Science is shattering our intuitions about consciousness | Annaka Harris

[@markpapallo718]

A recent study suggests that plants know when they’re being eaten. If memory serves, plants reacted adversely to the sound of insects chomping on leaves and favorably to sounds of wind and rain. So it would seem that consciousness does, indeed, run deeper than our conceits persuade us to believe.

[@tomdaniels6868]

If you put an obstacle in front of an ant, it will stop and decide which way to go around the obstacle. That decision making, to me, represents consciousness.

[@Wild4lon]

If you start the video with 'if you think about it, consciousness is really everything' You have not thought, my dear speaker Possibly ever

[@HexerPsy]

Their speakers are getting worse.... Is a guy locked in his head still concious... Is a car without wheels still a car?

[@pcbacklash_3261]

Whenever anyone begins to discuss "consciousness," I feel like I'm wandering into the weeds. It tends to be one of those subjects that anyone can freely adapt to any metaphysical notion they happen to embrace. Honestly, I haven't given it as much thought as I probably should, but if forced to offer a definition, I guess I'd say it's the awareness of being aware.

[@whatsontheothersside]

Things are conscious which don't know they are conscious. Bats are probably like this

[@waynehilbornTSS]

Ignoring your afterlife sounds brilliant to me dude.. feel free... Dying is safe if you could grasp all of your memories are forever external from brain/body as actual events captain kirk and spock could physically visit if they had a 1981 delorean capable of traveling 1/1,000,000th the speed of entanglement. Even your toaster can be aware if memory is simultaneous actual events silly humans cannot yet grasp. Dying is safe for a reason. Living randomly.. good on ya. smarter momnies await many

[@pcbacklash_3261]

@@whatsontheothersside I honestly don't know if bats are not aware of their own awareness. But on second thought, perhaps I'm conflating self-awareness with consciousness.

[@whatsontheothersside]

​@@pcbacklash_3261 There's probably some edge cases but considering humans have likely been the only earth bound animal whom thinks about thinking, and assuming this may be a necessary pre-condition for self-awareness, we might as well confidently exclude all non-humans from meta-awareness

[@timhenley3602]

@@whatsontheotherssideor earthworms…

[@ImNordicCelticSlavicIbericHan]

I think the universe is conscious and various things have various experiences of consciousness-my dog using smell has a very different conception of the walk we take than i do. Plants rooted as they may be dont necessarily have the experience of locomotion as humans and dogs do but they stand and the world is a buzz in and around them. Your video really resonated with me. Your intuition was communicated. I think when i die and even while im alive and breathing, my cells will slough off and become parts of the bodies of fungi, bacteria, archae, and so on up the food chain. Likewise when we consume a plant or animal, they live on in a very real way in us. And so on. We live on and on. And even when the sun consumes our world we will still go on. I can very well imagine that outer space has the fragments of the remains of other conscious beings. I hope youre on bluesky. I really like the cut of your jib.

[@polytechnica]

If consciousness is indeed a fundamental property of reality - like gravity, but intrinsically experiential - then what transforms the potential for subjective experience into the specific, individuated consciousness we know, and how does raw awareness become the richly textured inner life of a particular being?

[@bertkreft9689]

well - thats the right question 👍

[@waynehilbornTSS]

Oh.. I know.. Because all memories are simultaneous block universe vents ALWAYS existing and easily accessible by captain kirk and spock if they surpass the speed of light or go 1/10th as fats as entanglement using a 1981 delorean. Because block universe actual event memories are external.. and consciousness is external (from body) you could view life more simply as a collective dream of sorts.. and death as awaking up process.> YOU PERSONALLY were a plant to learn to breath.. a fish that waggled its butt to move.. and a crab to learn opposable thumbs.. aristotle's teleology.. darwin was a dummy. PERSONIFICATION is the answer to your question.. YOU will always FEEL separate.. and uniquely you.. for all of your lifetimes.. you cannot personify apparently so you can never be part of the ALL again.. not in so many words. Lifetime to lifetime you will continue to grow to something.. RAW AWARENESS... Your toaster (void of brain) - if we don't need a brain for memory.. why would a toaster.. Your toaster (void of brain) is aware (memory = consciousness) that it is simultaneously at the factory. void of eyes ears nose.. News to most folk: THOUGHTS are all themselves as conscious as every word in this sentence.. You experience a simultaneous event in a way that see,ms linear.. but retrocausality (ask a positron) is why we have free will. You were not instantly a bipedal.. humans are very advanced... we associate with thought forms. but we are all resonance.. if you feel separate and conscious.. then that's enough dying is safe because death is akin to waking up.. vindicating al religions. Your memories exist now.. a mirror in space could reflect your memory and surpassing light speed would; take you there. Mankind is not clever enough to understand fifth grade 120 year old theories of relativity yet. Wayne Hilborn youtube channel

[@slowdown7276]

The individual sensory barriers - ie skin, eyes, ears etc.

