How Panpsychism Can Explain Consciousness | Rupert Sheldrake

[@hagitterkeltoub9517]

sheldrake in my view, is one of the most brilliant thinkers of our time. thank you for clear and coherent explanations.

[@agnosticmonkey7308]

Did you know his son is a musician? A damn good one in my count.

[@casenanson2584]

You probably dont care at all but does anybody know of a tool to log back into an Instagram account? I was dumb forgot my login password. I would appreciate any tricks you can offer me.

[@brentlesheim7084]

I believe Paramahansa Yogananda is the most holy and brilliant thinker of our time.

[@suecondon1685]

Totally agree. Rupert Sheldrake makes perfect sense to me and should be highly respected, and yes, his son's music is amazing too.

[@eugenesokol3918]

I love Rupert Sheldrake's view of the conscious universe! It makes more sense than the limited materialistic view.

[@justaguywithaturban6773]

@Acid King but sheldrakes view makes more sense, because it already involved consciousness, materialists just think dead matter makes you conscious

[@paddydiddles4415]

I would have thought it makes more sense to think the cosmos is not ‘mental’

[@bobs2809]

"Consciousness is the realm of possibility". This is brilliant.

[@mariuszpopieluch7373]

Vague, you mean?

[@bobs2809]

@@mariuszpopieluch7373 no

[@ROARobinson]

“Accelerating the slide down the slippery slope into a full blown animism”…love this ❤

[@ArjunLSen]

Sheldrake is to me not only brilliant but heroic. He has an outstanding mind, superior to that of the materialist reductionists who sit on their nineteenth century instincts and decry new thinking. But thinking over carefully the two positions as Sheldrake describes them I am convinced that he is right because as far as consciousness and Mind at large go, it is his view that has the greater explanatory power. And like all great minds whose work is so solidly based that it cannot be dismissed, he makes the materialists who think he's mistaken profoundly uncomfortable. They try to dismiss him with titters and polite jokes but despite their superficisl.clevernrss as well as.erudition in science they have no instinct for truth,only in holding on to what they mistakenly imagine is an unassailable doctrine of materialism. Sheldrake is our most reliable and formidable guide to the larger mentalist view of fundamental reality.

[@adnanalamoudi]

Rupert Sheldrake is a genius. He’s been unfairly underrated and degraded in “scientific” circles when he was supposed to be celebrated. What a shame. Thank you iai for introducing many of us to him.

[@nelsonsoucasaux2751]

One more great talk by one of the most important truly avantgarde scientists of our times.

[@thoughfullylost6241]

Thank you for putting Rupert sheldrake on he is an amazingly unique and interesting theorist and experimentalist

[@JAYDUBYAH29]

he's a hack pseudoscientist.

[@tankgrief1031]

Nah. He's a bullshitter.

[@thoughfullylost6241]

Any proof to back up those character attacks

[@JAYDUBYAH29]

thoughfully lost his entire body of work is hack pseudoscience.

[@tankgrief1031]

@@thoughfullylost6241 To be fair, I don't know if he really believes his bullshit ("Dogs know when their owners are coming home"), which would make him deluded rather than a bullshitter. In truth, he could be honestly deluded.

[@suecondon1685]

Mr Sheldrake's Morphic Resonance theory seems perfectly reasonable to me. Thinking outside of my personal self centred human experience, it makes sense. Thinking of ant colonies etc. We are atoms, individually no part of us is alive unless gathered together in a closed unit. Closed units seem to be the key to me, like gravitational bound galaxies, solar systems, human bodies, a car... Total respect for Rupert Sheldrake.

[@guyolive1071]

That the universe is alive and conscious is an age old buddhist teaching.

[@JAYDUBYAH29]

not really. its na animist idea and somewhat echoed in hinduism... but buddhism, not so much.

[@thoughfullylost6241]

In its oldest form its found in most ancient and modern indigenous ideologies

[@JAYDUBYAH29]

thoughfully lost yup it’s called animism, and it is a mistake now as much as it was in ancient times.

[@picknfish]

@@JAYDUBYAH29 World as organism; Buddhist worldview

[@Babbaha]

@@JAYDUBYAH29 Exactly,

[@robflynn509]

I'm working my way through his books. Top man.

