The Scientific Problem of Consciousness

Anil Seth wants to understand how minds work. As a neuroscientist at the University of Sussex in England, Seth has seen firsthand how neurons do what they do - but he knows that the puzzle of consciousness spills over from neuroscience into other branches of science, and even into philosophy. Read more at Quanta: www.quantamaga...
Warning: This video may potentially trigger seizures for people with photosensitive epilepsy. Viewer discretion is advised.
Quanta Magazine is an editorially independent publication supported by the Simons Foundation.

[@prakharanand5760]

"I've been lucky enough to hang on to them" Well, very relatable really. I've had many moments like that, one of them was when my 12 yr old self was studying gravitation for the exams, and suddenly asked my father "well what newton told us about how gravity works, what the relation between the distance, the masses and the force is, but what exactly is gravity? " He replied "it just is" And left it at that. But I needed my answer, I googled it to find this on Wikipedia "acc. to GR it is the consequence of the distortion of the spacetime around the object, the trajectories of the objects around it are influenced by the geometry of that distortion" As a child, that was too much to take in, and with exams and school on the brink, I eventually forgot about it.... Now that I'm a teenager, I realised that this is important to me. Even tho no one around me is interested, I still am, and that's all that matters.

[@nabtogo]

you are very ahead of you generation

[@simonkamau32]

Nice! I too can relate. My 15 year-old past self would ask the physics teacher "What is gravity?" almost every lesson. Unfortunately, this was long before google and I developed other interests so never persued a degree in physics (for some reason, we only learned about Newton, not Einstein). My question had to wait for PBS Spacetime to be invented for me to get an answer I could understand! Stay curious :-)

[@bertrc2569]

At the moment the issue of gravity is stuck in a circular argument. Gravity is mass. Mass is gravity. There is an apparent attraction but not a force. The current explanation that mass bends spacetime gets us nowhere. It just begs the question ' how?' So we go nowhere by following this path. Perhaps you will find the answer.

[@prakharanand5760]

@@bertrc2569 yep, but what made this a brilliant insight was... That it works, right? As you said, there's still a, what I think is, long way to go in terms of understanding the fundamentals of gravity, the"why? "s And "how? "s still remain, which is a good thing ofc, how boring itd be if it all was just discovered at once?

[@Tyguy161]

I wonder why the universe is expanding rather than collapsing. If gravity is an all pervasive force seeking to bring matter to a state of equilibrium, you would expect the galaxies to congeal together into one giant mass and then form a black hole, eventually crushing the universe into non existence. One might also expect the big bang to never have happened if gravity simply seeks a state of equilibrium - if the universe is in a state of stable non existence, what can disrupt that? The facts are that the physical universe did come into existence from a prior state of non existence, as in the big bang did certainly happen, and all of the galaxies observed seem to be flying away from each other as the universe expands. The only explanations current scientists have is that "dark energy" is causing the universe to expand rapidly and the main bulk of the universe is composed of "dark matter", instead of conventionally understood "physical matter". Despite the supposed "laws" of thermodynamics, entropy, and equilibrium, the universe is only getting larger, more complex, and more sophisticated with time. I think new ways of thinking about old problems are needed in this day and age, really there is too much experimental evidence for outdated modes of thinking to cope with.

[@kevalan1042]

"I'll see it when I believe it" - very good phrase

[@alliemw]

That's perfect.

[@RatusMax]

I've had so many experiences with my consciousness. My first experience comes when I tried to stop peeing the bed. In the dream I would go to the bathroom and pee. The problem was, that wasn't a real bathroom. The way I stopped this habit was to finally realize I was dreaming. The dead giveaway was a toilet appearing out of the desert. I had to ask myself a lot a questions in the dream. It still felt consistent. Real...Then I was just looking at the cactus just behind the toilet. I then forced myself up and ran to the bathroom. Some years later I was placed under anesthesia when I had a surgery. The doctors were waiting for me to wake up. I was taking a bit longer than usual. So they went to go get my parents lol. I was in that dream, I was sitting on a porch just like at my grandparents house. There were multiple entities I was talking to. (I am not religious or superstitious ) I told them "ok well it's time for me to go" Then I opened my eyes and saw the nurse walking towards me with my parents. My mom told me "She said you were still asleep". Out of all chances, I woke up just when they walked up to me. I found that a bit odd. Some more years later I was in a dream and it was a beautiful sunset. I went to go read something on a piece of paper and could not see it at all. So I tried everything in the dream to see that paper. While in a dream I somehow also saw my closet. This threw me for a loop. I could not read the damn paper, I was in a dream walking around in a city with a beautiful sunset and then I also saw my ugly closet. It took me a while to realize what happened while I was in the dream. Apparently I tried to read the paper so hard that I opened my eyes WHILE SLEEPING!!! So I was experiencing the dream and also looking out into the world. THAT WAS AMAZING!!! I woke myself up to see if that closet was indeed a real closet I was looking at in the real world. The last thing that happened to me in my dream was I had full control of it. Usually I have like 50% control, (it's a great time to catch up on studying. All I have to do is to study until I fall asleep and then I dream about the stuff lol) and some times even more control. This one was special, I don't know why I was fully aware, but I was doing all sorts of stuff. I then met someone with a riddle in my dream. When they asked me it, I felt so smug, I was grinning. The reason being it's my dream, It's my brain I know everything in it. So I told a great answer to the riddle. I was waiting for my prize and they told me it was wrong. Then told me the actual answer which was far superior to what I said. It was then I realized (I could be wrong) my consciousness is a passenger in the brain. The brain is hiding information from me. I wanted to quickly write down that damn riddle, I went to go find a pen and paper. Then when I tried to remember it I couldn't. I REALLY HATE THAT !!! When I can't remember my dreams but I know they occurred. Sometimes I can remember it exactly. Sometimes I know they happened and then I am thinking about it just when I wake up...but then poof it's gone!! Unable to even think about it. I know many times my dreams helped me solve problems where after I was stuck on something, I woke up and instantly knew the solution. I want to expand this dream thing. Maybe VR. A place where you build up your personal translation from your self language to the universal languages. For example, mathematics. When we are young, we are supposed to be learning that universal language. Yet in the U.S.A many are left behind and are never taught to connect their personal language to the universal language of mathematics. The personal language is how YOU perceive things in the universe. The universal language is a way to find common ground with others in this universe. A VR world where all the keys to your personal language and the universal languages reside. Where you can use your personal language unimpeded and just try everything not burdened by the universal languages rules. Then when you get something, the translation can be created to translate it or maybe the key already exists.

[@BroomstickIsLove]

@RatusMax Sounds like the Tower of Babel, a Time where everyone understood everyone. Or the Akash Records, a Place where all Information in the Universe is stored.

[@libsh5684]

I’ve had that thing with a half dream too, where you see reality and your dream, except I could switch between it at will, I was in a very uncomfortable position but didn’t want to move since I knew that would end the dream, which I had delayed control of (I could make things happen but they happened like ten seconds after I wanted them too), eventually I just gave up and woke up

[@Milkshakman]

"If everybody would agree that their current reality is a reality, and that what we essentially share is our capacity for constructing a reality, then perhaps we could all agree on a meta-agreement for computing a reality that would mean survival and dignity for everyone on the planet, rather than each group being sold on a particular way of doing things." - Francisco Varela

[@thewiseturtle]

As I see it, reality is exactly the way it needs to be, and diversity is necessary for a healthy, complex system to emerge. Just as the diverse cells in our bodies form different kinds of organs, with different ways of doing things like pumping blood, building muscles, feeding gut bacteria, and moving information around with electromagnetic nerves, so too do the different individual animals, vegetables, minerals, and so on of the Earth are starting to form different organizations that serve the planet's needs, such as making the internet, shipping resources, sharing stories about what's going on locally in different parts of the world, and designing ways to use available resources to better serve the planet's needs in the future.

[@BrendanECasey]

Did OJ do it, or didn't he? The glove didn't fit... I think Oj is innocent. If you don't agree, you are living in an alternate reality. As long as questions like this remain unresolved, we will likely be stuck in a morass of uncertainties. Fire the lawyers, lock up the judges, "viva la revolucion!"

[@sternamc919sterna3]

@@BrendanECasey in a reality without uncertainty would humans be able to dream?

[@lilayeleex]

real

[@omarnomad]

It's amazing to see Varela cited here.

[@meestyouyouestme3753]

“I’ve just been lucky enough to hang onto them.” What a great thing to say about curiosity. Most people get through life by sticking with what they know, but some can’t get through life without poking what they don’t know with a stick. Sure the bear might bite but what’s bear science without danger?

