and flow-capacity-ness that pervades creation. Within and without, between and beyond, there can be no relation without Awareness. I would also borrow Iain's perspective that perhaps Awareness is more a verb than a noun, that "to be Aware" is fundamental to all of creation/relation formed by various in- and out-group relations, Please resist L-brain certainty about "attention" and "consciousness", which are laden with reductionist baggage (think ADHD, and "pay attention young man!") and then consider my suggestion. I suspect Iain would agree, what this is all about isn't "Awareness" or "being Aware", but rather "how" we are being Aware.... What do others think of this suggestion. Am I missing something?

[@albertralph2140]

Not what do I see but how is it that I see? Not what do I hear but what is hearing, not what do I know, but what is knowing? I am that I am is the most important verse in the old Testament. It is the ground state of consciousness. On the most fundamental level, not necessarily WHO I am but the simple fact THAT I am. The second level is about probing beyond the level of YOU-Ness, beyond one's own being to that which is around you. This is the essence of relationship. The summary of the New Testament is given in the Golden Rule. You can take these two verses and live your life by them. The rest is details and commentary. This is how fundamental particles behave. They are either attracted to or repelled by other particles. They do unto other particles as they would have those particles do unto them. The physical and spiritual are linked at the most fundamental level. The problem with humans is the complexity of their architecture. The various levels of signals from the fundamental particles, to atoms, molecules, aminos, proteins, organelles, cells. And then the specialization of various cell types, including neurons, axons, etc. We get caught up in the material things losing track of the basic universal messages in the consciousness that forms the energy patterns of fundamental particles. The universe is slowly building God, reuniting its scattered remnants in the face of entropy, and we are but a step in the process. Our role is important to us, and necessary in the grand scheme, but we are just a mote in the eye of the universe.

[@Bluebaggins]

If one views truth as being static, never changing, which if viewed logically is true, then any deviance from this is exposed by an opposing view point, until the opposing points are united by the emergence of a new third point of view. This in itself is how mind works, and those in power understand that with holding information and throwing out misinformation clouds the issue which causes cognitive dissonance. We as humankind have been lead on a wild goose chase, yet all the necessary information has always been available for those that are interested to follow the trail. The pressure created by forces of tyrrany itself excites the freedom seeking individual to find the correct information which can avoid the traps set, but not everybody is onboard as they are swayed by desires of personal gain. This does not stop those that seek truth itself, but those that are seeking comfort and safety. Consciousness and the ability to think abstractively is not tethered by the five sense organs of the body, and we call this intelligence. Truth is within the abstract and if one cycles back to the beginnig of this short sketch, a single point that emanates from within consciousness is the starting point of all that has manifested, is manifested and will manifest in the future.

[@jamesboswell9324]

44:45 Credit should go to Emo Philips for the joke. It's a nice one.

[@petervandenengel1208]

21:05 I have heard an atheist say: "How happy one must be having an ignorant religion to hold on to." In other words I am suffering because I want to know. Not denying anything. But very parallel to the story of Adam and Eve. Having a concsiousness means you are not in an ignorant heaven anymore. A blessing or a curse.

[@ultrasignificantfootnote3378]

Why not both.

[@petervandenengel1208]

25:27 My conclusion is atheism is the natural evolutionary result of two unfoldings. One is: the church has been bad for us. Not uplifting as they say. Catholic inquisition (also against the jews and scientists). The other is natural science seems to have broken this spell. By telling the truth. Which was enlightening. However this convolution does not mean anything absolute. Like an exeption does not prove the mean. But it starts to get complicated when the exeption claims to be the mean. If you understand what I mean.

[@ziryabjamal]

Interesting

[@misspy1153]

By the way. Obvs mcgilchrist spared sheldrake the embarrassment perhaps but within 10 secs of responding to the intro, sheldrake refers to religion as though it has anything much to do with spirituality. Seems a very basic misunderstanding and misnomer to still be retelling.

[@kbeetles]

...... because religion has nothing to do with "spiritual"? You mean the transcendent? Divinity? Metaphysical? The realm of spirits like demons/angels? ..... or you mean none of these, you are only a clever clog....

