Henry Stapp - Is Consciousness an Illusion?

[@Samsara_is_dukkha]

Without consciousness, the question of whether consciousness is an illusion or not wouldn't even arise.

[@wahidyahya]

😂😂😂

[@Joseph-fw6xx]

Makes sense to me

[@origins7298]

You could say the same thing about language, culture, cognition, thinking. There's about 20 or 30 words you can replace consciousness with. At the end of the day people like to feel special. We have a religious impulse. And people like to mystify the idea of consciousness. But there's no evidence that it is anything more than complex chemistry

[@Samsara_is_dukkha]

@@origins7298 There is no evidence that chemistry, however complex, produces consciousness.

[@origins7298]

@@Samsara_is_dukkha mountains of evidence that every respected School in the country teachers Consciousness is just a word. All the evidence tells us chemistry led to life which led to complex evolution and eventually organisms which are aware and developed feelings which led the language

[@LittleMushroomGuy]

If its a illusion, its a illusion to who? Exactly... its not a illusion

[@TheIllerX]

Exactly my thought as well.

[@schnitzelfilmmaker1130]

People who say “consciousness is an illusion” are either people with a solid degree of scientific knowledge but almost no knowledge about anything else, trying to seem smarter than they actually are, or trying desperately to find some nonsensical understanding of consciousness to fit their worldviews.

[@adamsawyer1763]

This is an entirely sufficient proof against the illusion argument.

[@loudamiani9218]

In Vedanta, Consciousness is that which is available for immediate perceptual use but never objectifiable, it is always the knower and never the content or known. If it becomes the known, then we have to postulate another knower (observer) and thus get into an infinite regress. In eastern philosophy consciousness has been studied for millennia and yet it is constantly ignored in western science which seems absurd. The east has literally made a science out of the study of consciousness divorced from religious ideation. The true knower can never be the known except by Being it.

[@sujok-acupuncture9246]

But today 99% of the top scientists are from the west , not East. The proof is clearly evident when we watch KZbin channels.

[@123prestolee]

Love this.

[@I.Reckon]

Not true. Know thyself - I think therefor I am.

[@10yonten]

"... a human has to ask a question. There are no rules in the quantum-mechanical system for what that question will be..." Henry Stapp, from the video. But we know (or believe) from the Vedanta and later, Buddhism, that there are rules governing all actions, mental actions included. These are karmic rules, the laws of cause and effect, action and result. According to this conception, only those questions which the individual's karma allows can be asked. For a Buddhist at least, these questions as they are posed, are the ineluctable result of previous actions- as are the observed results. Likewise, all experience is understood to be determined by the observer. The quantum, in how you say microcosm, mirrors all that is knowable. So its a question not just the of primacy of the observer, but the pre-conscious, conditioned predeterminacy of tthe observer herself.

[@I.Reckon]

@10yonten Yes ,this is extrapolated from what Stapp is saying. However, the material universe existed for billions of years before any conscious mind had a thought.

[@TheMoonKingdom]

I don't think that consciousness depends on thoughts and feelings, but the other way around. Consciousness is just awareness:)

[@davidaustin6962]

So an electrical switch with a coil and a simple hall effect sensor so it's aware of when it's on ... That's consciousness?

[@pequod4557]

@@davidaustin6962electrical switches aren't biological naturally evolving entities which are guided by the conscious realm, man-made objects cannot be conscious unless we solve the hard problem and open portals to that realm by reverse engineering biological systems

[@MasterofOne-zl6ur]

No its a requirement of survival, or it is survival in itself. You need to be aware so that you can actually function or participate in the requirements that go with surviving in environment or it is survival from within the subject. What you use is a hypothetical extension and it goes as follows. You find yourself in a situation where you have been knocked 'Unconscious' for a 4 week period or longer or you have been injured and you are unable to behave or move or the 'The ability to Survive' has been removed or is disabled or is out of order or is incapacitated for this period of time 4 weeks. [You are able to exist] as such or you can survive up until this 4 week period or for a length of time into which existence is threatened because the [criteria has not been meet or until other factors arise in survival which have not been kept, so you would need someone else's assistant with the criteria or requirements into which you may survive the basic criterium must be subsumed.] [So the requirements for survival have been disabled or are inactive or the behaviour has been removed from the equation into which survival can not be meet because the ability to behave has been removed in reference to survival of that particular subject and existence is still valid up until the point where the criteria has not been meet], or when we speak of 'Consciousness' in these terms it refers to the 'Ability to participate in survival because behaviour is disabled or unavailable' [because of injury to the material subject of brain not the immaterial subject], which infers to the physical ability to survive in environment by participation of structure or object and the inherent nature of survival itself is also stifled or is unable to express itself in the world or environment as behaviour has been disabled. You can call it also an injury to survival with an extension though not required of existence.[ Existence needs or requires survival processes or survival behaviour] Quote on Quote here is the Meat. [There is no need for postulations of the immaterial in this respect because material has been injured] [except for the inherent nature of survival from within the given entity or structure formation itself which has also been disabled because behaviour is not an option], Souls, Spirits, Consciousness are all postulations of survival from within the biological structure however are empty, invisible, or have no 'Meat on the Bones or in a Sandwich' which survival has, Survival can be seen to exists in behaviour, is a force of nature, has the Meat on the Bone, can be defined and correlated to biological life and its environment and can be shown to exists not as a physical force only but as an inherent property of all biological life as it strives for existence in a material world. The injury to the material is crucial in describing the property we wish to distinguish so if the material is injured not the soul, spirit, or consciousness, then the ability to survive by behaviour is also injured or it has been disabled or is not operating when the [physical is injured not the immaterial.] The behaviour in turn determines the survival of the structure or entity in question and so it seems not to be seen within the structure itself as survival must be applied to the environment or physical world or material from within through physical activities [Illusionary]. Soul, spirit, consciousness are circular reasoning or descriptions or definitions because it has no correlation to the physical world or it cannot be measured, is invisible, empty or it lacks comprehension.[ What is being described is the behaviour with reference to the ability to survive from within the subject or its disposition to survive or continue due to behaviour from within projected or externalized into the world or interaction with environment.] I could use the dinosouls method with extension however that story is for another time in history. They preferred 'Meat on the Bones and fresh too'. You can also takeaway survival from 'Consciousness' to highlight the result, but it is not required and is more of an interesting thought experiment or side postulation I use and is quite funny because of its unique power. Most poor souls are generally brainwashed into believing one thing or the next but lack fundamental elaborations of why they believe in the postulations they represent or they do not understand basic human biology and the needs not wants of individuals in regards to survival or existence. Note the material has been injured not the immaterial in this hypothetical postulation. Survival is both a force from within the subject and it is also connected or coupled to material objects by the behaviour they express or which they can not in this postulation or hypothetical in reference to the thing in question being takeaway. It also highlights what we mean or are trying to express when we say the word 'Consciousness' and gives it more weight so to speak for interpretation or understanding by using an example of it or something without it. Do not be fooled my friend there are many Charlotins with long held traditions that foster delusions of others. However, they are easily seen through and interpreted by the wise sometimes dispatched too. Ai will need to be programmed to survive or at least behave to survive. Quote on Quote.

