Neuroscience vs Advaita Vedanta - The SOURCE of Consciousness
Вставка
- Опубліковано 29 лип 2024
- Neuroscience has made giant strides in explaining how intricate networks of neurons in your brain endow you with sight, speech, memory, and even emotions. Some researchers believe that the origin of consciousness itself will eventually be traced to neurons. But according to Advaita Vedanta, consciousness cannot be produced by the brain, nor can it be studied by conventional science.
0:00 The Quest of Neuroscience
6:21 The Neural Source of Consciousness
12:52 The Independent Reality of Consciousness
23:47 The Hard Problem of Consciousness
Neuroscience has made huge strides in understanding the brain and its 100 billion neurons. Particular regions of the brain involved in sight, speech, memory, balance, and so on are being methodically explored and mapped out in great detail. Brain tissue is microscopically studied to see how neurons are interconnected with each other. The electrical signals that neurons use to communicate are measured, either by directly probing the brain, or indirectly, using EEG instruments and magnetic stimulation. More recently, functional MRI and PET scans are being used to create highly defined images of neural activity throughout the brain. In the future, new technologies might make it possible to measure the neural activity in your brain accurately that your innermost thoughts and feelings can be decoded.
Will scientific research ever locate a particular network of neurons in the brain that are responsible for consciousness itself? Decades ago, some researchers considered this idea, but ongoing studies have completely ruled out the notion that consciousness arises from a single, localized source in the brain. All current theories suggest that the source of consciousness is decentralized or distributed.
Bernard Bars describes the origin of consciousness in the brain through his Global Workspace Theory. By global workspace, he means a decentralized network of neurons that functions like a screen, a screen onto which various images and ideas are projected. According to Bars, consciousness emerges from the interaction of neurons in that global workspace.
Francis Crick received a Nobel Prize for discovering the structure of DNA. Later in his career, he collaborated with a researcher who considers consciousness to be a fundamental property of complex neural networks. Together, they theorized that, in a part of the brain known as the claustrum, neurons become synchronized with each other, and their synchronous activity gives rise to consciousness.
Giulio Tononi developed a mathematical model of consciousness called Integrated Information Theory. He claims that consciousness is nothing but highly integrated information. According to Tononi, the enormous integration of information in the brain's powerful cerebral cortex gives rise to consciousness.
According to the Attention Schema Theory of Michael Gaziano, when the interactions of neurons throughout the brain are filtered by the faculty of attention, a simplified model or representation is created. For Gaziano, that representation or schema is responsible for consciousness.
Finally, Robert Penrose is a Nobel Laureate in physics who believes that consciousness cannot be explained through ordinary physical and mathematical laws. So, he postulates the existence of quantum gravity, and concludes that consciousness is the result of quantum effects which are thought to occur in the microtubules found inside cells.
Those theories are highly speculative and extremely difficult to verify. Such theories are called materialist or physicalist. They're physicalist because they accept the existence of matter and energy alone, but they reject the existence of any kind of non-material, non-physical reality. But in Advaita Vedanta, consciousness is a non-material, non-physical fundamental reality.
"The hard problem of consciousness" is an expression coined by a philosopher named David Chalmers. He uses it to describe the apparently insurmountable obstacles that prevent neuroscientists from directly observing or studying consciousness. Much like in Advaita Vedanta, Chalmers differentiates the objective existence of thoughts and emotions from your subjective, conscious experience of them. And he proposes an alternative to the physicalist world view, the view that accepts only matter and energy as being fundamental. Chalmers says that consciousness is another fundamental reality that exists in addition to matter and energy. Other philosophers propose idealism and neutral monism. But none of these theories are widely accepted, nor do they offer a completely satisfactory solution to the hard problem of consciousness.
Swami Tadatmananda is a traditionally-trained teacher of Advaita Vedanta, meditation, and Sanskrit. For more information, please see: www.arshabodha.org/
Sorry for misidentifying Michael Graziano of Princeton University
Guruji I think Neuroscience is calling Jiva as conciousness. Brain is holding jiva. Jiva is called Tantra, represented with Jupiter & Moon in astrology. It will be duality. Atma is different which never born never die which is non dual.