[@innovationiq]

It could be that consciousness is fundamental to all living organisms and that system complexity determines the organism's robustness both in terms of consciousness and its ability to interact with the world around it (the later being much more obvious). Even if consciousness is a yet to be discovered fundamental force in the universe, it is still very tough to imagine how organism complexity does not play the critical role in the acquisition and utilization of such a force. This makes the idea of consciousness as an emergent phenomenon, driving by biological complexity, very appealing.

[@gammaminobutyricacid]

agreed

[@HexerPsy]

It is definitely found along that route. When we experience pain, the pain signal is processed in the spine, and your limb moves to draw it away from the pain. Its later that your mind catches up as it processes the pain signals. Though I dont think such reflexes make you conscious really. I think you need a slightly higher order of decision making - of agency - to be conscious. And such basic decisions are easy to make: Are you hungry? Time to search for food. You can change your state by making actions. Its much later that having a good model in your head of cause and effect, object permanence, understanding of others, and so on --- are all much higher levels of complexity, and signs of consciousness, because you are aware of many more things.

[@micdavey]

The issue with the Bauby (The Diving Bell and the Butterfly) reference is that while he had almost no outward signs of consciousness, he was still a fully human being with all the normal brain activity. So it's not a good example of something that appears inanimate to actually be animated with consciousness. We can split open rocks until they're dust and they're still inanimate matter. There's no more activity on the inside than there is on the outside. Which brings us to the problem with panpsychism in that no one has any idea at all about how it could function or have an effect on material reality, let alone an idea that's testable.

[@HexerPsy]

Yes, it is terrible. Why do you even need external evidence? Why cant we focus on figuring out, what basic properties a conscious system needs to have at a minimum? Like the basic definition of an engine is that it takes fuel and converts it into motion. We don't just look at the outputs of engines to determine if something classifies as an engine.

[@Jibreel-jt1qh]

Everything is conscious, degree of consciousness depends on complexity of matter. Stone< tree< animal< human

[@Lenny-wp2fu]

I think the problem with panpsychism is to assign consciousness to certain things or systems. In nature there are no real boundaries between things. It is our mind that categorizes the outside world in order to make sense of it. The different categories that we project on to things (e.g. Chair and Table) makes us perceive a boundary between them. But that boundary is only created in our mind. Outside of our mind in the material realm, there are just a bunch of atoms distributed across space with different levels of density. All the boundaries we perceive in the world are only imaginations of the mind, there is no such thing as objective boundaries. So it doesn't really make sense to ask if a rock has consciousness or not, because there is nothing that separates the rock from its environment. If consciousness is out in nature, then there are no boundaries that would limit consciousness to a certain fraction of nature. Consciousness would rather be a quality of the universe such as space or time. And to be honest, there is no reason to assume that consciousness is less likely to be a fundamental quality of the universe then space and time. No reason to assume it's more likely to evolve out of space and time.

[@rustamkhan8217]

I also agree that everything is conscious in universe

[@salvadorcastaneda6759]

Thanks for sharing what leaned about this subject

[@user-gy4qr9lh1p]

Good stuff. Every experience -- including the subjective feeling of being a "self" -- is comprised purely of thought. What else could it be? Even the concept of having a brain is itself a thought. Feelings are thought. Colors and textures are thought, etc. Being a "self" is thought. Thinking about thought is thought. Based on this view, no external reality can be established as existing outside of thought , up to and including the perceiving subject. In the Hevajra (buddhist) practice, it is said that the whole display of external and internal reality is a vast, self-recognizing illusion. I am a terrible practitioner and I struggle with religious practices, but I can't help but think the Buddha was on to something here... 🐚

[@michaelbartlett6864]

It's NOT about what we call consciousness, it's ALL about universal fundamental awareness!

[@dakota-sessions]

Science is beginning to understand this undescribed thing that we will keep moving the goal-post on... Forever.

[@kckarencarel6352]

Sheesh. No, science is NOT shattering our intuitions about consciousness.

[@OzoTenzing]

😂

[@miztahfrawg]

Who am I gonna beleive a scientist with credentials or some asshole leaving a youtube comment?

[@OzoTenzing]

Yes, it's shattering. Congratulation. ​@@miztahfrawg

[@MADDcartman]

Oh, ok then.