[@TheUltimateSeeds]

Panpsychism (and especially its cousin “idealism”) could also help in explaining the phenomenon of “abiogenesis.” If we can consider the possibility that the universe is “mental” in nature,... (as per a Berkeleyan form of idealism, for example) ...then the presumption is that all of the material features of the universe (suns, planets, water, sand, molecules, electrons, etc.) are literally alive* as is suggested in Panpsychism. *(Note: not conscious or self-aware, just imbued (saturated) with the essence of life (of a higher universal consciousness) in the same way that the substance that forms our dreams is imbued with our own personal life essence). In that sense, if life is already present within the fabric of reality, then it is simply a tiny little step in accepting how inanimate (yet living) matter could become animate matter in the form of evolvable micro organisms (i.e., abiogenesis). _______

[@hsitasamrahs2301]

Excellent... thanks 🙏

[@not_potaytoes_hobbit]

I got lost at the "substance that forms our dreams", what's that? Is it because we all dream?

[@TheUltimateSeeds]

@@hsitasamrahs2301 Thank you, arjun, for your kind remark. _______.

[@TheUltimateSeeds]

@@not_potaytoes_hobbit When we fall asleep and experience a vivid dream, we encounter three-dimensional phenomena within the interior context of our minds... (buildings, trees, cars, bodies, etc.) ...that seem to be almost as real as the three-dimensional phenomena we encounter in the exterior context of the universe. Logically, then, our dreams are not only composed of a malleable “substance” (a sort of “mental clay,” if you will) that is capable of being formed into absolutely anything imaginable,... ...but the substance is also “alive,” in that it is thoroughly imbued with our own personal life essence. And that would be in precisely the same way that the substance that forms the three-dimensional phenomena of the universe may be imbued with the life essence of a higher consciousness (as was suggested in my first post with respect to Panpsychism/idealism). In which case, try to imagine the fundamental substance from which the stars and planets are formed as simply being an extremely advanced and ordered version of the same type of substance that forms our thoughts and dreams. Indeed, think of the old Hermetic axiom: “AS ABOVE, SO BELOW.” _______

[@MauriiciioBriito]

I think that if we observe the conection between all expressions of reallity and existence, like from quantum physics to cosmology, from biology to philosophy, from psychology to chemistry, from art to mysticism, from shamanic experiences and so on we can find links that pretty much sugests that some kind of intelligence pierce over the whole universe and seams to leave a fingerprint that is the actual link between everything else, or as Sheldrake put it as ultimate manifestation the realm of possibility. We need to dissolve our cold view of rigorous models conceived by cartesian science as we know today, and be more open to incorporate notions that out intellect are not equiped to conceive, because the intellect is only one of the tools of counciousness, and as you explore the conections of the universe this tool proves ultimately limited. As a fractal projection of something larger than us we can feel literaly the experiences perpetuated for centuries. Just as today humans can be considered to have "godlike powers" to humans like 300 years ago, just because the expasion of the counciousness, we can understand how a much more conected network of counciousness like the plants realm was able to give animals life, just as the sun was able to give earth life. And thats why mysticism or the roots of shamanism worshiped the plants and the sun as gods, because they understood not by intellect but from surrender and direct experience how humans are linked to a much greater counscious realms. What is, as Shelldrake put it, a wonderful worldview that suggests that everything is eternal, is just changing states to reach every possible outcome of complexity and possibility till the end of time, transcending then in a singularity for the next step of dimension evolution and so on. Just food for thought, forgive my english...

[@markwilson2421]

Consciousness requires brains made from physical properties. Materialism is the only theory that makes sense.

[@EaZiE01]

Seems right to me, considering quantum physics, that everything is fitted with possibility. Everything responds to the world in its way (that is called consciousness by pansychists) but the more complex the interactions, the greater consciousness, requires more capable brains which have evolved in humans to achieve it and will continue to do so. All this can only happen if everything is connected.

[@kseniyabobro9976]

What then is the viewpoint of believing life happened by chance and our existence is random and consciousness emerged within us without a higher purpose, BUT ALSO having the awareness to live a purposeful and meaningful life.. “Maybe that’s enlightenment enough: to know that there is no final resting place of the mind; no moment of smug clarity. Perhaps wisdom...is realizing how small I am, and unwise, and how far I have yet to go.”