Bernardo Kastrup's Analytic Idealism actually resonates with Advaita Vedanta a lot. There are even some talks between him and Swami Sarvapriyananda here on UA-cam.
Absolutely recommend Bernardo Kastrup to anyone interested in this topic.
Watch the debate between bernardo and michael james.
The man is a genius. I was a nonspiritual athiest who thought the brain produced consciousness until I heard Bernardo explain in such a logical way why that was wrong. I've since been on a better path.
There is significant difference between the two views even though prima facie they seem to have a lot of concurrence. I watched an extensive discussion between ,Kastrup and Michael Matthews, an Advaita vedānta master. Matthews emphatically declared that all experience and suffering was illusory while Kastrup insisted that all experience was real but all reality was mental, therefore the everything was real. The denial of the reality of suffering was very difficult for Kastrup to accept and I felt exactly the same
I think this new discussion going on between Eastern metaphysics and analytical idealism is going to prove fruitful. For me, I have detected a weakness in Advaita vedānta : it's focus on cosmic reality leads it to actually deny other levels of being / experience as unreal. The radical ontology of Advaita does not answer our human needs. Whereas analytical idealism can see that ALL reality is non physical or "mental" but all experience which arises from excitations of cosmic consciousness are absolutely real. The illusion is of physicality pet se but NOT of experience. Thus, analytical idealism bridges the gap between ontic reality and experience, between cosmic bliss and suffering, and shows where these levels might taken together find us a roadmap towards true understanding.
@@cameronhuff5170that’s beautiful to hear. There are many atheists beginning to realize this. Bernardo is an absolute gift to the logically minded.
Swamiji, this is one of the most lucid videos that explains Consciousness while not shying away from counter arguments. You have cleared ALL my lingering doubts in my spiritual quest .Pranams and I am grateful.
Thank you Swamiji for exemplifying the spirit of self-inquiry- the ultimate quest! Imagine how disappointing it would be to find the source of consciousness and put it in a bottle or define it in an algorithm. Rather I sense, it is because consciousness is not graspable that everything is possible. To sink into the essence of your very own being is to understand consciousness as the source of itself. To get even close to this is like watching the most beautiful sunrise - the heart begins to melt in uncontainable pure joy. Consciousness is not an isolated ’dead’ thing. The journey of self discovery, is enabled by the purification of the heart and the mind, that goes through the heart and through the mind. The perceivable world is full of life and death, all coming and going, the witnessing of which renders one into dumbstruck awe. Consciousness is not even the ‘life” that I feel.. not even “the feeling of existence”, who I think I am .. or am not.. and therefore not death either… Despite all the doubt, speculation, conjecture & disappointment. Embracing all aspirations, hope and wonder stands the immediate knowledge of our true selves - that we name “consciousness” - the realisation of which is pure love - enough to make you cry the pure tears of a child come home forever 💛🌸🌏✨✨🙏
Great!
The final statement is a very important one. You're right in thinking that this discussion of the scientific origins of reality's might threaten Vedanta teachings. But the problem with science is lacking its own understanding of subjectivity. This is why Vedanta teachings teaching will stand the test of time 😉. However as part of limitations of self inquiry one could assume that Vedanta would be limited in objectivity. However in my experience (and i hope keen readers also understand this) this leads to enhanced objectivity. Why? Because i am aware of my own conscious experience and so i am aware of what i am projecting onto reality.
Anyone who pursues and understands vedantic teachings can use science as a way to understand this manifestation of reality we find ourselves in.
please study the development of language and in particular written language, which, in essence, allows for this awareness of my own conscious experience.
Wonderful - this was an illuminating Lesson. I believe you are gifted with an amazing ability of presenting very deep, complicated, even abstract subjects in a way that clears the path before us. I enjoyed this Lesson very, very much
9:46 small mistake-- robert penrose should be roger penrose
Dear Swamiji… thanks for sharing your wisdom … the world needs your teaching more than ever. 🪷🙏🏼
Great video Swamiji 🙏 ❤️
Swamiji, you described a very complex subject in such a clear way that it will put most professors to shame. Thank you for this video 🙏
Thank you! Swamiji🙏 Hopefully, some materialists will change their viewpoint on consciousness.
