Astonishingly well delivered. No distracting background music, measured speech, deep domain knowledge and compellingly marshalled arguments backed with facts. If all subjects were addressed like this, we'd be in much better shape.
Nice to experience an education video like this, at UA-cam, that does not play background music or sound effects, as if I need to be "entertained" while listening to an expert talk.
The day science begins to study non-physical phenomena, it will make more progress in one decade than in all the previous centuries of its existence. - Nikola Tesla
No because that isn't how science works!!! Science requires that you have proof and can verify your proof and said proof has to be able to replicated. We can't study non physical things what you want us to study souls.
non-physical does not mean non-material. he was referring to electromagnetism. science, by the nature of science, cannot study what we cannot interact with.
@@Skyfoogle- Is it possible that we can still observe what we cannot interact with? If I wanted to do a study on spontaneous healing for example I could still gather evidence for this phenomenon from the before and after. From there I could survey if there was any common correlations such as the person receiving prayer or having a particular spiritual experience. This phenomenon is quite common and has been observed and medically documented. There a person could examine if they can rule out coincidence for all or part of their sample. Perhaps a criterion for what constitutes a miracle might be established. For example if the event had a low probability and was accompanied by an intelligence or purpose. If for example you were praying for protection as a home invader entered your house and then was struck by a meteorite in the head while trying to take aim to shoot you. Still the question remains “Is that odd or is that God?” Perhaps there’s a statistical significance to justify the use of prayer. But we’re talking about actually doing the investigation. Is the purist materialist going to do actual science and try to disprove that materialism is all there is? Probably not even though their own minds and thoughts are not just a domino effect down the line of the Big Bang. Otherwise why would they think arguing with Creationism makes any difference since the Creationist is nothing more than a product of time and chance outside of their control set into motion by an explosion of time, energy and matter. But how the materialist believes borrows from the Creationist belief in free will. Since we can’t even have Materialism without Intelligent Design and the concept of mind it’s impossible to account for everything starting from pure naturalistic causes. So what purpose does it serve to force ourselves to try and understand everything through naturalistic logic when it’s insane to presuppose that the mind we use to understand the universe is itself an accident?
I love that my son sent this video to me! Listening/watching this video just once is just not enough. It deserves to be watched/listened to several times. The first time around, my brain was so busy just taking in what he was saying. The second and third time I watched/listened to this video my mind began to process what he was saying. This is fascinating subject! Many thanks to those who made, and shared this video. I may be 60+ y/o, but I still love to learn! We have SO much more to learn about the human brain! I want to continue to learn up until the day the Lord calls me home!
Man is entirely and totally body, of which the mind is an integral part. The mind is the part which created such abstract concepts as "spirit" and "soul," two things we imagine but have never shown to exist as something separate.
The reality is that if you are rigid materialist, you can't do good science. LOVE THIS. Keep fighting people, we are beginning to win the information war.
A more accurate statement would be, "If you are a rigid dogmatic person, you can't do good science." "Science" is literally "knowledge" and more recently "the systematic study of the structure and behavior of the physical and natural world through observation, experimentation and the testing of theories against the evidence obtained." Only religion can make airy unfounded claims concerning the existence of supernatural entities and phenomena which have never been observed and thus cannot be studied.
I was an athiest recently but after doing my own personal research on conciousness I do believe that we at least have a soul whether it be quantum or other. I believe that perhaps there is such a thing as an invisible matter that may account for our soul and or the invisible process of thought.
This is insane. This guy talks about it in such an easy to understand way it almost makes it sound obvious. Very profound stuff that most people are more than likely not attempting to integrate into their being.
he explains how certain things the brain does are incredibly well localized, he then says certain things the brain does are less obviously well localized (which isn't 'quite true as electrical stimulation of small parts of the brain can make you feel emotion for one example) and says this is evidence for Dualism. Think about it, this doesn't prove anything, let allow our minds are made out of something bizarre that is immaterial and we have no evidence for.
@@davidjellyman7006 You betray a materialistic mindset when you say, “… our minds are made out of something bizarre that is immaterial …” The point of this presentation is that our minds are not “made out of” anything. Thatʼs what “immaterial” means. “Immaterial” is not some other type of material; it means “no material involved.”
Much nonsense is so easy to understand that it almost sounds obvious, like, "When I look out across the prairie, I see no curve, therefore the earth is flat." or "there is so much profound stuff I don't understand, therefore god."
I just loved this video. "Behind the universe is a mind, a grand mind that is reflected in the way the universe works." What we see is not all there is.
Thankyou - I was taking copious notes on this lecture - Michael Egnor makes numerous points about research that shows a differentiation between mind and the matter of the brain. Then speaks of the clearly dualist implications. Very well thought out - and thought provoking. It was the materialistic issues (e.g., first cause, abiogenesis, failings of natural selection to provide a mechanism for macroevolution, massive coverups and poor science, etc. ) which led me to check out the dualist camp of an intelligent designer. And I would like to learn at a deeper level these clear lines of reasoning in regard to mind, intentionality and free will which also point to the same conclusion. A proper worldview should provide the best explanation in all areas - as truth does not contradict itself.
Why is it so difficult to understand that information lives in the abstract world of process and process is simply the behavior of matter? That mind isn't matter is abundantly obvious but that mind is the process of matter should seem equally obvious. Mind is abstract, immaterial. So is process but process is "of" matter so the assertion that mind is of matter in the same way should not cause any confusion. How it happens, well, that takes a pretty thick book to even begin to explain. Here's one that takes a pretty good shot at it... "Godel, Escher, Bach". Read it and you'll be in pretty good shape for understanding how.
9000 years of forging ethical and moral codes, some based on christian beliefs, has gotten us closer to some sort of peace, but we still resort to fists, knives, guns and missiles far too often. Many of Europe's bloodiest wars have been between different sects of christians!
the fact that humans can experience quantum mechanics with for example the douple gap experiment is evidence that there is more to this world than just matter
As CLEARLY documented, there IS anti-matter. What there ISN'T is anything "paranormal", "supernatural", "spiritual" or "miraculous", which is why NEVER A PENNY of this money has ever been handed out: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_prizes_for_evidence_of_the_paranormal
Wonderful lecture and conclusion. Materialism cannot explain awareness And, yes, purpose is the driver of everything and us all. I am sorry for all the Dawkins' of this world not to see the light.
Materialism explains awareness perfectly well; it is the chemical processes in the brain that operate when we are submitted to stimuli which interpret and organize the stimuli into meaningful grasp of surroundings and events...awareness.
I've been intrigued by the out of body experiences people have with near death experiences. Their consciousness leaves their bodies and functions independently of their brain activity. That tells me our consciousness is not generated by our brains.
Yes. NDE's that have included veridical perception, point toward and underline the fact that we are not our brains and that consciousness survives death and goes somewhere else after biological death. Some heaven/ dimension or reality is where we seem to travel after physical death of the body.
@@philosopher0076 I'm curious about #3 where Mr. Egnor says there are no "intellectual seizures," however, there are cases of "acquired savant syndrome" where a person develops profound mathematical or musical abilities following a brain injury.