[@cpcnw]

See also Donald Hoffman 'The Case Against Reality' and Pim Van Lommell 'Consciousness beyond Life'

[@QueenYak]

Such a beautiful man...his mind is so fine.

[@meiyuc22]

Human beings are really struggling with the hard problem. Until a great genius like Darwin comes about, there might not be a satisfactory explanation to this particularly interesting question.

[@miguelbinha]

Latency and potentiality, much more than possibility. "It is possible" seems to be just a covert way of denying one Creator and opening the doors to a multiplicity of origins.

[@thirdeye9106]

Intelligence / Consciousness / Principles of math have always been. No harder to believe than nothing.

[@samrowbotham8914]

Bernardo Kastrup is really on the ball we are all Alters of the Cosmic Mind.

[@ArjunLSen]

Bernardo Kastrup is a radical idealist. I'm not clear where Sheldrake stands with that. He hasn't discussed Kastrup. Kastrup goes far far beyond panpsychism in the direction of the primacy of Mind. I think Sheldrake would be positive about this approach by how far is not clear from this discussion. Sheldrake is, however, awesome.

[@ashleythor1803]

consciousness is all pervasive it is more than just a pity that people cant define self from other thanks RUPERT SHELDRAKE .

[@jasonwilcox6637]

The brain was created by the universe to perceive it.

[@TheGandorX]

Nothing can happen if there are no possibilities. So physical reality is about possibilities. Add to that the idea that conciousness is a property of matter.

[@BritishBeachcomber]

Consciousness is an emergent property of matter. Meaning that matter does not, by itself, contain consciousness or become so. As far as we can tell, a self organising system, what we call life, is required for consciousness to develop.

[@kokolanza7543]

So heartening. Thank you.

[@cj2075]

Brilliant.

[@cosmicdragonian]

Thank you. A Beautiful mind.

[@picknfish]

There is no separate, objective material world...

[@contemplateeternity8398]

Another scientist who figured it out. Everything is conscious, just remove yourself from the human experience for a short period of time and it becomes obvious.

[@contemplateeternity8398]

@@corniboi5711 Look up “panpsychism”. Then come back.

[@contemplateeternity8398]

@@corniboi5711 to elaborate on your confusion, awareness needs not have a substrate. To assume it does is just a metaphysical assumption from our every day experiences as humans. However, if you take the time to learn to meditate, relax deeply while remaining consciously aware- in time you will experience a separation of your conscious awareness from the substrate that is your body and your mind. Ultimately you will separate from all concepts but still be aware, without thought, but having an experience. This an experiment anyone can do, although there is an energy barrier to doing this (especially in the constantly busy world of thought and rushing we live in). But everyone (as far as I know) experiences this when they go deep enough into their own conscious experience. Turns out Descartes was only partially right when he said “I think, therefore I am”, perhaps just the “I am” is actually true at the core.

[@contemplateeternity8398]

@@corniboi5711 Did you do the experiment discussed above? Discover it for yourself.

[@steveboudreauquebec]

😂😂😂😂😂

[@lostmarxbro]

You are that which you are seeking- Francis of Assisi

[@1258-Eckhart]

So I'm seeking God ...

[@Bix12]

I love Rupert...such an original thinker! And he is absolutely correct regarding panpsychism/animism vs materialism. Check his facial expressions beginning at around 6:45 - he makes me laugh.

[@alexanderfernandez7404]

Brilliant!

[@yifuxero5408]

Most philosophers & scientists are confused about Consciousness. Forget intellectual discussions. Experience IT (Pure Consciousness without an object) "In-Itself". That is, the Ein Sof of the Hebrew Scriptures, the Tao, the "One" of Plotinus, The Substance of Spinoza, etc., access "Mahamritunjaya mantra - Sacred Sounds Choir". Listen to it for 5 min per day for at least two weeks and tap into (hopefully merge with), Pure Consciousness. The entire multiverse IS Consciousness. The delusion is that "objects" (thoughts, the sky, etc), are separrate from It. They ARE IT!.

[@dr.satishsharma9794]

Excellent..... thanks 🙏.

