Is Reality an Illusion? | Dr. Donald Hoffman | EP 387

Dr. Jordan B Peterson and cognitive neuroscientist Dr. Donald Hoffman discuss what we know as reality, why space time is now being considered a “doomed” framework, and how consciousness can be understood as a vast probability space within which we orient ourselves.
Hoffman received a Bachelor of Arts degree in quantitative psychology from the University of California at Los Angeles, and then his Doctorate of Philosophy in computational psychology at MIT. He briefly worked as a research scientist at the MIT Artificial Intelligence Lab, before taking on the role of assistant professor at the University of California at Irvine. He is now a professor in the department of Cognitive Sciences. He has written four books (below), on the topics of human vision, perception, consciousness, and the effects of/reasons for evolution on each. He is also a key proponent of MUI (Multimodal User Interface) theory, which states that "perceptual experiences do not match or approximate properties of the objective world, but instead provide a simplified, species-specific, user interface to that world." Hoffman argues that conscious beings have not evolved to perceive the world as it actually is but have evolved to perceive the world in a way that maximizes "fitness payoffs.”
Dr. Peterson's extensive catalog is available now on DailyWire+: bit.ly/3KrWbS8
- Sponsors -
PreBorn!: Help save 11,000 babies from abortion: preborn.com/Jordan
Shopify: Get a $1/ month FREE trial with full access to Shopify's entire suite of features: shopify.com/jbp
- Links -
For Dr. Donald Hoffman:
"The Case Against Reality: Why Evolution Hid the Truth from Our Eyes" (Book) www.amazon.com/Case-Against-R...
"Visual Intelligence: How We Create What We See" (Book) www.amazon.com/Visual-Intelli...
Dr. Hoffman on X donalddhoffman?la...
Dr. Hoffman's Ted Talk www.ted.com/talks/donald_hoff...
- Chapters -
(0:00) Coming up
(0:24) Intro
(1:30) Dr. Hoffman's theory of perception
(4:12) Fitness payoffs
(9:40) How has “reality” been shaped by evolution?
(18:19) Iconography, constraints, and pragmatism
(23:25) The VR headset analogy, the underlying reality
(27:54) Levels of potential patterning, “specifying the grip”
(37:08) Consciousness as conceptualized in mythology
(39:55) Why spacetime is a doomed framework, the theory of conscious agents
(46:53) Karl Friston, anxiety, and entropy
(51:59) How anxiety disorders warp your probability space
(54:25) Time is the fundamental limited resource
(57:41) Our reality is a projection of what lies deeper
(1:00:00) Every scientific endeavor starts with inherent axioms of faith
(1:05:34) Dawkins, reproduction, and the role of sex
(1:13:48) Is consciousness the primary reality?
(1:16:14) That which God lacks
(1:18:47) When the math backs the impossible
(1:23:50) There is no theory of everything
(1:24:45) Evolutionary game theory
(1:28:03) What lies beyond spacetime absolutely matters within it
(1:31:00) How has this understanding of reality affected Dr. Hoffman existentially?
// SUPPORT THIS CHANNEL //
Newsletter: mailchi.mp/jordanbpeterson.co...
Donations: jordanbpeterson.com/donate
// COURSES //
Discovering Personality: jordanbpeterson.com/personality
Self Authoring Suite: selfauthoring.com
Understand Myself (personality test): understandmyself.com
// BOOKS //
Beyond Order: 12 More Rules for Life: jordanbpeterson.com/Beyond-Order
12 Rules for Life: An Antidote to Chaos: jordanbpeterson.com/12-rules-...
Maps of Meaning: The Architecture of Belief: jordanbpeterson.com/maps-of-m...
// LINKS //
Website: jordanbpeterson.com
Events: jordanbpeterson.com/events
Blog: jordanbpeterson.com/blog
// SOCIAL //
Twitter: / jordanbpeterson
Instagram: / jordan.b.peterson
Facebook: / drjordanpeterson
Telegram: t.me/DrJordanPeterson
All socials: linktr.ee/drjordanbpeterson
#JordanPeterson #JordanBPeterson #DrJordanPeterson #DrJordanBPeterson #DailyWirePlus

[@teresadurocher8969]

I loved listening to Dr. Hoffman, and I think this is one interview that Jordan should have listened more than spoke.

[@AldoRaine43]

As someone said below, "Peterson has been the only smart enough host to discuss his theories. Everyone else just agrees without understanding". His questions are quite valuable.

[@AldoRaine43]

@user-wb4em9pw7m LOL

[@Bruhaha9]

@@AldoRaine43 Not mostly. If you spend a while absorbing Hoffman's theories, you can see in a few seconds that Jordan is off to a false start as it relates to Hoffman most of the time he gets wound up. It may be all interesting, but he's not waiting to know what Hoffman is saying. Knowing the theory fairly well, I was able say out loud the reason JP's comments just weren't connecting, and it was just what DH would say next. like "no, your whole point is still stuck in spacetime, Jordan". I'm not really throwing shade on JP, just saying he wasn't really on it. But that's not surprising. It's a really fundamentals shaking theory. You can see Peterson boggle a few times unlike I've ever seen. It takes a week or two just to get your head around, and you can see JP sort of realizing that a couple times, which shows he was tracking at least how far out it was at times. JP's whole interview style is doing most of the talking and trying to shoehorn his ideas into what someone else thinks and see what they say. That didn't work so well here. But it's ok.

[@Bruhaha9]

@user-wb4em9pw7m Well yes, but to be fair, lack of prep doesn't fully track a person's general intellectual level. He couldn't bring it to bear here, I fully agree.

[@creedsc1399]

The first part of discussion gives that impression, you can find a bunch of Dr.Hoffman's interviews basically laying out the theory on repeat, but JP uncoveres interesting depths of ideas and that is the point.

[@Fierbepere]

More than once in the past ideas such as those of Dr. Hoffman crossed my mind. I am a neurologist and psychiatrist. Although my background and my readings have been significant primers, I still felt slapped in the face by the powerful and concise presentation of Dr. Hoffman. Like he felt when becoming aware of the significance of his findings. I wouldn't be surprised if others watching him felt slapped in the face. I consider myself fortunate for watching this video.

[@davidcorrin7309]

I too felt slapped when I first encountered his work. Slapped awake that is...

[@st1nkh3ad]

I feel the same its like hes opened your eyes for the first time as if we are under hypnotic control hard to describe when you watch his talks

[@adamvicari3295]

I am just a layman, I am not an expert in neuroscience. However, do you know how ridiculous this sounds to an outsider and non-neuriscientist? How can anything possibly exist outside of space and time? Everything in the universe takes up space and exists in a frame of time. The life cycle of every object or entity, animate or inanimate, necessarily depends on time, and that object takes up space in the universe. To think of something outside of space and time is to think of literally nothing. The human mind can not conceive of nothing because everything it perceives is within space and time. This sounds like some half baked attempt to try to justify or explain the existence of "god". Not an expert by any stretch of the imagination, but I fail to see how anyone can rationalize something outside of space and time because the idea on its face in plain language at its essence makes no logical sense. It is a fundamentally inconceivable and irrational thought. Is this man an evangelical Christian?

[@adamvicari3295]

So the whole crackpot theory described here is just one big attempt to rationalize the god hypothesis and provide false "evidence" for the "existence" of god to the credulous and indoctrinated masses of believers. No wonder his theory is fringe, dismissed, and largely ignored or rejected by the scientific community.

[@jerm2011]

I was interested and I enjoyed hearing his ideas but its just theory. Just a way to think of things. It needn't shake you to your core or even surprise you. It could well be that he's ultimately wrong.

[@user-ml8jq4dh5x]

I've listened to pretty much every podcast you've done, Jordan, but this was the first one that broke my mind. Thank you so much. Wonderful, humbling, thought-provoking stuff.

[@bryfrancis3593]

I'm sure it did break your brain into a racist and a bigot. Try to get your brain fixed if you can.

[@quantumpotential7639]

I hope you can fix your mind soon. Now let us pray 🙏 the C A S O D E X opens for you and let's the light in. OK? Okay GOOD!! Thanks 😊

[@delavan9141]

I would much prefer that Jordan bring the discussion to his audience instead of expound on his own lovely thoughts. Throughout I was skipping over 4-5 minute expositions that seemed rather meaningless with respect to bringing out his guest's work and ideas. He seems too often to use his guests as a foil for his own desire to pontificate. Here we are at 37:20 and finally he seems ready to let him speak, but instead immediately launches into some analogy about something connected to a past lecture series. He held the floor for another five minutes on that tangent.

[@subatomicmystery]

Some of us actually prefer interviews that flow naturally in conversational style.

[@measententia3473]

Agree. Listened to the whole interview and enjoyed it. But phrases like “generically chosen payoff function” were not easily grasped.

[@JulianCrowe]

I love a JP podcast where I only understand 0.1% of it because it shows me how much room there is to grow.

[@anialiandr]

Rafter 12 years of Jordan plus my ow work I feel aligned with Jordan’s thinking. I started with his Harvard lectures by accident. Then his maps of meaning ❤

[@madcat61207]

@@anialiandr Wow, that's some really great news.