There is no basis on which to conclude that our consciousness is a separate entity. In dreams and even in conscious thoughts we are able to see ourselves outside of our bodies. Our consciousness is totally a function of our living brains, and disappears entirely when we die.
I don't necessarily hold to materialism, but, while I find these examples fascinating, they're not very convincing to me. There are plausible alternative explanations that would still need to be ruled out. For example, although higher thought is not localizable to one region of the brain, it may be distributed to neurons throughout the brain; it doesn't have to be the result of something immaterial.
I was thinking something similar. That is it possible that higher thought IS ensconced in material aspects of our brains and physiology but ... we just do not yet have the; understanding, knowledge, Skills, and measurement capability to monitor those activities? This is Sam Harris' refutation of the dualist argument, that these higher "thoughts" are indeed material but ... we just don't have the technical capability of proving it. While this next statement of course proves nothing ... my gut tells me Harris is incorrect and the Aristotleans are right.Effectively, this video discussion is similar to others and dancing around the same concepts as those tackling the nature of consciousness. There are certain VERY important aspects of "being" that are not material and are simply never going to be explainable entirely by rational \ scientific means.
Then what about the example of brain dead people being capable of responding to higher thought and even being capable of doing simple math? If they are vegatables, brain dead completely, even if it was localized neural networks, they wouldn't be able to maintain the complex order required to do higher thinking if the individuals brain effeciency was comparable to a cabbage. I would you ask if you had paused the video at the first example or if you went through them all. The hemispherical cutting in half was also quite a profound experiment, where higher thinking isn't impaired even if the brains were split in half. How then are the two brains communicating?
I might add another component to this: a person's "Will." Let me explain through my own example. This is not vanity, this is truth. With everything that's happened to me medically: only some examples being a brain injury, the resulting surgeries, and in other life events such as Hurricane Katrina, many people are surprised I'm still sane, (including me). And, I've also suffered from epilepsy--partial frustrating seizures, not full harmful seizures. A few years ago, doctors tried to diagnose where the seizures came from by putting me in a hospital, decreasing my meds, and seeing what might happen. And, they found the seizures--but, according to the brain patterns, the seizures should have knocked me out. But, again, just partial seizures. Still sane, only partial seizures--the reason is Me. My willpower must be separate from my brain. Otherwise I'd at least be insane and probably dead.
People with catastrophic brain damage are still self aware. They’re trapped in their inert body. That’s the most horrifying thing I’ve ever heard in my life.
The experiment that described the evidence for the existence of Free Will (or Free Won't) is extremely interesting to those of us interested in Christian Philosophy/Theology, Specifically Molinism vs. Calvinism.
YES!!!! I love that part! For me, the evidence he shares quite literally substantiates the verse from the Bible, Love the Lord thy GOD with all thy Soul all thy Heart and all Thy MIND! Also the last 2 sections clearly edify this point =) Cheers!
Double predestination is blown away by the writings of the early Church Fathers as well as multiple passages from the New Testament. It’s shocking anyone adheres to that dogma.
Science does not understand how the activity of the brain gives rise to the experience of consciousness. This is because consciousness (another word for "mind") is an epiphenomenon of the activity of the brain, just as the [experience of hearing a song] is an epiphenomenon of the radio wave that is the medium. More importantly, this is strong evidence that the mind is primary and the experience of the phenomena we call matter is an epiphenomenon of the interaction of Planck-scale spacetimeenergymatter events over time. This is not only a refutation of materialism, it's a claim that mind (spirit) is primary. In the Judeo-Christian tradition, this revelation is expressed in Genesis, both in the creation of the material world (the universe) ex nihilo and the creation of the human person in the image of the divine Creator. Since these truths cannot be proven experimentally, they will never be accepted by materialists. I hope Dr. Egnor would agree his examples support this interpretation.
Incredible intellect on display here, and further evidence that we are not just a collection of cells evolved from a mud-puddle. I only wish the camera person was as good at their job during this interview, the poor Dr is jumping all over the frame because it was apparently filmed with a phone being held by someone. Please consider a $20 portable camera stand, it would do wonders and can be kept in a vehicle or even a briefcase. If me pointing out the shaky camera work makes this harder to watch, just listen to it, the interview works just as well in audio-only form. I do appreciate the work of the Discovery Institute and I don't mean to be critical, but please make an effort to do better for viewers in the future.
I proudly accept being a collection of cells from a really slimy mud puddle. Since evolution makes no assertions concerning the existence of a god, we can say that the spectacular process that led from slime mold cells to us humans could be evidence of some god's miraculous workings.
Just two minutes into this and I keeping saying 'yes this is so good and so true' and I can't wait to listen the whole segment. It came at a right time when I need to write my essay. Thank you for uploading it !
So refreshing to listen to clear thought simply expressed, by someone who doesn't feel the necessity to impress the listener. And yet he is mighty impressive! Thank you for sharing.
Mind (the internal soul, syntropy) is dual to matter (the external soul, entropy) -- Descartes or Plato's divided line. Teleological physics (syntropy) is dual to non-teleological physics (entropy). Homology is dual to co-homology -- mathematics. Reducing the number of dimensions or states is a syntropic process -- homology, hypervolumes become volumes which become surfaces or planes, planes become lines and lines become points which are zero dimensional. Increasing the number of dimensions or states is an entropic process -- co-homology, points become lines, lines become planes, planes become volumes and volumes become hypervolumes. Syntropy (prediction) is dual to increasing entropy -- the 4th law of thermodynamics. From a converging, convex or syntropic perspective everything looks divergent, concave or entropic -- the 2nd law of thermodynamics. All observers have a localized or syntropic perspective -- a focused attention. My syntropy is your entropy and your syntropy is my entropy -- duality. Duality creates reality. "Always two there are" -- Yoda.
I recommend Dr. Edward Fesers "Philosophy of Mind", he's a great modern thomistic philosopher & in his book he adresses all the alternative metaphysics.
I feel like my brain would have lit the lamps of an MRI machine had I watched this during an MRI procedure and my mind would’ve expected it to be so! Great vid!
If you want to prove that the mind is not material... do it. First demonstrate the existence of some sort of immaterial storage where it resides. Showing that some functions are localized in parts of the brain and some aren't localized doesn't prove anything until you show where IT IS LOCATED and that place is OUTSIDE THE PHYSICAL BRAIN. Assuming this Brain Surgeon has helped some of his patients, I wonder how often he repaired or removed something that wasn't material? Calculus isn't material. Its concepts and understanding are explained and stored in books and in the brains of those who understand it. Those are all physical storage media, the existence of Calculus depends entirely on material reality. When the last storage media is loss, Calculus disappears entirely, only to reappear when another brain figures it out, stores it and pass it on.
He's making a terrible argument for dualism. But there is a good case for dualism. Conscious experience (mind) is just conscious experience. You don't have to prove where it is located, because *it is not located anywhere*. It's not a matter of physical storage. Unlike mystical dualism's claims, mind is absolutely dependent on, and is facilitated by, the brain - but it is not the brain.
thank you. I was listening to him thinking... wait of course abstract thoughts aren't localized to a particular "pea sized" spots in the brain. That's ludicrous. Consciousness and higher cognitive functions are made up of complex neural networks spanning across the brain through synaptic pathways that develop phenotypically. That is, through both nature and nurture. It isn't even that complicated to understand. When I say the word "duck" You and I have a similar yet not identical understanding of the word duck due to the context of our personal experiences relating to "duck." to use a blunt example: If I say "duck" to Identical twins separated at birth. The parts of their brain that would light up in response to me saying that word would vary immensely if one of the twins got raped by a psycho in a duck suit and the other twin's adoptive father played hockey for the Anaheim Mighty Ducks and had memorabilia around the house growing up. This guy is a big fail.