[@paddydiddles4415]

The concept of emergence has no problem describing how something different happens, it’s seriously not ‘a problem’. People who think there is a problem, are just committing the fallacy of composition

[@davidwilkie9551]

"A realm of possibilities", in which the theoretical compositions of attributes have a meaningless re-naming ceremony, from materialism to panpsychism without defining the Origin of the attributes.., a typical strategy of a "legal" justification argument from authority, not science. "All is Vibration", and all information is conducted via AM-FM communication mechanism of time duration timing/modulation, this continuous creation connection. Everything is connected to everything all at once in sync, a bit of a tautology, but required, because the here-now-forever instantaneous modulation of all existence is apparently difficult to understand when all information is in motion. (A moving target becomes an objective, when you thought you had an "object-lesson" in solid, documented statements) When you ask yourself how and why the Observable Universe is as it is, because you are the only person who can be you in your awareness, it becomes a matter of principle to discriminate fact from fiction.

[@judgewooden]

The idea that I am mystically connected to greater Minds is deeply depressing. I am of the opposite view about what depression is and purpose of life, it has nothing to do with a greater Mind. How is that even possible that I am connect, to what, and how, and when, and for what purpose?

[@honeys.kapoor2838]

Consciousnes means aware of whole thing and none. None is meaningless without experinece. Thinking is a state of consciousness. The work of thinking is to be experienced, to which no Law applies. Experience and experiencer are two different things. Time gender reality belief perceptions it all exists based on experience. Experiencer is thinking, state of consciousness. No Law applies to thinking. That is why experience format understand that I am experiencing myself. Any accident can be prevented by advanced thinking. Because the absence of advance notice is part of an accident

[@aresmars2003]

Funny people have been talking about "heart" as sort of "mind" that we don't experience as "mind", so we shift it down into our chest, so perhaps "heart" is our access to the "common mind" what we call mind in humans is our abstracting the world and ourselves for manipulative understanding. I do like the idea of different sorts of mind, and we really don't know. We'd probably say heart is more intuitive, and makes sense it could be how we have access to knowledge outside our personal experience.

[@BritishBeachcomber]

No. The heart is just a pump. One of the simplest organs.

[@aresmars2003]

@@BritishBeachcomber haha, literalism solves all problems.

[@thejunkyarddog732]

Enlightening

[@meiyuc22]

Maybe this problem is better understood in terms of analogy. For example, man-made groups like cities, nations, schools, unions, united nations, etc. Are they conscious? In a way they are, but strictly speaking, they're not. Totally depends on the definition adopted in a discussion.

[@shockwave326]

i think we just tap into consciousness and use it in a more ordered way i think its everywhere and in all things but the sun cant think like us but it has consciousness flowing through it,,, i dont think its alive in the same sense of us living matter that can reproduce copies of ourselves and all the way to trees and microbes,,,, our complex brains make us think ourselves special and separate from the consciousness thats everywhere

[@blackbird5634]

Well, the universe behaves in ways beyond the machines we've made to measure it.

[@bhaskarjyaachatterjee]

I feel this is a stolen concept from Advaita Vedanta Philosophy. It is more than 2000 years old.

[@lostpopcorns]

go and ask Sheldrake where he got his ideas from before you say he stole anything at all. also what if your 2000 year old philosophy took the concept from sumerians? what if sumerians took it from atlanteans? when did humanity start? are you denying Sheldrake's views? I really don't understand your intention with this comment. can't concepts be shared? can't several people have the same views about something so fundamental as our universe?

[@paddydiddles4415]

The problem with his arguments is that they’re based on a priori acceptance of ‘magic hypothesis’ - all phenomena are conveniently ‘consistent’ with such a hypothesis. There is no actual experimental support for this hypothesis. All of his observations can be accounted for (rather easily) by non-magical explanations

[@simonfernandes6809]

Actually there are no scientic materialism explanations for consciousness - it's assumed that consciousness is created from the brain but this has not been proved by science even to this day. On the contrary there are quite a few studies that show panpyschism or One MInd theory is credible.

[@anton3476]

So what happens with my consciousness when i die?