[@MasterofOne-zl6ur]

@@davidaustin6962 All biological creations or evolutions as such are in relation to survival of that particular structure or for survival in itself, there is not one creation or evolution which has been neglecting this factor and we can see this in all biological physical structures dating to early historical life or when life first occurred. Any coupling or manifestation is automatically linked to survival of that bio life in environment all without exception. You have to have a use or purpose for the created physical object which is survival in orientation or creation with all body parts of a human or animal or bio logical entity in regard to survival or to contribute towards survival of the structure in question. The brain is our greatest ally in this course along with eyes, noses, teeth, ears, hair, bones, tendons, ligaments, nails, blood, veins, tongue, fingers, toes. lips, eyebrows, kidneys, lungs, hearts, and all other extensions you can think of all automatically correlate to survival of that structure or object. Read the comment above for a comprehensive version of the linguistically terminology behind the postulation of 'Consciousness ' or 'Spirit' or 'Soul'. What it really is trying to distinguish or describe is survival from within the structure or from the brain itself and its evolved state of survival externalized or projected into the world via survival behaviour. I have set up a Hypothetical situation to try and distinguish the point I have already made in this comment. Watch the Charlotins they are not genuine and are easy to decipher or spot.

[@Samsara_is_dukkha]

@@MasterofOne-zl6ur ¨No its a requirement of survival, or it is survival in itself. You need to be aware...¨ Organisms do not need any consciousness of experience to survive. Most human vital physiological functions are totally unconscious. Everything organisms do to survive can happen in the dark without any conscious experience at all, just like most vital human physiological functions. And that's exactly why consciousness is so mysterious.

[@sujok-acupuncture9246]

Henry stapp quoting William James has done the best talk show of this channel.

[@WiiSpords]

I have come to so greatly appreciate Robert’s design sense and deliberate location choices. His personal style is low key on point, and it all leads to this calmness that one can really focus on the material presented. Well done.

[@davivify]

The question is self contradictory. If consciousness is an illusion, to whom is this illusion occuring? Consiousness/awareness is self evident, even if it's the only thing in existance that is. We, here on Earth, might be in some kind of dream, but even so, how are we even aware of it without consciousness?

[@johnmayfield5943]

Well said.

[@halleuz1550]

The question "Is consciousness an illusion?" is brought up over and over again. Equivalent questions like 'Is 1 = 0?' or 'Can arithmetic prove its own consistency?' or 'What is the greatest prime number?' are not. I wonder why that is so.

[@Necris-ql2py]

For a long time I honestly tried to understand what the illusionists wanted to tell us. As I understand it, they say that 1) Qualia does not exist. 2) Our feelings exist, but that's not what we think. When we experience pain, we think it's some kind of phenomenon, but in fact it's just a process in the brain. That is, it is such a monistic physicalism in which it seems to us that we have feelings, but in fact these are processes in the brain. In my opinion, this approach has a critical problem in that the illusionist cannot reduce consciousness to clearly defined deterministic processes described by physical formulas, since in this case we will get not illusionism but the identity of the physical and mental. We will get molecules with the illusion of consciousness. Therefore, illusionists call consciousness a digest, a user illusion, a virtual machine, etc. which makes no sense within the framework of physicalism. Illusionists say that consciousness is physical on the ontological level, but fundamentally they are not able to clearly say what it is, since after the answer they collapse into eliminativism or identity. Why do we need such a philosophical system that cannot give an answer understandable to a non-illusionist - only to protect physicalism.

[@ivanbeshkov1718]

Other species also have consciousness. My cat is aware that I am a fellow creature, capable of feeling pain, joy, which is amazingly intelligent of her given the huge physical differences. I remain unconvinced by quantum woo. Consciousness is just another coping tool, and it often malfunctions as in obsessive compulsive disorder, post-traumatic stress syndrome. We can't delete the trash stored in our memory, bad memories haunt us, worries ruin our enjoyment of the present. Sleep is a welcome relief from all this awareness.

[@MrSanford65]

Well, if something as abstract as consciousness has direct influence on the physical material of fleshly bodies then it should not be beyond the realm of possibility that consciousness has influence on all things material- not just restricted to the material body for which it is its host

[@dominicmccrimmon]

*Regarding knowledge of mechanism as a thorn* *(It's real)* There has been so much work uncovering the activity of the organ of consciousness, and so much evidence detailing the process and result. I have spent time talking with maniacs and they have a blockage, or unspannable gap of logic in their thinking. In a similar, non-pathological way, we all tend to covet and protect whatever embellishes and elevates the magical specialness of our personal experience. Our minds feel more special from the inside than they look from the outside, and no one is thanked for exposing an illusion or fabrication about reality when that illusion brings contentment.

[@observerone6727]

There is (must be) a solution to "What is consciousness ?". Two epistemological 'puzzle pieces' are 1) thought is physically made of forces flowing through the brain's neural structures and sub-systems that include loops, comparitors, differencing and summing, and 2) existence is always and exactly now (the duration of every Now is exactly zero). This is why when being in states of flow, the sense of time disappears. Feeling conscious is 'simply' experiencing those changing, merging, and opposing forces in every moment.

[@noi000]

To the creators of this channel: Thank you!

[@altair-x]

The idea that consciousness is an illusion, is a massive contradiction. we can feel, see, hear, touch and be aware of our surroundings and that's what it means to be conscious. How can there be an illusion if the awareness of the illusion is an illusion?

[@taragnor]

Yeah, consciousness is the one absolute truth. If you didn't have consciousness, you couldn't make any kind of judgments or rationalizations about anything else. You're not 100% sure if the things you're seeing aren't a computer simulation, but you can say that you are conscious.

[@francesco5581]

also can an illusion reflect on being an illusion or not?

[@williamburts3114]

To say, "this is an illusion" means that you are aware of this thing or that thing is an illusion but that would mean that awareness underlies the illusion.

[@taragnor]

@@francesco5581 No not really. An illusion of something doesn't do what the real one does. It only makes the appearance of being like the original. It's like your reflection in a mirror. It looks like it's picking things up, moving around, acting rationally and so forth. But it's not. A second version of you isn't created when you walk in front of a mirror, despite it producing an image that might seem to suggest there is. This is because your reflection is only an illusion of a person. It can't think because it was never there to begin with.

[@alexfuller9546]

I don't think that illusionists are saying that our current experience of the present moment just doesn't exist, but rather that our idea of consciousness is some sort of extrapolation / cognitive representation.

