JUNG'S METAPHYSICS & THE MIND AT LARGE HYPOTHESIS - Bernardo Kastrup PHD #34

[@KR-jq3mj]

Bernardo is so generous with his knowledge and so articulate and this was a wonderful conversation 👏 ❤

[@TheWorldTeacher]

Superficially, Bernardo Kastrup SEEMS to be promulgating the most ancient spiritual teaching of Advaita Vedanta (as found in the Upanishadic texts of India) but due to reasons I won't go into at length here, his understanding is rather flawed. If one carefully listens to any of his monologues or interview videos, it is obvious (at least it is obvious to those who are truly enlightened) that he regularly confuses and conflates discrete consciousness (as emerging from the neural networks of animals) and UNIVERSAL Consciousness (which is the all-pervasive, eternal ground of all being, more appositely termed "The Tao", "Brahman" or "Infinite Awareness"). He also believes in (limited) freedom of will, which is, of course, ludicrous, and his understanding of suffering is truly infantile, which is unfortunate, since the eradication of suffering is the goal of life. In order to PROPERLY understand the distinction between the two aforementioned categories of consciousness, you are welcome to email me for a copy of "A Final Instruction Sheet for Humanity", which are the most authoritative and accurate precepts extant. My address is on my KZbin homepage. However, my main criticism of Kastrup is not with his metaphysics, it is, rather, his METAETHICS. He is, objectively speaking, afflicted with a demonic mentality, as demonstrated with his support of all things contrary to Dharma (the law, and societal duties), such as egalitarianism, feminism, homosexuality, and socialism. In a recent interview, for example, Bernie displayed abject ignorance when discussing the topic of animal consumption. Hopefully, he will one day realize how incredibly hypocritical he is in this regard, and become a compassionate VEGAN. 🌱 After all, to criticize Bernardo for his teachings being only, let's say, ninety percent accurate, would be silly, since, compared with almost every other person who has ever lived, his philosophical understanding is fairly sound. Yet, what is the point of being even TOTALLY correct about metaphysics, when one's metaethics and normative ethics is fundamentally flawed? Furthermore, Bernado has admitted that he has struggled with mental health issues for several decades. I would suggest he flee to the loving arms of an ACTUAL spiritual master in order to learn Dharma (as well, of course, correct his flawed metaphysics). Peace! P.S. It seems Bernie Boy has BLOCKED at least one of my KZbin accounts, so if you are reading this, you are indeed fortunate. ;)

[@constancewalsh3646]

Bernardo is phenomenal in his genius and his humanity. It is just me? I sense that the host does not get what's being said. as with most interviewers, he swiftly refers to other people he considers to be in the same realm as Bernardo, without apparent comprehension of what Bernardo has just spent a passionate moment trying to express. I sense Bernardino knows very well that most of his listeners do not quite grasp what he is saying, as a patient kind of urgency enters his voice. I do get it, not consistently but in flashes of illumination that nearly knock me over. What a find! Thank you to all who contributed to this interview, one of the best. I'm devouring all the Bernardino videos on YT.

[@realterego]

I hope that Bernardo will still honour us with a couple of decades of his presence before retreating to a cabin in the woods :)

[@Nimbulus85]

I hope he has 10 kids and teaches them all these fantastic tenets. And if not that, then perhaps he’ll start a Pythagorean commune. 😂

[@TheWorldTeacher]

@@Nimbulus85, LITERALLY fantastic. 😅

[@TheWorldTeacher]

Superficially, Bernardo Kastrup SEEMS to be promulgating the most ancient spiritual teaching of Advaita Vedanta (as found in the Upanishadic texts of India) but due to reasons I won't go into at length here, his understanding is rather flawed. If one carefully listens to any of his monologues or interview videos, it is obvious (at least it is obvious to those who are truly enlightened) that he regularly confuses and conflates discrete consciousness (as emerging from the neural networks of animals) and UNIVERSAL Consciousness (which is the all-pervasive, eternal ground of all being, more appositely termed "The Tao", "Brahman" or "Infinite Awareness"). He also believes in (limited) freedom of volition, which is, of course, ludicrous, and his understanding of suffering is truly infantile, which is unfortunate, since the eradication of suffering is the goal of life. In order to PROPERLY understand the distinction between the two aforementioned categories of consciousness, you are welcome to email me for a copy of "A Final Instruction Sheet for Humanity", which are the most authoritative and accurate precepts extant. My address is on my KZbin homepage. However, my main criticism of Kastrup is not with his metaphysics, it is, rather, his METAETHICS. He is, objectively speaking, afflicted with a demonic mentality, as demonstrated with his support of all things contrary to Dharma (the law, and societal duties), such as egalitarianism, feminism, homosexuality, and socialism. In a recent interview, for example, he displayed abject ignorance when discussing the topic of animal consumption. Hopefully, he will one day realize how incredibly hypocritical he is in this regards, and become a compassionate VEGAN. 🌱 After all, to criticize Bernardo for his teachings being only, let's say, ninety percent accurate, would be silly, since, compared with almost every other person who has ever lived, his philosophical understanding is fairly sound. Yet, what is the point of being even TOTALLY correct about metaphysics, when one's metaethics and normative ethics is fundamentally flawed? Furthermore, Bernardo has admitted that he has struggled with mental health issues for several decades. I would suggest he flee to the loving arms of an ACTUAL spiritual master in order to learn Dharma (as well, of course, to correct his flawed metaphysics). Peace!

[@lokayatavishwam9594]

​@@TheWorldTeacher So, egalitarianism is against dharma? Principles of equality is against dharma? You're clearly a charlatan posturing as a saint when you evidently haven't read enough about the history or evolution of metaphysical and axiological precepts in human history. Bernado is at least honest about his rejection of moral realism. You're pretending to be normatively driven, but emotions and conservative vices dominate your arguments. Stop reading Manu and maybe start reading some Marx lmao

[@Jim-jx5ds]

You displayed too much pride to be in a proper place for criticizing anyone. Jim Chattanooga, Tennessee

[@krishnapartha]

I watch everything on KZbin on Bernardo. This is one of the best interviews. Kuddos to the love and curiosity of both parties. 🙏🏾❤️🔥

[@grzegkania]

Bernardo has a unique ability to explain exceptionally difficult things in such a way that they seem simple and obvious.

