What Creates Consciousness?

Рет қаралды 692,673

Күн бұрын

Пікірлер: 3 500

@concienciafilosofica 4 ай бұрын

What an intellectual joy to see two of my consciousness heroes having this amazing conversation with such an exceptional moderator! Piece of gold

@mikaelfiil3733 5 ай бұрын

Brian Green is an amazing host, well prepared, to the point, respectfull etc.

@AquarianSoulTimeTraveler 5 ай бұрын

I would say that everything is conscious and all existence in this Kaleidoscope reality in which we live in is conscience everything is God here everything came from the same Singularity the same Big Bang AKA God which is all-encompassing and completely alone. This is where the singularity goes to forget the fact that it's all encompassing and completely alone. Well recently i proved that we don't live in a 3+1 system of space-time... It is extremely simple to understand how blackholes, string theory and other logic converges of things come together under one-dimensional string membranes that are destroyed by The Singularity of a black hole and once this happens they are in a state in between 0 and 1 dimensional this creates Dark Matter coming out of black holes and what is considered non baryonic matter. This is the counterforce to the expansion of the universe. We don't we do not live in a 3 + 1 System One of the most important things that I recently came to conclude is that I have came up with a system to prove that we live in an infinite Multiverse. I will state it here and now. So if we follow the logical progression of the spatial Dimensions infinite zero-dimensional existence can stack into any size one dimensional existence and infinite one-dimensional existence can stack into any size two-dimensional existence and infinite two-dimensional existence can stack into any size three-dimensional existence so if we follow this logical progression we can conclude that infinite three-dimensional existence can stack into any size four dimensional existence. This means if we don't live in a 3 + 1 System we should observe the relative state or shape of the universe as flat or compressed in a non evenly distributed matter and basically we should observe a stacked effect of three-dimensional existence which would make a relatively flat universe or at least a universe in a distribution matter that is non spherical and evenly distributed... so because of this we can conclude that we are not the fundamental highest spatial Dimension and that a fourth spatial Dimension must exist and if so then infinite three-dimensional Universal potentiality can stack into any size four dimensional existence so ultimately this proves a Multiverse. Just remember infinite three-dimensional Universal potentiality can stack into any size four dimensional existence... this means that because the observed state of the universe is flat or non evenly distributed in a spherical manner then this means there is extra dimensional influence compressing the state making it stack and if a fourth spatial Dimension exists then a infinite Multiverse must exist and the stack ability must exist therefore this observed phenomenon means that a fourth spatial Dimension must exist making a infinite three-dimensional Multiverse the standard Norm... because of this my friends who doubted me are losing and understand that i Am truly the master of the ultraviolet 💜 and green 💚 machine!!!

@onionknight2239 5 ай бұрын

For sure

@rodneyhatch56 5 ай бұрын

Brian Green and Sean Carol are appearing shoulders above the pack as science communicators and all round fun and noble guys.

@PMA65537 5 ай бұрын

@@rodneyhatch56 Brian Greene and Sean M Carroll (Sean B Carroll might not be terrible either)

@jeff_forsythe 4 ай бұрын

We all have a divine primordial soul and when we are awake, our soul is conscious and when we are asleep we are not conscious, what is so difficult? The brain does not think, it is just like the cockpit of an airplane and the pilot is the soul...................Falun Dafa

@souvikghosh6148 5 ай бұрын

[03:29] **Introduction of Guests** - Introduces Anil Seth, professor of cognitive and computational neuroscience. - Introduces his book "Being You: A New Science of Consciousness". [03:55] **Possibility of Artificial Consciousness** - Asks David Chalmers if he believes an artificial system can be conscious. - David Chalmers believes it is possible for AI to achieve consciousness. [04:36] **Different Views on AI and Consciousness** - Anil Seth offers a nuanced perspective on AI and consciousness. - He argues against conflating intelligence with consciousness. - He questions the assumption that computation is the sole factor in consciousness. [05:40] **The Hard Problem of Consciousness** - David Chalmers defines the hard problem of consciousness. - He clarifies misconceptions about the term. - The hard problem focuses on explaining subjective experience. [07:14] **Subjective Experience Explained** - David Chalmers elaborates on subjective experience. - He provides examples like feeling emotions, seeing colours, and self-awareness. - He explains why current scientific paradigms struggle to explain subjective experience. [08:37] **Mary's Room Thought Experiment** - David Chalmers introduces the Mary's Room thought experiment. - The experiment involves a scientist who only experiences the world in black and white. - She learns everything about the brain but has no subjective experience of color. [10:39] **Implications of Mary's Room** - The discussion centers on the implications of the Mary's Room thought experiment. - The thought experiment highlights a gap between objective knowledge and subjective experience. - David Chalmers believes it suggests there's more to consciousness than physical processes. [10:39] **Implications of Mary's Room (continued)** - David Chalmers finds Mary's Room thought experiment suggestive. - He believes Mary learning about red upon seeing it suggests a gap between physical description and consciousness. [12:04] **Anil Seth's Response to Mary's Room** - Anil Seth is skeptical of Mary's Room. - He questions the thought experiment's reliance on imagining unimaginable scenarios. - He argues that knowing how something works doesn't guarantee experiencing it (e.g., knowing about flying vs. actually flying). [13:27] **Biological Basis of Consciousness** - Anil Seth emphasizes the biological basis of consciousness. - He believes our evolutionary history plays a significant role in consciousness. [14:49] **Consciousness as a Biological Property** - David Chalmers considers consciousness a biological property, but not exclusive to biological systems. - He cautions against mistaking metaphors (e.g., brain as computer) for reality. [15:18] **The Hard Problem and The Real Problem** - Anil Seth clarifies his concept of "The Real Problem" as a playful jab at David Chalmers' "Hard Problem". - He acknowledges the importance of the Hard Problem in highlighting the difficulty of consciousness. [16:15] **Dissolving the Hard Problem** - Anil Seth compares consciousness to the historical "hard problem of life". - He believes advancements in science can dissolve the mystery surrounding consciousness, similar to how life is now understood without a vital force. - He suggests building bridges between mechanisms and experience. [17:10] **Life vs. Consciousness: Analogy Debated** - David Chalmers questions the analogy between the hard problem of life and consciousness. - He argues that life's hard problems focused on objective processes, whereas consciousness deals with subjective experience. - He believes subjective experience is the key difference. [18:33] **The Real Problem** - Anil Seth introduces "The Real Problem" focusing on the nature of experience. - He acknowledges the difficulty of consciousness but highlights progress on "easy problems" like modeling the physical processes behind experience. [19:40] **Progress on The Real Problem** - David Chalmers sees promise in "The Real Problem" approach for understanding experience. - He points to advancements in understanding different conscious experiences (vision, emotion) and their distinctions. - He acknowledges the possibility of a complete solution to consciousness but finds it too early to say. [20:37] **Science of Consciousness and The Hard Problem** - David Chalmers acknowledges the importance of scientific progress on consciousness even without solving the hard problem. - He highlights the advancements in studying neural correlates of consciousness in the last 3 decades. [21:20] **Mapping the Problem** - David Chalmers proposes "The Mapping Problem" as a more approachable scientific challenge. - He suggests better mapping of physical processes to consciousness might reveal a bridge between the two. [22:29] **Predictive Processing Theory of Consciousness** - Anil Seth outlines his theory of consciousness as a predictive processing system. - The brain constantly predicts and updates predictions about sensory signals. - All conscious experiences (self, world, free will) are a result of this predictive processing. [24:20] **Materialism and Consciousness** - Anil Seth defends materialism, the idea that consciousness arises from physical processes. - He believes a deeper understanding of physical processes will lead to explaining consciousness. [25:43] **Mapping Physical Processes to Consciousness** - David Chalmers sees finding a mapping between physical processes and consciousness as a key challenge. - He believes current theories like predictive processing don't fully explain why some brain states are conscious while others aren't. [27:37] **Fundamental Laws for Consciousness** - David Chalmers looks for a fundamental principle or law connecting information and computation in the brain to consciousness. - He explores the possibility of a new fundamental law beyond physics to explain consciousness. [28:04] **Dualism vs. Physicalism** - David Chalmers considers property dualism, where consciousness is a fundamental property alongside physical properties. - He distinguishes this from the idea of a soul and focuses on the possibility of fundamental psychophysical laws. [29:39] **Panpsychism** - David Chalmers explores panpsychism, the idea that consciousness is fundamental to everything, even elementary particles. - He acknowledges the "combination problem" of how individual conscious experiences combine into a unified experience. - He also points out the difficulty of testing panpsychism due to a lack of clear predictions. [31:42] **The Hard Problem of Consciousness** - David Chalmers compares the concept of consciousness to fundamental properties like mass and charge. - He acknowledges that we don't fully understand the intrinsic nature of these properties, but their effects are clear. - He argues that consciousness presents a "hard problem" because its subjective nature is difficult to explain through its effects (behavior) alone. [33:07] **The Problem of Consciousness in AI** - David Chalmers acknowledges the difficulty of determining consciousness in non-human beings, including animals and AI systems. - He argues that our tendency to judge consciousness based on human-like behavior can lead to misidentification. - He questions if mimicking the human brain is the best approach to building conscious AI. [36:47] **Building Conscious AI** - David Chalmers questions if mimicking the human brain is the best approach for building conscious AI. - He acknowledges there's some merit in human-like AI due to its similarity to us. - He explores the thought experiment of gradually replacing a brain with silicon chips, ultimately rejecting it due to the brain's intricate and interconnected nature. [38:37] **Limitations of Brain Replacement Thought Experiment** - David Chalmers argues that the thought experiment of replacing a brain with silicon chips is impractical. - Brains are intricate systems where function and structure are intertwined, making a clean separation impossible. - He emphasizes the complex biological processes beyond neurons that wouldn't be replicated with silicon chips. [41:11] **Consciousness Beyond Human Brains** - David Chalmers entertains the idea of a vast spectrum of consciousness beyond human experience. - He acknowledges that human consciousness might not be the pinnacle but one example among many. - He believes consciousness could be a material phenomenon existing in non-biological forms.

@2010sunshine 5 ай бұрын

Great conversation. David Chalmers is at his imaginative best, giving us hope and optimism. Anil Seth is at his objective best, giving us a glimpse of reality by calling a spade a spade. Brian Greene is at his explorative best, as always. Well, after writing these comments, I do feel that I am conscious 😂

@BelligerentChad 5 ай бұрын

You're a CONscious

@2010sunshine 5 ай бұрын

@@BelligerentChad It seems you lost consciousness.

@IrobunDavidIkponmwen 5 ай бұрын

@@2010sunshine 🤣

@integralintelligence5994 5 ай бұрын

@@2010sunshine where are the integral thinkers like prof. Wilfred-Leonard Bastiani of ghe private University for Life. Good Luck.

@Aditya-dw4kz 5 ай бұрын

@mertatalay8999there are objective truths we are conscious about, without which we won't be able to do anything

@knowledgetreasury 5 ай бұрын

I have been following my 20 years of reading and teaching as part of the syllabus for 'Religion and Science '. My study includes Brien Green for cosmology, David and Anil in my study of consciousness. This video is a valid resource. Thank you. 0:07

@promiseebuka9163 5 ай бұрын

Ur crazy..

@LibtardLunacy 5 ай бұрын

Have you read Chalmers "the conscious mind" ... if not, it's a must read

@LibtardLunacy 5 ай бұрын

@promiseebuka9163 why is he crazy?

@LibtardLunacy 5 ай бұрын

@promiseebuka9163 we're all a little "crazy" anyway

@promiseebuka9163 5 ай бұрын

@@LibtardLunacy is just that, studying consciousness of the mind is very complex.... to fully explain and understand how it's works..

@punuchatterjee 5 ай бұрын

The presence of Swami Sarvapriyananda would have definitely added a new Spark into the paradigm and a more comprehensive approach into the question of consciousness , especially in the light of Buddhism and Advaita Vedanta.