RCW Numbers exist apart from you writing them down or having knowledge in your brain about them, they aren’t strictly in our head. If you want to prove that there isn’t an object in a box, I don’t have to go and find the object to prove this, I can just open the box and show that it isn’t in there.
There once was a young man who said: "God - I think it exceedingly odd - That the sycamore tree - Continues to be - When there's no one about in the quad. - Dear Sir: Your astonishment's odd. - I AM always about in the quad, - and that's why the tree - continues to be, - observed by, - yours faithfully God”
The thing is this: believing in matter is believing in something we can never know. Like Kant pointed out, we can never experience a thing in itself, ONLY EVER our own PERCEPTION of it. You can only ever experience your own consciousness. Your experiences of matter is in fact only your experience of consciousness. So the only thing we can really know is experience. Believing in matter is a bit like superstition.
Michael: This was wonderful ... most helpful. Thank you so much for elucidating a lot of gray areas. I humbly submit a couple of ideas that you probably already understand, but which are fundamental to this lecture. #1: We are a tripartite being created in God's image. He is Father, Son and Holy Spirit. We are spirit soul and body. These are separate and distinct entities. The inspired Scripture says, He formed man of the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and man became a living soul (Genesis 2:7). We must understand that we are a soul, we have a spirit, and we live in a body, (our spirit is God conscious, our soul is self conscious, and our body is world conscious) which brings me to point #2: When we die our spirit and soul leave the body (this explains your surgeon friends inability to physically destroy the mind which is part of the soul). Here are defining verses. A. James 2:26 For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also. B. Luke 8:54-55 But He ... took her by the hand and called, saying, "Little girl, arise." Then her spirit returned, and she arose immediately. C: 1 Kings 17:21-22 And he ... cried unto the Lord, and said, "O Lord my God, I pray thee, let this child's soul come into him again". And the Lord heard the voice of Elijah; and the soul of the child came into him again, and he revived. this is the extremely shortened version. More is available if you wish. God bless you. Rob Carpenter
Many nuero scientists are understanding that mind and brain are separate. Ebon Alexander another surgeon /scientists who had a NDE confirms that the mind continues beyond death. Amazing testimony. Shalom
Wow, I've seen so many videos of Closer to Truth that investigates the mind and counciousness and Dr. Egnor was way more brilliant that so many experts on the subject. I would really like to see an interview with Kuhn and Egnor. And I would really like to see Dan Dennet's opinions on these topics. I doubt his theory can get an even bit close to explain these topics.
What about dementia or Alzheimer's? How does that reconcile with the points made here? These individuals change a ton. What's the argument for the soul if these diseases can change the person so much? I'm a Christian theist and I'm genuinely curious.
Maybe that is why he kept on stressing the concept of dualism; meaning that our mind is the result of two things. The physical brain and then something else embedded within the brain (our soul? Our true intellect?).
My understanding on these concepts is that the brain could be looked at more as a receiver than a producer. If you damage a radio, it may not work, or static, etc but the signal itself is still out there and fine... Just can't be picked up properly by the radio when it's damaged. So brain damage would do the same.. The signal would not be received properly any more and therefore... Well, static..
"The intellect is not the brain." Our minds are more than the physical brain. This supports the belief in a divine Creator who makes us in His eternal image.
WOW, It's great to see a new video of Dr. Michael Egnor! I've been enjoying his easy to understand articles for a WHILE now! This is truly TOP NOTCH stuff! Thank you so much to all of you!!!
Dr Egnor is so interesting and easy to listen to, his voice, coordinated facial expression and mannerism merge to produce a very interesting and easily listened to interview. I would like to learn more, any recommendations that support the belief materialism of being at least insufficient and does not explain the mind?
Language is localized. Generally speaking, specific tasks that humans have done since there have been humans, those tasks have dedicated regions so they can be done more efficiently. Tasks that people do that are not usually necessary to survive, tasks where efficiency isn't crucial, those tend to be spread out and to use whatever brain resources are available to do those things. If higher intellectual functions are not functions of the brain, but functions of a consciousness outside of the brain, can we develop an experiment to test this claim? Maybe we measure people's performance on some highly intellectual task, give random people a drug that could inhibit brain function, or just alcohol, and give a control group a drug that might make them feel strange but that does not inhibit brain function, and see if the two groups have comparable shifts in performance. What do you think would happen?
So in other words people must become experiment subjects to satisfy your ego. There are already many experiments done on humans, why do you need even more? What will that change? If you use drugs, the main functions of brain are going to trash. Any drug paralyzes the brain and keeps you in a state of dream, halusination etc. That has been done in previous years, from people that did not respect human rights, and you call for another similar experiment, instead of reading the conclusions of these people conclusions. Where or when will this experimental stage will stop? When will your ego is going to be satisfied? Why do you people want to be cruel to other people? How about if I'd take you and experiment on you, would you like to be my experiment subject thus, to make my own conclusions? Are you people mad on something. or someone?
Free Won't: that we are bombarded with a multitude of impulses, desires and exhortations to act. And we then decide essentially which impulse to comply with. This is what God tells us and has revealed to us; our Flesh bombards our heart and mind with multiple impulses to act such as lie, speak, be honest, eat, eat some more, and higher actions such as greed, lust, ambition etc. One of those desires and impulses is the desire for the Good, or the impulse to do the Good. That is the Holy Spirit; that is God. It is up to us to listen to that or not.
The more you are free to think the more you find out. OC. We have a mentality problem, and as long as it remains ignored the longer it will take to find answers.
you really don't understand: the 'mind' is your councious activity in the perspective of your own experience as a subject. You cannot take away from the mind your subjective perspective as a sentient being and a thinker
A: Please sir, push the button to experiment... B: Yes, (B pushes, brain on chemical reactions) A: Please sir, push the button to experiment... C: No, I dont want to.. (no brain chemical reactions) What does this means?... Brain does not thinks by itself.. Good observation Mr. Egnor.
The free-will vs free-won't comparison is fascinating to me experientially in my life. My free-will has been delayed for a few periods of time I was taking triazolam for sleep. The next day after adenosine receptor antagonist (caffeine) consumption I would find myself wanting to perform an action but realized it would take me a full 1-2 seconds after deciding that I would engage. Also, the free-won't is a concept taught to baseball players in that we teach them to conceptualize and then engage every pitch as worthy of swinging at...but to then decide to not swing when their brain recognizes the pitch as unhittable or out of the strike-zone.
What an awesome video! So fascinating, exciting and scary. To have a soul and yet it being so limited by our functional bodies. Nice how some of the scientists he mentioned changed their mind based on their observations. Which is what science is.