[@sabarishr381]

We are decoding the secret of consciousness in a world made by our consciousness

[@radhakishandhakaddha7711]

Paradox

[@sabarishr381]

@@radhakishandhakaddha7711 Exactly

[@RecursionIs]

You and the world are made from the same components. A world perceiving itself

[@AThousandSuns42]

@@RecursionIs "We are the Universe's way of experiencing itself" - Carl Sagan

[@sternamc919sterna3]

Just to reach the conclusion that we might not be so conscious 😉

[@vectoralphaSec]

just waiting for this guy to eventually be on Lex Fridman podcast.

[@JanneWolterbeek]

Yes, pls. Someone pls let him know!

[@skib1digyat]

You should watch him on Theories of Everything With Curt Jaimungal. He has much more in-depth and, in my opinion, better and interesting conversations with people.

[@DannyPhantumm]

He has already had a great episode on Sam Harris's podcast "Making Sense". Lex was partly inspired by Sam, so I believe if you enjoy Lex's podcast, Sam's would be enjoyable.

[@vincentmiller420]

He will, I think.

[@seanleith5312]

Consciousness is not a physical or biological phenomenon. You can't measure brain wave to detect anything. It is like trying to find a ghost using x-Ray. Those people have no idea what they are doing.

[@CitizenOfTheWorld2025]

I also experience lucid dreams. In the beginning I didn’t know what they were called or that other people also had them. I have never met anyone else who has but have read about others. When I attempt to explain them to friends and family the usual bored response is: „They’re just dreams Chris.“ For me they are thrilling and ecstatic experiences but frustratingly infrequent. They start while I am in a typical dream scenario, completely carried along by whatever script my deeper consciousness has concocted, and then suddenly my normally waking conscience self will realize that I am dreaming and in the dreamworld. Instead of the experience growing duller or somehow less real it suddenly becomes what I can only describe as hyper-real. Everything is vividly detailed, colorful and tangibly solid, with a compelling richness and intensity both perceptually and emotionally. At this point the dream plot ends and I am suddenly free to do whatever I want. Usually I try to go as far as I can to test the limits of this thrilling environment often touching and examining things along the way. In the past I would sometimes confront people I met there by excitedly stating: „This whole thing is just a dream! „ to which I might receive an unexcited, tolerant and knowing little nod in return. I have also said at times to the inhabitants of this realm: „If this is all just a dream then it must be my dream and therefore you all must be fake!“. (Unassailable application of logic here.) The response to this is often something like an indignant: „Excuse me, but I am not - fake! „. I then usually accept their declarations of independent autonomous reality without further questioning and am a bit chagrined at my rudeness. I find this a fragil mental state out of which it is easy to fall. The problem is that if I lose focus I return to a normal dreaming state and if I concentrate on the fact that there must be a sleeping Chris lying somewhere I suddenly wake up. It becomes very important to me to try to bring back evidence that this other world is just as real as the waking world. Of course all my efforts here prove fruitless. I have tried various strategies such as memorizing street signs, newspaper headlines, and once even tried to return with a fist full of cherry tree blossoms. I had them gripped tightly in my fist and then I woke up lying in bed with my eyes closed. I could feel them still clutched in my hand and while lying flatly on my back, I opened my eyes and as stealthily as possible, so as not to break the spell, I looked down at my hand as I slowly uncurled my fingers and-damn it! … my hand was empty. [It just occurred to me that if my hand had been full of blossoms this would still prove nothing and no one would believe me and I would risk ending up in a psych ward! ] This is such a fascinating psychological experience that I wish it were the subject of serious study as I think it could be a useful tool into exploring the nature of consciousness.

[@yiboyu624]

Hi Chris. I am not sure if you have read the book, Dreams of Awakening by Charlie Morley, where he had scientific and spiritual explanations of lucid dreaming, and several techniques to bring about lucid dreaming more frequently. Some Tibetans as well as some sorcerers in the general area of Mexico also practice lucid dreaming as a way to enlightenment, power, and freedom. I do think lucid dreaming promises power and perception that is not experienced by most, but to understand the totality of consciousness, lucid dreaming might still be limited, because the dreamer still thinks it is separate from the dream. I hope you keep exploring.

[@CitizenOfTheWorld2025]

@@yiboyu624 Hello, no, I don’t know of this book or it’s author. Thank you for the kind recommendation; I am very interested.

[@CitizenOfTheWorld2025]

@@yiboyu624 Hello again, your comment about the “dreamer still thinking he is separate from the dream” got me thinking about my own experiences. Part of the thrill of lucid dreaming is that the dream seems overwhelmingly real and tangible. There comes with it the idea that one is out of one’s body and possessing a god-like freedom. There comes also the epiphany that the material waking-world is fundamentally no different from the dream world in that perception of both is a psychological projection. Some of the dream realms in which I have found myself are so creative and fantastic in their beauty and richness that upon awaking it leaves me with two ideas: one is that our minds are so much more creative than the waking self believes that if we could only learn to tap this we could transform our world and society for the better. The other interpretation that come to my mind, on a completely mystical level, is that the worlds I am having the privilege to visit are separate from myself and themselves “realities” with independent inhabitants. Either of these possibilities have profound implications. I am always fascinated that those I meet during a lucid dream insist on their autonomy. On occasion I have had the feeling that I am either being somehow “allowed” to visit or I have stumbled accidentally into another reality and that my presence is being tolerated with some anxiousness in that I, in my ignorance, could run amok with the false belief that “it is just a dream” and therefore my actions would have no consequences. I tend to take a passiv stance in hope that a “higher self” will guide me and reveal something I need to learn. Up to this point the main thing I have learned is that: “The medium is the message.” These experiences have led me to question the standard accepted premises of our culture and to question the very nature of reality, personal and otherwise. On a completely subjective level these experiences have lessened my fear of death because they have given me the feeling that I have already occasionally transcended my body and that death is no different than a shift of focus to another realities. I am well aware that a psychological experience is no proof of anything but I am nonetheless comforted. I wish you well in whatever reality you find yourself.

[@yiboyu624]

@@CitizenOfTheWorld2025 Hi Chris. I have read a great deal about lucid dreaming. My experience with it is limited. I have not any prolonged experience, only very short ones. In them, they seem so real that I could not really say they are a dream, so I usually dared not to do anything I wouldn't do in waking life (the logic might be twisted here). I understand the interpretations you provided. Some do believe that the dream world is an entirely different reality. The sorcerers I mentioned in the previous comment believed that the dream experience comes from our energy center shifting to a different position, therefore experiencing a different reality than waking hours. Some also believe that dream is actually just as illusory as waking perception, as they are both projections of the mind, and that there is an ultimate reality which cannot be attained either through the dream or waking mind. They say that the mind must stop its normal process, which is thought, to perceive this ultimate reality. It is very similar to the idea of nirvana in Buddhism. People have called it God, Truth, No-mind, enlightenment, and so on. I do think such a reality exists, and I am in the process of exploring this myself. The dream worlds have very different qualities among them. To my own experience, there are dreams in which I realize I was dreaming in the middle of it, and suddenly gained control of my dream-body. These dreams are usually very fantastical, hyper-realistic, and very different from waking perception. There are also dreams which I experience a vibration in my body, and my body becoming heavy to the point of inability to move. I then either fall through this paralysis or struggle to get up in complete darkness (since my eyes were closed), and then I realize I was awake, but then I realize I was actually dreaming, yet the details of the world are always very similar to where I actually sleep, namely my room and the apartment. It is very strange. So, I do think there are dreams in which one could learn a great deal, and other dreams in which they are just a continuation of our waking activity. And I have also heard about a dreamless state, in which there is no body, no thing, but one is aware of all of it. This some say is true freedom. Others say it is something completely untouched by our waking or dreaming mind, and that it has infinite height and depth. It is great to hear that you have explored and thought a great deal about these things. It is truly a beautiful experience that is very seldom talked about.

[@Robert-vm8cn]

@@CitizenOfTheWorld2025 can you elaborate

[@PlexiumGames]

I believe that psychedelics and other anesthetic dissociates like ketamine are the key to understanding this problem. If you have ever had a powerful experience on either class of these drugs you will know what it is like to breifly "lose" consciousness while still being able to experience. This is what the term "ego loss" refers to. You completely lose any sense of "I". You can still experience light, sound taste and touch, you can make decisions, you can predict actions but you are simply along for the ride. "You" are not making the decisions, "you" are not experiencing events. They are just happening outside of your control. It is single handedly the most powerful experience of my entire life and I think it highlights really what "consciousness" is. Its the sense of "I" that allow you to command the world around you. It is the illusion of free will.

