Giulio Tononi - Why is Consciousness so Baffling?

[@DavieParkes]

He would make a great bond villain.

[@robertobattoia2601]

Ah ah..true!!!

[@robertjones9598]

Glol

[@rossmarino2776]

He'd be The Evil Dr. Consciousness. 😂

[@robertjones9598]

​@@CosmoPhiloPharmaco Foreign accent. Very measured, cold and calculated responses.

[@dancharles6009]

Jurgan Klopp's brother

[@RolandHuettmann]

I love his expressions and flow of thoughts. Cool. Unfortunately, the interview ended when it just started.

[@winstonsmith7652]

I often feel like that with most of his videos.

[@simonecamps8862]

That is exactly what I said !

[@charlescouturier395]

The Stream of Thoughts is an old concept, best studied if you go back to its root. Principles of Psychology, Volume #1 - William James (1890)

[@robertfields7688]

Consciousness is not defined by our experiences.

[@keithgreenan3177]

@@robertfields7688 there is an thereness behind the eyes that has no thought or feeling. Yo are simply there and aware that can observe all thought and feeling. It is the sky of your mind.

[@Cilexius]

Consciousness - This is maybe the greatest unsolved mystery of our time. We understand so much of the world today, but what we really are is still unknown to us.

[@nickolasgaspar9660]

what we really are is irrelevant to how the brain produces conscious states.

[@jeffrey3498]

The enlightened know who we are; the unenlightened don’t.

[@Cilexius]

@@nickolasgaspar9660 Our understanding of what we are, and how we see ourselves in this world, heavily dependents on how we view consciousness.

[@dumpsky]

@@jeffrey3498 that sounds very unenlighted.

[@jeffrey3498]

Exactly what I was saying. Thanks for the proof 😃👍@@dumpsky

[@irishcowboy42]

I'll always believe that consciousness exists, even in a dying person. One of my best friends in life, kept ventilated for all to say goodbye, a horrific experience for his family, his friends. I wouldn't wish it on anyone. I'll always remember telling him i loved him and that i'll see him soon for a pint, a night out. I remember the squeeze of his hand, not once but twice. The doctors saying because of forced oxygen, that was only a bodily impulse. I'll always believe that was a conscious impulse.

[@huwwiliams8426]

Thanks for sharing that one mate.

[@Luisoliva57]

Nah that was definitely him telling you something 🙏🏽

[@GIJoe-hc8mr]

As someone who also lost a loved one I find your experience very touching, thank you for sharing.

[@bluebelldays7650]

Yes i believe we are conscious when dying, and still conscious leaving our body, i think it's our soul or spirit, it doesn't die maybe? But i know it doesn't go into any grave or cremation. That's what i think so far in my life anyway.

[@GetOffTheLawn]

Your friend squeezed your hand. Doctors will be doctors. I'm sorry you lost your friend...for now.

[@groznyentertainment]

what an amazing background for an interview

[@Chadgigington]

Very true

[@BulentBasaran]

Wonderful! Just like the background we call consciousness :)

[@__L_S_B__]

Totally. Well thought out as you can tell, props to the set designer

[@alanssnack1192]

Thats called nature, it was once everywhere before we tarmac over it.

[@S2DIOfficial]

A fucking beautiful spectacle, indeed.

[@mariadegan1029]

Wow, this was great to hear Giulio Tononi, l have always heard what a HUGE brain he is from my sister in law (we live in Italy) who has been dear friends with the Tononi family forever! Now I know why she and her sons mention him so often, and hold him in high regard!

[@nazirkazi2588]

His neighbours say he's quite the idiot.

[@nickolasgaspar9660]

@@nazirkazi2588 and the facts,auxiliary principles and accepted paradigm of Science.

[@_highfrequencies]

These guys could do a 3 hour podcast, beautiful.

[@nickolasgaspar9660]

sure.. discussions based on claims that do not conform to evidence can go for hours.

[@michaels9388]

@@nickolasgaspar9660 I bet you're fun at parties.

[@nickolasgaspar9660]

@@michaels9388 are you a con artist? Do you run a scam and you have issues with those who demand objective evidence? lol

[@thwood40]

@@nickolasgaspar9660 what or which claims?

[@nickolasgaspar9660]

@@thwood40 Existential claims on the nature of an abstract concept (consciousnesses).

[@montyvergo5844]

I started to write my own conclusion before the end of the video, deleted it and watched it to the end; now I feel pretty stupid. Beautifully explained, thank you.

[@nickolasgaspar9660]

IF you think that in this video there is a beautiful explanation...then I will agree with your feeling....no offense.

[@Bill-uo6cm]

​@@nickolasgaspar9660Humanity's complete and universal ignorance about the subject was reasonably well explained in the limited time alloted in my opinion.

[@SomebodyPickaName]

I was in a coma for two months in the hospital when I had Covid, and even though I appeared to the outside world like I was not conscious, I was having such a crazy experience that nobody could detect. I was experiencing another reality that was being influenced by the people, the sounds, etc going on around me in the hospital bed. I remember almost all of it, and based on what I learned later on after I woke up about what was happening around me, it helped me understand how my alternate reality was being influenced. I was fully conscious since I was having daily experiences that felt perfectly real to me at the time.

[@somos]

Whoao, please go ahead and share more! What did you experience?

[@phunam6804]

amazing but painful realizations are most memorable. sorry for any living matter has to go through it... I hope you make something positive out of it..

[@hamletgiragosian6147]

You must've gotten immensely bored at times.

[@Hakumeiun]

Wow, that's incredibly fascinating. Would you be willing to tell us more? I have this whole other reality I dream about sometimes. My sleeping self is completely unaware of my waking self, and the dreams refer back to each other, like having memories of my dreams in my dreams. There are many locations, and they all interconnect and intersect. I can draw a map of the place, even, though it's grown a lot the last few years and there are all sorts of new places I'm still exploring. I even have recurring friends who are not people I know in real life. It's bizar and as much as I've asked around I've not ever met another person with anything similar. So I would really, really love to hear more about what you experienced. Was it anything like what I described?

[@laszlozoltan5021]

that is really scary- imagine, if you were locked in a nightmare world full of evil beings and horrors.

[@marcgoecke9401]

Fascinating. Consciousness is something I think about a lot. Consciousness is as incomprehensible and overwhelming as the existence of the universe

[@mystic1der2000]

Indeed! What if it’s because they are the same thing?

[@riflemanm16a2]

I saw Dr. Tononi speak in Seattle in 2012 when he was on a book tour. One of the most interesting talks I've been to. I clicked on this video based on the title and only later realized, "Oh that's the same guy!" I still haven't got around to reading his book though, lol.

[@nickolasgaspar9660]

when you don't have the science to link it with your claims....you attach a philosophical worldview and you go around selling books.

[@rizwanqamar1974]

How beautiful the place is! Amazing silence and stillness. That's consciousness.

[@Camera1production]

Consciousness is literally just the universe experiencing itself. We are all born from the universe within the universe and therefore are the universe. So we are the eyes of the universe, every person, every animal, is a version of the universe trying to experience itself as much as it can, experience new existences as much as possible which is so many of us are so different, some homebodys and others thrill seekers. Something interesting that happens with magnets, when they fall through a copper tube they fall at a slower speed- the essence of the universe, the energy, consciousness of it if you will, slows down through the human body, we are the magnet slowing down in the copper tub that is out bodies, giving us enough time to look around, to ponder, like a tourist in the savana, only a quick glimpse of this far away play, only to experience for a time.

[@lisac.9393]

Very interesting backdrop, as always!! Thank you Dr. Kuhn, for this channel.

[@winstonsmith7652]

I heard a story from someone who saved a young octopus. Every day for the next week, when she was on the beach, she claims the octopus would swim over, and in it's own way, say thank you. Suggests consciousness to me.

[@ruckboger]

I'm impressed the young lady understood Octopi. It's tough to grasp.

[@deeestuary]

I can well believe this, it's well known they are very intelligent.

[@thedopeson]

Octopuses are definitely conscious. They are one of the smartest animals on earth, which is fascinating considering they are invertebrates and one of the furthest species from humans/mammals.

[@Thedudeabides803]

Did she feed it?

[@lewiscoacher7781]

Winston Smith: The whether-or-not of animal consciousness resolves itself the moment we notice the unmistakable change in behavior that accompanies one of them being knocked unconscious. It is hard to turn off a light that isn't there. So we cling to our shrinking exclusivity with claims like "beasts abstract not" until we see wild dogs on an impossibly coordinated hunt, while serving multiple simultaneous "levels" of abstraction, or dolphins gleefully fluttering their dorsal fins in a mirror. Fight. Flight. Freeze. Fawn. All invented long before speech, by minds that are as opaque to us as our own.

[@KpxUrz5745]

I love to hear discussions of Consciousness, in the wild hope of learning something about it from those most educated in this field. ---- Sadly, however, there is never anything concrete to learn about it, not even a decent definition. All anyone can say is: "I cannot explain it, but I know I experience it, and I can only assume that others experience it". Pretty oblique, considering that it is all we have.

[@bardoteachings]

Try KZbin videos of Swami Sarvapriyananda or Rupert Spira :)

[@dylanlundberg9609]

Yeah it’s similar to why gravity does what it does, we don’t really know yet. Or why universal laws don’t all of a sudden change, instead they always stick to strict rules.

[@gundabalf]

Everything explainable and knowable is an object to consciousness, but consciousness cannot be an object to itself, it just is. Or as Alan Watts puts it, you cannot see your eyes with your eyes.

[@LiMitZplus]

Nothing is more convincing then experience

[@CSUnger]

I had heard of thee by the hearing of the ear, but now my eye sees thee; Job 42:5

[@colinwhite5355]

Wow, what a gripping introduction; how could I not watch the rest?

[@tulinbeyduz920]

Consciousness is the worlds heartbeat 💓

[@nickolasgaspar9660]

wrong biological organ....Consciousness is a mental property of the brain

[@antimaterialworld2717]

Nice one. But i would say more precisly, God's heartbeat. Impersonal objects usually dont have heartbeat. But all subjects from trees trought animals to human has. So in that sense man is created on image of God.

[@tulinbeyduz920]

@@antimaterialworld2717 i haven’t met God personally .. so i wouldn’t know if he has one … but life itself is one heart beat to me .. I am not religious by nature but can reconcile as being a patchiest .. it’s what resonated with me .. that life itself is an expression of God itself …

[@antimaterialworld2717]

@@tulinbeyduz920 so in that sense we humans, who are pretty nice expression of life, could be considered like small samples of God. And based on that we can infere that God would have similiar qualities, but in higher degree.