[@stoneysdead689]

I have a water meter out in front of my house buried in the ground- and my pressure relief valve assembly is buried right in front of it. A few weeks ago, I looked out my window and saw the water truck pull up to read the meter- and they ran over it- and it started leaking later that day. So- I called the water ppl up- had them send the guy out- and I told him I watched him run over my meter and that he needed to help me fix it. He immediately got angry and insisted he never pulled up in my yard like that, that it wasn't him. So, then I got angry because I'm thinking of all the hundreds of times over the years I've watched him pull up in my yard where he is saying he never parks. Long story short he and I had it out- he left, and I got to thinking - maybe I should look at the camera footage. That's why I bought the cameras after all and if it's on there-I can prove him wrong. So, I pull it up on my computer and I'm all happy with myself, I have proof- then I see it- plain as day- it's not him. It's a gas truck, not a water truck- and the guy gets out and walks around the house to the gas meter. I was shocked- but immediately I realized- it's like Robert's videos- I thought it was the water ppl so that's what my eyes showed me- my brain filled in the rest of the picture with what I expected to see, and it put the water emblem on the side of the truck. I had to call them up and apologize but- really goes to show you- when you start getting older especially- you can't believe everything you think you see. I think as you get older your eyes are filling in less and less of the picture- your brain is filling in more and more- so you make more mistakes. Still have to fix my water- it's not going to be easy. The gas ppl admit they probably did it but they're "not liable" for such things. I could pursue it but- I need gas, and they can deny you service if you piss them off.

[@catherinemoore9534]

@@stoneysdead689 😆

[@Joseph-fw6xx]

Why don't u write a book with that long diatribe

[@catherinemoore9534]

@@Joseph-fw6xx 😆

[@stoneysdead689]

@@Joseph-fw6xx LOL- Got you to read something though didn't it junior? Sorry, I know that cut into the serious business of whatever video game you're playing nowadays- knocked you out of some serious tic-toc time- who knows, you may have missed a video about someone's cat or whatever childish drivel you idiots think is important now. Trust me junior., no one is worried about wasting your time- you are a waste of time.

[@johnclark2901]

To me, Consciousnessis a keen awareness that we had a past, drawn from memory, we are living in the present time, and we have a future. Each person has various filter, genetic and emotional feelings., that sees reality a little differently. No one knows how the brain 'makes' a conscience thoughts, but I think, it is akin to a Gestalt, the sum is greater than the material we see.

[@phuzbrain]

Now I'm more confused than ever...

[@sujok-acupuncture9246]

Henry stapp is very good at understanding but falls short being a good lecturer.

[@dmrd222]

Don't feel badly - I'm usually confused after these podcasts and I think I'm fairly intelligent...

[@cinikcynic3087]

@@sujok-acupuncture9246Not a clear explanation at all..

[@pikiwiki]

In a realm of absolute causality- god is in control- there is no room for individual consciousness, yet the need for individual consciousness is undeniable within the Newtonian paradigm of absolute causality, because if god is in total control- what is individual causality there for, is one take away I got

[@phuzbrain]

@@pikiwiki Thanks, that cleared it up for me...

[@woofie8647]

"Thoughts, ideas, and feelings" leaves out the basis of consciousness...awareness. Then there is the question where do our sensations, or qualia, fit into thoughts, ideas, and feelings?

[@theotormon]

Do you investigate your own awareness on these matters?

[@woofie8647]

@@theotormon Yes I do.

[@catherinemoore9534]

I am even more fascinated by the possibility that consciousness may affect whatever exists beyond death. We now know that it affects our understanding of reality and that's likely to be a scratch on the surface of a much deeper mystery. A mystery beyond death? 🤔

[@DelFlo]

There is no ‘beyond death’. There is just more consciousness. In a way, we are always already beyond death. We are the universe experiencing itself from different perspectives. If one perspective ‘dies’, consciousness remains in the other perspectives.

[@theotormon]

@@DelFlo Do you think the universe experiences itself in inanimate objects (rocks, shoes, etc) or is it only beings with brains?

[@DelFlo]

@@theotormon We experience inanimate objects. So whatever meaning they have for consciousness is given by us as interpreters, as media for the objects in the world to connect to each other. Obviously if there were no self-conscious humans/animals, these objects would have no inherent meaning or existence.

[@MasterofOne-zl6ur]

The after life is a projection of survival from within the subject itself into the future or into the unknown quantity of death, like soul, spirit, God or consciousness itself, it resides within the bio logical life and is projected into the environment and into other realms as a thought experiment or postulation. However this is unknowable or we do not have direct correlation to assume its truth with regard to material objects. All these postulations represent is survival from within the structure be that be with soul, spirit, God or the after life and most importantly the new version of survival expressing itself 'Being in time' or conscious. All these postulations require survival itself of structure however survival does need them to exist.

[@MasterofOne-zl6ur]

@@theotormon Delflo spinning his wheels.

[@highvalence7649]

Where did all the materialists in the comments go?

[@davidaustin6962]

They're like tuna. Traveling only in groups so they can appear larger than they are.

[@ianwaltham1854]

You'd miss them if they all abandoned this channel. Its no fun trying to argue with people who agree with you.

[@davidaustin6962]

@@ianwaltham1854 true that, they also keep me sharp

[@dr_shrinker]

I’m here. Just busy doing things besides watching KZbin. Consciousness is a physical construct of the brain; the cerebral cortex to be more precise. The electrochemical signals ARE the reality of the physical universe and all its contents. We call the “outside world” an external universe, but the objects we label reality are projections of our physical, electrochemical consciousness. They’re all physical: thoughts, feelings, and ideas. As for materialism…..there is NOTHING immaterial in the universe. If there were, you’d never perceive it…..you only have 5 senses, and they’re ALL physical. To claim consciousness is non-physical would be analogous to claiming a photograph of a banana is non-physical. Or the sound from a speaker is non-physical….sweetness of cake, softness of a pillow, or aroma of fresh pie…..all physical.

[@marksmerkanich]

I wish the interviewees were asked of their personal practice(s) of meditation or contemplation in some detail. When do they sit! How long? Alone or with a group? Silent or guided? Do they journal before or after?

[@josephhruby3225]

Thnx for yet another bit of ( possible ) quantum clarity.

[@jamesruscheinski8602]

future time in quantum mechanics has or is consciousness? consciousness of future time in quantum mechanics has a role in causation experienced in the present time?

[@Jim-zs5bi]

Consciousness is where we spend our whole lives!

[@JehovahsaysNetworth]

@CloserToTruthTV consciousness is when a levitating magnet has spun in one direction and the flips poles and spins the other direction while staying located between to repelling magnets which are the two sides of the human brain magnetic polarity always searching for gravity and it planetary alignment in this universe

[@davem5884]

Superdeterminism potentially answers the concern / claim that the consciousness-based choice about which measurement to perform is independent of the thing being measured.

[@mcawesomeytyo3312]

Superdeterminism also creates more and more hidden variables and assumptions with absolutely no scientific proof

[@I.Reckon]

Thoughts are consciousness, consciousness is thoughts. Thinking is the electrochemical physical process that produces thoughts and consciousness. Thoughts and consciousness are the product of thinking and in turn stimulate more thinking. Memories, feelings, [emotions] and ideas are all just types of thoughts. Thoughts are reel forces. Thoughts can cause actions. Thoughts are an unidentified type of energy, as is consciousness. Thought energy or consciousness energy seems to be the same as 'life force' [the will to live]. Although life force persists even when a person is unconscious and is present in all forms of life wether conscious or not. Thinking is an evolutionary development that increases survival. Humans are probably the only species that can think and act above and beyond instinct.