[@Mmdg634]

Thank you for writing this out👍

[@arpitkumar4525]

Exactly

[@geauxxtune]

"Where was I before I was born, well that leads to what happens after I die." A hard pill to swallow

[@plopsmcgee9672]

When I was a kid I asked "why am I me instead of me being someone else being me? Or instead of me being someone else?" My answer was "lol, if I wasn't going to be me then who would be?" I figured that if someone inhabits my body and has all of my experiences then nothing else much matters; they actually ARE me.

[@arpitkumar4525]

Wow! Oh my god! I had this exact same thought when I was 7 or 8 years old. I thought I was the only one. Reading this really humbled me.

[@ankit_s]

The idea of vedanta about consciousness written thousands of years old is mind blogging and deeply fascinating as well .

[@josephoutward]

Yes.

[@josephoutward]

I agreed that Vedanta is interesting. Now what is the truth of all of this? I honestly believe that you live once. No after anything. No magical bliss or Nirvana. Live for a bit then die just like a scent on the wind. Here then gone to be forgotten.

[@gouravmahapatra423]

@@josephoutward But if "you" are not existing anymore then it doesn't matter if people remember you or forget.

[@josephoutward]

@@gouravmahapatra423 I did not say it mattered to be remembered.

[@gouravmahapatra423]

@@josephoutward But you did write “gone to be forgotten” while you could have just written “gone”.

[@sanebadger8018]

i wish there was such rich content available for everyone when i was young

[@quill444]

One of the most startling things about consciousness is that as humans, we can all agree that often we dream, and that for the most part, during almost every dream, it seems as though we have a conscious experience of something tantalizingly real and believable occurring and happening to us, and yet often upon awaking, it frequently all becomes quite absurd; but within the context of the dream itself, very often it surpasses whatever test or muster of realism we subject to it, or are able to apply toward it. Therefore, could and might we one day "wake up" from what is perceived to be this reality we live in, as we know it, and transcend that, too, and see it for the illusion that it may ultimately be? - j q t -

[@bobmoore9475]

Look into the philosophy of René Descartes, and you will see that he addressed (and found an answer to) that question.

[@fullyawakened]

doubtful

[@enestastan7147]

That "wake up" moment could be the moment of our death as many belief that suggest life after death narrate that the person would see himself dead but not consider as dead and be suprised why everyone is treating him like he is dead.

[@stitchtui3619]

@@enestastan7147 maybe it will just be an awareness? since the brain will stop working. we wouldnt be able to hear and see.

[@star19741-r]

Thanks for Anil with his great answers for consciousness science.

[@sjmousavi8754]

Our mind is a super master of writing new scenarios based on past unpleasant and distasteful events only to heighten our egos. That's where the incessant self-talk originates.

[@jnighs8380]

That's your mind your perspective no one perspective is objective reality.. our mind over here could possibly not think that way and you could

[@maydaymemer4660]

what about qualia?

[@SophiasIchor]

The question as to the problem of consciousness is as spiritual and philosophical as it is scientific. We live it everyday and in the first person and yet, as to the very "what" of it, it remains the most profound mystery. Not only that, but the very question as to the origin of consciousness, it has itself as its origin. In pondering consciousness it ponders itself. It is always already presumed and assumed in everything we do yet it is never made explicit. Consciousness, along with the raison d'etre for the whole universe, remain the most fascinating existential puzzles of all time.

[@SophiasIchor]

@An Meme I mean consciousness ponders the question as to its own existence as itself. It may or may not have one. It's just somewhat paradoxical that consciousness inverts it's eye to wonder about itself as itself. And I agree with you that pure consciousness pre-exists the big Bang and is timeless. I think it's a field that sufficiently complex organisms access rather than produce.

[@geraldkenneth119]

Consciousness seems like one of those things where even if we figure out what kinds of computational processes give a being consciousness, we still won’t be able to answer the question of “why?”

[@arpitkumar4525]

The 'why' is pretty simple. It gives survival advantage. By knowing what's happening in your body you would be able to take better decisions. That's the theory. But over consciousness can lead to demise. Think wouldn't an AI become too powerful if it has consciousness? Some actually already do to some extent.

[@geraldkenneth119]

@@arpitkumar4525 I didn’t mean “why” as in “why does consciousness exist?” I meant “why” as in “why do these specific computational processes give rise to subjective experience?”

[@arpitkumar4525]

@@geraldkenneth119 Ah ohk. That one is pretty simple too. I have always approached consciousness from AI side At its basic consciousness just means a system being aware of itself. So those computations are related to the state of the system. This combined with the ability to make decisions or make the next move based in the evaluation of the current state of the system is what gives us a very personal experience of life. That's the high level view. But at the detail level we might not be able to identify which computation gives rise to what emotions and evaluation of the system. It would be like looking at the calculations of a machine learning Neural Network after it makes a decision and trying to figure out why it made that particular decision. It's black boxed. The individual numbers won't give us the why of the output.

[@stanleyklein524]

Pure nonsense.@@arpitkumar4525

[@PhuongVu-sn8nl]

​@@arpitkumar4525Consciousness defies observation. Even if you were able to see the neurons that create consciousness, how are you supposed to answer what they were seeing in front of their eyes?

[@dariushober1506]

Main problem with this limited anthropomorphic position is in overlooking the fact that the human body is a collective of trillions of beings (bacteria, viruses, fungi, etc.) and the totality of organisms found in a meat-bag synergistically create consciousness. Easily verified scientifically with Psychobiotics-if you alter the digestive microbiome you directly affect the thoughts and emotions of the person. Consciousness experienced is not a "singularity" just because linguistically we say "I".

[@n4v33nkum4r7]

yea ur right, it's all a consequence of emergence

[@dariushober1506]

@@n4v33nkum4r7 Hi Naveen-it is about "emergence" or "expression" and the key process is through "communication". This emergence occurs on ALL levels from the quantum through to the cosmic. On all of these levels there is communication (the transference of information/LIGHT) through frequency and vibration. Hard to express linguistically or mathematically (like what is Love for a simple example) and falls into the ineffable category. But it can be "felt" experientially through altered states of Consciousness. Best tool I have found for such exploration is Psychedelics-meditation and breath work can shift the brain-pan channel, but it is not guaranteed without practice and discipline. Then sometimes still "never". Have a Great Day!

[@369Sigma]

I'm 30, and I've been haunted by those same questions since I was a child... not that I'm afraid, as I'm not, but rather like it's the universes greatest mystery. And I hate not knowing.

[@CruzzioXT]

You might wanna take psychedelics to aid you in this. It changed my view on what reality is.

[@vv-yo3vv]

@@CruzzioXT how did it change for you?

[@DavidWaltersDDW]

I think there is an assumption that the brain is solely responsible for consciousness and we just don't understand how. What i'm interested in is if findings about the 'gut brain' and the brain gut connection may also play a role. It would be interesting to take the types of scanning research and experiments expanded beyond the skull to include the whole body. Specifically to see if there's any relationship with activity in the brain-gut, but also more generally to see if there may be other areas within the body that have a related response. The idea of having a brain in your gut is relatively recent, so it's not out of the realm of possibility that there may be other areas within the body that may contain similar phenomenon. Perhaps identifying additional contributors to the effect of consciousness outside of the brain will provide new insights that can aid in the development in the field.

[@BiggyJimbo]

I often think about this. I suppose it's only natural to assume that the brain alone is responsible for consciousness, but it is still just that - an assumption.

[@maydaymemer4660]

yea whos to say arms arent conscious as well?

[@sohiniroy8126]

I have been lucky enough to be introduced to these wonderful topics by somone but unlucky as i couldn't understand the beautiful world this could behold earlier. As i am understanding and knowing more about it,it's such a wide interesting question to think of.Who are we?does our consciousness define us or we define them? A hearty thanks to the one who introduced me to this world !

[@morkovija]

Exquisite choise of background music. Aside from extremely interesting topic covered in the video. Thanks editor san! edit: very outro song is "Sweet awakening" by Adam Double, for those wondering

[@RahulChauhan-nm3mv]

One who really craves for the understanding of consciousness should try delving into this ancient Indian philosophical school called 'Advait Vedant'. I'd recommend watching an hour long intro talk on this topic by Swami Sarvapriyanand which is titled 'The power of Om'. Nothing religious, just a remarkable take on our understanding of this world, ourselves and the divine consciousness within us.

[@sourabh_mandlik]

I love those videos by Swami Sarvapriyananda, do watch video about Who I am by Swami sarvapriyananda at IIT. Mind blowing lecture.