[@misspy1153]

I could have been clearer. But I did write 'much' to do with spirituality as opposed to what you've wrongly cited by reflecting that I wrote 'nothing' to do with spirituality. I do perceive that the two certainly overlap in some traits but that they remain different 'creatures' which is the point I was trying to make, and is 'pointed to' in TMWThings. In his reply I thought Sheldrake 'lumped' them both together without appearing to make a distinction, which is what I'm highlighting... @@kbeetles

[@justinwalker4475]

nice jumper

[@jonmcmahon90292]

🙏

[@petervandenengel1208]

11:42 In the 17th and 18th century people in France (which is Europe) believed life on earth was like a clockwork (they just invented,) wherein everything was predicted and with God at the switches. So when you were poor this was your destiny. The same kind of believe still present in India. So, what people tend to believe over time and call religion does not always mean it is sacred. When it is a false believe. . Be carefully in generalizing.

[@aminam9201]

5:00 does he means Rupert spira the thief ?! He was one of the first thieves!

[@johanneskiessling4085]

All very interesting. However what present day man and woman is about you can see when in the middle of this an advertisement brakes one's concentration. For example you get this ad about a mascara! Now that is what life is about and as we have learned not only for women but for men also. That is if such beings as men or women can even be named any more. I would add... even "mascara" is still on a higher lever of appreciation than what we will "cherish" tomorrow. After all we find ourselves on a slanted plane which is as slippery as ice and the way down, down unstoppable while we all work away as sweepers.

[@gillcoombs9855]

10:00 I appreciate Iain's nod to cross-species equality. However, 'humans' and 'animals' suggests that humans are not animals, when of course we very much are - many of our current problems stem from our forgetting this kinship. And then the word 'above' implies a hierarchy; a value judgment. I suggest that we simply have peculiarly human attributes, contributions to the living cosmos. Other animals each bring their own participation, maybe more fully and naturally than most humans do. We simply cannot assume, or even imagine, what those contributions might be - far less place a value judgment on them. As Nagel pointed out, we can imagine being a bat - but only from the perspective of a human imagining being a bat. We can never comprehend what it's like for a bat to be a bat.

[@riesinclairofficial]

I love the work that McGilchrist done on everything - except Autism. I would argue any theory he's applied to Autistics, has been coupled with the wrong assumption of external variables, and he would reach the same conclusions for those with severe Trauma . When reading his work, the quotes are often dated papers science one could poke holes into. And would argue, if someone needs help with too much ambiguity it is a problem with translation or too heavy right hemisphere thinking.

[@puccaso]

hearing that people actually believe that a Palestinian Jew from 2000 years ago actually had healing powers is peculiar. even more peculiar because now we ought to question their understanding of mathematics too.

[@michellejohnsen912]

I find it curious that you have the point of view that a calendar change was made to reflect the birth of Jesus of Nazareth, and yet he didn't exist? Very unreasonable

[@samandtheplants]

amen

[@samandtheplants]

Re Intention vs 'Let it be' in the spectrum of prayer/devotion/manifestation it might be good to factor in Bill Bengston's techniques and all the modern magical theories from Austin Osman Spare onward. Just a thought.

[@blakereneehope]

Gona buy Sheldrakes book, but only when this other one gets tossed off... by the dust storm.

[@petervandenengel1208]

13:31 Pagan beliefs just as well knew there was more: invisible forces. Like behind thunder, or the God of the sea. We now understand what they are. So it does not make much sense referring to other Pagan, or somewhat more literate religions from India or China or Japan, to have been right all the time. That there is more has hardly ever been questioned by humans. The question is what.

[@gillcoombs9855]

I don't think anyone is suggesting they were/are right all the time? Simply that religious beliefs are more widespread than we might imagine, if we are contemporary westerners.

[@papiarang8655]

I highly respect both gentlemen and read and listend to some of their work. That said I have to be really outspoken about my opposition or rather clarification about some points. For all you say, you would be burned at the stake in your wonderful pre-science and pre-modern world. Like always, so much idealization and non-differentiation here. Ask people in these last centuries how their mystic, telepathic etc. experiences were welcomed by the church(es). And what the missionaries did to those peoples, who believed in an animated world or talked to spirits. I dont know if it is more humane and compassionate to put people to psychiatric "care" for that or try to extinct them.( both terrible but to different degrees) And the second mix-up is the one of institutionalized religion and spirituality. How well were the Mystics and their experiences included in religious institutions, one can tell with a little historical knowledge. That you can talk about all that (of course with non-appreciation of the scientific community) is thanks to this secular and relatively free society ( though threatened now in many ways, but this is a different story). Thanks for the rest of the interview and I would love to hear more about the actual topic of the conversation. maybe in a follow up?