[@ZValenT]

I appreciate the camera work in this video. It can sometimes be hard for me to concentrate when it's just two stationary cameras pointing at two people but with the cameras moving around, we got to see more of the background which I liked

[@Novastar.SaberCombat]

Perspective (and Reflection) is always key. *"Time is the only resource for which no creature may bargain."* 🐲✨🐲✨🐲✨ "Before I start, I must see my end. Destination known, my mind's journey now begins. Upon my chariot, heart & soul's fate revealed. In Time, all points converge--hope's strength re-steeled. But to earn final peace at the Universe's endless refrain, We must see all in nothingness... ...before we start again." 🐲✨🐲✨🐲✨ -- Diamond Dragons (book 1) -- 12.21.21

[@nickolasgaspar9660]

@@Novastar.SaberCombat Reflection can never help us identify physical causal mechanisms. Its a lazy excuse people use to avoid studying our epistemology.

[@mystic1der2000]

The problem of the science of consciousness, very well said and explained by Tononi !

[@shane7850]

Its conversations like this that have left me torn from my "Family" and even so called friends... and I have never been happier. Ask the hardest questions, search for every fact. When you do, then you will know.

[@Novastar.SaberCombat]

I agree 100%. *"Time is the only resource for which no creature may bargain."* 🐲✨🐲✨🐲✨ "Before I start, I must see my end. Destination known, my mind's journey now begins. Upon my chariot, heart & soul's fate revealed. In Time, all points converge--hope's strength re-steeled. But to earn final peace at the Universe's endless refrain, We must see all in nothingness... ...before we start again." 🐲✨🐲✨🐲✨ -- Diamond Dragons (book 1) -- 12.21.21

[@nickolasgaspar9660]

lol this is not how we produce knowledge. Not all sentences with a question mark at end qualify as serious questions.

[@shane7850]

@@nickolasgaspar9660 and by that, what you mean is?

[@shane7850]

Ill wait, Im up all nite and need another to pick brains with... no harm here.

[@nickolasgaspar9660]

@@shane7850 My point was a general statement. Conversations are not and shouldn't affect our relations. First of all we don't know if the points made in a conversation are epistemically correct.

[@nanow1990]

Because we are so wrapped up in ourselves that we never stop to consider that we are not the only conscious entity in the universe. We are all part of a single consciousness that transcends time, space, and matter. The fact that we are all part of the same consciousness implies that we all have the same potential for self-actualization and happiness. We are all in this together. The sooner we realize that and stop trying to pull away from others, the sooner we can all achieve our highest potential.

[@tomortiz3514]

Consciousness is a gift to enjoy each other and to be aware of the good things around us like colorful flowers 🌸 and tasty foods, plus to be capable of seeing beyond this dimension

[@cabforwardooo9983]

When considering what consciousness is, out of body experiences provide important clues that shouldn't be ignored.

[@DD-gi6kx]

don't go bringing nonsense into an otherwise good discussion The guy speaking doesn't even know what consciousness is or if its an illusion, yet you know what an out of body experience is ??

[@cabforwardooo9983]

@@DD-gi6kx Obviously a near death or out of body experience is entirely related to the discussion of what consciousness is. It is consciousness outside of the body which can only happen if it is not tied to the physical brain. It's nonsense to ignore it.

[@DD-gi6kx]

@@cabforwardooo9983 consciousness outside the body not tied to the brain is nonsense

[@cabforwardooo9983]

@@DD-gi6kx Too many people have reported out of body experiences where they saw and heard things that they couldn't possibly have. You can ignore these accounts if you wish, but doing so amounts to willful ignorance.

[@DD-gi6kx]

@@cabforwardooo9983 every experience is chemicals in the brain no matter what that experience feels like, anything else is nonsense that does not belong in a discussion with scientists

[@dermotthompson2115]

An extraordinary session - brilliant interview

[@psalmsofoblivionpromotions2269]

Consciousness is a perfect representation of a higher power. The ability to observe and ponder our surroundings and the universe is the ultimate explanation to a creator.

[@scambammer6102]

then why are we so stupid? Seriously, if i was god, I wouldn't give a rats az for humans. Any more than we care about sponges.

[@nickolasgaspar9660]

lol magical thinkers will see their gods in anything.

[@psalmsofoblivionpromotions2269]

@@nickolasgaspar9660 lol buddy I’m not the one that believe the universe randomly came into existence and by mere chance created galaxies and life as we know it.

[@nickolasgaspar9660]

@@psalmsofoblivionpromotions2269 To whom are you directing this strawman? First of all "randomness" is an observer relative term that depends and its limited by available facts and observations. Matter has the ability to group and organize based on really simple "rules" produced by its basic properties...so "mere chance'' has nothing to do with the structures in our universe. Its like saying..." These 2 magnets clumped up the way they did by mere chance."

[@krumplethemal8831]

I once had a dream that I was a beetle living like a person with other human people. It was horrific and I quickly became depressed thinking that I am now this thing that is so much different than everyone else, no one would accept or love me in this condition. But then something happened, I discovered I had abilities that other people didn't have that I could utilize. It made me special and unique. I had a purpose and now looked at this situation as a gift rather than a nightmare. I started to enjoy the existence as a human-like beetle. Then the dream ended, waking up to my normal human self. I was now depressed that I wasn't a bettle anymore.

[@pluutoop]

Same here. My dreams r what is real not this reality we wake up to.

[@goodguy5595]

I had a dream I was Ringo a beetle

[@scambammer6102]

^ Gregor Samsa (that's Franz Kafka for you viewers at home)

[@joebloggs4925]

@@scambammer6102 yeah this is the definition of kafka-esque LOL

[@pelementmaker]

i like the quote about consiousness that says "self awareness is the universe subjectivly experiencing itself". personaly ive had a thought, just an idea painted with religious colors, the fundamental building blocks or whatever mystical starstuff that make up our body and soul is the continuation of a star that has died, thusly, perhaps an aspect of an afterlife that this or that star is experiencing. A trillion different shapes and compositions, and paradoxically this time beeing the receptor of its own light thru the very essence of its own beeing.

[@SOLIDSNAKE.]

Wow

[@alanssnack1192]

Yah we already know we are star stuff.

[@Saltbreather]

@@alanssnack1192 the idea that we are the descendants of stardust isn’t news, but the idea that we are the remnants of a star that is receiving it’s own light from very far away and maybe millions of years after the star emitted that light? That’s a new idea to me and pretty mind boggling to consider.

[@jarjar3143]

Ummm......NO !

[@alanssnack1192]

@@Saltbreather how can we be from a star then receive light from that star? From different stars sure. The sun is suspect

[@pearlmarley]

Whomever is reading this remember to spread as much LOVE AS POSSIBLE, don't litter, help out the homeless and take care of nature please it's really important we gotta take care of eachother and mother earth. thank you and have a blessed life ❤

[@ricardo22841]

I am of the mind that Satre’s “I think therefore I am” is synonymous with “I think therefore I am what I think” both share subjective implications. Whereas consciousness is a state of being that facilitates awareness pure and simple.

[@Novastar.SaberCombat]

Consciousness obeys linear Time. Unconsciousness ignores it, and thus, is unchained and unleashed. *"Time is the only resource for which no creature may bargain."* 🐲✨🐲✨🐲✨ "Before I start, I must see my end. Destination known, my mind's journey now begins. Upon my chariot, heart & soul's fate revealed. In Time, all points converge--hope's strength re-steeled. But to earn final peace at the Universe's endless refrain, We must see all in nothingness... ...before we start again." 🐲✨🐲✨🐲✨ -- Diamond Dragons (book 1) -- 12.21.21

[@verse8833]

This was a very interesting and stimulating conversation. One tip, maybe cut out the weird camera shots. You're filming a conversation not a fight scene. Thanks for sharing this.

[@nickolasgaspar9660]

you are ok with the weird claims but you see an issue in....camera shots?

[@verse8833]

@@nickolasgaspar9660 Just because I entertain a thought does not mean I accept it as truth, and yes certain camera angles did not fit.

[@nickolasgaspar9660]

@@verse8833 You find interesting and stimulating a conversation on pseudo philosophical ideas????

[@F8TVOfficial]

The answer is art. Filter life through the mediums we are capable of as humans and our appreciation for beauty, art is the product of us filtering life through our experiences, and we can find some answers in asking ourselves the questions no one else could fathom. We can find our future through the understanding of what it’s like to be conscious and what it’s like to feel. It’s like our soul purpose is to experience deeply and within ourselves we can find the answers to the universe.

[@phonsefagan3754]

I would suggest the key may be in our understanding of "incremental" consciousness: working upwards from the very simplest "stimulus response" creatures to the most complex forms. If we can see what ability was added with each evolutionary modification we get a better sense of the mechanics of consciousness. However there still comes a point where we have to deal with an emergent phenomenon that is fundamentally unique. And, because it is so profoundly unique, we have no simpler analogues by which to help us comprehend it.

[@dazboot2966]

Surely the whole point is that we are considering that consciousness may not be an 'emergent' phenomenon?

[@phonsefagan3754]

@@dazboot2966 I dunno. I thought we were just trying to figure it out. I grant it's possible that it's not emergent (i.e. that there is some aspect of Nature we are entirely missing). But I wouldn't be too quick in writing emergence out of the equation. In fact, if I was forced to bet my house on it, emergence from atomic/molecular/cellular/electromagnetic interactions would be my bet.

[@dazboot2966]

@@phonsefagan3754 I love that quote from David Chalmers where he asks 'how does the water of the brain turn into the wine of consciousness' - we really seem a long way from understanding how a material construct could possibly give rise to the phenomenon of 'experience'. The notion that if you get enough neurones gathered in the correct arrangement then consciousness emerges seems - ridiculous.

[@phonsefagan3754]

@@dazboot2966 I turn water into wine on a regular basis as one of my hobbies. I also turn wine into urine. But I digress! The fact is, we see emergent properties (where the whole has properties that are not present in the parts) all over the place - as I'm sure you're well aware. The fact that we don't yet know the process by which consciousness (possibly) emerges from unconscious matter makes it a profound unknown - but, not (IMHO) 'ridiculous'.

[@CSUnger]

There is no such thing as “incremental consciousness”. A living entity is either conscious or it is inert matter. Period. The question is not what IS consciousness? We know what consciousness is: it is self-awareness. The right question is: where does it come from? Evolution cannot provide us with the answer since it is devoid of the mechanism for explaining origins. [Edit: inserted "for explaining" ]

[@thomboy892]

I am glad consciousness and its mechanisms are largely a mystery to us humans. The possibilities of what would be done with such knowledge scares me!

[@BobzimG]

Have never thought like this, great point

[@thomboy892]

@Seven Inches of Throbbing Pink Jesus It is irrational comments like yours that solidify my original post

[@nickolasgaspar9660]

lol what do you think consciouness really is Norm???

[@thomboy892]

​@@nickolasgaspar9660 I actually think consciousness is meta-physical. Natural Science does not have the means to quantify it let alone understand it. We only see outward workings of its existence.

[@thomboy892]

@Seven Inches of Throbbing Pink Jesus Why are you so antagonistic? My statement was not an indictment on knowledge or discovery, but rather an indictment on the human condition. I don't believe we as human are prepared for the implications of such a discovery. Let work on ourselves first so that we can be.