[@OzoTenzing]

@@MADDcartman They always have to go with sensational headlines, don't they? SHATTERING OUT INTUITIONS

[@HakuCell]

if everything was conscious, how do you explain the fact that when you go unconscious you don't experience anything?

[@monkeknts]

Something to do with microtubules someone with a better understanding might be able to explain it better than I could.

[@boognewsnetwork7620]

Do you dream? Near Death Experience? Our physics has always had issues. Trying to find falsifiability within theories allows for experiments. The marriage of science, religion and/or spirituality was inevitable, or our destruction was.

[@brodymacfarlane3202]

Part of the reason why this consciousness discussion exists is because there are certain aspects of our definition of consciousness that don't map neatly onto physical brain states. When someone is 'unconscious' due to being knocked out, what we're really describing is a disruption of certain brain functions and memory formation - not necessarily the complete absence of all forms of consciousness or subjective experience. Just as we don't remember most of our dreams despite having experiences during sleep, the lack of remembered experience during unconsciousness doesn't definitively prove there was no experience at all. The initial argument conflates the medical/colloquial use of 'unconscious' with philosophical questions about the fundamental nature of consciousness and subjective experience.

[@akis7416]

You are unconscious when you sleep, yet you are experiencing dreams

[@brendanrobinson6860]

Being unaware is an the experience of unawareness.

[@jamiedorsey4167]

I'd add to question #1 Chalmer's philosophical zombie. An entity that has all the appearance of being conscious but isn't, a sophisticated android for example. Or Solipsism, I know that I'm conscious but can't directly show that anyone else is. Only through the inference that other people are built the same way I am makes a reasonable assumption that they'd have consciousness as well. For question #2 I'd ask if there is difference between "fast and slow" thinking. Does consciousness serve a different purpose in autonomic responses than it does in deliberative thinking?

[@mangarox134]

Consciousness is something that it’s like to be that thing

[@ptanji]

Beautiful notions!

[@paulshenouda3191]

Great topic, and well presented. Top stuff! This subject is absolutely fascinating and mysterious. Thank you Annaka for your work!

[@joelharris4399]

A lot of the words and terms we use in the everyday to navigate the world lack a stable basis

[@KootFloris]

Well, we also need to question that stable basis. Once the earth was flat, remember, and the 'Church' was always right. I predicted we'd find energies with or that have 'an attitude' some years ago. And now that provocative idea, might be more real than even I thought.

[@asokt4931]

Not self aware but does it have an intelligence and agency including autonomy. I would argue yes. Plus - awareness is an increased efficiency or a leap in efficiency where complexities and its configurations are inherently more efficiency when you have someone who is self aware.

[@KevinsDisobedience]

Some folks in the comments need to chill. She’s a reporter or sorts, who is entertaining panpsychic philosophies. Although if you read her book, you’d know she favors funding materialist philosophies of consciousness. Sounds about right to me.

[@TakanashiYuuji]

Lex Fridman did a podcast with Annaka Harris, and another with her colleague Donald Hoffman about this idea. I'd link to it, but KZbin doesn't like that.

[@conzidv8]

Grateful for her work! At least one of them has their head on straight.;)

[@h7opolo]

i've been considering plants as conscious since they react to the environment's changes that affect botanical homeostasis.

[@Jade15888]

In Buddhism where I came from, we have 弥勒(菩薩) which we pronounce 369 (菩薩) in Japanese. In my understanding, 369 is qualia, and the number 9 is absolute qualia. 弥勒菩薩 is the 51st stage of lucidity. Isn't that Kundalini awakening, enlightenment, 6th sense, 3rd eye, etc, the same thing? If so, I think we can artificially acheive enlightenment by microdosing of psychedelics. I wonder how many stages of consciousness exist, but the number 9 is always absolute. I thought it's the common sense.

[@JustinMShaw]

While it might be very cool for consciousness to permeate all of reality, I don't see the logical progression to that from what we've learned beyond just that it's not as unique to us as we foolishly used to assume generations ago. Could be true but I'm not going to assume it yet.

[@saralamuni]

Everything we perceive as being real is nothing but the perceptions of our own mind.

[@jerrylaserry443]

true,even death life and time is nothing more than illusion of human mind

[@RalphBrooker-gn9iv]

That’s a tautology. Every perception is perceived. We perceive nothing as false.

[@bertkreft9689]

perception is real - the meaning is made up - out of realy good reasons...

[@JustinMShaw]

And our own minds very clearly strive to model an external reality. That limitation that you mention is very specific to just an individual and a moment in time. Extend either and we test our models to confirm that external reality.