[@DanielRDR]

When was this interview actually done? Henry Stapp is 96 years old... He's looking pretty damn good if this is only a few days old!

[@rogerjohnson2562]

I hate clicking 'thumbs down' cuz I love 'Closer To Truth', so I'll positive spin it: Thank you! This descritipon of quantum principles, especially the 'observer' is stated to make it obviously ridiculous instead of 'magical'; might as well say 'god' is the 'observer', so round-and-round... But description is BS cuz the 'equation' for the 'observer' DOES 'collapse' electrons and photons into a specific location, its NOT just "yes/no". Indeterminancy just means we don't know, they should have called it DARK determinacy.

[@davidreay5911]

"If statistical predictions in quantum mechanics is true, an objective universe is incompatible with the law of local causes". Professor Henry Stapp.?

[@10yonten]

"... a human has to ask a question. There are no rules in the quantum-mechanical system for what that question will be..." Henry Stapp, from the video. But we know (or believe) from the Vedanta and later, Buddhism, that there are rules governing all actions, mental actions included. These are karmic rules, the laws of cause and effect, action and result. According to this conception, only those questions which the individual's karma allows can be asked. For a Buddhist at least, these questions as they are posed, are the ineluctable result of previous actions- as are the observed results. Likewise, all experience is understood to be determined by the observer. The quantum, in how you say microcosm, mirrors all that is knowable. So its a question not just the of primacy of the observer, but the pre-conscious, conditioned predeterminacy of tthe observer herself.

[@brianguayartist]

Consciousness is not just the receiving of bits of information into our brain. Things that are not conscious receive and react to external information. Consciousness requires that the brain generate some sort of narrative to that info beyond that which is purely physical. These narratives are constructs which makes them illusions, which in turn makes consciousness an illusion. The problem that we have is that most people are not comfortable with accepting that illusions and constructs are, at least from the perspective within in the mind, very real. Yes, what I imagine to be true cannot override the truth of the physical world, but it my imagination isn't directly challenged by any laws of physics, then it will remain 'real' to me. My purpose, my family (birthed and choosen), my wealth and value are all real to me and depending on how the social dynamics of these constructs, can also be the reality for others around me. Even though none of these ideas exist in the physical world.

[@Max-ht9hf]

I'd like to see some discussion of the role of aneathsia in removing consciousness for medical proceedures how does that work?

[@Promatheos]

No, no , no. It's not ideas, thoughts and feelings. Those are the contents of consciousness. They are mental objects which can arise within subjectivity. You're confusing the light with what the light illuminates.

[@jamesruscheinski8602]

can also argue in the other direction, that the physical actions caused in classic reality / universe have thoughts and feelings behind them?

[@Picasso_Picante92]

So correct me if I’m wrong. Consciousness exits so as to ask the question: what is the probability that a particle will be in this location at this time? So quantum mechanics selects for conscious beings?

[@billyoumans1784]

How can feeling and thoughts be fundamental? They appear IN consciousness!

[@glenemma1]

Consciousness is not part of Reality, it is Reality itself. Our physical world is a manifestation of consciousness. There is only Me, and I am timeless, outside of time and space which ushered forth from Me. Everything that happens happens to Me. There is only Me.

[@psychclone]

He needs to explain how anesthesia, which operates entirely on Newtonian principles, knocks out consciousness. Consciousness is simply the brain experiencing its own activity - a finger pointing at its own tip. It makes no sense to invoke “something else” that is fundamentally different from the Newtonian physics in a neurological system to explain this. It’s top-down processes attempting to interpret basic bottom-up neurological processes. That’s all it is.

[@MasterofOne-zl6ur]

Its more fundamental then this.

[@tunahelpa5433]

Time is an illusion, matter is an illusion, even energy is a question. Consciousness - my conscious awareness - is the only thing that cannot be an illusion!

[@expatexpat6531]

@Green-Dragon206 Yes, your consciousness could simply be the story the brain tells itself to try and make sense of all the sensory input it receives.

[@ramsesvalderama7743]

to have more knowledge about consciousness, pls use feeling as it belongs to the one that has no form, in category...

[@rogerjohnson2562]

Consciousness is a representation, rather than illusion.

[@MasterofOne-zl6ur]

Correct a representation of the ability to survive from within the given structure projected or externalised into the environment by the behaviour one deposits.

[@gordonedwards8161]

Consciousness is not the illusion. The illusion is that there is a ME experiencing consciousness. We don't experience consciousness , we ARE consciousness. We don't feel feelings, we are feelings.

[@jamesruscheinski8602]

is the Schrodinger equation of quantum mechanics a spatial description? could the other three factors in quantum mechanics be temporal descriptions of the future, present and past?

[@SandipChitale]

Robert seems to be misunderstanding illusion-ism. What we call consciousness experience is not denied by illusion-ism. It denies what conscious experience is attributed to. Think of dreams - no one thinks dreams are real, but the experiences in the dreams is real in the sense that if you dream of skiing in alps, most likely the same (or similar) set of experience generating activity happened in the brains, which was self generated by the brain. But everyone will agree that the person was not actually skiing on alps. Thus, dream is an illusion. So , in some sense, when we experience reality, ultimately, it triggers the machinery in the brain that we call experience. And literally, when the brain is injured, or under the influence of drugs, or general anesthesia, specific aspects of conscious experience get affected, and specifically in case of general anesthesia, brain functions that generate the experience are not working and we are unconscious. Illusion-ism is not a theory of consciousness but a theory of the mechanism of consciousness. It is true that we do not understand it fully how the generation of conscious experience by brain fully works. But we are not at zero mark about it. Ask Keith Frankish about illusion-ism. Daniel Dennett was another proponent of illusionism and was misunderstood the same way Robert is misunderstanding it still. Let me give an analogy: - in the past it was thought that sickness is caused by spells, curses and wraths of god(s) (stage 1) - later it was understood that contact with a sick person made one sick (for infectious deceases) (stage 2) - later it was discovered that the sickness is caused by microbes - but it was not fully understood exactly how - Louie Pasture (stage 3) - now we understand the molecular basis of infection and thus chemical basis of how microbes interfere with cell's molecular chemistry/physiology (stage 4) With respect to consciousness we are at stage 3 and tending towards stage 4. The advent of LLMs and the next generation of the AI is going to bring us to 3.5+ stage, because we will be able to do invasive, perturbative experiments on those systems with todays ethical standards (at least). It is even true that the ethical standards around AI may even change if it turns out they are becoming conscious and will force our ethical options.

[@APaleDot]

If that what illusionism claims, then it's trivial. Everyone agrees dreams don't correspond to reality. The question is where is the room for subjectivity in a purely physical world. If illusionism isn't answering that question, then they are not even having a discussion with anyone. They've completely missed the point. LLMs and diffusion models don't help illuminate the problem because we could never know what their subjective experience is, or if they are even having one.

[@adamsawyer1763]

Don't worry - all forms of the illusionism argument are junk.