[@Bill-uo6cm]

I enjoy every one of these episodes even though each one understandably seems to end on the exact same note: We don't know the truth, we don't know the path to the truth, we don't know how to find the path to the truth, and we can't even imagine what the path to the truth or the truth itself could possibly look like. I enjoy the mystery, it doesn't bother me. Looking hard for the truth and only seeing a pure mystery is preferable, at least for me, than seeing the pure truth. I love the hunt ... but not the kill.

[@willymack5677]

I don’t think it matters whether or mot consciousness is “real” or an illusion. If it is an illusion, it’s pretty damn convincing. Good enough for me

[@yodhin79]

The mere fact we're using a computer to discuss that which we are and that we experiene is proof that consciousness is real at a base level. How grounded our consciousness is is debatable though.

[@jogib.9596]

@F trogs With meditation practice you will get more access. Just try it out for yourself.

[@Velereonics]

Because it would mean that no one is really making any decisions for themselves, if it isn't real. For instance, if consciousness is not real, and you downloaded the arrangement of your neurons and your memories into a computer and gave both you the person and the copy of you in the computer the same decision, both would make the same choice, ie your most "real" decisions would come from early in your life. Everything after a certain point would just be a matter of patience.

[@thesage90]

Like all illusion would be

[@richardamos5898]

U have dodged this question excellently

[@3FKMedia]

I like the fact that he's reverse engineering it instead of tackling it head on. Almost like building each component of a computer to give you a complex experience. İnteresting approach but fuel for the singularity.

[@Novastar.SaberCombat]

During consciousness, the brain is LIMITED by Time (the Present). But during UNconsciousness... there are no such chains and manacles. *"Time is the only resource for which no creature may bargain."* 🐲✨🐲✨🐲✨ "Before I start, I must see my end. Destination known, my mind's journey now begins. Upon my chariot, heart & soul's fate revealed. In Time, all points converge--hope's strength re-steeled. But to earn final peace at the Universe's endless refrain, We must see all in nothingness... ...before we start again." 🐲✨🐲✨🐲✨ -- Diamond Dragons (book 1) -- 12.21.21

[@nickolasgaspar9660]

@@Novastar.SaberCombat Why do you pretend to know things that you don't? How can you objectively demonstrate the truth value of your unfounded claims?

[@Novastar.SaberCombat]

@@nickolasgaspar9660 What are you getting on about? It's a scientific fact that the mind can think abstractly during the stages of sleep (REM, for certain). Thousands of years of dreams, nightmares, NDEs, etc. etc. verify this science. What moronic, trolly agenda are you trying to peddle here? You didn't even back up your claim with something intelligent or interesting. Get OVER yourself for just 3-6 seconds and admit that the brain/mind is MUCH more complicated during unconscious states than it is during 'normal', everyday life where Time proceeds in a linear, unidirectional format. 🐲✨🐲✨🐲✨

[@nickolasgaspar9660]

@@Novastar.SaberCombat what the brain can do during REM stages is irrelevant to your claims sir. NDEs....verified by science???? In what comic series was this claim published? I guess I missed it lol. You are obviously ignorant of neuroscience. The brain and it's emergent mind properties don't become " more complicated" just because you view them as such ...

[@Novastar.SaberCombat]

@@nickolasgaspar9660 I'm not going to get in some online pissing match with an obvious troll. Your straw-man, ad hominem BS is utter JANK and nonsense. Intelligent people can look up Sam Parnia and DOZENS of other scientists and neurology experts who have written volumes on the complexity of the brain, mind, and man's interpretation of Time. You can 'believe' whatever the bloody hell you want, though. I am not here to convince you that science exists. You would need to do that yourself. But--for example--the same types of people who believe 'viruses must be killed' believe that the fact that they CANNOT be killed... is 'my opinion'. It isn't. It's just science. Good luck, everyone. Keep an open mind for science, but a skeptical one for random, non-sequitur opinions. 🐲✨🐲✨🐲✨

[@sarazohar4923]

What a gorgeous space to speak for the intellect

[@surameenputtu]

Consciousness can inexplicably drop away. When we go to sleep, we are still conscious, but not bodily. The dropping away of the thinking mind, all of a sudden, while riding the train, for example, is totally different. It is non experiential. It is not the view of an entity. It does "happen", but not to anyone in particular. It is definitely not illusory, but rather alarming in its clarity. The mind is there when this happens, but has observed it as if it were a witness. The clarity is astounding for the mind, but oddly, it remembers this event as something absolutely real, and not imagined. So real that the mind understands the nature of existence as it knows is absolutely illusory.

[@doiron12]

I would say that a part of your brain is vaguely conscious when you sleep. Your just operating on a different wavelength. You are in a sense a different being when you sleep. You really could not make the statement, " I think therefore I am" while sleeping.

[@surameenputtu]

@@doiron12 You can only make the statement "I think therefore I am" only when you are awake. We are aware only of 2 states, namely awake or asleep. Oftentimes you have experienced knowing that you are dreaming while asleep. That's a sort of twilight zone. When you have fully awakened from sleep, you sense your bodily self. The physical world along with your physical self seems to have returned. What I meant in my earlier comment is this: In the state you and I are in right now, it is utterly impossible to escape from the cage that is our individual minds. You cannot think, not think, or meditate your way to liberation. I don't know how rare it is, but there is a possibility that the mind drops away in an instant and one gets to "experience " a third state. I use the term "experience " because of the English language which we must use to communicate this. However, this third state is a literally absolutely a state of all knowing, sans the thinker. You have heard ad nauseam about how difficult, if not impossible it is to describe, and unfortunately it's true. You are physically and mentally absent and this strange "seeing" does not involve "you" at all. In spite of all this, the mind has witnessed this "non experience " and remembers, thus enabling me to relate this to you. It is a kind of divine accident. It cannot be brought about by any effort, deep contemplation or meditation. Most people think that this happens to a select few who are exceptional, but it can happen to literally anybody. You are not a special person if or when it happens to you. You are also unable to convince anyone about your "non experience ", and there is no necessity for anyone to believe you.

[@donnievance1942]

@@surameenputtu Yes. I understand you. This understanding you communicate is what the speakers in the video seek, but do not reach. It is not an intellectual proposition, and cannot be found by analysis of the brain as a system or anything else. We wish we could reside in this third state, but the wise people say that wishing is a barrier. "The way that can be followed is not the way. The name that can be named is not the true name."

[@donnievance1942]

@@surameenputtu Thank you for writing what you did.

[@surameenputtu]

@@donnievance1942 Hi Donnie. You are most welcome. If you have "experienced " this non experience I would love to hear from you. It might even have been so subtle and nuanced, comparable to a quick flick of the curtain, letting in a flash of light. Thank you

[@maxieduardoapariciom.3181]

The smartest guy you have interview so far.

[@scambammer6102]

omg really?

[@charliebee4338]

I accidentally found this channel and it’s right up me alley. It’s a subject that really fascinates me but every few minutes, I have to Google these “big words”, especially from the comment section. Bloody Hell. Lol

[@nickolasgaspar9660]

there are Academic Moocs that teach real science on how the brain does what it does.....or you are just in for the magical claims?

[@charliebee4338]

@@nickolasgaspar9660 No way…your kidding me!!! Please, kindly direct me to more of these channels. I am just still learning. Cheers 🍻

[@nickolasgaspar9660]

​@@charliebee4338 btw its Central Lateral thalamus the part of the brain that connects all parts of the brains responsible for Reasoning, Pattern recognition, memory , symbolic language etc to the Ascending Reticular Activating System (state of awareness)

[@juneack5848]

Never heard of this dude. Great discovery, thank you

[@nickolasgaspar9660]

that should raise a red flag.....

[@dylanlundberg9609]

I’m super interested in when someone is temporarily put to sleep during an operation. I wonder why you lose the ability to be aware if the rest of your body is shut off. Somehow, the ability to think shuts off when the senses shut off. It’s as if consciousness is the flow of information into the brain. This also means you need new information to be inputted into the brain in order to recall your previous memories, because in order to remember the past, you need to rethink it in the present while your senses are functioning properly. This implies, the memories in the brain alone does not give you consciousness (otherwise you would be able to be aware of your existence and your past during an operation). There seems to be some form of denied access to your memories during an operation. The same is true when you fall into a deep sleep and no dreaming. It’s as if your present memory is what gives you the consciousness. If you don’t produce a present memory, then you’re no longer able to be aware. Then all the emotions felt in life are physical traits inherited from years and years worth of trial and error (natural selection). Which is why humans are so like minded. They are usually all after the same thing: survival. Anything that poses as a threat to us, it will make us feel uncomfortable. This to me makes me believe that we are conscious, but we are not in control of our actions.

[@nerfbutt]

This is a great thought and the first time I've heard it. I think you're on to something.

[@Novastar.SaberCombat]

Time has no meaning inside of a dream (or during sleep). Past, Present and Future all intermix... and *SO* much more is then possible, while inside this curiously 'complete' state. *"Time is the only resource for which no creature may bargain."* 🐲✨🐲✨🐲✨ "Before I start, I must see my end. Destination known, my mind's journey now begins. Upon my chariot, heart & soul's fate revealed. In Time, all points converge--hope's strength re-steeled. But to earn final peace at the Universe's endless refrain, We must see all in nothingness... ...before we start again." 🐲✨🐲✨🐲✨ -- Diamond Dragons (book 1) -- 12.21.21

[@nickolasgaspar9660]

In May 28 2020 (PNAS June 16 2020), scientists have solved this "mystery''. Check for academic publications with the title. "Scientists unravel the mystery of anesthesia"

[@sudhabansal21]

Brain is just like a TV. TV has not any drama or person in it and no colours but it catches or say perceives the Waves that carry all the information . It converts that information into pictures and words and projects that information for us to see .Brains are just like that consciousness is everywhere and brain is simply the tool like a TV . Brain receives ,perceives and projects so that we are conscious of this consciousness.

[@STGFilmmakers]

We will never get back that 10 minutes of consciousness.

[@DarioMiticocchio]

My thought exactly: a very articulate conversation on not having a clue

[@joebloggs4925]

@@DarioMiticocchio enlighten us humble man

[@DarioMiticocchio]

@@joebloggs4925 I don't recall claiming to have enlightening truths...

[@pspaulstewartinterviewinspires]

To sense more about consciousness and to explore it, you know yourself as a point of consciousness. And you allow that consciousness exists whether there is a brain or not. Limiting consciousness to the human condition is indeed, limiting. There is no mind-body problem. There is however, human beings clinging to our own thoughts and limiting our consciousness experiences to that. That’s one reason silence is recognized as such a doorway to consciousness, or life.

[@nickolasgaspar9660]

Nonsensical statement. Exploring the content of your conscious states will never provide any meaningful insights for this biological property. You need to identify the physical mechanism and the physical stimuli relation to our states. This is the only way we can objectively evaluate our frameworks. You need to study the science of relevant fields...not adopt an idea that fits people's comforting beliefs. Describing the causal mechanisms responsible for a mental property is not limiting..its descriptive. We keep our descriptions checked and avoid bovine manure polluting our epistemology and conclusions. We no longer practice and present medieval theology as Philosophy or Science.