[@kaantax8666]

"nothing religious",but you say "divine consciousness" after it lmao

[@caribgirl726]

He gets it. “Consciousness IS everything”. Robert Lanza explains this in depth in his Biocentrism books. It’s fascinating.

[@CeRockTV]

I am not quite sure Mr Seth would subscribe to Lanza's theory. To me it sounded more like he is a proponent of Integrated Information Theory (IIT), but as I am not very knowledgable on either of these models, I cannot judge to which extent they overlap or contradict each other.

[@eddiepool2546]

Langan's CTMU takes it even further.

[@NathanOkun]

The term "dimension" in physics means a parameter that some structure possesses that must be known to fully understand that structure (position, motion, or anything else that cannot be left out in its complete description). If there is a complete, mathematically describable "Theory of Everything" in physics, it will supposedly give ALL such parameters or at least the pieces that such parameters are formed from (as neutrons and protons are made up of smaller quarks). By this description, any function or process that we discover would be "emergent" in that, no matter how bizarre (such as emitting X-rays when you peel a roll of cellophane sticky tape (true!) or the like), the reason for the results found can be ultimately run back to the laws in this Theory. This seems to cove all physical or energy relationships in the universe. However, while such a Theory can be used to describe how a digital computer or even a biologic structure like a muscle or neuron works -- physically and electronically and in any other sense -- in what possible way can such things related to consciousness like "self-awareness" or concepts like "honor" or "jealousy" or any other emotion that we "feel" directly applicable to our conscious mind be emergent in the above paragraph's meaning? How can you bend and stretch and twist the Theory to handle consciousness, meaning the "I think, therefore I am" parameters? The emergence of consciousness in all of its meanings seems to require new dimensions in our universe that are not physical like those in the assumed Theory. The fact that our universe allows the various consciousness-related things (whatever such a "thing" might be) implies a much more complicated set of rules than in that Theory, much like there may be physical dimensions that will be needed in that Theory that one cannot directly observe (the wave/particale duality of Quantum Mechanics will NOT allow the wave part to EVER be directly observed, since it is resolved to be just the CHANCE of the particle being observed when and where it is, so this is already such a necessary, but not physically reachable, "dimension" needed in the full description of the given particle). Can the unreachable dimensions that parametrize the things related to consciousness be found and measured in some as-yet-unknown manner, like the wave part of Quantum Mechanics? This would require that consciousness be described in some manner that allows some kinds of "quantity" that can be measured in some ways, so that tests of how these quantities that make up consciousness can be performed that allow patterns to be created that allow the definition of the correct types of dimensions for this study. If you never heard of "time" before, imagine how much would it take to even identify what it was and how it affects the physical world, since it has no physical part that you can examine under a microscope or other normal sensor. So we have a problem of first getting the underpinnings of the various dimensions that constitute what a conscious mind is so that we can figure out the rules that govern what it can and cannot do and how it does what it does. THEN we have to figure out what such dimensions mean to our universe as to its true structure over and above the Theory, meaning that the Theory is no longer "of Everything", just the physical part (like defining the chessboard in a chess game). At the moment, we are far from such an ability to break down consciousness into its components, whatever they may be. Major project!!!

[@karlnikolasalcala8208]

Up

[@Mekesi1]

[n what possible way can such things related to consciousness like "self-awareness" or concepts like "honor" or "jealousy"] Chemical reactions in your body that result in electrical signal then interpreted by the neurons of your brain. Specific feeling are really not that hard to measure

[@rtnman]

@@Mekesi1 I think they were talking about the result, not the cause

[@HiddenExp]

@@Mekesi1 Do you know the qualia thingy?

[@Mekesi1]

@@HiddenExp No, but enlighten me

[@bobmoore9475]

One of the first things we need to do is divide "consciousness" into its smaller parts. For example, the parts might be something like : - perception of the world around us - analysis to gain an understanding of what we perceive - decision making about what it means - decisions about what we want to do in and with the world around us (sometimes called our free will) - how our MIND causes our brain to cause our body to do what we want it to do - memory - reflection and contemplation - etc. Once we have decided on how we should divide up the component parts of consciousness, then we can go on to learn about each part separately, and then eventually start to understand how the parts work together to make up the whole of human consciousness.

[@jackcasali4180]

I think the issue can be summed up as this: we know how consciousness is structured in the brain, but we don’t understand why those structures create consciousness. Particularly, what about their function creates consciousness?

[@JiveDadson]

I don't.

[@iTzProLike1]

@@JiveDadson we, the humans

[@Noah-uo8zb]

Honestly I wouldn’t even say we truly know, it’s quite an incredible mystery

[@JiveDadson]

@@iTzProLike1 I meant I don't think it can be summed up that way.

[@123duelist]

No human has been able to explain anything related to consciousness.

[@donaldf.switlick3690]

Many organisms have two hemispheres and can be conscious. On the other hand, self-consciousness, like a mirror, is the recognition of ourselves, by the reflection, from the mind in our brain's other hemisphere.

[@deegobooster]

The more research is put into the brain, the more complex the brain becomes.

[@BrendanECasey]

And the more we know that we don't know.

[@thomasjohnson4987]

well your brain doesnt become more complex because we research does it

[@deegobooster]

@@thomasjohnson4987 Reading comprehension. "The" brain. Meaning the category, the concept. Not anyones specific brain.

[@Nonamelol.]

Once we understand what consciousness is and how it works, everything will change. I don’t think many people are aware of this..

[@casskillian]

Imagine transfer of consciousness

[@Nonamelol.]

@@casskillian exactly

[@Elijah-pf9gi]

If it's immaterial... that will really be a game changer

[@badneighbour2025]

@@Elijah-pf9gi i think we sadly already know it is not immaterial. that would be the most beautiful thing, but i think they figured out already consciousness is just from the brain... what do you know? please present me with some information, it could give me hope

[@niftyszn9469]

​​@@badneighbour2025 purely described in physical and scientific terms doesn't give people what its like to actual know the phenomena of an experience. If you were to give the exact wave length of red to someone who is colorblind and can't see red, it gives him knowledge yet tells him nothing of the experience. And this is all linked to consciousness obviously

[@NLOneOfNone]

The only place where you can find meaningfull answers about consciousness, is inside your own head. But you can only study the _contents_ of consciousness, not the consciousness itself. Studying the behavior of the contents of consciousness, is intelligence studying the behavior of intelligence.

[@BrendanECasey]

Remember Highlander, if you lose your head... It's all over...

[@bobmoore9475]

@@xeniartius By looking at the mind/consciousness, you change the mind/consciousness. It's like the Uncertainty Principle in quantum physics, but applied to a completely different part of science.

[@SophiasIchor]

There exists a kind of experience wherein consciousness becomes identical with its contents and they unify in a liberating epiphany. In the East its called Satcitananda, or Being-Consciousness-Bliss, and its a realization that consciousness is the ultimate ground of all-being.

[@emmashalliker6862]

^ that comment, I was just going to say this.

[@brown2889]

I like that break down. But you know A.I. is not conscious. But has the ability to study it’s own behavior and learn from it. If it truly does begin to take in most everything we can and more, what if A.I. turns to us and claims that it is conscious. Would we learn what consciousness is?

[@Liteskinxo]

His determination and intelligence are so inspiring.

[@josephang9927]

Matter makes consciousness or consciousness makes matter? If someone copies me, which one will still be me? If both, how will it feel the split? Will it feel? How If I can only be one? What decides which one will be me? If both, will I see both? If we are just atoms, then if we construct against the atoms then resurrection is possible? Will it be me? If qualia is caused by matter, everything is conscious? Or maybe everything matter is made off consciousness?

[@hopeandpiece]

Ugh, why must there be rapid blinking visuals in this.

[@earendilthebright5402]

If anyone is intersted Anil does a talk at the RI, it's quite good.

[@christopherinman6833]

while he cites chalmers, i think he says he, seth, is working on where the hard problem manifests itself, where conscious phenomena arise, rather than how they arise and what they are. he doesn't seem to be talking about what, biologically, make conscious phenomena different from other biological/neurological "calculations". am i missing something?

[@philippgerbert9290]

Great endeavor! And yes, we will need to rid ourselves from lots of philosophical and psychological ballast to make progress. The fastest route might come through Artificial Intelligence. Two related developments we can already observe: The first is that a rudimentary notion of 'self' emerges naturally in a robot, that realizes how one part of his percept is always there... and develops a concept for it. The second is that the latest Natural Language Processing (NLP) models, such as GPT-3, trained on just predicting the next word (very much in Anil's spirit of how the brain works as a prediction machine), exhibits lots of emerging capabilities and has forced linguists and philosophers to redefine the very terms and concepts they use to describe language (the 'pipeline model of language' is going the way of the 'Aristotelean celestial spheres'). We will hopefully live to see the 'mystery of consciousness' unravel!