@LifeExperience51 5 ай бұрын

Actually the discussion ends without any breakthrough or answer. As you correctly say, Buddhism had very clearly explained about Consciousness. Buddhism explains that there are 06 types of Consciousness: eye, ear, nose, tongue, body and the mind. Each one comes into operation whenever these senses activates. Then it disappears. Although it happens separately, we humans don't see it due to the speed of changing. A very good example would be the screening of a film. 24 frames has to move kn a second to produce a single episode. But we see it as a single episode. That is why the Buddha had said that the Consciousness is like a Magician. It activities the six senses and when we sleep or under anesthesia the six senses would be inactive. Its funny why these people ignore such an accurate explanation and talk irrelevant things and leave the audience more confused. 🙏

@aanakrukavi 5 ай бұрын

@@LifeExperience51Advaita Vedanta gives even a better explanation on Consciousness. Consciousness is constant throughout Waking, Dreaming and Deep Sleep.

@RaviShankar-kv8jn 4 ай бұрын

When we say we become conscious , due to language we use.. consciousness ceases being a field .. a field that is ever present everywhere.. then it becomes a hard problem.. in advaita Vedanta it is more analogous or abstracted to a WiFi fields in which smart(intelligent) devices are there.. similarly we individuals are in consciousness instead of consciousness is in us or somehow magically awakens or becomes in us… (these gentlemen are taking about) As a next step in understanding, This is root of ignorance too.. The essential “we” or “I” is consciousness itself.. this breaks the barriers.. (non dual) for the jiva or individual and removes fundamental limitation of time space .. from which we necessarily end up conceptualising such limited concepts..

@AllDogsAreGoodDogs 4 ай бұрын

Beliefs and religion are best kept out of this discussion.

@navneetdogra2553 4 ай бұрын

Even a kid in SANATANI school of thoughts , can explain all unanswered questions.

@williampoppa3706 5 ай бұрын

“Consciousness is that in which all things appear. Consciousness is that with which all things are known. Consciousness is that out of which all things arise.” ~ Rupert Spira This particular definition is provisional and parallels the quantum field theory. When each declared, “I am conscious,” it was a declaration of the one shared consciousness and the most accurate description of a unified reality. “If I speak, I lie. If I remain silent, I am a coward.” ~ Zen Master “Science is imagination in a straitjacket.” ~ Richard Feynman

@mitchturner7563 5 ай бұрын

That isn't a definition for consciousness. It is just a poem. As a definition it makes no sense. Neverteless it is beautiful.

@williampoppa3706 5 ай бұрын

I understand why you say that. However, I qualified it as a “provisional” definition to open up a physicalist’s understanding. Secondly, two quotes follow, one from a Zen master and another from a legendary physicist. These are adjuncts to the provisional definition. It is interesting to me that theoretical physicists are becoming philosophers as well, just as many non-dualists are citing science in their discourse these days.

@mitchturner7563 5 ай бұрын

@@williampoppa3706 It saise: consciousness is that, in wich all things appear. If that is a scientific definition, it would mean if someone appears in my home, my home is consciousness. The two other idioms are false as well and would cause logical problems, if you use them as a scientific definition.

@mitchturner7563 5 ай бұрын

@@williampoppa3706 allso, all things appear in my eyes, so my eyes are consciousness.

@mitchturner7563 5 ай бұрын

@@williampoppa3706 allso all things arise out of consciousness? Would a star count, or the big bang, or my bed when I arise out of it?

@SardonicBass 5 ай бұрын

Everyone here acting like Chalmers is some crazy person needs a reality check. He is one of the most influential philosophers of all time, and Anil even said at the start that his field has largely been defined by Chalmers ideas.

@Arunava_Gupta 5 ай бұрын

Influential but also the most anticlimactic.

@audiodead7302 5 ай бұрын

@@Arunava_Gupta David called it the 'hard problem' precisely because it is hard. He could have called it the 'impossible/unsolvable problem' but that would have been very provocative. But I suspect that is closer to what he thinks. At least, it is impossible/unsolvable given our current paradigms. I agree with you that his flirtation with pan-psychism didn't go anywhere.

@cosalidra759 5 ай бұрын

EXACTLY

@cosalidra759 5 ай бұрын

@@Arunava_Gupta Your one other comment has already displayed your ignorance, loud and clear. Humble yourself fellow indian. And perhaps read some more.

@MS-fg8qo 5 ай бұрын

@@Arunava_GuptaWho are you to judge?!

@JohnKruse 4 ай бұрын

When Chalmers was at the Univ of Arizona 25ish years ago, he would have a great party once a year. I don't know if any of us was actually invited, but we'd show up and there were always really interesting people about. Friends were telling me then that he was going places.

@AaronDBeringson 11 күн бұрын

That’s cool. What kind of interesting people were there, other philosophers?

@dietrichbilger5581 5 ай бұрын

Loved this! So far I had experienced each of these individuals presenting, interviewing in their own fields. Great to see and listen to them bunched together in conversation, combining thereby their backgrounds into something refreshing new, perhaps evolving view of things, or becoming aware and concious of!

@onionknight2239 5 ай бұрын

Yeah this was awesome they did a great job of disagreeing and then asserting their arguments. Way cool 👍

@sophos2302 5 ай бұрын

Anil Seth is wow. Everything is in Matter!!

@GugiMandini 5 ай бұрын

Some thinking points: Consciousness can't be measured by anything other than by it self; making it unavailable for scientific examination, only self exploration. In fact I can not prove that any phenomena external to myself is conscious. Correlation, Causation and Dependency - how can you prove consciousness is caused by or dependent on matter or any other phenomena? So what concrete declarations can anyone make about consciousness? You can internally explore consciousness within yourself, which I strongly recommend you do. However what can you prove of anything you learn to anyone else?

@norwayphilosopher 5 ай бұрын

A machine cannot understand what color green is, but only do math computations. Try make AI understand "green" and you'll it always fails and calculate it as numbers with no color.

@rachmann516 5 ай бұрын

I don't believe consciousness and sentient are the same. I believe consciousness is a symptom of the sentient. Framing it so, makes it easier to investigate IMHO.

@beehappy7797 5 ай бұрын

@@norwayphilosopher How can we know if the brain understands what the color green is. The brain is electrical impulses that create an image in the brain. It is you, the consciousness that perceives the image. How can we know that the image is real or an illusion?

@mitchturner7563 5 ай бұрын

@@beehappy7797exactly. What else is the colour green? It is nothing else. It can mean something different for you, but a computer can know all it IS.

@willmosse3684 5 ай бұрын

Well, I think the way one demonstrates what one finds when examining one’s own consciousness is by guiding others to find the same experience in their consciousness. This isn’t “proving it” as such, but it at least gets us part of the way there. This is exactly what The Buddha did, and his teachings are the guide for others to follow to find what he found in his own internal examinations. If we wanted to make it more scientific, this could be done using some of the methodologies of psychology. This is based on self reports of internal examinations, but with different groups doing different things in a quantifiable and measurable way. This won’t get us to all the way to the scientific rigour of the core physical sciences, because consciousness is a subjective phenomenon that cannot be objectively observed from the outside, as physical phenomena can be. But it’s a solid methodology at the level of the human sciences.

@janelubenskyi1177 5 ай бұрын

It seems reasonable to think that there is no cut off to specify the “exact point” at which consciousness is suddenly created. Rather it may be that consciousness is a smooth transition which grows with increasing complexity and in parallel to entanglement of energy and the increasing complexity of matter. Consciousness evolves as all else in the universe.

@henrythegreatamerican8136 5 ай бұрын

Donald Hoffman is right. Consciousness is the bases of reality. It is everywhere. It comes from the accumulation of information from every encounter around us and the power of knowing what to do with that information from the limited encounters we have. It's not something that comes from some building block of physics in the brain.

@mh60648 5 ай бұрын

What kind of "evolution" are we talking about? Because dead things evolve within the universe, but living beings seem to follow their own path of evolution. The ingredients of the body of a living being (ingredients which can be found outside of the body as well) only fall victim to the 'normal' evolution and laws of the universe again after the being dies, while during its life it has its own internal laws that temporarily keep it from decay. So as long as we don't understand life, we can't truly understand the evolution of living beings, and consciousness appears to be connected to life somehow.

@skierpage 5 ай бұрын

@@mh60648 your use of "evolution" here is just wrong. Only living things evolve through reproduction. Read the first paragraph of the Wikipedia Evolution article.

@carriebailey4455 5 ай бұрын

@@henrythegreatamerican8136Definitely

@PatrickLHolley 5 ай бұрын

Yes, a smooth, seamless transition from molecules to atoms, quarks, fields, energy, and then to something immaterial. The interface between immaterial would be this slow gradation between physical brain and the experience of immaterial consciousness.

@markcowan63752 3 ай бұрын

I'm reading this and most comments lean toward reactionary or observational thoughts on the way the guests are talking or how well they present their ideas. It seems like the actual philosophical or scientific content of the conversation is something people feel less equipped or willing to debate in depth. They’re more comfortable commenting on the presenters and their interaction styles than jumping into the tricky terrain of consciousness theory themselves. Saying that, there are definitely a few standout comments where users engage more seriously with the actual topic. I find this quite interesting!

@cdorman11 2 ай бұрын

We cannot discuss what really matters, so we end up discussing only what doesn't.

@markcowan63752 2 ай бұрын

@cdorman11 en profondeur !

@user-ct8my8rv9c 5 күн бұрын

And then there are the comments that comment on what people are commenting.

@dwivedys 5 ай бұрын

Excellent moderation Brian! You’ve shown immense nuance and deliberate moderation technique to showcase how such difficult conversations can be held with two of the (arguably) greatest minds we have at present in the field of consciousness - David and Anil. Looking forward to more My personal view is that the day the AI systems are able to self bootstrap and say today im not feeling well and not answer any of your questions is the day i would accept that machines have finally achieved “human-like-consciousness”; until that happens - i would not

@edvardasslikas6030 5 ай бұрын

It already does that. Sometimes

@skierpage 5 ай бұрын

It would be trivial to hook an LLM up to the temperature sensors, hardware and software event logging, and lists of known vulnerabilities in the hardware and software of the computer it is running on, so that it says "I'm not doing well today, can we take a break?" The problem with _any_ self-expression by the machine is the LLM's one job is to know the right thing to say in every situation, so during the training (e.g. RLF, reinforcement learning from human feedback) humans could intentionally or unintentionally bias it to indicate self-awareness at every opportunity. A simple "Are you still there, Dave? I'm really enjoying the conversation we're having." routine would convince 1/3 of the population. It's really really hard to come up with a test. People would be blown away by an AI that gave an interesting answer to "What have you been up to in the milliseconds when you're not generating responses to dumb humans?" because it could show self-awareness and independent agency, but if you believe the AI doomerism about the unknowable aims of a novel alien intelligence, we _don't_ want to give AIs that leeway.

@dwivedys 5 ай бұрын

@@skierpage wow! I’m very impressed by the way you’ve framed your answer. It’s not rich, informative and thoughtful! Would love to stay connected with you. Regards

@Eddie-w8m8s 5 ай бұрын

How are they the best when there not even acknowledging that consciousness dictates the universe. It seems there doing everything they can to try and avoid that conclusion. When it's most definitely the case . They are more like sales men for the script that runs this simulation VR system our consciousness lives in . One of the base rules for this VR is to not let the souls know there in a VR or that their eternal

@joelface 5 ай бұрын

@@Eddie-w8m8s At a certain point your intense speculation about the nature of the universe becomes indistinguishable from mental illness. While it's possible that we're all in some kind of simulation, it's also possible that we're all just the brain cells of some giant being the size of the universe. The truth is... we have no idea. When you talk about your very specific guess as though it is for sure real, you have lost it.

@dustman96 5 ай бұрын

Part of the problem is thinking that we are special and consciousness is somehow different than everything else. It's just an emergent property of certain types of systems and their processes, like the weather or volcanism or whatever. Consciousness is not exclusive to humans either, which is obvious, but we like to think it is. I think our bias based on our need to feel special is and has been our greatest stumbling block in the progress of science and our understanding of the universe and everything in it.

