Physicalist Arguments Debunked: Irreducible Mind (Part 3)

Do the Libet Experiments support the belief the brain creates consciousness? How about split-brain patients or brain damage? We address all that and more in this video.
Don't forget to help us create more videos! We need your support:
/ @inspiringphilosophy
Sources:
The Blackwell Companion to Substance Dualism - Jonathan J. Loose, Angus J. L. Menuge, J. P. Moreland
More Than Matter - Keith Ward
Human Immortality: Two Supposed Objections to the Doctrine - William James
Functional correlates of musical and visual ability in frontotemporal dementia:
www.cambridge....
Emergence of artistic talent in frontotemporal dementia:
www.researchga...
The savant syndrome: An extraordinary condition:
www.researchga...
The Idea of the World - Bernardo Kastrup
Holotropic Breathwork: The Potential Role of a Prolonged, Voluntary Hyperventilation Procedure as an Adjunct to Psychotherapy:
www.researchga...
Does Consciousness Disappear in Dreamless Sleep:
www.sciencedir...
Consciousness lost and found: subjective experiences in an unresponsive state:
pubmed.ncbi.nl...
Acceleration-induced loss of consciousness. A review of 500 episodes:
pubmed.ncbi.nl...
Mind, Brains, and Science - John Searle
Irreducible Mind - Edward Kelly & Emily Kelly
Reconstructing Visual Experiences from Brain Activity Evoked by Natural Movies:
www.sciencedir...
Reconstructing imagined letters from early visual cortex reveals tight topographic correspondence between visual mental imagery and perception:
link.springer....
Barking up the wrong free: readiness potentials reflect processes independent of conscious will:
pubmed.ncbi.nl...
Neural precursors of decisions that matter--an ERP study of deliberate and arbitrary choice:
elifesciences....
Brain preparation before a voluntary
action: Evidence against unconscious movement initiation:
www.sciencedir...
Does the Brain ‘Initiate’ Freely
Willed Processes? A Philosophy of Science Critique of Libet-type Experiments
and Their Interpretation:
journals.sagep...
Brain signals do not demonstrate
unconscious decision making:
pubmed.ncbi.nl...
Analysis of a choice-reaction task yields a new interpretation of Libet's experiments:
pubmed.ncbi.nl...
Do the models offer testable proposals of brain functions for conscious experience?
pubmed.ncbi.nl...
The Point of No Return in Vetoing Self-Initiated Movements:
www.pnas.org/c...
The Mind and the Brain - Jeffery Schwartz & Sharon Begley
Systematic Changes in Cerebral Glucose
Metabolic Rate After Successful Behavior Modification Treatment of Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder:
pubmed.ncbi.nl...
Movement Intention After Parietal Cortex Stimulation in Humans:
science.scienc...
Mystery of the Mind - Wilder Penfield
Sequential Operation of Disconnected Cerebral Hemispheres in Split-Brain
Patients:
pubmed.ncbi.nl...
The Psychology of Attention - Harold Pashler
Visual integration in the split brain:
www.sciencedir...
Bilateral visual cross-integration by human forebrain commissurotomy subjects:
www.sciencedir...
Perceptual and attentional processes following callosal section in humans: www.sciencedir...
A view of the world from a
split-brain perspective - D. W. Zaidel
The unity of consciousness and the split-brain syndrome: www.researchga...
Explaining Consciousness: The Hard Problem - Jonathan Shear

[@robertbalassan]

this documentary is like a dream coming true for a person so addicted to the materialist thinking but willing to change that, and that because it makes a lot more sense than anything else i believed so far. amazing work!

[@_H8ed_]

Exact same feeling I'm going through now.

[@isakhedeen]

When we as humans put our biases aside and seek for truth it really is amazing. The feeling of abandoning a closely held belief is both scary and liberating. I know this is a year later but I hope you are doing well and still eager to learn and expand your knowledge!

[@maximgruner]

Hey. I see this comment is two years old. What do your beliefs look like now if you don’t mind me asking?

[@mcawesomeytyo3312]

I am trying so desperately to escape that paradigm. I feel like this will help

[@KaapoKallio]

This whole documentary is very fascinating!

[@killingtime9283]

Such a great video Mike! The presentation is so good, the slower pace and super low volume one the music, makes it easy to focus on the information being presented. The topics you tackle are so deep that one cannot afford unnecessary distractions. Still the presentation isn’t dry at all. All your hard work really shows, great work man. 🙂

[@ConsciousnessMatters]

I think your use of the word soul might throw off some skeptics a little, but damn, that was a really interesting video. I learnt new things about split brain patients that I didn't know before! Thank you. Love the work.

[@InspiringPhilosophy]

Luckily, in part 2 I explained what I meant by that. I hope they view it in context

[@jjphank]

It’s biblical God is a spirit he’s not made of matters is the Bible and he created matter in the first verse. And the rest of the first chapter breaks it down. Use your brain gets another guy to the Bible by reading the Bible. All & everything can be explained good and ask me any questions

[@luisalmeida8275]

@@InspiringPhilosophy Hello IP. Hope you´re doing well bro. i just want to say a few things about your video. If our brains exist to limit what we can do rather than to allow us to do what we can do, then it seems to me that it would be a lot better if we had been created with no brains at all. That way, we could have unlimited memory, unlimited intelligence and unlimited _insert name of any cognitive ability here _. Surely an omnipotent God could create us with unlimited cognitive abilities without even giving us brains. BTW, things like memory, intelligence or emotions aren´t consciousness. Those are cognitive abilities. A conscious mind can be consciously aware of the fact that it possesses those cognitive abilities but none of those cognitive abilities are consciousness itself. Consciousness is the phenomenon of being self aware. Memory is the cognitive ability of remembering information. Intelligence is the cognitive ability of performing mental simulations of results and possibilities. Emotions are whatever... let´s just move on because i gotta go to work soon. I´m aware of the rain man´s amazing abilities and the fact that he has brain damage and all of that. It´s plausible that if certain brain areas aren´t functioning, the brain will try to compensate by rewiring the remaining brain areas that are still functioning in a totally new way which can produce savant abilities. So, i agree that the way a typical brain works may have the side effect of making certain possible cognitive capacities impossible... but i don´t think that´s incompatible with substance dualism or even physicalism. I´m not a physicalist by the way. I don´t think absolutely everything that exists is physical. As far as loss of consciousness due to anaesthesia or blunt force trauma to the brain or just regular sleep is concerned, i don´t agree that dreaming while sleeping means one was conscious while sleeping. When i´m conscious, i can mentally reflect about the fact that i´m conscious. I can never do that when i´m sleeping and dreaming. In my dreams, very bizarre, surreal things happen and i never recognize those things as very bizarre and surreal during the dream. When i´m awake and conscious and i haven´t yet forgotten the content in the dream i had, i always recognize the content of the dream as bizarre and surreal. When it comes to nightmares, i always behave very irrationally in my nightmares. When i wake up and regain consciousness, i recognize the "decisions" i made in the nightmare were completely retarded and irrational. So, when it comes to the allegations that people are conscious when they are dreaming, i´have no choice but to grab my brother´s xbox controller and press X to DOUBT. But, maybe you can change my mind. I´ve never been less certain that consciousness is generated by the brain since i´ve become an atheist as i am now. One last thing... could you please explain to me what you mean by idealism exactly! Are you saying that NOTHING physical AT ALL exists and absolutely everything that people think is supposedly physical is really just an invention of immaterial minds? Are immaterial minds the only things that trully exist?

[@patmoran5339]

Yeah using that word might throw off a few skeptics but probably they are the Bart Simpson types. Beliefs in the supernatural are soup for the the soul. That way the soul can be healthy when she grows up to be whatever grown-up souls get to be when they grow up. It's just logic.

[@jjphank]

Pat Moran God feeds our soul, soul food the Word of God.

[@DanielApologetics]

Watched at 01:00 AM in the night after a hard day - WORTH IT!

[@greid1317]

Me right now 😂

[@kyogregroudon6457]

Wow worst than ml players etc.

[@lancerialga7271]

Absolutely worth... and NOT JUST because i said so

[@quantumcognition5827]

In split brain patients, although the corpus callosum is severed, the lower brain regions are still connected.

[@islandonlinenews]

I’ve actually gone to sleep before without losing consciousness, just faded right into a dream world. It’s like being neo in the matrix.

[@joshuaphilip7601]

You can actually intentionally do this!

[@Sixty_Five_Pronghorn]

Same. I do it all the time. I somehow trained myself to drift off into the dream world immediately. It’s lead to some pretty weird and freaky dreams.

[@williamwrightjr.2765]

Yeah, same here. After many years of practicing lucid dreaming and other techniques, I achieved this a handful of teams. I've also had too many lucid dreams to count and I still have them occasionally even though I no longer practice any methods.

[@williamwrightjr.2765]

@Dominus Illuminatio Mea It's quite amazing, but it's certainly not like being in the Matrix and it's very easy to "slip out" of your lucidness.

[@TragedysHalo]

I've done something similar. Like when I try going back to sleep, when I wake up too early for work, I mostly just drift off into some deep thinking & sometimes feel super rejuvenated when I snap out of it. Idk what it is but it feels different than when I normally just go to sleep lol Like how I imagine meditation may feel like.

[@kr0nz]

This series needs to be watched by everyone. In fact, I wish we had something like this taught in school so that we can all understand how it all works at an early age.

[@azurephoenix9546]

You could "debunk" pretty much the entire arguing from brain damage argument just by looking at cases of global brain damage that should result in a permanent vegetative state that ends up having only minor physical or cognitive detriment, of which there are myriad. Then, you could go further by listing the amount of people born prematurely who do not experience fetal amnesia, despite having all necessary physical development that should ensure that. while the second group is obviously much smaller, the matter still holds that physicality of the brain is not a determinate of capabilities or functionality or cognition. One of the biggest problems in neuroscience research seems to be the idea that we know more about the brain than we actually do.

[@ethelredhardrede1838]

He could debunk if he was not utterly full of it. He is trying to support his religion in denial of the science.

[@azurephoenix9546]

@Ethelred Hardrede I would argue that faith and religion cannot be debunked through the science because we are talking about function of the brain, which is not fully understood. You may say God does not exist, yet your evidence for that is as slim as someone who says that God does exist. You can not prove or disprove the argument through the use of science because science is largely limited to the observable. You can say that some things are observable through tertiary observation, like dark matter is, but then someone could use the same argument to assert the existence of God. Either way, it remains unresolved.

[@biggestbungus3096]

@@ethelredhardrede1838 yet you, from between what you have just said and the video presentation, sound more bias

[@ethelredhardrede1838]

@@biggestbungus3096 That was garbled at best. The video is in denial of the evidence. The video is biased because of his religion.

[@biggestbungus3096]

@@ethelredhardrede1838 you still havent given any examples

[@user-zs3vd5np2s]

We've been learning about the brain in school and indoctrinated physicalism... I'm so glad to have this playlist to help my faith. Thank you!!

[@lewis72]

"Faith" being the keyword here. When you don't have proof or evidence but you like how it sounds, you have faith.

[@azurephoenix9546]

@@lewis72 faith might also be described as "instinct". for example, a child experiences complete global brain damage of approximately 80% of the brain, effecting all areas including death in the motor cortex. The mother is told "your child will be a vegetable, completely non-functional and it would be a mercy to let her go and withdraw life support " However, the mother has an unshakable faith that her child will not be a vegetable, that her child will probably have some physical or cognitive limitations, but that she absolutely will not be a vegetable. She has no proof of this, and all available evidence shows that she is misguided and completely wrong. But she will not give up and pull the plug and withdraw all life support and demands that life-preserving care and measures be taken to ensure her child's survival, regardless of medical opinion. After 2 weeks, the child is aware, interactive and appears to have normal cognition, but limited motor skills on her left side, none appear to be permanent or permanently impaired with therapy after 2 years. Now, who was right? the entire medical community that agreed that child was not worth saving, or the mother who had faith and no proof? Don't underestimate faith. It's saved more lives than you could possibly imagine.

[@lewis72]

@@azurephoenix9546 I said recently somewhere on here that I really don’t care what people’s personal beliefs are. If someone wants to believe that someone is watching over them, then fine. No problem with that at all, same with your example. However, performing FGM, killing people for what they say or what they have drawn because they think some god instructs that punishment is ridiculous. If god existed and wanted someone punished, it doesn’t need a human to do that.

[@azurephoenix9546]

@@lewis72 none of that relates to the subject at hand, which is the fallacious and quite stupid physicalist perspective of the brain, which assumes that brain function is based in the physical state of the brain. If you have issues with those things you brought up, then don't observe them and do what you can to fight against them. I do these things myself, having had a lot of experience in the middle east, so don't think your concerns go without my acknowledgement. However, I highly doubt that for all yours or anyone else's efforts, you will never overcome the human desire for power and control over the lives of others, nor their propensity to use God or religious beliefs to achieve their goals, and most unfortunately, people's ability to believe other people who speak in authoritative ways. We currently live in a climate of fear and are told "WEAR A MASK! WEAR A MASK!" Well, mask studies prove mask efficacy is negligible, the best result from those studies producing "inconclusive" findings, the very best thing you can say about them is that you don't really know if they work or not. And that is for larger pathogens like allergens and bacteria. A viral particulate is 100x smaller than those, so if we rely on the data we have on mask efficacy, we can say that they're basically like trying to catch a rabbit with a hula hoop. Yet, here we are, told to wear them "for the greater good, for our own good" and to what end? To be anywhere from useless to making us even more sick when we inevitably do become ill? One can make a religion of anything and be mindlessly devoted to that religious belief without even so much as a second glance at it. Where we say "we believe the experts!" because we think "science" is more than a methodology for discovery, these people also say "We believe the experts!" when it comes to their eternal souls, and in both cases are called dangerous for not believing what they are told on face value, or questioning the motives of the people involved. This is why I brought up instinct. We know they exist, scientifically, religiously and philosophically, so when something alerts your brain that this is not good, or this is not true, trust and explore that. At the very least, your instincts are trying to keep you alive and away from harm, so if someone asserts something that you instinctively feel is wrong, trust your gut. It's not perfect, I admit, but it's a lot better than just blindly trusting "the evidence" or "the experts" or in turn rejecting something with endless variations because people suck donkey balls sometimes.