[@IvikosDigital]

Yes, the search for knowledge is more addictive than video games for some of us

[@iro4201]

Great! 😘💚 Being humble already shows you're on a good path :)

[@fury_saves_world]

People are losing their lives.

[@JhonnyNexen]

I genuinely think Hoffman dropped the coldest statement I've ever heard in the closing segment, when he said that we are just multiple projections of the consciousness looking at each other I felt chills down my spine, something I've never felt before.

[@misterla9683]

time stamp please?

[@rebelraccoon9018]

What did he mean by that?

[@iggle6448]

@@rebelraccoon9018 He says that what he's discovering through his study and the math of consciousness is that consciousness is what comprises everything (though we don't know where, when, why, how it is - space and the universe seem to be a very elaborate stage set, rather like a video game). Pieces of this consciousness break off to animate, inhabit, inspire, operate human bodies (and presumably every creature). That is every living thing is a part of The Consciousness temporarily playing a role. When our avatar bodies die, our consciousness doesn't die, it returns to the The Consciousness. Of course, in principle this is what many sages and philosophers have posited for millennia. Dr Hoffman believes he's proving it through the work he and his team are doing.

[@Nettamorphosis]

@@rebelraccoon9018 I think he means we’re all branches stemming from the same consciousness.

[@dominicjan]

this is basically what my mushroom trip was all about

[@ellekay5241]

This conversation most definitely requires a part 2! You stopped at the very moment that it was getting most interesting!

[@Ppstate32]

You need to get Bernardo Kastrup on the podcast. He’s the leading idealist philosopher (also a computer scientist). You can discuss pretty much anything with him, but the major points of interest could be idealism, artificial intelligence, Carl Jung and Christianity.

[@Arjunrajuanke]

Donald Hoffman is phenomenal ❤

[@VolodymyrPankov]

Zero proofs. Only verbage.

[@jeffj4440]

For the first half of this conversation, it was interesting how Dr. Peterson and Dr. Hoffman were approaching the topic on different levels. Practical psychotherapy vs. computational psychology. Very challenging but enthralling.

[@edujyoung]

Oh wow. After listening to more of this, I realise this is the thought I had when I was very small and young, like 4. I had these ideas. I was playing hide and go seek at night with a torch, but I was staring at the spotlight on the wall. I saw where the light was and where it wasn’t. When I moved the torch, I saw new terrain but lost the original position. I felt that the light represent things we learned and understood. The darkness around it represent that which we didn’t know. So I dreamed up an inifinitely large spotlight, but the problem was it had an infinitely expanding circumference of darkness to follow it. I realised that God or whatever this thing was I was thinking about represented the forever unknowable thing. The more you learn, the more you don’t know. That’s God. And we pursue the explanse of improvement or knowledge and it can go infinitely.

[@aleksandrkutko5439]

I think the above was the best textual and emotional response. Realisation of my own nativity is so humiliating and inspiring at the same moment.

[@user-dm2ig3mf3w]

Difference between us and Prof. Hoffman is that he's not only got the thought or intuition, but a rigorous mathematical formulation of it. There lies the work. See, we're literarily all of genius, but most of us aren't ready to pay the price to make their idea as plausible as possible to everybody around them who is interested in it.

[@Allplussomeminus]

I love conversations like this. Wandering through reality and attempting to make sense of it and pinpoint things. Even if it's futile, the journey is still so much fun.

[@madcat61207]

I think it seems like intellectual masterbation.

[@childofkhem1.618]

​@@madcat61207but it's fun tho! Maturation of the mind!! Especially when u have no arms!

[@quantumpotential7639]

If you have too much fun, you transcend the C A S O D E X. Now let us pray 🙏. Okay? OK good!! Thanks

[@shefalichow7917]

@@madcat61207 The latter drains you of your vitality and purity, and the former bolsters your sense of awareness and makes you literally more thoughtful. They are nowhere close to one another.

[@AHouston06]

Agreed 👍

[@theothermebutwhoami]

We need part 2 immediately. Thank you both, or to that which we are, for such a meeting of minds, & to the dedication of such endeavors.

[@iro4201]

Hahaha, delay your gratification 😘

[@XanaxMilf]

These ideas he and many scientists have confirmed were already before there before them in religions focused on spirituality like Hinduism or Buddhism and more

[@iro4201]

So what, does repetition imply less quality? Why would it ever matter? Just wanted to say that someone is better than them? @@XanaxMilf

[@YarHarFD]

I'm 24 minutes in and the theories brought up are so complex and mind blowing I need a break to think about them before moving forward

[@PandosII]

@@Cryptic_TriptychComdescension isn’t a good motivator

[@YarHarFD]

@@Cryptic_Triptych there is a difference between mindless listening and active thought

[@callum7081]

Yes my intellect is straining a bit to keep up 😅

[@YarHarFD]

It's amazing you are unable to fill in the blank when you have 12/13 of the pieces. Please continue to display your intelligence, everyone is just riveted by how smurt you are@@Cryptic_Triptych

[@YarHarFD]

it's not a matter of intelligence, just a lot of things I haven't considered before with regards to reality and perception@@callum7081

[@robmastin7964]

Please continue these conversations!!!! I beg you! I find this to be one of the most enlightening and stimulating conversations I have had the great pleasure of sharing in. Thank you both with the most sincere of hearts.

[@robmastin7964]

@@Rocksteady246 and.....?

[@takeeverythingin]

@@Rocksteady246 so what's your point.. and its relevance to this discussion. you're on the wrong page mate.

[@Shutupandsquatnow]

​@@Rocksteady246yeah but to be fair, he most likely did a lot of other mistakes aswell. He is just a dude at the end of the day.

[@katyaloban]

One of the most fascinating interviews I’ve seen. Man, it might make believers out of some who stumbled across this dialogue. I’m so excited to see the continuation of this conversation about the topics Jordan proposed at the end. I’m into math and spiritual, too, so it’s so refreshing to hear scientists to talk about how science points in the direction of existence of One consciousness- it’s unbelievably exciting❤

[@OnceTheyNamedMeiWasnt]

Hoffman's leading the charge, but he is not a believer. What do we do in response to this? Believe some more?

[@behnaz5097]

Have you t listened to bernardo kastrup?if not i totally advice you to try .

[@justaperson9155]

Believer in what?

[@iro4201]

💚

[@Thomas-ot5ei]

Intellectual giants of our time. Thank you so much for your work and for showing it publicly. It is awe inspiring.

[@bblueangel2]

Time is an illusion. Everything happens now. All of intelligence it's a matter of being conscious enough to manifest it.

[@adrianbenedictmendoza6818]

Indeed.. but also wait for him to have Dr. Robert Gilbert in his show

[@ericcricket4877]

Hilarious. One is genuinely building a scientifically valid model of fundamental reality, while replacing the dogmatic physicalism rampant across the scientific community since the 1700's and possibly solving the cosmic expansion, dark matter, the mind-body problem and the entropic arrow of time in the process too, while the other is telling incels to clean their rooms by using big words and quoting the bible. Awe inspiring indeed, but the other is an influencer while the other may turn out to be the Copernicus+Newton+Einstein of 21st century, posthumously receiving multiple nobels, as he will likely die before any of his theories are validated to the extent that the nobel commitee will bend the knee.

[@OnceTheyNamedMeiWasnt]

@@ericcricket4877 You've clearly got lots going on in your head. Always good to commit it to paper.

[@bblueangel2]

hes done more of influence then your ignorant comment will be acknowledged to even matter@@ericcricket4877

[@StevenAbbott]

From a very young age, I have had precognitive dreams. At the intersection where the dream intersected with its realization, sometimes 10 months later I would experience what I can best describe as an out-of-body experience. From my perspective, very few people on this physical plane, actually understand our space and time.

[@leondbleondb]

Yeah...? Prove it.

[@kasarajaxen5793]

Same!

[@catoochi510]

I'm so glad these two are finally talking!

[@catoochi510]

I don't think Dr. Peterson understands his theory very well.

[@montelvontaviouspore]

I fully understand and believe you 🙏

[@arzuakca5248]

I am so proud to hear your way of thinking and sharing your universal needed knowledge. As a writer also wish to thank you for feeding people with genuine information. May your journey be flowing and reaching millions. Thank you.

[@edujyoung]

You can tell when JBP has someone to learn from, or someone who wants to learn from him. This one’s the former and his brilliance shines in his intense curiosity to learn paired with his humility to get a concept wrong initially. He is one of the best “understanders” to witness and observing him has helped me understand, merely from embodying his head tilt, in ideating what questions he might ask. Bizarre. This is so good.

[@bryfrancis3593]

Jp is a dumb persons smart person. Please read a book that actually has some value.

[@ltwig476]

Yes well, I have been watching Jordan off and on sense his debates 15-20 years ago with Hitchings , Sam Harris and Dawkins. He kind of has an m.o. that he tries to find substantiated sciences and relate his Christian spin to them. So he is always searching for newest greatest science. He has very much relaxed his will to debate atheists. He already did that with fairly poor results. Yet I have very high respect for the man for his accumulated knowledge about the human condition and willingness to learn more.