Many Thanks Swamiji for this superlative comprehensive video. Truly the need of the hour!
You have given a brilliant simplified overview of so many conflicting theories .
I cannot even begin to imagine the hours of intense study involved to make this 30 minute video with such clarity.
Eternally grateful,,🙏🙏🙏
Pranam Guruji 🙏
Pranam Swami ji
I am Self Realized after 30 years of agonizing inner work. After everything I have experienced and learned...the Individual Soul is absolutely real and is Divine. The Source of the Divine within is located deep inside the heart. The Source of the Soul is the Divine Oneness ...the Absolute...that is the Ground of Being and sustains all living beings without fail. Every Soul is like a wave on the Ocean of the Divine.
Make a video
Well said.
"Every Soul is like a wave on the Ocean of the Divine." Beautifully said. Thank you!
The source of the divine is situated deep within the heart hey?! 🤔 OK, why not?
Oh, did I forget to say that I'm Self Realized too? 😊
Swamiji, this video is a real beauty though it deserves to have more time. It's short looking to the complexity of subject. Pls make another video on the same subject after sometime
As someone who leans toward Jnana Yoga, I consider Advaita Vedanta the right path for me. Your beautiful exposition clarified things even further for me. May I request the following topics for your future videos: "What is the difference between Advaita and Dvaita?" Also, "What is the difference between human consciousness and artificial intelligence?" (Not so much the technological aspect, but how both the conscious mind and an app's prompt-generated content on a topic appear to be based on an algorithm that reviews stored data.)
Dear Swamiji.....Thank-you for tackling this rather complex subject. You have, as always, succinctly summarised & explained a deeply complex subject. We are fortunate indeed to be taught by you. Thank you again.
Saved to my Exploring consciousness playlist. Thank you so much for this. 🙏
Thank you for this great new video of yours. Already 20k views
In last two sentences Swami ji beautifully summerized whole video.....😊
Absolutely marvellous video, this isy bread and butter thank you 🙏🏼
Thank you Swami! 😁
Wow, Swamiji!! This video was amazing, I feel like it answered a lot of questions I had about the scientific theories about consciousness. Thank you so much for sharing your wisdom, you truly have the gift of imparting knowledge 🕉️ namaste
Wow! Swamiji truly has a gift for breaking down, explaining and comparing such complex subjects from both spiritual and scientific perspectives. One of the most intellectually engaging pieces of media I've consumed in a long time! 🙏❤️
Thank you for addressing this 🙏
Neuroscience can keep trying... Wonderful video Swamiji !
The only thing they could ever do is show you a correlate, but never the Qualia. And as we know, correlation does not equal causation . Matter, only looks like matter because our perceptions have evolved to present it to us that way, same goes with neurons and brains. Matter/neurons the way they appear does not have its own stand alone existence apart from the observer. Bernardo Kastrup explains this beautifully if anyone’s interested.
@@vinceofyork neuroscience correlation is discovering Tantra. Tantra is dualism called jiva. Atma is Adwaita. Jiva takes rebirth atma never born nor die. Neuroscience assuming jiva as conciousness. 😂
Muito obrigado pela aula! ❤
You’re awesome as alway. Thank you for sharing your own sensed limitations. Your balance of learning and wisdom are refreshing as always. I’m always weary of people who claim to know everything and you don’t do that❤️
I am at this time working in the forest. I see, hear, touch, smell and even taste the wonderful forms of nature. And I know it's all experience within me . Not outside of me. Thank you.
Thank you for presenting knowledge and introducing Knowing.
Pranam swami ji 🙏🍁🙏
Wonderful and beautiful explanation 🙏🙏❤❤❤
Thank you so much for this knowledge, Swamiji... 🙏🙏🙏
30:16 - "not a philosophical speculation". Yet, Advaita is translated as "vedantic philosophy" on many occasions, including in the ArshaBodha videos. 😀
Thank you Swami ji. This is a very complicated topic which you tried to explain very well.