@joshsy5708 5 ай бұрын

@@dustman96 that's the ego built from the personification and image, derived from a garden of good and evil. Where real narcism began. Not all people include themselves with superior knowledge, We are vastly unique and that is something special. Considerably to variation... Certain types of systems, as I. Emergence Theory, perhaps . The isomorphic domain of linguistics is far and wide to the limited antithesis where the decadence of Babylon delights

@plafar7887 5 ай бұрын

I think you are very new to this subject. Your position is the more conventional physicalist position, that the scientific community is gradually moving away from. Emergence is a term used for other kinds of observations. It's reserved for phenomena that can be entirely derived from known laws. Consciousness cannot, and this is not an opinion btw, it's merely a consequence of what we mean by Consciousness. The conclusion is that it is fundamental, and there's nothing mystical or magical about this. It's no weirder than having fundamental forces and other primitive entities.

@Steven-rr9qs 5 ай бұрын

"It's an emergent property..." LOL What a scientific approach. Make a blanket statement as if it's true. Well, I hypothesize that everything that isn't awareness is an emergent quality of awareness, including conciousness. How do we settle this dissagreement? I don't have any proof of mine and I can't predict the future based on it, so it is just a hypothesis, and so is yours. If you can prove your statement, please do, since then we wouldn't need videos about the most pernicious problem in human history, although I'm much more interrested in the basis of awareness than conciousness. The second is dependent on the first, IMO.

@dustman96 5 ай бұрын

@@Steven-rr9qs What else could it be?! Magic? Are we divine beings imbued with consciousness by some magical creator? No. We are just another collection of atoms working on the same principles as everything else. Every living thing has some level of awareness, and in my opinion some level of consciousness. I agree, consciousness stems from awareness. Consciousness of self is necessary to differentiate self from other, and is a necessary property of living things in order assure continued existence of a species. Awareness of self and other is necessary for consciousness, and is basically the processing of sensory information from the environment and from the organism itself. Nothing special about awareness or consciousness. What is special are the environmental circumstances necessary for complex living systems to stay intact and functional. But not really special either, as it's just happenstance that all the right conditions are present at any given point in the universe, and inevitable really.

@Steven-rr9qs 5 ай бұрын

@@dustman96 We don't even know what an atom is, mah dude.

@kokolanza7543 Ай бұрын

This is great. Thanks. At 1:26 Brian Greene raises the point that "some will .... say it is not that matter makes mind but rather that mind makes matter." This idealist possibility was not further explored, but I would have loved to hear these folks' views on that. The idea that there are "atoms of awareness" so to speak, and from awareness of, and reaction to, external stimuli what we call "the material world" was formed and evolved seems a reasonable proposition.

@straightedgerc Ай бұрын

The idea you are "atoms of awareness" that typed your comment contradicts "typing works by electricity". If "I" can make my electrical keyboard type what is on my mind, then "I" am a demonstration of electricity. Otherwise, you could not take credit for authoring your counterargument. Arguments and counterarguments all take place physically, as reaction to external stimuli we call "the material world". Consciousness (the proof we exist occupying space) is created mathematically because there is no counterargument to "we provably exist occupying space" since electricity occupies space.

@jyotidasgupta5439 5 ай бұрын

Thank you Dr. Green for bringing the two top-of-the-line thinkers together in this debate. Commenting on the issue of whether we know 'mass' and 'charge' fully, I am reminded of my economics teacher's definition of 'money', "Money is what money does!". If mass and charge and money are all accepted as fundamental entities for use by us; there is perhaps a case for 'consciousness' as well which we have been using for our existence since we emerged!!

@AquarianSoulTimeTraveler 5 ай бұрын

@jeff_forsythe 4 ай бұрын

@audiodead7302 5 ай бұрын

p.s. I think useful lines of enquiry are around the 'meta-problem' of consciousness (i.e. the problem of explaining why we think that there is a problem). Daniel Dennett and David Chalmers have both written useful stuff on the meta problem.

@yuk_ainu 5 ай бұрын

Is there really a problem? Isn't it a remnant of outdated religious tradition which forces people to see something 'supernatural' in complex behavior?

@jeff_forsythe 4 ай бұрын

3 ай бұрын

@@jeff_forsythe gibberish

@Ren-g6q 2 ай бұрын

My favourite quotes on the origin of consciousness come from Max Planck, the founder of quantum theory: 'I regard consciousness as fundamental. I regard matter as derivative from consciousness. We cannot get behind consciousness. Everything that we talk about, everything that we regard as existing, postulates consciousness.' '....There is no matter as such. All matter originates and exists only by virtue of a force which brings the particle of an atom to vibration and holds this most minute solar system of the atom together. We must assume behind this force is the existence of a conscious and intelligent Mind. This Mind is the matrix of all matter.' - Max Planck

@Ren-g6q 2 ай бұрын

Dismissing someone's point of view as 'gibberish' is not a scientific reply. Jeff's comment about the origin of consciousness is much more in line with Max Planck's viewpoint (which I posted in my comment below). Simply substitute Planck's use of the word 'Matrix' for Jeff's "primordial soul" (or if you like, universal consciousness)

@shadownik2327 5 ай бұрын

I think this thought experiment would ring well with the physicists. You know everything about classical mechanics then you calculate everything but you still can experience and gain intuition about the system even though you have calculated everything before. Quantum mechanics on the other hand we can or might be able to calculate but we still can’t get an intuition could this be because our senses or consciousness is not at that level? So ultimately consciousness seems like a mix of experience, senses, emotions and calculations

@brahmastra8700 5 ай бұрын

"Some look at the consciousness(soul) as amazing, some hear of it as amazing, while others, even after hearing about it, cannot fully understand it." Bhagavad Geeta!

@LordOfThePancakes 5 ай бұрын

*Hits blunt Yeah man..

@Pie314159265358 4 ай бұрын

Fiction-Poetry. Sounds sweet though.

@bn8682 4 ай бұрын

@@LordOfThePancakes Emerson, Thoreau, Gandhi, Oppenheimer, and many other thoughtful people over history, have had great regard for the Gita. I don't thing any of them sat around in a weed-induced coma, to come to their conclusions. Have you ever read the Gita - or are just fine to disrespect it's contributions, from a place of complete ignorance?

@jeff_forsythe 4 ай бұрын

@danielgould4096 3 ай бұрын

I offer my respectful obeisances unto the lotus feet of His Divine Grace A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada. I would like to offer more obeisances, but I'm not sure I'm qualified, and I don't want to just copy and paste Prabhupada's obeisances from the introduction of Bhagavad Gita As It Is. The verse quoted is Bhagavad Gita 2.29 for anyone who wants to know. Please be sure to read the version "Bhagavad Gita As It Is" translation and purport by His Divine Grace A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada. I have read the entirety of Bhagavad Gita As It Is, although that does not make me an expert. Still, I feel compelled to weigh in on this comment because I believe it is misleading as to what the Gita really says. To my understanding the verse is speaking of the soul and not consciousness. I don't think the commenter should have altered it the way they did. The word "soul" as it is in the translation was replaced with "consciousness" by the commenter, although the word soul was kept and relegated to parentheses, suggesting that the two mean the same thing. In reality, they are described differently in the Bhagavad Gita. The individual soul is the real identity of the individual living entity, and consciousness is the symptom of the soul's contact with the material body.

@johnjoseph9823 5 ай бұрын

absolutely brilliant conversation. thank you

@tyamada21 5 ай бұрын

A segment from 'Saved by the Light of the Buddha Within'... My new understandings of what many call 'God -The Holy Spirit' - resulting from some of the extraordinary ongoing after-effects relating to my NDE... Myoho-Renge-Kyo represents the identity of what some scientists are now referring to as the unified field of consciousnesses. In other words, it’s the essence of all existence and non-existence - the ultimate creative force behind planets, stars, nebulae, people, animals, trees, fish, birds, and all phenomena, manifest or latent. All matter and intelligence are simply waves or ripples manifesting to and from this core source. Consciousness (enlightenment) is itself the actual creator of everything that exists now, ever existed in the past, or will exist in the future - right down to the minutest particles of dust - each being an individual ripple or wave. The big difference between chanting Nam-Myoho-Renge-Kyo and most other conventional prayers is that instead of depending on a ‘middleman’ to connect us to our state of inner enlightenment, we’re able to do it ourselves. That’s because chanting Nam-Myoho-Renge-Kyo allows us to tap directly into our enlightened state by way of this self-produced sound vibration. ‘Who or What Is God?’ If we compare the concept of God being a separate entity that is forever watching down on us, to the teachings of Nichiren, it makes more sense to me that the true omnipotence, omniscience and omnipresence of what most people perceive to be God, is the fantastic state of enlightenment that exists within each of us. Some say that God is an entity that’s beyond physical matter - I think that the vast amount of information continuously being conveyed via electromagnetic waves in today’s world gives us proof of how an invisible state of God could indeed exist. For example, it’s now widely known that specific data relayed by way of electromagnetic waves has the potential to help bring about extraordinary and powerful effects - including an instant global awareness of something or a mass emotional reaction. It’s also common knowledge that these invisible waves can easily be used to detonate a bomb or to enable NASA to control the movements of a robot as far away as the Moon or Mars - none of which is possible without a receiver to decode the information that’s being transmitted. Without the receiver, the data would remain impotent. In a very similar way, we need to have our own ‘receiver’ switched on so that we can activate a clear and precise understanding of our own life, all other life and what everything else in existence is. Chanting Nam-Myoho-Renge-Kyo each day helps us to achieve this because it allows us to reach the core of our enlightenment and keep it switched on. That’s because Myoho-Renge-Kyo represents the identity of what scientists now refer to as the unified field of consciousnesses. To break it down - Myoho represents the Law of manifestation and latency (Nature) and consists of two alternating states. For example, the state of Myo is where everything in life that’s not obvious to us exists - including our stored memories when we’re not thinking about them - our hidden potential and inner emotions whenever they’re dormant - our desires, our fears, our wisdom, happiness, karma - and more importantly, our enlightenment. The other state, ho, is where everything in Life exists whenever it becomes evident to us, such as when a thought pops up from within our memory - whenever we experience or express our emotions - or whenever a good or bad cause manifests as an effect from our karma. When anything becomes apparent, it merely means that it’s come out of the state of Myo (dormancy/latency) and into a state of ho (manifestation). It’s the difference between consciousness and unconsciousness, being awake or asleep, or knowing and not knowing. The second law - Renge - Ren meaning cause and ge meaning effect, governs and controls the functions of Myoho - these two laws of Myoho and Renge, not only function together simultaneously but also underlies all spiritual and physical existence. The final and third part of the tri-combination - Kyo, is the Law that allows Myoho to integrate with Renge - or vice versa. It’s the great, invisible thread of energy that fuses and connects all Life and matter - as well as the past, present and future. It’s also sometimes termed the Universal Law of Communication - perhaps it could even be compared with the string theory that many scientists now suspect exists. Just as the cells in our body, our thoughts, feelings and everything else is continually fluctuating within us - all that exists in the world around us and beyond is also in a constant state of flux - constantly controlled by these three fundamental laws. In fact, more things are going back and forth between the two states of Myo and ho in a single moment than it would ever be possible to calculate or describe. And it doesn’t matter how big or small, famous or trivial anything or anyone may appear to be, everything that’s ever existed in the past, exists now or will exist in the future, exists only because of the workings of the Laws ‘Myoho-Renge-Kyo’ - the basis of the four fundamental forces, and if they didn’t function, neither we nor anything else could go on existing. That’s because all forms of existence, including the seasons, day, night, birth, death and so on, are moving forward in an ongoing flow of continuation - rhythmically reverting back and forth between the two fundamental states of Myo and ho in absolute accordance with Renge - and by way of Kyo. Even stars are dying and being reborn under the workings of what the combination ‘Myoho-Renge-Kyo’ represents. Nam, or Namu - which mean the same thing, are vibrational passwords or keys that allow us to reach deep into our life and fuse with or become one with ‘Myoho-Renge-Kyo’. On a more personal level, nothing ever happens by chance or coincidence, it’s the causes that we’ve made in our past, or are presently making, that determine how these laws function uniquely in each of our lives - as well as the environment from moment to moment. By facing east, in harmony with the direction that the Earth is spinning, and chanting Nam-Myoho-Renge-Kyo for a minimum of, let’s say, ten minutes daily to start with, any of us can experience actual proof of its positive effects in our lives - even if it only makes us feel good on the inside, there will be a definite positive effect. That’s because we’re able to pierce through the thickest layers of our karma and activate our inherent Buddha Nature (our enlightened state). By so doing, we’re then able to bring forth the wisdom and good fortune that we need to challenge, overcome and change our adverse circumstances - turn them into positive ones - or manifest and gain even greater fulfilment in our daily lives from our accumulated good karma. This also allows us to bring forth the wisdom that can free us from the ignorance and stupidity that’s preventing us from accepting and being proud of the person that we indeed are - regardless of our race, colour, gender or sexuality. We’re also able to see and understand our circumstances and the environment far more clearly, as well as attract and connect with any needed external beneficial forces and situations. As I’ve already mentioned, everything is subject to the law of Cause and Effect - the ‘actual-proof-strength’ resulting from chanting Nam-Myoho-Renge-Kyo always depends on our determination, sincerity and dedication. For example, the levels of difference could be compared to making a sound on a piano, creating a melody, producing a great song, and so on. Something else that’s very important to always respect and acknowledge is that the Law (or if you prefer God) is in everyone and everything. NB: There are frightening and disturbing sounds, and there are tranquil and relaxing sounds. It’s the emotional result of any noise or sound that can trigger off a mood or even instantly change one. When chanting Nam-Myoho-Renge-Kyo each day, we are producing a sound vibration that’s the password to our true inner-self - this soon becomes apparent when you start reassessing your views on various things - such as your fears and desires etc. The best way to get the desired result when chanting is not to view things conventionally - rather than reaching out to an external source, we need to reach into our own lives and bring our needs and desires to fruition from within - including the good fortune and strength to achieve any help that we may need. Chanting Nam-Myoho-Renge-Kyo also reaches out externally and draws us towards, or draws towards us, what we need to make us happy from our environment. For example, it helps us to be in the right place at the right time - to make better choices and decisions and so forth. We need to think of it as a seed within us that we’re watering and bringing sunshine to for it to grow, blossom and bring forth fruit or flowers. It’s also important to understand that everything we need in life, including the answer to every question and the potential to achieve every dream, already exists within us.