[@jerrylaserry443]

@@RalphBrooker-gn9iv can you elaborate?

[@bertkreft9689]

there is consciousness - spread all over the entire universe - but it is not equally distributed - neither in quantity nor in quality - not even among human beings - so there is a few missconceptions - leading to ignorance

[@h0tbr0wn]

I'm only ever conscious of things coming thru my nervous system, and then only a tiny bit of that, and then only some of the time.

[@dr.nobody3357]

This is awesome.

[@fabiocarletti5192]

When she talked about running through the woods and seeing the plants as conscious creatures, it came to my mind this italian university professor, Stefano Mancuso, who founded the LINV international laboratory of plant neurobiology…look it up, his foundings are really interesting

[@KootFloris]

I predicted we'd find energies with or that have 'an attitude' some years ago. We're getting closer!

[@matmehalfway]

"Mentalism: The universe is a mental creation, and all things are created through the power of the mind." - The Kybalion The mind that creates and rules everything has many names: Supreme Counciousness, Cosmos, Universe, God. But it simply is the very fabric of existence coming into being to experience as many perspectives as possible. Infinitely. For the best notion of Consciousness you'll ever find, read the Bhagavad-Gīta.

[@rickhaydan3433]

In Transcendental Meditation, we learn, and eventually may personally experience, that the entire universe is conscious and we are only extensions of that consciousness ... not the originanators of consciousness.

[@robertdouglas8895]

We see it in the terms we give it, which are our thoughts about it. When we see ourselves as victims, that is different from seeing ourselves as manifesting it and interpreting it as what we are making it up. We see an insane world with insane thoughts, a condemned world with judgmental thoughts, a gentle world from forgiving thoughts. From the latter, we approach God's thoughts. ACIM.

[@AhirZamanSairi]

I though TM had nothing to do with belief/ideology, and that it was just a neutral utility to be used for health benefits. At least that's what bob roth and seinfeld explained it as in that podcast.

[@robertdouglas8895]

@@AhirZamanSairi The value he is giving it is that we are victims or functions of real consciousness like fingers of the real body. Love is the unifying factor. Without it, we think we are separate.

[@Traderhood]

All the way until you fall into deep sleep. Where there is no consciousness like there is no consciousness in anesthesia.

[@rickhaydan3433]

@AhirZamanSairi Yes, there is no religion in what I described, just a reality. Please note, the Maharishi was a doctor of physics and modern physics substantiate the concepts of TM.

[@kmi-o-nr7262]

Hello and thank you for these interesting videos... I like to think that consciousness as we imagine does not really exist but is closer to a shared global energy. Which associated with a biological body, like mammals, will give “consciousness”. Plants share this energy but use it differently. And that everything is shared, there are many concrete examples which suggest that human consciousness is not the property or creation of the human body.

[@livephysiology]

Is it possible to have consciousness without life?

[@atheistsince1210]

Well I can't exactly throw out my entire philosophy hundreds of editions I'm too far gone and comfortable in my own Descartesian skin I think therefore I am.

[@encounteringjack5699]

Glad to hear science is catching up to philosophy. Note: no need to start a debate, though I am up for it. lol This comment is based on the heavily naturalistic or materialistic focus many scientists have. Plus, some have claimed that science has replaced philosophy, hence why it can be thought of as “science vs philosophy”. Science is a good source of truths regardless since it deals with empirically verifiable data, however, there is an assumption to be aware of when looking at scientific data. Science deals with what can be observed empirically, however, you can only know so much through empirical data alone. The fact that science is dependent on what is physical and empirical, limits what can be gathered from scientific studies. Philosophy allows for deeper explanations and non-empirical approaches.

[@MADDcartman]

“Catching up” would infer these two fields function on the same plane. Philosophy has the ability to search into the distance but without science you never build the steps required to see further.

[@encounteringjack5699]

@ True, but some say philosophy is not needed in today’s world. However, philosophers have come up with plenty of conclusions. It’s just many don’t agree out of assumption and stubbornness. That or isn’t taken very seriously since most of it comes out of questions and problems rather than an exact answer. Science deals purely in the physical, while philosophy can explore anything it wants without limitation. There’s still plenty of unanswered questions, but as of now the only thing people agree on with consciousness is that it is something more than just physical. So saying “it’s might not just be coming out of complex processes and may be fundamental” is literally catching up to where philosophy is at. There’s currently some focus on panpsychism which basically, it agrees with the idea that consciousness is fundamental. Same with idealism. Most disagree with panpsychism due to the combination problem. Personally, though I’m not completely certain that I have proven this (I have to review again to be sure, plus even if I haven’t maybe someone else did), I’ve concluded that consciousness is fundamental, though I’m not sure in what way yet. I based my conclusion of off an observers point of view, but exactly what follows from this conclusion I’m not sure. Whether it’s panpsychism, idealism, or theism, or maybe something else, I don’t know.