[@robtallon9927]

Doesn't seem to me that these individuals are calling for a wholesale return to the 1500s. It seems to me reclaiming the intrinsic link between spirit and our daily lived experience is something worth manifesting collectively.

[@papiarang8655]

@@robtallon9927 I didnt say - or mean- they call for it, as you may see, and dont believe they do, if you read carefully, I just said, they dont differentiate or point out, what would be important to do, and by not doing that, are ignoring implicitly, what religion did already for devaluating and muting these voices and experiences, long before science did the rest. Thats all. And I find that extremely important , when we talk about these topics and the role of science and religion in our daily lives. An don a societal level.

[@petervandenengel1208]

15:17 Yes, well. Christian and Islam religion at the time recognized human behavior was bad. Because after the agricultural revolution material possessions started to emerge and created the classes. It is not by chance what became western religions all started in the middle east. Where the agricultural revolution happened. Right ? So, being sinfull: suffering, had everything to do with being poor. Since people still pray and thank for their daily bread, it proves they have missed the point. The baker makes daily bread and we do not pray to him but simply pay. For our debt. Praying would not do. So since the causation (in that respect) has disappeared, there is no reason feeling sinfull (bad) anymore. Overall it shows God is a logical and not an illogical devine power.

[@gillcoombs9855]

I should think people had possessions long before major religions emerged, but the development of agriculture was certainly a significant step in the notion of 'ownership' ('my land'', fences, 'live stock' etc)

[@gillcoombs9855]

Zeno didn't want a book about stoicism, because he knew that it would all become about the book; stoicism would be fixed and defined, which he thought would be limiting .Something I would love to ask Iain as a Christian: aren't all religions a left brain representation of something far more complex than any one set of teachers or writings?

[@tgrogan6049]

Two very self-assured men. Leading back to the dark ages.

[@petervandenengel1208]

18:27 I have heard philosophers mention the word porous before. Which is weird since it means leaking or absorbing some flued. It is inert. While human consciousness is like a force. Something like a search light. Becoming aware is not being a sponge. Although I understand the counterintuitive meaning. Perhsps I just do not like the word. Imagine a prophet in Life of Brian saying: "You are all sponges." Eric Idle responding: "Well, I am not."

[@aminam9201]

Can you comprehend?! This universe has no consciousness type one, and consciousness type two is something else (it’s not consciousness type one)!

[@truepatriot6388]

What about Awareness?

[@ejenkins4711]

Or we now live in einstines mind. As jung pointed out einstine being predominantly a mathmatician he couldnt see the bridge to alchemy. E=father M=son C2=holy spirit. 2000 years nearly bang on

[@dogbitefoot4300]

In fact I think I'll leave because I can't focus on the dialogue because of this.

[@D.E.Saccone-no4og]

The word Consciousness is rather troublesome. Certainly, there is an impossibly broad spectrum.

[@margueritespringer3687]

Rupert is hilarious :)

[@theobservereffectexplained1102]

By far I find this conversation difficult to understand and follow. For me spirituality is daydream using the right brain activating the parasympathetic nervous systems and corresponding hormones to activate emotions and moods that promotes wellbeing, happiness health peace etc. I know it’s right because one experience by giving and not getting. On the hand religion is from the left with rules and regulations with prides and prejudices activating mostly the sympathetic nervous seeking certainty, do’s and don’t. Wisdom is where the dream and reality overlap. Spirituality is needed in uncertain existence because humans are vulnerable beings i.e before weapons…, In short spirituality is medicine for the mind ❤

[@kbeetles]

Pretty left-brain synthesis! You miss the the essence - the beauty of it all. Keep looking!

[@jamesmcdowell5615]

The asymptotic approach to truth....

[@gabriellecunningham7196]

🌹🇦🇺

[@glengravel]

All religions pray to the same Creator/God

[@michellejohnsen912]

There's only one savior: Jesus of Nazareth