[@mcw0261]

@@lewis72 FGM and killing people are not what Christians are called to do. And I would tend to agree with your distaste for it. Thankfully Jesus said quite the opposite. To even love our enemy and feed and clothe them.

[@ToxicallyMasculinelol]

This is such a great series. I'm so glad this stuff is being published. It feels like we're in the midst of a revolution, a kind of renaissance and rediscovery of the wisdom of the ancients. I thought I'd add another counterargument against physicalism: even if you fall asleep or are under anesthesia and you don't have any dreams, that doesn't necessarily mean you lose consciousness. It may just mean your mind is disconnected from all known physical inputs and outputs. Maybe this is a language problem. We use the word "unconscious" to describe a state of non-responsiveness in animals. But this isn't the same thing as "consciousness" in the context of the substance consciousness, or in the context of the hard problem of consciousness. It could be the case that your conscious mind is always completely operative throughout your entire life (and perhaps after and even before your life), it's just periodically detached from all physical inputs and outputs. I'll use an analogy. What happens to your computer when you unplug the monitor, the keyboard, and the mouse? Is your computer "asleep"? Is it "off"? Is it "dead"? Or is it simply detached from all inputs and outputs? The processor is still running, and in the case of modern operating systems, it's performing all sorts of calculations all the time, moving stuff in and out of memory. Those operations are just not having an effect on the computer's "physical" outputs, and they're not being influenced by any of the computer's "physical" inputs. Likewise, when I'm asleep and not dreaming, my mind could still be performing all sorts of conscious activities, without dumping them into my memory and without accepting any sensory input. Moreover, we have to make an ontological decision about what it would mean for the brain to stop performing operations. What happens to your computer's processor when it stops performing operations? There's a difference between a completely idle state and a state in which all electrical input has ceased. With respect to the mind, even in a physicalist model we can't say that consciousness really stops under anesthesia, only that it is idle. In the physicalist model, it only stops when all electrical activity has stopped. But in the dualist model, is it even possible for consciousness to stop? The dualist mind does not rely on anything for its existence except the ground of all existence, that is, God. Like, turning off consciousness would essentially mean deleting its very metaphysical basis. But that would make "turning off consciousness" equivalent to "deleting the concept of the number 1" or "deleting the concept of a square" or something. If consciousness, the substance, is analogous to a Platonic primitive, then it's not something that stops and starts at all, let alone something contingent on a physical state of affairs. It's basically an eternal soul that could only conceivably be deleted by God. It's one of many reasons I have come around on this subject. I used to be a materialist. I spent too much time studying biochemistry and grew arrogant. I kinda bought into the general disdain for philosophy in the natural sciences. Ironically, it was the historical evidence for the Resurrection that really opened my mind. I had to accept that it happened, and if it happened, then clearly materialism can't be correct. So I needed to reevaluate everything I believed for my first 27 years of life. I erroneously believed that the other natural sciences (the ones beyond my area of expertise) and even philosophy supported the materialist worldview or at least made religious claims impossible or highly suspect. Christianity in particular has been destabilized a few times by scientific findings, but not really due to the religion itself becoming implausible or being found inconsistent with reality. St. Augustine anticipated a lot of this - the possibility for people to read scripture and lean towards a particular interpretation, even though many are possible, and then develop a whole story around that interpretation. For example, the Bible doesn't advance a cosmological model, but it's easy to extrapolate a primitive geocentric model from the Bible. So, when lots of religious people believe something they've extrapolated from scripture, and science proves it wrong, it comes across like science has proved religion wrong. That has happened dramatically a few times in the history of Christendom, and it has dramatically influenced western thought. So, I erroneously believed that Christianity itself makes historical claims that can't possibly be true, makes claims about the planet and the origin of humans that are totally incompatible with consensus in the natural sciences, and even makes philosophical claims that have been discredited by modern philosophers. And it was easy to believe that for so long because American fundamentalists do such a good job of embarrassing the faith. St. Augustine was so right, seeing men of faith desperately and idiotically defend false ideas against empirical evidence is really scandalous and discredits the religion as a whole, even though it shouldn't. I was lucky to be introduced to Catholic thought in very short order after stumbling on the evidence for the Resurrection. So it didn't take me long to find out that what American fundamentalists believe is a consequence of bad exegesis, a bad understanding of the cultural contexts and origins of the scriptures, and probably political and cultural biases informing religious expression (for example, populism and anti-elitism yielding motivated skepticism of the sciences). And it's so helpful that the internet can connect us to video series like this which show that not only is Christianity not implausible or inconsistent with empirical evidence, it's actually one of the only ways to make sense of a lot of unassailable evidence from many disciplines. Whatever the truth is, we need something beyond the physical to explain the only thing we know exists for certain - ourselves. With other philosophical proofs (like Plantinga's and William Lane Craig's) we can make a perfectly reasonable assumption that God exists, and that he has the attributes traditionally attributed to him. With that assumption, we can finally make sense of the historical data of the Resurrection and the miraculous survival of the Israelites throughout history. There just aren't a whole lot of other plausible theses that make sense of all of this. At the very least, my old atheist/materialist/secular humanist worldview could not make sense of even a small bit of it. Which is why I got so sucked into this, piece by piece I became obsessed with the mystery of how all this happened. It started as just an interesting novelty, a mystery to solve with deductive reasoning and a presumption that all could be explained as a natural sequence of events. But pretty soon I was basically an agnostic who admitted that the mind is totally inexplicable without the supernatural, and that Christ rose from the dead, performed miracles, claimed to be God, and otherwise manipulated the laws of nature. Then I was an agnostic who also admitted that God is the most plausible explanation for reality itself. Then an agnostic who admitted that several events in history seem best explained by God's activity. So it wasn't much of a leap to finally just assenting and acknowledging that God is the best explanation for everything _because_ God is the source and seat and mover of everything, the one holding it all up. In that view, miracles aren't strange at all. They're not momentary violations of the laws of nature, because the laws of nature are merely _post hoc_ models for describing the way things usually behave, and "the way things behave" is just another word for the style of God's art. Miracles are not violations of the laws of nature because they're not breaks from God's style, they're flourishes layered on top. They're actually characteristic of God's style, even if they "stand out" from the rest of the piece. Art is not homogeneous or isotropic; not the same everywhere you look. The presumption that the universe should be, on the basis of the isotropy and non-relativity of the laws of physics, is basically spurious. If the universe is a painting, then the non-relative physical laws only describe the background color of the universe. They clearly don't describe the ineffable, liminal, paradoxical, orderly chaos of the human mind; so why should they describe all the actions of God? It all seems to fit together when you think of God as a being that holds all of reality (and not just the universe but all metaphysical beings) in existence. The mysterious, non-physical nature of the mind helps to show that miracles are something we should expect, even though we should be somewhat skeptical of miraculous claims, purely due to the human tendency to lie or be deceived.

[@ToxicallyMasculinelol]

By the way, even if we grant that computers could become conscious (which we shouldn't grant, but just for the sake of argument), that doesn't disprove that consciousness is purely emergent from physical matter and energy. It's entirely possible that when you manage to create a truly conscious computer, you actually generate an immaterial soul.

[@themanofshadows]

Very well put. The idea I have is this; using physical observations and models is not the only way to understand the Universe and reality, nor does it begin to conceptualize even a fraction of a fraction of the true nature and extent of these things. Using scientific logic and methodology (observations and measurements) is only good for helping us understand reality on the level of merely interacting with the physical world; but ultimately it says nothing about how the Universe and reality truly are (and this is where the supernatural and metaphysical come into play). Essentially, all of our physical models reaffirm physical beliefs about reality because they were intended only to do so.

[@generalscheisskopf7435]

Well presented and thoughtful. I've found a new favorite channel; only regret is I clicked on Part 3 first. Will definitely go back and watch the others.

[@garyh2100]

No atheist can argue against the reality of non-material things without using non-material things. It's like someone arguing that there's no such thing as oxygen, while breathing the whole time. It's almost like arguing that there's no such thing as arguing! For when a materialist argues that only the material realm is real, that only material things exist, he cannot do that without using immaterial things. For example, like Einstein said, ideas are not physical. It turns out to be so simple, to disprove the claim that only the physical realm exists . Non-Material Things List: - Numbers are not physical. - Math is not physical. - Information is not physical. - Grammar is not physical. - Logic is not physical. - Reason is not physical. - Ideas are not physical. - Science is not physical. - Concepts are not physical. - Morality is not physical. - Truth is not physical. - Souls are not physical. - Spirits are not physical. - Codes are not physical. - The square root of negative one is not physical. Knowing where the truth leads, some atheists are afraid to acknowledge that numbers are not physical. In their fear, they throw a temper tantrum and insist that numbers, such as the number 3, are made of matter. One wonders what they'd think about the number googol, which is 1 followed by a hundred zeroes, a quantity greater than the number of particles in the known universe. For that matter, exponentially, they should be able to realize that a googolplex, 10 to the googol power, also cannot be made of matter because there too that much matter doesn't exist. And next we could ask the same atheist, "Are imaginary numbers, such as the square root of negative one, physical?" An imaginary number is a concept and as such, obviously, and like all concepts and all numbers, it is not made of matter. Yet scientists use imaginary numbers to better understand electric circuits and quantum mechanics. A strictly materialist big-bang universe though would be incapable of using an imaginary number, because imaginary numbers are not physical. Therefore, the square root of negative one reveals the intellect of the Creator! When He designed the function of quantum mechanics, like our own designers, He conceived of and implemented optimal designs using an immaterial concept that has no parallel in the physical realm. See more including what Wigner and Einstein thought about such things, at rsr.org/math#sq-rt-neg-one. - Infinity is not physical. Yet it is real. Don't believe us? Then believe Vsauce... - Consciousness is not physical. The best an atheist can make of a physical explanation for consciousness comes from one of the world's leading mathematical physicists, Roger Penrose, who wrote of the brain that it somehow has harnessed, "details of a physics that is yet unknown to human physicists." Other atheists including Daniel Dennett and Jerry Coyne argue that consciousness is an illusion.

[@kimbo99]

I am an electrical engineer too Need to know, people, What you really are, first. That's logical Laymans Gnosis-discover a second intelligence www.truebluehealer.com 20 mins BEGINNERS TOUR Vivid messaging night dreams within 7 days Immediate physical evidence that something has changed Messaging day dreams (visions?) physically verified Signalling music to slowly morph into an internal mentoring voice just like Socrates and Plato described Expect keywords names and even websites to be typed into your mindseye with info vital to YOUR personal life. Holy book readers will find their misunderstandings corrected by the internal mentoring voice Go to www.truebluehealer.com Do the 20 mins BEGINNERS TOUR All questions answered And its FREEEE See you back at the website www.truebluehealer.com Feedback It’s amazing how a 20 minute tour can cause the individual to experience a waterfall of knowledge.

[@backtothescriptures6592]

I'd love to see you debate this

[@kylexinye1990]

Bob Smith Or Harris. PLEEEASE Harris. His ridiculous, illiterate views on this particular subject need to be put out of their misery (nothing against him personally of course; he seems like a great guy).

[@FStan-co8vv]

@Bob Smith Wow, that's laughable. Basically saying "the guys at CERN haven't found evidence for ghosts, therefore an afterlife does not exist", that's a huge non-sequitur. Can you please link the source?

[@ManlyServant]

wow he loved it

[@FStan-co8vv]

@Kek Kek I hope it is.

[@cakep4271]

@Bob Smith sounds like your spreading fake news. No one in the universe would say cern has anything to do with ghosts except as a joke.

[@willyh.r.1216]

The theory is very appealing and I look forward to watching several debates around it. Thank you for the high level presentation. Personally, I'm interested in getting closer to truth on anything.

[@kerryburns6041]

I agree with Max Planck, that physical matter is derivative of consciousness, in other words consciousness creates matter, not the other way round. This can be a difficult concept until you realise that no physical matter is actually solid, but composed simply of energy. So consciousness is fundamental, and is innate in all matter, and indeed all matter is sentient to the level required for its role. This may be anathema to some, but right or wrong if accepted it engenders a new respect for the world we live in once the implications are understood. If, for example, you regard consciousness as the Creator in a religious sense, then for you everything in the world is sacred. Not a bad mindset. This scientific approach fails because our science is based on what we perceive with our five senses, and so our understanding is necessarily limited to physical matter. Science gives us technology, which gives us the microscope and telescope, but it understands little about the being who looks through them.

[@dukepalatinemmxx2098]

This is the correct view of reality. I was not aware that Planck figured this out though. I didn't really pay much detailed attention to western philosophers.