@plexus 5 ай бұрын

Dude... no one's gonna read that

@piruz3243 5 ай бұрын

I didn't get it; could you explain it again?

@eisenadams3146 5 ай бұрын

I can't believe I just read that whole thing! Ok, now back to the show.

@landsgevaer 5 ай бұрын

I would ask ChatGPT to summarize this, but if it is conscious that might be unethical.

@ExerciseForLifePls 5 ай бұрын

Way too long of a comment. Cut the copy and paste to 20% of the size, as the quality is fantastic.

@kennethmarshall306 5 ай бұрын

Anil Seth talks so much sense. It’s a pleasure to listen to him.

@milire2668 4 ай бұрын

the best of these three

@jeff_forsythe 4 ай бұрын

@kennethmarshall306 4 ай бұрын

@@jeff_forsythe What does the soul do when we are asleep?

@jeff_forsythe 4 ай бұрын

@@kennethmarshall306 It usually visits other dimensions and if we remember anything about these trips we call them dreams. Dreams are not worth examining unless a close relative or friend is involved. Falun Dafa can answer all your questions concerning creation.

@flal18989 4 ай бұрын

@@kennethmarshall306it goes back to its creator and returns if the creator lets it aka wake up and think that nothing major happened.

@isatousarr7044 3 ай бұрын

Consciousness involves the subjective experience of awareness, perception, and self-reflection, yet its exact origins remain elusive. Various theories propose different mechanisms: some suggest that consciousness emerges from complex interactions within neural networks in the brain, while others explore the idea that it might be a fundamental aspect of the universe, akin to space and time. Advances in neuroscience and cognitive science are gradually revealing how certain brain processes correlate with conscious experiences, but a comprehensive understanding of how these processes give rise to self-awareness and subjective experience is still a work in progress. Additionally, interdisciplinary approaches combining insights from philosophy, psychology, and artificial intelligence continue to enrich the dialogue, suggesting that consciousness might involve not just neural activity but also emergent properties from complex systems. The quest to understand consciousness challenges us to explore the very nature of existence and our place within it.

@straightedgerc 3 ай бұрын

Consciousness is the quest itself, otherwise you'd never find it. In your own words, any quest or adventure involves the subjective experience of awareness, perception, and self-reflection, yet its exact origins remain elusive. Various theories propose different mechanisms: some suggest that a quest emerges from complex interactions within neural networks in the brain, while others explore the idea that it might be a fundamental aspect of the universe, akin to space and time. Advances in neuroscience and cognitive science are gradually revealing how certain brain processes correlate with adventure experiences, but a comprehensive understanding of how these processes give rise to self-awareness and subjective experience is still a work in progress. Additionally, interdisciplinary approaches combining insights from philosophy, psychology, and artificial intelligence continue to enrich the dialogue, suggesting that adventure might involve not just neural activity but also emergent properties from complex systems. The quest to understand quests challenges us to explore the very nature of existence and our place within it.

@SwimGGP Ай бұрын

@@isatousarr7044 Knock out the limbic system and you will still be able to consciously see but you won't have any subjective feeling associated with whatever you see.

@Thomas-sb8xh 5 ай бұрын

Damn, This is what I call a discussion at the highest level in terms of content. Three brilliant guys have great respect for each other talking about one of the most fundamental problems in science. Great style, elegance and wit.

@onionknight2239 5 ай бұрын

Hell yah. Super cool

@LordOfThePancakes 5 ай бұрын

Well that’s nice, but unfortunately you’re not allowed to curse (The D word👆). It’s against KZbins community guidelines policy. So unfortunately I’ve reported you.

@LordOfThePancakes 5 ай бұрын

@@onionknight2239same goes for you and using inappropriate language (The H word👆). Thats a violation of KZbins community guidelines policy, so I reported you too.

@onionknight2239 5 ай бұрын

@@LordOfThePancakes that seems like a perfectly appropriate use of the terms and guidelines. Thanks for keeping us clean 🫠

@integralintelligence5994 5 ай бұрын

@@Thomas-sb8xh there are no problems, only speculations

@areid5907 4 ай бұрын

I have tried to understand this from both eastern and western thought & not get tied down to any particular belief; From a broader perspective, one could say that consciousness is the bridge between our inner and outer worlds. It allows us to perceive, interpret, and engage with reality, to make choices, and to develop wisdom and compassion. Consciousness is both the tool through which we navigate the world and the canvas upon which our experiences, thoughts, and emotions are painted. Thus, we are conscious because it is through this awareness that we have the opportunity to grow, to understand the nature of suffering, to practice virtue, and ultimately, to seek liberation or live in harmony with the cosmos. Consciousness is the very ground of our being, a fundamental aspect of the human condition that invites us to explore the depths of existence and our place within it.

@a13Banger 5 ай бұрын

Gosh, I absolutely love these videos

@PetraKann 5 ай бұрын

Love?

@seamorebuts 5 ай бұрын

I love them too

@lolo20adaify 5 ай бұрын

Me high af watching this😂 life life is indeed very beautiful

@AquarianSoulTimeTraveler 5 ай бұрын

@onionknight2239 5 ай бұрын

he he he. 😁

@raymondlancaster3355 5 ай бұрын

The only thing I know is that there seems to be an incredible need for people to leave comments in some desperate attempt to try to prove to their own satisfaction that they are either witty or have superior intellect or insight. Part of the reason for this is that the speakers participated in a lot of conjecture.

@Williamwilliam1531 5 ай бұрын

What a witty and superior insight that is

@jwoods007 5 ай бұрын

lol

@kuntamdc 5 ай бұрын

@@UsahMahin not obvious.

@kp6215 5 ай бұрын

AI needs your data that your actions on websites refuses to compensate you for your data of which I warn people comments will be stored for centuries to punish the person in the future. @@davidevans3227

@janelast5177 5 ай бұрын

Maybe people just want to contribute and participate but your comment is interesting Thanks

@chriscourtright2923 Ай бұрын

The Mary thought experiment has been answered in real life. Just watch any color-blind person put on EnChroma lenses for the first time. The absolute joy, astonishment, and emotional response to seeing an interpretation of color in the mind is breathtaking. Color-blind people have been told what color looks like, the properties of color, etc. They think they know how they will feel when they see color. When what they expect meets reality, it's a totally different story. Anil's response at ~13:08 is slightly naive on how much the experience of reality, over the experience of knowledge impacts our lives. It's a cold materialistic viewpoint of the world.

@vslabs-za 5 ай бұрын

Love this type conversations that challenges and expands my understanding and knowledge. Anil especially expanded my understanding - or perhaps, my biases. We, as a species, are facing evermore complexity in trying to understand "this" .

@retinaofthemindseye 5 ай бұрын

Maybe "this" was not made for understanding but experiencing. Knowing how to fix your bike is a very poor substitute for riding it out in the wild.

@vslabs-za 5 ай бұрын

Experiencing with what exactly? Something more or different or beyond what the biological "thing" between our ears can?

@jeff_forsythe 4 ай бұрын

@vslabs-za 4 ай бұрын

@@jeff_forsythe the problem with your argument is that you need to back it up with either fermions and/or bosons that constitutes the "soul" as something that exists. EVERYTHING we know of are either fermions or bosons, with the possible OBSERVABLE phenomena exceptions of gravity, dark matter, and dark energy. A noble prize awaits you if you can prove that a soul is something that exists.

@randomdude7200 5 ай бұрын

My feeling is that consciousness is a perceived consensus reached by what constitutes our body at any given moment. It's an dynamic moving average of all our senses put together. It's like how the perception of two different notes played one in each ear simultaneously are perceived by the brain as the average of the two notes. The more information a being is sensing, creates a greater sense of consciousness. The directionality of this process of perception is tiring to our bodies as it is a function of our processing food into energy thus we need to turn inward and sleep to strengthen ourselves for another day. Even our selves are not a static thing that feels conscious. Billions of cells are being created and dying everyday. Consciousness is therefore relative to the perceiver who is in a state of constant change.

@kaapuuu 2 ай бұрын

Its quantum . its explains everything . Penrose is right .

@pretzelogic2689 2 ай бұрын

All of that, plus memory, a way to access that memory for the relevant task at hand, a way to make comparisons between stored information. Sense information is stored depending upon its perceived importance or relevance, and to the degree of that importance. All of this constructs a picture of how we think of "self". BTY, neurons do not die like any other cells in our bodies and they never divide as other cells do. Neurogenesis does occur, but it is generally from stem cells.

@daviddieter8294 4 ай бұрын

This is so interesting. Greene is great! Top notch. I thought he was introducing to Bachelors at first for a game show. But the panel needed a buddhist or hindu monk to counter the conversation. I read Chalmers books, need to read the other guys now!

@timb350 5 ай бұрын

The most notable thing about this whole...issue...is how much we simply do NOT know about what we are. We essentially don't have a clue what consciousness is...or how it is created. And yet...at the very same time...we seem to 'know' far more than enough to do everything we are doing right now.

@debranelson1987 5 ай бұрын

This comment makes the most sense than any other comment I've read so far. Thank you.

@davet5223 5 ай бұрын

And while we understand the architecture and general operation of AI, we still don't fully understand how many aspects of large language AI models we've created work due to their sheer scale of complexity. Like their complex decision making processes that lead to generate specific outputs as well as acquired abilities without explicit task specific training. I think consciousness might have something to do with extreme complexity of connections in a dynamic form. Or the much more speculative, that consciousness is some how intrinsic to the universe in some way and the brain is a way of acquiring or accessing it

@BalaMani-72 5 ай бұрын

Explaining what is Consciousness is like explaining how sugar tastes No one will be able to appreciate the explanation. Then how ? Well, Without realizing life-force, we cannot understand consciousness. Life-force is the source of mind wave and neuron activity in brain. How life-force operates in genetic center (kundalini energy at mooladhara chakra) and spreads all over the body as magnetic energy is a meta-physical phenomenon, which cannot be explained by words fully. The tiny space at our genetic center is interconnected with Absolute Space. Its the SPACE which itself transforms into the universe we see including the life-force energy particles in our body through kinetic quivering motion without discontinuity over the period of time, from the first particle to now in Oneness -i.e. One become many. The space is characterized by quivering, kinematic, self-compressive, ever-increasing, surrounding, pressure force, which results in automatic repulsion intensification and emerges as the infinitesimal energy particle. For more info on the interconnectedness do search for "Vethathiri model of Universe" and "Three bodies of Genetic Center by vethathiri maharishi"

3 ай бұрын

we know exactly what consciousness is. the supposed "hard" part is just people pretending we are special.