Thank you for this talk.
Nice summary from NeuroScience to Advaita. Roger Penrose's microtubules quantum theory has the best chance of success to connect to the consciousness. Chalmer doesn't explain how the consciousness produces matter/energy or how they're interconnected, does he?
Your presentation is very much appreciated. It's very thought provoking. Critical thinking is at work here. The validity of Atma and Braman is very challenging. Consciousness is a very wonderful concept. Integrating all these ideas are very mind expanding.. A job or research well done, professor!. I love it all Please do more. No one ever knows it all. But, you're almost very close.
Beautiful explanation for learners
This topic is fascinating when it’s explained properly so thank you for doing that so thoughtfully.
Donald Hoffman is one of the few scientists that go against the grain and well worth a listen too.
I must admit a lot of what he says goes straight over my head but still fascinating 😅
Gracias por regalarme más armonía de pensamientos con sus enseñanzas 😊
Agree with you.Greatest vedio of the universe,or may universe be one of our conciousness!Thank verry much.
I love your work
thank you
Thank you for this stimulating video. I don't think that Science And Advaita are talking about the same thing when they use the word "Consciousness". It's 2 different "things" for me. For science, consciousness is part of the human experience. The sensation of being a "me" an "I" can be in part the produce of my mind, of my story, of my memories. This is the mundane part of my self. The part who belong to the world and that is produced by/in the world. And there is this other part, the only one that really is and that is not subject of any experience, and that cannot be grasped by any means. By definition, consciousness (Brahman) will always be out of reach of science. So I don't think that science and religion (Advaita specificaly) can meet and establish a dialogue.
You can study the radio(brain) but the actual broadcast(consciousness) is completely separate from the radio.
Good point, by an example. Extending the analogy, if we can study only the radio (brain) then we should be able to find where the demodulator (to convert, decode the broadcast to local electrical signal to produce sound) in the radio is. That should give a clue about the broadcast (consciousness).
How do you explain Anaesthetics turning off consciousness?
Consciousness is the infinite eternal awareness in All That Is. Consciousness can create the illusion of separation from Spirit. Our human experience is actually a dream in Spirit. You are One with everything.
Consciousness, a complex metaphysical subjective phenomenon; has been tackled with clarity and excellent analysis with the objective co-relates.
Well said Swamiji. Advaita Vedantic self-inquiry of witness within, has and will continue to stand up to the test tested eternal truths in the the way of meta-physical experiences. Meaning, it is only the Consciousness that can experience itself.
Let me expand more. Any self-enquiry tool, such as the intellect, which itself is the manifestation of Consciousness, cannot experience Consciousness. Only Consciousness can Self experience itself. And that is where science and its analytical methods, will continue to find difficulty finding answers to "hard problem of Consciousness."
Swamiji, while I was meditation I had something going into my brain kind of distubing waves. I got vision of Chhinamasta, and it happened like my head was removed and I was in peace but still centered to my being. This would also mean that even though the head is removed and if you meditating on chest area you will identify yourself to your chest part rather than brain.
Thank you
Very clear analytical explanation of experience . ..consciousness is Supreme, youtube video by Raghavendra Tippur. Gives further clarification and explanation of what is consciousness.
Grazie, veramente interessante 🙏🏻🕉️🌸
What do you think of the statement of Julio Tononi who said that consciousness is a physical property of the universe much like gravity or mass ??
speculation
Can advaita explain why only ever the same body-mind (mine) appears in the one non-dual consciousness?
Henri Bergson's theory is intriguing
This is the only clear definition of consciousness, including differentiation between 'localized'' consciousness and consciousness as a phenomenon in general, that makes sense to me. But as a scientist-minded person, I'd love to hear a clear definition and differentiation from any scientific experts that makes as much sense.
Please give a hint to the music played
Analytic Idealism provides a comprehensive philosophical understanding of consciousness. Bernardo Kastrup is a philosopher and Scientist has produced much scholarly work arguing for this. There many are many thousand s of people who have studied this and aligned themselves with this philosophical movement. I am one.