[@waynehilbornTSS]

@@encounteringjack5699 - Dying is safe because your memories are forever and ever (amen) stored as simultaneous block universe events easily accessible by captain kirk and spock if they used a 1981 delorean capable of going at 1/10th the speed of entanglement (much faster than light speed). Do I need a second sentence to explain all of reality or are you good now? A mirror in space would show you memory.. but surpassing light speed would allow you to film your first kiss. So... EXTERNAL memory/consciousness... means your toaster void of brain.,. can also be aware (memory - consciousness) that it is simultaneously at the factory being entangled. a rock thinks the hard problem of consciousness is ridiculous. You are learning every word in this sentence concurrently to now.. in a real place we can visit if we surpass light speed.... as entanglement provenly does. Combination problem is solved by energy followking all thoughts.. expectations (faith runs kaboodle - who knew) cause all quantum collapses even into the perceived past. Teleology.. not darwin.. you personally were a plant to learn to breath.. you personally were fishy that waggled its butt to move.. you personally were acrab to learn opposable thumbs, Science (materialism),..... is a foolish religion if memory is external.. we reside in a collective dream (not solipsism at all - almost opposite.. everything has consciousness). Every word in this sentence has a consciousness and thoughts petition our minds. My first sentence explained all of reality.. but you evolved into god yesterday but with hindsight and 20/20.. There is fifth grader simple science behind your logical conclusions/. Wayne hilborn KZbin channel

[@JustinMShaw]

@@encounteringjack5699 Technically science is a branch of philosophy - specifically the one that emphasizes empirical testing of ideas. Saying that one is catching up to the other is pretty meaningless.

[@encounteringjack5699]

@@JustinMShaw You could say that about every field of study.

[@akif1633]

Well put!

[@christinechapman9764]

I never assumed that.

[@Robert-yc9ql]

Nice to see Sam's wife getting some exposure. Much preferred to those pseudoscientists often featured here.

[@Pradeep_889]

Amazing.

[@EllBailz]

For those interested further, go and listen to anything by Rupert Spira. Exceptional communicator on the nature of reality.

[@OzoTenzing]

Rupert Spira is a non-dual zombie.

[@darbs1977]

Inspiring!😃

[@Leo88Lovely]

Everything is everything

[@LucaNova101]

It never startet and it will never ends.

[@bobinkurian3357]

All I have to say is don't be confused between 'Awareness' and 'Consciousness'😂 Also...there are multiple levels of Awareness and Consciousness.😊

[@AAA9549-w7w]

22/11/2024 Nobody has ever seen an atom. However, consciousness is a result. Metaphysician

[@BillMurey-om3zw]

10:14 to say...we don't know.

[@muhdkamilmohdbaki7054]

This is my limited understanding about anything or everything. First, we understood the concept and then we come up with the term/word to describe/illustrate/summarize it. Not the other way around, come up with a term/word and then figuring out what it means. It seems that we don't even have a clear definition of consciousness.

[@DBFilms.]

Consciousness is primary in nature. All matter is a derivative of consciousness.

[@Ayubkdkisitu_ug_usa]

Its crazy how i have had this idea all along but just cause am a truck driver and not a scientist, anyways i think AI will help us decode plant and animal languages, imagine working with elephants on a construction site and other things like owning pet birds that come back home😂 and go check on our friends 😂😂 birds might ask for citizenship or an economy under water after we have decoded fish languages. My final thought 💭 of today, I think all living things communicate but we just don't understand each other

[@kella4721]

if experiences can be shared between systems? yes

[@compassroses]

My consciousness says that this meaningless broadening of a term is utter twaddle.

[@aletheiai]

The flakery in the comments supports that conclusion.

[@prestonbacchus4204]

Are atoms conscious? What a great question. Isn't the entire Universe conscious?

[@leponpon6935]

"Consciousness is chemicals, what our environment makeup is and none of it is our own free will". Maybe no.

[@VeronicaRamirez-NWI]

If I'm ever locked in, please don't further torment me with a nightmarish simulation. Have the decency to leave me the fuck alone. I will gladly read a book.

[@technolus5742]

Wtf, asking a writer to make such bold and unfounded claims on such a non-consensual topic among actual experts both within their fields and across fields.

[@bmwassim4839]

Yes

[@mikescarborough9196]

Fascinating, but I’m in more of a blue pill mood today.