[@fernandoblanco3001]

It is perhaps likely that those who surmise consciousness as "baffling," "unsolved," or "mysterious" lack an advanced biological comprehension of the central and peripheral nervous systems, primarily the reticular activating system.

[@Earth1960]

"you cannot solve the problem of consciousness by looking at the brain", the one thing he said that I agree with

[@jakobflores5382]

ok professor

[@Earth1960]

@@jakobflores5382 how ironic, your comment belies the fact that you think the problem can be solved with intelligence

[@donnievance1942]

@@Earth1960 Not at all. He wrote only of how it cannot be solved, not how it can. The rejection of a proposition does not imply an acceptance of the contrary.

[@nickolasgaspar9660]

if by "problem of consciousness" he means the pseudo philosophical problem proposed by Chalmers...then he is right. If he is trying to entertain his personal failure to explain the available data then he is not the first scientist or philosopher who attempts to make things more mysterious then they are.

[@ampfoster1062]

Fascinating pov, I believe - if it is helpful in understanding - that I have memories of being born among my earliest memories and just a perception of just what I'll call, pure awareness. I remember later on (likely after a nap) looking upwards at what I now know to be adult heads but at the time they seemed huge. Hearing words from what think is my memory of the time - "He's so cute" ... that I'll be a heart-breaker. Which I remember even now; of coarse, when I found out what a heart-breaker was I've done my best not to be so callous or inconsiderate as to hurt others feelings. IOW, some of those memories attenuated my decisions. I'm aware of that being now a senior. One more thing I think was left out of the discussion. I believe the 'spark of life' itself also has a major role in consciousness.

[@stevemacbr]

@Amp - - First 45 seconds in,.... and the 'guest' shows he hasn't got a CLUE about 'consciousness',... unless it's based on the 5-sense perceptions.

[@RosstheYid]

Bullshit. You can't remember being born. You just think you do. It's impossible

[@nickolasgaspar9660]

the hardware necessary to remember things isn't developed during your birth...you are shoveling bovine manure.

[@stevecopper1667]

Right around the last 30 seconds of the video shows you that a man can spend almost 15 minutes having no idea what he's talking about and in the end know how to figure out what he's talking about but have no idea what he's talking about that is what you call brilliance

[@DaiBei]

During a meditation I float with my astral body upwards where I stayed against the ceiling, seeing my material body sitting on a chair. So I know that my consciousness isn't a part of my body. Every person with a out-of-body-experience or a NDE (about 15% of the people) knows this. This doesn't fit into the boundaries of the current science. But we will evolve in that direction.

[@dylanlundberg9609]

I believe it is your imagination inside your material body that puts you on the ceiling looking down at yourself. I could be wrong though. It sound relaxing either way!

[@DaiBei]

@@dylanlundberg9609 In know very well the difference between dreaming, imagination, visualization, normal being awake and an experience like that where everything is much more clear with a feeling of bliss, that stays alive and vivid after 40 years, where all the other experiences are slowly disappearing.

[@dylanlundberg9609]

@@DaiBei So why do I feel like I’m stuck inside my body? How did you manage to get out?

[@Soapandwater6]

@@dylanlundberg9609 Sometimes, when I am recalling childhood memories, I see myself from outside myself. I should recall the memory from the perspective of my eyes as I experienced it, but instead, I see it from the outside as an observer looking in at myself. Isn't that odd?

[@dylanlundberg9609]

@@Soapandwater6 did your parent have a lot of videos of you as a child? Is it because you can only remember your childhood from pictures that people took when you were young?

[@budverissimo1]

consciousness is what makes all of us and everything. The spirit.

[@nickolasgaspar9660]

so you just came up with a new name for the old useless concept of god...?

[@iliaadamanthark8336]

Consciousness is just how our brain making sense of sensory input and abstract thinking process.

[@dylnjshua4256]

@@nickolasgaspar9660 No, Nicki. Stop being a dicky

[@nickolasgaspar9660]

@@dylnjshua4256 sorry ,did I offended your new age religion?

[@dylnjshua4256]

@@nickolasgaspar9660 Nicki boy

[@JannisChatziminas]

Excellent interview.

[@deckearns]

Yep. My dogs, definitely are conscious. They feel, they love, they hurt, they think (deeply), they measure me, others, eachother. Other animals are the same. I do not believe that we as humans are the only species that's holds consciousness.

[@dylanlundberg9609]

Completely agree. It would be one of the most baffling discoveries if only humans were aware. I do wonder if there are some animals out there which aren’t complicated enough to be aware though. I’m thinking a blurry line between plants and animals in the tree of life.

[@Soapandwater6]

I've seen enough videos/documentaries on elephants that I would say that they have consciousness. They are very social as a species and in one documentary, the herd would go to visit an "elephant graveyard" where they would linger and caress the bones of their dead relatives as if in mourning. It appeared that they might know that they will die.

[@christosshugeh9573]

I think what they are saying is awareness of self. What your dog feels is something different. Your dog does not know it's a dog, it is not conscious of it. It does make you wonder though, I have seen dogs whining and such when they are sleeping which gives the impression that the have to be dreaming and this man said dreaming is part of our consciousness : )

[@dylanlundberg9609]

@@christosshugeh9573 I wonder if dogs truly don’t know that they are a dog. They might not go “I’m a dog”. I think humans don’t know exactly what they are either although they call themselves humans.

[@fullyawakened]

I've never read or heard a single sentence from a scientist, philosopher, or average joe that suggests animals are not conscious. the only question is what kind of consciousness do they have. It has a few similarities but it is demonstrably not the same kind of consciousness that occurs in a human brain.

[@1bionic1]

Our host admitted he didn't know before or after he got his degree, and our guest went on for 10 minutes explaining he didn't know either. All we are left with is the host's description of the video: "magical web of inner awareness"!!! Reduced further: consciousness is magic!!! Yeahhhhhhh - magical :)

[@philippeichert]

The thing is: It is kinda like magic. You are not gonna get a reductionist explanation for qualia.

[@1bionic1]

​We all know, if we know anything, what it's like to experience red and other qualia because we all, each one of us, has subjective experiences. The problem arises when we attempt to verbalize our subjective experiences. I submit to you that the first person who opened his or her mouth to utter "red" was a reductionist! Speech is a reduction. Extracting qualia out the domain in which it occurs, and into the domain of language, IS reductionism, or more precisely, is transduction. And like all transducers, something is lost in the process/translation. We go from an electrochemical-hormonal domain into a symbolic-semiotic domain: it might as well be night and day - not even a thousand words will suffice! The real questions are: why in the world would I want to reduce my consciousness to speech, to explain it, or to symbolize it? Didn't we agree that consciousness is subjective, specific to a subject? Then why O why do we expect and insist that consciousness should exist (be explainable) outside a subject? The illusion that words and symbols and science can extract/explain/reduce consciousness out of a being, any being, is IMHO the original sin, the original death drive! "Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent." (Wittgenstein's Tractatus 7) This is a stark message indeed, for it renders literally unspeakable so much of human life. As Wittgenstein's friend and colleague Frank Ramsey put it, "What we can't say we can't say, and we can't whistle it either." (Source: www.philosophypages.com/hy/6s - copy and past into browser since KZbin returns a 404 if you click it) To me, IMHO, "we can't whistle it" means we can't neuro-image it, neuro-extract it, neuro-examine it, neuro-cognize it. etc. One more: "Consequently, there is no scientific language (i.e. neuroscience) that could totalize the truth of subjectivity." (Source: "The difference between neuroscience and Psychoanalysis: Irreducibility of absence to brain states" by Cadell Nicholas Last, available here www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/15294145.2021.1926312 )

[@cosmicHalArizona]

Very mysterious

[@scambammer6102]

@@1bionic1 Speech doesn't reduce consciousness. If some aspect of your thoughts cannot be expressed through language, they still exist regardless of whether you use speech occasionally. I also doubt that such unexpressed consciousness has any value beyond performing bodily functions. What's so great about it?

[@piehound]

Sounds like a sensible and a very interesting approach. Let's go that way and see where it leads. Thank you gentlemen.

[@nickolasgaspar9660]

Or let's follow actual scientific work...

[@shawncolton9507]

Fascinating! I've always wondered the relationship between mind, body, and spirit with consciousness.

[@insomniak4760]

Spirit? What does that even mean?

[@TheMagnificentGman]

@@insomniak4760 spirits get you drunk

[@havenbastion]

Mind is a metaphor for the patterns in the brain. Spiritual means "of the human spirit" and is a metaphor for the personally salient sub-patterns in the brain, like preferences, priorities, opinions, ideas, etc. Your favorite color, for instance, is a spiritual fact. It has real-world effects but can only be known/verified indirectly.

[@insomniak4760]

@@havenbastion That's complete and utter bullshit.

[@ats-3693]

@@insomniak4760 😂 yep

[@jamesjosheph3006]

What we experience is objective, objects, emotions, feelings. What thing is aware of all these is consciousness 🙏

[@nickolasgaspar9660]

Consciousness is not a "thing'.

[@howardmueller1535]

I think consciousness is a product of self awareness, which is not an illusion at all. Like the scientist said, consciousness is the self that experiences reality. I think the KZbin algorithm is becoming self aware 😂 it’s tracking my interests too well. Loved this video.

[@axle.student]

Thank you. Enjoyable conversation gentlemen. Consciousness: I feel that this occurs at that point just before the mind adds it's preconceived filters to the raw perception of the external world. Possibly an unborn child may be as close as it gets to "RAW" consciousness.

[@Novastar.SaberCombat]

I believe that we (collectively) need to start asking more young children to 'write down what they experienced' BEFORE they were born. Yes... before. Once humankind has done that (and more scientific methods) with 120,000+ children... it will shed some serious Light on many mysteries beyond the veil. 🐲✨🐲✨🐲✨ "Before I start, I must see my end. Destination known, my mind's journey now begins. Upon my chariot, heart & soul's fate revealed. In Time, all points converge--hope's strength re-steeled. But to earn final peace at the Universe's endless refrain, We must see all in nothingness... ...before we start again." 🐲✨🐲✨🐲✨ -- Diamond Dragons (book 1) -- 12.21.21

[@axle.student]

@@Novastar.SaberCombat Although it is difficult to offer validation to myself or to others, I do have memories from what I believe is prior to birth. Interestingly the memories also match in some ways to my experience of the spiritual enlightenment. A place where you have consciousness and awareness but no knowledge or names of the things you are experiencing. What you experience "Just is", nothing more.

[@axle.student]

@@Novastar.SaberCombat P.S. To leave the ego behind and fall into the abyss of the universe ("Beyond The Veil") is a somewhat difficult thing to explain to others because, in essence, there is no human experience that explains it, and the experience itself is unlike our everyday life of knowledge and and subjective descriptions and labels. From the little you say I feel you may have an understanding :)

[@nickolasgaspar9660]

@@Novastar.SaberCombat Lets go back to the middle ages...where subjective experiences fueled more than 4.300 religions and 160+ spiritual worldviews....just by accepting claims on face value. Great....pls tell me the methodology by which we can objectively evaluate and distinguish imagination from real stories....Good luck I guess.