[@Divine-spark-d1v]

THERE IS 7.8 BILLION LEVEL'S OF UNDERSTANDING AND THE MOMMENT YOU IDENTIFY WITH ONE ... YOU EMBODY IT'S REALITY. BE LIKE A FLOWER..SERVE A PURPOSE BUT CONTROL NOTHING. " FIND YOUR PURPOSE "

[@BritishBeachcomber]

No need to SHOUT

[@peterribolli8300]

A brilliant mind:)

[@ronnysingh4509]

Wow he just kicked the b@tt of atheist materialist scientists

[@ronaldmadrid9929]

Whether or not the Sun us conscious, it created us.

[@shockwave326]

do ideas come from us or the information in the universes conscious mind??? downloaded in a sense to us,,, that then think we thought of it ??? how did some of the composers of old just wake up with a whole symphony in their minds and have to write it down immediately or it be lost forever ???

[@jamesruscheinski8602]

Could consciousness be an infinitesimal time that is inside or permeates everything?

[@Kostly]

Even the language of "math" is becoming antiquated.

[@BritishBeachcomber]

Actually, the language of math is evolving and advancing faster than you can imagine.

[@RoryOConnor]

*** How Panpsychism CanNOT Explain ConSciousness FULLY!

[@widipermono854]

🙏🙏🙏

[@derektrotter499]

This time next year we'll all be animists.

[@codvideo6]

Funny to see everyone here think they know what they Are talking about, and that they infact know Everything

[@Kostly]

I don't believe in magical thinking when it comes to Consciousness. Who would buy that bumper sticker?

[@laika5757]

Advaita Vidanta.

[@iruleandyoudont9]

if everything is consciousness, that explains consciousness? that makes no sense

[@AchimMorinaKunst-design]

Und nun sind sie mit ihrer Erklärung - der eigenen Weltanschauung zufrieden? Erläutert haben sie dagegen gar nichts, nur ihr Weltbild wiedergegeben

[@iruleandyoudont9]

@@AchimMorinaKunst-design I agree

[@adamkallin5160]

While I believe that consciousness is universal and prior to matter, I’m not sure that it explains anything. The explanation for why consciousness exists is still pretty much - because magic. Brains generating consciousness though magic seems just as likely to be true if you have no further argument.

[@AchimMorinaKunst-design]

Pinker und Co., denken leider nicht über den Tellerrand des Universums hinaus bzw. den Atomismus. Deren Arroganz alles erklären zu können ist meines Erachtens zutiefst anthropozentrisch

[@lsb2623]

Giant pupils, drooping eyes... something up?

[@tankgrief1031]

Can we just not use 'argument from ignorance' as some kind of proof? Please? No? Never mind, I'll count the logical fallacies.

[@TheTruthKiwi]

I agree. He seems to pull this consciousness out of nowhere therefore gods and he thinks the secular world view is depressing. He's not as smart as he looks

[@thepolemic5970]

@@TheTruthKiwi But appeals to a certain mindset. Just read the comments section.

[@TheTruthKiwi]

@@thepolemic5970 yeah, confirmation bias of theism and theists

[@rahuldewan4104]

Top-down consciousness -- you start with the worldview that Consciousness is what the Universe is made of. This is essentially the Vedantic/Hindu idea - and all Hindu views emerge from this worldview.

[@songsabai3794]

I wonder if he has ever dabbled in psychedelics?

[@quasimobius]

So has his intellectual nemesis, Sam Harris. Harris did LSD during college. He'll probably be in diapers long before Sheldrake.

[@casspirburns]

Search for his "Trialogues" with Terence McKenna and Abram.

[@wehsee912]

🌚☄️❤️💫

[@JAYDUBYAH29]

next up: how leprechanuns whisper in dogs ears that their owners are on the way home...

[@TasteMyStinkholeAndLikeIt]

next up: weetard Julian Walker explains consciousness arising from matter.... the same matter that science is recognizing doesn't exist. After Julians lecture, there will be a Q/A period where Julian explains how his method of refuting claims is through humor, as he never took formal logic courses and doesn't understand how to address claims logically.

[@tankgrief1031]

I thought it was fairies?

[@TasteMyStinkholeAndLikeIt]

@@tankgrief1031 Confirming my irrefutable statement that you're a bedwetting moron, and an anonymous chickenshit coward. I love how you're so terrified of anyone knowing a thing about you, that you went to the EXTRA steps to configure your channel to hide every feature that could possibly be hidden. lololololololol... and we're supposed to take the useless opinion of cowards like yourself seriously? Bah haa haa haa haa NO.