[@kerryburns6041]

@@dukepalatinemmxx2098 Considering that Plank is often referred to as ¨The Father of Quantum Mechanics ¨very few seem to have taken him seriously on this. The western scientific community is governed by the herd instinct and the principle of Reductionism, which made Fritjof Capra´s book ¨The Tao of Physics ¨ such a revolutionary work, since he drew from east and western sources.

[@dukepalatinemmxx2098]

@@kerryburns6041 I actually have the Capra book. I simply couldn't get into ever reading it. Nietzsche, Jung, Spinoza comes to mind as western philosophers that I am familiar with and whose ideas I relate with, The others 'names' and what they believed is vague and mixed up in my memory. I have focused on Eastern philosophy and western psychology, with a thorough general reading of western philosophy only.

[@kerryburns6041]

@@dukepalatinemmxx2098 If (and I do say if ) you are comfortable with ¨channeled ¨books, then Jane Robert´s series of Seth books have been immensely helpful to me. It provides a perspective from which to view our situation which I have not found elsewhere.

[@dukepalatinemmxx2098]

@@kerryburns6041 we are all channels of information, we just have to open ourselves and it flows in. In accordance with each ones evolutionary point in development. As for me, I have satisfied my curiosity for earthly, spiritual knowledge, I have been under an compulsion to know it all, since birth. It's been a trip. I am at peace. I am with the Tao. I live in joy and I love interacting with the organism of which I'm part, humanity. There is such a vast volume if wisdom teachings on earth, it's wonderful. So many paths, many of which if pursued with total dedication, leading to the same destination.

[@1999_reborn]

Another claim I’m having issues with is where you said brain damage leading to improvements in certain aspects of cognition isn’t something you would expect if the brain produces consciousness. But you didn’t give an argument for this. Why is it that if the brain produces consciousness damaging it shouldn’t ever improve creativity?

[@51elephantchang]

I thought exactly this as well...it's far from obviously true.

[@pwharman]

This is the problem when you start with a conclusion.

[@perverse_ince]

He didn't link it with overcompensation lul Listen to this beloved lunatic instead: kzbin.info/www/bejne/hqi0qYytfNt0pK8

[@dakrontu]

So we should all go hit our heads against a wall to incur brain damage until the world is flooded with stable super-geniuses. Then we won't need Trump.

[@TeaParty1776]

> brain damage leading to improvements in certain aspects of cognition A postmodernist fell on his head and started teaching Aristotle.

[@ikilledthewendigo4745]

I'm definitely going to watch these playlist. God bless you. You're videos are truly inspiring and a gift of the Holy Spirit.

[@danniealexander4131]

Only people who believe in stuff like holy spirits would think this made any sense.

[@ikilledthewendigo4745]

@@danniealexander4131 Than refute it! Tell me how the video is wrong!

[@anoncanada2341]

GOD LOL,what a joke,you wouldn't even be able to define what it is ,after 2 minutes that would be laughable ,in no credible scenario theres a place for such variable ,its pure magical thinking ,this existance is aninformatic simulation we already know as fact ,who created it is/was simply by logic;an A.I ,ourselves we're programms ..............god is a human construct made from primitives minds trying to explain what they couldn't ,END OF THE STORY,dont waste time replying if you want to oppose what i said i dont have time for that ,but if you have interrogations its fine ,but i aint arguing about ''god'' whatever that is .

[@JerryMitchell97]

@@anoncanada2341 Though everything you said is true, technically, it didn't make any of this false. The contradiction is coming from inside the house (your mind "is", but it can't be in your brain.) Your consciousness isn't physical and doesn't have any physical evidence whatsoever to support its existence. But you're not a Chinese room, I assume but can never know or prove, that you're you. All I know for sure though, is that "I am". Therefore I think, not just watching a series of dominoes fall into inevitably predictable thoughts, but think. And because I think, I know I am. That is paradoxical, tautological, and fundamentally true. Anything argument which asserts "A & !A" devolves into nonsense, yet all arguments for the existence of your mind, which you know exists, ultimately go there. So you're right, it's a joke, you can't explain it, and everyone who tries is talking nonsense. Just, in some cases at least, nonsense that happens to be correct (if not "true" since the concept of logical truth doesn't allow that.)

[@JerryMitchell97]

(if it's not obvious, I'm saying that it's perfectly possible for a system in which I don't exist to happen, where everything that has up to this point, including the words I just typed being in front of a body just like mine, etc, is there in the same configuration, and everything that will happen from now on would still happen in such a world. But I know I'm not in it, because that's the sole defining difference I stipulated at the beginning. If I was in it, it wouldn't be that world, because I exist. Therefore, I do not exist in this world. But I exist and this world still happens, etc. That's the paradox.)

[@isaiahlawrence9870]

Wow I just found this channel very recently and I’m starting to watch all your videos IP. You’re a very inspiring thinker, you’ve earned a loyal sub. Wish I knew about you during my philosophy class lol 👍🏾

[@MySpace662]

Consciousness has nothing to do with brain, Consciousness is part of the soul that gives life to the body, in death the soul leaves the body, and so does consciousness.

[@shbarry2233]

a whole lotta active claims and yet no proof in sight

[@MySpace662]

@@shbarry2233 Surgeons have witnessed patients in the operating room that have had out of body experiences, they were able to describe exactly what the surgeons were doing to them. This is premature death where the soul and consciousness leaves the body.

[@shbarry2233]

My Space interesting. I’ll definitely look into that thanks

[@SimpleAmadeus]

It is intuitively much easier for a mind to imagine a dead universe, than it is for a dead universe to "materialize" a mind.

[@jjphank]

Yes I can go to Hawaii in my mind even though I’ve never been there. First verse in the Bible God created matter because God is a Spirit he’s not made of material matter.

[@MrShaiya96]

why is the universe "dead"?

[@AlexPBenton]

J Hankins Yes, we can imagine things that are true, but we can also imagine things that are false. There are also things that we can’t image (at least for now) that are true, and vice versa.

[@305thief8]

Makes sense

[@JerryMitchell97]

@@MrShaiya96 it's dead because it contains no life, or at least no conscious life. It's a mechanical clockwork moving in predetermined patterns contingent solely on those that came before it: "dead".

[@zecka1913]

I'm new to this channel, i'm still trying to catch up with all your videos, and all ready i wish i was half as smart as you. You have the answers i need for my agnostic friend.

[@kennydawson5098]

Great video, I had been wondering about many of these objections myself and I think you explained them very well.

[@michaelflores9220]

The last 2 verses of Genesis 1 say God made animals to be vegetarians, and then God say that his creation was “All very good”. Genesis 1 also ahs God command animals to produce “each according to their own type”. This refutes the obviously silly notion that the facts for evolution and belief in The Bible are not logically compatible. Genetics, geology, radiometric dating, stalagmites and stalactites, etc. all show we are NOT descended form just one lone man and woman who both lived at the same time with no other humans around and that the Earth is far over 6000 years old and evolution is true. There are fossils of thorns from Canada older than man, as well as of animals eating other animals, showing that the biblical idea that thorns an death are results of the fall is false.

[@webslinger527]

@@michaelflores9220 you do know that Christians believe in evolution right? Also what are you talking about when God says the animals will make each of a kind that’s just talk about them having babies. Man and women = a baby. Their own kind also I think you should do more research on the being vegetarians. Also of course the earth is older then 6000 years old

[@OculusOfficial]

I would argue that consciousness is the result of a process that can remember its past actions and modify them, the system is literally entirely explained by that and chemical feedback, I do not see the need for anything supernatural at work, im open to the idea, yet do not see any debunking here and have seen no proof for anything extra-physical

[@FStan-co8vv]

Can you prove that remembering past actions results in subjective experience?

[@dukepalatinemmxx2098]

If you consider Electricity as supernatural, then yes, it is sacred and Natural. The Universe is Electric, (and miraculouly so, from our limited perspective). So are you and your thoughts and memories and emotions - not real, an illusion of consciousness. Memory is in the water, the Spirit. Gravity is a natural electro magnetic phenomenon, not a force, so are you. God is ALL (obviously not an old man somewhere up in heaven).

[@JP-mp5st]

Problem solved! By all means please explain it. I’ll wait.

[@xavieryounger1631]

What is this process, and why can’t it be detected by any physical instrument?

[@HillbillyBlack]

NDEs imply more evidence that memory is stored in the spirit vs the brain. that would be logical and show a supernatural unending ability to memory. Humans did live for 800 years at one point.

[@simonjohnson3424]

If the brain is the limiter of concsiousness, then who knows just how powerful consciousness can be, once it's no longer limited by the brain. Could we possibly achieve God like "powers"? Would we become omnipotent? Man, I love this topic so much! I've consumed so much content relating to this topic for more than half a year now, and I'm really starting to doubt materialism. It used to be the most obvious explanation, and the simplest one too. But I've discovered that it's too simple. Saying that consciousness is nothing but a product of the brain, isn't an explanation for what consciousness is or how it works. Things like idealism and dualism are much more compelling to me now, because I also learnt about superpositions and some quantum mechanics (not that I by any means understand much about quantum mechanics). I've also wondered about the afterlife. My life right now is so average, that it's painful. I hope that there's a better, and more free world after we die. One where consciousness has no limits. (I'm not suicidal, I just hope life isn't just a life on Earth and that's it.)

[@ionutandrei4224]

The most interrsting subject related to the concsiousness is Andrei Linde theory who suggest that our universe become alive and evolve in time when an observer exist.

[@snikrepak]

@@ionutandrei4224 wouldn't there then had to of been an observer for that to happen?

[@dtphenom]

@@snikrepak I wonder Who that observer would be.

[@danharte6645]

Great work IP, these videos are extremely valuable. I'd also like to add that physical trauma to the brain can very well cause emotional distress to the sufferer that can also affect behaviour and frames of mind in a similar way to PTSD. Even a tooth ache can affect people's moods.

[@guadalupealvarez9500]

Omg finally something else that came up on top on KZbin and not thoses political ads, I was so tired of seeing those policies ads on top but now you came along some how and that's why I'm commenting on here

[@JohnnyWalkerBlack142]

This is very interesting. I am not a Christian (I'm agnostic), but I have seen a lot of evidence for there being a soul (OBEs, NDE, extra-sensory perception, etc.). This is a very interesting argument for dualism.

[@gregariousguru]

The fact that we dream at all during sleep, proves awareness doesn't sleep.

[@Valandor_Celestial_Warlock]

The brain creates consciousness just like how the lasagna makes the chef.

[@INYO121277]

Im more of a substance dualist in this Mind vs Body thing, though your videos had made me leaping towards Idealism occasionally. I think the problem with sleep on and off switch argument may be also found in Insomniac people. In normal conditions, sleeping is usually done by the brain releasing a substance to make us relaxed, in stress-caused Insomniac people, the brain released higher cortisol that made your body hypersensitive (or hyperfocused), while chronic insomniac's brain is more 'active', in a sense they are always 'on guard'. So i think by this, the state of sleep may be just the brain working on a 'low power mode', so in a sense, the mind is in zero or very low state of focus. In Insomniac person, the mind is in a higher state of focus due to the brain being more active. I think this 'switch' is nothing more than a jolt from a sleep mode to active mode. The consciousness is still there, just inhibited by a lower-working brain vs more active one.

[@uninspired3583]

There is also no evidence consciousness arises from non natural forces. We would need evidence for non natural forces before using this as an explanation.

[@AlisSpark]

As a small little addition to the computer issue that was discussed: Computers might never truly be fully conscious agents or might never become truly conscious of themselves, BUT as the complexity of computers increase hypothetically an irreducible mind might be able to entangle with a highly developed computer system in the same way as it entangles with our own brain (as described in video 4 with the quantum entanglement) and thus make it seem like the computer became conscious by themselves. However here again correlation would not imply causation! Additionally a computer without conscious mind might be able to resemble conscious agents ever more closely through imitation and pattern recognition.

[@sydeweizgt]

interesting

[@janwaska521]

As David Chalmers has said, what neuroscientists do is research the easy problem of consciousness, using fMRI, EEG, etc. From the medical point of view that’s a great approach to understand how the brain functions. But the hard problem of consciousness seems getting harder.

[@boguslav9502]

A lot of medical profs are rushing to crack conaciousness because the one to first prove its ohysicalism, as reaching as it is, will become a god among the neuro community and human history.

[@pixymisa8087]

The "hard problem" does not exist. That's the only reason it is hard.

[@bemusedatheist5706]

This doesn't seem to demonstrate that the brain does not create consciousness, just that there are still gaps in our knowledge, which you seem to try to fill with this archaic fix-all solution of a soul.

[@InspiringPhilosophy]

And as always this is just circular reasoning-you assuming physicalism is already true so any evidence pointing away from physicalism must not be accurate. kzbin.info/www/bejne/q2LLimala6xmbcU

[@bemusedatheist5706]

@@InspiringPhilosophy I'm not assuming. I am reaching a conclusion based on what is observable and can be proven. As for circular reasoning I could take the same reasoning and turn it on you. You don't want "physicalism" as you call it to be the sole explanation of human consciousness, so you look for any gap and insert an religious explanation.

[@SomeRandomDude000000]

Or he could be presenting the point that based on our current data its no less unreasonable to infer idealism or substance dualism than it is to infer physicalism from it.

[@SomeRandomDude000000]

@@11kravitzn Like what?