[@georgedoyle7971]

@@nickolasgaspar9660 “4300 religions” It’s actually 4301 religions you forgot to add your own personal religious fanaticism. “Then there are the fanatical atheists whose intolerance is of the same kind as the intolerance of the religious fanatics and comes from the same source.” (Albert Einstein). Einstein to an unidentified addressee dated 7th August 1941. Einstein archive reel 54-927; Jammer p.97.

[@SwitchTTS]

Tip for the camera guy's just use 2 solid angles, and pan and zoom left right in out really slowly, 100% to 110% over a time of one minute switch between timelines. It will give enough variation and isn't distracting. The tripods can be moved while letting 1 other camera roll for close ups at important parts and stuff. Options are endless. 🤞

[@gordonirvine726]

The producer was semi conscious

[@markupton1417]

Yes...the professional videoing for a living should totally listen to the guy who took a course in junior college.

[@SwitchTTS]

@@markupton1417 tips ain't always free.

[@haroldfloyd5518]

I dig Lawrence’s enthusiasm when he encounters new ideas.

[@KnowledgeCollectiveOfficial]

To understand the nature of consciousness, we should start first by understanding why our beliefs about matter and physical things are so damn confusing. In our minds the space between us and the other side is called "time". In reality, there is no time or space between us and them. We should realize that we should stop thinking of everything as a separate entity that exists in a void. They should be thought of as a part of us. Everything is connected, nothing is separate. We talk about this stuff in our videos!

[@nicklarsen3113]

Therefore you’re nothing more than a comment I’m viewing on KZbin. Idealism is just solipsism.

[@scambammer6102]

dr woo

[@nickolasgaspar9660]

Of course there is. Time is the phenomenon that emerges due to a simple facts. Things in the cosmos don't happen all at once and at an identical pace. You are doing a category error when you claim that everything is a part of us. They just aren't. They are different processes unrolling at their own pace an in the process they produce entities and structures. Those structures are different entities in the same evolving process (Universe). Consciousness as a word describes many aspects. In science consciousness is the property of a specific biological function. (a brain being aware of the environment, its self and thoughts). Consciousness as an abstract concept describe the quality of that biological property. In pseudo philosophy....consciousness is just an invisible magical substance that enables our conscious states. Its nothing more than a failed attempt to explain a phenomenon by making up a substance that happens to have the same properties with the phenomenon we are trying to explain. We did that with Phlogiston, Miasma, Orgone Energy etc etc. The epistemic failure in making up agents , substances, energies etc....is only the subject of pseudo philosophy.

[@thephilosophicalagnostic2177]

I totally agree with him. Scientists who deny consciousness are playing unwarranted reductionistic games with us.

[@JAYDUBYAH29]

No one actually denies consciousness. It’s a semantic question that has to do with reification.

[@JAYDUBYAH29]

@@seeithappen1 non sequitur.

[@JAYDUBYAH29]

@Shoqzzzsmo zzzQAlo on an imaginary hand.

[@1stPrinciples455]

Given that scientists generally not confident of explaining consciousness, could it be that it is just something people think exists but does not? Its like if you believe big foot exists, your mind will use all your creativity and imagination to explain it can exist. But what if its just a figment of your imagination? Could it be just something created from nothing?

[@davidmonroy2509]

@@JAYDUBYAH29 No denies? All those who claim it is an illusion or a epiphenonmenon?

[@jacobgrunwald4175]

What a very intelligent man,

[@darkstatehk]

"The great assembly of the world inside my skull is responsible for the world itself"

[@svendtang5432]

I strongly disagree… it is responsible for my perception of the world who ch care not for my perception at all.

[@vanessali1365]

@@svendtang5432 Well said. We are more than our consciousness....

[@LiMitZplus]

@@svendtang5432 the world requires an intelligent observer to collapse the matterwave so it cares quite a lot for your perception

[@huwwiliams8426]

And so it would seem. lol.

[@mkgvlc4]

@@LiMitZplus you might believe that.. youll never prove it

[@theSpaceAmoeba]

Up until the end, I thought we finally had an interview with someone that gets it. He's right to say that no matter how much you study the brain, you will never find consciousness. He then suggests working backwards, but that changes nothing. The "hard problem" can be described simply as the fact that subjectivity exists. Methods that are objective in nature *cannot* tease out subjectivity. Science can study humans as objects, can even connect their experience as subjects to their reality as objects, but *cannot* explain how subjects are also objects - that is an impossible bridge to cross. A physical description of the brain does not require consciousness - and yet it exists. Why aren't we just walking computers? That's the question.

[@huwwiliams8426]

We are emotional beings after all.

[@Krossiniti]

I thought the same, for what we do as animals, why does there need to be a conscious observer in order for us to do the things we do. Its not necessary. But its there. For me personally, life is like a simulation consisting of a nature so complex humans simply cannot and will not ever comprehend.

[@nickolasgaspar9660]

-"The "hard problem" can be described simply as the fact that subjectivity exists. " -Subjectivity is not a thing...it doesn't exist. Its a quality of subjective experiences. Subjective conscious experiences emerge through the interactions of things that exist. Of course science can explain our conscious states and why they have a subjective quality. We have tone of material explaining that. We even produce technical applications (medicines, surgery protocols) to improve subjective experiences. -"A physical description of the brain does not require consciousness " -That is a vague statement....Consciousness is the product of the physical function of the brain. By describing brain patterns we can even decode the conscious thought of a brain.

[@nickolasgaspar9660]

@@Krossiniti -"I thought the same, for what we do as animals, why does there need to be a conscious observer in order for us to do the things we do.'' -seriously? its in the freaking word "to be conscious of". In order to survive from environmental threats and seek for shelter, mates and resources you need to be conscious of them and your needs..... Its not only necessary ......its an essential condition.

[@kenhiett5266]

I've been spending time achieving a state of flow and then addressing the question of consciousness. I'm beginning to *feel* there's a greater consciousness that's connected to the quantum world. I'm beginning to have a more robust intuition that's where the answers to these questions lie. With that said, the fundamental nature of consciousness is even more tentative from an observational perspective than Einstein's intuition about the relative nature of space and time.

[@kirillnovik8661]

This is such a great episode

[@LawrenceKassab]

Memory I believe plays a big part in consciousness, if it's all about experiences, then I would suggest that wherever the brain stores memories and how it retrieves them might be a link to consciousness. Also, can we be conscious without being self-aware of our own existence. How does the brain create the (I) in me so early in childhood. I have tons of family and every one of those little ruggrats from ages under a year too three years old already possess what would call a personality with distinct characteristics. Consciousness must be linked to Memory but maybe not as much as I once thought.

[@arunrush]

Soul is the seat of consciousness.

[@lewiscoacher7781]

@@arunrush Or not.

[@КонстантинКругляков-г1у]

@@arunrush No proof of soul whatsoever irrational to believe in its existence )

[@andybrown3016]

No memories are simply thoughts and emotions that are stored in the brain. They are a direct result of being conscious but are in no way linked to what consciousness is. Consciousness could best be described as an empty open space of awareness and everything that occurs in that space is personal experience. Individual personalities are simply the net result of all your past experiences which gives you your own personal identity. This is the ego, identification with form. Ego arises within consciousness but in no way defines it.

[@Bradgilliswhammyman]

This is a deep question...you could say we have a " soul " , not in the religious sense but in the sense of " why you why now" why am I myself and why are you not me. What gives rise to individual experience, our individual identity. Take all sensory perception away and would still be " you " in the void. You are a unique phenomonon in the universe.

[@Ariyaan666]

consciousness is your invisible self comprising of the mind and the soul that which portray your personality in the three dimensional world through your physical body

[@djrychlak4443]

Maybe. I think it is directional recursive apprehension of phenomena.

[@Ariyaan666]

@@djrychlak4443 yes that also

[@bell1095]

2:21 Descartes’ „cogito ergo sum“ meant that doubt is essential for thinking and the freedom to doubt is essential for beeing, not the believe, on what authorities tell.

[@danf7568]

Biology, chemistry and physics helps us ponder reality, and MY personal existence is better defined, but no less puzzling in terms of this curiosity.

[@RP-ch8yn]

@Seven Inches of Throbbing Pink Jesus Ok, I’ll grant you that it might be the case that the bible isn’t intended to be taken literally. Good luck telling that to all fundamentalists though. But science is absolutely no religion and science has nothing to do with ”fundamental materialism”, which isn’t even any actual position. Materialism is the word you’re looking for and science doesn’t endorse it. In fact, it hasn’t been a thing for almost a hundred years, since matter demonstratably is a form of energy, which ultimately reduce to excitations of quantum fields. Everything in physics can be demonstrated and it is therefore not a religion at all, so your claim is absolutely definitionally false. For example, we can demonstrate that an electron does have a wavelength, we can demonstrate that it’s in a superposition of states until its wave function collapses into a single state upon interaction and thus demonstrate that an electron can thus change its position arbitrarily fast without having any velocity etc. This is called quantum tunneling, or as it is called in popular culture, teleportation, and it’s literally what is used in flash drives, and Quantum tunneling composites, which are implemented in your smartphone. Electron microscopes wouldn’t work without an electron actually being a wave. All the accurate nuclear degradation models are predicated upon the nucleons’s wave functions and chances of quantum tunneling enabling them to exit the nucleus stochastically. What are you trying to deny here? These things are observable facts. Be a bit more specific, because asserting that physics is a religion with no substantiation is laughable and weak. And the bible hasn’t predicted science. The bible is literally geocentric, makes ridiculous scientific errors about the sun orbiting the earth and being able to stop its movememt temporarily, the stars being small dots on a vast solid firmament dome, which can be temporarily surpressed. This is nonsense, plus the bible doesn’t mention wave-particle duality, polarization of light (or matter that is), nuclear decay, general relativity, levi-civita base tensor, Fourier analysis, quantum field theory, quantum tunneling, vacuum fluctuations and the casimir effect, fission, fusion, Maxwell’s equations, nor did it help in any way in the development of mathematics.

[@joebloggs4925]

@@RP-ch8yn ye i dont think he's got a response to that LOL

[@psterud]

Pretty cool interview. I think the Zen Buddhists have a leg up on answers to this sort of problem, and should be consulted. Scientists, being materialists by their nature, can only go so far with this. In other words, consciousness is more than just the effects of material. There will be paradoxes involved that materialists cannot handle with logic.

[@richardomier5501]

A leg up you say. But a leg is material and made of flesh.