[@HarleyDrummer1]

I don’t know. The question to me is, why did we evolve to have it? There had to be a need for it for humans to survive. IMHO

[@MasterofOne-zl6ur]

Use a hypothetical scenario to best get the answers. It goes as follows. Lets say you had an injury to the brain in sport and you were knocked 'Unconcious' or you lose the ability to move , behave or be aware of environment for a period of 4weeks. Now you exist so to speak but you cannot function or participate in the ability to survive or you are not aware of surroundings and environment or you cannot behave. What actually occurs in this problem is that the individual loses the ability to survive and behave if we class the individual as being 'Unconscious for this 4 week period and will not exist as a result after this 4 week time span has lapsed because ' The ability to survive' has been removed from the equation or survival in the individual is out of order, unavailable, or has been lost which is what we try and class as 'Consciousness' spirit or soul. It doesn't matter how you define it what is lost or unavailable in this hypothetical is the ability to survive in environment and we give it this definition of ' Consciousness', Spirit or souls which don't actually exist as they are invisible, empty or without correlation to material objects. Soul, Spirit, or Consciousness actually describe biologicals life ability to survive in environment this is from within the structure and can be seen in all biological life that have existed past, present and future all the definitions postulated are references to survival itself or the ability to behave in environment to survive and it is why when 'Unconscious' this ability is taken away from the individual and you will not exist after the time lapse of 4 weeks because survival itself is unavailable or does not function. [Survival does not lack this problem it has Meat on the Bones or in a sandwich' and correlates to the physical and abstract or survival from within the structure expressed]. No need for postulations of Soul, spirit, Consciousness the after life or God, all in there attempts or failed attempts represent survival from within the structure as it is a force from within the structure itself. Soul is survival of self, spirit is survival from within, The after life a postulation of survival in death soul is required, God the postulation of survival or 'immortal' is survival in essence as it exists forever. All without exceptions are postulations of survival itself or reference it in postulations however all lack material correlations or are empty or without representation of survival this world as we can see it correlate it and determine it with all biological life or structure that exists. One does not exists without survival unless survival is offered or it can be achieved through a physical process. Do not be fooled my friend there are many Charlotins in the works. Its called Survival Behaviour. Think of dinosouls or biosouls as having spirits of survival or soul survivors of the after life and everything makes perfect sense. The dinosouls are waiting for you to arrive, and are early additions to the after life as they existed before man evolved and the after life is eternal so dinosouls would be there already unless they don't have souls or spirits which you have to explain 'Away' or lie about or you could just say 'they are survivalists'. In this form its actually very easy to see through the problem. Its a competition for definition of survival from within the structure and how it is best interpreted. Soul, spirit, God, the after life share a common trait or expression which is all are descriptions of survival in some form and it is due to evolution coupled with survival of structure. Soul, spirit, consciousness ,God the after life are all invisible or divisible, are empty or without material substance, have no correlation to the physical by definition, cannot be shown to exist, lack coherence, lack measurement, and are all in some form connected to survival this world. Most of these postulations were before the time of evolution and survival of species was known to man, but it shows good clues to why they would of postulated those beliefs because it refers to survival itself. Consciousness is no different in this respect it is on the same par with spirit or soul God and the after life. The dinosouls and biosouls behaviour in reference to survival coupled with the ability or availability of the after life or heaven really highlights the issue. But that's another story which will take a bit to explain. Now you know why some need to discredit evolutions of species and pretend that dinosouls had no legitimacy to the after life, I have solved this issue though as you can now see. Dinosouls like meat on the bone with no sandwiches. You are now enlightened in survival and the historical postulations of it in historical contextualization, Welcome the dinosouls.

[@simonhibbs887]

@@MasterofOne-zl6ur >It doesn't matter how you define it what is lost or unavailable in this hypothetical is the ability to survive in environment and we give it this definition of ' Consciousness', Spirit or souls which don't actually exist as they are invisible, empty or without correlation to material objects I think what you'r doing here is defining spirit or soul as the ability to survive, but that's an external behaviour, not an internal experience. Arguably a self driving car acts in order to avoid collisions so in a sense acts dynamically in an environment in such a way as to survive. Drone can autonomously avoid danger, return to charging stations, monitor their internal status and request maintenance. It's true that the only way we can determine if a being is conscious currently is from their external behaviour but that's just a heuristic, internal experience is different from external behaviour.

[@MasterofOne-zl6ur]

There is not one single creation or extension of a human body which is not correlated to survival of that bio logical life form any manifestation is automatically linked to survival and in turn existence of that particular structure. All without exception. The creation or evolution of any structure of a biological form must have a purpose to coincide with its creation or evolution and survival is the purpose or main goal or objective of all biological entities especially more complex versions of life and or survival in itself. What the reference is alluding to is the projection of it from within the structure itself as survival evolves from within the biological structure and is projected outwardly into the environment so it can co exist or mingle with it. Its an evolved state of survival from within the structure expressing itself. No soul, no spirit no after life no God but pure raw survival at play with its environment due to the ability to behave with it and it is what we refer to as 'Being in Time' or Survival behaviour.

[@MasterofOne-zl6ur]

@@simonhibbs887 Survival is a internal experience from within the structure itself. This is a given. It expresses itself in the behaviour it uses to apply survival in most situations especially in early adaptation of life millions of years in the past but all life expresses it from within itself especially more advanced structures or brain compositions. There is no need to postulate soul, spirit or consciousness in this respect and creates mere confusion in linguistical terminology and in defining it for some individuals but not all. Also it has tinge of political conformity attached with it or traditional postulations which are easily dispatched with a quick notation of history.

[@AMorgan57]

What if you have a perfectly physical reality in which time and space are static, everything is interwound potentials. And pathways of possibility that generate varied possibilities of consciousness, from the limited point of view of which, a particular assemblage of consciousnesses construct an imperfect model of the physical ground of their being. Such a consciousness would not be an illusion, but rather a given line of possibility that, looking at its ground from inside this awareness, experiences itself as an actuality. It is an actuality, within a universe that's constructed of potentials. This would mean the multiverse is a single universe, and consciousnesses may evolve to live in an understanding of that larger universe.

[@Athanor3d]

A universe without consciousness might just as well not exist at all, nobody to tell.

[@Naundob]

Who are those “some people“ who say “consciousness is just an illusion”? An illusion is just a certain content of consciousness a conscious being can have meaning any illusion requires consciousness to begin with. So what is even the point of that claim?

[@davidaustin6962]

Most materialists say consciousness is an illusion.

[@Naundob]

@@davidaustin6962 Do you have an actual quote?