[@bryfrancis6915]

​@@ltwig476Jordan Peterson is a pseudo psychologist and bigot.

[@TheJeremyKentBGross]

​​@@ltwig47615-20 years ago with Hitchens et al? I don't think so. Afaik he NEVER spoke with Hitchens and his first talk with Sam Harris was on Waking Up within the last decade. I'll grant that he started off badly due to many wrong preconceptions about where they were coming from, but you seem to have some pretty basic facts quite wrong.

[@AbdullahMQureshi]

​@ltwig476 Yes that's what you do when you're trying to research on a mental level. Welcome to the world of hypothesis testing

[@roddevere2975]

Donald Hoffman is a very patient man.

[@jorgetorres6162]

Goodness sake, Peterson keeps interrupting him.

[@IjsBlice]

When the host waffles on with zero structure to his questions and comments

[@copaito2008]

What a bunch of nonsense!!!!

[@dunki-dunki-dawg]

@@copaito2008 Metaphysics is the most astonishing subject I have ever discovered.

[@ilovetech8341]

​@@jorgetorres6162Peterson has been the only smart enough host to discuss his theories. Everyone else just agrees without understanding.

[@joegrant413]

I greatly enjoyed the Lex Friedman interview, and have read Dr. Hoffman's seminal paper and his book The Case Against Reality. Can't tell you how much I look forward to this convo with Dr. Peterson.

[@johns2220]

It's funny because it's scientific rationalism turning on itself. How can you trust your own senses or logic models if they were born out of a system designed for fitness - not necessarily truth. An atheist is someone who hasn't taken science far enough.

[@zr5438]

@@Rocksteady246he holds a phd in psychology

[@joegrant413]

@@Rocksteady246 yep

[@zr5438]

@@Rocksteady246 I'm well aware of the replication crisis in psychology and other fields. It's also observed in economics, medicine and probably all soft sciences.The inability to replicate seems to be worst in social psychology and oncology, with oncology possibly having replication rates of as dismal as 10 percent, or so I've heard. Does even that discredit oncology as a field? To some degree, yes, but psychology is a more serious science than oncology eith much higher replication rates and lesser Big Pharma influence. I would separate psychology from from actual social sciences though. Psychology is somewhere between the soft sciences and the hard sciences. I agree that we should take some things from psychology and generally other science as well with a grain of salt, but that doesn't mean that psychology hasn't discovered something useful about people and the world around us. It also doesn't discredit jordan, right?

[@BobDingus-bh3pd]

@@Rocksteady246what is your point? That the “Dr” in Dr.Peterson doesn’t mean he does heart surgery?

[@nigelbryant7980]

Of of the best talks on the channel for a while, Hoffman makes for a great and intelligent conversation.

[@kaledon6]

It was the best rational explanation for the metaphysics of the ressurection of the dead, specially when Hoffman says "We´re all gonna laugh when we thought it was all over"

[@juniva11]

Thank you Jordan and Donald for this very insightful episode. The reality of reality itself being a part of a larger consciousness, where we essentially are experiencing our lives as such. Thank you looking forward to your next conversation. My mother lost a son to a tragic vehicular accident at the age of 3 years and 11 months. I, myself was born the following year and named after him. I attribute a lot of my decisions since young as honouring my late brother, due to my Mum sharing with me stories of my late brother and why she gave me the name I have today. That his consciousness exists independently makes sense to me purely in a spiritual sense, particularly with living my life in memory of him. Allthough I prefer that theory than the possibility of the movie Matrix starring Keanu Reaves and being physically plugged into a computer system and being a part of the code within :)

[@saidaabukar4937]

Everything has cause and effect. Misunderstanding or ignorance, without limits. In some cases of our society. You both have covered a lots of scientific evaluation. Many thanks Dr.Peterson, Dr. Hoffman.

[@bryfrancis3593]

You support a bigot and psuedo psychologist, Jordan is unhinged and is knowing spreading narcissistic propaganda that is actively hurting people. You a bigot too like JP?

[@andrewbud]

This is the sort of interview where Jordan's tendancy to interject really does the topic a disservice. I've seen many interviews with Donald Hoffman handled much better. He's really on the frontier and intersection of cognitive science, neuroscience, computer science, and philosophy, and Jordan ends up needlessly muddying the waters with his tangents and detours. I can tell Jordan meant well and was genuinely interested in his ideas, but if anyone is interested in understanding Hoffman's work (and the incredible implications that arise out of it), I'd recommend pretty much any other podcast he's done.

[@lieutenantbl4ck]

Alternatively. Why would you want them to cover the same grounds that have already been explored in other podcasts?

[@andrewbud]

@@lieutenantbl4ck I wouldn't for my own sake, but for many people I would imagine this is their first exposure to Donald Hoffman's ideas. It would have been a more informative podcast if Jordan had cut down on the analogies and asides. Although, I suppose that's kind of a calling card of his, so I don't know. Perhaps I'm just disappointed that, because of the way Jordan views the world, he's ended up filtering Hoffman's ideas through a less revolutionary and disruptive lens than they deserve to be.

[@amphimrca]

Peterson..OMG 🙈

[@huntforberries]

Indeed. Especially because the interruptions tend to be clarifications of points still yet to be fully made, and when they don't match his presumption of where they're going, he spirals into a conclusion that he doesn't understand when perhaps had he let the guest complete their point, he would know what the concept is in completion.

[@andrewbud]

@@huntforberries Agreed. It's frustrating, but that's just how he rolls.

[@horacelidenbrock3905]

Very impressed with Dr. Hoffman. Articulating such complex notions in a way that is understandable by the layman without ever over-simplifying or generalising is no small feat.

[@peterstmartin87]

I'm not sure he achieved that. I'm pretty intelligent, and I'm still scratching my head.

[@bwmclaurin]

​@@peterstmartin87most people think they're pretty intelligent...

[@bwmclaurin]

​@@Rocksteady246if you put half the energy you put into trolling, into maybe improving what seems to be a sad, unhappy existence or maybe improving your fellow man's experience...you might finally accomplish something? Also, maybe seek professional help with your weird, borderline stalking, and seemingly homoerotic obsession with Dr Peterson and his commenters ASAP... 🤔👀🥴🤡🌎💩🙄🤷‍♂️

[@stri8ted]

@@peterstmartin87 I think his book does a better job at articulating the idea. The discussion was fragmented due to the frequent (interesting) interjections by Dr Peterson.

[@JeffThomas-ld3cz]

u still stuck in the headset then 😆 noob @@peterstmartin87

[@CounterFiat]

I've been on a Hoffman Kastrup binge so the timing of this drop is impeccable 🔥

[@isabellawolgoth9447]

I read and reread Hoffman's "The Case Against Reality" in order to get it. And listening to this interview drove home one important point regarding Hoffman's idea of "one consciousness." As a reader and follower of Advaita Vedanta, I can't help but smile and nod my head.

[@JoshuaRosaaen]

Wow...this was exceptionally insightful and I am looking forward to the part 2 of this at the metaphysical ethical level and where responsibility lies. Thank you both for this great discussion.

[@bryfrancis3593]

Jp talking about ethics 😂 he's a bigot who actively seeks the destruction of a group of people he's evil.

[@fury_saves_world]

@@meepmeep8728 It could be done by enhancing the very means by which perception is availed of perceptive beings to the utmost extent possible within the current manifold of the universe. It may even be able to reach a self-improving state at the highest levels anything ever could.

[@brandoncoleman4013]

I know this may seem crazy or you could just as well write it off as a nonsensical experience with psychedelics, but... In hoffmans closing systement ive felt this to be true so many times on psychedelics! Ive actually already theorized it as a teen, exactly what he said. There are times where i was innately aware of the idea that everything is intimately connected everything everywhere all at once lol. Seriously, also had many times where i confused myself and thought i was my friend or my girlfriend at the time and they thought they were me. My conclusion i could not put into words but me and my friend swore we would try to bring knowledge from inside the trip to our normal lives by writing it down and it came out as this "everything is everything no matter what" what were we doing? Trying to figure "it" out whatever that means. Its strange that we thought those simple words were the most important thing to write down about all of our ponderings. Ill tell you though that i have felt deeply and intimately the interconnectedness of everything and felt on such a high level that this wasnt a questionable theory but an absolute reality. Was it? Who will ever know?

[@madcat61207]

Yes, and what does it even matter, and who cares?

[@brandoncoleman4013]

@@madcat61207 what do you matter and who cares?