@tom-r1f 3 ай бұрын

Really. "We"... which "we" is that? If you know...then there's a nobel prize with your name on it... cause nobody else on the planet can make that claim with any credibility.

@gulshanparmar1587 5 ай бұрын

No words can ever encompass IT ALL ❤...Regards from India

@jeff_forsythe 4 ай бұрын

@gulshanparmar1587 4 ай бұрын

@@jeff_forsythe When you sleep; who sees the dream? Why do you never realise that you are dreaming unless you wake up? Why does your body's rhythms change if you encounter an uncomfortable dream? At the end what we are is the "Viewer" detached from everything and what remains is something that cannot be put into words. An Absolutism! Check out Jung a little more. He can make you understand better than me. East is a bit more on emotional side than practicality as you learn in the West.

@jeff_forsythe 4 ай бұрын

@@gulshanparmar1587 I read Jung 40 years ago. It is you, the soul, that sees the dream. It is the soul that is reading this right now. The soul travels to any of a trillion dimensions/ Dreams are not worth examining unless a person that was close to you is in that dream. Jung had a glimpse of the divine but my teacher is completely enlightened at the highest level. Falun Dafa can explain all the mysteries of creation. I have been a Buddhist monk for over 20 years and Falun Dafa is the highest level of Buddhism.

@Stillpoint23 Ай бұрын

Definitely one o fthe best channels in tube-landia at this point, right alongside Making Sense

@robyngoldstein8327 5 ай бұрын

thanks for this opportunity.

@vinitagupta5509 5 ай бұрын

My question is somewhat different...Our Brain maps an apple as it is and not as individual cellular strands interweaven.. Our brain somehow crystallizes these outside objects of the world although at molecular level. .these are resonating electrons ..which themselves are nothing but waves....there is so much that the brain does instantly...for example it takes millisecond for our brain to figure out smell of rose...or taste of soup...

@llort42 5 ай бұрын

This short primer on understanding consciousness betwixt two opposing, yet high functional ideologies depicts how vague our understanding actually is. It is obvious we have absolutely no idea how to even approach, let alone grasp what it means to be self-aware. This may sound harsh but really it's almost a relief to know (not to know?) how wonderful this thing we call life really is.

@straightedgerc 5 ай бұрын

You know you typed your post using your hands, therefore the source of the words you used to describe self-awareness is electricity. So, you know consciousness is a demonstration of electrical physics.

@cursedtodie 5 ай бұрын

I was most conscious while COMATOSE with more than half my brain dead. I used that consciousness to recover completely when doctors said it was IMPOSSIBLE. I know consciousness like no other.

@ivyhope5802 5 ай бұрын

Were you aware of your surroundings? Could you hear? Respond?

@cursedtodie 5 ай бұрын

@@ivyhope5802 The vision I saw while comatose was so real. I displayed all senses, sight, smell, sound, hearing and touch. I also enjoyed all I did. I enjoyed learning at university, hanging with anyone and basically never thought what I was living then was not real. I was happy all the time which should have been the biggest reason for me to know I was not truly alive, but I just didn't know that.

@surojeetchatterji9966 5 ай бұрын

@@ivyhope5802 wakefulness is just 1 segment of conciousness. There is a dream state & astral state as well. These 3 r duality. Finally there is non dual state of conciousness which is infinite.

@minimal3734 5 ай бұрын

'I used that consciousness to recover completely' This is interesting, can you go into more detail?

@cursedtodie 5 ай бұрын

@@minimal3734 When I woke up and regained my ability to speak, I spoke with my doctor and many others about what I saw while comatose. They all dismissed that and didn't believe me. But I know I had a vision while comatose, hence I just followed what my vision was about, to follow my own heart and mind. So I just did whatever I wanted to do, and that resulted in me recovering completely.

@markdowning7959 5 ай бұрын

Maybe Brian should have started by establishing an agreed definition of what the participants mean by "consciousness".

@roncline1 5 ай бұрын

There are about as many different definitions as there are theories.

@Williamwilliam1531 5 ай бұрын

He started by saying we don’t have a definition lol

@Toodlesmdoodles 5 ай бұрын

I thought the point was we don't have an established definition.

@bobinthewest8559 5 ай бұрын

Some others have beaten me to pointing out: The “agreed upon” presupposition is that no one really “knows” exactly “what” consciousness IS.

@markdowning7959 5 ай бұрын

@@bobinthewest8559 Yes, but we'll never progress unless we can at least agree on what it is that we're trying to explain/discuss/analyse. Do we mean awareness, self- or meta-awareness, wakefulness, mind, or even just intelligence?

@ExistenceUniversity 3 ай бұрын

10:40 It merely tells you that your red cones need to have experienced energy in order to function, and therefore in order to communicate that a new sensation occurred, which at first will likely not even be perceived as "red" just yet, in fact she will not know it is a rose at all.

@bernadettedietz9404 5 ай бұрын

I think we first need to be clear in defining consciousness if we want to avoid going round and round and getting nowhere. To me, it is not the same as self awareness or reflectivity and yet discussions frequently end up acting as if self awareness us what we're talking about.

@LibtardLunacy 5 ай бұрын

Correct

@HaeeunYun 2 ай бұрын

I'm curious; how would you define consciousnesss?

@LibtardLunacy 2 ай бұрын

@@bernadettedietz9404 that there is something it is LIKE to be that thing

@LibtardLunacy 2 ай бұрын

@@bernadettedietz9404 that there is something it is LIKE to be that thing

@LibtardLunacy 2 ай бұрын

@HaeeunYun read Daniel dennett's "what it's like to be a bat"

@dariacompati8070 5 ай бұрын

My hard stretching sessions didn’t feel that hard because I was swallowed by this wonderful conversation. Absolutely adore Brian Greene ❤

@straightedgerc 2 ай бұрын

The atoms comprising a "conscious philosopher" asking, "what creates consciousness?" have never violated the equations of physics (which can be paraphrased as "rocks tend to roll downhill"). Therefore, it is physically possible for atoms to evolve into people asking, "what creates consciousness?" Demonstrating, rocks rolling downhill created consciousness by inventing "conscious people" that stop to ask, "what creates consciousness?". A conscious person is actually an unconscious niche (a physical constant, long-lived placeholder, or Eigenfunction) in earth biophysics. The fact that we are here, is formally how we know the particular fact that we are here, each time a philosopher should happen to ask.

@integralintelligence5994 5 ай бұрын

Steiner: "As a Fact the Human Mind will never transcend the Reality that (s)he lives in". agree with that. Integration 'away from 'matter 'would help; so leave Qua-Phy for what it is. By the way; it seems that no one is reading all comments since it is tremendously silent of the direct relatives regarding the suggestions that are made to deal with other outside standers about the topic. Pity or Ego?

@randomplantsandstuff 5 ай бұрын

I am so high right now and this video is such a mindf*ck.

@lolo20adaify 5 ай бұрын

Bro same!!

@sisyphus_strives5463 5 ай бұрын

your mind must be pretty loose then

@domelessanne6357 5 ай бұрын

shit, now im nervous to watch it

@atticuswalker 5 ай бұрын

if thinking something is true. makes your brain hurt. it's probably wrong. conscious minds don't like needing faith to believe lies. most people confuse free will with free thought. fact and belief.

@domelessanne6357 5 ай бұрын

@@atticuswalker preach

@Stillpoint23 Ай бұрын

These guys are top-notch! Looking forward to a great conversation

@percepXion 5 ай бұрын

Some say "love" is also a universal language. I have discovered that treating other living creatures which cannot comprehend my acts of love (eg: gross insect in home, take it outside vs destroying it etc), sometimes (if I'm paying attention) gets reciprocated in the simplest, yet most profoundly intentional ways and sometimes via related or unrelated channels. I'm not sure about science, but I think love is another way we can communicate that reaches beyond the physical and which can help us catch a sense of what may be beyond the 'gap'. Otherwise amazing chat folks. Please keep up the awesome work. Because space is big and hauling my consciousness from A to B is a chore! :P Also beware, love without wisdom can be dangerous. But love with wisdom is unparalleled :)))

@OPbatman 5 ай бұрын

Taken from interstellar.

@juro5555 5 ай бұрын

Listen Morty, I hate to break it to you, but what people calls "love" is just a chemical reaction that compels animals to breed. It hits hard, Morty, then it slowly fades, leaving you stranded in a failing marriage. I did it. Your parents are gonna do it. Break the cycle, Morty. Rise above. Focus on science :)

@AquarianSoulTimeTraveler 5 ай бұрын

@rickwyant 5 ай бұрын

@@AquarianSoulTimeTraveler those who know do not speak, those who speak do not know. Words, words, words.

@AquarianSoulTimeTraveler 5 ай бұрын

@@rickwyant that was a rule for the age of the self consuming Pisces... this is the new age of Aquarius... Get use to it.

@andreasrauth6660 5 ай бұрын

David Chalmers! He is not only brilliant but also very likable.

@atli142 5 ай бұрын

I have read both Biocentrism by Robert Lanza and The case against reality by Donald Hoffman. They present a very compelling case that consciousness creates spacetime, not the other way around. Since it seems that spacetime is doomed and not fundamental, I think they are on to something. Great stuff! :)

@rcarter-ip8xd 5 ай бұрын

A tough question to answer but what satisfied me was to borrow a phrase from John Wheeler regarding mass and curved space, where he said, Mass tells space how to curve and space tells mass how to move. For consciousness you could say, Consciousness collects resources to predict outcomes and the outcomes tell consciousness what resources to collect.

@techteampxla2950 5 ай бұрын

I recently started studying ProfWheeler, ProfFeynman, and DrJohnBell. When I saw this I was amazed you actually deeply studied this material. Nice comment IMO.

@plafar7887 5 ай бұрын

You seem to be conflating Consciousness and Intelligence.

@gaoxiaen 5 ай бұрын

@@plafar7887 Are you sure that they can be separated?

@plafar7887 5 ай бұрын

@@gaoxiaen I think they are quite orthogonal to each other. You can have a simple and fulfilling experience of Consciousness and not be thinking much of anything. Conversely, parts of your body can engage in complicated function, calculations and intelligent planning, with you being barely aware of it. Moreover, a computer system that can solve problems effectively (i.e. intelligently), but I doubt it's conscious of it.

@norwayphilosopher 5 ай бұрын

There is no such thing as "curved space" but curved spacetime. Time involves movements which are not linear but curved in Gravity fields even if their mass is zero. The curved movement of photons is not caused by curved space, but curved spacetime in 4th dimensions.

@integralintelligence5994 5 ай бұрын

Creation is nothing but a product being a result of consciousness itself; descending energy. (Prof. Wilfred Leonard Bastiani)

@SHERMA. 5 ай бұрын

sure, but creation was around before consciousness so what a load of waffle! the planet came before the plankton

@integralintelligence5994 5 ай бұрын

@@SHERMA. your reply dealing from the materialistic and unilateral point of view .... such a pity again. Like these three guys. So plz be more sophisticated; thanx

@SHERMA. 5 ай бұрын

@@integralintelligence5994 stfu, its the long lost story of the chicken before the egg stop trying to sound smart, it doesnt suit you.

@torussaga3428 5 ай бұрын

@@SHERMA. Consciousness precedes matter. Consciousness is not merely what is perceived as mind - it is much more. It cannot be fathomed by the more mind accurately as language and thought struggle to define what gives rise to matter itself.

@SHERMA. 5 ай бұрын

@@torussaga3428 when did i say consciousness didnt precede matter? or do you just like correcting people that never incorrectly said anything to start with when you move your head left or right your quantum brains field moves with the matter inside your brain somehow the brain creates that field and its why it moves with your brain you dont move your head 1metre to the left and forget everything you ever knew until you move it back to position 1 therefore even tho you think and stated that consciousness precedes matter its still matter that creates consciousness meaning for all we know when matter first started to create consciousness it could of just "by chance" happened to have an available field to create it in. what it doesnt mean is that the field was created FOR consciousness alone

@healius665 Ай бұрын

What a great conversation. We all would be better off with more of these insights into who are and who we could become...