[@JAYDUBYAH29]

TasteMyStinkhole consciousness indeed arises from neurobiological matter... it’s the only context we’ve ever seen it in. Period. You’re making the idiotic sheldrakian arguments though that still rely on outdated mind body dualism along with,pseudoscience quantum mangling. Just stop.

[@TasteMyStinkholeAndLikeIt]

@@JAYDUBYAH29 1) learn the difference between an opinion and a logical statement. 2) you've spent your adult life learning to put your legs behind your head so you could hide your pickle in your mouth. 3) you clearly know nothing about Upanishad philosophy nor been educated in logic, because if you had, you'd feel like a fool making your YogaTarded argument.

[@tankgrief1031]

Like anyone, Sheldrake can put his ideas to the test. Peer review. But he doesn't . He writes books and sells them to people who don't know any better. A bit like the UK's own version of Deepak Chopra.

[@bitdropout]

I think he tried or proposed some actual experiments. None of them held up. I feel he gives panpsychism a bad name. He drifts too easily into massive, unevidenced speculations.

[@tankgrief1031]

But people accept his claims at face value. I found this at HTLGI, which surprised me.

[@restorationofidentity]

@@tankgrief1031 Rupert sheldrake is definietly like Deepak Chopra pseudo science bullshit. It's classic just because current scientific explanation hasn't been able to fully understand consciousness. These pseudo intellectuals will find a god of the gaps argument. It's to differcult for many to simply accept that we are mortal and can't survive death. Sheldrake I agree is just selling his books and trying to gain platforms were were he can..

[@BigfootAnthropologist]

You are incorrect. Sheldrake many of his theories have been peer reviewed and verified through rigorous testing. Look it up. Next time, do your research before you leave a comment that disparages the Einstein of our generation.

[@BigfootAnthropologist]

@@tankgrief1031 That is a more accurate description of your comment. Thank you for your paradigm shift.

[@ZeroOskul]

00:11 "I think..." and subjunctive claptrap follows.

[@caseyspaos448]

Subjunctive? You're pissed off at Sheldrake for using big words you don't know l, so you're striking back with more big words you don't know?

[@Tychoxi]

say wat

[@ObscurityIsBest]

This guy blinked like 4 times during the entirety of the video.

[@longcastle4863]

Big gaps in logic and whole fields of knowledge ignored

[@WeeWeeJumbo]

First, you mean 'Panpsychism.' Second, this is obvious nonsense and deeply embarrassing for the IAI

[@justinmcneil659]

He doesn't blink very often

[@marqgoldberg7454]

Ridiculous. We experience consciousness because our brains are basically computers. Nothing is going to experience consciousness without a computing device of some sort. Why don't computers experience consciousness? Only because they aren't programmed for it. Gosh, now I guess this guy has to go do something else with his life. Sucks to be you!

[@JAYDUBYAH29]

the dishonest rhetoric about "materialism is stuck in 19th century worldview .." is so smarmy and just plain wrong. the materialist/idealist dualism is what is outdated -no-one thinks that way anymore. its a false dichotomy/straw man you set up that makes it seem as if the only way to resolve the old framing of the question is to revert to idealism (panpsychism is a version of idealism) instead of recognizing the several other ways of 21st century framing of consciousness, like emergentism. the interviewer is right to suggest it is a problem with language -the word "consciousness" as it turns out does not refer to a substance or object or specific thing... it is an umbrella term for multiple neurobiological functions as they interact with the environment, all interacting via feedback loops to create the phenomenon of conscious experience, which we see in prototypical form in the most basic types of biological life (but not in rocks or stars or fire or cars for example) and that gets gradually more complex as organisms evolve to develop more complex neural nets... oh crickey, and then the malarky "if you hold an atheist materialist world view .." bit that starts at 9:24 -look rupert is basically a creationist religious zealot dressed up in academic and new age clothing.... what an intellectually impoverished argument "if you think you live in a meaningless world and your mind lives inside your brain...that's deeply depressing" -therefore believe this wishful thinking and you'll feel better. what a smug twit.