[@nishamartin4793]

The quality of this production and the complexity of the subject material is presented fairly well by both of you professionals. I hope all of us who got the privilege of watching this or hearing it. Are reminded that some days more than others it's awesome to be conscious and alive. We get to hear these wonderful individuals provide us with such awesome content. You can't get this kind of content on regular TV, cable tv or many other news and media platforms. I for one-- will not be taking for granted the hard work and dedication of the speakers involved in each episode. And I am grateful for any staff that either gentleman in this production have-- that allow them to bring this to life. So that we are able to listen to these highly intelligent individuals. These individuals who are trying to be intellectually Honest. And to conceptualize these rather abstract concepts in a way that all of us can understand by map out these complex ideas in a generally and high-resolution manner. You can only navigate as good as the map that you have when you're in the wilderness... A discussion like this is to complicated to complete in one sitting. Based on the comments sections I hope-- both men would be willing to have a continued conversation. Seeing conversations like this and seeing some of the comments-- some days make me more hopeful. Reconfigure some important things out that we need to figure out. If we are to change and grow individually and together.

[@nishamartin4793]

Sorry for the typos and grammar errors I'm very tired where I am and I didn't get much sleep so I apologize out of respect for everybody... I hope all of you have an awesome next few days.

[@albertoverenzuela5641]

Definitely worth watching. Thank you Dr Hoffman and Dr Peterson, great debate. My emotions ranged from anxiety to awe. Amazing.

[@smashingtwoscoops4999]

Wow! This is a wonderful combination of two intelligent gentlemen, to have a conversation like this!! Praise the Lord! Amen! 🙏❤️😊

[@simoncarrier9910]

Juden peterstein is actually a charlatan.

[@janetajanemcneil1531]

I adored this talk.... Having been raised Catholic, hating the religious aspect, I couldn't wait to move out of my parents home & escape the religiosity of it. Interestingly, a profoundly powerful mystical experience happened to me a few years later and set me on a path of discovering the meaning of life. After myriad courses, studies, psychedelics, a particular interest in the Tao te Ching, and decades of meditation, I came to Dr. Hoffman's conclusion here intuitively. Bless you Jordan and Howard for furthering our exploration of these crucial issues, especially at this challenging time on Earth! :)

[@nrich99999]

Me too. I also came to Dr. Hoffman's conclusion intuitively. My intuition came from spending my entire life being scared of death, logical and critical thinking about such and the total denial of it along with an actual grasp of what infinity actually means - infinite possibility, of which this 'reality' is but one. ♾️

[@SubAtomicFabric]

@@nrich99999Don’t you agree our fear of death lends itself to clever engineering of “escape hatches.”

[@lennardtoma6803]

Bernardo Kastrup would be a great add-on in this conversation. He has a different, but great analogy on this concept of reality that would help make it more clear: Bernardo talks about the panels, dials and instruments in a cockpit to fly a plane. So imagine that reality is what is outside the windshield of the airplane. But flying through clouds forces the pilots to rely on their instruments in the cockpit. The instruments represent and correlate with reality. They show where the plane is in relation to the ground, speed and so on. But the instruments are NOT reality. They are just the interface. Our perceptions are the dashboard of dials and instruments. It correlates with reality, or else we would not be able to survive. But it isn't reality in itself. With current science we often mistake the dashboard of dials with reality. And we often and only study the dashboard. Not reality in itself. So we can only state things about the dashboard, but not reality itself. I really like that analogy. Dr. Hoffman is great. Though I think Bernardo's conceptualization and explanation of it all is much clearer for lay-people (like myself) to comprehend. I would recommend to anybody that likes this topic to check him out.

[@theloniousscalliwag]

This is awesome! Although i will say that many spiritualists have come to this realization literally millennia ago. Listen to Alan Watts, he covered this notion really rather thoroughly in the sixties. It's nice to see science finally catching up with reality

[@bryfrancis3593]

You're falling for a snakeoil salesman. JP cares about money and glout he doesn't give a F about you or any of his fans.

[@nivek2223]

Reminds me of an argument that C.S. Lewis makes in “Miracles;” or the philosopher Alvin Plantinga’s argument, the “Evolutionary Argument Against Naturalism.”

[@sleeperino3054]

Advaita Vedanta

[@adrianbenedictmendoza6818]

Watts.. the sexiest way to understand reality.. hes so amazing

[@assortmentofpillsbutneverb3756]

It's kind of the human default perception tbh. It's basically the belief in the material world with a metaphysical world on top of it

[@nick_t]

Good stuff. I always appreciate a conversation so substantial that I know I'll get more out of when I listen to it a second time.

[@zaqsiefert5508]

​@@Rocksteady246chill

[@zaqsiefert5508]

@@Rocksteady246 for sure

[@nick_t]

​@@Rocksteady246 Haha, well I haven't actually listened to it twice. Believe it or not, you can "get out" and still listen to podcasts at the same time. It's called multitasking.

[@nick_t]

​@@Rocksteady246 This is what we would call the "appeal to hypocrisy" logical fallacy. He had an issue with benzos once, so I guess everything he says must be invalid.

[@poetry_on_standby6440]

This conversation is definitely above my head but I still try hard to listen. One thing he said at 15:43 was that we have to integrate our motives or we will fight. I was speaking to someone about yawning being contagious. I do not know if what I will say has been discovered already or posited but as a young person I naturally asked myself why I think we do that. All I could see was that if I don't signal to my mate that I'm tired and only I sleep, then he stays awake and might engage in an activity that compromises my sleep. Then, he finally sleeps but then we need to eventually wake up but I have less energy. If there is a baby involved then we must do our best to both sleep when we can because the baby will wake the both of us and then no one will function. Therefore I see yawning being contagious as an evolutionary cue to integrate our motives with one or more people we need to survive and cooperate with.

[@donaldberry4181]

Always fun to listen to Dr. Peterson interview himself.

[@thetruthexperiment]

Uh.. no

[@russberry3240]

🤔 fun to think down these paths… we got to the “we need more funding sign” ! 🤗

[@woodedape]

😂

[@alejandronunez7650]

he is stupid.. talks a bunch a stupid stuff and then throws a random word that no body uses to sound smart.. i cant listen to him for 5 minutes before my brain becomes a pulp.. i am here for Dr Hoffman!!

[@georgegraham472]

does seem like that sometimes doesn't it.

[@ellekay5241]

This conversation absolutely needs a part 2. Pick up right from where you left off here. We have the background let's hear where it goes!

[@adrianespinoza2306]

First, I can’t think of a better suit for such a conversation. JBP is at his best when he’s grappling complex theories, building them up and tearing them apart. Also, bring the best out of Donal Hoffman. You can see that special place of child like play at a high level on display here. Hopefully we don’t have to wait to long to resolve that cliffhanger.

[@jennymcgowin9140]

Hehe!

[@iggle6448]

I don't understand what he's doing with these bizarre suits. By all means, people can dress as they like within the bounds of decency. But outre dress is often 'look at ME!' and gets in the way of a person's credibility.

[@nickpolice2902]

I am very much looking forward to listening to/watching your next conversation with Dr. Hoffman.

[@snigdhadey8631]

Hello, I'm Snigdha. I'm interested in improving my English. I think practising with a native speaker will help me to improve my English. Can you help me with it? Thanks

[@nickpolice2902]

@@snigdhadey8631 Your spelling of "practicing" is incorrect. That is about all I may help with. I wish you all the best.

[@snigdhadey8631]

@@nickpolice2902 oh, thanks.

[@ashleygatewood]

I feel this conversation between these two only scratched the surface of the deep. And Hoffman's background in fundamental Protestantism, very intriguing. I was thinking of various Biblical references and trails throughout this conversation. Looking forward to reading your thoughts in this upcoming book. Praying for you, your tour and that the ARC gathering is wildly successful - I know it will be. May the peace of God rest upon you and yours~

[@ashleygatewood]

@@patm6704 Thanks for sharing your thoughts. How you got all these talking points out of my simple comment is the real miracle. “mega cash-cow and powerful tool of political control” This would be the Catholic Church. (You can ask Constantine how that all happened.) The denominational Protestant Churches are too separated to have major cash flow throughout or political control. However, there are a few who seem to forget that Jesus was not politically ambitious or focused. I love these brothers and sisters but I do not follow them. Ah, but what do I know? You can be sure, in whatever fashion is most beneficial, the watered down ‘church’ will be a major role player in the New World Government being setup across the world today. The real Christians will be either stripped of power, or worse, of their lives, livelihoods, or imprisoned. No where in the Bible that I know of does it state the age of the Earth is 6000 years. That’s perhaps the religious establishment just trying to counter evolution and science. But I’m not the one to consult about this because my beliefs are not similar to most Christians where this is concerned. The keys to the age of the earth are in Job and some of the prophets. There was an earth before Lucifer fell and he is far older than Homo sapiens…the serpent was, after all, in the garden already slithering about. There was also a different race of beings on the earth (the King of Tyre tells us something about Lucifer’s fall and the peoples?/races?/beings of that time…perhaps millions of years ago.) You may call them Neanderthal - and maybe that race was akin to human - but I’m not so sure it’s the same human as was Adam and Eve. Anyway, it’s too radical to go into so I won’t. But I absolutely know the earth is far older than 6000 years and Neanderthals, or that which scientists have decided to call this race, are also millions of years or at least tens or hundreds of thousands of years old. Humans on the other hand, might be closer to 10K in my estimation. I do not believe Homo sapiens is millions of years old. Religion thrives because of man’s power, this is absolutely true. The power of the children of God, however, thrives because of the power of the Holy Spirit who lives and moves and has His being within them. ‘My speech is not with enticing words of man's wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power.”

