Alan Wallace - MINDFULNESS IN SCIENCE - March 23, 2015

MINDFULNESS IN SCIENCE: Contemplative Science & Objective Science.
Mindfulness can make a contribution to science, explains Dr. B. Alan Wallace, Ph.D, one of the most senior scholars in the cross-field of Buddhism and modern science.
In this public talk, Dr. Wallace explores the complementary nature of contemplative science and objective science.
The Center for Wisdom and Compassion teamed up with Peter Elsass, professor of psychology at Copenhagen University, to bring Alan Wallace to Denmark.

[@SarahVerwei]

exploring this ....thank you Alan Wallace

[@alpennyworth8770]

Awesome . Enjoyed listening, Thank you Dr. Wallace

[@SarahVerwei]

A revolutionary discovery is happening

[@mamunurrashid5652]

43:12 I agree....It is by nature 'luminous,blissful,non-human,still,non-conceptual'........It is a great feeling(understanding...realisation) to get in touch with that 'nature' of consciousness...and only by meditation,it can be tested!!

[@boodabill]

Please put a more respectful cover photo of Alan. Thanks.

[@mamunurrashid5652]

Excellent talk....

[@ani7662]

Q lástima ni se ingles Escucharé los traducidos

[@summondadrummin2868]

The constraint of playing it safe why? To get tenure to get grants for what? financial and collegial acceptance...we've allowed a world to be constructed which gives far to much power to money to determine our collective fate. Is this no more than deferring to dominance?

[@squamish4244]

Try doing anything without money.

[@squamish4244]

There is a university lab that studies consciousness from a first-person perspective now, and works to develop technologies derived from the knowledge we may gain: Transformative Technology Lab at Sofia University in Palo Alto. transtechlab.org

[@frankfeldman6657]

Just spent an hour with one of this guy's books on the treadmill at the gym. How ironic that it was a treadmill, in that it/he took me absolutely nowhere. One cough of Alan Watts contains more wisdom, humor, and poetry then, etc., etc.

[@squamish4244]

Alan Watts is indeed the superior communicator. But it's not really fair because Alan Watts is the greatest communicator of Buddhism of all time. Alan Wallace is also very traditional. No talk about innovations in skillful means from him. All these emerging neurotechnologies - they don't exist in his world.

[@phils0209]

Friend of Russel Brand aka jesus.

[@alfrednagy1237]

neglected to mention my most important hero the buddha himself . thankfully the precept to practice loving kindness prevents me from saying what i really think

[@dromgarvan]

To generate the sort of paradigm shift Dr. Wallace wishes to see , it would be necessary to have a least a general proposition which is susceptible to falsification. Western Science advances by discarding knowledge as a weight of evidence renders one testable proposition less likely to be true than another. Which of Dr. Wallace's claims could be falsified and how would we proceed to demonstrate that consciousness is as he describes it. Private experience is just that Private. Western Science is public and open to public refutation.

[@5piles]

were you asleep for the lecture? the whole argument is the paradigm shift will occur when you give up your worship for physicalism by returning to your scientific roots, placeing primacy on direct observation over dogma

[@squamish4244]

But where is the testable hypothesis?

[@backwardthoughts1022]

for merely falsifying perfect samadhi? this was already completed now almost 2 decades ago with the discovery and monitoring of the neural correlates for attention and concentration. you, empirically known to possess 2sec attention max on avg. ppl with perfect samadhi, based on neural correlate measurement confirmed to be able to sustain multiple hours immune to ANY distraction or impingement by any external or internal stimulus. you're....a little late to the party? more importantly the amount of falsifiable evidence demolishing physicalism is utterly overwhelming, from the studies on post clinical patients and 50years of data and studies at the uni. of virginia, to the fully scientifically monitored and tested work collected on practitioners meditating post clinical death for days and weeks without decomposition called tukdam. the one in Taipei 2020 collected spontaneous brain activity activation a month post clinical death, fully monitored and studied by neuroscientists, total absence of bodily decomposition etc for weeks post clinical death until the meditation stopped

[@phils0209]

OManipadmehum

[@alfrednagy1237]

very painful to see my heroes galileo, einstein, james and darwin so misused by this psycho babble bullshit

[@myreddays]

C'mon. No revolution in mind sciences? What about Freud? Jung? Reich?

[@myreddays]

We do know how consciousness arises, through opposition. The ego arises from the conflict between the Id and the environment. 'No' is the main word related to awareness, or consciousness. 'No' allows individuality.

[@myreddays]

"Mental phenomena are caused by neurophysiological processes in the brain and are themselves features of the brain". Wrong. The brain is a perceptive organ. Feelings do not occur in the brain, they occur in the body.

[@myreddays]

Funny how he talks about projections, which is a psychoanalytical term. That which is unconscious is projected. Projections disappear when incorporated to consciousness. Still, interesting video. I am being too critical, probably.

[@DTTaTa]

myreddays Thats an assumption, where is the empirical evidence?Im sorry but i dont understand what you are saying. Could you elaborate?

[@DTTaTa]

myreddays Clearly they do not ocurre on the body, nor in the brain. If they did you could watch them by watching the brain or the body. If you open the brain you dont see, expectations, desires, or fears, you just see chemicals and electricity.Same thing happens with the body. Besides, anyone who is trained, for example, in lucid dreaming knows that one can have emotion, feelings without a physical component in the body

[@alanhussey]

.Lots and lots of words. The Intellectual concepts he is purporting have no substance; an awful amount of flim-flam. What is the point he is alluding too. Many Questions, not enough answers

[@phonic1451]

As opposed to your comment which overflows with substance. Vast amounts of it, primarily: ignorant bias, arrogance and conceit.

[@dromgarvan]

Oh dear! Are grown-ups supposed to take this seriously?

[@QED_]

What a condescending little pissant you are . . .