While I am not a materialist in general, I do have to point out that lobotomies can and do destroy a persons personality, sense of self, and reasoning abilities. The pre-frontal cortex is "damaged" by a needle inserted to the side of the eye and produces drastic changes to mental states. How is this not a case for Materialism?
Our purpose is beyond our understanding We see the basics and assume the purpose but really don't comprehend its overall purpose. When we are free from the constraints of the physical brain the essence of our being will be revealed.
Because we're programmed to do it just like all many other animals higher who navigate their environment using their minds to make decisions that aid in their survival and often their comfort.
Just Wow!! Very impressive! Enjoyed this very much. Going to think about it. Probably watch it again. It definitely shines another bright light on creation!
I suspect both idealism and materialism are misnomers. Probabilistic waves can be considered as early stage material. Materialism may be contradicted because it appears there's a very good chance consciousness is actually quantum... perhaps in a way that would've baffled Einstein. The long story short, materialism, in the traditional view, is at least incomplete but idealism may similarly need to be modified, as most things are only useful when in solid, material form. It may be apt to suggest each view represents a stage of existence. Dualism is probably the most accurate theory.
If higher cognitive functions are not localizable in the brain, then dualism is true. Nah. Cutting the corpus callosum DOES show that the different halves have different answers to deeply personal questions. In fact, one patient has one half of the brain atheist and the other a theist. Again, nah.
Sorry...really quick... Is anyone in the comments actually listening to this guy? He is no producing evidence for his beliefs, he is proposing questions without answers and claiming they necessitate a creator and an immaterial mind. This guy may be a great surgeon, but logician he is not.
Whenever I hear someone say that there is is no specific location in the brain that serves as the centre for higher thought I’m always left wondering “why does there have to be a centre at all?”. I can see why there would be specific areas for basic motor functions but at higher levels of though the brain can use any neurons or collections of neurons it needs to to synthesize it’s ideas. Science has shown that any neuron is usable for multiple purposes and often something like a motor command may use different neurons every time. This implies to me that the brain is dynamic and doesn’t need to have local centres for higher contemplation. I really struggle with how people just jump to “the mind is fundamental”. Am I missing something?
What your missing is that if you are attempting to define the mind by materialistic means from the brain you pretty much have to do it by neurochemical computation. And if it is computation that makes up all out thoughts, dreams desires, and actions then there is no plasticity in that. Not when it comes to hardware. If you want to say that all neurons can somehow serve all functions then you need to justify why it can't with simpler things like motor control, but can with higher more complex things like abstract thought. You also have to explain why, and how the brain does sometimes alter which sections light up for the same sort of thinking phenomena. Because not only is it plastic in regards to many things like that, but inconsistently so. You also have to justify how one person can recieve sever frontal lobe trauma and be irreconcilable changed, but another person can recieve the same, or even worse trauma, and keep their personality in tact. Computation in a physical sense is not plastic. If you are trying yo explaine the mind materialisticly you need to say it's computation, and I acts nothing like computations.
Counterargument #4 It is very interesting that half of the people studied who were in a coma showed some relevant brain activity when they were asked questions. The conclusion to draw is that some people in comas still have parts of their brain that can work like a healthy person's, and are probably not the parts that are causing the coma. I don't see why this is evidence that materialism is wrong.
He is incorrect about the findings and conclusion of Roger Sperry's split-brain research. They found that a second self does emerge and the British consciousness research Anthony Peake writes about it in his books, in fact, Sperry's research seemed to inspire Anthony's title of his second book: www.anthonypeake.com/product/the-daemon-a-guide-to-your-extraordinary-secret-self/
Neurosurgeon Michael Egnor started out sounding mechanistic in his argument to challenge materialism. That is he reported on studies that simply examined the functionality of the brain; specifically the relationship between the areas of the human brain to the body’s nervous system. The experiments used to study the brain were mainly done with applying external stimulus and noting the cause and effect of specific stimuli. I was hoping for a discussion focused on the effects of psychedelic drugs i.e. LSD (Lysergic acid diethylamide). When small doses are taken, it can produce mild changes in perception, mood and thought. When larger doses are taken, it may produce visual hallucinations and distortions of space and time. I can only go on what I have read and seen in documentaries but I am left thinking that LSD being a product of nature i.e. a substance found in ergot, which is a fungus that infects rye (grain). A substance that has been around and used by humans for thousands of years as a medium into the ‘spirit’ domain and to virtually catapult the human mind into patterns of thought that otherwise remained hidden from consciousness.
Astonishingly well delivered. No distracting background music, measured speech, deep domain knowledge and compellingly marshalled arguments backed with facts. If all subjects were addressed like this, we'd be in much better shape.
Nice to experience an education video like this, at UA-cam, that does not play background music or sound effects, as if I need to be "entertained" while listening to an expert talk.
We can't be "deluded that we have minds." A mind is required to have delusions. Bricks, rocks, and other inanimate objects can't be deluded.
@All About Britain Ask any eight-year-old with a laser pointer.
Hey, Dougie the Shoe!
Thanks for that excellent conclusion.
One would think this to be common sense. 😄
The day science begins to study non-physical phenomena, it will make more progress in one decade than in all the previous centuries of its existence. - Nikola Tesla
Sadly, that's probably why they don't want to. Too much progress would be bad for their materialist sociopolitical dogma.
No because that isn't how science works!!! Science requires that you have proof and can verify your proof and said proof has to be able to replicated. We can't study non physical things what you want us to study souls.
non-physical does not mean non-material. he was referring to electromagnetism. science, by the nature of science, cannot study what we cannot interact with.
@@Skyfoogle- Is it possible that we can still observe what we cannot interact with? If I wanted to do a study on spontaneous healing for example I could still gather evidence for this phenomenon from the before and after. From there I could survey if there was any common correlations such as the person receiving prayer or having a particular spiritual experience. This phenomenon is quite common and has been observed and medically documented.
There a person could examine if they can rule out coincidence for all or part of their sample. Perhaps a criterion for what constitutes a miracle might be established. For example if the event had a low probability and was accompanied by an intelligence or purpose. If for example you were praying for protection as a home invader entered your house and then was struck by a meteorite in the head while trying to take aim to shoot you. Still the question remains “Is that odd or is that God?” Perhaps there’s a statistical significance to justify the use of prayer.
But we’re talking about actually doing the investigation. Is the purist materialist going to do actual science and try to disprove that materialism is all there is? Probably not even though their own minds and thoughts are not just a domino effect down the line of the Big Bang. Otherwise why would they think arguing with Creationism makes any difference since the Creationist is nothing more than a product of time and chance outside of their control set into motion by an explosion of time, energy and matter. But how the materialist believes borrows from the Creationist belief in free will. Since we can’t even have Materialism without Intelligent Design and the concept of mind it’s impossible to account for everything starting from pure naturalistic causes. So what purpose does it serve to force ourselves to try and understand everything through naturalistic logic when it’s insane to presuppose that the mind we use to understand the universe is itself an accident?
So we just blindly follow Creationist dogma?
I love that my son sent this video to me! Listening/watching this video just once is just not enough. It deserves to be watched/listened to several times. The first time around, my brain was so busy just taking in what he was saying. The second and third time I watched/listened to this video my mind began to process what he was saying. This is fascinating subject! Many thanks to those who made, and shared this video. I may be 60+ y/o, but I still love to learn! We have SO much more to learn about the human brain! I want to continue to learn up until the day the Lord calls me home!