[@tzelemelohim]

⁠@@patm6704 Respectfully, I disagree. The majority of Christians don’t fit the strawman caricature of the young Earth creationist, southern fundamentalist preacher you have in your mind. I hear and see this comment repeated ad nauseum by atheists, antitheists, panentheist, pantheist, universalist, humanist, materialist, reductionists etc. This is a mischaracterization and misrepresentation of Christianity. There are a number of views on the creation narrative in the Bible. The word for day in Hebrew is “yom” and can mean a 24 hour period or indefinite expanse of time. The Hebrew word for “the Earth” that God flooded in the story of Noah is “eretz” which consistently and soley refers to arable land i.e. the waters covered the localized land in the Middle East they had discovered at the time the text was written. The majority of educated Christian’s don’t reject the geological record or age of the earth/universe. There is the theistic evolution view (see BioLogos.com), progressive creationism (see Dr. Hugh Ross or Stephen Meyer), etc. I encourage you to give Christianity more than than a superficial, cursory glance before you oversimplify it. I speak as someone who used to be guilty of the same thing. It’s just not a good faith argument and does everyone involved a disservice even if we are couched within the limitations of an illusory phenomenological spatiotemporal VR like reality as Hoffman posits. And despite any predisposition you may have against the Bible, there is a preponderance of historical, archaeological evidence for the claims of Christianity. The leap of faith lies only in the belief in the resurrection of Christ. There were eyewitness accounts and testimony, but the belief in the resurrection of Christ is largely based on the personal experience of transformation that people, including myself, have had after repenting of their sins, dying to their self, and believing that Jesus is who He claimed to be. This is why Christianity will never die off as some atavistic, antiquated belief system because the experiences of many Christians are so palpable and transformative, that combined with the preponderance of evidence for reliability of the OT and NT, that it can’t just be easily dismissed as behavior modification or a comfort pillow for people to lay their heads on at night, as inconvenient and uncomfortable as I know that may be for someone who espouses your worldview.

[@johndymond6588]

Wow! I really like where professor Hoffman is going with this. This is very exciting work! The fact that he's using mathematics to show the work involved is also really astonishing. I hope to hear updates whichever way his experimentation goes.

[@chickenmonger123]

I’ll have to check that out. I saw it, but not everyone he hosts is interesting to me.

[@SweepTheLeg2023]

❤❤ “If the world hates you, keep in mind that it hated me first. If you belonged to the world, it would love you as its own. As it is, you do not belong to the world, but I have chosen you out of the world. That is why the world hates you. John 15:18-19

[@Trrippy_Shades]

Why

[@jenoop60045]

My world does not hate me. It loves and excepts me. As I do others.

[@jenniferflower9265]

Just make sure you are not being hated for a real and decent reason first and don't use it as an excuse not to take responsibility. Then, you can claim it's because he chose you.

[@ResoluteRonin]

Hatred displayed is pain revealed.

[@SweepTheLeg2023]

@@jenniferflower9265 "Decent Hate"? ❤🌈"But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also” Matthew 5:38-39

[@mozellagi]

I have been listening and trying to understand Donald Hoffman for months. This is the most cogent and thorough interrogation of his ideas, bringing them further to life.

[@controllerbrain]

It can all be boiled down to his GTA VR interface example.

[@mozellagi]

@@controllerbrain At 48:20 " I want to make a connection between his thinking and yours" is a lifekine....

[@stressless2997]

This particular conversation has jogged a notion in my mind which I think Dr. Peterson may find amusing and or helpful when addressing the topic of consciousness in relation to living a meaningful life. Assuming the headset is present and fundamental to our experience, from there one MUST agree to play the game of existence in this world. Behaviors that interfere interrupt or physically change the chemical balance of an otherwise basic framework (brain), such as alcohol or drug use, could be the manifestation of attacking the game console. Like we must agree to play or else we’re doomed

[@anialiandr]

Donald’s paper was a breakthrough I had with my students . Thank god because it was going uphill and his insights, documented with beetles etc, were very helpful.

[@milesmungo]

Yes, the example of the beetles was a great summation of Darwinian evolution's bend towards adaptation rather than 'truth'.

[@anialiandr]

⁠@@milesmungoon the contrary. It showed that if continued the silly beetles would have gone extinct unable to adjust to truth . We grew better brain for better capacity yo adjust. How well we chose our paths life will show.

[@rodacampos]

Jordan's question about homomorphism (red Ferrari) in the VR analogy was brilliant. One of the best questions I've seen being asked to Donald. Even Donald did not expect that!

[@demetriusmiddleton1246]

:and I've only heard his immediate response comma, so I hope after talking to him a little and thinking about it, he feels comfortable enough to address. the question more directly. but I'm starting to get frustrated because I feel like every time dr Peterson asks him something. he doesn't address what dr Peterson says directly, he simply tells what he thinks. period, it's kind of like he's not having a conversation. comma, he's just listening to what dr Peterson says and. merely responding as if he was asked the question directly for the first time

[@H4ymaker]

​@demetriusmiddleton1246 I felt the same way. I thought JP was onto something, and when Hoffer responded with the explanation that it was analogous because there are a cascade of functions, I thought that perhaps that is why we can't perceive reality in its fullness because we only exist (in relation to the computer analogy) as merely the computer and perhaps our conscience would represent the person outside of the computer directing it. Idk if that articulates properly what I'm thinking because it's hurting my brain to try to conceive the idea.

[@jerm2011]

I agree far more with Dr. Peterson's homology theory than I do with this guys explanation that reality and its representations in both higher and lower orders of magnitude are simply causally linked.

[@NathanGuerraTV]

Yes, it does feel like we are havjng more of a discussion about the phenomology of math/numbers mixed with a mind body problem...like the theory got stuck in how it was mapped in the equations, therefore making its assumptions based on the system it used to discover.

[@jerm2011]

@@Rocksteady246 You make the false equivalency claim that because of his field and level of cognitive ability that, in his day to day life, should allow him to easily eschew choices such as taking benzos. The man was losing his wife and the mother of his children. He was facing oblivion. Until you've found yourself in that position, you can make no claim nor judgement. You wish to postulate publicly that somehow Peterson "isn't as smart as people think." In your case, you are "not as smart" as you think or at least lack the life experience to understand the position grief can put you in, causing you to take chances and do things that you normally might not in order to achieve some level of relief. But you just wanted to take the piss out of him in front of his fans because seeing how much he's appreciated by people makes you feel like a mental midget by comparison. Which is accurate.

[@username4794]

The conversation with Donald Hofmann was excellent and I can't wait for the 2nd round of your interview

[@stuartboorman]

Thank you Jordan and Dr Hoffman. I really hope you have a second conversation and pick up where you left off - you stopped at the most interesting part! I want to hear more about what Hoffman thinks about the nature of consciousness and how science can prove his ideas, if it can.

[@sampillsbury9337]

Dr. Peterson, kudos to you . The breadth of your knowledge is astounding. I find your ability impressive to instantaneously recall amazingly numerous relevant quotes from other learned people. Thank you for sharing this interview. Dr. Hoffman managed to bring what I hope is the essence of his theory to a layman’s level of understanding. Thanks to you both my paradigm is open to a new perspective.

[@strikerorwell9232]

Mainstream media here in Sweden told Jordan Peterson to "crawl back under his rock", the last time he was here. Just because Jordan Peterson said a woman was a woman?

[@andrewsocial9309]

@@Rocksteady246 Are we just asking irrelevant questions here? Okay. Are you aware that planes having landing gears?

[@noobandfriends2420]

18:50 Good to hear this being spoken of. I contemplated this possibility years ago when introduced to the oddities of quantum physics. We're only observing the interface of reality, not the Truth of our reality. I call this progress.

[@demetriusmiddleton1246]

that word truth is very tricky period. it seems like. to you truth is what is at the bottom layer of reality period, but I think what dr Peterson is. suggesting is that there are higher levels of reality that are just as much true as the bottom fundamental levels period. just because it's not at the bottom level does not necessarily mean it is not truth

[@attilaszekeres7435]

The idea you are referring to isn't actually new. It's simply a modern reiteration of Plato's cave allegory. This isn't meant to belittle Hoffman's contribution, but rather a remark on the philosophical roots of the headset metaphor and the interface theory of consciousness.

[@walsergomez]

It’s called analytical idealism

[@iggle6448]

@@attilaszekeres7435 YES! Thank you! Sages in many cultures have been avowing this same interpretation of our being for millennia. Dr Hoffman's contribution seems to be the math which may (or may not) prove it.