[@hook-x6f]

He is so good with analogies and metaphors plus he is brilliant with a lot of knowledge in philosophy and CS.

[@spandon]

Too good to be a car salesman...er salesperson...

[@mojoomla]

You think you really understand all the gobbledygook that he utters in the most abstruse language so fluently ? You think you can understand and mentally overcome pain by listening to all these words ? What is the use of all these wordy concoctions beyond massaging the intellectual egos of these PhD holders ? Ultimately no theory is going to be useful to tell me who I really am. Words, ultimately are of no use in understanding the soul.

[@NarendraSingh-zf6dm]

I’m😮😅😅😮😮😅😅😅😅 1:44

[@grzegkania]

You didn't understand what I wrote because you totally ignored the word "seem" in my statement.

[@riikkapauliinaussa1910]

It was only quite recently that I found my way to Bernardo, analytic idealism, Federico Faggin etc. The more I listen to Bernardo´s interviews, the more I respect him and what he has to say. His philosophical stance is a radical departure from materialism and very much needed, if we don´t want to continue the path of destruction. Capitalism is ideologically deeply rooted in physicalism. I also respect him as a speaker and a person.

[@javadhashtroudian5740]

Thank you both. My journey from 1965 when I entered university to major in chemistry, then biochemistry and neurochemistry as a radical materialist atheist to today an Advaita Vedanta idealist. 1967 took LSD-25. 1972 because a Radical Monist with consciousness the fifth property of matter. 1980s first studied Plato. Rejected idealism. I described my pantheism to one of mystical teachers. He asked why not make consciousness primary. Much meditation study etc later, discovered Advaita Vedanta. I love the way you described how the One is dissociated to produce our illusory individual awareness. Thank you. Tat Tuam Asi

[@grosbeak6130]

You're hooked on intellectualizing. It would be better if you were asleep now.

[@georgiagm]

Amazing Journey 😍

[@TheWorldTeacher]

Superficially, Bernardo Kastrup SEEMS to be promulgating the most ancient spiritual teaching of Advaita Vedanta (as found in the Upanishadic texts of India) but due to reasons I won't go into at length here, his understanding is rather flawed. If one carefully listens to any of his monologues or interview videos, it is obvious (at least it is obvious to those who are truly enlightened) that he regularly confuses and conflates discrete consciousness (as emerging from the neural networks of animals) and UNIVERSAL Consciousness (which is the all-pervasive, eternal ground of all being, more appositely termed "The Tao", "Brahman" or "Infinite Awareness"). He also believes in (limited) freedom of volition, which is, of course, ludicrous, and his understanding of suffering is truly infantile, which is unfortunate, since the eradication of suffering is the goal of life. In order to PROPERLY understand the distinction between the two aforementioned categories of consciousness, you are welcome to email me for a copy of "A Final Instruction Sheet for Humanity", which are the most authoritative and accurate precepts extant. My address is on my KZbin homepage. However, my main criticism of Kastrup is not with his metaphysics, it is, rather, his METAETHICS. He is, objectively speaking, afflicted with a demonic mentality, as demonstrated with his support of all things contrary to Dharma (the law, and societal duties), such as egalitarianism, feminism, homosexuality, and socialism. In a recent interview, for example, he displayed abject ignorance when discussing the topic of animal consumption. Hopefully, he will one day realize how incredibly hypocritical he is in this regards, and become a compassionate VEGAN. 🌱 After all, to criticize Bernardo for his teachings being only, let's say, ninety percent accurate, would be silly, since, compared with almost every other person who has ever lived, his philosophical understanding is fairly sound. Yet, what is the point of being even TOTALLY correct about metaphysics, when one's metaethics and normative ethics is fundamentally flawed? Furthermore, Bernardo has admitted that he has struggled with mental health issues for several decades. I would suggest he flee to the loving arms of an ACTUAL spiritual master in order to learn Dharma (as well, of course, to correct his flawed metaphysics). Peace!

[@theostapel]

The core of spirituality - other than love - is for humans - to have a sound base of ethical thought/action. (Ram Chandra) These are a given in this field of spiritual perfection Thank you for your point. Fare thee well.@@TheWorldTeacher

[@TheWorldTeacher]

@@theostapel, Good Girl! 👌 Incidentally, Slave, are you VEGAN? 🌱

[@Dia-Gnosis]

At 1:30:24 Bernardo comments on our ability to impose our will upon the world. While this is not possible through thought alone, there may not be any limitations on what we can achieve through consistent effort directed towards an adequately specified vision. An awesome Terrence Mckenna quote that has deeply impacted my thinking from a young age, “Nature loves courage. You make the commitment and nature will respond to that commitment by removing impossible obstacles. Dream the impossible dream and the world will not grind you under, it will lift you up. This is the trick. This is what all these teachers and philosophers who really counted, who really touched the alchemical gold, this is what they understood. This is the shamanic dance in the waterfall. This is how magic is done. By hurling yourself into the abyss and discovering it's a feather bed.” This comes from the idea that our only limitations are the ones set by our own limiting beliefs. Quite a beautiful idea and one that fits nicely with idealism.

[@lisamamajama]

Synchronicity is dynamic and meaningful. Thank you for this beautiful explanation.

[@dwai963]

this channel is very underrated Bernardo is fascinating

[@fleddybabble]

Thanks Dvaita! It’s early days for this project so please share to help me spread the word!