This is one of those rare interviews that I watch again and take notes. Thank for posting.
That free wont concept totally makes sense..
It is our duty to resist
Free will is a burden at times
Man is more than body and mind. Man is a spirit that possesses a soul / mind and lives in a body
That's horrifying. Like we can never escape this nightmare. No rest ever. I certainly hope this nightmare idea is not true, I would just like to rest.
@@joecheffo5942you rest every time you sleep…I’m sure there are peaceful times in your life
Man is entirely and totally body, of which the mind is an integral part. The mind is the part which created such abstract concepts as "spirit" and "soul," two things we imagine but have never shown to exist as something separate.
The reality is that if you are rigid materialist, you can't do good science. LOVE THIS. Keep fighting people, we are beginning to win the information war.
One man's opinion. Atheism is increasing throughout the world so don't get too excited
A more accurate statement would be, "If you are a rigid dogmatic person, you can't do good science." "Science" is literally "knowledge" and more recently "the systematic study of the structure and behavior of the physical and natural world through observation, experimentation and the testing of theories against the evidence obtained." Only religion can make airy unfounded claims concerning the existence of supernatural entities and phenomena which have never been observed and thus cannot be studied.
I was an athiest recently but after doing my own personal research on conciousness I do believe that we at least have a soul whether it be quantum or other.
I believe that perhaps there is such a thing as an invisible matter that may account for our soul and or the invisible process of thought.
The implications are staggering! 😱 This was a great analysis! 💯
This is insane. This guy talks about it in such an easy to understand way it almost makes it sound obvious. Very profound stuff that most people are more than likely not attempting to integrate into their being.
Yeah, agree. Actually, it is obvious..."simple for the simple".
he explains how certain things the brain does are incredibly well localized, he then says certain things the brain does are less obviously well localized (which isn't 'quite true as electrical stimulation of small parts of the brain can make you feel emotion for one example) and says this is evidence for Dualism. Think about it, this doesn't prove anything, let allow our minds are made out of something bizarre that is immaterial and we have no evidence for.
@@davidjellyman7006
You betray a materialistic mindset when you say, “… our minds are made out of something bizarre that is immaterial …”
The point of this presentation is that our minds are not “made out of” anything. Thatʼs what “immaterial” means. “Immaterial” is not some other type of material; it means “no material involved.”
Much nonsense is so easy to understand that it almost sounds obvious, like, "When I look out across the prairie, I see no curve, therefore the earth is flat." or "there is so much profound stuff I don't understand, therefore god."
I just loved this video. "Behind the universe is a mind, a grand mind that is reflected in the way the universe works." What we see is not all there is.
Yes!!!! Behind the universe (curtain) is a mind, a grand mind (Oz) that is....."
18:55 "There's no sign of any brain activity when you decide not to comply"
Brilliant research Thank God for brilliant Scientists like you!
Thankyou - I was taking copious notes on this lecture - Michael Egnor makes numerous points about research that shows a differentiation between mind and the matter of the brain. Then speaks of the clearly dualist implications. Very well thought out - and thought provoking.
It was the materialistic issues (e.g., first cause, abiogenesis, failings of natural selection to provide a mechanism for macroevolution, massive coverups and poor science, etc. ) which led me to check out the dualist camp of an intelligent designer.
And I would like to learn at a deeper level these clear lines of reasoning in regard to mind, intentionality and free will which also point to the same conclusion.
A proper worldview should provide the best explanation in all areas - as truth does not contradict itself.
Matter cannot generate information, only a mind can do it. We receive information 24/7 , there is a universal mind that connects everything
I receive no information from your post, I guess the universal mind has blown a fuse.
That you noted it proves you did.
Why is it so difficult to understand that information lives in the abstract world of process and process is simply the behavior of matter? That mind isn't matter is abundantly obvious but that mind is the process of matter should seem equally obvious. Mind is abstract, immaterial. So is process but process is "of" matter so the assertion that mind is of matter in the same way should not cause any confusion. How it happens, well, that takes a pretty thick book to even begin to explain. Here's one that takes a pretty good shot at it... "Godel, Escher, Bach". Read it and you'll be in pretty good shape for understanding how.
I agree, but you wont convince an evolutionary Biologists
Equivocation.
(You are less skilled at dressing it up than the good doctor-but it's essentially a good summary of this whole video.)
In a universe of nothing but matter, nothing matters.
There is no reason in chance.
if materialism is true then you can have nothing to say about justice, other than what you can say with your fists
9000 years of forging ethical and moral codes, some based on christian beliefs, has gotten us closer to some sort of peace, but we still resort to fists, knives, guns and missiles far too often. Many of Europe's bloodiest wars have been between different sects of christians!
Sir John Eccles said that the brain is a computer that a ghost can operate.
[Edit] Sam Harris take note.
I never believed in materialism i am so glad i stuck to that belief.
the fact that humans can experience quantum mechanics with for example the douple gap experiment is evidence that there is more to this world than just matter
As CLEARLY documented, there IS anti-matter.
What there ISN'T is anything "paranormal", "supernatural", "spiritual" or "miraculous", which is why NEVER A PENNY of this money has ever been handed out:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_prizes_for_evidence_of_the_paranormal
Absolutly.
Wonderful lecture and conclusion. Materialism cannot explain awareness And, yes, purpose is the driver of everything and us all. I am sorry for all the Dawkins' of this world not to see the light.
Materialism explains awareness perfectly well; it is the chemical processes in the brain that operate when we are submitted to stimuli which interpret and organize the stimuli into meaningful grasp of surroundings and events...awareness.
I've been intrigued by the out of body experiences people have with near death experiences. Their consciousness leaves their bodies and functions independently of their brain activity. That tells me our consciousness is not generated by our brains.
Yes. NDE's that have included veridical perception, point toward and underline the fact that we are not our brains and that consciousness survives death and goes somewhere else after biological death. Some heaven/ dimension or reality is where we seem to travel after physical death of the body.
@@philosopher0076 I'm curious about #3 where Mr. Egnor says there are no "intellectual seizures," however, there are cases of "acquired savant syndrome" where a person develops profound mathematical or musical abilities following a brain injury.
@@romainvicta9793true
Love reading these comments
There is no basis on which to conclude that our consciousness is a separate entity. In dreams and even in conscious thoughts we are able to see ourselves outside of our bodies. Our consciousness is totally a function of our living brains, and disappears entirely when we die.
We are wonderfully made in the image of our Creator: Body, Soul & Spirit and Mind, Will & Emotion!
I don't necessarily hold to materialism, but, while I find these examples fascinating, they're not very convincing to me. There are plausible alternative explanations that would still need to be ruled out. For example, although higher thought is not localizable to one region of the brain, it may be distributed to neurons throughout the brain; it doesn't have to be the result of something immaterial.
have you done you statement in a lab and testing it?
I was thinking something similar. That is it possible that higher thought IS ensconced in material aspects of our brains and physiology but ... we just do not yet have the; understanding, knowledge, Skills, and measurement capability to monitor those activities? This is Sam Harris' refutation of the dualist argument, that these higher "thoughts" are indeed material but ... we just don't have the technical capability of proving it.