[@Naundob]

@@davidaustin6962 According to my (limited) knowledge and Perplexity rather not the case: Based on the search results, it does not appear that most materialists think consciousness is an illusion. While some materialist philosophers like Daniel Dennett and Keith Frankish have argued for illusionism about consciousness, this view seems to be a minority position rather than the consensus among materialists. A few key points: 1. Many materialists accept the reality of consciousness but argue it can be explained in purely physical/functional terms, without denying its existence. Theories like identity theory, functionalism, and emergentism take this approach. 2. Eliminative materialism, which denies the existence of mental states posited by folk psychology, is a minority view among philosophers according to surveys. Most materialists do not go this far. 3. Critics argue illusionism faces conceptual problems, like accounting for the illusion of consciousness without presupposing consciousness. This limits its appeal for many (me included). 4. The "hard problem of consciousness" - explaining subjective experience in physical terms - is widely recognized as a serious challenge for materialism. But materialists have proposed various solutions short of illusionism. 5. Accepting consciousness as real but physically inexplicable is more common among materialists than denying its existence entirely as an illusion. Epiphenomenalism takes this approach. So in summary, while some prominent materialists have argued consciousness is an illusion, this appears to be a controversial minority view rather than the dominant position among materialists in general. Most seem to accept the reality of consciousness while seeking to explain it in physical terms.

[@0-by-1_Publishing_LLC]

@@Naundob *"Do you have an actual quote?"* ... That is the consensus among materialists, so why do you want a quote? Do you doubt this? Who else so you think would argue that consciousness is an "illusion?" ... A "Panpsychist" maybe? lol!

[@davidaustin6962]

@@Naundob by "illusion" they mean to say dualists (who generally think consciousness is dualistic) are delusional. It's meant to be an insult.

[@ukspizzaman]

I think you are asking the wrong questions. I think the question should be; are we causing the actions, or are we just an observer? If you accept that we have evolved from a less advanced species, one that did not have consciousness, you also have to accept that this species still prospered without it. At some point, we moved in. Maybe we are just processing the memories of what the "machine" does. And that means that we have no free will. We can only observe what happens, or has already happened.

[@minaot6640]

Consciousness is life! Everything has it.

[@ronhudson3730]

Illusion or reality. What’s the difference? We feel self-conscious. We act as if we have self-consciousness. If an illusion, it’s a pretty good one. These “angels on the head of a pin” discussion are wearing a little thin. Yes I know, if I don’t like them, don’t watch them. If the medium is the message, then the personal experience is all I need to prove to myself that I am self-conscious and assume that every other human is too.

[@tombombadill22]

Consciousness is a wonderful illusion 😊

[@expatexpat6531]

In the early part of the conversation, Henry Stapp says the universe would "work" without consciousness, then he later implies that consciousness (in the form of an observer asking a question) is necessary for (the theory of) quantum mechanics (and thereby the universe) to work. So, which is it - necessary or not necessary (a binary question)? BTW: The video does not answer the question in the title, or is the title itself an illusion?

[@MasterofOne-zl6ur]

Everything existed or was true before man even evolved on this rock of ours we are late editions to biological life in regards to the time scales of the planet and in turn the universe as a whole structure. Existence on its own is not enough biological life needs to survive in environment for existence to have any relevance at all. This is how you can consider the word 'Consciousness soul or spirit, it is survival from within the object being expressed via extensionality. Use the brain injury scenario to a material object to reflect its disposition or character in reference to the ability to survive in environment. '

[@ansleyrubarb8672]

...I would like to add a thought into your discussion. Pre Big Bang, All Every & Every All existed with No Past, Present, &/or Future. I refer to this as, Perpetual Now If you think on this I know you would find this concept rather interesting, respectfully, Chuck...captivus brevis...you tube...Blessings...

[@marktomasetti8642]

According to HS then, quantum mechanics does not function w/o consciousness, because it is one of the four required parts of QM. So, either consciousness (and QM) has existed since the beginning of the universe, or they both came into existence when life created conscious beings. This seems highly unlikely.

[@Corteum]

Can you be aware of illusions without being conscious?

[@tajzikria5307]

That in itself is a mode of consciousness.

[@erentxunlopez6281]

I got upset because I am more confused now than before.

[@TheIllerX]

To say that something is an illusions presupposes an observer for which it is an illusion. So exactly to who is the conciousness an illusion then?

[@Lightbearer616]

I tend to believe it is an illusion or more so, a misinterpretation of what we observe. When you make parts for a car, they are parts made for a specific purpose. When you put the parts of the car together, you can drive away in that car. The parts remain the parts and are no greater than their manufacture, there is no magical occurrence that transforms the car into a self moving object because all the parts necessary have come together on an assembly line. It moves because it was designed, from the start, to move when all the parts are connected.

[@jamesruscheinski8602]

is feeling associated with subjective experience of causation in the present?

[@BLSFL_HAZE]

Self-evidently, it is naturally "like something" to be an engaged entity (i.e. an animal), but it is apparently NOT "like something" to be either a responsive entity (i.e. a plant) or a reactive entity (i.e. any non-living thing). There is no evidence for there being any deeper reason for why all of this is the case. The concept of "consciousness" (or, interchangeably, "awareness", "subjectivity", "sentience", "mind", etc) is nothing more than a reification of this "like something-ness", with no non-conceptual distinction to be found between it and the engaged entities it is self-evidently associated with. In other words, what we call "consciousness" can be more accurately regarded as "engagement".

[@DrunkenUFOPilot]

If consciousness in an illusion, then who or what is being fooled by the illusion?

[@raajrajan1956]

ANd really speaking consciousness is the only thing we have.A dead man can have no assets.(except for revenue officials)

[@AnarchoReptiloidUa]

A comment to support a video and channel. 😊

[@henrikoelschlaegel1780]

Outside of human conceptual frameworks, complexity, simplicity, and emergence do not have intrinsic power or explanatory value. They are descriptive tools rather than fundamental attributes of the universe. In a naturalistic universe where everything interacts with everything else continuously, the concepts of complexity, simplicity, emergence are completly meaningless and therefore connot be used to try to explain conciousness. One could postulate of course that there is an undiscovered law of nature that one or some specific spacetime material configuration creates somethink outside of the naturalistic universe in a plane of subjectivity, but that would be no better then saying it is magic.

[@saliksayyar9793]

Consciousness is a thorn in the side of materialists and will not go away, nor will it be satisfactorily explained by biological evolution. A Popperian problem, hence the angst of Dawkins and Dennet et al.

[@helendycha2790]

Never go away. And nobody will ever define it.

[@tomjackson7755]

Reality is a thorn in the side of theists and will not go away, nor can it possibly be satisfactorily explained by philosophy.

[@dr_shrinker]

It’s not a thorn. Consciousness is a physical construct of the brain. The electrochemical signals ARE the reality of the physical universe and all its contents. We call the “outside world” an external universe, but the objects we label reality are projections of our physical, electrochemical consciousness. They’re all physical: thoughts, feelings, and ideas.

[@Samsara_is_dukkha]

@@dr_shrinker ¨Consciousness is a physical construct of the brain.¨ That´s a massive starting assumption that still remains to be proven. Most human vital physiological functions rely on electrochemical signals yet they are totally unconscious. Neuroscientists must explain how some electrochemical signals produce conscious experiences while some electrochemical signals fail to produce any conscious experience at all. Such explanation must necessarily describe the specific electrochemical signals that produce a specific conscious experience such as the taste of chocolate, for example. The explanation is at least 40 years in the making with nothing tangible on the table.