[@nickolasgaspar9660]

Sure....everyone with an unfalsifiable idea claims to have an answer on made up problems. So you are suggesting to ask what Zen Buddhists believe about it even if they have no way to offer objective validations to their claims? Now you are making a huge error based on your ignorance on what science is. Scientists are not materialists, at least they shouldn't be IF they are practicing science correctly. They are methodological Naturalist. This means that they do not have an opinion on the nature of causal mechanisms in our world. What they have to do is work with their methods and try to produce OBJECTIVE EVIDENCE. IF Zen Buddhists's woo is not supported by objective evidence, then the problem is with their claims not Science's methods. -" In other words, consciousness is more than just the effects of material." -YEs this is what you believe....do you care demonstrating the truth of your belief...or its just an other death denying ideology masquerading as eastern "wisdom"? -" There will be paradoxes involved that materialists cannot handle with logic." -You keep bringing up a pseudo philosophical worldview (materialism) in this discussion about science. I guess this is the only way you can make your pseudo philosophy look better than it does.

[@psterud]

@@nickolasgaspar9660 Any scientist worth his or her salt should be open to various angles on any given subject, even if it is philosophical or theoretical. To close oneself is to become dogmatic, and therefore lethal to higher inquiry and truth. You should talk with a Buddhist about consciousness and gain some insight you didn't have before on your own beliefs. If that scares you, you're not a scientific thinker, just a bog-standard materialist.

[@nickolasgaspar9660]

​@@psterud -"Any scientist worth his or her salt should be open to various angles on any given subject, even if it is philosophical or theoretical." -Scientists should be open to objective FACTS...not angles. Those ancient, magical "angles" that are in direct conflict with our 500 years old scientific paradigm and has zero objective facts so it should be rejected UNTIL someone can provide some. -"To close oneself is to become dogmatic, and therefore lethal to higher inquiry and truth. " -Open mindedness is the willingness to consider new "angles" in the face of new evidence....not to accepted them without any. Truth , by definition, is a claim that is in agreement with Current Facts....you can not dodge the requirement of facts. Your struggle to promote pseudo philosophy and unfalsifiable hypotheses as meaningful is a dead end with Objective facts. -"You should talk with a Buddhist about consciousness and gain some insight you didn't have before on your own beliefs." _I am not interested in what people believe....but what they can prove objectively. My beliefs are knowledge based(facts evidence)...not faith based. -" If that scares you, you're not a scientific thinker, just a bog-standard materialist." -you have a huge misconception on what Science , what scientist should think and what qualified as open minded behavior. You are confusing open mindedness with gullibility.

[@jeffw.1854]

You cant define it anymore than a light can shine back on itself.

[@justthemessengers]

jeff w. 🙏 Not so . . . . . ꧁Consciousness꧂ DMT and 5-MeO-DMT are two of the Molecules that comprise a human’s Consciousness. All True Psychedelics are the Molecular Structures of Pure Consciousness. The human body synthesizes it’s own Consciousness (the DMT & 5-MeO-DMT found in humans). The human body then metabolizes the Consciousness that it is producing. The amount of the endogenous Consciousness that the human body is able to metabolize depends on many factors. The less pollutants, poison & other contaminants present in the body will result in the ability to metabolize more of the Consciousness that body is producing. Likewise, the more pollution, contaminants and poison a body has inside of it the less Consciousness it is able to metabolize. Here is a list of some of the most common poisons that humans ingest regularly which interferes with a human body metabolizing the Consciousness that it produces, as well as any Consciousness that is ingested from external sources: alcohol, nicotine, sugar, caffeine, amphetamines, dissociatives, tranquilizers, flouride, and a plethora of other drugs are just some of the substances that interfere with humans metabolizing their own Consciousness. “Even the priests who regularly come near to the Lord must purify themselves”. (Exodus 19:22) The following substances are NOT Psychedelics: mdma ketamine salvia kratom dipt pcp datura/jimson weed dxm There are others . . . . . . . Any True Psychedelic will proclaim this Truth if you ask Them. The following substances are True Psychedelics - They are Alive, Omnicient Living Beings of Light: DMT 5-MeO-DMT LSD Mescaline Ibogaine Psilocin Psilocybin THC DPT DET Muscimol There are others . . . . So if a human can achieve 100% purity within their bodies, with zero contaminants or pollution (an unattainable state in these current bodies) and managed to metabolize 100% of the endogenous Psychedelics that their physical body is producing (DMT & 5-MeO-DMT), that would be the limit to how Conscious that human can be. In order for a human to become more Conscious than this, they must put more Consciousness into their physical bodies. You must put more Molecules of Consciousness inside of your physical body in order to attain a Higher level of Consciousness. When you ingest Psychedelics you see Them that you just ingested, not some doorway or window or a “portal” to somewhere else or some entity somewhere else. When you ingest LSD, the Light that you see is the LSD Themselves, very Beautiful Living Beings of Light. When you ingest DMT, the Entity you see and hear is the Living Light Beings DMT Themselves. The same is true for All True Psychedelics. There is this part from Scripture: “They are the Eternal among things that pass away. Pure Consciousness, of Conscious Beings. The ONE who fulfills the prayers of many. Only the wise who see Them in their Souls attain the Peace Eternal” (Katha Upanishad) The Physical Body of Consciousness is The Flesh of God. The Flesh of God is the True Communion Entity (the Eucharist). The Flesh of God (the Psychedelic) is the Fruit from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and evil. Our Bodies truly are the Temple of God because God the Psychedelic Lives within it. As Saint Paul says: “We are only the earthenware jars that hold this treasure, to make it clear that such an overwhelming power comes from God and not from us”. (2 Corinthians 4:7) This part explains why the human body is the Temple of God - because God Lives inside of the body. So whether or not a person is ingesting Psychedelics, every single human’s body is God’s Temple because DMT & 5-MeO-DMT Live within it. Anything you do to hurt or harm your body you do to harm God’s Temple. This understanding is a good Foundation, a good step towards a person Knowing God and being able to stay with Them both in this Lifetime & afterwards. “O just Creator, though the world has not known you, But I have known you And these have known that You have sent me; So have I declared, so will I declare Your Name to them, That the Love with which you have loved me May be in them and I in them”. (Saint John 17:25) kzbin.info/www/bejne/m3nXZZWpq7KcosU [e-mail]

[@karaokehammick5215]

Here is a mind bender. Everything we experience are interpretations our brain makes for the world around us. Sound waves are nothing more than vibrations through matter and therefore sound waves doesn't really make sound. Our brain catches the sound waves in our ears and makes an interpretation of how we experience those waves. That is sound. A tree falling in a forest sends vibrations through the matter around it upon impact, but it doesn't make a sound. The sound only happens in our brains. This same principle applies to everything we see as well. The universe doesn't "look" like anything. It doesn't have any actual appearance. What we see are interpretations our brain makes for the light entering our eyes. It gets even weirder when you ponder if the universe exists at all without a conscious being around to experience it.

[@shanecle]

Woah!! That’s crazy to think about.

[@thegenesis6896]

The brain came from the universe as a translator for itself

[@RPKGameVids]

I've thought of this as well but wasn't able to explain it as well you did.

[@sandywall9498]

Except you don't need a conscious brain to interpret those examples. A mechanical "iphone" can make the same interpretations.

[@shanecle]

@@sandywall9498 A conscious brain can give it meaning.

[@doubleprofits3949]

After watching the whole videos, I now understand what "consciousness is experience" means and what consciousness is. The basic example I can think of is having an experience of eating a chocolate and relay that information to you, you would only understand what it is but wouldn't grasp the full experience I had at that moment. That's why he says even you uploaded your brain to the super computer, the computer would only understands what it is, even act and talk just like you but wouldn't have any consciousness. I also realize all consciousness are not the same, every consciousness is unique to an individual just like our finger prints, that's what makes consciousness consciousness.

[@badromenful]

“Such an extraordinary gift”

[@christophermorgan3261]

Both are materialists with interests in the technicalities of cognitive function. Is it not consciousness of or towards something rather than consciousness alone? Would this not carry us to phenomenology?

[@major253kannon]

Maybe, but the question still remains. We have consciousness and we know it emerges from our brains, how and why?

[@christophermorgan3261]

​@@major253kannon We don't know it "emerges" from our brains. It somehow appears to us this way. Mystery is in the mix philosophy wouldn't exist without it.

[@davejacob5208]

i think it is pretty obvious that they talked about phenomenology the whole time...

[@christophermorgan3261]

@@davejacob5208 Thanks for the reply and assent. The thing is although years ago I studied phenomenology in Cambridge USA and Paris I don't have a definition and no confidence at all in writing about it or reading it (leaden prose) or recognizing it and esp. why or what leads a philosopher to adopt it as their necessary so called "technique". It only seems to soil up the car windows.

[@davejacob5208]

@@christophermorgan3261 my mistake, i just meant they talk about phenomenal consciousness, not phenomenology as a method. though what tononi speaks about at the end seems to me to be exactly that phenomenolical method. i think tononi makes it pretty clear why this method is at least in comparison a promising method to answer the mind-body-problem: if you just look at the world itself in places where it correlates with consciousness, you have no certainty (most would say not even any hope) of ever finding the actual causal (or methaphysical) link between it and our conscious awareness of it. btw. i am always a bit irritated by how little attention is given (in this case at least implicitly by not mentioning it) to panspsychism: we have no solid basis to rule out the possibility that there are versions of "conscious awareness" which are not at all linked to what we would call "sensory input" or even "thoughts". since it takes our own subjective view to interprete physical relations as symbolising or giving rise to "aboutness", i don´t see an apriori reason to rule out that this "aboutness" is a too vague concept to differentiate "meaningfull sensations, being processed by neurons or maybe processors, which have a phenomenal aspect" from any other physical interaction, relation or even just object or fact, possibly having its own quale per se, but simply unknown to our human consciousness, due to them not partaking in the shaping structure of such macrosubjects like us.

[@esauponce9759]

I love how he put the hard problem here. This channel is awesome!

[@nickolasgaspar9660]

if only the "hard problem" was a real problem for science or Philosophy.

[@georgedoyle7971]

@@nickolasgaspar9660 “If only the “hard problem” was a real problem for science and philosophy” Ho the irony!! If you can explain away (The hard problem of consciousness) using our current science then I suggest that you submit your repeatable scientific experiments to a scientific Journal for peer review. Because what can be claimed without evidence can be dismissed without evidence! Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence! Furthermore, according to the Director of the Institute for Mind and Consciousness professor David Chalmers the current laws of physics have not explained away “the hard problem of consciousness” that is phenomenal consciousness. According to professor Chalmers… “Materialism is a beautiful and compelling view of the world, but to account for consciousness, we have to go beyond the resources it provides.” (David Chalmers). Evidence and citations please not rhetoric, prevarication and (Stone Fallacies)!! I’ll wait!!