[@genteka5106]

It just suddenly became clear, don't you think so? 😁

[@a.t.789]

According to part of this reasoning, it would be possibile for a rock to write a book with the equivalent of their eyelid, one day?

[@andyrogers747]

Why is consciousness thought of as more complex than just experiencing the inputs from all of our senses run through a set of rules specific to an organism, and traversing existing pathways similar to the themes from those inputs. The experience itself feels profound but not sure it is.

[@shaliuk]

Because of our emotions. It's hard to equate emotions into it. How does a loin learn to protect its cub. Why do humans feel sad and happy by sheer will sometimes. That is where the whole evolving theory falls.

[@mattdamon2084]

​@@shaliukemotions are key to reach actual whole body control... without it conciousnes can't exist... Balance is necessary look around

[@shaliuk]

@mattdamon2084 true but how do cells,atoms, molecules, neurons ect trigger emotions? That's the conundrum

[@jamiedorsey4167]

The hard question is how do all those inputs produce something so intangible like consciousness. Why is there experience at all? Your hypothesis is a possibility, but it has yet to be demonstrated scientifically. Consciousness is unlike anything else we know of, so it doesn't automatically follow that its origins are like everything else we know of.

[@andyrogers747]

@@jamiedorsey4167 consciousness I think is purely a function of evolution. It helps us navigate things such that we continue to persist, and the rules (like protecting cubs for example) are sets of behaviours which led to organisms with that trait surviving. How they become hard coded rules which differentiate lions from humans, and are then passed down the evolutionary tree (or phylum classification) I’m not sure

[@gianpaulgraziosi6171]

I meditated so hard I spoke to a tree…

[@SimonFalkentorp]

There is no observer There is nothing observed There is only observation (Erwin Neutzsky-Wulff, Danish philosopher)

[@thewisetemplar]

Claims that consciousness is a basic phenomenon in nature, essentially pervading everything. Yet, no proof is provided. Her mention of the paralyzed person doesn't take into account that the subject is a grown man with a mature brain, who obviously already has an internal model of the world to perform computations. However, she proceeds to dismiss the idea that complex processing is required for consciousness to arise. When mentioning the brain's ability to integrate temporal disparities in real events into a single, unified experience, she fails to acknowledge one of the brain's most important functions: making predictions. The brain processes information hierarchically, allowing it to handle temporal disparities with relative ease. From this, she leaps to the non sequitur that all systems are conscious and that consciousness is fundamental. Overall disappointing arguments.

[@aletheiai]

"Overall disappointing arguments." That's putting it politely.

[@gabor6259]

We have zero reasons to think that non-animals are conscious. I hope Big Think doesn't go down this esoterical route.

[@MichelleCarithersAuthor]

We are spiritual being using our physical bodies to interact with our planet. We are able to exist due to our 'consciousness not our minds'. Our minds(via our senses) are assisting our consciousness, therefore the driving "force" in our lives are our consciousness with is undefinable with words, but can only be "experienced" in nature. We are similar to a "big bang" seemingly created out of 'nothing' Hope this makes sense

[@OzoTenzing]

Consciousness is an emergent property?!

[@encounteringjack5699]

Only under naturalism. It’s an assumption scientists make because “it’s not science if it hasn’t been tested empirically”. That BS. There is only so much science can do with the subject of consciousness. This is more suited towards philosophical inquiry.

[@EduardoRodriguez-du2vd]

No. It is not true that one is aware of being a certain substance. You are carbon, and yet you have no idea what it means to be carbon. Not understanding what consciousness is always leads to imagining irrational hypotheses. If one is going to consider the phenomenon of consciousness, it must be concretely defined and its limits must be clearly determined, as understood up to the present, regarding reality.

[@dryburn]

A person can have all of the wacky ideas they want. When you’re an attractive person, people will listen to you and your thoughts. Sam has the pleasure of listening to her not say anything of substance for the rest of his life. What a lucky guy.

[@MultiRRR123]

Sam?