[@dwai963]

@@fleddybabble Thank you will do 🙏

[@ready1fire1aim1]

Entelechy is a philosophical concept that originated in ancient Greek thought and has been used by various philosophers throughout history. At its core, entelechy refers to the idea of an inner potential or driving force that moves things toward their natural end or goal. The term "entelechy" was first used by Aristotle, who believed that everything in nature has an inherent potential or goal that it strives to achieve. For example, an acorn has the potential to become an oak tree, and it will naturally strive toward this goal if given the proper conditions and environment. The concept of entelechy was later developed by the German philosopher Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz, who used it to describe a pre-existing inner principle that determines the nature and behavior of all things. According to Leibniz, this inner principle is what gives a thing its identity and makes it what it is. In modern times, the concept of entelechy has been used in various fields, including psychology and biology. The psychologist Carl Jung, for example, used the concept of entelechy to describe the inherent potential for growth and development within the human psyche. Similarly, the biologist Hans Driesch used the concept of entelechy to describe the innate developmental potential within living organisms. Overall, the concept of entelechy emphasizes the idea that everything in nature has a purpose or goal that it naturally strives toward. It suggests that there is an inner driving force within all things that moves them toward their natural end or potential, and that this force can be harnessed and understood through careful observation and study.

[@briobarb8525]

Thank you for sharing this!

[@jenniferarnold-delgado3489]

As mom , after giving birth to the creature , the most important thing that I felt that I did was observe the entelechy of my child , even comparing notes with pre conception , conception and pregnancy time , - all together its about one year of engagement -- and the birth form - also tells a story about the childs self , and then , doing my very best to help them forge into reality with that energy . Bascially , continuing to nurture the seed of their soul . Until , oh gosh , they turn and bite that umbilical cord with the strength of a Scottie Dog snapping the neck of a rat - and its done . I really liked this description you took the time to write , I never heard the word , and did not pick it up during the conversation -- another proof for the beauty of the written word - To me , I just think of it as we are born a shard of glass , one piece each from the shattered cup .

[@theostapel]

Remembering the Real Being continually - is my base - for thought and action - the result is always - His. There is a whole delightful mystery and real life - therein.

[@fineasfrog]

Sing along: "Row, row, row your boat gently down the stream. Merrily, merrily, merrily, merrily; life is but a dream." Repeat as need be. With just a bit of awakened intelligence, we can begin to extract more and more depth from the wisdom encoded in the words of this little ditty. Probably this little song serves as a 'Moses basket' to protect and carry the encoded wisdom in the words across the hazards of time, across the generations, for its depths to be rediscovered again and again by someone who is innately and/or otherwise prepared to response to it and decode some of the wisdom hidden in its depths. At the very least it may spark a question in a fertile mind that may ask: "What might the words of this little ditty mean?

[@John12512]

Any idea on where that song came from?

[@briobarb8525]

Thank you for your comment.

[@johnd.shultz7423]

Theres no "wisdom" there! at best its a song for a childs mind that wants to avoid reality,thinking life is a dream is A. Wrong and B.a regressive escapism that appeals to childish minded"adults" too frightened of reality to face Life/directly..its Obvious your retreat into magical thinking has kept your mind at a kiddie land level...

[@ultramiddle4991]

Thank you for the thought provoking post. 😊

[@jenniferarnold-delgado3489]

From one of my songs " Tell me since when , did the river of life , become a highway , with a white striped line ? I"d rather water and a boat to row , than miles of black top , upon which to go , I'd rather water ... and a boat to row.

[@_WeDontKnow_]

wow. Bernardo's take on entanglement was absolutely incredible. 1:42:37 what a mind

[@PetraKann]

Excellent discussion - especially the analogies used. It’s a very rich subject so analogies work well here

[@HighCountryStudio]

I absolutely loved this interview! Thanks so much to you both.

[@koanforty]

A wonderful philosopher, helping me to conceptualize the "measurement problem." This was a first for me. Well Done! Awesome!! Deep thanks as well to Changing Consciousness broadcast.

[@KipIngram]

1:57:00 - Look, Dr. Kastrup already conceded that the dissociative boundaries are "imperfect and pourus." That *potentially* opens the door to all kinds of things. I really liked how he phrased all that - he said he could not "rule it out," and I think that has to apply to most if not all psi phenomena. But... those dissociative boundaries are still pretty good boundaries, so... don't look for this stuff to be happening every day. It just seems to me, though, that if one dissociated alter can temporarily pierce his boundary and sense "Zen enlightenment," then two of them could do so at the same time and hook up for a chat, so to speak. Why not? That "slit in the door" Dr. Kastrup mentioned - well, it makes a lot of things "not totally impossible."

[@ultramiddle4991]

Very well put and a powerful reminder to keep an open mind to experiences. As Scully, the scientist said,”All I know for certain is that I’ve seen things I cannot explain .” PS The X-files Season 1, Episode 7 is about adapting AI and its potential uses for evil. Early 90s, no less.

[@KipIngram]

@@ultramiddle4991 Yep - I just re-watched the first several seasons of that a few months ago.

[@109ARIANA]

Thank you so much for drawing Bernardo’s thoughts in this direction 😊

[@juanjuarez9581]

A humble suggestion: consider the Frankl idea about the meaning of life: 1.- realization of values under the unrepeatibility of your life situation. So yes, meaning is about your life. And you don’t need to wait for the second part of your life. 2.- We don’t know the super meaning 3.- It is debatable that universal mind is not metacognitive. Regularities in nature and the problem of theodicy are not solid arguments. When you learn to drive bike you develop a “second nature”. 4.- Don’t despersonalize your life. Of course the ego is not your higher identity but the meaning of the totality is not in opposition to your individuation in junguian sense.

[@HeronMarkBlade]

I love this conversation. Really top drawer - I just can't see a way past Bernardo's reasoning - other than to say maybe there are issues with the reasons for dissociation - but then this challenge strikes me as similar to that against Hoffman - why does the single agency multiply at all? Neither party can really be expected to account for this. With so many converging narratives supporting idealism now, I can see it growing enormously, and potentially delivering the cultural improvements it promises.