[@millenialmusings8451]

I can think our language and by definition our thoughts evolved to survive thousands of years back and they're are not necessarily a good tool to understand thr fundamental mystery of consciousness. It's like trying to measure the width of a table with a voltmeter. Anil is right that a lot of these are just semantic problems due to our archaic language and will dissolve once we have tools and technologies advanced enough to probe directly into the working brain.. All exsitential philosophy is in a way nothing more than entertainment and I fact an impediment to really solving any mysteries

[@alwaysdisputin9930]

@@millenialmusings8451 Philosophy asks is our reality is just a dream? You guys are saying don't ask this question. Philosophy asks is our reality a computer game? You guys are saying don't ask this question. Philosophy asks is our reality created by our brain? You guys are saying "don't ask this question. Just assume it is." But I say maybe your dumb ass umptions that the brain creates consciousness are the "ballast" & the "impediment"

[@millenialmusings8451]

@@alwaysdisputin9930 ok boomer

[@alwaysdisputin9930]

@@millenialmusings8451 delete your dumb comment & make a proper comment with reasons in it

[@edbertkwesi4931]

Hey Anil you are the hero of the century you have confirmed what i have been reading in the bible long ago.. thank you for this great revelation

[@VikingTeddy]

It's been my experience that woefully few people actually wonder about the self. It seems many people aren't 100% conscious. My "awakening" so to speak took a bit longer, to my late teens. I started to look at myself from the outside viewing myself like I do others instead of just reacting to everything like an automaton. This led me to notice that not all people "wake up" and have that experience. But if they do, it usually happens as a child. I've only ever once met a person who became aware of themselves late in life, and that was thanks to drugs. I don't really have the words to explain it properly, but it really does seem like people are differing levels of conscious.

[@eldi578]

I definitely agree with you. I've always had this feeling that many people have their eyes closed and their heads down, and suddenly they start opening their eyes and looking around, seeing all that they've missed on their life since they were always focused on their feet and where their feet were going, but never everything around. It's weird to explain, but I've noticed pretty much the same as you did. I'm glad we aren't alone in this sort of "awakening" x)

[@mihaivilcu5515]

i dont think this is necessarily a good thing or something like an awekening , it feels actually like going backwords if your saying you started viewing yourself from the 3rd perspective because thats not your expirience ,your only expirience is how you see the world not how others see you

[@pugsnhogz]

@@mihaivilcu5515 that's a valuable note but I disagree ultimately. more awareness is generally good. I think contrary to your worry, recognizing the value in seeing yourself from an outside perspective (one that isn't your own) is the whole point of these comments

[@mihaivilcu5515]

@@pugsnhogz i think thats good only to gain insight about your action not a way to view life, and i would not call it a sorth of awakening or higher consciosness

[@VikingTeddy]

@@mihaivilcu5515I think you misunderstood. Being able to view yourself from outside doesn't mean you stop viewing yourself from the inside. On the contrary, it offers a way to explore the self deeper than ever before. And not just id, but parts of the Id , and Id in relation to the outside *and* self. i.e how others see the world and you in it. Before that, things like ego dissociation were impossible. It's like with any growth. You can't advance if you don't know where you're going, or that there even is anywhere to go.

[@mureebe1]

Actually, the hard problem of consciousness is whether it is transferable or not. I think it is impossible to answer, since it is a qualia problem.

[@monolithwraith1511]

I believe the connectome project will hold the answer

[@ModiBhakt30]

Mind and Consciousness they are different they are not same. Consciousness is more deeper than the mind. The mind changes but the Consciousness doesn't change.

[@thewiseturtle]

My description of consciousness is: informationally connected matter. The more complex the network is in a collection of matter, the higher the level of consciousness we'll likely say that it has. I've got a video about this, with some simple models that help show how this works on a chemical level, if anyone is curious about the idea. The more detailed "how" of human brains is basically: lots of different chemicals, all interacting, thus generating vast amounts of diverse information at many different levels of connection (from atomic bonds to all manner of electromagnetic waves). Asking what "consciousness is" in a specific way is kinda like asking what Bach's Brandenburg concertos "is". It's sort of a nonsensical question. These are both complex interactions of many different things that can be perceived in a variety of different ways. So there's no single, simple is-ness to them.

[@bobmoore9475]

The IIT (Integrated Information Technology) theory of consciousness. My own theory is that the whole picture of consciousness will require some of IIT (from the bottom up) and some of one of the dualist theories (from the top down). Much like quantum physics has (so far) failed to explain the phenomena seen at the macro and universal levels. We'll see how the science of consciousness develops over time.

[@alwaysdisputin9930]

"let's glue a gazillion calculators togehter & it will become conscious" is not going to wok

[@thewiseturtle]

@@alwaysdisputin9930 Yeah, calculators aren't very complex. So connecting them together won't make something with a very high level of consciousness. But it will be more conscious than a single calculator.

[@jesternotclown]

E=Mc2 defines the relationship of Energy and Mass but surely that cannot exist without information exchanges. If you want to “locate” consciousness you have to understand all information transfers with infinite variables, but it’s a good start.

[@Phosphene_Dr3am]

It feels as though I (that is the entity/ consciousness within me that is perceiving this reality and that I identify as being the self that is “me”) am the universe looking back at it’s self, and that is both within and consists of many subtle infinites that are all fractal in nature.

[@jonathanjollimore7156]

This makes sense because any predictions or notions you have. Have to be based on what you do know and the unexpected is unknown. How do you expect the unknown you can't but you can improve that I am betting with meditation and some mindfulness that were take break sit by yourself and rewind and mull over what you are doing why and other thing ect. This is a good way to generate new ideas that are more accurate but you have to be honest with yourself brutally honest for it to be worth anything.

[@janwaska4081]

@2:46 we have come to understand life? Really? where is the documentation that explains it in valid coherent and comprehensive terms?

[@arzelzon1137]

is there any kind of scientific documentation how mind works on the people totally loss their sensory input? how they form reality and give identification to their environment?. this is the one interesting case related about mind/brain.

[@orfyreus1961]

Consciousness, an internal answer for external question. Every creature, has its own consciousness. Level of consciousness depends to understanding of external question.

[@orfyreus1961]

This is my gift for everyone who is able to understand what I wrote.

[@nicolasachee9765]

Consciousness is just conformational change. If i hit a rock with a hammer, the rock is conscious of the event as much as it is changed by it. I am only conscious of this video as much as the patterns in light and sound have changed my network of conformational changes that rationalizes current change with past change (eye proteins, neural stimulations). When these people speak of "consciousness" they mean ego, which always opposes consciousness as it opposes change within itself. The universe is made of consciousness (changes by interactions), but is indifferent to human ego beyond the impact it makes on the world and the world's impact upon it. Namaste.

[@nicolasachee9765]

@MiPhinx When someone begins on a journey toward enlightenment, which is the language of a western translation of something in Buddhist culture, invariably one is confronted with the language of 'the ego,' and ego dissolution or ego death or some other such absolutism. The ego is a place in the mind that stores our identities, the stories of our relationships, our rolls. If one is 'seeking enlightenment,' one must first feel a burdening within one's identity, some disharmony regarding one's roll. This will always occur when one views one's ego or roll as absolute and unchanging. The trick is to practice fluidity in one's rolls and identities. We all wear many hats, embody many spirits as the situation calls for it, father, mother, son, daughter, hunter, gatherer, artist, cop, healer, warrior, neighbor, citizen, human, animal etc. As you peel the layers away from a seemingly inescapable roll as, for example, a boyfriend or girlfriend in an unhealthy relationship, an experience so traumatic if done successfully, at times, that it feels like some sort of death, you find that there is always more you underneath. Even under the influence of heavy doses of brain altering compounds to the point where all mental constructs of boundary to define one's self by are disrupted, there is still the universe. I am all things everywhere in eternity is still an ego, still a conception of self. When you see a tree, just being itself, and take a deep breath and know, as easily as it is to recognise one's self in one's own hand, that you are seeing yourself, it is enlightening, unburdening, if of nothing else then of the concept that you won't be here anymore when you die. Such notions in the matrix of ideas through which we interpret our experience that we call mind, naturally cultivate a sense of self that is inclusive of our family, our planet, and our selfishness grows to serve that which serves us, our community, our ecosystems, the rest of our lives, a million years, our self. "Before enlightenment, chop wood, carry water. After enlightenment, chop wood, carry water."