While this next statement of course proves nothing ... my gut tells me Harris is incorrect and the Aristotleans are right.Effectively, this video discussion is similar to others and dancing around the same concepts as those tackling the nature of consciousness. There are certain VERY important aspects of "being" that are not material and are simply never going to be explainable entirely by rational \ scientific means.
Joshua Veltman
The intelligence of the body has been overlooked. Not even considered. Perhaps I missed it.
Then what about the example of brain dead people being capable of responding to higher thought and even being capable of doing simple math? If they are vegatables, brain dead completely, even if it was localized neural networks, they wouldn't be able to maintain the complex order required to do higher thinking if the individuals brain effeciency was comparable to a cabbage. I would you ask if you had paused the video at the first example or if you went through them all. The hemispherical cutting in half was also quite a profound experiment, where higher thinking isn't impaired even if the brains were split in half. How then are the two brains communicating?
If it's distributed, how can it remain in tact after a surgery like severing the corpus callosum?
I might add another component to this: a person's "Will." Let me explain through my own example. This is not vanity, this is truth.
With everything that's happened to me medically: only some examples being a brain injury, the resulting surgeries, and in other life events such as Hurricane Katrina, many people are surprised I'm still sane, (including me). And, I've also suffered from epilepsy--partial frustrating seizures, not full harmful seizures.
A few years ago, doctors tried to diagnose where the seizures came from by putting me in a hospital, decreasing my meds, and seeing what might happen. And, they found the seizures--but, according to the brain patterns, the seizures should have knocked me out. But, again, just partial seizures. Still sane, only partial seizures--the reason is Me. My willpower must be separate from my brain. Otherwise I'd at least be insane and probably dead.
People with catastrophic brain damage are still self aware. They’re trapped in their inert body. That’s the most horrifying thing I’ve ever heard in my life.
The experiment that described the evidence for the existence of Free Will (or Free Won't) is extremely interesting to those of us interested in Christian Philosophy/Theology, Specifically Molinism vs. Calvinism.
I wish I had free will -- I could lose 40 pounds! LOL! JK. Actually, come to think, I need Free Won't.... Blessings, E.C.
YES!!!! I love that part! For me, the evidence he shares quite literally substantiates the verse from the Bible, Love the Lord thy GOD with all thy Soul all thy Heart and all Thy MIND! Also the last 2 sections clearly edify this point =) Cheers!
Double predestination is blown away by the writings of the early Church Fathers as well as multiple passages from the New Testament. It’s shocking anyone adheres to that dogma.
Science does not understand how the activity of the brain gives rise to the experience of consciousness. This is because consciousness (another word for "mind") is an epiphenomenon of the activity of the brain, just as the [experience of hearing a song] is an epiphenomenon of the radio wave that is the medium.
More importantly, this is strong evidence that the mind is primary and the experience of the phenomena we call matter is an epiphenomenon of the interaction of Planck-scale spacetimeenergymatter events over time. This is not only a refutation of materialism, it's a claim that mind (spirit) is primary. In the Judeo-Christian tradition, this revelation is expressed in Genesis, both in the creation of the material world (the universe) ex nihilo and the creation of the human person in the image of the divine Creator.
Since these truths cannot be proven experimentally, they will never be accepted by materialists. I hope Dr. Egnor would agree his examples support this interpretation.
Incredible intellect on display here, and further evidence that we are not just a collection of cells evolved from a mud-puddle. I only wish the camera person was as good at their job during this interview, the poor Dr is jumping all over the frame because it was apparently filmed with a phone being held by someone. Please consider a $20 portable camera stand, it would do wonders and can be kept in a vehicle or even a briefcase.
If me pointing out the shaky camera work makes this harder to watch, just listen to it, the interview works just as well in audio-only form. I do appreciate the work of the Discovery Institute and I don't mean to be critical, but please make an effort to do better for viewers in the future.
I proudly accept being a collection of cells from a really slimy mud puddle. Since evolution makes no assertions concerning the existence of a god, we can say that the spectacular process that led from slime mold cells to us humans could be evidence of some god's miraculous workings.
This video gave me chills. This is life-changing, world-altering stuff. I need a minute or 60.
Just two minutes into this and I keeping saying 'yes this is so good and so true' and I can't wait to listen the whole segment. It came at a right time when I need to write my essay. Thank you for uploading it !
So refreshing to listen to clear thought simply expressed, by someone who doesn't feel the necessity to impress the listener. And yet he is mighty impressive! Thank you for sharing.
This is an incredible presentation! Thank you!
This is such a lucid informative talk. Some of these experiments I had never heard of. Materialism is anti knowledge and unscientific.
Mind (the internal soul, syntropy) is dual to matter (the external soul, entropy) -- Descartes or Plato's divided line.
Teleological physics (syntropy) is dual to non-teleological physics (entropy).
Homology is dual to co-homology -- mathematics.
Reducing the number of dimensions or states is a syntropic process -- homology, hypervolumes become volumes which become surfaces or planes, planes become lines and lines become points which are zero dimensional.
Increasing the number of dimensions or states is an entropic process -- co-homology, points become lines, lines become planes, planes become volumes and volumes become hypervolumes.
Syntropy (prediction) is dual to increasing entropy -- the 4th law of thermodynamics.
From a converging, convex or syntropic perspective everything looks divergent, concave or entropic -- the 2nd law of thermodynamics.
All observers have a localized or syntropic perspective -- a focused attention.
My syntropy is your entropy and your syntropy is my entropy -- duality.
Duality creates reality.
"Always two there are" -- Yoda.
Ahh, but evolutionists/atheists need materialism or thier theories become obsolete.
I recommend Dr. Edward Fesers "Philosophy of Mind", he's a great modern thomistic philosopher & in his book he adresses all the alternative metaphysics.
I feel like my brain would have lit the lamps of an MRI machine had I watched this during an MRI procedure and my mind would’ve expected it to be so! Great vid!
If you want to prove that the mind is not material... do it. First demonstrate the existence of some sort of immaterial storage where it resides.
Showing that some functions are localized in parts of the brain and some aren't localized doesn't prove anything until you show where IT IS LOCATED and that place is OUTSIDE THE PHYSICAL BRAIN.
Assuming this Brain Surgeon has helped some of his patients, I wonder how often he repaired or removed something that wasn't material?
Calculus isn't material. Its concepts and understanding are explained and stored in books and in the brains of those who understand it. Those are all physical storage media, the existence of Calculus depends entirely on material reality. When the last storage media is loss, Calculus disappears entirely, only to reappear when another brain figures it out, stores it and pass it on.
He's making a terrible argument for dualism. But there is a good case for dualism. Conscious experience (mind) is just conscious experience. You don't have to prove where it is located, because *it is not located anywhere*. It's not a matter of physical storage. Unlike mystical dualism's claims, mind is absolutely dependent on, and is facilitated by, the brain - but it is not the brain.
thank you. I was listening to him thinking... wait of course abstract thoughts aren't localized to a particular "pea sized" spots in the brain. That's ludicrous. Consciousness and higher cognitive functions are made up of complex neural networks spanning across the brain through synaptic pathways that develop phenotypically. That is, through both nature and nurture.