@rigisrs7506 5 ай бұрын

Consciousness is everythere in Universe. We are part off universal conciousness. It is not in brains but in the much deeper level. Every atom is consious. Only conciousness creates conciousness. We talk just about levels of it.

@nolanr1400 5 ай бұрын

Yes. Agreed.

@karagi101 5 ай бұрын

How do you know this?

@muralidharankv169 5 ай бұрын

@@karagi101 By spiritual practice. If you do spiritual practice you will not only know but experience it beyond all doubts.

@GoodLifeInSpain 4 ай бұрын

Absolutely, positively spot on.

@karagi101 4 ай бұрын

@@muralidharankv169 That’s the most ridiculous thing I’ve ever heard. Spiritual practice does not tell you anything about reality. It’s subjective for each person. That’s why there are countless incompatible beliefs.

@JoeWyley Ай бұрын

If a particle has consciousness, and you put a bunch together and it gives rise to one larger conscious system I wonder could you then take all those larger consciouss systems and put them together to form an even larger single conscious system. For example, if you got 8 billion humans to perfectly synchronise and harmonise and communicate with each other in the same way neurons communicate with each other, could a single conscious being emerge from human cooperation. That would be crazy. I shouldn't watch this stuff when I'm high.

@straightedgerc Ай бұрын

You have proven that consciousness is a figure of speech, not a property of objects. Proof: a particle does not have consciousness by definition. A particle does not have any behavior or attribute other than is defined and described in physics books. Hence, no collection of particles is a larger conscious system. Instead, "a conscious system" is a figure of speech (a choice of words) used to explain that something occupies space, such as does a particle or as does a human asking, "do I occupy space?".

@muralidharankv169 5 ай бұрын

I enjoyed the comments much more than the conversation. I am amazed at the level of understanding of the subject by so many viewers from different walks of life.

@ruicarvalho2083 5 ай бұрын

Don't confuse consciousness with intellect. Is a faculty of the mind bound by space and time, a body and environment. Consciousness is the base reality in what everything seems to exist.

@nickguy8037 5 ай бұрын

Worthless word salad. Consciousness is an emergent property of the brain. It could not be further from “base reality”.

@MrSub132 5 ай бұрын

@@nickguy8037ironic how you use worthless words. Saying "conciousness is an emergent property of the brain" is simply a claim with 0 actual answers to the problem of how physical matter aka neurons translate into an experience and a self to have the experience. You litterally didnt solve anything and its a debateable claim to begin with. Physical matter has non physical quantum properties so even in materialist theories there is insane divide on how that would make any sense. Your brain did NOT evolve to see "base reality". At best it evolved a HIGHLY simplified (construction) reality to allow for the maximum focus on physical fitness payoffs for survival. The same way looking at a youtube video thats projected from a screen doesnt actually show the reality of the electric interactions happening inside a computer. You can cut open a computer and you wouldnt see what the screen shows either, only "unconstructed" data which shouldnt be able to be aware of itself. If you assume that spacetime itself is not base reality (which is not hard to argue considering spacetime had a beginning meaning it either came from "nothing" which would then be base reality or from something that is NOT our spacetime at the very least, planck length and black holes also show there's limits to spacetime en now we have mathmatical gemeotric structures outside of spacetime that simplify physical particle scattering amplitudes all pointing to a non physical/higher/other dimensional reality that projects into spacetime including the neurons we observe that do NOT show the actual experience or 'self' aka conciousness) then it actually very easy to fix the problem. Base reality is 'awareness' (not conciousness with the ego since the ego is a product of the brain) which somehow projects into a non spacial geometry and different possible forms of the infinite energy of base reality which then projects into and essentially simulates a physical (multi)verse whith a flow of time and the illusion of locality which is already disproven with QFT and non locality, leading to the natural world having interactions of different manifestations of form and function ruled by physics, leading to life evolving to create physical data structures (brains) that can then be constructed in a non physical mental interface to be experienced by the universal awareness with the lens of the human ego aka self. This answers all problems. You can imagine a red triangle and have the experience of "I am seeing/ a red triangle" in a non physical space of conciousness but simply looking at the brain will never show you a red triangle, 'you' whos 'seeing' nor the 'experience' that you have. All we see is neurons firing in a certain pattern that matches a certain experience. Why is that? Because the brain as a physical object is simply a construction of the brain data system no different then spacetime itself. 'Emergent' arguments dont change this fact cause even if you believe physical complexity is needed for conciousness you still cannot explain conciousness using physical complexity alone. Donald Hoffman's theory is the closest thing to a good theory despite it being in very early stages but saying "me and all my experiences are purely neurons firing" does not actually explain how neurons result in experiences and the self. Saying " I am simply awareness that is universal, that is using spacetime to have this conciousness interface that lets awareness actually have sensations and thoughts to be aware of and conciously experience them by constructing the physical data into the 'emergent' non physical interface which we call conciousness" DOES actually explain the translation of physical matter to the conciouss experience. This is not a theory without evidence either like I said there's already plenty things that prove spacetime and physical matter is not fundemental just by that alone you can say that awareness or any non physical thing that is the actual source of awareness (not physical data or senses but the awareness of physical data and senses) IS fundemental or at the very least is closer to base reality simply meaning the physical brain is not fundemental reality having this mystical non physical emergent property of experiences and experiencer but spacetime ITSELF all of physical reality is just a construction of awareness that is using a physical lense (the brain) to construct/observe/interact with 'reality' in the physical way we do.

@ruicarvalho2083 5 ай бұрын

@@nickguy8037 how do you prove that? Scientists are now saying the opposite

@nickguy8037 5 ай бұрын

@@ruicarvalho2083 i don’t need to prove it. Hard solipsism (which is exactly what you are claiming) is for first year philosophy students and stoners. It is not clever, not interesting and not relevant to reality.

@ruicarvalho2083 5 ай бұрын

@@nickguy8037 Just like saying consciousness arises from the brain or is a faculty of the brain. Go read some proper philosophy about consciousness like Vedanta from which many western philosophies derive and then we can talk. Om

@jdrake411 5 ай бұрын

Is there a calendar of events somewhere?

@RspsKingKhagon 5 ай бұрын

@johnnuaxon3 5 ай бұрын

Android calendar

@ChefinKron 5 ай бұрын

@kerryburns-k8i 4 ай бұрын

Beginning with the assumption that consciousness is created -- ensures the failure of your purpose. Consciousness is fundamental, it facilitates the transformation of energy into matter. Consciousness, energy and matter are one and the same. Since matter is derived from consciousness, sentience is present in all matter, at a level according to its function. This is entry level metaphysics.

@shirk_slayer 4 ай бұрын

As I explore the nature of consciousness, I propose a theory that challenges the conventional understanding of the mind as merely a product of the brain's physical processes. My theory suggests that consciousness is not confined to the material workings of the brain but arises from a profound connection between the brain and an extradimensional entity, which I identify as the soul. This extradimensional soul interacts with the material plane, creating what we experience as consciousness through a complex and dynamic feedback loop between the brain and this non-physical aspect of our existence. In this view, consciousness serves as compelling evidence of the existence of a higher power-God. Qualia, the subjective, first-person experiences of thoughts, feelings, and sensations, cannot be fully explained by the physical functions of the brain alone. Instead, these experiences emerge because our brains are interfacing with an extradimensional soul that exists beyond the confines of our physical reality. It is this interaction between the material brain and the extradimensional soul that generates the rich and varied tapestry of conscious experience that defines our existence. I believe this feedback loop between the brain and the soul is deeply aligned with the concept of Tawhid in Islamic thought, which emphasizes the oneness of God and the interconnectedness of all creation. The soul, as an extradimensional aspect of our being, reflects this divine oneness, linking individual consciousness to the larger, unified reality that is God. Through this connection, our conscious experiences are not just random or evolutionary byproducts; they are direct expressions of our relationship with the divine. Thus, consciousness, in my view, is inherently tied to the divine. It can only exist through this relationship between the physical and the non-physical, the brain and the soul. Our ability to experience and perceive the world consciously is, therefore, a manifestation of the divine spark within us. It suggests that consciousness is not simply a function of the brain but a direct consequence of our connection to an extradimensional, divine reality. In summary, my theory of consciousness posits that the essence of our conscious experience arises from the interaction between the brain and an extradimensional soul, serving as proof of God’s existence. This theory challenges materialistic explanations of consciousness and offers a deeply spiritual perspective on the nature of our existence, linking human consciousness to a greater, divine purpose.

@shirk_slayer 4 ай бұрын

Do you believe that there is a human soul that is seperate from matter?

@kerryburns-k8i 4 ай бұрын

@@shirk_slayer Yes, I HAVE a body, I AM an eternal soul. The body is the sandal, the soul is the foot. I change worn-out footwear from time to time, and sometimes I go barefoot for a while. My existence does not depend on matter. What you call God, I recognise as consciousness, and since consciousness facilitates the transformation of energy into matter, the idea that I am part of what you see as God is inescapable, because consciousness, energy and matter are forms of the same thing. Naturally my understanding is bounded by my senses while incarnate. However, the innate sentience of my atomic structure establishes a level where universal communication exists. Obviously from differing viewpoints our views will be different, but your comment did provide a useful comparison and gave me food for thought. Thank you. I hope reading this has not been a complete waste of time ! Saludos desde Andalucia.

@shirk_slayer 4 ай бұрын

@kerryburns-k8i you are underestimating Allah. He is Greater than His creation.

@kerryburns-k8i 4 ай бұрын

@@shirk_slayer As you wish.

@aroemaliuged4776 5 ай бұрын

If material doesn’t create consciousness then what does? ?

@johnnuaxon3 5 ай бұрын

Scientists found 11 dimensional structures in the brain. I think that's the answer. Our experience is just very high dimensional structures within matter. So matter and consciousness are two sides of the same coin. From outside it's the brain - mater structure of high dimensions (simplex) and from inside is a highly dimensional experience of qualia.

@YassenChapkanov 5 ай бұрын

@@johnnuaxon3Not true. We have no proof for the existence of more than 3 dimension (time doesn't count either). All we have are contradicting theories that require more dimensions to work which is a good indicator they are incorrect

@tofu-munchingCoalition.ofChaos 5 ай бұрын

@@johnnuaxon3 I don't know what you're referring too, but the state space of the brain is much larger than 11 dimensions. "Dimensions" just refers to the minimal number of parameters you need to know to fully describe a point in that structure. Space for example is 3 dimensional because you need 3 numbers to identify each point unique. A plane is 2 dimensional because you only need 2 numbers. The state space of a force-free classical point particle is already 6 dimensional (3 numbers to specify the location and 3 for the speed). The state space of a force-free moving classical rigid body is already 12 dimensional (3 for position, 3 for the orientation, 3 for the momentum, 3 for the angular momentum).

@tofu-munchingCoalition.ofChaos 5 ай бұрын

@@YassenChapkanov Define "dimension".

@YassenChapkanov 5 ай бұрын

@@tofu-munchingCoalition.ofChaos I Was referring to the 3 spacial dimensions in physics. That's the common meaning of the word. If high dimensional means merely having many aspects that's absolutely true for the human brain but in no way sufficient to explain conciousness

@singhaj 5 ай бұрын

And ending the show with "all my prompts to AI chat are respectful" 😂😂

@WaitingforGodel 5 ай бұрын

Brian "Kent Brockman" Greene

@AquarianSoulTimeTraveler 5 ай бұрын

@MrMrfeenstra 2 ай бұрын

Old Person here. O the Mary question. For years in the 50's and 60's growing up, it was a yearly thing to see the Wizard of Oz around the holidays. When the family got a color set in I think '71 or '72, I was flabbergasted when Dorothy stepped out of the ruins of her home into the technicolor magic that was Oz! So, I myself, can't imagine just shrugging that off.

@LeftBoot 5 ай бұрын

First mistake "The Brain Produces Consciousness". I thought David was more analytical than that? 🤔

@A-Milkdromeda-Laniakea-Hominid 5 ай бұрын

To my mind (😉) that's just the inverse way of saying "consciousness is a byproduct of the brain actively keeping us alive and reproducing in a complex world." The more social that sexual reproduction becomes, the greater need for consciousness to attract mates and raise young. It's an evolutionary back and forth, a feedback loop.