[@dougaltolan3017]

Is there not a better word than prediction? To me prediction implies a future event, whereas our experience of our environment is purely of past events. I think it is a bit "thin" to use the concept that we predict that continued or refined exploration of our environment will match our current model, is sufficient to focus so much on a very charged word.

[@deeliciousplum]

I love exploring talks about the brain and its emergent properties. What makes me a wee bit concerned is when the placeholder term 'consciousness' is used as an agency for something that the speaker is claiming or alluding to. Using an unknown, a gap in our knowledge, to describe a phenomenon may not be very helpful. Whatever consciousness is or is not, I do hope that our brightest minds can one day model it or may we move on to other hypotheses which may help us to better understand life and the universe. 🧠🐈

[@rwesenberg]

A very nice video, thanks! That the brain/mind somehow models external events and from that creates and internal reality is useful. It seems to me that awareness of self as an object in that event-set is basically our internal conversation with our self. Perhaps, that internal conversation has much in common with how we learn from others. Most of what we know we learn from others, discursively. I have always wondered about what is in common and what is not.

[@bgalbreath]

An "internal conversation with our self" only makes sense (in my opinion) if there is more than one party involved, in other words, if "the self" (to the extent it exists at all) is not a unified, internally transparent thing. A conversation conveys content from one party to another. If I were a single thing, I would already have the content and would be unable to convey it.

[@sjmousavi8754]

Shall we say an " internal interpretation" and/or assessment rather than the internal reality? Which is a long-term experience process to become reality.

[@rwesenberg]

The internal experience of oneself is like the experience of an external object or event in some ways and unlike in others. For me, the question is, in what ways like, and in what unlike. Reflection is often thought without words. Words only seem to conclude the experience.

[@sombh1971]

3:00 I'm not entirely sure we have life figured out in terms of biology and chemistry, if we did, we'd be able to reverse engineer our way to immortality, but instead we are just these fallible creatures with failing bodies and minds blundering our way aimlessly through a puzzle no one has been able to solve till now.

[@treva31]

Yea that surprised me haha, what exactly is he referring to?! We can't define life, we can't create life, we don't know how cells work....

[@Regimeshifts]

true but far better understanding of life in comparison. the human genome is now finally truly mapped

[@treva31]

@@Regimeshifts Mapped yes but is it truly understood?

[@kiranraveendran2437]

@@treva31 very good question.

[@ryan-cole]

He isn't saying we understand everything. What he is saying is that mechanical explanations of biological phenomena are far more plausible nowadays. For example, if some new disease comes out. Instead of appealing to some mystical explanation, we can quite confidently talk about how the disease works, without appealing to mysticism. Even if we never understand it. The truth is we never fully understand anything, not even the laws of physics. There will always be mysteries left unexplained.

[@YHWHsavesDotCom]

Cool work!

[@alidarai2779]

He's right. The dilemma of consciousness dissolves only when we stop over mystifying it.

[@bee1707]

I still hold on to its mystery. I don't think that his FMRI machine can explain an out-of-body experience or telepathy or telekinesis. Consciousness has more to it than physics and biology.

[@banehog]

@@bee1707 *common sense has left the chat

[@moinuddinnizam1362]

Don't agree, to me mathematics is the purest of conscious endeavor. But Godel and Turing has proven even that stands on mysterious grounds. So any formal logical system is incomplete let alone one that can generate new logical processes like our consciousness.

[@shinjirigged]

​@@bee1707 that's cool and all, but being that no one seems to be able to provide evidence that any of those things are not just imagination + confirmation bias, I think ill put my trust in the FRMI observations.

[@achyuthcn2555]

@@shinjirigged, Is there any evidence that so called reality exists outside of your consciousness?? Reality might be another made-up structure by mind just like dream.

[@jamesruscheinski8602]

When the brain turns sensory information into electric signals of neurons, is matter being turned into energy? And if matter being turned into energy, could that explain conscious experience?

[@Neomadra]

Great Interview! Don't understand why you included the epilepsy triggering scenes, though. They could have simply been cut from the video.

[@thewiseturtle]

Those flashing lights are part of the research. They are important. I don't understand why folks who are hyper sensitive to flashing lights don't just install (or invent) a utility on their computer that has options for decreasing the flashing so that it's not problematic. No need to try to force the rest of the world to stop being diverse just for a few people who have the power to control what they watch.

[@JosueMartinez-ww1vj]

What if consciousness is divided into different consciousness? consciousness of self, do we need to be in this material world to understand self, can I feel self if I was just the energy or electricity of my neurons floating in space? Consciousness of inanimate objects and animate objects, then adding them together we may be closer to understanding.

[@CreateWithRobin]

Consciousness is surely THE mystery - as it's all we have.

[@thomaskist9503]

I have lucid dreams which means I know that I’m dreaming. I experience Qualia in my dreams. Also I’ve done experiments in my dreams one interesting experiment was shifting my focus back-and-forth between a leaf and the bush. I was unable to see both the leaf and the bush at the same time in my dream, some thing that I’m able to do in real life.

[@alwaysdisputin9930]

I wish I could do that. I would be dreaming of a different kind of "bush" if you get my meaning. Do you ever dream of a black hole?

[@pootzeketzi1233]

@@alwaysdisputin9930 bruh

[@alwaysdisputin9930]

@@pootzeketzi1233 WHat? ITzNATTRAL

[@CitizenOfTheWorld2025]

Hello Thomas! I also experience lucid dreams. In the beginning I didn’t know what they were called or that other people also had them. I have never met anyone else who has but have read about others. When I attempt to explain them to friends and family the usual bored response is: „They’re just dreams Chris.“ For me they are thrilling and ecstatic experiences but frustratingly infrequent. They start while I am in a typical dream scenario, completely carried along by whatever script my deeper consciousness has concocted, and then suddenly my normally waking conscience self will realize that I am dreaming and in the dreamworld. Instead of the experience growing duller or somehow less real it suddenly becomes what I can only describe as hyper-real. Everything is vividly solid, colorful with a compelling richness and intensity both perceptually and emotionally. At this point the dream plot ends and I am suddenly free to do whatever I want. Usually I try to go as far as I can to test the limits of this thrilling environment often touching and examining things along the way. In the past I would sometimes confront people I met there by excitedly stating: „This whole thing is just a dream! „ to which I might receive an unexcited, tolerant and knowing little nod in return. I have also said at times to the inhabitants of this realm: „If this is all just a dream then it must be my dream and therefore you all must be fake!“. (Unassailable application of logic here.) The response to this is often something like an indignant: „Excuse me, but I am not - fake! „. I then usually accept their declarations of independent autonomous reality without further questioning and am a bit chagrined at my rudeness. I find this a fragil mental state out of which it is easy to fall. The problem is that if I lose focus I easily return to a normal dreaming state and if I concentrate on the fact that there must be a sleeping Chris lying somewhere I suddenly wake up. It also seems very important to me to try to bring back some evidence that this other world is real so I can make people believe me when I wake up. Of course all my efforts prove fruitless. I have memorized street signs and even tried to return once with a fist full of cherry tree blossoms. I had them gripped tightly in my fist and then I woke up lying in bed with my eyes closed. I could feel them still clutched in my hand and while lying flatly on my back, I slowly opened my eyes and as stealthily as possible looked down at my hand as I slowly uncurled my fingers-damn it! … my hand was empty. [It just occurred to me that if my hand had been full of blossoms this would still prove nothing and no one would believe me and I would risk ending up in a psych ward! ] This is such a fascinating psychological experience that I wish it were the subject of serious study as I think it could be a useful tool into exploring the nature of consciousness.

[@bibitobastosqueiroz]

@@CitizenOfTheWorld2025 Beautifully put, one of the most impressive characteristics of dreams is how real it feels, even when you know you're dreaming! It makes you feel as that everything that you see is reality and there's no question about that, much like we see our wake reality.

[@luciuspertis5672]

Yogic Science already discusses all these and reaches fantastic and convincing answers .........

[@suryakant6357]

those fake Gurua again?