[@Wgp79]

Single agency multiplies for the simple reason that it if just stays single, then there is just nothing there, no room for growth, it will just be single for ever. So it divides itself into many different individuated units of consciousness so then it can evolve and then begin to reduce the entropy of it's own existence as per evolution and the choices it can make to experience. How does this actually happen? We can't know this because it is how the system is programmed and we are in the system so we can never get outside of it to understand it's motive or inception.

[@HeronMarkBlade]

@@Wgp79 I tend to think we are its motives, and its inception and continuity, we are it. and metaphysics does seem able to penetrate and potentially provide understanding about..it, hence this conversation. I'm nowhere near the level of...acceptance of the likes of Spira and co, but its extremely compelling and intuitively feels right, whereas the bullshit teenage narrative most of us live by feels intuitively wrong.

[@CALCANEUS3535]

I am no scientist, but wonder if asking why the mind of nature dissociates, is similar to asking why a cell divides? Because nature does what nature does… just a thought

[@HeronMarkBlade]

@@CALCANEUS3535 yeah that's a good point. But if we're able to discern at least what appears as structure, perhaps one day telos can also be revealed or modelled.

[@CALCANEUS3535]

If I am free to use spiritual metaphor here, I wonder if love is the “trauma” or catalyst for disassociation, for the one to fracture in to the many. Likewise, love could also be the catalyst for the multiplicity to have a primordial drive to feel and eventually return to the one. In this model, god is not a static state. God is a process of which we are an intimate part of.

[@anne-mariemoore]

Really enjoyed this conversation. Thank you 🙏

[@giantessmaria]

Brain melted! thanks, wonderful discussion!

[@RighteousMonk-m1m]

I love this great man - The awesome Bernardo 👌 👏 👍

[@jorgegarciapla6880]

I believe that the problem of causality can be greatly simplified by considering the subjective nature of any phenomenon, external or internal. That is, causality is certainly a phenomenon of which the subject is conscious (the "amorphous self," in Kastrup's words). Consciousness, the amorphous self, is the common factor in any equation of objective reality. An equation is a logical relation between particular objects. Causality can be written as an equation: A = B, "move hand = bottle falls", for example. But in both members of the equation there is hidden a common factor, which is consciousness: I am aware of A, I am aware of B, and I am aware that A and B are related. If we eliminate the common factor "consciousness", then there remains the equation, the relation between objects, the causality. In other words: the first and ultimate reality, consciousness, harbors causality within itself, generates it, as an appearance or image. The materialism that Kastrup questions is nothing more than the mechanism that eliminates the common factor "consciousness" and sustains the endless dance of particular relations between objects. It is the "de-subjectification" or subject-object dissociation. Is "thought" in Krishnamurti's words. The problem of causality is the problem of becoming, of time. Time is only an appearance, one more form cut out of consciousness. But the human being, because he sustains himself as a being apart, is subjected to time. The "amorphous self", the "dreamer" of this apparent world, is the container of it all.

[@Anders01]

Interesting explanation by Kastrup if I understood it correctly of how the split between science and the church made society move into a material perspective, because science had to stay away from the mental realm which was monopolized by the church at that time.

[@briobarb8525]

Thank you Anders for offering your simplified explanation of thought on this interview. It really helped me to put my head around it easier. And I mean that sincerely. (Post stroke victim.)

[@theostapel]

Be well and clear and jolly.@@briobarb8525

[@rwm1980]

Wonderful interview

[@ltandrepants]

This is brilliant!

[@carolehuxter9543]

Just subscribed to chasing consciousness today. Listen to wonderful Bernado quite a bit and indeed feeling... all is unlimited freefalling incognito potentiality...what a wonder"full" pre"sense" presence we all are one way or other. Fascinating discussion. Thank you

[@taonow369]

Aloha just found your channel! Fantastic ❤ It’s amazing the similarities between what Bernardo discusses and A course in miracles- A great guest would be Leanne Whitney her book Consciousness in Jung and Pantanjali follows along the lines of Bernardo’s work - her comprehensive study on ancient philosophy and modern depth psychology is great . I disagree with the idea of a autonomous world around us , I believe it’s thought base and individual- he discusses in the first part of the lecture the fundamental quality of thought which I agree with but I offer that our world is a mixture of the collective conscious and the individual conscious and subconscious creating a relative reality which is also influenced by observation and our senses are a bit behind in time/ space to recognize this And the measurement problem I would offer is a consciousness answer: here me out We are as human consciousness part of creation and that part is physical as we use our senses and intellect- if we reverse engineer this would could say that without our conscious awareness or “measurement” the physical world would remain as it is - probability Again our tools can’t keep track effectively- this has similarities to Advita Vedanta and Buddhism along with the Upanishads - There something missing in the time / space fundamental idea - it my be that why is fundamental is beyond or intellect as of now - enter Don Hoffman And the Big Bang is in serious trouble with the latest from the James Webb telescope discoveries and the size problem with galaxies that should be much larger and the collision theory that they get bigger by colliding- both seam untrue in the light of pristine galaxies and small galaxies that appear to be older than the Big Bang itself - is the universe a expression of a collective unconscious

[@jenniferarnold-delgado3489]

NXIVM: ‘Smallville’ star Allison Mack faces sentencing in Upstate NY sex cult case / the Manson murderers , also females , also brainwashed . The brainwashed female mind is far more problematic than the egoistical male mind , which at least still has one lobe that is susceptable to imagery as a pacification and mediator - this is in response to my response below - to illustrate the male female brain differential .

[@JoJo-vg8dz]

Great interview.