[@nickolasgaspar9660]

lol

[@georgedoyle7971]

“lol” We, and life itself are more complex than can be condensed into mechanical associations or the hypothetical constructs of its theoretical counterparts and metaphors. Science has taught us something about the brain of course, neuroanatomy and neurophysiology, histological taxonomy of various types of neurons, mapping of various regions of the cortex and the limbic system, and the correspondences between brain loci with emotional, visual, and motor functions. Science has identified many brain pathologies, structural and pathogen-caused. But the brain is not consciousness. Consciousness is non substantial, it is not a physical phenomenon in and of itself. The fact is that consciousness without extension in space or time, with no mass and no physical attributes, consciousness remains a fundamental law of reality and existence. The (Hard Problem of consciousness) arises within the conceptual framework of scientific materialism and perceptual direct realism. Ironically, it’s only a problem if you assume materialism! According to the strictly reductive materialist, atheist or philosophical naturalist the mathematical apparatus of quantum field theory describes fields of insentience. According to perceptual direct realism, we can directly perceive surgically-exposed brain tissue and inspect decohered neurons under light microscopy. So how do first-person facts (e.g. I’m in pain) arise from third-person facts (e.g. neurons firing in the somatosensory cortex)? Physics as formalised by the Standard Model is causally closed and effectively complete. How is consciousness generated from previously insentient matter and energy without invoking spooky “strong” emergence? (Magical emergence). It’s a question begging fallacy and special pleading fallacy of the highest degree. How can consciousness exert the causal power to inspire exploration of its varieties and discussion of its existence? How can the rich diversity of subjective experience arise from the relative qualitative homogeneity of the brain's basic constituents? And how can a pack of discrete, membrane bound nerve cells in the CNS give rise to local and global phenomenal binding, i.e. the unity of consciousness? Scientific materialism has no idea nor even any conception of where or how we should start looking for answers. We should be zombies. In desperation, a few courageous zealots claim they are zombies lol and that consciousness is just the brains user illusion of self!! “Let us begin by giving all proper respect to what neuroscience can tell us about ourselves: it reveals some of the most important conditions that are necessary for behavior and awareness. What neuroscience does not do, however, is provide a satisfactory account of the conditions that are sufficient for behavior and awareness. ... The pervasive yet mistaken idea that neuroscience does fully account for awareness and behavior is neuroscientism, an exercise in science-based faith. ... This confusion between necessary and sufficient conditions lies behind the encroachment of “neuroscientistic” discourse on academic work in the humanities...” (Dr Raymond Tallis). The fact remains that the bravery, courage and self sacrifice of the doctors and nurses during this horrific pandemic clearly can not be described by the natural sciences without reducing values such as morals and ethics to absurdity. The natural sciences can’t “prove” anything as they are provisional and can only infer. It’s a constantly changing landscape regarding what (is) not what (ought) to be. The fact is that reality and existence and in particular the qualities of experience aren’t made of “matter” they are made of what matters. Equally, the expert linguist and brilliant cognitive scientist Noam Chomsky is in perfect agreement with Schopenhauer as Schopenhauer points out that since there is no viable definition of “matter” the strictly reductive materialist or philosophical naturalist simply posits matter as an absolute given rather than even attempt to justify his near worship of matter as the generator and genesis of all things. “There is something dodgy, of course, about the claim that an empirical science can address essentially metaphysical questions such as whether or not human freedom is real” (Dr Raymond Tallis) “Many philosophers [like Daniel Dennett] think the self is unreal because you cannot see it in the brain. They say this is not a failure of neuroscience, it’s simply evidence that the self is an illusion. But those that argue that the self is an illusion have to explain how we have arrived at that illusion. It requires an awful lot of self to argue for the illusion of the self” (Raymond Tallis). The fact is that we cannot empirically observe matter outside and independent of mind, for we are forever locked in mind. All we can observe are the contents of perception, which are inherently mental. Even the output of measurement instruments is only accessible to us insofar as it is mentally perceived. ❤️😎

[@georgedoyle7971]

@@nickolasgaspar9660 “If only the “hard problem” was a real problem for science and philosophy” “lol” (Strictly reductive materialism, atheism/relativism or philosophical naturalism) “The belief that the truth is that there is no truth” Sorry but everyone has a right to believe what they want and everyone including theists have a right to find it ridiculous!! ❤️😎

[@nishachauhan2545]

The great conversation I ever seen between two men

[@Traderjoe]

What I find unusual about consciousness is how our consciousness is capable of ignoring certain stimulus to the point of our unawareness. Example is how our carotid artery runs right alongside our ears and the blood that roars through it must be making sounds as it gushes right next to our sensitive ears, and yet we are completely unaware of it. I think it’s not that our ears are not detecting the sound, but that they have been hearing it since we were in the womb and must have become conditioned to disregard it. I often wonder if people who have what’s considered hearing loss are actually people who have a condition that disables the ability to ignore it and are deafened by the roar?

[@alanssnack1192]

Do these people complain of a loud roaring sound? No.

[@nickolasgaspar9660]

Anil Seth explains the "discriminatory" process that takes place in our brain and how a stimuli achieves a specific threshold where it becomes the dominant content of our conscious state.

[@bennyskim]

Very interesting, and this coincides with the fact that the cortex is inhibitory and the branching logical structures model what is left out. As if the default experience is maximum everything, and we have to learn to tune most of it out to get down to meaningful objects.

[@lukebowerman9734]

Never thought I’d watch Steve Jobs talk to himself on the mystery of consciousness.

[@NaveenBosco]

That too with Einstein...

[@LazzarrusLong]

Now that I see it, I cannot unsee it. 😆

[@scambammer6102]

Consciousness isn't complicated. People try to make it complicated because they don't like the fact that they are just bugs on a rock. The better question is why are we so fg stupid?

[@LazzarrusLong]

@@scambammer6102If what you say is true, then why should I listen to thee, O’ fellow bug on this rock with me? Seriously though, I share your existential bent, though I daresay it’s worth exploring alternatives.

[@fractalflight5752]

Dude you stole my future comment

[@mylucksmiles]

This is such an interesting subject I just hope I am around when this subject is solved. Cheers

[@guidedmeditation2396]

The funny thing about contemplating consciousness is when you contemplate it. It is contemplating itself.

[@alwaysdisputin9930]

yeah. A golfer knows all about golf. A physicist knows all about physics. A consciousness knows nothing about consciousness. It's like how a video camera doesn't record the video camera?

[@nickolasgaspar9660]

conciouness doesn't have a "self". Sure you use your conscious states to reflect on your ability to have them but that is nothing more than a biological process being affected by actual physical or real stimuli of this world.

[@guidedmeditation2396]

@@nickolasgaspar9660 I hope your atheism brings you all the happiness in the world. But if it doesn't all I ask is you don't blame us for it.

[@Mevlinous]

0:39 what is aware of the seeming coming and going of consciousness at night? Is absence of experience just experience of absence?

[@user-gx4wi4cv2m]

This is a very troubling claim 😟

[@denvned]

I think we just don't remember most of our night conscious experiences.

[@Mevlinous]

@@user-gx4wi4cv2m it troubles you because you overlook it to be immersed in the world. Realise that the world is immersed in this, and then ask, who am I?

[@Mevlinous]

@@denvned I think that is ALSO true.

[@geraldfriend256]

Betting the unders tho

[@jaydodsworth3063]

I am the whole universe experience what's it's like to just be me....my ego...I'm trying to spiritually grow through lessons in life 💜

[@nickolasgaspar9660]

No you are just a small process in the universe with mental brain states that likes to thing big of himself....😉

[@Quietprofessional1]

I believe our consciousness uses our brain for two things. One, an anchor to this reality and the second is a tool to experience this reality and when the brain and body dies where our consciousness is unanchored from this reality then our consciousness moves on to another reality.

[@stephenclarke3990]

You use the word "reality" a lot in your comment, so whats reality ❓

[@imreplyingtothiscomment2378]

Waiting for an explaintion

[@nickolasgaspar9660]

All this just to deny the expiration date of your biology? So what's next......accept Phlogiston as an explanation for Combustion, Miasma for diseases, Orgone Energy for life? I thought that people would be able to keep up with our current epistemology and avoid making the same childish errors of our early immature philosophical efforts. I guess the human animal never really matured ...intellectually speaking.

[@stephenclarke3990]

@@nickolasgaspar9660 Great comment.

[@townssanford4539]

His explanation of Consciousness is interesting. He brings a sense of depth to the understanding, but I still believe he’s missing a core foundational explanation of the state of mind that is Consciousness. Would love to see more of him to see how deep he actually goes.

[@SeemsLikeSomething]

You’re making a bold claim by saying he’s missing a “core foundational explanation” then not offering what that is…

[@alwaysdisputin9930]

@@SeemsLikeSomething We know we are consciousness. Nobody can say what it is. It's obvious no one knows. Therefore he's not making a "bold" claim. He's making a safe & reasonable claim.

[@robinhoodstfrancis]

@@SeemsLikeSomething All this mystification. I hope the guy would be able to go further, as did my own college Bio Anthro orientator T Deacon. Deacon has written some books about symbolic use by the brain, including the essentials when I was with him of neural circuit networks. I haven´t been able to read him since, but based on the knowledge Deacon didn´t draw on that I did, there´s a kind of range of phenomena people need to get from behaviorist psychologists from Pavlov to Watson to Skinner, and then to social psychology and anthropology and philosophy. ED Chapple did great work in 1942 already as an anthropologist drawing on Pavolov, Alfred Korzybski from General Semantics, and others including anthropologist B Malinowski. A fun angle is etymology, and its implications about how words change. As much as we like to objectify the etymology of words like tomato, potato, and ketchup, the truth is that the etymology reflects people using the words in historical psychosocial types of contexts. From Nahuatl and Taino indigenous to Spanish starting in the 1500s for the first two, and from a Chinese fish sauce until I think New Englanders or somebody added tomatoes. Sure, Descartes said, "I think, therefore I am," but "Hey, I think Nahuatl-Spanish tomatoes would go great in this Chinese fish sauce, and on these Taino-Spanish potatoes, French fried....." There´s a shift from Caesar´s "I came, I saw, I conquered," and other crucial material. With the sufficent relevant information of psychological subdisciplines, the subject of "symbols" gets a little closer to the very crucial and special phenomena that it is. Human symbolic knowledge-identity circuits and association networks based on psycho-biological sensory-identity foundations in neural circuit network systems. Dual interactionism, revealed by "mind over matter." We humans can pull an all-nighter despite our biological urge to go to sleep and blow it off.

[@robinhoodstfrancis]

If he can´t even get to mentioning human symbolic communication, he may not go quite as far as is necessary. Terry Deacon in Bio Anthro has done some serious work, as far as he goes. I suggest reading up on psychology from Freud-Jung to Skinner, and anthropology, like Malinowski. See my comments below if you like.

[@nickolasgaspar9660]

@@robinhoodstfrancis why do you think word salads are even relevant to the discussion??? You are confusing the property of mind (to be conscious) with an other property of mind (symbolic language/thinking). The later only enables the content of our conscious states to feel the way it does. How consciousness emerges and why the content of our conscious thoughts feels the way it does are two different question. The first is a scientific hard problem due to the complexity of the system and the second is a philosophical "why" question that can only be answered by scientific "how" questions.

[@miamiexplorer6451]

Great audio!

[@keithpix]

Thoughts have a quantum universe of their own. I thought he would say that the explanation and/or definition of consciousness cannot be explained but it could be experienced.

[@nickolasgaspar9660]

lol what? You do understand that there is a field of biology (Neuroscience) that every day explains more and more of that phenomenon right? why are you bringing QM in to the picture. Do you know many using QM to explain digestion or mitosis or combustion?