[@SomeRandomDude000000]

@@11kravitzn what does that first question have to do with consciousness? Maybe I'm misunderstanding could you explain why this is relevant? That 2nd/3rd question has already been addressed by IP in this video. Those two scenarios would still be expected under the model IP presented. About the going to heaven part you seem to be under the impression idealism is inherently theistic. It's not. These 2 concepts are not opposed to each other. The last question is probably the only one with merit. Physicalism answer is simple by comparison. Still this question alone is not really a smoking gun. Idealism could very well be proven true even if we don't necessarily know the reason for the minds existence. The reason would probably be what seperates idealism into theistic and atheistic understandings. Kinda like how we don't know why the big bang happened. The why question seperates understanding into either a theistic cause or atheistic one.

[@michaelbartlett6864]

I really can't watch any more of this straw-man argument but here is my bottom line - All living things are conscious to a certain degree. Humans are a special case only because our brains are developed enough to use language to communicate with others by various means other than and including speech. We think in words - "I think, therefore I AM"! Your consciousness is inextricably linked to your brain, nervous system, nature and nurture. It's a package and ours as humans allows us to contemplate these "WORDS" - What is consciousness?

[@christiansoldier77]

Michael Bartlett Why do we have feelings like love or embarrassment if we are just organic robots??? What would be the point of those feelings???

[@michaelbartlett6864]

@@christiansoldier77 I never said that we were organic robots. On the contrary, we are high functioning animals with free will, making our own decisions and working through the consequences of those decisions.

[@michaelbartlett6864]

@Marc Hermans I did say that I believe all living things are conscious and are aware of it to a certain degree. Humans are much more aware because our brains allow us to process abstract relationships with words, symbols and images. Having written code for computers since they were first invented back in the day, I can see the path in the future for sentience, awareness and consciousness for machines - It is coming in the very near future as is virtual reality that rivals life,

[@christiansoldier77]

@@michaelbartlett6864 Why do we have emotions like feelings or embarrassment ? Why do we dream or make plans for the future? Animals dont do this or need to do this so why do we??

[@michaelbartlett6864]

@@christiansoldier77 Animals absolutely do have feelings and they do make plans for the future! Have you never seen a bird build a nest or watch predators prepare for a hunt? Have you seen animals mourn their dead?

[@janwaska521]

Excellent presentation!!! I like your clarity without compromising details and depth. I’m starting to get addicted to your videos. Blame it on my brain. ;)

[@cursedtodie]

I was most conscious when I was comatose for 15 days. My brain was heavily damaged after I hit my head in a car accident. My dream continued on for 3 months after waking up. This I think was my mind protecting my body because I was in a lot of pain after waking up. But I don't remember screaming or feeling any pain at all because of the dream. Because my brain was damaged, I feel it was my soul that kept me from experiencing pain.

[@bjarnesegaard5701]

How were you most conscious when comatosed? How more than when awake?

[@rappermerch7785]

no that's still your mind. The brain cuts out unnecessary things as to not be overwhelmed and manage body resources. Example: frostbite. Brain takes away blood from the limbs as to keep the vital organs warm at the cost of your fingers and toes. Another example, stab yourself in the stomach and act as someone would when they're stabbed in the stomach. Then try to remember what you smelled.

[@cursedtodie]

@@rappermerch7785 Your mind is responsible for consciousness not brain www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-hidden-mind/201812/the-automatic-mind

[@rappermerch7785]

@@cursedtodie your brain is your mind. I ask again, give me proof that something exists outside the brain.

[@cursedtodie]

@@rappermerch7785 I can't explain what I experienced in a few words. I've spoken with neurologists, psychologists and they have been left stumped. So I experienced something which the human mind can't easily understand. Hence you definitely will not get it. I think you should just stick to your rap.

[@rickwyant]

This is so wrong on so many levels. No brain, no consciousness. Show me consciousness without a brain, then we'll talk.

[@mothin4678]

Did you even watched the whole series? This issue has already been adressed. Also in a dualist or idealist model of the mind we would expect this.

[@emilewilliams5361]

@@mothin4678 It hasn't been addressed, it's been hand-waved away. The brain (better put: the central nervous system) is where consciousness is formed. We have a hard time with that, because we are desperate to feel special and like we are more than "animals," but we aren't.

[@mothin4678]

@@emilewilliams5361 hand-waved you say? This series has proposed since the begining a dualist or idealist model, challenging materialism, it is a direct adress. Not a "handy-wave" thing. For the arguments and studies showed here exceed what you have said, also I would love to know how do you propose that the brain or central nerveous system generates consciousness and still people with severe brain damage (and central nerveous system damage) actually increase intelligence, how the mind can rewire the brain and it's chemicals in ways, how can the mind with refocusing, reunderstandment and thinking has been capable of increasing the life quality of OCD patients, how a young boy who lacked a brain excibited signgs of consciousness, even if all the things that you claim makes us conscious (except the nerveous system) were lacking, how split brain patients experience a full "united" perspective while their brains are basically cutten in half, and how even when in our life our neurons may change completely the sense of self is always there. these things are not compatible with a materialist model. But oh surprise! this series adressed that too. You say we want to feel more than animals and that this series does not adress anything of directly, however you failed to realize that this series actually implied that consciousness exists in other animals too. Why would we be more special than them if what we are arguing for is that the brain is not the mind, therefore whatever the mind is, it's the same wherever it is? It's just limited by the brain (thing that was said in this series too).

[@monkeypox3147]

​@@emilewilliams5361 why haven't you responded yet 😂 🤣 🤣 🤣

[@emilewilliams5361]

@@mothin4678 1. Its "direct address" is to hand-wave away arguments for physicalism. The arguments and studies shown here are exactly WHY I said what I said -- they don't exceed anything. For example: the video cites cases where much of the brain is damaged or missing, and yet the individual has normal intellect (or even higher intellect in specific cases), and uses this as evidence that physicalism can't be true. Except, this completely dismisses that the person still has an intact central nervous system! Because the brain is damaged...the brain that is left means physicalism can't be true? That isn't even logical. Further, the video hand-waves away all of the correlational evidence for the brain and CNS being the seat of the "mind". In short it says, "this is only correlational and so we can dismiss it" -- very hand-wavey. I should point out, as quick as they are to dismiss physicalist correlations, there isn't a touch of proof on their end -- even correlational proof. 2. To your second point/question: No one has ever lived without a central nervous system. The brain and nervous system are extraordinarily plastic. This is how we can use damage one region and still function. This is why children are more likely to recover from brain damage than adults (because children have a greater level of plasticity). The "mind" is not separate from the brain, and does not "rewire" the brain from a distance, the mind IS the brain. And when we study, go to therapy, take drugs, recover from injury, etc., etc., our brain uses that incoming input to create new synapses and/or strengthen old, still functioning ones. 3. There is nothing in physicalism that expects split-brain patients to have 2 consciousnesses. In most instances, information enters both hemispheres of the brain, not one. And in cases where only 1 hemisphere receives information (e.g., in a controlled experiment), it becomes clear that the person is "conscious" only from that hemisphere! There are many theories, all fitting with physicalism, that can explained a unified perspective -- local processing, connection beyond the corpus collosum (e.g., anterior/posterior commissures), information crossing over at the brainstem/spinal cord, and so on). Nothing about split-brain patients rattles physicalism. 4. We like to think we are "higher beings," which is why we like to think that we have a mind separate from the body. This is my explanation for why this video series (and your beliefs) exist. Animal consciousness is irrelevant. Sure, animals have a mystical, invisible mind too...but our is better! And by making it invisible and non-physical, it is limitlessly better. If we remain in reality, i.e., physicalism, we are forced to admit that we are not very different from animals. We have bigger brains (than most), but we are just brains -- not a limitless, grand "mind".

[@concreteheat6396]

A friend of mine suffered significant brain damage, he was a prison warden and was bashed by some inmates, this changed him significantly because of the brain damage, he went from one side of the prison bars to the other in the most dramatic way, becoming an extremely violent criminal, he ended escaping prison and had part of my city in lock down as he was armed and unfortunately ended up dying during this, such a tragedy, all stemming from brain damage.

[@jancerny8109]

You argue that the "immaterial mind" shapes brain chemistry. Okay: HOW, exactly? What is the mechanism for this interface? How does your "soul" "read" your neurons, or fail to "read" your neurons? You are making a stack of claims about physics, and you aren't backing up a single one of them. If you can, don't talk to KZbin; talk to a committee in Sweden and claim your Nobel.

[@agnesag7458]

You've formulated exactly what I wanted to express. It would be nice if IP would answer that question - how non-material mind could affect the material brain.

[@TheBrunarr]

You must be new to this channel then. IP isn't a dualist, so there isn't an immaterial/material bridge to cross, and he's an idealist, so he would say something like "a physical body is the extrinsic appearance of a mind and the physical brain is like the 'seat' or control center of the mind," and so the neural activity that scientists can observe is just what our mental activity _looks like_ from a 2nd person perspective. You can't ever access what it is like to be me from my 1st person perspective, all you have access to is what it is like to be me from your perspective, which is what my neural activity is. If this is the case then it is entirely expected that brain chemistry will supervene on mental activity, which is how " the 'immaterial mind' shapes brain chemistry." This isn't just physics, this is philosophy as well.

[@jancerny8109]

@@TheBrunarr "The neural activity that scientists can observe is...what our mental activity looks like from a second person perspective. You can't ever access what is like to be me from my 1st person perspective, all you have access to is what it is like to be me from your perspective, which is what my neural activity is." I don't dispute a single word of those statements. I also think that IP is reaching for something beyond the subjectivity of experience--he keeps insisting that mental events are NOT traceable to the "second person perspective" of neural activity. If that is so, he needs to cough up a better description of what the x factor is.

[@sanjeevjain5519]

a theory of consciousness based on the dualistic soul that also leads to a creator God is attempted here. This demonstrably shows the soul- kzbin.info/www/bejne/mnq2k4lsnpZ1sLM

[@TheBrunarr]

@@InescapableRealityOfficial pretty cringe take, not gonna lie

[@arthousefilms]

Somebody should produce a consciousness independent of a brain. I'll wait.

[@InspiringPhilosophy]

You should wait until part 5 is out.

[@avatar1867]

Living organisms without brains. Trees. Bacteria. Etc.

[@arthousefilms]

@@avatar1867 I guess we have different definitions of consciousness

[@avatar1867]

@@arthousefilms Conciousness is a part of living organisms. It exists in extremely simple forms. A tree is very simple conciousness. Likewise bacteria. There are a small crew of animals that have no brains, yet are living. An many creatures have extremely tiny brains. Conciousness is a part of living things. Brain or not. Brains simply allow for more complex conciousness. Anyway. That's my thoughts on it. Even an ant runs in fear and knows pain andexcitement. Even with its tiny brain. Even a slug is living, although its brain is near non existant. Is a brain needed for awareness? No. Self awarness? It seems so. But! I could definitely br wrong. Just throwin some good ol ideas out. A baby born with zero senses cannot even know it is alive. An will not know if it dies. It has no conciousness because it has no senses. Thus I deduce, the senses are more pivotal to conciousness than a brain. Not that the brain isn't important, as the senses are simply an extended portion of brain. Essentially conciousness reflecting conciousness, senses are a reflection of mind and vice versa. An thus self awareness is born. Somethin like that.

[@arthousefilms]

@@avatar1867 Your point is well-taken. But I don't think that is the level of consciousness that is being addressed in the video. If you kill a tree, I don't think it goes to tree heaven. It dies and it's "consciousness" dies at the same time. Just like with people.

[@Nellak2011]

Idealism is ridiculous. Since when have you seen the blueprints for a building build themselves without the building materials? For mind to be a thing, it needs a physical substrate. In fact, for anything abstract, it needs a physical substrate to be realized. Since idealism isn't based on justified beliefs, that means that dualism is pretty dumb too. Why should we assume that there is mind and matter? What makes mind special? It is analogous to assuming that we are the center of the solar system, just isn't likely. It is more likely that mind is nothing special, just like literally everything else in nature we observe. There is no need for unnecessary and unjustified assumptions that place the mind as something special and reproducible from physical parts. It is analogous to a TV. Is the TV signal coming from a radio station, or from the TV itself? In the absence of evidence of the radio station, one must default to the belief that it is orignating from the TV itself. Likewise, it may be true that consciousness arises from something else outside of the brain, however, it is most likely some emergent physical phenomenon that we can't comprehend yet.

[@FStan-co8vv]

You seem to appeal to the idea that consciousness is a material phenomenon and that an objective reality exists independent of consciousness. However, QM doesn't seem to support the existence of objective reality: www.livescience.com/objective-reality-not-exist-quantum-physicists.html

[@davemwangi05]

Matilda Macelroy alien interview, from the 1947 roswell crash incident. It was conducted by the military and it's declassified. Look in there at what a human is, your mind will be blown.

[@Constellation3232]

Just because you can't see it doesn't mean it isn't there. If the blueprint is considered a form of data, then the data can exist in the system in a compartmentalized way.

[@pchemist]

"For mind to be a thing, it needs a physical substrate. In fact, for anything abstract, it needs a physical substrate to be realized." On what do you base those assertions? The mind can create seemingly physical reality easily. We dream every night. But matter creating consciousness has never been observed.

[@JerryMitchell97]

That doesn't work at all.. even if one gives in to your fundamental conceit, that a physical substrate is needed.. that substrate becomes the blueprints in your analogy: did these "substrate" blueprints build themselves? Whatever your explanation, it could just as easily apply to the realm of your mind as to the physical realm, and they could be utterly separate, each created by a mechanism like you answered.. or all created once by the same thing, being 4+x dimensions of a single universe. I mean, the quantum explanations that require 8d existence, the other d's are just mathematically implied by the way things happen.. you can't really describe at all what it would mean to "move" in an additional dimension of spacetime or of spacetimemindspace or of whatever else there is, even though they try to limit the implications of the math by claiming those dimensions are as small as possible and barely qualify as having room for a subatomic particle, that's not really necessary so much as it is trying to minimize the amount of "supernatural space" you have to allow for because the less the better. (i.e. if a particle seems to have moved there, it must be a one-particle sized dimension, if you let it be larger then that's putting "here there be syrpents" on the dimensional map that you're trying to assert. People have enough trouble with the "why can't I see it then?" without that extra excuse, so claim only what must be.)