[@CH-RC]

Yes but is the math he’s using based in the time space continuum? lol should he not consider using a calculative math based on a new model, assuming living outside of what we call time and space. Sorry but this guy is what we call “fake smart” - listening to this discussion is interesting if you’re willing to practice warping your mind around something that’s impossible to wrap your mind around. Ie - a reality that doesn’t exist unless you’re really deep into the drugs :) lol

[@XbigXswordX]

I have thought a lot in the same direction since I was little (6 years old), when it comes to reality and how we live in it. But the concept that I see through my eyes and live in this body, and everyone else does the same. Always led me to believe there was something more. You hear it often from religion, from all over the world. Is this a coincidence? Awesome video! 😏😄

[@ftmrivas3043]

Hoffman makes extremely good points. However, there is so much to be discovered. I am just so happy to have access to this content. 🙏

[@mariobartholomew]

You can tell Donald Hoffman meditates nearly 50% of his waking day. His patience is amazing and easy to undertand, and his conclusions are basically non-dualist, but mathematical precise.. The patience to listen to Jordan is a real challenge and times I feel he could simplify his conclusion, in less words. Reminds me at times we spend too much time in thoughts, too much time analyzing and thinking in our heads, rarely spending time in stillness being a witeness to our thoughts.

[@jimeddy1316]

A national treasure that Canada is fortunate to have and such a thinker to share with the World. Stay safe and be aware Sir. Good luck.

[@garrysekelli6776]

Apparently he got some heat (oct 8) from David Icke. Hope they can work that out.

[@KoolT]

Check out the threads man, he's a rock star❤❤❤❤

[@MichaelBuhelt]

Thank you for this most interresting conversation. How this reminds me of the good Alan Watts and his thoughts on the wave-nature of reality 🙏

[@ashuraam]

Sir I highly respect you, but I think Dr. Hoffman shouldn't be interrupted as much. Also I understand the excitement of Dr. Peterson at encountering the most beautiful concept that tries to point towards the ultimate reality. Consciousness. In our nondual tradition, we call this bliss. Pure Consciousness is bliss, it is unchanging, undying, unborn, and it is you.

[@jennymcgowin9140]

Whoa! That was a wild ride! I think I understand what he was saying, maybe. It was so interesting. Nobody asks better questions than Jordan! Please do a second podcast on this.

[@goodleshoes]

Incredible you're giving Donald a platform for his theory. Thank you so much. This is amazing!!! To me, he's the next Kant.

[@rebelraccoon9018]

Emmanuel Kant is one of my favourite philosophers. 😎 🧡

[@oliviergoethals4137]

More Schopenhauer

[@EmberAsh]

@@oliviergoethals4137 Heheh! That comment made me quite giddy. Have a great day. That reference really brightened mine.

[@RickMacDonald19]

Descarte?

[@bronsonstone725]

Good to see you Jordan, and beautiful that you are speaking with Donald, two of my favourite people speaking together, I'm having a beer and enjoying this moment. I will add, I was an atheist. At age 11 I experienced god consciousness, it lasted about 10 minutes, and then again at age 49 it happened again while walking to work, this time it lasted almost 3 hours. This showed me what we are, and we are not we but "I Am". More insights flowed after, things I would never have said prior I just said from a position of absolute knowing. Don't worry too much about what churches say, they are very wrong, I believe Jesus was real but he wasn't born from a virgin, this is church dogma, he was the same as the Buddha, the same as all of the Buddhas, he was a Buddha, the enlightened one. The state I was in was what enlightened being can go into at will, I will leave it at that for now, if you are interested, then I will share more, it's up to you, although it doesn't matter either, what is going to happen will, including this comment

[@Paakku97]

Thanks for sharing ❤

[@johnc.356]

This interview is by far the best discussion on consciousness I have seen to date. It provides deep insights into that ever elusive question, who are we? Can't wait for Pt. Bravo Gentlemen!

[@goodleshoes]

As I'm watching this I'm realizing JP doesn't get the big idea but it seems like he's slowly getting to understand it, hopefully by the end he will get it for real.

[@JeffThomas-ld3cz]

hated everytime he cut donald..to talk about some bullshit, and everytime ,saying big words, complicated sentences to say so little..wtf is he on..sadge

[@applefishmusic]

Agree. For some, Hoffman's understanding is intuitive. JP proves that being a giant intellectual doesn't equate to wisdom.

[@FinnRo-bx3lu]

@@applefishmusic I think what Jordan knows is that intuitive understanding, although a hunch and the first starting point of science, isnt sufficient to pose as a sufficient theory and therefore also unable to be embodied as a philosophy. Hence he is trying to articulate Hoffmans intuitive theory of reality and mirror it back to him. I think he does get the big idea concerning Hoffmans idea of reality as a headset but intuitively disagrees with the fact that there is no commonality of patterns in the headset and the thing (Hoffmans metaphor was the computer here) governing the headset or creating the atmosphere the headset observes. I think that what Hoffman doesnt understand that at some level of analysis the casuality of things even vastly qualitatively different (or at least perceived as such) is proof that there is a pattern that corresponds to another pattern, meaning that its homogynous (or whatever the word was Hoffman used for it). I think that Hoffmann is stuck on the fact that the qualitative experience is incomparable, while Jordan goes beyond the qualitative experience and tries to argue that even though different in quality per se, a quality that emerges as a consequence of another pattern is still tied to that pattern by a commonality. Not sure if that made sense so I am open to feedback but thats the core disagreement I felt between these two in the first fifty minutes.

[@ericcricket4877]

@@applefishmusic Giant intellectual... What has he published that makes you think he's a giant intellectual?

[@ericcricket4877]

@@FinnRo-bx3lu Hoffman's theory isn't intuitive, it's extremely counter-intuitive and backed by very hard science and mathematics, and he isn't the only one working on it. I have read nearly all of his teams publications. Hoffman's theory states that all of perception has emerged only as a result of an evolutionary game, where success is defined by varying degrees of adaptive behavior relative to an unperceivable true environment guided by ontologically false - but increasingly adaptive - perceptions of said environment. Correspondence between two systems doesn't make them homogenous. Any loss of information makes the mapping between two systems non-homogenous, so perceiving nothing of the "true" environment makes the mapping between perceptions and the environment non-homogenous. In his theory the relationship between perception and true reality isn't even causal, it's correlative. Some change in perceptions of space-time objects is correlative to the "true" environment, but nothing in space-time has a causal effect to the "true" environment. Observed interactions within space-time merely deliver vital information of action potentials and relative system state (your state), but the actual action (the causality) happens outside of space-time, as with monitors, keyboards and transistors. The keyboard isn't "real" to the transistors, neither is the monitor, and both of them merely allow for a limited set of interactions and monitoring of system state, interaction which doesn't even happen in the keyboard nor the monitor, but in the processor. "[Jordan] intuitively disagrees with the fact that there is no commonality of patterns in the headset" Patterns in perception don't reflect true ontological reality, they don't map to reality, they reflect contextual action potentials, ever changing, and true reality contains infinitely more content than what those patterns reveal, and due to the contextuality those patterns objectively reveal nothing but something relative to you. Nothing on your monitor is a transistor, and can never be, however everything is there to make it efficient to alter their states. Hoffman has studied perception for decades, he isn't missing something that Peterson can point out in a casual 90 minute conversation.

[@darthtater4655]

Would love to see a much longer interview

[@Truth-Virtue-LVX]

Structure of our being (homology or otherwise) must be relatively consistent or we simply would not be able to think Without a consistent structure how could we know anything "a posteriori"? Thinking being that dance between "a posteriori" and "a priori", in that order. Grasping for the faculty of grasping is a fine example. The axioms to scientific theory as mentioned are also "a posteriori" presuppositions. And hence the prerequisite for thought comes back to the structure again.

[@CSMcVay]

What an excellent dialogue! I may have to listen again, and I will definitely try to catch your next one. Thank you 🙏

[@ravindramehta9087]

This conversation is intriguing and complex. As a physician and a psychiatrist in simple sense,this is what I understood. The physical world around us is influenced by our thoughts /the consciousness and our observation, that we pay attention to. The idea is strikingly similar to our spiritual beliefs “as you think you behave.’ That’s why prayers are powerful in the healing process.. The realization of quantum super position means anything is possible, inspire us to pursue our dream, explore new possibilities, and shape the world, according to our intentions, ultimately ready for a more fulfilling and purposeful life.

[@ReyFelipe00]

Seems like the comment above has nothing of value to contribute so they look to bring others down. Ironically though I’ll add that theoretical physics should also be taken with a grain of salt, seeing as it’s our modern attempt to apply the concept of physical matter to every realm of existence. Constantly assuming that everything is matter/derived from matter will get us nowhere. It’s like putting on a blindfold, then earplugs, then attempting to discover the secrets of the universe. We should start by putting aside modern pride and seriously investigating older myths, spirituality, beliefs of other cultures, etc. Without them our current culture wouldn’t exist, and we need to understand why our culture, despite our apparently amazing science and discoveries, is now deteriorating. As they say in the East, the material world is an illusion.

[@iggle6448]

All very well said, thank you . @@ReyFelipe00

[@Shutupandsquatnow]

​@@ReyFelipe00well said.

[@areacode3816]

I think it is important to separate perception from truth. Truth despite being infinitely complex is unchanging and is separate from individual perception (minus quantum theory split beam divergencies). Our being sees slices of reality but not the whole thing. Our FPS senses, spectrum observation, even cognitive bias is variable, but within our confined limits, looking outside to greater realities, I argue we can see glimpses of a reality though it is far from the only reality. I agree spacetime is a limit that holds back our complete understanding.