[@keithpix]

@@nickolasgaspar9660 Nick, Nick, Nick.....where have you been? Living in a bunker? You’ve lost your imagination...it’s sad, Nick...sad.

[@nickolasgaspar9660]

@@keithpix you don't know how arguments look or sound like right? You need to compose them, and provide evidence for the premises (if of course Sound arguments are important to you). Ad hominems are not serious arguments.

[@keithpix]

@@nickolasgaspar9660 more sadness, Nick.

[@nickolasgaspar9660]

@@keithpix You can change that...you can educate yourself and stop feeling sad for yourself mate.

[@garyb8528]

I always thought that each different individual experiencing the same realities, might actually be sensing those realities within their own brains. Do different people see a blue crayon the same or is classical conditioning telling our brains that the wavelengths we perceive are blue. I might see that crayon totally differently than my daughter but all my life I was told that this wavelength is indeed blue. Which can be expanded. Is this a tree? This leads me to contemplate if reality itself is created within one’s mind.

[@nickolasgaspar9660]

You are committing a common error. The stimuli produced by light and "blue" surfaces displays an Empirical Regularity. This means that we all can use the same label and describe the experience we have when looking at blue surfaces no matter HOW our personal experience may differ. The same is true for the structure will baring the label "tree". In the case of the tree we can gather more stimuli and have a better interaction with it (touch it, taste its leaves or fruits, hold it, smell it...etc). SO there isn't anything there to expand than a begging the question fallacy. -"This leads me to contemplate if reality itself is created within one’s mind." -Reality , by definition exists independent of our mental states. The objective verification of many characteristics of what we call reality renders your question just another fallacy.

[@garyb8528]

@@nickolasgaspar9660 You are probably correct. I can’t argue with you logic. But I did just watch the new Matrix movie and I have no idea what was portrayed as reality or simulation. Thanks for you r response. Have a happy and healthy New Year

[@nickolasgaspar9660]

@@garyb8528 You too Gary! Btw I am in for a "what if " discussion based on Ideas like those found in the new Matrix movie. I just don't think those ideas can be used to explain "mysteries" in our world. I wish happiness to you and your family.

[@geraldsmyth8158]

@@nickolasgaspar9660 My take is that the issue Garyb raised is that our personal experiences may differ, even if there's no way we can tell that. We certainly can't tell that our personal experiences are the same. I think this is a question beyond the agreement on labels that empirical regularity gets us to.

[@nickolasgaspar9660]

@@geraldsmyth8158 -"My take is that the issue Garyb raised is that our personal experiences may differ, even if there's no way we can tell that. " -we can tell that in most of the cases. -" We certainly can't tell that our personal experiences are the same." -No they aren't because we are different organisms with different biological setup and previous experiences. Its non nonsensical to believe that i.e. a spicy meal tastes the same to super tasters and those with reduced taste buds. -" I think this is a question beyond the agreement on labels that empirical regularity gets us to." -And what question that would be?

[@stephenvanboening2147]

The thing that really baffles me is that on such a thought provoking intellectually powered conversation the absurd comment section talking about things such as james bond villains and other absurd crap blows me away as to why these people even came to a video such as this or why they would even be interested in this topic at all.

[@johnrobinson4445]

I think they have it just backwards: the ultimate indivisible unit of the Universe is consciousness. Consciousness calls all others (preons, quarks, etc) into being. The brain doesn't generate the mind, the mind generates the forerunners of the brain. Knock out the brain and the consciousness is disoriented to the point of blankness for a time, but then it wakes up again. The brain focuses the consciousness on the physical reality the consciousness is interacting with. This is the brain's importance. Take a driver out of a car and you still have a driver, simply in very different circumstances.

[@GeorgeEast-hj5zt]

Exactly! This means that the existence is the result of consciousness, not the other way around, like we always assumed! Impossible for most people to wrap their brains around that, because it's counterintuitive..

[@0zyris]

And you know this how?

[@ntiisw]

@@0zyris how do you know this isn't a possiblity? Only a few human beings who have ever lived have managed to be quiet enough in their brain to observe the brain outside of their own thoughts. It is difficult to master the skill of getting rid of your conditioning. These few people like the Buddha have managed to gain infinite knowledge that would not be possible otherwise through memorization memory or reading. Listen to self actualized human beings they seem to see things through and say exactly what you needed to hear. And nothing explains evolution better than this, it feels like there is an inherent intelligence within creation. I dont believe this but it seems so plausible, it doesn't however explain the suffering.

[@surreygeorge11]

I agree with you completely. I exist, not because things exist. I would be even if no thing exists.

[@johnrobinson4445]

@@0zyris The same way Einstein "knew" what he knew: a thought experiment. It may prove to be true; it may not. We'll see. By the way, at the end of this video, he essentially agrees with me, at least in his philosophical approach: consciousness FIRST.

[@gypsydoratarot8441]

Ok I’m in love….with this man and his poetic explanation of consciousness ❤️

[@johndeggendorf7826]

He’s not wearing a ring. And you must be a very smart girl. 🤔☕️🎩

[@kenlnetherland]

I will add to Giulio's definition of consciousness as I think it is deficient. As an A.I. practitioner, everything he described could easily be replicated by a machine. Where conciousness truly comes into play is wherein collective, unique, and independent thoughts and decisions are made. I say unique in that some decisions would never be able to be matched by a neural network. In terms of thoughts, how could a machine have its own thoughts? Those niches are what I believe give us consciousness.

[@nickolasgaspar9660]

The difference between Human conscious experiences and our current "machines" is that we process meaning(through emotions and reasoning) while machines process algorithms and they rules they impose. They don't, as you stated make decisions based on what it means for their existence, their feelings their social state. The foundations of our conscious states are emotional. Mark Solms's latest theory on consciousness addresses just that.

[@kenlnetherland]

@@nickolasgaspar9660 Well put.

[@constructivecritique5191]

Consciousness is a local sample of the external world

[@danielekirylo]

what if it was the other way around?

[@constructivecritique5191]

@@danielekirylo as in the material is sending information and consciousness is when we are receiving it. Yes that works too. The world is alive and well and we only perceive part of it.

[@phunam6804]

I love this topic. But the videography, being slightly off in framing and its dramatic camera movements on sliders is subconsciously making me cringe. I'm still thankful for all these videos. Om shantee.

[@zlovitch]

Agreed! The camera work was beyond distracting -- just lock the cameras down and let the subjects speak.

[@esauponce9759]

I like the camera movements.

[@phunam6804]

​@@esauponce9759 did you like the part at 04:11? The camera movement was shaky and framing was in between and beyond the rule of thirds. But it is very interestingly baffling we all have different sub Consciousness and therefore have rights on all opinion. And I am grateful for such a dynamic Universe that baffles me with creativity with art of NO rules :) thank you Esau for the compliments to the videographer of this video.

[@vineflower]

I love his reasoning. Its just so occams razor.

[@mikel4879]

The last sentences of Giulio, from 9:55 onward are correct. When you create full Artificial Consciousness, you don't have to do it in the exact way the nature has done it on Earth through natural evolution. You should skip many redundant steps, and do it much faster.

[@stevecoats5656]

How would we ever verify that a machine is conscious or not? It seems, in principle, to be impossible. Of course, we can't even verify whether other people are conscious or not, but we can make a good inference that other people are conscious based on the fact we're all pretty much built the same way. Not so with machines. It will always be an open-ended question whether any machine is actually conscious.

[@mikel4879]

Steve C / It is very easily done, and exactly how you do it for the rest of the animals: using a mirror and see if the computer ( "the machine" ) recognizes itself in it. However, even at his not perfect level of consciousness, the human can understand very well the level of consciousness of another being or sentient entity by having a long talk of "different modalities" with that sentient entity.

[@francesco5581]

Tononi thinks that AI cannot be compared to human consciousness. And every intelligent being should agree...

[@stoictraveler1]

Terrifying. We cannot evolve fast enough, on every level. We may be overrun and this might be the fate of many blooming civilizations across the universe.

[@francesco5581]

@@stoictraveler1 overrun by what except out stupidity ?

[@wisedupearly3998]

If consciousness and experience is an illusion in the meaning of being false, then reality would kill us. Interaction with reality corrects any discrepancy between the mind's understanding and what actually exists.

[@Ndo01]

Are you familiar with Don Hoffman? He thinks the opposite.

[@wisedupearly3998]

@@Ndo01 Hoffman in interview "Evolution has shaped us with perceptions that allow us to survive. But part of that involves hiding from us the stuff we don’t need to know. And that’s pretty much all of reality, whatever reality might be." So it appears that what we know is sufficiently accurate to enable survival. The part of reality that is unknown is unnecessary. Only through perception of reality is the mind able to develop the mental representations we use for cognition and memory.

[@Ndo01]

@@wisedupearly3998 Yes, but the point is that the mental representations aren't a 'direct' perception of reality. It's mediated, interpreted, constructed, distorted perception, like the user interface of a computer screen. We see things that aren't there or that aren't fundamental to reality, and we can see the tells of this in all those gestalt illusions. Reality itself would be too complex, so the brain has adapted to creating 'shortcuts' to quickly group information. So it's actually illusion that saves us. Evolution doesn't favor direct experience of reality, nor is that a philosophically possible thing in principle (see Kant's critique of pure reason). All we ever have access to are the perceptions, and we can only infer what the reality beyond that is actually like. It's like the Matrix.

[@wisedupearly3998]

@@Ndo01 Agreed that the mental representations are abbreviated representations but they are continually being validated by our repeated perception of reality. The mind creates hierarchies of mental representations which are essential in matching what we currently perceive with with what we already 'know'. We do not, for the most part, store complete experiences but experiences broken down into their component MRs akin to your "shortcuts". While evolution has ensured that match accuracy is 'good enough' the matching process can yield false matches such as the gestalt illusions. The illusions are, however, eradicated by different viewpoints or a widening of the FOV. The "reality beyond" is not a concern. If it was evolution would have informed us or killed us. BTW. I posit that the faculty of Gestalt visual analysis (similarity, continuation, closure, proximity, figure/ground, and symmetry & order) is inherent to human mind. It is what the child uses to form MRs and thus understand reality.

[@Ndo01]

​@@wisedupearly3998 Nice, what you posit about Gestalt visual analysis is more or less what Kant and Hoffman posit for all experienceable phenomena, but they radically include time and space into those categories. This brings into question not only 'reality beyond', but reality at face value itself. Our perception of reality is already itself dictated by the aforementioned a priori mental categories. So this 'repeated perception of reality' is already illusory, and any subsequent validating against it is validating against itself, and not reality. All matches are already false matches, some are just more functional than others. It is like if you have a misprint in the weekly newspaper - You then don't check whether it is a misprint by buying another newspaper with the same misprint and comparing them. Even though our perceptions have adapted to be sufficiently 'good enough', they're only correct until they aren't; like in the case of the Australian Jewel Beetle that suffered a temporary population decrease because it mistook Australian manufactured beer bottles as their mates.