[@waynehilbornTSS]

Idiots assume brain memory while death is safe because memories are actual simultaneous block universe events captain kirk and spock could actually film.. if they could travel even 1/10th as fast as entanglement (much much much faster than light speed) Atheism is rooted in stupidity.. and even if you wouldn't recognize a scientific fact if it bit you.. Dying is a WAKING UP PROCESS (all religions are valid) because memories are external You're simply viewing every license plate number concurrently to forever and ever. Much of mankind simply needs to be born top smarter mommies. Brain memory.. that is mythical whacky unproven idea YOU BUY INTO.. as part of YOUR materialist religion of fools. A materialist has TWO ways to prove they are not living a collective (not solipsism) dream 1) have their mommy sign a note 2) self pinch very hard. show me a video of either.. a note form your mom.. or a video of you self pinching.. and I'll add that to your competent thoughts. You would need to understand fifth grade physics to grasp reality and consciousness... humans seem allergic to common sense and reasoning.. Make no mistake.. atheism is rooted in idiocy.. smarter mommies await.. and being recycled has its downfalls sometimes.. graduation from this republican loca is only done one way.. graduate. This argument is irrefutable.. you must resort to ad hominem, if you want to feel amusing. Tell us in your bestest words.. why your mommy feels you're not living the common drama like the rest of us. Truly.. atheists are all morons.. .

[@salatsoose1290]

@@MultiRRR123 Her husband, who is the actual expert here since he's the one with a degree in neuroscience not his shill of a wife

[@Maddreck]

I knew it! I figured this out on mushrooms one time :D

[@Anthaliel]

No disrespect to the speaker, but her whole talk irritates me -.- It's like seeing a croissant, when you're starving, and explaining its shape and taste,without actually taking a bite. It also feels like I'm back in college, listening to my teacher explaining why cats "lack the ability to communicate", because her definition of "communication" is so restrictive that it only applies to humans. Gosh. Either you want to admit the rare and inadmissible possibility that humans aren't the centre of the Universe, or you admit that we are but a series of comical -sorry- chemical coincidences over billions of years and the Universe couldn't care less about us. TL;DR: you want to pinpoint the exact border between consciousness and basic instinct? Go ahead. I have more important (to me) things to do, like enjoying and experiencing life outside my own head.

[@cipaisone]

Are farts mean?

[@shaunaksoni7595]

Depends on the smell

[@bitofwizdomb7266]

Pantheism

[@HexerPsy]

5:55 Why are you viewing an impair person as the example of this story? Look at a properly functioning system and ask the same questions. WHY do you need external evidence for the confirmation of conciousness? You would end up in a debate of 'what qualifies as evidence?', which is a sliding scale. Rather a much better question would be: What properties does a concious system have - vs a non conscious system? The obvious answer is: choice or agency. To process one of more inputs into a certain output, which may vary. 6:14 Instead you go with a leading answer: the absence of evidence is not evidence of a present consciousness. There lives a pink elephant in my walls - that you cant detect it, isnt reason the believe the pink elephant is not there. It is a ridiculous assumption. Wishful thinking. 7:58 You are describing the brain's model world. The brain builds a model of the outside world, and uses processed sensory input to update the model. Its how your brain deals with object permanence, with expectations about the physical world - and updates to the model can lead to surprise or humor. You doing a double take on something, is because you didn't believe your last correction to your world model. This is why, if someone cant wrapt their head around something, its very hard for them to notice certain things that are beyond their understanding. Information is lost and filtered out during the interpretation process. This model building is by definition concious, imo. 8:37 Not all processes and systems are conscious. If you stub your toe, the pain signals in your spine cause your foot to twitch back. Thats an 'unconscious reaction' because your leg responds before your head realized if your toe is even hurt. I think its fair to say reflexes are not conscious - because you didn't choose to move your leg. But, let's say you did think your twitching leg is a sign of conciousness -- then you must accept your leg - as it reacts on spinal level - and your mental model in your brain are on different levels. Either implying your consciousness varies - or your have multiple partial ones. Does a bug, hiding from a flash light under a rock, know why it should hide from bright light? I think not. Its reactive but not conscious.

[@Raymund-Swales]

Gaia.

[@OzoTenzing]

Noosphere

[@billyb6001]

Why do they have that stupid backdrop?

[@bruceneeley1724]

Well done!

[@sbtz7]

❤

[@JonasWally]

Bernardo Kastrup

[@OzoTenzing]

Evan Thompson

[@yuvalkaplan3074]

@@OzoTenzing I thought Evan Thompson is a materialist.. I am pretty sure he belive that consciesness is a brain product.

[@OzoTenzing]

@@yuvalkaplan3074 No, he's not a materialist, he's just more open to scientific findings and not dogmatic with his Buddhist past.

[@khc8800]

I think consciousness a very different energy that's beyond our current understanding of physics and time. It probably requires a larger brain to fully understand.

[@lovethyneibor22736]

"Consciousness is an illusion. If people were really that conscious, they would probably stop having kids a long time ago considering how crazy and dark the world is" - David Benatar

[@WillyJunior]

Dumb quote. To have an illusion, you need to have someone/something that is subjected to the illusion. That thing is consciousness.