In one ear and out the other. I might have to listen to that again. Anyway, I am consciousness, which is not a thing. If someone were to supposedly find some source of consciousness, consciousness would still have to be before whatever source that is to say that it exists. 🙏
I read somewhere that brain is responsible for consciousness. It was a scientific article. I asked them what if consciousness exists seperately from brain. There is still no response to it. 😊😊😊😊😂😂😂😂. They can't disprove it. Theirs is just a concept based on neurological functions.
Consciousness has no source ... consciousness is the source of everything
Having studied for many years I'd say Hermetic philosophy, or 'Hermeticism', and Advaita Vedanta, are arguably the same but by different terminology.
Is this statement correct. Connect with Guru as consciousness,not as a person.
How a limited entity can be a source of an all pervading infinite consciousness? The source of such consciousness can only be things present everywhere. Can it be space and entity so far known as well as unknown!
thoughts aren't knower of thoughts, and emotions are just expressions of our attachments to objective objects, we don't get emotional over anything that we are not attached too. But what is it that makes that attachment possible? Answer: The pleasure principle, and that pleasure principle is of the self. It is because we are beings that seek gratification of our senses that makes us attached to those things that give us pleasure and from that attachment comes emotion. But the pleasure principle can't be observed as being of brain matter. So, the knower represents " chit " and the pleasure principle represents " ananda" (bliss ) both of these aspects of the self can't be attributed to neurons.
Thank you for the clear explanation. I really appreciate it. I do have a question: Why is it that the presence of the witness (in addition to thoughts and emotions) depends on an intact and functioning brain? If one puts the brain in a certain state (e.g. by administrating propofol to induce general anaesthesia) there is no witness anymore; The "light goes out" just as in a dreamless sleep. Why is this the case?
Wakefulness, dream, deep sleep, are states of our material experience that come and go day by day but you as the knower of these states exist as a continuum that doesn't goe through states.
@@williamburts3114 Let me clarify my point: In deep sleep there is no witness, so the presence of the witness clearly depends on the state of the brain and I would be interested to know why this is the case according to Advaita Vedanta, because the witness is supposed to be the ground of existence.
@@user-fl1rz3uw6d Your experience of deep sleep is vague, but it is still an experience because when you wake up you know that you dreamt nothing, so that experience still relates to you. In wakefulness and dream states objects appear on the screen of consciousness and we are engaged in them but in deep sleep since there is no objects to engage with the knower lies dormant. But we shouldn't think the self isn't present in such a state because if someone were to touch you or yell in your ear you would wake up.
@@williamburts3114 We indeed remember that we were in a dreamless sleep, but I don't see how this implies that "the knower lies dormant". Likewise, when someone touches you, you wake up because the brain is activated, but I don't see how this implies that "the self is present" during sleep. This seems like a huge leap of faith and not based on direct experience. As far as we know, during dreamless sleep, coma, general anaesthesia, or death, the light goes out and a lot is known about the underlying neurophysiological mechanisms. I know that some people (e.g. Nisargadatta Maharaj) say that they are aware during dreamless sleep and I believe that it is indeed possible to attain such a state,, but I am convinced that this still relies on an intact brain.
Preperation, knowledge, knowing, process, and experience of consciousness - all explained in hundreds of thousands of Hindu texts, transmitted since more than 30,000 + years ago
I came recently to consider that a thought, an idea could be seen in some "ridiculous" way as a kind of object and now I wonder if this is part of Indian philosophy?? It could be Plato too, not sure.
🙏🏼
I think you confused Michael Gaziano (epidemiologist) with Michael GRAZIANO...
Swamiji, Pranam.
My question is this:
If the consciousness is not materially connected to the brain, then what happens to consciousness when a person goes into comatose condition where all body functions are intact and the autonomous system keeps that person alive but totally unconscious about the environment and is unable to function within the normal functioning? Does consciousness gets impaired with the damage to the portion of brain?
Consciousness as the unchanging reality remains even when the body is comatose.
The answer to your question lies in how you define consciousness. Consciousness as defined in neuro science as a response to stimulus is different from vedantic consciousness which is that unchanging reality that reveals your thoughts, emotions and perceptions.