[@jamesdeavin7457]

How do feedback loops create consciousness? What laws of physics predict this?

[@JAYDUBYAH29]

James Deavin physics? It’s neurobiology, and we don’t fully understand how it works... but pansychism is not a good hypothesis. Emergentism fits what we do know much better.

[@jamesdeavin7457]

@@JAYDUBYAH29 The processes of neurobiology are ultimately based in physics. Everything neurobiology does can be traced back to laws of physics. What laws of physics predict the emergence of consciousness in neurobiology?

[@JAYDUBYAH29]

James Deavin really? How does physics predict a rat taking a shit, or a parasite bursting out of the eye ball of a sheep, or you typing nonsense on the inter Webs? That’s the wrong level of reductionism, plain and simple.

[@kendrickjahn1261]

I got into a discussion the other day about this issue with someone who held that Universal consciousness is what creates matter. Lol. I was like, what? How does someone reason like this given what modern brain sciences say about conscious experience? I realize we don't have the answers as well, but how do you make that leap and reverse it without any sort of evidence whatsoever besides, "I just feel it subjectively." This man also had the audacity to claim that neuroscientists are full of conjecture while then simultaneously spewing out nothing but conjecture, such as there being a Universal consciousness that establishes matter, and you and I, rather than the other way around.

[@JAYDUBYAH29]

ah yes, let's not gloss over how blithely he says that "i think the sun is conscious.." facepalm.

[@restorationofidentity]

Lol 🤣🤣🤣 good one like science has proven that the sun's ultraviolet radiation has striped Mara atmosphere. I guess sheldrake Believes the sun is choosing which planets live and die 😂🤣😃 these pseudo intellectuals are idiots.

[@edzejandehaan9265]

"I think this","I think that". Well I think these ideas are simply non falsifiable. Fanciful fantasies that have more in common with religion than philosophy or science.

[@caseyspaos448]

Philosophy is pretty much by definition thinking about non-falsifiable concepts, no? It is itself closer to religion than what materialists refer to as the hard sciences. When discussing consciousness you are employing consciousness. The only attempt I'm aware of to make claims about consciousness falsifiable is the work of Donald Hoffman.

[@view1st]

@@caseyspaos448 And that's why philosophy is not science. And never will be.

[@TheTruthKiwi]

I agree. Baseless assumptions and assertions

[@TheTruthKiwi]

Hmmm, so he finds the secular world view depressing so there must be a god? Just because you don't like something doesn't mean that it isn't true Rupert.

[@joegibbskins]

It doesn’t really matter what’s true though. I mean it does for the purposes of scientists and people involved in setting or an enacting political policy, but it really doesn’t matter what you, or I, or anyone else believes about existence. There isn’t a reward for being the most right waiting at the end of our lives when we will simply disappear and forget anything we learned anyway. Believing whatever gets you through the night is a perfectly appropriate response to the awful curse of being born

[@TheTruthKiwi]

@@joegibbskins You might not care but I do.

[@joegibbskins]

@@TheTruthKiwi right because you don’t actually believe what you are saying and haven’t internalized how meaningless you and your opinions are. I have. You’ll get there one day, kid

[@pootwiggs]

reading CC and it said "pant cyclists" hahahah

[@JAYDUBYAH29]

how can something different from matter emerge from matter? the same way chemistry emerges from physics, biology from chemistry and consciousness from biology, and then language from consciousness and culture from language and the kind of nonsense sheldrake utters from his particular cultural context... how can something as different from philosophy and science as incoherent pseudoscience waffle emerge from his mouth?

[@jamesdeavin7457]

How does consciousness emerge from biology?

[@tankgrief1031]

@@jamesdeavin7457 Argument from ignorance. Classic logical fallacy.

[@jamesdeavin7457]

@@tankgrief1031 Who's arguing from ignorance?

[@jamesdeavin7457]

@@tankgrief1031 He made a claim and I asked for evidence. How is this an argument from ignorance?

[@tankgrief1031]

@@jamesdeavin7457 "How does consciousness emerge from biology?"

[@laze4534]

Nah mate.

[@harrycrosswell2844]

There are so many holes in this man's thinking. Interesting ideas, poor logic.

[@oneoflokis]

State some of these "holes" then...

[@science212]

He's a liar.