[@alancollins8294]

It's important to note that the lack of evidence for a world in which there is matter and objects before the subject is NOT evidence against materialism. Logic 101 everyone.

[@superdog797]

IP: 4:30 - 5:17 "Substance dualist and philosopher JP Moreland explains this connection with an analogy of a CD. There is no music in the CD, there are only pits. CDs also do not create music. However, if the configurations on a CD are placed into the right retrieval system, music can be played. If the CD is damaged, the CD player can no longer properly read the configurations and play the music." Me 1. I always liked the CD-music analogy but it's obviously so flawed it's irrelevant. Music from CDs is a well-understood physical phenomenon in which differences in light waves bouncing off the CD pits are translated into specific electrical currents that cause changes in air pressures that stimulate the eardrum to cause the emergence of music qualia in our consciousness. At no point in the pathway from CD to music production does the physicalist encounter a problem. To try to analogize consciousness to music and the brain like a CD is irrelevant because music is a well-understood physical phenomenon and it just brings you back to the primary question of if the physical causes the mental. In the case of music, it's obvious that the CD and player (physical) causes the music (physical), so there's nothing there for the substance dualist or idealist to latch onto. IP: "Likewise, the mind can read pathways in the brain to access stored information in the brain to access stored information in the soul, but if those pathways are changed or damaged, the underlying information the brain received and stored will no longer be available, or could be read in an altered way." Me 2. There's definitely absolutely no evidence for this claim whatsoever, and the claim could be false even if some variation of substance dualism were true. It's possible that "the mind" actually reads something called "the mind 2", and that "the mind 2" reads the brain. It's possible that we have two brains, one in our body ("brain 1"), and another quantum-linked somewhere else in the universe ("brain 2") that instantly and simultaneously changes when our bodily brains change, and that "the mind" reads "brain 2". There's just no evidence for that, as there's no evidence for the above claim. It's just a hypothetical suggestion that this is how the "non-physical mind" works. Possible? Sure. Lots of things are possible. There's no evidence - there's not a single substance dualist out there who can say a single word about how this supposed process allegedly works. It's just a bald assertion. IP 5:21 "We can thus say that minds read or interpret the configuration of neurons which store information that the brain has received from its environment. They may then influence this configuration by thoughts and further experience. The configuration is stored in the brain as a symphony is stored on a CD." Me: 3. Again, there is no evidence this is the case - substance dualists can say absolutely *nothing* whatsoever about the "substance" they are proposing, other than to baldly assert that "it influences the brain". That's not an explanation; it's a bald assertion. 4. The CD analogy is really quite funny to me because it actually supports the physicalist view. Physicalists would say that the brain makes the mind (one-way). Dualists say that the brain makes the mind and the mind makes the brain. A CD and music absolutely does not work like this: it's the opposite. A CD makes the music, and it's always one-way.

[@joshuavan8391]

@superdog797 sup I think you’re confusing possibility with probability. When you say that there is no evidence for the “mind 2” I think you’re misunderstanding what IP means. The debate is over whether or not brain produces consciousness. So when you say there is no evidence for this, what do you mean?

[@superdog797]

@@joshuavan8391 Substance dualism (call it "1") is the position that there is "some substance" "outside" or "not part of" the brain that either "is consciousness" or "produces consciousness" and both influences and is influenced by the physical brain. This is opposed to the alternate view (call it "2"), which is basically that the brain's material arrangement fully controls consciousness in a one-way fashion. So on (1), you have this idea of two separate systems that are linked in a feedback loop - the brain (call it aA) and "some other substance" (call it B) which together form the aggregate consciousness experience. On (2) you have the brain alone, which in some way or another is essentially unified with our conscious experience - either way, the brain determines the conscious experience. There is excellent evidence for (2) because there are literally hundreds and perhaps thousands of ways in which we can directly and completely unambiguously control conscious experience by material changes to the brain or material input changes to the brain. Without exception, the pathway is, temporally speaking, physical change in brain -> conscious manifestation. There is no empirical evidence for (1): Firstly, there has never been any empirical experiment in which manifestations in consciousness unambiguously preceded some physical change in the brain; the brain state always precedes the conscious change. If dualism were true there should - there must in fact be - some conscious mental state that precedes the physical brain state and there should be some empirical evidence for that; it's a straightforwardly testable and fundamental prediction of substance dualism, and yet the prediction has never been verified, though it should be verifiable if dualism is true. This is extremely strong empirical evidence against dualism. Secondly, there is no empirical evidence or observation of the "substance" substance dualists hypothesize. This is devastating for dualists in two ways: first of all, the fact that nobody has observed or somehow detected the "substance" substance dualists hypothesize is highly problematic because they are the ones calling it a "substance". Well, all the other substances we know of are observable in some fashion. This "substance" should somehow be observable in some other fashion, and it's not. Hence, it's another failed prediction of substance dualism. Second of all, let's say you take an alternative view on what "substance" means and you say that dualists aren't actually positing some "substance" that you could observe; you can merely observe the "effects" of it. OK, that could be fine, but that brings us back to (1), which I addressed above, and for which there's no empirical evidence and all the empirical evidence is against. Moreover, this is devastating for dualism as a hypothesis because it is not well-defined, and any scientific (science merely in the sense of reliable, testable knowledge) position must be rigorously defined or it's not a scientific theory at all but just pseudoscience. This just begs the question why dualists call this "substance" dualism - it's a poorly defined term that is really quite incoherent because a substance dualist can't tell you anything about "the substance of mind" other than that "it's something that influences the physical brain" and "is conscious" - it's meaningless words. As a final note, in addition to the evidential problems, there is one more extremely problematic logical issue for substance dualism. Let's say you propose the existence of some other "substance" that either "is consciousness" or "produces consciousness" in conjunction with the brain (rather than the brain producing consciousness in a one-way fashion). The problem with this hypothesis is that it immediately violates Occam's Razor. A dualist will tell you that the "physical brain" is somehow insufficient to "produce consciousness" and will then posit this "other substance". Well, like I pointed out, are they saying this "other substance" *produces* consciousness (option 1), or are they saying this "other substance" *is* consciousness (option 2)? Well, if you go for option 1, you're literally back at square one, because you're just positing some "other substance" that "produces consciousness" in some unknown fashion, and yet this is the very hypothesis of what a brain does: it's a substance that produces consciousness. So option 1, though it is compatible with a form of substance dualism, is thoroughly useless as an explanatory hypothesis because you don't need to invoke some other material that "is able to produce consciousness" when you can simply postulate that the brain "is able to produce consciousness". It's not relevant that we don't understand exactly how qualia emerge because in neither case (the physicalist view or the substance dualist view as described in option 1) is the mechanism explained and it's just some intrinsic property that matter or this "other substance" has. This is the point I was making about "mind1" and "mind2". If you go with the aforementioned option 2, and say that this "other substance" "is consciousness itself", you run into all the major problems I mentioned about lack of evidence and poor definition of words. It's by far simpler to say that the brain somehow produces our conscious experience than it is to posit dualism, because if you allow dualism in the door, there's no reason you can't posit as many hypothetical substances as you want to explain consciousness. What you need is evidence in the form of predictions that bear out or observations of the existence of this "substance" directly, and moreover, you need to have a *clear definition* of what these words mean in the first place. Dualists don't have any of that and hence their position is vacuous. Physical explanation that is one-way in causation may be mysterious at its base but it's a far simpler hypothesis and thus more likely to be true a priori, which is all we've got to adjudicate the issue.

[@Bane_questionmark]

"At no point in the pathway from CD to music production does the physicalist encounter a problem" yes they do, the final step where electrical signals cause the emergence of qualia. the problem of materialism is that it does not explain this, along with very closely related problems like qualia supposedly being material in nature yet lacking any material properties. The music may be physical (though you could and I would argue that the only difference between musical and non-musical sound is that music is sound arranged and understood by a conscious observer, "understanding" is another concept which materialism has no basis for describing or explaining), the literal event of waves of air hitting your eardrum or electrical signals traveling to your brain are physical, but the experience of the music is not physical in any way that has ever been shown. Also the point of the CD analogy is that the CD is simply an encoding of sound information which then must later be decoded by the appropriate equipment, not that the CD or the sound played out of the machine decoding it is non-physical. However information is not physical, only its encodings are physical. Music is really information, everything from the bumps on the CD to the electrical signals from your ear to even the waves of air are simply encodings of this information. Music once heard can be imagined without air waves or CD bumps or anything else, and can also be created in the mind before it is ever brought into the real world and sang, played on an instrument, or put into a production program. The only correlation between the air waves, cd bumps, and electrical signals is that they physically encode the same information.

[@SantiagoRK96]

Bane? The experience of music is subject to its _physical properties_ (frequency of wave, etc.) and it’s then processed by a _physical mechanism_ (which starts with the inner ear where the information is then transmitted via neural discharges, etc.). We have evidence of how music is processed in the brain, but there is not evidence of a “substance” that experiences the music and that is beyond the physical. Yes, there is consciousness and there is a subjective experience and science cannot yet completely explain how consciousness emerges, except that it is intimately related to the brain. But that doesn’t mean that there is a nonphysical substance, and moreover, there isn’t any scientific theory that can back up that idea.

[@Bane_questionmark]

@@SantiagoRK96 "there is not evidence of a “substance” that experiences the music and that is beyond the physical" the evidence is the experience of every living person every second they've been alive. digital computers process data too but they do not consciously experience it. The fact that the experience of the music is subject to it's physical properties is not contrary to this, obviously perception is affected by the thing being perceived, however the conscious experience of the perception is not physical. And as I said music or any other qualia can be experienced purely in the mind without outside input. You could say that's the same as data retrieval on a digital computer, but there all the computer does is manipulate data syntactically or somehow display it for a conscious being who can actually experience the data as qualia. You could say the brain works in a similar way, it saves and retrieves information which is then accessible by the conscious mind. "science cannot yet completely explain" gotta love the science of the gaps reasoning. science has never explained it at all, the only reason to think it ever will is because you hold the a priori belief that everything has a material cause and explanation "there isn’t any scientific theory that can back up that idea" yes, science as a process can really only deal with questions regarding the material world, naturally non-material things won't fit under a scientific framework. I think materialism as a philosophy comes from not understanding this. You think there must be a scientific explanation because non-scientific explanations aren't valid, and you know non-scientific explanations aren't valid because there's no scientific evidence for them! Non-physical substances don't have any physical properties to measure, to say that this means they must not be real because they lack evidence is to say that non-physical things aren't real because non-physical things aren't real, circular reasoning.

[@dantke1]

It made me feel like i'm living in 200 B.C

[@bleirdo_dude]