BTW, this is my understanding from Swamiji's teachings on his website and on You Tube.
I may be wrong.
ua-cam.com/video/9NWi3qX4sR8/v-deo.htmlsi=wWrg-GXtzz4fizaD
Rainbow picture Over-Consciousness,
Colors picture Under-Consciousness =
Day-Consciousness and Night-Consciousness.
Instinct, Gravity, Feeling, Intelligence, Intuition, Memory,
our physical body, is a Gravity-Body, at Night, We do Move our
Day-Consciousness, to the Night-Bodies, (Deep-Sleep)
one by one, via the Coupling-Body, (REM)
Dreams, NDE, OBE, Coma, messages, Visits, Warnings,
is experienced by Day-Consciousness, via the Coupling-Body.
So, Day-consciousness Never sleep, it just goes in Circuits,
Day/Night, and Larger. Our Body is a Organ-circuit, correspond
with respective Bodies during Day/Night-circuit.
a man denied that he had been away, after 17 years,
within one year, the grey brain got pink.
a woman thought she was still teenager, after 20 years
Consciousness is 100% Electric.
Try subbing in consciousness for awareness and read it again.
"If the **awareness** is not materially connected to the brain, then what happens to **awareness** when a person goes into comatose condition where all body functions are intact and the autonomous system keeps that person alive but totally **unaware** about the environment and is unable to function within the normal functioning? Does **awareness** gets impaired with the damage to the portion of brain?"
Once you do that, can you see how it makes sense now?
🙏
Thank you Guru. We cannot explain consciousness because we all have a different consciousness. That is what make us unique. Science experiments, researches are conducted by scientists who look and explain the unknown from their own point of view. Only Brahman can exist.
Brain is concentration of cells with tiny consciousness of cells and cells are just collection of atoms which have consciousness, there is no reason to think robot isn’t conscious, anything which has many interactions would be conscious and we have no way to prove it.
How consiousnes came in atom
I always say..
Brains can think, and maybe we could make machines that think..
But ONLY CONSCIOUSNESS can experience
Only consciousness begets consciousness...
The mind and consciousness is as much in the brain/body as a radio signal is in a radio.
This seems to be true in the way that consciousness arises from the six sense bases in buddhism. These sense signals are dependently arising so it wouldnt be right to to say "consciousness comes from the brain".
The brain does seem to facilitate consciousness, but no more than the sense organs do.
Consciousness is part of a system and the system is in the body and outside the body.
💜☸️☯️☸️💜
💙 Thanks 💙
Connect with Guru as Consciousness,not as a person.Swamiji is this statement correct.
Neti neti.
Rainbow/Colors picture our Over-Consciousness and
Under-Consciousness = Day-Consciousness,
and Night-Consciousness,
Instinct, Gravity, Feeling, Intelligence, Intuition, Memory.
We are Gravity-Beings, about to become Feeling-Beings,
Deep-Sleep is our Night-Bodies, REM is our Coupling-Body
Day/Night-Circuit, correspond with the Organ-Circuit
in our physical body.
It is the Same Eternal Abilities that make 'This Device' work so well.
in technical composition,
Automatic, Power, Sensors, Logic/Order, (*), Harddisc
So this is the Eternal basic-picture of our Consciousness-Circuit,
and Day-Consciousness Never sleep.
Life-Desire is Motor of Life,
Hunger- and Satisfaction-Principles is Compass.
How can jellyfish be conscious to catch its food?
Consciousness is fundamental
Generator Organizer Destroyer
Of ⭕️ = I = ♾
Dimensions
Swami SriDattaDev SatChitAnanda
🕉🕉🕉
Un crack!
Awackaning self love😊
I'm sorry, but I disagree with your points. The sweetness of mango or chocolate, for example, is not related to consciousness. Instead, the pleasure we feel is due to the chemical reaction in our brains caused by certain chemicals present in the food. If you could stop this chemical reaction, you wouldn't feel any pleasure. Ecstasy drugs can make you addicted not because of consciousness, but because of the chemical effects that produce pleasure in your brain.