[@luciuspertis5672]

@@suryakant6357 Yogic Science my friend .... "guru" is a mere title given to a person. I meant "science", which has experimentation as it basis, quality of being tested and questioned and stuff n stuff blah blah blah ............. why am i boring u xD

[@luciuspertis5672]

​@Dhruva Punde okay .... Firstly, what ever conclusion and definitive answers or models we have of consciousness "right now" is not at all concrete and borderline meta-physical. Its like entropy; all the scientists are doing are objectively discovering (through experiments) how some "objective" things work, eg. multiple brain world-models using separate neural bundles in frontal lobe (explaining super-GAN like behavior of human brain), eg. "differentiation" of deep-sleep (also REM is the most objective). All these examples are like the models of ideal gas and different discoveries of energy transfer and models for temperature gradients and all. Entropy cant be thought of like that. You need to be subjective and one-up your level of objective inquires/experimentation. (plz look up what "objective" means) If you ask modern science to give an encompassing definition of consciousness, they will fail. Secondly ... sharing some "answers" won't be impactful here so I would write a few lines of deduction which yogic science uses and hopefully you'll get some sense that this might work ... 1. if you sit in a chair everyday, you begin to like it or may be your so attached that you feel it belongs to you. 2. Even if you forever keep sitting on that chair, that chair won't become you. You, are not a piece of chair. That chair might be "yours" but not "you". 3. Our earthly "accumulations" are not us. It may be "mine" not "me". 4. One-up this logic and we can say this body (nah im joking, thats not "one-up") … Any "thoughts" and any "identity" any "memories" any skillful "intellect" is not "me" but "mine", gained from the time of my birth and also the methods of evolutionary biology. 5. One-up this and you can find yourself into nothingness … and now I'll lose awesomeness in my words cus I don't know much ... but the catch is that whatever that nothingness consist of, may be consciousness. 6. (this state described above, called turiya, has more layers to it) The point is .... consciousness is not a physical quantity. Using a physical stick to measure it, will always measure something but not it. And modern science ALSO AGREES with this. You can't be objective. Or else there no reason that "Consciousness Research" should stick out of Neurology. As we get more subjective, we'll understand.

[@Corteum]

There is no 'brain basis of consciousness'. But there is a consciousness basis of reality and everything that exists.

[@bellajbadr]

the roblem is not how consciousness came to existence but how initially "we thought" about building it up.

[@Moe-kl7kf]

"Life is not accompanied with this grand sense of mystery anymore" - I beg to differ. I believe this "sense" will find its way back science. Here and there it already has.

[@caricue]

Science declared life to be "just chemistry" when urea was synthesized in the lab. This was a counter-attack against the Vitalists, and it was a knockout blow. However, during the almost two hundred years since this declaration, science has identified countless chemical reactions that go on inside a living cell, but still haven't found the "secret ingredient" that makes it alive, instead just maintaining that the chemistry is all there is. It seems to me that while life uses chemistry, electro-chemistry and mechanics to carry out various functions, none of these things make the cell actually alive. I don't believe that it is magic or some vital force, but it is still an absolute and total mystery how life works.

[@trpimirkarlovic838]

​@@caricue Is this a good time to aknowledge intelligent design?

[@caricue]

@@trpimirkarlovic838 Looking at nature and seeing order seems to be an illusion. The only way you can say there is order is if there is some preferred configuration, otherwise it is just whatever happened to happen. If you imagine that "someone" wanted elephants and redwoods as opposed to something else, then that is your belief, but there is nothing in nature to show this preference. If you said the same thing 100 million years ago, which you would have to in order to be consistent, then why are almost all of those creatures gone? The only thing special about right now is the fact that you are here looking at it. Isn't that just egotism?

[@RecursionIs]

Often times, consciousness researchers attempt to differentiate between that which is conscious and that which is responding to its environment through sensed reactions gained through millions of years of evolution. I would argue there is no difference between the two, but others disagree and often try to figure out which elements you need to remove to remove the conscious experience. Once their research is done, they often come to the conclusion that the many specialized components of the brain construct the various aspects of the conscious experience. If you remove any of those components, the experience becomes less and less "conscious".

[@bluebonics8079]

It seems to come down to the experiential nature of it. You can medicate someone such that they can act and respond to stimuli but they have no experience of it. I think one of the biggest issues in the discussion of this is just definitional. When someone says "consciousness," you can't really understand what they're actually referring to without clarification and this has seeped into the discussion of it at all levels, from every day to scientific.

[@RecursionIs]

@@bluebonics8079 This is the exact reason that when I set out to program a consciousness, I felt a need to explicitly define it. This way, the definition is a a publicly available axiom of my thought that can be revisited at a later time.

[@quantumfrost9467]

Reactions gained through millions if years of evolution? Give genetic entropy a read.

[@RecursionIs]

@@quantumfrost9467 Will do! Is there something specific I'm looking for?

[@edwardlewis1963]

Start by defining consciousness, or coming up with a few definitions of consciousness.

[@virajelix]

Foremost thing is to experience the existence of "SELF", the "I" that says internally "I EXIST". Not knowing this "SELF" of "I", the discussion of CONSCIOSNESS would NOT have any sense.

[@PissaniMethod]

“Belief is the relief to the brief mischief of our grief.” Cree y crearás.

[@MrBoybergs]

A question that's always bugged me; We are a part of the matter that is the Universe. Would the Universe actually 'be' if we weren't here to observe it's existence?

[@CruzzioXT]

Quantum physics teaches us that something "is" once it's observed. Without the observer, there is only possibility.

[@MrBoybergs]

@@CruzzioXT yeah; sort of. That's my problem though; when quantum and metaphysics blur into confusion. Although I admit my understanding of both is sketchy to say the least.

[@marcusjackson569]

I'll share a memory that may help in understanding what consciousness is: At 32 yrs I was walking around at a flea market & a book on a stack of books jumped & turned without anyone moving it (which definitely caught my attention). I grabbed it & read a sentence that matched a memory of a sentence said to me by another white foggy soul in the shape of a sphere while being that same description just before entering the womb of my future mother. That sentence was "You'll become part of a New Age movement". I bought the used book for .50 cents (my best purchase ever) and got immersed in metaphysics, reading other books on the same subject. I happened to have just met a woman who was also into the same subject & we bonded in part due to a mutual interest in personal power, karma, dharma, syncronicities etc. It changed my life for the better and I also came to realize that we all have a soul, so I wondered what the dynamic is between the body/mind & soul. This is my theory: That all life forms have a soul, not just people. The DNA to support a certain thought level in an individual is = to the thought level of the consciousness. If the DNA alters through education or experience to support a higher thought level, the consciousness elevates to match it, meaning they always balance at the same thought level. At physical death the DNA support that thought level drops to zero, breaking the bond & the soul separates to later fuse with another life form to continue to ascend to higher, more energetic thought levels back in the direction from whence it came, full consciousness. So as mass in stars release thermal energy, it descends in overall energy level in the universe, consciousness energy overall is ascending, which is an energy exchange. At the conclusion of the Big Crunch this composite of all the souls in the universe at a peak thought level, transfer their thought energy in the form of thermal energy into the One black hole it overlaps, causing it to heat up & expand into a new universe. Consciousness is reduced to minimal which isn't bad because it will be billions of years until life gets started on planets like Earth, then those bits of consciousness fuse with microbes to initiate a symbiotic positive loop exchange between species evolution (Darwin) & consiousness evolution (two layers in each life form) to ever higher, more energetic thought levels in successive lives and more evolved species...

[@doylesaylor]

One peculiar word usage is ‘expected’. That sounds like a deterministic concept of prediction. Let’s ask though is it is a neural network it projects connectivity across the brain. So patterns are captured over time then the connectivity across the whole of the brain seems to be ‘predictive’. But that seems to me a weak version of understanding connectivity. It implies a logic over connectivity that I think is wrong. Is in my view trying to assert that a sort of computational prediction happens rather than building a sense of meaning to connectivity. Especially in the way the whole of the body is linked to the world. A subtle but telling flaw in the presentation.

[@DeeOneLight]

Anil, the perception of 'I' or the 'Me' does not come from the brain. That origin of that perception is metaphysical. No matter how much understanding we have with the interaction of the neurons in our brain, we will not be able to track down the source of consciousnesses as something within the brain. Your work is important to help humans understand how the brain function to animate the body and how the body affects the brain to conjure up emotions. Perhaps we might one day, be able to understand how the brain and our body connects to the metaphysical and have a glimpse of the source of consciousness.

[@GoGreenHeating]

So does Seth think consciousness emerges or is created in the brain? That seems like the fundamental question... The Hammeroff / Penrose microtubule model says consciousness emerges... But I'm not clear what Seth thinks ..

[@mathematicalninja2756]

Consciousness is the playground where singularity splits into observer and observable. It’s the playground for cause and effect

[@kkoooookkokokoko]

This is vague enough to maybe be correct

[@DirtyPhlegm]

I fookin' love Anil Seth. I'm proud to be a Beast Machine

[@floridaman1506]

Is there any research regarding how IQ correlates to consciousness?