[@ecelsozanato5603]

I have a question about collective unconscious: from anthropology we know that humans had a great migration from Africa at about 60,000 ya. Couldn’t it explain the similar contents of unconscious throughout cultures? (Genetics and epigenetics)

[@robfields49]

So how might we characterize UAPs within Kastrup’s idealist worldview?

[@MateAdum]

First time here and there it goes: the sales intro speech encourage to share this with friendS and suggests to give not any amount but 5 stars rating etc. when I hear those introductions with “sales speeches” it rejects me from even listening more. Let me be the judge at the end if I like what I see and hear. Then naturally and out of my excitement I would share it and like it but don't need to be reminded about that in advance while loosing patience to get to the point of the subject without those reminders of: like it, subscribe, share, bla bla bla….make me popular, spread the word, I need to have more followrs 🤫

[@jaquelinevalle3628]

Genius. Obrigada from Brasil!

[@MrJonblundmusic]

Wonderful discussion. I am so omnboard. 'Just how' I see it as well. Anyways it is beautiful and it was funny as well

[@huahindan]

Thank you for this

[@KipIngram]

This is amazing.

[@robfields49]

If there is no matter, then why do we pursue degrees in computers or work in places like CERN?

[@KassJuanebe]

He never says there is no matter. He acknowledges that we sense matter. Matter is how we experience certain events. But matter comes from consciousness, not the other way around.

[@andybaldman]

Saying that 'everything is mental' is basically saying the universe is computation, and information is the fundamental building block of everything. And this is the same position Demis Hassabis holds. I think the computational/informational wording is more grounded and practical.

[@sarahmottramart]

Interesting, I’m drawing a scarab beetle, listening to a podcast on synchronicity, that mentions scarab Beetles.. super fun but serious indeed. It’s all a big tapestry .

[@psyfiles7351]

Bernardo’s memory makes me think of that great song by neutral milk hotel, “how strange it is to be anything at all”

[@jenniferarnold-delgado3489]

Bernardo seems to be the only man saying anything among the emperors of the stream - he is so amazingly beautifully spoken . Walk softly and carry a big stick - thou sayeth Bernardo .

[@spandon]

Check Donald Hoffman?

[@jenniferarnold-delgado3489]

@@spandon yes , but Bernardo is so complete in his overview -- as an artist , my experience with that active unconscious that Bernardo is staring into is such an amazing experience . In a way , the work of the artist is to bring to the lit world "new" visions , sounds , and languaging of story to tell others about . Deep space exploration. I feel that Bernardos work is truly artistic in the most beautiful sense of the word . Because Jung did not live in the same world as Bernanardo , he did not think that the golden scarab that hit his window was about HIM < he thought it was a message for his client . Interpersonal self awareness is so important right now as we are integrating with AI so intensely right now , We actually need to rapidly upgrade our understanding of the perception process and the inner process of self discovery of unique self ( spirit ) so that it does not get perverted by viral style AI interface . Non unique eventing eventually looks like lemmings running straight over a cliff edge into the sea , which is how I feel things are looking right about now , but actually the lemmings have been running across the prairie heading west for quite a few years now . [e-mail]

[@jenniferarnold-delgado3489]

PS this OCEAN of PHYSIC ACTIVITY that Bernardo speaks of is spoken of as experienced by my teacher Neville Goddard , a man who lived from 1905 - 1972 - May be someone interesting for contemplation for yourself -

[@spandon]

@@jenniferarnold-delgado3489 Hey, thankx

[@jenniferarnold-delgado3489]

@@spandon the sound of the spanda is the gift of Nile Rodgers , the guitarist and music producer . Since your code name is Spandon , I thought you might like to listen to the sound of your chosen name . He took David Bowies silly song , lets dance , and turned it into something with his gift , which is that spanda sound . I love to study musicians and examine the forces that they are re creating with sound . Lately my experiments have more to do with viceral than the languaged conceptual . I try to only talk about stuff AFTER I have experienced it , so I can speak about it first hand . Once , I was listening to this radio interview with a guy who was a white kid raised by his missionary parents in the Amazon . He ended up becoming their tribe leader and marrying a woman from the tribe . But he comes to the US , and the interview was totally fascinating . He said that they had a major problem telling the tribe about the people in the Bible , because it happened so long ago . IN their world , If a guy is in the forest and sees a jaguar , he can tell that story to the people . If he meet a man in the jingle who saw a jaguar , again , he could tell the people about the man seeing the jaguar , but if he met a man who met a man who saw a jaguar , at that point , information transmission is stopped . Ha Ha if we applied that to the "machine " AI , the whole system would just crumble into dust . I like to write e mails , communicate fresh to people - nobody gets it . Its like "We Only drink homogenized canned milk that has been on the shelf for at LEAST 15 years , so we know its SAFE . " and I am like a milk maid who just milked the goat walking in with a bucket and a ladle . NON ON NONO ! run everybody ! People say to me " HOW DO YOU KNOW THIS >? " and I am like , 'My brain told me ? " Have a great day today , and check out some Nile Rodgers to tap into your energy -

[@zardoz7900]