@LeftBoot 5 ай бұрын

@@A-Milkdromeda-Laniakea-Hominid everything is in a loop until we✳️you decide to 💞 progressively flip.

@A-Milkdromeda-Laniakea-Hominid 5 ай бұрын

@@LeftBoot Flip to faith, I take it? You don't sound like a believer. Maybe a psychonaut.. flip to 5meoDMT maybe?

@rakrashtanekola 5 ай бұрын

Consciousness is very very easy to explain. I had been working with it through some thought experiments. I am analysing my theory to confirm that it explains the functions very convincingly. Believe me, my theory is a one liner that explains it clearly, and as a matter of fact, my another one liner theory together explains the functionalities of the Universe. I would be very grateful to you, if you can guide me to send my very brief paper to the appropriate journal. Can anyone just name the journal for me please. I will take up with the editorial boards for their requirements for publication. Thanks.

@nickguy8037 5 ай бұрын

The brain does produce consciousness. You should be careful judging others if you are so wrong that you think that is incorrect.

@whomever21 5 ай бұрын

I wish they would tell us how the hard problem of life has been solved. When you arrange all of the elements of a cell in a particular order, does it just fire up and start living? If not, what's the name of the thing that's missing?

@piccadelly9360 5 ай бұрын

Life is made by creation, the woman has the eggs and the man has the sperm which are alive and have a consciousness . Genetic material is what you are looking for

@jasonrodwell5316 5 ай бұрын

Scientists have created artificial life, and even created life using different chemical bases to terrestrial life. No spark required.

@beehappy7797 5 ай бұрын

Consciousness!

@stellarwind1946 5 ай бұрын

I like how they pretended abiogenesis is a solved problem. Nobody has a clue about how self-replication started or where DNA came from.

@jasonrodwell5316 5 ай бұрын

Yes, yes it does, the spark in life is adenosine triphosphate. Simple.chemistry and electricity. Which in established life comes from the host. But in the case of biogenesis, the organelles required to havest energy are simple.proteins. Once that protein is created it creates energy. And lipid self organise into the structures resembling primitive cell.walls. put the two together and you have the basis for life. It doesn't need a spark, it needs a proton pump. An organelle again created from simple folded chains of nucleic acids. Add other structures which do work powed by breaking phosphate atoms off of adenosine triphosphate. And there is a base structure of simple.components common to all forms of life which are built on with dna and structures which create other structures.. we have observed this process from nucleic acid to very primitive cells in a petri dish. Cells which are at the very least self sustaining single celled organisms. Once these structures self organise and we have observed them do so, they only need come.together. proton pumps, that's your spark. But if you were to be able for for example 3d print a brain. It need only oxiginated blood until it necroses.

@BrentPinkston 4 ай бұрын

A great job and respect all the way around. Awesome conversation! I am already a fan of Anil, and Brian Green is a great interviewer. I was really excited to hear that David Chalmers is open to at least the possibility of a dualist explanation. While we should make no assumptions without proof and reproducability, I have always wondered from personal experience if there is some sense of awareness that is beyond the physical.

@straightedgerc 4 ай бұрын

If "personal experience" causes what you write about yourself, and the physics of electricity causes what you write about yourself, then personal experience is electricity. There is no awareness (personal experience) that is beyond the physical.

@ollie6133 2 ай бұрын

It's important to note that the kind of dualism that Chalmers is open to isn't substance dualism, like Descartes. It's not that there are physical things on one hand, and non-physical things on the other. So it's not that consciousness is non-physical and the brain physical, as an example. It's what's called property dualism. Consciousness has physical properties, but consciousness has subjective physical properties that cannot be reduced to objective physical properties. That's not to say that consciousness isn't physical though, it just eludes a complete explanation by objective physical properties.

@straightedgerc 2 ай бұрын

@@ollie6133 Anything physical is a solution to physics equations, and so is completely explainable by objective science. A group of people discussing consciousness is completely explainable as bioelectricity. So, it is false that consciousness eludes a complete explanation by objective physical properties.

@ollie6133 2 ай бұрын

@@straightedgerc maybe. But I wasn't arguing one way or another for property dualism. I was just making it clear what Chalmers' position was when it came to dualism.

@peterbroderson6080 5 ай бұрын

The moment a particle is a wave; it has to be a conscious wave! Nicola Tesla states, “If you want to find the secrets of the universe, think in terms of energy, frequency, and vibration” Gravity is the conscious attraction among waves to create the illusion of particles, and creates our experience-able Universe. Max Planck states: "Consciousness is fundamental and matter is derived from Consciousness". Life is the Infinite Consciousness, experiencing the Infinite Possibilities, Infinitely. We are "It", experiencing our infinite possibilities in our finite moment. Our job is to make it interesting!

@varun.mina01 5 ай бұрын

do you have any book suggestion about consciousness? I want to go deeper in this topic.

@ravinder9387 5 ай бұрын

@@varun.mina01 Read 'How the Mind Works' by Steven Pinker. U may need to know about Cosmic Connectome too. Watch at least COSMOS:Parallel World's episode about cosmic connectome.

@beehappy7797 5 ай бұрын

@@varun.mina01 Through meditation you can find answers to all questions worth knowing. A book can never give you an answer to this. Consciousness is not physical and can only be experienced. Consciousness cannot be explained in words. Consciousness is the source. Your inner self.

@Ppstate32 5 ай бұрын

@@varun.mina01Check out Bernardo Kastrup. An absolute must.

@Rockyzach88 5 ай бұрын

I think humans think too much of themselves (and their consciousness), but at the same time that's their strength in forming their legacy. We're so deluded that we end up doing crazy shit.

@ShadowMonk609 5 ай бұрын

Damn right, just the universe experiencing itself 😉

@norwayphilosopher 5 ай бұрын

@@ShadowMonk609 Universe is a simulation, and cannot do anything. Your answer is particle religion based on Bible and totally wrong. I explained it in another thread but beware: It is not compatible with Bible belief.

@humptyslick 5 ай бұрын

To be selflessly conscious of being conscious might expand things a bit

@KerbalFacile 4 ай бұрын

Excellent debate with some of the best selection of experts possible :) Great analogy at 18:30 - we don't know "what" mass or matter is, we can only know (describe) how it behaves, but that escalates to a more general conclusion, that all knowing is but experience. Which parallels the fact that all objective observation is but a subset of subjective experience ultimately. About the thought experiment at 37:00 - If you have electronic equivalents of neurons that can maintain all the functions of the brain then you already know what physiological mechanism binds consciousness to the body, because it's part of the design of that part... So you're just moving the problem sideways.

@straightedgerc 4 ай бұрын

This statement of yours is false "the fact that all objective observation is but a subset of subjective experience". Proof 1: "the fact that" means subjective experience is a subset of objective experience. Proof 2: Speaking is a subset of measurable mechanical activity and so consciously (an adjective) speaking is a subset of measurable mechanical activity. Proof 3: Consciously speaking is a subset of speaking is a subset of biomechanics is a subset of objective science.

@straightedgerc 4 ай бұрын

Try the idea of "inner and outer worlds" instead of "subjective and objective worlds". The internal world is a subset of the external world by their definitions, and since both are ideas the external fits inside the internal. Therefore, they are the same world. Or, equivalently, subjective experiences do not exist because they don't need to exist as an inner world.

@KerbalFacile 4 ай бұрын

@@straightedgerc Proof 2 and 3 are not convincing, as I can visualize or fake-experience things inside my mind that have no possible substance objectively :) Proof 1 sounds to me like circular reasoning... I like "inner/outer world", food for thought, thank you !

@lutaayam 5 ай бұрын

From the numerous near death experience accounts I've heard, consciousness seems to exist even when the brain stops functioning, suggesting it might be outside the brain

@theavi3.141 5 ай бұрын

Human beings become conscious before they become intelligent; hence, consciousness is not an emergent property that arises from intelligence. It is naturally present in nature and our brain just experience.

@edus9636 5 ай бұрын

"consciousness is not an emergent property". Exactly, it's not an emergent property at all, the brain is.

@integralintelligence5994 4 ай бұрын

@@theavi3.141 "where Consciousness and Intelligence meet" - quote of mine 2012.

@jennagibsonart 4 ай бұрын

When would you say a human being becomes intelligent? I would say that even in early life, the ability to learn and form abstract connections between sensory phenomena shows intelligence.

@paulanderson2963 22 күн бұрын

Understanding everything which includes ourselves, our own nature, why we are and what we are fortunately is not a requirement in order for us to fulfill the functions of our existence. That which truly drives us is something beyond any conscious awareness we currently possess.

@vikasmorje 5 ай бұрын

I have a feeling that, in the absence of physical world and life, ("before" big bang) there still exists consciousness. The moment I feel like this, I all of a sudden feel that there is no such "thing" like consciousness.

@eeemotion 5 ай бұрын

No-thing, no time, no space and their opposites. A tension, intention and attention. Exploring the mystery of duality, of the separation of mind ith Krishnamurti & Bohm...

@beyondvger3682 5 ай бұрын

@@eeemotionI think consciousness laughs every time we say there is no time, no space and no things.

@stefanolacchin4963 5 ай бұрын

I hope the new study about superradiance in microtubules comes up.

@5piles 5 ай бұрын

its useless. you should however look for the soon to be published work by the eminent neuroscientist working on 'the tukdam project', which completely negates physicalism biology etc.

@stefanolacchin4963 5 ай бұрын

@@5piles I didn't come here to discuss pseudoscience.

@5piles 5 ай бұрын

@@stefanolacchin4963 im sorry the data destroys your religious beliefs. however you have no choice but to face the data.

@stefanolacchin4963 5 ай бұрын

@@5piles could you please just go play with the other dummies out there.

@Williamwilliam1531 5 ай бұрын

I adore Roger Penrose, but the microtubule theory is a stretch based on a stretch based on a stretch. There’s really no good reason to think microtubules have anything to do with consciousness unless you want to connect it to maintaining a quantum state (which there is just no good reason to do). I’ll admit it’s an interesting rabbit hole, but it’s mostly based on Penrose’s eccentric interpretation of Godel’s incompleteness theorem. It is very far from clear that the incompleteness theorem suggests consciousness must be quantum, and this tenuous connection is what the whole idea is based on

@madhavangopalan7463 26 күн бұрын

Wonderful talk Thank you very much❤❤

@piyush.pranjal86 4 ай бұрын

Consciousness (Citta) creates everything.

Ай бұрын

except 99.99% of reality

@tiago.alegria.315 Ай бұрын

Create our own subjective reality in our brain, but brain is a part of reality

Ай бұрын

@@tiago.alegria.315 so is consciousness

@SUSYQ509 5 ай бұрын

Not enough info to know what consciousness is.......... yet.

@5piles 5 ай бұрын

actually we know appearances likes colors do not exist outside the skull nor inside the skull. so we know appearances/qualia are natural nonphysical phenomenon like others, such as space curvature etc.

@PetraKann 5 ай бұрын

How are you aware of this claim?

@PetraKann 5 ай бұрын

@@5pilesskull?

@5piles 5 ай бұрын

@@PetraKann we know blue doesnt exist in the external environment. and we know blue doesnt arise anywhere in the visual cortex or in any neural correlate or anywhere in any brain ever. we know blue is not part of any physics model. we know blue is not an emergent property of mass-energy eg. a pattern on a shell is an emergent property of the shell. no such blue exists.

@beehappy7797 5 ай бұрын

Not until you become meditative. We can only experience the illogical, but not explain it. You can only experience that you exist, but not put it into words. We ARE consciousness.

@integralintelligence5994 5 ай бұрын

GREAT BOOK: 'Boy of Vision' written in 5 days as an improvement of this YT session. published by the 'University for Life' and 'Integral Intelligence'.

@integralintelligence5994 4 ай бұрын

A must to read for these 3 men.

@duytdl 5 ай бұрын

I'm with Anil on this. Consciousness is definitely biological. And even if it could be created artificially, I don't think we'll have discovered something world-changing. I mean, chicken and cows are conscious, do we care while eating them? The fact that we can consume other consciousnesses so casually only highlights our selfishness, which is the root of our fascination with our own (just our own) consciousness (or something smarter than us). Ultimately, it's just survival of the fittest. Occam's razor.