It isn't even that complicated to understand. When I say the word "duck" You and I have a similar yet not identical understanding of the word duck due to the context of our personal experiences relating to "duck." to use a blunt example: If I say "duck" to Identical twins separated at birth. The parts of their brain that would light up in response to me saying that word would vary immensely if one of the twins got raped by a psycho in a duck suit and the other twin's adoptive father played hockey for the Anaheim Mighty Ducks and had memorabilia around the house growing up.
This guy is a big fail.
RCW
Numbers exist apart from you writing them down or having knowledge in your brain about them, they aren’t strictly in our head.
If you want to prove that there isn’t an object in a box, I don’t have to go and find the object to prove this, I can just open the box and show that it isn’t in there.
Biologist's have tried to explain biology without the concept of purpose and they can't do it. Wow. That little nugget is priceless.
I keep watching this over and over! Its amazing. 💯❤️
There once was a young man who said: "God - I think it exceedingly odd - That the sycamore tree - Continues to be - When there's no one about in the quad. - Dear Sir: Your astonishment's odd. - I AM always about in the quad, - and that's why the tree - continues to be, - observed by, - yours faithfully God”
The thing is this: believing in matter is believing in something we can never know. Like Kant pointed out, we can never experience a thing in itself, ONLY EVER our own PERCEPTION of it. You can only ever experience your own consciousness. Your experiences of matter is in fact only your experience of consciousness. So the only thing we can really know is experience. Believing in matter is a bit like superstition.
Wouldn't you need to have a mind in order for it to become diluted enough you to think you have a mind?
We cannot see the human mind, but we know that it exists by its effects. The same could be said of the universal mind, which we call God.
Michael: This was wonderful ... most helpful. Thank you so much for elucidating a lot of gray areas. I humbly submit a couple of ideas that you probably already understand, but which are fundamental to this lecture.
#1: We are a tripartite being created in God's image. He is Father, Son and Holy Spirit. We are spirit soul and body. These are separate and distinct entities. The inspired Scripture says, He formed man of the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and man became a living soul (Genesis 2:7). We must understand that we are a soul, we have a spirit, and we live in a body, (our spirit is God conscious, our soul is self conscious, and our body is world conscious) which brings me to point
#2: When we die our spirit and soul leave the body (this explains your surgeon friends inability to physically destroy the mind which is part of the soul).
Here are defining verses.
A. James 2:26 For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also.
B. Luke 8:54-55 But He ... took her by the hand and called, saying, "Little girl, arise." Then her spirit returned, and she arose immediately.
C: 1 Kings 17:21-22 And he ... cried unto the Lord, and said, "O Lord my God, I pray thee, let this child's soul come into him again". And the Lord heard the voice of Elijah; and the soul of the child came into him again, and he revived.
this is the extremely shortened version. More is available if you wish.
God bless you.
Rob Carpenter
Wow his point of teleology was brilliant. Nothing more needs to be said!
This is possibly the most interesting video I've ever seen. Thank you so much for sharing
Many nuero scientists are understanding that mind and brain are separate. Ebon Alexander another surgeon /scientists who had a NDE confirms that the mind continues beyond death. Amazing testimony. Shalom
‘All roads lead to God’ - putting together these wonderful talks on materialism and ‘the God hypothesis’ by Dr Steve Mayer, it all makes sense.
Absolutely fascinating interview, so telling of UA-cam that it has less than 200K views at the time of this comment - brilliant stuff
A really excellent interview. Thank you so much for posting this.
Wow, I've seen so many videos of Closer to Truth that investigates the mind and counciousness and Dr. Egnor was way more brilliant that so many experts on the subject.
I would really like to see an interview with Kuhn and Egnor.
And I would really like to see Dan Dennet's opinions on these topics. I doubt his theory can get an even bit close to explain these topics.
What about dementia or Alzheimer's? How does that reconcile with the points made here?
These individuals change a ton. What's the argument for the soul if these diseases can change the person so much?
I'm a Christian theist and I'm genuinely curious.
Maybe that is why he kept on stressing the concept of dualism; meaning that our mind is the result of two things. The physical brain and then something else embedded within the brain (our soul? Our true intellect?).
My understanding on these concepts is that the brain could be looked at more as a receiver than a producer. If you damage a radio, it may not work, or static, etc but the signal itself is still out there and fine... Just can't be picked up properly by the radio when it's damaged. So brain damage would do the same.. The signal would not be received properly any more and therefore... Well, static..
"The intellect is not the brain." Our minds are more than the physical brain. This supports the belief in a divine Creator who makes us in His eternal image.
Absolutely amazing. Thanks for producing this video
WOW, It's great to see a new video of Dr. Michael Egnor! I've been enjoying his easy to understand articles for a WHILE now! This is truly TOP NOTCH stuff! Thank you so much to all of you!!!
Dr Egnor is so interesting and easy to listen to, his voice, coordinated facial expression and mannerism merge to produce a very interesting and easily listened to interview. I would like to learn more, any recommendations that support the belief materialism of being at least insufficient and does not explain the mind?
Hallelujah! God is good! Thank you, Jesus!
Language is localized. Generally speaking, specific tasks that humans have done since there have been humans, those tasks have dedicated regions so they can be done more efficiently. Tasks that people do that are not usually necessary to survive, tasks where efficiency isn't crucial, those tend to be spread out and to use whatever brain resources are available to do those things.
If higher intellectual functions are not functions of the brain, but functions of a consciousness outside of the brain, can we develop an experiment to test this claim? Maybe we measure people's performance on some highly intellectual task, give random people a drug that could inhibit brain function, or just alcohol, and give a control group a drug that might make them feel strange but that does not inhibit brain function, and see if the two groups have comparable shifts in performance. What do you think would happen?
Oh look.. someone who actually understands how science works. First comment out of 100.
So in other words people must become experiment subjects to satisfy your ego. There are already many experiments done on humans, why do you need even more? What will that change? If you use drugs, the main functions of brain are going to trash. Any drug paralyzes the brain and keeps you in a state of dream, halusination etc. That has been done in previous years, from people that did not respect human rights, and you call for another similar experiment, instead of reading the conclusions of these people conclusions. Where or when will this experimental stage will stop? When will your ego is going to be satisfied? Why do you people want to be cruel to other people? How about if I'd take you and experiment on you, would you like to be my experiment subject thus, to make my own conclusions? Are you people mad on something. or someone?
This was FASCINATING !!!!! I LOVE IT !!!!! More like this Please!
This is an amazing video. What's with all the thumbs down? Atheists I presume. I love this mans perspective. Thanks Michael!
Thank you! I've been reading Dr. Egnors articles all through school.
All that I can say to this is ..hallelujah!!!!... awesome stuff. Thanks Michael Egnor.
Free Won't: that we are bombarded with a multitude of impulses, desires and exhortations to act. And we then decide essentially which impulse to comply with.
This is what God tells us and has revealed to us; our Flesh bombards our heart and mind with multiple impulses to act such as lie, speak, be honest, eat, eat some more, and higher actions such as greed, lust, ambition etc. One of those desires and impulses is the desire for the Good, or the impulse to do the Good. That is the Holy Spirit; that is God.