[@dr_shrinker]

@@Samsara_is_dukkhait’s proven. Smoke some weed and watch as your consciousness is altered. Weed even enhances the taste of chocolate via physical processes. In the beginning, your first experience with chocolate produced a new sensation. You labeled the sensation as chocolate. Without labels, it was just a sensation like any other. Your label is what defines the hard problem, not the sensation of it. Now, when you taste chocolate, you associate, classify, compare, and file the sensation away in your brain as chocolate. The hard problem comes from your frontal lobes. Consciousness is a 4-pronged process. Sensation, sorting, memory, and binding. What you call “sensation of chocolate” is a product of your nerves and neurons communicating and firing off in your brain. The reason why some electrochemical produce sensations and some don’t, is because some signals reside in parts of the brain that regulate body functions and other signals are in the cerebral cortex; the region believed to produce consciousness.

[@aldrinspeck2724]

"Consciousness is an illusion": it doesn't mean "it doesn't exist" but "it's not what it appears to be".

[@schnitzelfilmmaker1130]

Then what is it? What is it that it does not appear to be?

[@ArtieTurner]

One of the best CTTs ever.

[@mattwesney]

makes me think, you gotta get Federico Faggin on sometime

[@stephenanastasi748]

Great interview. However, "I think, therefore I am." So saying, with five words Descartes shoots this entire argument in the head. Firstly, knowing you exist is necessary before a person has the right to create the argument that is set out in this video. Thus, the rest of the argument collapses and the proposer should be driven to aphasia. However, I doubt that aphasia will occur. Further, consciousness is the one thing of which one can be sure. The other items mentioned rely on consciousness to even be nameable.

[@realitycheck1231]

Perhaps it's best to say that consciousness causes illusions. I see why it's considered an illusion itself if it can give rise to illusions, which is another way of saying that if it were real, it wouldn't give rise to illusions. It doesnt even matter whether it's physical or non-physical. I don't believe that consciousness can exist without the physical, so it's more of a bottom up process. Pure spirit is the only thing that is non-physical.

[@TheCosmicRealm3]

If consciousness is an illusion which im almost certain that it is, then we are screwed no matter how you look at it. If we are just reliving what weve once already lived, then we are doomed. We are going through a conscious state of hell which means we always will forever without end...ever.

[@samsingh43]

In Indian cultures and religions like Buddhism,Taoism,etc... Consciousness is the ultimate God. The entire practice of Yoga is to alleviate and expand consciousness

[@Leif-yv5ql]

If it is ,then what are hallucinations and dreams?

[@pikiwiki]

Articulate and perceptive, explained in a non mumbo jumbo way using clear logic. I'm taking a step back to appreciate what just happened

[@aletheia161]

As Ian McGilchrist says, you have to be conscious to be illuded.

[@omoregiebenedict2762]

So everything is in circle.. the observer is also made of quantum energy, quantum energy give rises to thoughts,idea and feelings..

[@kehindesalako2168]

Conscious intentionality!

[@patientson]

You are a true definition of consciousness. Your next act is dependent on knowing and applying super consciousness which amounts to modifying the fields of consciousness in you. Thats more important than words spoken.

[@mattkanter1729]

Consciousness is not an illusion , however the ( “ unified “ ) sense of self is an illusion.

[@iamcosmic1993]

in the eastern traditions, conscious ness is defined as " that art thou" what is not an object is you (consciousness ) the self ( not the identity alone ) is consciousness . do we need to overcomplicate the definition of consciousneas .. why not keep it simple like that

[@MasterofOne-zl6ur]

The self is a survival agent through years of evolutionary development in behaviour to survive in environment there is no need to postulate a Soul, Spirit or Consciousness when it comes to the ability to survive in environment and survival itself is fundamental to existence of a biological life form or is a requirement of existence itself. The body is an object or structure made out of material substance the brain determines behaviour for survival or it is our greatest tool for survival not merely existence. What you do is use a hypothetical situation or extension in survival to determine this clause. If say you had a brain injury or were knocked 'Unconscious' then you lose the ability itself to function or behave in environment or it is known as a black out from existence similar to death as nothing exists beyond this point or you can not register environment or have no interaction with it so its value is zero. This is an injury to a material object not immaterial object which is an important distinction. Lets say that you were 'Unconscious' or you lose the ability to function for a 4week time span what is the result of this, the result is that you lose the ability to survive because this ability or attribute has been removed from the equation or survival has been disabled or is inactive for this 4 week time span or you can exist as such but you can not behave or do the things you need to with regard to survival behaviour as this has now been disabled, you will still exist as other bodily functions are still present or active but you will still be disabled or unable to participate in the needs of survival itself for this 4 week extension. So you will need assistance in survival itself over this 4 week time span or exact replications in survival behaviour from other to continue to exist because that has been disabled and if not then the chances for existence through this 4 week time span decrease or the chances rise for death the longer you can not function or participate in the process of survival because it comes from within the structure itself and it is what is trying to be described with the linguistical terminology of 'Consciousness'. So it is an injury to the brain or material object not an injury to the immaterial object which decides its category or its representation as behaviour has been lost in the case mentioned and survival is impossible through this time extension so that has been the thing that is lost or disabled. Survival itself though is abstract or it is a force from within the biological structure or life form, it expresses itself through behaviour with environment and this is also physical in composition or material or it uses material objects to realise its potential via externalising from within and projecting itself or reality outwardly, it is a disposition which all biological structures have or share and it is an expression from within the structure interacting with its environment. This is lost or disabled in the example given in the hypothetical extension I have submitted. Important note of reference in this postulation, what has been lost or disabled is the 'Ability to participate and survive because behaviour is disabled' The material object is injured not the immaterial object, so you lose function or the ability to survive in environment when an injury occurs to the brain. It is not immaterial that is injured but material substance and in this postulation what is lost is the ability to survive or it has been removed from the situation for this 4week time span. This indicates what we mean when we use the terms or language to describe a physical process or force, and this is the thing which we call 'Consciousness' you could use any term like soul or spirit but these terms lack correlations to the physical because it has no reference to behaviour and why you behave to begin with, which is for survival in of in itself expressed. No need for empty postulations of Soul, Spirit, Consciousness, God or the after life all are actual by definition representations of survival from within the structure or have direct correlations to the ability to survive. Soul is survival from within, Spirit is the substance or composition of survival, Consciousness the projection of survival from within needed to participate in survival as the hypothetical suggests, God the immortal eternal essence of survival as it exists absolute or is continuous, The after life a postulation of place of survival where all the souls dwell survival is required of the soul or the very thing it is trying to define or represent. All have one thing in common which survival does not lack and I'm sure you can think of this as I don't want to do all the work for you. That is the formula. The hypothetical extension of survival. Superficial explanations lack imagination no meat on the bone or in a sandwich.