[@jennymcgowin9140]

That actually makes sense to me

[@vladimirsmusic]

What a wonderful meeting between two great thinkers. I've certainly been waiting for this. I think that for the next discussion between the two, the audience could benefit a lot if they explored together the field of autopoesis, kybernetics and, in particular, the work of Francisco Varela.

[@TR-uw2sp]

This reminds me of Schopenhauer's philosophy of the will manifesting itself in different forms and the highest form of manifestation being, at this time, the human consciousness. The fact that its being mathematically supported, somewhat, is fascinating and I eagerly await the follow up pod cast. Thank you Mr. Peterson for brining on Dr. Hoffman and exploring this subject.

[@bryfrancis3593]

Pseudo Psychology.

[@PeterAcrat]

Thank you gentlemen! Very Much Looking forward to the follow up! ⚡ ✨All the _fascinating exciting juicy bits (IMO)_ start about here 1:14:49 and go all the way to the very last minute

[@_modiX]

Remember the double slit experiment and how it clearly shows the limits of reality? I hope you can continue this talk, I also do believe there is a higher root from us that interconnects us, Hoffmans conclusion and his look on himself aligns in some way with mine.

[@whippet71]

I could not get my mind off the 'Delayed Choice Quantum Eraser' experiment when I listened to these two, especially Hoffman.

[@carlosalcedo1242]

Jordan I listen to you everyday 100% focused. I enjoy it and learn a lot. But Dr Hoffman here I wish you let him speak more. I wish you just asked questions, some input but let Hoffman say what he has to say. What hes talking about is very precious too and new and intriguing.

[@marcuseldridge8948]

i absolutely loved jp’s question at the end, what it does for hoffman existentially, an how his perspective on consciousness and reality has impacted his mind because you know exactly where jp was going with that lol and i just grinned while watching jp ask that question knowing the kind of answer he was going to get from hoffman. i can’t wait to see these two talk again on the subject of ethics.

[@thewillsfamilyaccount6486]

I love this sort of talk!! Gets me so excited! Two great brains debating some deep stuff.. 😊

[@damaris1530]

I’ve never been drawn to Science yet I’m here listening to Dr. Peterson.

[@Kaizen747]

pero si estan bien chingonas las ciencias

[@dashcammer4322]

This seems more metaphysic than scientific.

[@attilaszekeres7435]

@@dashcammer4322 Hoffman's science is grounded in rigorous mathematics but he deals with entities beyond spacetime and conventional physics. Depending on how you define metaphysics, you may identify his work as such, but in the traditional sense of the word it is anything but.

[@sophiamarquis]

Dr. Peterson is not an expert of any science field, at all.

[@glutenfrei628]

@@sophiamarquishaha sure sure, of course

[@prplhealing7575]

WOW WOW WOW. What a conversation!!! The whole time Dr. Hoffman spoke, I had Eastern Philosophy at the forefront of my mind. When he mentioned it in the end, I jumped out of my seat. Dr. Hoffman’s theories are absolutely in line with eastern Vedanta (Shankara) philosophy. I’m so interested in Hoffman’s theories and an a supporter, though with small caveats. Truly looking forward to the next one. And to your next book, Dr. Peterson. Thanks for everything you do

[@sammitkhandeparkara]

True dat

[@jefffeathers9116]

More of Hoffman please and thank you, you waded much further into the deep than with Dawkins

[@Emmanuel_Ramirez717]

Yooo I love Donald Hofmanns theory and work. Saw a couple of his interviews and podcasts in the last few years. Never thought he would talk to Jordan. Cant wait to watch this podcast!

[@libertequeliberteque3521]

@@Rocksteady246 Yes that is insane and so stupid of him. I once read three books on how to protect myself against wasps and then many years later I got stinged by a bee. I am not worthy ;-)

[@kenkemp8748]

Love to see Scientist Robert Lanza and Bob Berman on the show. They wrote 4 books along these lines.

[@ambition112]

0:54: 📚 Dr. Donald Hoffman discusses his research on reality, the doomed framework of SpaceTime, and how consciousness is a vast probability space. 8:05: 🔍 Evolutionary theory is indifferent about the shape of payoff functions and does not require them to preserve the structure of the world. 15:36: 🤔 The speaker raises a complex question about whether there is a higher order set of integrated constraints that perception serves for optimized long-term survival. 38:54: 📚 The video discusses the interaction between mythological accounts and neuroscience in understanding reality. 23:22: ! The speaker discusses the concept of resolution and how it relates to our perception of reality. 30:52: 🧠 The immune system learns to recognize and attack foreign molecules through trial and error, similar to a baby learning to use its arms. 46:07: 🎲 The speaker explains the concept of a probability space and applies it to the idea of consciousness. 53:15: ! The video discusses how our perception is influenced by our ability to predict the future and the impact of obsessive-compulsive disorders on perception. 1:00:36: 🧩 The video discusses the assumptions and premises of scientific theories and the potential relationship between the integrity of the scientific process and an underlying transcendent ethic. 1:07:54: ! Abraham's story of leaving his secure life and facing numerous challenges, but still aiming up and making sacrifices. 1:22:32: 💡 Einstein's field equations reveal the limits of our theories and the properties of spacetime. 1:29:27: 🧠 Scientists have proposed a mathematical model of consciousness outside of spacetime and are working on testing it by projecting it into spacetime. Recap by TammyAI

[@jaimereynolds8337]

Thoroughly engaged with this conversion. I think intent or the intent to achieve a thing is the foundation of action in consciousness.

[@JonValdivia]

It is always a happy moment when scientists start looking at something that other traditions have known for thousands of years, and they believe to be the first ones to "discover" it. I have been wishing that Peterson would study the Vedanta tradition for a few years now. Yes, what if Consciousness is primary? What if the mathematics also point in that direction? This interview could be an inflexion point. Peterson's Maps Of Meaning is predicated within space and time, within narrative structures. But what if that structure is secondary and consciousness is primary? Is it a good move to take the space-time framework as our foundation for life, when we know that space-time is an artifact of the mind, not reality itself? Welcome to Advaita Vedanta territory!

[@SusheelKumarRavinuthala]

Exactly, he cannot ignore a serious contemplation of Advaita anymore!

[@JonValdivia]

@@SusheelKumarRavinuthala That'd be an interesting day...

[@adityaaundhakar3556]

Beyond words... Spectacular talk... Kudos

[@aralnuorsize]

Dr. Donald Hoffman, this is the first time I listen a scientist say that we are a conciousness trying to get to know itself through different manifestations of itself. I don't really know where this comes from but I've tinkering with that idea for several years now, not like a scientific theory that explains anything but just as an interesting framework to make sense out of life and existence. This really blew my mind as I never thought of it as more than a phylosophical exercise. Now I'm looking forward to see what comes out of your research.

[@elrichenrik3633]

Peterson's curious character makes this interview very interesting, never was a moment I felt bored. His use of mythological and biblical stories spices up the conversation. Hoffman was more into mathematical. Both was deeply philosophical and both are very intelligent and wise. This is one of the best KZbin video I have watched so far.

[@Shane7492]

So glad to see Donald Hoffman speaking with Jordan. Humanity is slowly waking up to the reality that we are all an aspect of the eternal and infinite Divine, and this knowledge will help us evolve to higher states of consciousness.

[@iggle6448]

Yes, though it's problematic that 'the divine' has given us a universe that is incredibly dangerous and a world where the primary goal is to survive at the expense of others.

[@Paakku97]

​@@iggle6448It's perfect. Perfection. The paradox is that when you really do see it as perfect, all of that need to survive at any cost and to become grand starts to die.

[@iggle6448]

@@Paakku97Aye, just so. But you and I know that. Now we need to get the other 8 billion to see the light.

[@P2Chill]

Super interesting interview. Thank you Dr. Peterson and Dr. Hoffman. I wish I was more versed in maths so I could also understand and appreciate that fundamental part of this theory, but a very interesting take nonetheless.

[@P2Chill]

@@Rocksteady246 I'm sure he was. I am well aware and I was before I started taking them for my anxiety too, yet I still chose to take them in conjunction with exposure therapy over suffering from debilitating anxiety. I'm fairly certain he knew exactly what the risks were but benzo dependency sneaks up on you even in spite of that knowledge. I get what you're saying but I don't think it's accurate per se, he may have accolades and titles but he's still human like the rest of us.

[@P2Chill]

@@Rocksteady246 I can, overprescribing these medications is definitely a big problem in the medical industry in general. I got addicted to opiates for a long time because of prescriptions due to lower back pain and it took me 10 years to break this habit. It's been almost 6 years now but I was only 16 when I was prescribed heavy painkillers for my back pain so yes I understand its a problem. I'm not gonna sit here and blame Jordan Peterson for it though, there are cases in which the use of these medications is indicated and I don't know the patient cases in which he chose to prescribe them. As sometimes there just is no better alternative. I understand your concerns though. That he said he didn't know the dangers, to me, means that he didn't grasp the severity of their side effects until he experienced them for himself, but was aware of there being side effects present. I can only speculate that having had this experience himself would make him a better physician and better suited to gauge when these medications are indicated or when there's better treatment options. I fully get why your concerned with this stuff though it's no laughing matter.