*Drug addictions, and thought addictions are closely related on a neurological level.* Some people are more beholden to the ancient part of the brain (Meso Limbic System/emotional) rather than someone that reasons using the modern part (Frontal Cortex/rational). "The second system, known as the mesolimbic system, has its cell bodies in the ventral tegmental area, which is medial to the substantia nigra. It projects to several parts of the limbic system, including the nucleus accumbens and ventral portions of the striatum, amygdala, and hippocampus, as well as prefrontal cortex. *This system has been linked to reward-related behavior (Berridge and Kringelbach, 2015). Dopamine levels in the nucleus accumbens increase in response to both natural reinforcers (such as food, drink, and sex) and drugs of abuse (such as amphetamine and cocaine). Additionally, in humans, activity in this region increases in response to more abstract rewards, such as money."* Marie T. Banich/Rebecca J. Compton, Cognitive Neuroscience, Section: Subsystems, pp. 2/3 *"Dopamine, in fact, is critical in association learning and the reward system of the brain that Skinner discovered through his process of operant conditioning, whereby any behavior that is reinforced tends to be repeated. A reinforcement is, by definition, something that is rewarding to the organism; that is to say, it makes the brain direct the body to repeat the behavior in order to get another positive reward.* ...The connection between dopamine and belief was established by experiments conducted by Peter Brugger and his colleague Christine Mohr at the University of Bristol in England. *Exploring the neurochemistry of superstition, magical thinking, and belief in the paranormal, Brugger and Mohr found that people with high levels of dopamine are more likely to find significance in coincidences and pick out meaning and patterns where there are none."* Michael Shermer, The Believing Brain, Section: 6 The Believing Neuron pp. 8-10/29 *"Genetic and behavioral factors influencing religiously motivated behavior appear related to dopamine metabolism and signaling. Inclination toward religious behavior and motivation has been associated with a polymorphism on the dopamine receptor gene DRD4 (Comings, Gonzales, Saucier, Johnson, & MacMurray, 2000;Sasaki et al., 2013). Acquired disorders of dopamine physiology also show links to religious behaviors."* www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5478470/ *"Religious and spiritual experiences activate the brain reward circuits in much the same way as love, sex, gambling, drugs and music,* report researchers at the University of Utah School of Medicine." unews.utah.edu/this-is-your-brain-on-god/ "Dopamine, adrenaline, and noradrenaline are neurotransmitters that belong to the catecholamine family. Dopamine is produced in the substantia nigra and ventral tegmental regions of the brain, and *dopamine alterations are related to schizophrenia (1, 2). ...The “original dopamine hypothesis” states that hyperactive dopamine transmission results in schizophrenic symptoms."* www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4032934/ *"Dopamine In schizophrenia (SCZ), there is evidence that very high levels of dopamine in the limbic system play a major role in emergence of hallucinations and delusions. Antipsychotic medications, which block central dopamine activity, alleviate the hallucinations of psychosis. Drugs with strong dopaminergic effect, such as L-dopa, methylphenidate, bromocriptine, pramipexole and piribedil, may induce hallucinations. D-amphetamine, a direct dopamine agonist, may also induce psychosis and hallucinations."* www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2996210/ *"Here, we show that administration of a drug that enhances dopaminergic function (dihydroxy-L-phenylalanine; L-DOPA) increases an optimism bias. This effect is due to L-DOPA impairing the ability to update belief in response to undesirable information about the future."* www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3424419/ "Tibetan mystics have long practiced a method to create sentient beings (Tulpas) from the power of concentrated thought." Note: These (Tulpas) are not sentient beings, but a manifestation of the subconscious mind through neural plasticity via neurochemical imbalancing inducing meditation. In other words it's having a dream state while awake, and interacting with a character that's made up of one's own preformed thoughts (building blocks of ideas/concepts that are below conscious awareness) which gives the illusion of sentience. In simpler words it's self induced schizophrenia due to stresses (psychological/physical/environmental) where neurochemical traffic gets rerouted causing hallucinations to any of the five senses, also including involuntary movement, and distorted speech (glossolalia). www.google.com/amp/s/www.vice.com/amp/en_ca/article/exmqzz/tulpamancy-internet-subculture-892 Imagine the euphoria experienced by the average person for believing they won a million dollars on a scratch off ticket (it could be a joke ticket yet as long as they believe). Now imagine someone having the same sensations, but being convinced it's a paranormal contact for believing John 3:16. We evolved to seek pleasure (eating/reproduction), and avoid getting killed (tiger in the grass/competing neighbor/harsh enviroment). With our increased cognitive abilities we made up other reasons for pleasure, and survival beyond basic necessity. The Dopamine Reward System over time bridges gaps in pathways in order to form habits in order to repeat behaviors, and or thoughts. The often cited testimony of getting off an addiction thanks to a God is just a placebo replacement due to the power of the mind (an AA participant I heard of chose to worship the radiator in his room instead of an higher power, and became sober). Ancient people did not know the neurosciences. Philo of Alexandria thought that joy came from Heaven by way of God's chief archangel the "Divine Word/Right Reason (Logos)". ON DREAMS, THAT THEY ARE GOD-SENT Book 2 "XXXVII ...And *who can pour over the happy soul which proffers its own reason as the most sacred cup, the holy goblets of true joy, except the cup-bearer of God, the master of the feast, the Word?"* ALLEGORICAL INTERPRETATION, III "LX *...the soul very often, when it is delighted, is yet unable to explain what it is that has delighted it; but it is taught by the hierophant and prophet Moses, who tells it, “This is the bread, the food which God has given for the Soul, (Exo. **16:15**)” explaining that God has brought it, his own Word and his own Reason; for this bread which he has given us to eat is this Word of his."* The High Priest's headdress had a crown made of a plant known for it's hallucinogenic properties at which a golden plate covered the forehead. On said golden plate was inscribed sacred characters for the name of God. Josephus: THE ANTIQUITIES OF THE JEWS, BOOK 3, CHAPTER 7 (172-178), CONCERNING THE GARMENTS ...OF THE HIGH PRIEST "6. The high priest's mitre was the same that we described before, and was wrought like that of all the other priests; above which there was another, with swathes of blue embroidered, and round it was a golden crown polished, of three rows, one above another; out of which arose a cup of gold, which resembled the herb which we call Saccharus: *but those Greeks that are skilful in botany call it Hyoscyamus. ...Now the fruit is preserved by this coat of the calyx, which fruit is like the seed of the herb Sideritis: it sends out a flower that may seem to resemble that of poppy. Of this was a crown made, as far as from the hinder part of the head to each of the temples; but this Ephielis, for so this calyx may be called, did not cover the forehead, but it was covered with a golden plate, which had inscribed upon it the name of God in sacred characters. And such were the ornaments of the high priest."* *Hyoscyamus Niger* " ...was historically used..., *as well as for its psychoactive properties in "magic brews". These psychoactive properties include visual hallucinations and a sensation of flight. ...The plant, recorded as Herba Apollinaris, was used to yield oracles by the priestesses of Apollo.* " en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyoscyamus_niger Scrambled neurochemistry is insight to another realm for some people. The Holy Dopamine Ghost (Thoughts are addictive) kzbin.info/aero/PLQATeZAnm87BaJjBtM1vMIq_gHRmBq3ie Scripture is designed to keep people in the thought addiction, and shut out from the group those that question. "The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge; fools despise wisdom and instruction." (Prov. 1:7) "In their case the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, to keep them from seeing the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God." "but when one turns to the Lord, the veil is removed." (2 Cor. 4:4, 3:16) "As for the Disbelievers, Whether thou warn them or thou warn them not it is all one for them; they believe not. Allah hath sealed their hearing and their hearts, and on their eyes there is a covering. Theirs will be an awful doom." (Quran 2.006-.007) "Fools say in their hearts, "There is no God." They are corrupt, they do abominable deeds; there is no one who does good." (Psa. 14:1) "but whoever blasphemes against the *Holy Dopamine Ghost* can never have forgiveness, but is guilty of an eternal sin" (Mark 3:29) i.imgflip.com/1ydvtk.jpg

[@webslinger527]

@@bleirdo_dude What are you trying to get up with all these drug references some of these patients do not have drugs in their system also you heard the Caraun verse and you missed quoted one of your scripture verses. Also who said you’re not allowed to question anything how old is the fool in his heart says there’s no God doesn’t say you can question anything. If you could just summarize that be nice it’s a very long thing you wrote

[@webslinger527]

@@bleirdo_dude Also I forgot to mention what does John 316 have to do with anything pull it mentions is for God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son that who shall believe shall not die but have everlasting life reference I do not know he’s not a funny joke north of comical. Also yes ancient people used to wear medicinal herbs or marijuana or any drug inducing state on their head or sniff it or smoke it but when it comes to the Bible certain things that we do now is put in the new testament the apostles and do things like that, and so did other profits in the Old Testament. Also I feel as if your cherry picking this of course this happens to humans I’m not doubting that but according to the evidence this happens to people all over the world regardless of their medication or not they have the same symptoms over and over again you can I call the drug lead an issue it would be if they were all on certain types of drugs put in cases where they have no medicine in their system or if they do in the medicine to the cause of hallucinogenic feeling you cannot claim this hallucinogens because you say it is when there’s not evidence to back that up with his examples or other medical examples.

[@MafiaChess]

Yeb bro reading and understanding is the key. Good Job. Keep up the good work bro!

[@WasOne2]

The Argument from Ignorance extended for three videos. Along with more than it's fair share of straw men and minority opinions. I will not be watching any more of your work.

[@nzsl368]

bye bye ...

[@MrDreckweg]

Agreed

[@beephex1]

Saucy.

[@stevedoetsch]

Label and run away; the perfect example of close minded.

[@trtlphnx]

I Concur 100%!!!

[@GarryBurgess]

I've never believed this physicalists for at least 30 years or more.

[@brianshkodrani6058]

Great video! So far the most insightful. I really like the integration of concrete studies with popular beliefs. Looking forward to watching the fourth part. Keep up the good work.

[@CedanyTheAlaskan]

I was just watching Trinity Radio's video on the Eric Hernandez and Aron Ra debate about the soul, now this. This is a good day

[@CedanyTheAlaskan]

@Bob Smith Oh he already did. It was quite funny

[@davemwangi05]

@Bob Smith that dude got an IQ of what? 180? but the funny thing is that even the brightest minds don't have an agreed upon answer. LOL, all are confused.

[@spitfiremase]

So, this is as good a time as any: what do you make of people (usually in comments) who say you misunderstand or are lying about trying to understand the physics and neurology in this series of videos (and others) because many of the scientists you cite come to nontheistic conclusions? I responded to one comment like this and said "well, there's really nothing wrong with coming to a different conclusion as long as it makes sense with the data, and it's probably intentional he uses popular scientists or atheist scientists." And I was met with "coming to a different conclusion then them is stupid because it's their data." Or "Mike is talking about quantum woo, and no professor with a public email would agree with him on physics or neurology" And I feel like that's just hardheadedness, especially since it's not like they have quotes from those professors. Thoughts?

[@carsonwall2400]

Unfortunately, the physicalist paradigm is so entrenched in academia that many conflate physicalism with science itself. Many quality popular science channels reinforce this conception without recognizing the shortcomings of their own persuasion or even presenting alternative views that are present in the literature.

[@joshuaphilip7601]

I would say IP does make flaws when it comes to quantum mechanics. However when it comes to materialism, there are Atheists that agree on alot of this.

[@marcosgalvao3182]

Mind can deceive itself easily , some atheists say that even mind is a ilusion , so the desilusion is so strong that mind denies itself .

[@Yameen200]

@Bob Smith can you provide any studies on NDEs ? The way i see it with NDEs many reports have similiar traits (life review, tunnellight, feeling peace,love etc) which people see as evidence of NDEs being valid occurences but these could be delusions of the brain and similiar traits signifying the common brain wiring that we all share as well as subconsious desires manifesting itself the way we can dream very emotional and vivid dreams. Further its really strange how many NDEs can vary that some become so much more religious afterwards whilst many become so "new age" god is love no hell heaven interpretations. NDES may be evidence against religion or atleast fundamentalist interpretations of the quran & bible.

[@oakinwol]

I find the issue is the need to be fully convinced one way or the other. When we move the simple fact that we are all limited in our understanding and knowledge and don't really know what we're talking about to the background, then its easy for people to get entrenched in their current beliefs. But if we lead with uncertainty, then we can remain open to and interested in physical interpretations that can be investigated, so we avoid over spiritualizing every single thing, but can also give serious consideration to metaphysical ones. And I think anyone who gives serious consideration to metaphysical claims will have to conceed that they are extremely compelling, but most especially, to me, those found in the Bible.

[@cdteddey]

I feel like everything you say is spot on minus your definition of a soul. Sorry I don't have a better definition of Soul for you but your definition is that of the consciousness or ego, that much I do know. A lot of people to confuse their consciousness for their soul though.

[@jasonH5997]

We are immortal beings that incarnate in order to experience. Our soul has nothing to do with our brains...our experiences are lessons and knowledge for our ETERNAL souls.

[@damiene5360]

I wonder what happened to all this knowledge that I gathered in my eternity of learning. Can only find what I learned in this lifetime :( I should be a fuckin genius

[@jasonH5997]

@@damiene5360 wouldn't be much to learn or experience if we had all that knowledge in this life, we can tap into that but we're just on the cusp of turning that corner on earth. Just an opinion, science and physics are beginning to state things they never dreamed they would be stating.

[@redbad2652]

Ip you wouldn’t be claiming absence of evidence is evidence of absence would you?

[@Draezeth]

There are a few things in this video that I (Christian and Patron) take issue with, myself. Some of his arguments sound an awful lot like arguments made by atheists that we would reject. On the matter of brain imaging for example, his points tend to be rather pedantic. What he said about "not overstating the evidence" and about the small sample size don't diminish the impact of the implications of the studies he is addressing, and I think he should steer clear of such arguments entirely. However, he does recover by pointing out the study's very low accuracy, which is a damning point, and really what I think he should have led with. I think IP does demonstrate some signs of cognitive bias every now and then, and these moments are what his critics seize upon. If he could acknowledge these and work to overcome them, he would be unstoppable.

[@redbad2652]

Stubadub I find the topic of consciousness very interesting and while I do appreciate the information that IP presents I think he cherry picks what studies he selects to help his argument. My original comment was about his thumbnail saying there is no evidence the brain creates consciousness. It is a popular back and forth for atheists to ask for evidence and theist to say absence of evidence isn’t evidence of absence. I just found the irony funny.

[@InspiringPhilosophy]

Cherry-picking needs to be demonstrated not presupposed. This is also part 3 of 6, so I gave evidence for my position in parts 1 and 2 and plan to present more. Don't judge a video by the thumbnail or a book by the cover.

[@redbad2652]

InspiringPhilosophy are you saying there are no studies with a contrary conclusion to the studies you’ve presented? www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1525505014002017 There are more examples if you need. I do not have the expertise to debate the conclusion of these studies, but there are several studies which point to consciousness being a function of the brain. And as I explain the original post was jest about the phrase absence of evidence. I agree we shouldn’t judge by title but it is a poor first impression.

[@InspiringPhilosophy]

@@redbad2652 It is like you didn't even watch the video, where I addressed related studies making the same points.

[@theeternalanglo4626]

You do know that all the evidence you brought up, in favour of dualism was just analogies explaining how it would work. This is not evidence just baseless interpretation.

[@InspiringPhilosophy]

You do realize that was the point, right? Notice this is part 3. This was addressing arguments from physicalists, mainly not offering evidence for my view.

[@theeternalanglo4626]

@@InspiringPhilosophy Wouldn't evidence be the best counter point, why not bring it up? Instead of just saying "this could also be explained by a dualistic perspective, here how that would work" it doesn't refute the point.