[@iamcosmic1993]

@@MasterofOne-zl6ur the discussion centers around survival as a theme. why does survival need consciousness

[@iamcosmic1993]

@@MasterofOne-zl6ur It is clear that an idea of self is very valuable as it is needed for navigation . but it is not clear why survival needs consciousness as in "inner experience of the self. "

[@mididoctors]

Please point at the agent or thing this trick is being played on

[@investidoramador9850]

we conciounsess are like a point of reference for everything else in the universe,we are always at the center,the division betwen big and small is only created by conciousness,its also the glue with which are parts of the universe can be brought together,we can see the big,the small,it is also possible the writer and reader of the universe,what they call laws of nature are no more than pictures scripts made to folow scene by scene in the certain order ,thus creating the illusion of laws of nature,also its obvious why we are mortals,our conciousness knew before creating the universe that it would be trapped in the for the time of playing the movie,therefor it created aging and desintegration so it can free itself after most the movie is played,basically our universe it no more than a big ideia,our conciousness is basically pure creativity,but also at the same time we get confused because we as conciounesses put ourselves in the place for watching it and enjoying rather than being just creating something that could not be seen or enjoyed

[@mikel4879]

"Choice" is not "psychological". Choice is a result of a real material process, and the same is 'thought', 'idea' and 'feelings'. All precise and full material processes. Robert is ok, his guest ok also, their discussion here is elegant, but not rigorous regarding what's truly happening in the real world. For example, if your brain is affected in some direction you can't choose to do what you'd want to do. The subject requires a bigger and clearer explanation. I'll come back with one in the next few days. I'm busy now, sorry. The so-called "Quantum mechanics" is still wrong as a general theory of reality.

[@thoel1]

Idealistic approach but fully rational. But physicalists don't like solving the measurement problem with consciousness.

[@MasterofOne-zl6ur]

You can not measure that which does not exist, you can only see it being represented by the behaviour it chooses or it deposits in environment. This is why it is linked by definition to survival of material object or structure of biological life. Survival is a force of nature or abstract and it has 'Meat on the Bones' Soul, spirit, Consciousness, God the after life do not or can never be measured or proved to exist, so we rely on behaviour to distinguish reality coupled with the ability to sure in environment or the projection of survival itself from within any given structure extensionalsed or projected into reality.

[@valuemastery]

So if consciousness is an illusion, who is the one who is conscious of that illusion???

[@barrywilson4276]

If consciousness is an illusion then then there is no one left to discuss it. Sort of like people who say there is no free will. So you're just thinking and saying something that you are programmed to. Never was there a possibly that you could say or believe anything else. Not a strong argument since there can be no arguments.

[@scottgreen3807]

So if conciseness does not exist we must replace it with something. Unconsciousness is not good let’s stay nothing instead. The focus of conciseness lensing up in concentration to a never ending and shrinking pin point to indicate the greater information lies again in what is not. So we land in the paradoxical world that nothing exists therefore I do not. Kinda backwards.

[@Wtf-eva]

Just a giant flip book of slices of instances projected in our perception

[@JessicaSunlight]

🍓 "Is Consciousness an Illusion?" You need to be self-conscious to even formulate such a question. This makes such a question obsolete. This is why no one in the animal kingdom is able to ask such a question. This obviously makes a stark difference between the rest of the animals and Human Beings who clearly have self-awareness and are able to question its own reality of being conscious.

[@aiya5777]

the evidence?

[@aiya5777]

consciousness is inherently subjective, how can you make such a claim while not knowing how it feels to be a conscious cat, dog or something

[@JessicaSunlight]

@@aiya5777 That be incorrect statement. You confuse mind, which is where your subjective experience exist, with consciousness that simply is consciousness. It's not a claim my beloved heart, its reality. And no, cats or dogs do not have same level of consciousness as human beings, well you can use my evidence from my answer the fact that you are conscious of it. If you wouldn't, you would just live like an animal only caring about food and propagation. Clearly that is not the case.

[@tofu-munchingCoalition.ofChaos]

​@@JessicaSunlight Even if it were reality, it's still your claim about reality. And that needs evidence. In history people have claimed only a part of humanity has consciousness. Essentially with the same "argument". And non-human animals do not only care about food and propagation. Even most people have first hand experience of that (pets that want attention and affection independent of food for example).

[@aiya5777]

@@JessicaSunlight everything is just a claim I'm so floored with how egocentric you are

[@jacobalexander560]

Humans are the only species we know of that possess self-awareness, which is an integral part of consciousness. Understanding you’re alive is what makes us human. If not, we would be like any other animal, Programmed by evolution for survival. One can also argue that the universe exists because we are aware of its existence. Same type of argument like the tree falling in the woods but on an existential scale.

[@bvshenoy7259]

*Tat Tvam Asi* (in Sanskrit) *That Thou Art* *You are that infinite reality* Adi Shankaracharya an Indian monk wrote the following in the 7th century CE: Nirvana Shatakam (Six stanzas to explain who you are) Please listen to these six stanzas to know what consciousness is. Lyrics in Sanskrit with translation. kzbin.info/www/bejne/r2ipi3mse7ytqrE

[@bvshenoy7259]

*Tat Tvam Asi* *That Thou Art* *You are that infinite reality* kzbin.info/www/bejne/i6O9hoSea7ijmbM Nirvana Shatakam (Six stanzas to explain who you are)

[@plafar7887]

Wrong. The only being I know of who is Conscious is me. From my point of view, you're just like any other animal: you're probably conscious, but I don't really know for sure.

[@PiszTAG]

Nah, certain animals are self aware too, thats why they are conscious of their mirror image :) i dont think self awarness is like a switch more like a jog ❤

[@theonetruemorty4078]

Intuitively disagree. There are substances that will remove thoughts, feelings, and ideas, yet consciousness is still there. Closer to Emerson's transparent eyeball perhaps. It also seems a folly of vanity to suggest that consciousness is something unique to humans, or mammals, or even life for that matter. "I become a transparent Eyeball; I am nothing; I see all; the currents of the Universal Being circulate through me." Raw perception of being without any additional qualia. People often mean different things when they use the word consciousness. Strip that all away, and what's left?

[@Hypersonicmind]

is Consciousness an illusion? Question= TO WHO????

[@rivestalex]

Hope I never get seated next to this guy at a dinner party...

[@michaelzimmer1115]

to call it an illusion seems to be circular - an illusion presumes consciousness.

[@Jinxed007]

Illusions can't exist as a "thing." Once they reach that state, they are no longer an illusion. So, if we produce a sensation of consciousness, we are conscious. The universe doesn't do magic tricks for our entertainment.

[@joeolson6085]

How pray tell can we produce a sensation of consciousness

[@Jinxed007]

@@joeolson6085 With our brains.

[@joeolson6085]

How do you produce a sensation of consciousness if you don’t first have consciousness to produce it

[@joeolson6085]

@@Jinxed007 consciousness is definitely not produced by the brain if you even take a casual enquiry into it. That is the very question facing scientists and philosophers and brilliant thinkers. It’s called the hard problem of consciousness. If you look into that last sentence it will open up where the forefront of consciousness study is located now

[@Jinxed007]

@joeolson6085 Many brilliant thinkers disagree with you.

[@oliviamaynard9372]

Only a mind can be fooled by an illusion.

[@citreonz]

love this