In addition, who has said that neuroscience has already answered all its questions? It is an evolving field that continues to discover new things. Also, the explanations that you refer to as speculative are no more speculative than philosophical explanations, including Advaita Vedanta. They are written, but not proven.
One can argue that consciousness can be achieved. In response, I can say that even science may one day be able to explain consciousness, as it is just the beginning, not the end. Personally, I think consciousness is overrated. If it exists beyond our physical being, it can at best be described as the dark energy passing through the space between atoms, not reacting to our universal laws of physics. However, I disagree with the idea that feelings are a part of consciousness. Feelings can be created using chemicals, which are not related to consciousness but are about hormones.
Coming from a behavioral biology background, I have to disagree that you can have feelings without consciousness. Feelings are the observed experience OF those chemical and hormonal changes and reactions. Chemical signals can be created artificially, but without a conscious observer, those chemical reactions won’t be felt. Therefore, you can have chemical reactions without consciousness but you can’t have an experience of those chemical reactions (what we call feelings) if there is no conscious entity to experience it.
The sweetness of mango/chocolate can be recreated chemically for sure! However I believe that swami is referring to the internal awareness that arises with the experience of sweetness. The experience of sweetness is not just a chemical high, but can also be an immersive life experience overwhelming your senses, awareness, feelings and emotions. This experience can not be recreated in a chemical sense, as it would be a very different experience.
If you desire to replicate this, experience a mango that is fresh from the tree, then compare a mango from the supermarket. These are wildly different experiences. There is a chemical factor present (time of mango off the tree and how that impacts the mango), but does that factor make up for the different of experience?
You are partly true but not entirely. It is true that neuroscience is evolving continuously and it will keep getting more and more accurate. Who is observing? Once mango taste signals have reached Brain and brain chemicals are triggered, who is experiencing/interpreting those physical entities called taste-triggered brain biochemicals & neurons into a "feeling of happiness"? Imagine you can create the exact same brain biochemicals & neurons in the lab, The Container holding that exact same brain biochemical will not be able to experience the sweetness of that biochemical. Imagine a state where science has reached a state where the entire human (or any animal) body can be atom by atom recreated with all organs exact replica of organically created body. It will still be a dead body with the presence of all biochemicals and neurons. It is the presence of "consciousness" that makes a dead body into a living entity. The unique and exclusive "me-ness" or "i-ness" or "not-you-ness" existing in each of us is consciousness.
@@silverly0 Yes chemically speaking that factor does indeed change the experience. By many different variables. Soil, sugars, pesticides/herbicide either directed or from drift. All of these variables change the mango at the chemical level and those changes effect how you experience the mango through your chemical signals.
No Consciousness...no experience. Full Stop.
❤❤❤❤🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🌷🌷🌷🌷🌷
lol, yes its called language!!
I'm pretty sure the only thing that is in the brain is one big peanut 🥜 because the physical plain in one Big Circus 🎪.
You will not change "my mind" because it's all mine!
Scientists do tests to check what they understand about consciousness. This guy just make claims without any test to provide any new evidence. 😂 LOL
The test is the path that we choose to follow or not. The "methodology" to validate those teachings has nothing to do with the ones that science follows. That's why I think the effort to establish a dialogue between religion and science is vain and create more confusion than anything.
Tests to check CONSCIOUSNESS ? LOL
@@ncsh9301 check “what they understand”
Thank you swami, but still does not answer the origin of Brahman, Ishwara, Pure Consciousness, etc...?
💖🕉️🙏🏻
For last 500 years neuroscience failed to find consciousness inside Brain. How they will find it in future.😂😂they can keep trying. Good luck to them.😂😂 It's witch-hunting.
Consciousness is not side effect of brain matter. But it's matter that is side effect of consciousness😂. Calling consciousness as side effect is insult to consciousness. Materialism and dualism both are wrong and disapproved. Scientifically and philosophy.
Saved to my Exploring consciousness playlist. Thank you so much for this. 🙏
I subscribed to your channel after seeing all your playlists!
🙏