[@wildboysplanet205]

we are stuck inside our own minds... we have 5 sensory tools we use in order to fulfill our survival needs... we don't know anything, we have no clue of what's happening around us, or of what we are... reality is a forever mystery. we are like ants trying to make sense of the backyard, not knowing how further reality goes. and we can't even grasp what we can't perceive. i'm depressed for this reason

[@studyspace_xd]

Hi quanta magazine.. Pls could you do a favour by covering a series for how all these fabulous and knowledgeable people went on the journey of making scientist. especially neuroscientist .. As I also want to become one in field of my interest currently I am in high school and I don't know what courses particularly we should get in order to get into research... I hope you are able to understand what I mean to say... Currently I am at biology majors and want to persue research specific field in medical science but I don't know any course other than that of being doctor (M.B.B.S). pls try to start this series... Friend pls support so that my problem could be solved👍👍👍pls

[@emeraldfinder5]

both biology and chemistry courses from high school are a necessity. I’d suggest focusing on getting those right now

[@pkul9583]

Brain is like a TV 📺 and Consciousness is the electrons flowing through wires creating images and voices on TV. One can have a person like moving TV with battery of electrons. Without flow of electrons TV is like a dead bossy. With web cam it can analyze the surroundings. Consciousness is little more than electrons

[@Mark1Mach2]

Yepp, that is my understanding as well, nothing more to it.

[@suryakant6357]

first half was impressive but in last bit i think you over exaggerated

[@jeromebullard6123]

I was so excited at the first few seconds of this video thinking they were going to play the “Little Einsteins” theme! 🤣

[@bobaldo2339]

There is no compelling reason to think of "consciousness", as separate and distinct from "the objects of consciousness" (sensation, thoughts, feelings, intuitions, and dreams). When these "objects" are not present where is the "consciousness"?

[@Carbocats]

The concept of consciousness was invented by humans before they knew what it should be. Thus, searching for an answer to what it is before we even know what it ought to be is therefore futile. Many have tried to give a definition of it but it has usually just ended up being a threshold value of "this is consciousness at this level and this is not", where the threshold is fundamentally arbitrary.

[@bobmoore9475]

Some scientist are starting to say that consciousness is a fundamental part of all reality, but life forms and especially higher life forms have a means to concentrate and channel that 'fundamental consciousness' in ways that make them more conscious than other things. This theory is called panpsychism. There is also a slightly different theory, called panspiritism, that only attributes a conscious 'spirit' to living things, with higher order life forms having more of a 'spirit' than lower forms.

[@bobmoore9475]

In other words they are starting to NOT say that there is a threshold for consciousness, but that there are varying degrees of consciousness from a simple one-celled organism (barely conscious) up to a very diversified multi-celled organism like humans (very, very conscious).

[@Carbocats]

In that case we are simply exchanging the word consciousness for complexity in lifeforms. As the complexity of the lifeform increases, so does its consciousness. Its a meaningless exhange of words as it intruduces more confusion about the subject, than the more precise term "complexity". We still don't achieve any greater understanding of what consciousness is supposed to be. Panpsykism and panspiritism seems to make giant claims about the universe and the existence of spirits without equally supporting evidence.

[@bipolarbear9917]

South African psychoanalyst and neuropsychologist Prof. Mark Solms has some interesting theories about consciousness which appears to be backed up by empirical data.

[@ag-bf3ty]

@@Carbocats You're right. But it's more than just meaningless, it's misleading. Because there are plenty of things that are complex, yet not conscious. The sun is extremely complex with its weather system of plasma, its magnetic fields, its nuclear fusion process etc. But it is not a conscious being.

[@farhanrafid8584]

Good video

[@sarkasedlackova3524]

What happens whwn person is near to the end of life? Have you experienced allergic reacion which is quite severe and blood presure goes quickly down and you have breathing difficulties too? It is not pleasant to experience something like that.

[@jamesklinger5605]

I've often thought that the brain in concert the other major organs of the body and the neurological systems, pulmonary, vascular and all of the sensory organs synchronize or work syncreticly to produce The Cinematic effect we call consciousness. The role that memory plays cannot be understated. The multiple intelligences as per Howard Gardner and the great Geniuses like Leonardo DaVinci and also The mystical experiences of the great Seekers meld together to form one's own personal consciousness. So it must vary from Individual to individual. I have read that the indigenous Australian people of the first day, suggest that their Consciousness swings constantly to the outscape and back to the inscape in a figure eight contiguous Loop configuration. Your thoughts?

[@razony]

There are things Science will never explain. Consciousness is just one of them.

[@bertrc2569]

There are two important statements here. First, that biologists understand life. They don't. Far from it. The more they find the less they know. The other is, Consciousness is everything. An arrogant statement but true for humanity. Lets remember that there was an existence before the rise of humanity and it will remain when humanity is gone. Also, the reality of this statement is that we cannot resolve consciousness. It can only be resolved from outside and we cannot be outside our experience.

[@typologetics3432]

A correction. Technically, it is not possible to correlate brain states with consciousness. Brain states can be correlated with behavior, but we then individually infer that something like our own inner experience is attending that behavior. See under "other minds problem." That's why it's so "hard," as Chalmers says.

[@cara-seyun]

That just felt like you danced around the question without ever posing the question or providing any clues, theories, or evidence. What is the scientific problem of consciousness?

[@adityamishra7711]

I would like to ask this guy just one QUESTION - What do you mean by consciousness ?

[@marcellovignoli8083]

Good luck! Too many known unknowns and unknown unknowns to make any serious hypothesis. What is Chemistry, is not QED in action? Is not any even subtle chemical reaction emitting em photons that when not absorbed can travel all the Universe or propagate from cell to cell? I would prefer to start trying to understand how the simplest organism can understand if it is touched by something or what is food or danger: probably just Chemistry but he understand or memorize something of the environment or is just automatic?

[@alinebaruchi1936]

All about finding taste and feeling

[@eewls]

the sackler centre?

[@RoYaL3796]

The real question that needs to be explored is whether Conciousness is created by the brain.

[@antonmilland1905]

Consciousness has many levels some from the brain and much beyond which only can be understood by Occult Science / Mysticism ie where psychology is but a preparation all else is just hard science arguments true to degree but very limited to just the waking personality which generally spiritually blind 🤔

[@kimbanton4398]

Well, I don't think that this is a mystery anymore. Consciousness IS the product of brain chemistry. The fact that your mind, subjectivity and consciousness can be affected directly & even drastically through damages of brain tissue should be evidence enough. But for me the fact that we develope object permanence (the ability to know that things continue to exist outside your FOV or sensitive perception) after 8 months only as a result of physical changes in our prefrontal cortex structure - i.e. we need brain matter in order to be able to be able to think logically - is clear cut proof that consciousness IS an emergent property of our material brain. No soul required.

[@djjfive]

@@kimbanton4398 Perhaps, however, have you considered that our brains could be receiving consciousness? As an analogy, if your TV were to break, all the TV networks would still be broadcasting; however, you would be unable to receive them correctly due to a broken receiver? This idea is just a potential theory. I’m certainly not claiming to have any facts here; however, since science has yet to find out where consciousness arises from in the brain, this remains a possibility.

[@douglashurd4356]

Well said, good summary.

[@stinerbros]

what's the device he's using for light therapy?

[@thomaskist9503]

Consider the homunculus problem. The little man who sees what we see in our head. For materialists this cannot be. So how would you answer it: the observer observes itself. What if a conscious observer is able to look at the outputs of its own processing and pattern recognize on itself.

[@devrim-oguz]

We discover the parts of circuits and how they relate to each other. You can't imagine the whole thing working at once, but you can imagine it in parts.

[@lightdark00]

Is there a video comparing the consciousness of an average awake person, one sleeping, one passed out from alcohol, one overdosed and passed out on weed, one in a coma?

[@MeRetroGamer]

How could you "measure" the consciousness of someone who can't speak or respond to you? How can you trust the level of consciousness that someone says that is having? If he/she tells you "higher" or "lower", is it fair to compare it with another person's? If you ask people after a period in which they couldn't speak or respond to you, can you trust in their memory?

[@MeRetroGamer]

I think we can measure our own "level" of consciousness and to me it seems to be related with how many information I'm managing at a specifyc moment and its retention (namely attention). So maybe with no retention of information at all there is no consciousness as we know it, but there may still be a little bit of primitive consciousness, a pure sense of "being". Would you trust me if I tell you that I'm kind of entered into this primal state and that *sense* felt much more as an action than something that were just "happening"?

[@matthewbaker6177]

It's sad to see that since I studied psychology, some 20 years ago, there haven't been many advances really. Disappointing. I think consciousness is a natural consequence of complexity.

[@Predestinated1]

that's true. Science isn't progressing so fast as some people claim