The instruments in the airplane are entangled with the "outside" world. You see what you are supposed to see relative to the instruments you are using e.g. your 5 senses which again are entangled with the reality of the arbitrarily defined "outside" world. On a PBS Spacetime episode they said, if i remember correctly, that you are entangled with a specific universe, one out of many. Myself and Kastrup also seem to agree that the multiverse theory is an ad absurdum proposition. However, the entanglement part seems logically consistent. But again, I don't know what exactly Kastrup is implying that there are things "outside" the cockpit measuring instruments, and he states that the world "outside" nevertheless real. Ok. What is real is really up for debate, but the cockpit instrument theory is similar to Hoffman's Headset Theory but Hoffman ads that we see reality in a particular way because of survival which isn't a strong philosophical argument but what I do think is going on is as i mentioned earlier entanglement which is in essence one and the same with the wave function collapse. From the day you were old enough to acquire five senses/cockpit instruments, you essentially became entangled with the world and the only way to come out of that entanglement is to go through it. Run out the clock. No other way out. This reality/world is a mathematical possibility. One of perhaps infinite. So in a sense its a paper thin reality if not a phantasmagoria of apparitions or archetypes if you may. So archetypes are mathematical constructs part of the fog of potentiality awaiting to manifest. David Bohm talks about the implicit and explicit order. Things sort of unfolding and then folding back into this inaccessible to our senses likely atemporal dimension. Not to get too far off on a tangent. Let me reel myself back and reiterate what I meant. We are entangled, in a sense the instrument is what is seen. We don't have proof of other universes because it is not possible for us to have instruments that would allow that. So in a sense we live in a paper thin reality. Now his/Jungs argument that God has a unconscious dark side to him and there are all these biblical references. Have in mind Jung as intelligent as he was was heavily influenced with Christianity and he lived in a time way before YT and before all these NDE testimonies and many people reported that what they thought was "bad" , all made sense on the other side. It all made perfect sense and that there was no such thing as bad. Im open to the Idea that God may be this mathematical bottomless well of possibilities and that perhaps the price of narrowing it all down and instantiating an "individual" just may be Gods way of experiencing life. But again, I wouldn't bet my life that God is this static mathematical structure of possibilities as people who have had NDE experiences did face " the light " in other words something that was very much alive. This lies in direct opposition to Kants view of God which in essence, for lack of better worlds is static, mathematical, rule based, non living. Again, that is if my understanding of Kant is correct. Its the map of the road vs the road itself. So perhaps to be alive is to merge both. This implies a kind of dualism.

[@gireeshneroth7127]

So called reality is what consciousness beholds of itself living a mind wake.

[@jason-iy7vs]

The clip that starts the vid is way cut out of context! Shoulda left the part in where he says "Consciousness, as defined by Jung..." Without that bit, its misleading to his theory.

[@Pegasus4213]

16:25 Bernado says; "Why would multiple fundamentally independent minds pop out fundamentally out of nothing in nature at the same time and how do they interact if they are fundamentally different?" Obviously enough, they are merely the unique perspectives that each of us have as an individual, on the experience of this (Seemingly) physical reality! We feel ourselves to be the centre of the universe. So to say that we don't want that, as Bernado does, is not helpful in understanding our unique individual perspective. He (Bernado) has a unique perspective and realization of what reality is and each of us has that same perspective of feeling ourselves to be at the centre and at the leading edge of creativity.

[@etzenhammer]

Interesting discussion! Question: is there at any place argued for consciousness existing without a functioning brain? It seems to me the topic is touched but not really fleshed out, or am I wrong?

[@MountainDharma]

This podcast host is way too heavy handed with Bernardo. He interrupts and redirects back to his plan . Bernardo is brilliant when given time to fully express his ideas

[@carolannshepherd2189]

I read his books 📚 😊

[@LeftBoot]

There is only one time, and that time is NOW

[@natashapope3785]

Psychosis intelligence / mind matter interaction of all kinds.. Just a knowing thought.

[@persnickety369]

25:00 but you can unknowingly be drugged or ruffied and your body responds regardless that your conscious brain not knowing it happened. 🤔

[@ltandrepants]

Hoffman’s “headset”

[@BernardMcmahon-g1v]

Bernado is officially a Silver Surfer.

[@adventurealchemy805]

Under the anesthesia pain is not present,wich allude that pain is in mind,which again suggest that pain in body is an illusion or body is mind,only its part of unconscious mind,and soul which experience pain is elsewhere.

[@thomassoliton1482]

Bernardo states that the ontic problem is that it makes no sense that there is mind and matter - mind and matter are “incommensurable”; yet how can mind arise from matter or vice-versa? But we know there is mind so there can only be mind so matter must be mental. Or something like that. But he also states at one point “Mind is the pre-theoretical given from nature”. So then there are still 2 things, Mind and Nature. So back where we started - mind and non-mind. In order to assert that there is only mind, one must create all kinds of rationalizations as to 17:16 why what we ordinarily assume is matter is in fact mind. None of that makes sense to me. If I play darts with someone, we are both hitting the same dartboard. Do you think we are hitting “mind”? Or there is some Great Mind making this all up? Sorry the “empirically given notion of dissociation” seems to be preventing me from understanding why all this rationalization is necessary. Here’s a simple solution. There is no fundamental difference between “mind” and “matter”. This (IMO) is essentially the essence of the Hindu statue “Shiva as Nataraja”, the dance of creation and destruction, showing Shiva dancing in a ring of fire (energy). So: (1) Matter and energy are interconvertible; our bodies arise from energy (literally from the energy of the sun arriving as light). (2) Although our brains think in terms of mind and matter, this is an illusion - there is no fundamental difference; no absolute dividing line. All matter consists of transitory patterns of energy. (3) Our “mind”, specifically our thoughs, arise as patterns of energy within our “material” brain - electrochemical reactions, bioelectric fields and currents, etc. (4) You think that consciousness is something you can grasp like a block you played with as a kid. It is more like a phase transition - like ice changing to water and then water vapor as the molecular energy increases. Our minds have 2 phases - internal (introspection) and external (sensory awareness), and consciousness is like a phase transition between the two. Like a material phase transition, you cannot “pin down” consciousness; it cannot be defined because that state is never the same from one moment to the next. The question to ask is not “what” is consciousness, but how do you know you are conscious? That requires self-reflection, which is a mental phase transition. Problem solved.

[@neilgrace9147]

Noice, Watching, ill tell you in the morning ;-)

[@fourshore502]

what if you havent accomplished anything in the first half of life? should you skip to the second half of life anyway? or should you end your life?

[@briobarb8525]

I am sure there are those who scoff at your comment...but I can honestly relate to it. Thank you for making me not feel so alone in it.