[@saralamuni]

The belief that the world is inherently crazy and dark is the illusion. Consciousness is a profound reality, and it enables people to find meaning, beauty, and purpose in life, even amidst challenges. It is precisely this awareness of life’s richness that motivates people to have children and nurture the next generation, demonstrating an enduring hope and faith in humanity’s capacity to grow and thrive.

[@urmama1-x2i]

Bro why you so pestemistic? We live in a beautiful world, beauty is everywhere Ukraine, Afghanistan, North Korea...

[@NamelessAwarenessG]

As someone said something like, "If consciousness is illusion, then who is the one being fooled?"

[@saralamuni]

The belief that the world is inherently dark and crazy is the illusion. Consciousness, rather than being a false construct, reflects the human capacity to find meaning, beauty, and resilience even amidst challenges. It is precisely because people are conscious that they continue to have children, driven by hope, love, and the potential for a brighter future.

[@crutsenor]

it went out of my head. can someone make videos like this in hindi language?

[@KsK-p7o]

💖❤️💖

[@silvioi9061]

I think the problem is that, as doctor Harris said at the beginning of this video, we don’t have a definition for consciousness, and she didn’t even provide a provisional one for the means of the video. So we could allow everything to fit in this non-description of consciousness

[@ptanji]

2:20 “awareness, felt experience, sentience”

[@WillyJunior]

The definition of consciousness isn't the mystery, we have concrete definitions.

[@Mikaelebl]

Consciousness is what allows us to experience our inner world and outer world through our senses, knowing/knowledge and intuition. Conscious is our lived experiences through both subjectivity and objectivity. You could look at Hegel and his concept of phenomenology ie experiencing consciousness

[@KenmoreChalfant]

It's in the beginning of the video. Consciousness is all human experience - it's everything we know and experience. In other words, we wouldn't know if anything existed if we weren't conscious. We wouldn't be able watch this video and write these comments. The technology of computers and KZbin wouldn't exist if conscious entities didn't cooperate. It's like Descartes famously says, "I think therefore I am". If you have the capacity to doubt your existence, the one thing you can be sure of is that you are someone having a thought, therefore, at least you exist as consciousness.

[@whatsontheothersside]

The double negation of the presence of experience

[@GeorgesDupont-do8pe]

I will make an assertion. Well a couple. Make of them as you will. 1/ consciousness is an emergent property of intelligence. 2/ intelligence is intrinsically entangled in our universe. Where, I don't know. Quantum field? Atoms? Big question, in certain quantum physics interpretations, one needs "an observer" to collapse the quantum wave function. If you want to bug a sub-atomic physicist ask them about this observer. And keep digging. Who observes that which we cannot perceive but nevertheless exists? Like beyond the observable Universe. They call this the "shut up and calculate" interpretation of quantum physics. For a reason.

[@Theleily]

When you are in pain or when you fall in love or when you injured badly you are conscious.

[@jasondads9509]

Please define the term, first

[@jamiedorsey4167]

2:20 “awareness, felt experience, sentience”

[@area9364]

Consciousness in its basic form is the mingling of vibrations together. More the mingling of vibrations, more the consciousness, and everything in the universe is conscious at some level. Im assuming humans are at the highest level.

[@zombieskin]

The universe itself could easily be a whole consciousness, so to speak, and we might never know. A quark has more of a chance at understanding what being part of a human is like, currently.

[@ewAphex]

Mu

[@Thomas-gk42]

Sorry, that´s nonsense

[@lisaprince1313]

WHEN THI CHANNEL FEATURED SAM HARRIS i knew i couldnt take them serious

[@iankane1733]

What’s wrong with Sam Harris?

[@robertdouglas8895]

All of the physical world is made up of illusions because we are not separate but all one. Forgiveness is the mental process, metanoia, that brings us together and eliminates the thought that we are victims.

[@hym279]

Two words: Prove It

[@AndersRosendalBJJ]

Short answer: No.

[@dolliemollly]

its called big think, not short think.

[@matmehalfway]

Imagine being arrogant enough to infer I know something specialists are trying to figure out. Such a short minded attitude..

[@thomasbardoux1692]

​@@matmehalfway hardly, specialists have. Tendancy to be dead wrong

[@Eighteen19]

Short answer: Yes.

[@GregoryMills-ht2td]

Short Answer Trump. Go watch Fox News

[@Nature1-k9y]

AT OM Not exist !!! A Tom not exist !! SEE IN YOUR CURVED Light shining eyes !! YOU DREAM DANCERS in IMAGES ILLUSION 😊😊😊😊😊😊😊😊😊

[@macdougdoug]

Sounds like we can believe anything based on our confused assumptions