[@InspiringPhilosophy]

Which I presented in other videos of this series, but objections still need to be addressed. I can’t respond to physicalists that incorrectly use the libet experiments by just pointing to other pieces of evidence that support my position

[@theeternalanglo4626]

@@InspiringPhilosophy No when you state that it could be caused by a dualist model you would need to state why or else the point isn't complete. And I am watching im about to finnish the first episode. Read my responses if you like.

[@InspiringPhilosophy]

I do state why and explain how the models works

[@pazuzil]

So consciousness cant be explained by the brain, therefore wizards and magic do?

[@jjphank]

God is a spirit according to the Bible in a creative matter in the first verse in the Bible. We are tri une just like God is,body soul and spirit. God is not the author of evil so you can’t blame him for that he just gives free will seek after God you’ll end up in heaven if you stay on course otherwise all of the roads lead to hell. You can’t say to God you didn’t want to be born he’s gonna see you should’ve been born again. So there’s no loopholes to get out of it on judgment day seek after God and use your brain and read the Bible.

[@305thief8]

slander much thts always the last resort

[@pazuzil]

@@305thief8 okay Mr smartypants, if its not explained by the brain and its not explained by magic or wizards, how does consciousness work then?

[@305thief8]

how am I supposed to know i didnt establish it God did lol and I only chose to comment your stuff becuz it is rude the whole magic, wizards, and fairies stuff is getting dont insult him like I wouldnt do to you

[@305thief8]

Also a immaterial substance or soul always made sense to me I dont think saying within a materialists sense your thoughts, opinions, etc are wrong thts saying my neutrons are more correct than yours it doesnt make sense I think there is something more to it lol give it a shot also i have to finish the vid

[@JulioCaesarTM]

I never want this series to finish, Fascinating and Interesting Stuff. I'm Reading Philosophy Of Mind: An Introduction by Edward Feser as of now, joined with this series is very fascinating.

[@LogosTheos]

Look up a rising star in the philosophy of the mind named Brandon Rickabaugh. He is the best: www.brandonrickabaugh.com/

[@JulioCaesarTM]

@@LogosTheos Thanks, I will check it out.

[@kimbo99]

Julio Dear Intellectual Need to know, people, What you really are, first. That's logical Laymans Gnosis-discover a second intelligence www.truebluehealer.com 20 mins BEGINNERS TOUR Vivid messaging night dreams within 7 days Immediate physical evidence that something has changed Messaging day dreams (visions?) physically verified Signalling music to slowly morph into an internal mentoring voice just like Socrates and Plato described Expect keywords names and even websites to be typed into your mindseye with info vital to YOUR personal life. Holy book readers will find their misunderstandings corrected by the internal mentoring voice Go to www.truebluehealer.com Do the 20 mins BEGINNERS TOUR All questions answered And its FREEEE See you back at the website www.truebluehealer.com Feedback It’s amazing how a 20 minute tour can cause the individual to experience a waterfall of knowledge.

[@valsarff6525]

Correction: The soul is that part of the mind, the emotions and desires, which are unchanging. Whatever changes or evolves cannot be eternal by definition. What is me is split between what has always been and what must be in the present time line. Cause and effect are in fact the same.

[@richardbalides1687]

I was just thinking about this subject while stepping out for a smoke. When I came back upstairs and opened KZbin, this video was on the screen. So I chose it because I for one believe that the ALL is Mind. Out of the 3 Grand Spectrums of Space, Time and Being (or perceiver). Being is the most basic as being is Mind. Time exists in multitudes of timelines which each have reasonable cause and effect stories with meaning. Space is dependent on Timeline, as space may have variations in different timelines. So just as today's child might ask his parents to buy him his own computer, a Soul might ask to occupy a body or vessel, so as to gain access to a particular Timeline in order to glean the Meaning from this Timeline which is food for the evolving Soul. The Space involved are just the props and backdrop setting so to speak. Thumbs up for this video. For me it was Instant Karma to have happened upon this. Positive Karma that is. Creation.

[@saammahakala]

From personal experiences., consciousness, Soul and body are three separate states of being with the latter two being integral for the development of the first. This is coming from someone who as a child asked of myself Who, What and Why I was, contemplated that I knew nothing in the grand-scheme of what there is to know and that I'd left someone important behind from my most recent life, like a wife. Flash forward several decades and after putting the pieces of the puzzle together so to speak., I was able to contact her. I was right about her husband having told her that it's not important what other people think and not to hold herself back by underestimating herself. So.., there's that. The brain is the body's CPU. If it becomes damaged the consciousness/character within the Soul/cage, tied to the body through a unique organ., I'll let you all figure that one out on your own, will not be able to effectively have its Will conveyed. My last four bodies have been decapitated, shot, crushed and shot. We are not these bodies nor their genders, families, cultures or confining labels. Pain is information. "God" although conceived has yet to be born. Suffering., like pleasure, is code for writing "god."

[@yourself88xbl]

Interesting philosophy

[@saammahakala]

@@yourself88xbl Thank You. I may have been at this contemplating thing longer than I can imagine.., and I can imagine a lot.😁

[@jjharvathh]

Very interesting work. From some of the comments we can see this work seriously upsets the worldviews of some people.

[@kimbo99]

Need to know, people, What you really are, first That's logical Laymans Gnosis-discover a second intelligence www.truebluehealer.com 20 mins BEGINNERS TOUR Vivid messaging night dreams within 7 days Immediate physical evidence that something has changed Messaging day dreams (visions?) physically verified Signalling music to slowly morph into an internal mentoring voice just like Socrates and Plato described Expect keywords names and even websites to be typed into your mindseye with info vital to YOUR personal life. Holy book readers will find their misunderstandings corrected by the internal mentoring voice Go to www.truebluehealer.com Do the 20 mins BEGINNERS TOUR All questions answered And its FREEEE See you back at the website www.truebluehealer.com Feedback It’s amazing how a 20 minute tour can cause the individual to experience a waterfall of knowledge.

[@pwharman]

I guess the evidence of how the soul connects physically to the brain is coming in part 4...

[@InspiringPhilosophy]

Yes

[@Fuzzawakka]

Easy...maaaaaagic.

[@piage84]

@@Fuzzawakka IP will never say magic. He'll make up some stuff that sounds reaaaaly scientific, will quote (parts) of studies (that of course will not have the same conclusions).

[@ea-tr1jh]

@@piage84 Lol do you ever actually read the studies?

[@kimbo99]

Piezo electric properties in brain tissue specifically corpus callosum Need to know, people, What you really are, first. Thats logical Laymans Gnosis-discover a second intelligence www.truebluehealer.com 20 mins BEGINNERS TOUR Vivid messaging night dreams within 7 days Immediate physical evidence that something has changed Messaging day dreams (visions?) physically verified Signalling music to slowly morph into an internal mentoring voice just like Socrates and Plato described Expect keywords names and even websites to be typed into your mindseye with info vital to YOUR personal life. Holy book readers will find their misunderstandings corrected by the internal mentoring voice Go to www.truebluehealer.com Do the 20 mins BEGINNERS TOUR All questions answered And its FREEEE See you back at the website www.truebluehealer.com Feedback It’s amazing how a 20 minute tour can cause the individual to experience a waterfall of knowledge.

[@cloisterene]

I realized a couple of years ago that the brain is a 'transformer' or 'interpreter/translator' of the mind which exists integrally within the structure of the Universe. Its most basic purpose is to achieve long life for the physical body. Additionally, each individual is limited by the structure, conformation, and soundness of their own brains. The brain doesn't produce thought, it only *processes* information that exists independently. The process of thought is triggered by environmental events. The brain also serves for personal memory storage. The word "memory" etymologically in ancient times meant essentially, "love". That is, we naturally hold on to the things/thoughts that we want to keep, that are meaningful. And I believe we have freewill also, because without it there would be no concepts of morality, safety, security, or virtue.

[@Aanthanur]

no

[@canipleasehaveyourname]

​@@Aanthanur idk why but I chuckled

[@PavinDurai]

Congrats on 150K subs

[@reziboy100]

I'm gonna rewatch Westworld after I finish this series.

[@VanishingNomad]

The brain is the interface between the spirit world, and the physical world.

[@SamirKhan-yy5gy]

I believe that. Maybe consciousness is a tool used by the soul. Consciousness may be dependent on the brain but the phenomenal quality of it is perceived by the soul (in a non-physical place) and thus, hundreds of years of confusion and speculation.

[@x1smind]

Are you saying the brain is a transmitter/receiver of some kind?

[@alexanderlennon9164]

There is no such thing as a soul we can not even say definitively that there is such a thing as consciousness just a brain that is a reactor to the stimuli and not a generator of thoughts. Samir you may find the talks by UG. Krashnamurti of interest and the lectures by Robert Sapolskey . Good luck

[@hysuka2]

What?? You can't even prove that there's a "spirit world."

[@SamirKhan-yy5gy]

@@alexanderlennon9164 Cheers mate. I think it's a bit far to say definitively that there is no such thing as a soul but I really appreciate the links mate. I''m studying consciousness for a masters in philosophy and so I cannot thank you enough. :)

[@Joe-jc3bh]

Good Job. You and your crew hang in there! I know there's many nasty and weird comments, so I figured I'd let you all know you're getting through a bit. Plus you'll be way better at debating, encouraging, studying and more from all this. Heart, Soul, Mind, Strength and all that. Thanks.

[@danzigvssartre]

I remember studying cognitive science as an undergraduate. Back then, I thought the neuroscience behind understanding visual perception was pretty much straightforward, that is, until the course tutor stated that neuroscience does not know how the brain constructs our 3-dimensional world. At which point I thought: "if the brain were to construct the 3D world inside itself than that means the world that I experience in perception is actually inside my head rather than my head being inside the world." I have since concluded that the so-called "inverse optics" problem in computational vision is a bogus problem. Thankfully the works of James Gibson in ecological psychology and Henri Bergson in philosophy have shown me that consciousness is not generated by the brain and the mind is not located inside the brain.

[@haros2868]

Also Jar pinto showed the classical view was wrong, you'll understand once you look it up. Plus its kind of super stupid to say there are two independent agents, since their volitional attention is one. Their eye focus with synchronisation, under the split model thats a paradox. And again why stop to the two hemispheres, if we cut the brain in 4 will it make 4 agents? In 8 ?. This leads to every neuron is conscious and in turn any atom. Basically panphysism, this is where the rotten reductionalism propaganda leads us.. hopefully it gets destroyed

[@kylexinye1990]

THERE'S JUST NO EVIDENCE. [that the brain creates consciousness] :D

[@pressure609]

@@11kravitzn my theory is the material our brain is made from plus the electricity throughout the spine work as antennas and receiver., which "catches" signal from the aether. Theres 7 types of electricity as well which some of these can operate within these frequencies.

[@pressure609]

@@11kravitzn That's why it's a theory, which is going to either need technology we don't have to prove, or require me to begin egg hunting down sources, organizing, and writing alot of shit for the internet. No thanks, I have a life. But if I see something similar or in the vein of, I'll try to let you know.

[@pressure609]

@@11kravitzn stfu donny

[@jjphank]

In fact our DNA does not auto encrypt, it did not make it self the code writer is outside the code. so God, the code writer wrote our DNA and this proves your point the brain cannot create. So anybody that says it’s all from the brain is denying the facts about DNA.

[@AlexPBenton]

People with consciousness have been shown to have brains, people who had brains but now don’t are not conscious as far as we can perceive. There has been no evidence of consciousness that does not come from a brain. Brains that have been damaged or stimulated exhibit apparently changed consciousnesses. Oh yeah, and we aren’t the ones claiming that consciousness is proven to come from minds, we are simply skeptical when people claim that it comes from something else (which we have literally no evidence for). Burden of proof is on you, sorry.

[@CJ-xm5kz]

Well, well, well, you've done it, you've convinced me that the brain isn't the cause of consciousness and that the mind is separate from the brain and body... I've raised some of the objections raised in the video and it was good to see that you addressed them. I still don't understand everything especially how the mind, soul and brain interrelate and I am still skeptical of the existence of the soul but you've convinced me that the mind is separate from the brain.

[@geoffrobinson]

C J not understanding is completely rational

[@anoncanada2341]

soul? what is that ?

[@justadude777]

@@anoncanada2341 The Soul is you, If your soul were to leave your body your Physical body would drop dead like rag doll while you are just standing there. How do I describe this?? Hmm here's an example Your Physical body is like a car and your soul is the person in the car. The car can't do nothing of its own but it's a person in the car that has to start it and move it to place to place. I hope this gives you a better understanding. And if I'm correct of what I'v learned the mind, emotions and Willpower comes from the soul and is manifested into the Physical body. So yes the Soul is who you are, your Physical body is your body but if I'm correct it's not you

[@mattsmith1440]

@@justadude777 There's no evidence of the soul though, so there's that.

[@JerryMitchell97]

@@justadude777 I think there might be something very different going on. My suspicion is that if your soul were to leave your physical body, then that uninhabited body would physically continue exactly as if that had not happened. No one would ever know until your body died its normal death, having eaten, spoken, and acted as if you were still living in it, because it exists in a deterministic physical universe, which had already been set into motion at the moment you left (or indeed at the moment of the big bang in that specific universe, strictly deterministic factors had led to the point at which you left, with the particles in your brain arranged in a certain way, etc.) Had you stayed within it, you would have chosen to do those things exactly, but you chose something different than what that universe "matches", and steered in a different extradimensional "direction" away from that particular confluence of physical factors, thus "leaving" that body behind to carry out the system set in motion, and "entering" a different body with thoughts that aligned with your soul's course. Naturally, that leads to an overwhelmingly huge multiverse through which your soul navigates, but an infinity of infinities isn't really a problem in Christianity, is it? I would describe this as, the car keeps rolling when you jump out, and continues the path onto which you had steered it. If this is the case, then willpower/faith is your soul's ability to navigate against the stream in its "dimension," and to choose ever more unlikely events to follow from the course you've set so far. Up to and including moving a mountain with your mind/soul.