[@zacharyshinder940]

Excellent conversation - heady, but excellent. LOVE your tie, Dr. P! Any chance of making that commercially available? I'm ready to buy!!!

[@trinitychani9931]

The Unexpected Dinner Guest Dr. Hoffman - this discussion fascinates me (I bought your book and find myself reading it at 3 am, on the very edge of understanding … well I don’t quite know yet). I believe the realm outside of space and time is not uninhabited. It is the realm of the “Being outside the world.” I have watched this podcast three times. I do not claim to be your intellectual equal or even close. However, I hold a Masters of Accountancy, and at my university our professors - both under- and post-grad- taught us that above all things, to proceed thoughtfully, seriously, and to abandon any pre-conceived notions. They taught us to think critically, deliberately, to reserve judgment and always to keep an open mind. My humble understanding of mathematics once allowed me to have a conversation with a Japanese man through the beauty of a calculus equation. And yet, despite math’s utility as a universal language, it is still missing something. If it weren’t, we’d have no need for imaginary numbers. I have been thinking about this for weeks. I believe it’s possible you are a far more significant character in the story of everything than you realize. Might you be the unexpected dinner guest? (Matthew 22: 1-14) Furthermore, I am firmly convinced there is a connection between what you are studying and the existence of God. At the end of this lengthy comment, I have copied and pasted a brief excerpt from C. S. Lewis’s book “Mere Christianity.” This “mere” 2 page excerpt is often referred to as the Liar, Lunatic, or Lord argument. That’s as far as I’ve gotten … for now. When you read Lewis’s exquisitely structured writing, maybe you will see something I am missing. But no matter what you think of Lewis‘s argument, there is no doubt in my mind that you are absolutely correct about the existence of a place beyond space and time. Many people, including me, call it Heaven. I will let Mr. Lewis do the rest of the talking: Liar, Lunatic or Lord? An excerpt from Mere Christianity by C.S. Lewis “Among these Jews there suddenly turns up a man who goes about talking as if He was God. He claims to forgive sins. He says He has always existed. He says He is coming to judge the world at the end of time. Now let us get this clear. Among Pantheists, like the Indians, anyone might say that he was a part of God, or one with God: there would be nothing very odd about it. But this man, since he was a Jew, could not mean that kind of God. God, in their language, meant the Being outside the world, who had made it and was infinitely different from anything else. And when you have grasped that, you will see that what this man said was, quite simply, the most shocking thing that has ever been uttered from human lips. One part of the claim tends to slip past us unnoticed because we have heard it so often that we no longer see what it amounts to. I mean the claim to forgive sins. Now unless the speaker is God, this is really so preposterous as to be comic. We can all understand how a man forgives offences against himself. You tread on my toes and I forgive you, you steal my money and I forgive you. But what should we make of a man, himself unrobbed and untrodden on, who announced that he forgave you for treading on other men’s toes and stealing other men’s money? Asinine fatuity is the kindest description we should give of his conduct. Yet this is what Jesus did. He told people that their sins were forgiven, and never waited to consult all the other people whom their sins had undoubtedly injured. He unhesitatingly behaved as if He was the party chiefly concerned, the person chiefly offended in all offences. This makes sense only if He really was the God whose laws are broken and whose love is wounded in every sin. In the mouth of any speaker who is not God, these words would imply what I can only regard as a silliness and conceit unrivaled by any other character in history. Yet (and this is the strange, significant thing) even His enemies, when they read the Gospels, do not usually get the impression of silliness and conceit. Still less do unprejudiced readers. Christ says that He is ‘humble and meek’ and we believe Him; not noticing that, if He were merely a man, humility and meekness are the very last characteristics we could attribute to some of His sayings. I am trying here to prevent anyone saying the really foolish thing that people often say about Him: ‘I’m ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don’t accept His claim to be God.’ That is the one thing we must not say. A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic-on a level with the man who says he is a poached egg-or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God: or else a madman or something worse. You can shut Him up for a fool, you can spit at Him and kill Him as a demon; or you can fall at His feet and call Him Lord and God. But let us not come with any patronising nonsense about His being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to.”

[@MrAmitArun]

I have been waiting for this interview for 6 years. Thanks Dr. Peterson

[@iggle6448]

Have youbeen following Dr Hoffman? What he's saying here is really the same as he's been saying for the last decade - only now with math.

[@whippet71]

I knew you two would have to hookup sooner or later. Great questions and humbly approached in an open and honest manner. What more can an observer ask for?

[@RogerKM]

I’ve been hoping (and asking) for this conversation since I watched Jordan Peterson vs Sam Harris (disagreeing about what is “truth”). Hoffman’s “interface theory of reality” is mind blowing. Thank you for doing this! My next Christmas wish will be for Jordan Peterson to talk to David Deutsch. Many parts of this conversation - including the infinite nature of objective reality and our unbound possibility of making progress (“a scientist’s job security” as Hoffman put it) - have David Deutsch written all over them. I’d be surprised if JP has not read The Begging of Infinity or The Fabric of Reality, but nothing could ever replace a conversation with Deutsch himself, interviewed by such an unorthodox thinker as JP. Please Santa, grant me this wish and I’ll clean my room every day and be a very good boy in this version of the multiverse.

[@RogerWilco66]

A great and sophisticated discussion. I think the most important factor in perception and consciousness is systemic discrimination (I mean that technically) and maybe advanced abstraction, which separates us from other life forms. Without that we could not create that vast probalbility space and orient ourselves.

[@attilaszekeres7435]

Two of my heroes. Peterson came across as trying hard to be validated but seemed somewhat out of his depth while being hell-bent on playing. On the other hand, Hoffman was super focused and abstract - he probably can't even reenter spacetime at this point.

[@juliannadawson]

Disagree on the trying hard to be validated part, but your, “he (meaning Hoffman) can’t even renter space time at this point” I think is spot on. So spot on that you prompted my 1st comment on JBP’s podcast after watching 80 episodes.

[@nathancurry7944]

This is a fantastic conversation. I've been waiting for Hoffman to make an appearance and discuss his ideas with Peterson for quite a while. I have huge respect and admiration for both men, and even though I do not buy everything both of them say, I think they both have a lot of wiswom and value in what they say, generally speaking. However, I'll not lie, I honestly didn't think that Peterson would be able to keep up with Hoffman as he is one of the rare polymaths of todays age. Hoffmans' level of erudtion is extensive and very deep across multiple disciplines from cognitive science (which alone is multidisciplinary with 6 core intersecting domains), mathematical physics, and evolutionary biology to name but a few. I was pleasantly surprised that Peterson held his own in this interview, and he probed some very important epistemologal questions, which were very fastinating. Much of what Hoffman discussed will sound redundant if you have read his work and listened to him before, but it's good to see more people discussing the central issue of Gödel’s incompleteness theorem regarding the fact that any theory requires an untestable axiomatic assumption, and that therefore the name of the game in science is to work towards developing better assumptions and testing them. More often than not, people are mostly unaware of this vital fact. Towards the end, they started a preliminary dig into what Hoffmans theory means ontologically, and I can't wait to hear them exlore this important terrain. P.S. please bring Michael Levin on really soon 🙏

[@nathancurry7944]

@Rocksteady246 what an outstanding reply that is. You have nothing of any substance to say, so you choose to try to deliver an out of the blue low blow in an attempt to call into question Jordan Peterson's professional expertise, knowledge, and personal willpower. I can only encourage you to educate yourself with at least a cursory understanding of the biological underpinnings of addiction and also to the psychology of optical and auditory illsuions. Why would I suggest that? Well, consider that experts on optical and auditory illsuisons who have spent the best part of 30+ years studying these phenomena are the first to admit that no amount of understanding or willpower will enable you to defend your senses from falling prey to the illusions. A good case in point is the McGurk effect. If you had concerned yourself with understanding how this works and how it bypasses any willpower or reasoning ability provided by the frontal lobes, then you might not have been so haste to put forward such am empty attack on the man. When you put in the work and come to understand how ill-informed and ignorant your comment was, then we can have a real discussion. Until then, good luck.

[@VenomCruster]

Why are the ads overlaying the interview, literally missing parts of it 😡 42:40 Shopify and while video running

[@rduse4125]

Two brilliant thinkers…and my comment is to tell you how much I appreciate the way you handle advertisements. There are other people that I watch (Shapiro, Walsh etc.) who just break into their own conversation and try to sell me something - and it cheapens their platform. You’ve found a way to do it and maintain the platform’s integrity. BTW - this was a fabulous episode!!!

[@cosmicmuffet1053]

It took me a while to take in the fact that the suit is a version of the tie which is a version of the art piece that's in the intro. Jordan is constructing a hologram of himself, which I guess is appropriate for this guest.

[@CapriceWalker]

Hologram ? Or avatar ?