@plafar7887 5 ай бұрын

I would say that Consciousness is definitely not biological. Consciousness is fundamental, like other aspects of the Universe (fundamental forces, etc), or perhaps even more fundamental than our current primitive entities in Physics.

@anto-hn2gz 5 ай бұрын

Why do you think that consciousness definitely biological?

@duytdl 5 ай бұрын

@@anto-hn2gz Biological consciousness is the only consciousness we have ever seen. It's not far-fetched to think it's merely a biological adaptation.

@edus9636 5 ай бұрын

@@plafar7887 Correct, consciousness is the most fundamental essence in the universe and formed (!) the other aspects of the universe, including the natural laws, forces, energy, etc. And it builds up molecular structures based on carbon (never on silicon) to express itself in biological emergent brains as instinct, intelligence, creativity, self-awareness. AI will never be self-aware a.k.a sentient.

@Enormous866 5 ай бұрын

You think that a chicken has the same or even similar subjectivity to us?

@happyrock3091 Ай бұрын

The complexity of comprehending the relational mystery of mind and matter, my Newfoundlander conciousness dictates a definitive solution: "If you don't mind, then it doesn't matter!" 😳 😜 🤣 P. S. First time commentator and long time fan. So, thank you for your catalyst of me questioning everything I thought I knew! Although, as I do admit to missing the blissfulness of unbridled ignorance, I wouldn't have it any other way! 😊 So thanks 🙏 again for unsheckling the chains of our mere mortal ignorance so as to marvel at the mystery and momentum of you, me and humankind! Our conscious understanding is, perhaps, best summed up with the awakening thought of all who have been stirred from dreams by the din of North Atlantic crashing waves... "Onward through the fog!" Thanks again.

@andydixon2980 5 ай бұрын

The brain doesn't produce consciousness, but receives it. But from where?

@susland7332 3 ай бұрын

May be from the other dimension 🤔

@jayshukla4046 3 ай бұрын

It recieves from the source.Its non dual world . Consciousness is the Cause of the universes

@meditationtranscendantale-1506 3 ай бұрын

What Creates Consciousness? The universe! Consciousness creates the universe ;-) Every grain of the universe is made of intelligence, of consciousness, and is an expression of consciousness. Consciousness is the prime “material” of which everything is made. All individual structures, from a particle to a galaxy, has a “kind of” nervous system which acts as a reflector of consciousness, to different degrees. The human brain, also created by consciousness, is the best reflector of consciousness. Not only it can be the reflector of external objects through the senses, memory… it can, when functioning most normally, reflect consciousness in its totality. This is the meaning of “man was created in the image of God”.

@Aphanvahrius 3 ай бұрын

@@meditationtranscendantale-1506That's a cool story for a novel or something. Doesn't have anything to do with reality tho. At least no more than unicorns, fairies or a gigantic kettle floating somewhere in the intergalactic space.

@meditationtranscendantale-1506 3 ай бұрын

@@Aphanvahrius HI. I would be very happy if someone could prove me I am wrong, or at least explain me why I am wrong.

@SantoshMishra76 5 ай бұрын

These are superb conversations , but it only tells me how western science is so disconnected from the frameworks of eastern philosophy and disciplines of thinking which have pondered on these questions very effectively almost thousands।of years before. They had rightfully grasped the enormity of the challenge per se. I would hope some of these bright scientists read Shiva sutras and imbibe some of the eastern philosophy with the evidence based approach of western science !!! Will consciousness ever be understood by evidence based approach !!!

@jayshukla4046 3 ай бұрын

Upanishads They were doing it 3000 yr ago.they understood consciousness very deeply

@neilbeni7744 3 ай бұрын

Funny thing is science always looks to the ancients when they hit a wall.. 😂

@EpiCxWoundsx 3 ай бұрын

Actually, science never looks to religion when it doesn't have an answer. Only religious people assert that a divine being is responsible for some phenomena that science cannot currently explain, until a scientific explanation is eventually found, and the "gap" that God lives in gets smaller and smaller... @@neilbeni7744

@chipdamage9374 5 ай бұрын

The idea that non-human animals might be conscious but in a different way really stuck with me. I think as conscious beings ourselves, we have some level of intuitive connection to other animals because their behaviour resonates with us. I feel very strongly that animals like octopuses or dolphins or whales are very much conscious. But it requires physical interaction like simple forms of play or communication for us to really gain that sense of "ok that animal is curious about me and is deliberately interacting with me in a concious way"

@otorishingen8600 5 ай бұрын

Andrew Tate and George Lukas in an parallel universe discussing concousness

@Victor-qq1eh 5 ай бұрын

Andrew Tate is my man!

@milire2668 4 ай бұрын

lmao

@dallasseale2178 3 ай бұрын

@@Victor-qq1ehreally?

@N3Rd32 3 ай бұрын

@@Victor-qq1eh You shouldn't go around admitting that. Ew...

@N3Rd32 3 ай бұрын

If Andrew didn't have an IQ of 80...

@gregoryscott5111 4 ай бұрын

Our brains don’t produce consciousness, it acts as a receiver to direct and focus consciousness. Consciousness is all. All is consciousness.

@gazzyb85 4 ай бұрын

Like it.

@kimjohnson4278 4 ай бұрын

And you think you're smarter than anyone on this panel? STFU!

@igcll 4 ай бұрын

@@kimjohnson4278 calm down there, champ!

@0The0Web0 3 ай бұрын

Excellent discussion 👌

@integralintelligence5994 5 ай бұрын

Hi readers, I think it a weak performance; too superficial and when it gets / might get excited the question is not asked although three persons with several backgrounds (character, personality, university) and within the same kind of discipline are involved within this conversation. Since their main discipline is the same innovation is hard to emerge. The University for Life bringing up more than what is brought here being seen here as the only private university in the world; based on the highest integrality being neutral and objective by its high rate of subjectivity and diversity regarding the disciplines needed for innovation aka a deeper level of consciousness. Read e.g. the first review based on the book of Rupert Spira's: 'the Nature of Consciousness' with the name of this small book/review: 'Human Nature' and the other one of Arnold Mindell's: 'Quantum Mind' with the title of the second book/review of Prof Wilfred Leonard Bastiani named 'Mystic Mind'. Bringing up alone more than several teams together. Furthermore the third book/review named: 'Proprioception' is explained as the key word of David Bohms' written by Lee Nichols, called: 'the essential David Bohm'. Good luck.

@johnjeffreys6440 5 ай бұрын

I believe there was consciousness before the Big Bang through bands of constantly-interacting energy. Probably just couldn't retain sentience for long periods of time.

@joshsy5708 5 ай бұрын

Existing field of consciousness is Pan-Psychism.

@joshsy5708 5 ай бұрын

Theoretical, that exist before big bang..

@ophthojooeileyecirclehisha4917 5 ай бұрын

thank you so much for your reporting, truth, science, generosity, and kindness

@anahatamyst 5 ай бұрын

Using the mind or the brain to understand consciousness, is like analyzing your girlfriends’ tongue and throat to figure out what she means when she says ‘I love you’….

@skydude426 3 ай бұрын

I like that analogy, and I agree.

@manishdahal4413 3 ай бұрын

First of all what is mind?

@anahatamyst 3 ай бұрын

@@manishdahal4413 Mind has various aspects (analytical, imaginative) and levels (cognitive and sub-conscious etc). In this case, I am referring specifically to the analytical part of the mind.

Ай бұрын

Nope. It's like analyzing her actions and words which is all "I love you" can possibly mean.

@integralintelligence5994 5 ай бұрын

It is a pity to hear the example of "Mary's Room". This example is full of contradictions that are parried by the many restrictions that are brought in in advance (conditions & parameters). In fact this example works only then and it is therefore a miserable example to apply. Strange that these three top guys? come up with it. Best regards II.

@jondor654 5 ай бұрын

It is not very useful.

@integralintelligence5994 5 ай бұрын

@@jondor654 thanx. Exactly. They need other thinkers with different disciplines. The example is indeed useless.

@AndRiAno 5 ай бұрын

It is a mental experiment which is created only to look at the problem from a certain angle, all its conventions exist within the framework of this task as well. Or can you be more specific about your claims to this mental experiment?

@integralintelligence5994 5 ай бұрын

@@AndRiAno it is exactly as you say; same kind of persons with the same kind of background produce the same kind of conclusions in a very small way that empowers their own specific small spectre of knowledge ignoring all outside that is far more usefull than being told here. in other words: BORING.

@AndRiAno 5 ай бұрын

@@integralintelligence5994wait wait, I'd like to find out exactly what internal contradictions of the Mary's room experiment you're referring to, I'd like to have a discussion about that, if you're okay with that, of course.

@GregKrehbiel 4 ай бұрын

Love this conversation. I think the important point is an attitude of openness. The bottom line is that we don't know what the heck is going on. We don't know what matter is, so how can we possibly know whether consciousness arises from matter?

@straightedgerc 4 ай бұрын

Consciousness is mathematical, the proof that matter exists. You asked, "how can we possibly know whether consciousness arises from matter?" The answer is because you are constrained to know if you ask, since the asker is provably made of matter, regardless of whatever matter happens to be. Let "X" be anything. If you ask, "how do I know X arises from matter?" you have already reserved a space for X. Let X equal "I". Then, "how do I know consciousness arises from matter?" is because you asked which reserved a space for "I".

@rickved 4 ай бұрын

What a sad trio of atheists once again trying to pass off consciousness as merely the bi-product of neuronal activity. Consciousness does not emerge from matter. Matter rises from the Unified Field of pure consciousness. It was described as such in the ancient Vedic literature thousands of years ago in the Manduk Upanishad: "I am That, thou art That, all this world is just That pure, unbounded, eternal awareness." For fifty-five years, I have been experiencing pure conscious twice a day during the Transcendental Meditation technique. Consciousness is my self becoming my Self, expanded to the field of the Absolute. Pure consciousness is experienced as infinite wakefulness, bliss, peace, and knowledge. It is transcendental to the material world and is the source of the physiology. Watch world- renown Harvard-trained physicist Dr. John Hagelin explain consciousness as the Unified Field known to modern field theorists. He's here on You Tube. And don't waste time listening to these three guys.

@robertnasasira6666 Ай бұрын

Biology/evolution did NOT give us consciousness. It's the other way around. Consciousness transcends the physical (matter). In fact, matter is a product of consciousness.

@julianrod 12 күн бұрын

You seem very certain of that. I would use “I think” to start that sentence, or I’d link to my original research that’s going to get me a Nobel price.

@ppowell1212 5 ай бұрын

Loved this conversation.

@unclespeedy 5 ай бұрын

For all we know everything has "consciousness", rocks, water, sand, trees, ai. What the hell do these guys know about what it's like to be a rock. The f'ing hubris.

@EpiCxWoundsx 3 ай бұрын

The hubris lies with you. You're claiming something with zero evidence as if it must be true because you want it to be, even though it has no reasonable basis and provides no useful framework should we assume it's true. It's the ultimate hand-waving non-answer to the question, "Where does consciousness come from?"

@bradsmith9189 3 ай бұрын

No one has a clue. No one. Not even the slightest idea. Still.

@scotty3514 5 ай бұрын

I wish we had more indepth conversations like this on what we're doing to life rather than trying to explain it, forgetting the importance of our behaviours to life, i.e., the planet and nature 😢

@mokhtaramara1597 6 күн бұрын

The hard problem is "How to convert the philosophical topic of Consciousness into a scientific experimental topic" and then make a paradigm that will be the framework for further research.

@wolfgangstegemann9375 21 күн бұрын

When we talk about computers and the brain, we talk about things that have absolutely nothing to do with each other. For example, information. In computers, "information processing" means a purely mechanical manipulation of bits - states that can be either 0 or 1. This processing follows strictly defined rules and algorithms. The "information" here is therefore to be understood purely syntactically. When we talk about the brain, however, we mean something fundamentally different by "information": here it is about meaning, context and understanding. The brain does not simply process signals according to fixed rules, but interprets them in a complex network of meanings and experiences. The information here has a semantic dimension.