[@juancarlosaliba4866]

Woah! I learned more from these videos on Christian and natural apologetics than in seminaries and universities hahaha Praise the Lord! You're the man IP! Keep those videos going and BTW, thanks for resolving for me and for all faithful Christians the Barabbas incident. I can finally read the Passion with ease and pray the Stations of the Cross with ease! Former agnostic here and now a Catholic Christian!

[@aldrichemrys]

Excellent choice of denomination. Welcome home!

[@junelledembroski9183]

Welcome home!

[@juancarlosaliba4866]

Thanks!

[@jjphank]

Keep reading the Bible my friend God created Matter in the first verse of the Bible. Our DNA does not auto encrypt it did not make it self so Gods leaving evidence there that he made the matter. That really blows up the argument of it’s in the brain. As a Catholic the more you read the Bible the less you’re going to be a Catholic because the Jesus does not come back physically when you do the communion. Acts 1:11 Matthew 24 26 Revelation 1 7. It’s a representation. to say that that’s Jesus that’s not the Jesus that can save you it’s a replacement of Jesus. Jesus said that himself let no man deceive you many will come in my name saying I am the Christ and deceive many people. The Roman Catholic Church has a different Jesus that cannot save you you need the biblical Jesus stay in the Bible. Any questions you have I’ll gladly help to answer them

[@aldrichemrys]

J Hankins As a Catholic, the more I read the bible, the more I became Catholic.

[@sehbanomer8151]

Why would you assume soul exists in the first place

[@kimbo99]

omer Need to know, people, What you really are, first Laymans Gnosis-discover a second intelligence www.truebluehealer.com 20 mins BEGINNERS TOUR Vivid messaging night dreams within 7 days Immediate physical evidence that something has changed Messaging day dreams (visions?) physically verified Signalling music to slowly morph into an internal mentoring voice just like Socrates and Plato described Expect keywords names and even websites to be typed into your mindseye with info vital to YOUR personal life. Holy book readers will find their misunderstandings corrected by the internal mentoring voice Go to www.truebluehealer.com Do the 20 mins BEGINNERS TOUR All questions answered And its FREEEE See you back at the website www.truebluehealer.com Feedback It’s amazing how a 20 minute tour can cause the individual to experience a waterfall of knowledge.

[@youeitherlovegodormoney6742]

Consciousness indeed creates reality...!!!..When your subconscious mind says to get something to drink...You oblige...!!!...This is because the body is in total submission of the mind rather your aware of it or not...Direct thought and indirect thought is a non physical action that PRODUCES physical action we call reality.Which reminds me of a quote from James Allen, "A man is LITERALLY what he thinketh".The body is nothing more than a vehicle for the consciousness to drive on the Earth plane...

[@williamwrightjr.2765]

I'm loving this series. I hope it never ends! It's beyond fascinating to me.

[@bretnetherton9273]

Awareness is known by awareness alone.

[@Aaron-bd9sj]

Consciousness is what is fundamental. Consciousness precedes the appearance of matter.

[@SpaceDin0]

Erwin Schrodinger said that consciousness was fundamental.

[@jonathonpeterson6203]

This. This exactly. In order to make observation, induction and deduction, there must first be an observer and a thing that directs attention. Consciousness is fundamental. What it is exactly, that may never be available to observation, and will likely remain at the level of ontological metaphysical argumentation. But then again I'm not one to poo-poo metaphysics and ontology as they are the bedrock of modern science.

[@robertedwards909]

I am brain damaged it made me dumber

[@Aaron-bd9sj]

@Bob Smith You're thinking about it the wrong way. Consciousness is not an object, it is pure subject. This vid will help you out: www.organism.earth/library/document/does-matter-create-consciousness

[@alancollins8294]

@Bob Smith Metaphysical concepts make no sense. Purely subjective is meaningless. It's either fundamental in which case it's made of something or emergent meaning produced by stuff like words are specific vibration patterns in the air.

[@clevernamehere]

I believe our consciousness is not in this dimension but we are connected to it. Think of the eyes that we use to SEE our dreams... Where are those eyes? Or our past. You can SEE your past. Or how bout that voice that you hear in your head when you think? Where are the vocal cords we're taught are necessary to make sound located? I didn't use mine. I didn't speak. I didn't use my mouth at all and yet as I type I AM SPEAKING and HEARING myself speak. So where are those senses? With our consciousness.

[@lilcam-qk9mp]

That is about the same as my view

[@gdub6152]

Amazing work! This 40 minute video did a better job at teaching then a top 5 university!

[@alancollins8294]

As soon as you said soul it was clear this isn't science.

[@alancollins8294]

Science is about understanding the natural world, which is the only one that exists. The best part of existence is consciousness because without it you wouldn't really exist. And it's gonna be measurable sooner or later, then you'll see.

[@ArmchairSkeptic2010]

Absolutely awesome videos IP! I have wondered while watching these videos if you are more of an Idealist or a Substance Dualist? Thanks again for making these!

[@InspiringPhilosophy]

Idealist

[@ArmchairSkeptic2010]

@@InspiringPhilosophy Thank you for your quick response I always regarded myself as a Substance Dualist, however after just finishing your Irreducible Mind series it has given me much to think about. Thanks again😃

[@parsivalshorse]

A thousand years ago people couldn't explain thunder - so they attributed it to a God, now in 2020 you are attributing consciousness to God just because science does not fully understand consciousness. How is your argument any less of a 'God of the Gaps' fallacy than was attributing thunder to Thor?

[@serhiisietrin9314]

Do you understand what you are saying at all?

[@parsivalshorse]

@@serhiisietrin9314 Yes, IP is simply presenting an argument from ignorance fallacy. A 'God of the Gaps' argument.

[@lilcam-qk9mp]

I like your idealist view because it still allows us to account for obvious truths relating to the mind and the brain that probably will grow in number as mri tech advances

[@EliOfMilkyWay]

Another condition for consciousness seems to be that it can arise only when the “higher” areas of the brain, such as the frontal cortex, which is connected to the circuits for emotions and decision-making, are activated. It thus seems that for consciousness to exist in the physical, there must be some communication or resonance among various parts of the brain.

[@UntEyEHero]

Mate, your channel is a gold mine. Please do a video on good reads on human consciousness that have tried to tackle the hard problem.

[@Sequencers]

Wow I just had a discussion with my wife last week about "is memory in part of the brain or the soul" personally I think it's in our soul the brain is just an interface between our body and soul 🤔

[@jesserochon3103]

Precisely. The brain is just a super complex conduit by which consciousness can operate in physical bodies.

[@uninspired3583]

Wrong. Hippocampus.

[@Danaluni59]

Excellent video

[@indoolderguy4041]

The brain is an instrument for interactive living. It can provide the solutions to do so. It has no creating mechanism.

[@Contribute_TakeCare_Learn_Play]

On limiting consciousness: To conclude that if the brain doesn't create but limits consciousness in a normal functioning state and that if the brain is damaged in that case, we can expect the limiting factors to be broken as well giving rise to genius level abilities isn't necessarily true. The brain in this case, expresses and gives rise to the limitation of consciousness, consequently where there is no brain there is no consciousness to be expressed or limited through an entity so consciousness needs an entity to show itself but is limited. So a broken part of the brain in that case could just as well in that part of the brain specifically no longer produce consciousness or be a constituent of the consciousness created in the rest of the brain. Additionally, people with severe brain damage as we see quite often have severe deficits even those that have genius traits unlocked can also potentially have deficits unlocked. This brings us back to the physicalist perspective

[@sjmarel]

Although everyone is entitled to their own ideas, opinions on the matter of brain functioning without proper knowledge of neural circuitry, or even an inkling on the subject (as well as opinions on any other subject), are tremendously misguided. The brain has a set structure that works very well for the evolutionary setting it evolved for. To say that the brain posits a constrain to mental capabilities is ignorant. Out of the tools the brain has ready access to at any given moment (and one has to take into consideration the bus and processing limits determined by the physical properties of its functional units), there is a delicate balance on the their use to applied cognitive problems. Otherwise, unbalanced processing, though it could show impressive phenomena on some specific cognitive activities, severely impairs the overall integration of the others. Scientifically, one cannot disregard explanations out of the actual state of scientific knowledge, but if that's the case, really good evidence should be presented, without misrepresenting factual discoveries.

[@londontheist9903]

Imagine being a physicalist. Nah not me

[@mister_dadstersays_hi7372]

Me but I'm here because I respect your opinion and I want to see both sides of the coin

[@mister_dadstersays_hi7372]

@Dizasta Boi what do you believe is the right theory Mind or matter

[@gonzalezm244]

Mister_dadster Says_hi The mind is just the dynamic process of matter interacting. At least, that’s our best scientific guess so far. What we don’t know/understand we often give mystical properties like giving our consciousness a soul.

[@mister_dadstersays_hi7372]

@@gonzalezm244 I'm also a "materialist" I just like to see both sides and and observe the others believes

[@kimbo99]

Need to know, people, What you really are, first. That's logical Laymans Gnosis-discover a second intelligence www.truebluehealer.com 20 mins BEGINNERS TOUR Vivid messaging night dreams within 7 days Immediate physical evidence that something has changed Messaging day dreams (visions?) physically verified Signalling music to slowly morph into an internal mentoring voice just like Socrates and Plato described Expect keywords names and even websites to be typed into your mindseye with info vital to YOUR personal life. Holy book readers will find their misunderstandings corrected by the internal mentoring voice Go to www.truebluehealer.com Do the 20 mins BEGINNERS TOUR All questions answered And its FREEEE See you back at the website www.truebluehealer.com Feedback It’s amazing how a 20 minute tour can cause the individual to experience a waterfall of knowledge.

[@mrdovie47]

I believe the brain is more of an interface between soul (or spirit) and body. A child in the womb moves it's arms and legs learning what action of the spirit controls what movement of the body. The brain is like an enormous keyboard on which the soul sends and receives information. I like your take on this, also.

[@kentheengineer592]

maybe spirit not soul

[@kentheengineer592]

Mind influence the spirit maybe

[@mrdovie47]

Something I have suspected for years, the Human Brain does not think.

[@hopehope2316]

Is it possible to get pictures or even video inputed in your brain were u can see these when you close your eyes...

[@hopehope2316]

@Sam Barker we are now

[@sakogekchyan7366]

I feel like the terms mind and consciousness are used interchangeably. In Indian philosophy, there is a distinction made between the two. There are different kinds of consciousness and mind is simply the culmination of various types of consciousness. Consciousness is simply some kind of awareness. So a thermostat has heat consciousness or temperature consciousness. My iPhone has touch consciousness as well as a few other types of consciousness. In Hindu and Buddhist literature, these different types of consciousness are described in depth. So even if neuroscience comes to the conclusion that the mind is the product of brain activity, the same cannot be said for consciousness. Consciousness proceeds the brain.

[@zs9652]

This is an interesting idea to me. I have always thought nearly everything has some sort of consciousness. Any recommendations for looking further into what you are talking about?

[@sakogekchyan7366]

Z S That should get you started my friend. Let me know when you want more.

[@Frosty-cq8sn]

Would love to know any recommendation about this!

[@zs9652]

@@Frosty-cq8sn The recommended reading is the wiki page for panpsychism

[@Frosty-cq8sn]

@@zs9652 thanks!

[@Drp_br_]

My god this stuff is interesting as hell man. Love this Micheal.

[@TeaParty1776]

A doctor removed the brain of a physicalist. The physicalist continued to advocate physicalism.

[@kimbo99]

Need to know, people, What you really are, first. That's logical Laymans Gnosis-discover a second intelligence www.truebluehealer.com 20 mins BEGINNERS TOUR Vivid messaging night dreams within 7 days Immediate physical evidence that something has changed Messaging day dreams (visions?) physically verified Signalling music to slowly morph into an internal mentoring voice just like Socrates and Plato described Expect keywords names and even websites to be typed into your mindseye with info vital to YOUR personal life. Holy book readers will find their misunderstandings corrected by the internal mentoring voice Go to www.truebluehealer.com Do the 20 mins BEGINNERS TOUR All questions answered And its FREEEE See you back at the website www.truebluehealer.com Feedback It’s amazing how a 20 minute tour can cause the individual to experience a waterfall of knowledge.

[@Xgy33]

I wonder how IP’s prayers are

[@SimeonDenk]

The primary fundamental problem with this entire line of reasoning is that in order for a "soul" to be considered a possible cause for anything, it must be previously verified to exist. Otherwise, you are depending on ad ignorantiam reasoning.

[@ea-tr1jh]

This is part 3, stated in the title. He presented a lot of evidence in parts 1 and 2

[@SimeonDenk]

@@ea-tr1jh I know. I watched the others in the past. The only "evidence" for a soul that I've heard is NDEs, none of which has ever been studied under controlled scientific circumstances.

[@ea-tr1jh]

@@SimeonDenk lol so you're one of those guys? Denies the evidence then pretends there is none?

[@SimeonDenk]

@@ea-tr1jh No, I'm one of those guys who has standards of evidence.

[@codygillard]

I think the AI portion of this video is more relevant now, especially with everyone freaking out about LaMDA.