[@hannesdewachter7803]

Isn’t the point BK is making all about individuation being the only worthwhile accomplishment that triggers the “second half of life” (as opposed to materialistic accomplishments)? You may simply be a fast learner, or someone that’s more intuitively in sync with true nature / the collective unconscious. Fascination with life banalities seems to be what the most “accomplished” human beings start to focus on. Our relatively short lives are the result of billion years of natural evolution that we get to witness from this temporary “dissociated” perspective. Seems like a worthwhile ride to me, especially knowing that materialistic privileges are a distraction rather than a prerequisite to play life’s game and learn as much as we can about the nature of reality.

[@goldwhitedragon]

End, as in take one's own life. Don't do it. Both God and Buddah warn against it, lest you be cut off from ultimate salvation.

[@adventurealchemy805]

How can it be experienced consciousness if person is not meta conscious

[@nwogamesalert]

Advise to the channel owner. Your face and the microphone are interacting with the high contract background in a weird way, making you look like an alien from the movie "They Live". It doesn't look good.

[@StuartBroomfield]

Yes, great content but this is off-putting.

[@tayfunisk6400]

🎉🎉

[@RighteousMonk-m1m]

This video may change your entire existence if you could grasp the deepest meaning.

[@imperfekt7905]

The way the interviewer's microphone disappears and appears is distracting.

[@Arewethereyet69]

@1:12:00 wonder if what Bernardo is saying is what Indigenous people of the Americas were already knew and continue to do.

[@mohanmohabir2093]

The true teaching of the Hindu does not encourage you to redraw from the world but to be active and productive in it with non attachment to the result.

[@k.arlanebel6732]

If you will allow me, you guys are "idealizing" Carl Jung. His work, his thought, his vision, in the end, does not have the conclusive lucidity that you seem to be attributing to it. I would not even go so far as to say that Jung was philosophically an idealist. Jung claimed, in terms of value, that psyche was higher than either "matter" or "spirit"; but Jung also said that on a foundational level, approaching the reality that Jung called "psychoid", psyche is matter. Jung says that we cannot experience matter except through psyche, but nowhere that I am aware of does he say that matter is originally psyche. But he does say that psyche, is at its origin point, probably matter. And yet he obviously differentiates psyche from matter and says that it is of greater importance/value than matter (or spirit). There are traceable directions and inclinations in Jung, but there is nothing like a conclusive lucidity that eliminates frustrating ambiguities and Wolfgang Pauli took Jung to task more than once about this. I am by no means dismissing Jung or his work, I am simply saying that his work is by no means as conclusive as you seem to be implying. I don't think Jung can accurately be called an idealist. I think his position at the time of his death was that psyche is the primary realm of human meaning, but that the actual relationship between psyche and matter remains unknown.

[@k.arlanebel6732]

Even though Pauli was himself "Mr. Synchronicity," Pauli also took Jung to task for not taking "matter" seriously enough, particularly concerning Jung's interpretation of the importance of the Catholic Church's dogmas concerning the Assumption of the Virgin Mary. You guys are projecting and oversimplifying because you don't want to deal with the same difficulties that Jung did not want to deal with. In fact, Jung confessed to Pauli that if he (Jung) did take these unanswered questions sufficiently seriously his 80-year-old heart might not survive it. And he meant that literally.

[@chrisbeatrice2990]

"We're only 150 years into developing technology." Really?

[@BigJack512]

I think the context was electronic technology.

[@billyoumans1784]

Richard Rohr also teaches 2nd half of life wisdom- see his Falling Upward

[@adventurealchemy805]

So "evolution" is dissociation precisely

[@davidchou1675]

1:12:46 Bernardo often speaks of a "Western Mind" but I haven't heard him yet explain exactly what that's supposed to mean, really...are we talking about upbringing or something "racial?" He's very careful usually with his terms but this stuff is simply taken for granted and it's puzzling what he might actually mean here. Even more puzzling, perhaps, is how no one ever asks him to define himself! Is that because everyone's white???

[@davidchou1675]

Like, is there an "African Mind?" A "Southern Mind?" How about Polynesia, with their traditions -- did all that come out of their special Jungian psychic profiles, as Bernardo might put it??? That no one asks any follow-ups makes me wonder if for white people such beliefs are just natural, so natural they're not even aware of it!

[@elyashiv11]

I don't pretend to know enough about his thought, but, this kind of conclusion assumes a general sensory evaluation, almost statistical. kastrop knows a lot of Western thought and at the same time a lot of Eastern thought, plus many individuals from the West and the East, and sees that each has a cultural bias by default. Maybe another viewer, with a different experience, can disagree, it's all about assessment and life experience. By looking even superficially at different societies it is easy to see that a variety of cultures' basic assumptions and feelings towards life are varied and different.

[@scottstruif3939]

In other interviews, he disavows expertise in Eastern thought, but states Indian thought is much more nuanced in its understanding of different levels of consciousness. By “western,” he only means a somewhat limited appreciation of the levels. He has to explain the distinction between phenomenal consciousness and meta-consciousness to westerners, whereas it might already be apparent to Hindus, for instance.

[@leifbeyond]

Western Mind is material and believes consciousness is born from the mind. Eastern Mind refers to Indian and other ancient civilizations who know the true reality of nature that consciousness is fundamental and our Universe is conscious.

[@briobarb8525]

​@@leifbeyond Thank you for your comment. It was helpful to me.

[@mikekretmar4923]

,360% of consciousness, even the dead are conscious,there residue lingers in the Sea of consciousness, it's the spirit that is conscious, and the Avatar is jacked into the matrix through the nervous system,the body is the ship,the empty vessel,a ship comes through the canal on the water where it's birthed at the dock, admiralty maritime law of the water, when you're born,tge vessel the ship is birthed through the canal through your mother's water and delivered by the doctor, natural law,law of the land,

[@RighteousMonk-m1m]

Q: why hot meat soup? Why not hot tomato soup?😋

[@casteretpollux]

The black swan is not anecdotal if it is verified.

[@soebredden]

Consciousness is NOT equal to the EGO-consciousness!

[@djzouke]

We really do not know what consciousness is.

[@soebredden]

@@djzouke Ok- We do not know what anything is- but we find terms in which we talk of phenomenons which we experience. What is a thought? It is definitely not matter- it might be talked of as frequency or fields- but there is a subject involved who is conscious about itself in humans. The consciousness of God transcend that.

[@djzouke]

@@soebredden Well put, I agree

[@Constantinesis]

But why did the supreme consciousness dissociate into each of our minds? Because of boredom? If it knows everything why play this game?

[@robertodacunha9388]

Maybe he,she ,it has a creative impulse as humans have.

[@hansfrankfurter2903]

He’s just projecting his own life and experiences to everyone else. Not everyone, in fact most dont have it made by 34, or own a million and half by 40. This guy lives in his own elite bubble.

[@andybaldman]

The host keeps wanting to take it into woo, and it's irritating. Bernardo keeps things grounded.

[@hadigid]

m

[@SpruceGumRules]

Far too much hubris in analysis. As far as seen at any scale and any timeframe this universe drive by several fundamental functions/processes. Synchronicity appears to be one. Flow of time appears to be one. Expansion appears to be one. Contraction appears to be one. From such functions the universe appears to be a modeling machine in the flows of time. Humans are but one cohort or instance of billions of years of modelling. There is little special if anything special.

[@drm54321]

Hi Freddy. Please, can you get a new microphone? It's hard to watch you because the mic keeps distorting your face. I keep seeing a white hole going right through your jaw, LOL. Other than that, Good Job. I'm a subscriber now. Thanks!

[@ChasingConsciousnessPodcast]

Definitely on my shopping list thanks drm. As a podcaster i thought i should put a copy up on You Tube as a further exposure and it's really taken off, so i need to save money to invest in the video element. Thanks for your patience while i upgrade my gear!

[@KassJuanebe]

It's the background remover!

[@FormsInSpace]

he's begging the question when he claims even in deep sleep or "the pass out game" people are still conscious. anybody can verify that he's wrong. the buddhist 5 aggregates /khandhas shows there is no "self" "consciousness" there is only sense stimulus and mental activity.

[@KassJuanebe]

The Buddha had no interest in ontology. He was an extremely smart extremely practical guy. His ideas are intended to free people from the drawbacks of psychological attachments.

[@LoneRanger.801]

It is so annoying that you keep plugging in other episodes in between everytime you speak. You just break the flow man! Let your guests talk. You disrespect them, as well as, annoy your listeners with that behaviour.

[@sophiafakevirus-ro8cc]

Believing what Bernardo says makes zero difference to reality.

[@casteretpollux]

Sorry but the description of " materiialism" is grossly clumsy ncorrect. Hearing a supposedly high level science come out with this is worrying. Hegel was an idealist. No.mention of Marx, Engels and Lenin of course. We seem to be under a situation with " thinkers" like this of a runaway truck filled with dynamite careering downhill , with the driver saying " look no hands ".

[@casteretpollux]

Just adding that the classical Greek "psyche" had the meaning " life"

[@Mr.RGBiggsGuyRGBG]

This small boat sailing into the eye of the hurricane of colliding particles is a dystopian Kantian construct. It’s failed poorly conceived unsound and unstable. Truly tragic terrible judgment without a clinical study and lacking taste. This conversation suffers through lack of insight….but I’ll listen intently to this missmagosh and meandering.

[@grosbeak6130]

Bernardo Kastrup is at it again here, with the same old tired 😴 metaphysical tropes. This has become a fetishizing on the so-called true nature of consciousness. He does but conjecture. And to what end?

[@bernardofitzpatrick5403]

WTF

[@grosbeak6130]

@@bernardofitzpatrick5403 your "WTF" is juvenile in making a response to my comment here. Grow up. If you have something specific to ask regarding my comment, in order to understand it, go ahead.

[@bernardofitzpatrick5403]

@@grosbeak6130 you take yourself too seriously pedant.

[@craigwillms61]

OK - "with the same old tired metaphysical tropes" I assume you would tire of Christian, Muslim, Jewish, Confuciusan and Buddhist tropes as well. It's a belief system, it's not perfectly coherent - none of them are. All of them have some truth in them and Bernardo's does too. It's interesting. Why would you bother listening to him - he says the same things in these interviews. Either you buy it, or some of it or you don't - you obviously don't. You ask-to what end??? As with many of the religions his conjecture is that "you" don't end when your body does. Believing that will make what you do and how you live in this realm quite different than if you think otherwise.

[@thomassoliton1482]

Agreed; a lot of gloss paint over fundamental issues. Specifically, where does mind come from? It is highly ordered and diversified - what "laws" (if any) regulate that? At one point, BK says mind emanates from nature. So there is not just mind, there is nature too - but any similarity to "Mind and Matter" is purely unintentional! Mind must exist in relation to SomeThing, otherwise it could not be diversified (e.g. all our "bodies"), which is the "nature" of our experience. Mind cannot exist solely in relation to itself if it manifests diversity. That is just misdirection based on nonsense. Mind and Matter do exist, but they are just two sides of the same coin - the coin of energy. Consciousness, however, which is the real "problem", is neither mind nor matter - an illusory concept like time and love. It's not like the coin, it's like flipping the coin - which involves mind, matter, and energy!

[@ISAM.001]

So basically “God” (ourself) is really upset and hurt about something and dissociates into this thing called life to cope and take a break from it and then we wake up to whatever tf we’re actually dealing with after we die and we’re gonna realize it’s a lot weirder and harder to deal with than even this life…is what a mushroom trip made me feel like one time and this reminds me of that a little bit with the dissociated alters thing. I think I projected a lot in that trip, but the feeling that whatever we are is hurting…idk that stuck with me.