It is up to us to listen to that or not.
Great way to look at it.
never heard of the intellectual seizure argument it's hella amazing. also im new to this channel. love it!
Niether have I. It's a very good point to consider.
i wish i could talk the this guy for an hour or two.
The more you are free to think the more you find out. OC.
We have a mentality problem, and as long as it remains ignored the longer it will take to find answers.
When most picture the mind_ they see the brain. The mind is not a thing it is an activity.
An activity of a brain.
Daniel Doucet : I see it as a byproduct.
Yes!!!!
you really don't understand: the 'mind' is your councious activity in the perspective of your own experience as a subject. You cannot take away from the mind your subjective perspective as a sentient being and a thinker
How could this be explained?
A: Please sir, push the button to experiment...
B: Yes, (B pushes, brain on chemical reactions)
A: Please sir, push the button to experiment...
C: No, I dont want to.. (no brain chemical reactions)
What does this means?... Brain does not thinks by itself.. Good observation Mr. Egnor.
Great video. Let's have more like this.
The free-will vs free-won't comparison is fascinating to me experientially in my life. My free-will has been delayed for a few periods of time I was taking triazolam for sleep. The next day after adenosine receptor antagonist (caffeine) consumption I would find myself wanting to perform an action but realized it would take me a full 1-2 seconds after deciding that I would engage.
Also, the free-won't is a concept taught to baseball players in that we teach them to conceptualize and then engage every pitch as worthy of swinging at...but to then decide to not swing when their brain recognizes the pitch as unhittable or out of the strike-zone.
The part with "free won't" is amazingly funny 😄
Great video
Is it free-want or free-won't. The caption show the latter but I think it is the former. What do you think??
What an awesome video! So fascinating, exciting and scary. To have a soul and yet it being so limited by our functional bodies. Nice how some of the scientists he mentioned changed their mind based on their observations. Which is what science is.
While I am not a materialist in general, I do have to point out that lobotomies can and do destroy a persons personality, sense of self, and reasoning abilities. The pre-frontal cortex is "damaged" by a needle inserted to the side of the eye and produces drastic changes to mental states. How is this not a case for Materialism?
I figure every concrete/material "thing" has an "abstract" or immaterial level.
Example; writing on a page and its meaning.
meaning is all decoded inside our brains.
That would be complete minimization of the human experience IMHO.
Our purpose is beyond our understanding We see the basics and assume the purpose but really don't comprehend its overall purpose. When we are free from the constraints of the physical brain the essence of our being will be revealed.
and the ending was brilliant : what's the point of trying to make sense of no sense(no design, no purpose, no free will, no destiny )?
Because we're programmed to do it just like all many other animals higher who navigate their environment using their minds to make decisions that aid in their survival and often their comfort.
26:00 You can't explain the purpose of something without someone who determines its purpose, and that must be the one who created the thing.
So it’s not localized but it can be a shared among various locations.
Just Wow!! Very impressive! Enjoyed this very much. Going to think about it. Probably watch it again. It definitely shines another bright light on creation!
I suspect both idealism and materialism are misnomers. Probabilistic waves can be considered as early stage material. Materialism may be contradicted because it appears there's a very good chance consciousness is actually quantum... perhaps in a way that would've baffled Einstein. The long story short, materialism, in the traditional view, is at least incomplete but idealism may similarly need to be modified, as most things are only useful when in solid, material form. It may be apt to suggest each view represents a stage of existence. Dualism is probably the most accurate theory.
Fantastic video!
If higher cognitive functions are not localizable in the brain, then dualism is true. Nah.
Cutting the corpus callosum DOES show that the different halves have different answers to deeply personal questions. In fact, one patient has one half of the brain atheist and the other a theist. Again, nah.
Deep! Very much enjoyed this!
This is amazing!
What about mania, flight of ideas, hypergraphia and other examples of intellectual seizures?
should of used a tripod
I kind of like "The Office" vibe :)
When is the book coming out?
Materialism is a product of the mind.
Excellent discussion I am glad I come across this segment. Thank you discovery science.
Sorry...really quick... Is anyone in the comments actually listening to this guy? He is no producing evidence for his beliefs, he is proposing questions without answers and claiming they necessitate a creator and an immaterial mind. This guy may be a great surgeon, but logician he is not.
Whenever I hear someone say that there is is no specific location in the brain that serves as the centre for higher thought I’m always left wondering “why does there have to be a centre at all?”. I can see why there would be specific areas for basic motor functions but at higher levels of though the brain can use any neurons or collections of neurons it needs to to synthesize it’s ideas. Science has shown that any neuron is usable for multiple purposes and often something like a motor command may use different neurons every time. This implies to me that the brain is dynamic and doesn’t need to have local centres for higher contemplation. I really struggle with how people just jump to “the mind is fundamental”. Am I missing something?
What your missing is that if you are attempting to define the mind by materialistic means from the brain you pretty much have to do it by neurochemical computation. And if it is computation that makes up all out thoughts, dreams desires, and actions then there is no plasticity in that. Not when it comes to hardware. If you want to say that all neurons can somehow serve all functions then you need to justify why it can't with simpler things like motor control, but can with higher more complex things like abstract thought. You also have to explain why, and how the brain does sometimes alter which sections light up for the same sort of thinking phenomena.
Because not only is it plastic in regards to many things like that, but inconsistently so. You also have to justify how one person can recieve sever frontal lobe trauma and be irreconcilable changed, but another person can recieve the same, or even worse trauma, and keep their personality in tact.
Computation in a physical sense is not plastic. If you are trying yo explaine the mind materialisticly you need to say it's computation, and I acts nothing like computations.
6:34 - what if we already have multiple conscious perceivers, and only the most dominant prevails? What if that is the cognitive architecture?
So Plato, in the end, was right!
Once I had the same conversation with an Atheist. He quote Neil deGrasse Tyson "Consciousness is not real" . (An Astrophysicist)
Counterargument #4 It is very interesting that half of the people studied who were in a coma showed some relevant brain activity when they were asked questions. The conclusion to draw is that some people in comas still have parts of their brain that can work like a healthy person's, and are probably not the parts that are causing the coma. I don't see why this is evidence that materialism is wrong.
He is incorrect about the findings and conclusion of Roger Sperry's split-brain research. They found that a second self does emerge and the British consciousness research Anthony Peake writes about it in his books, in fact, Sperry's research seemed to inspire Anthony's title of his second book:
www.anthonypeake.com/product/the-daemon-a-guide-to-your-extraordinary-secret-self/
Neurosurgeon Michael Egnor started out sounding mechanistic in his argument to challenge materialism. That is he reported on studies that simply examined the functionality of the brain; specifically the relationship between the areas of the human brain to the body’s nervous system. The experiments used to study the brain were mainly done with applying external stimulus and noting the cause and effect of specific stimuli.
I was hoping for a discussion focused on the effects of psychedelic drugs i.e. LSD (Lysergic acid diethylamide). When small doses are taken, it can produce mild changes in perception, mood and thought. When larger doses are taken, it may produce visual hallucinations and distortions of space and time.
I can only go on what I have read and seen in documentaries but I am left thinking that LSD being a product of nature i.e. a substance found in ergot, which is a fungus that infects rye (grain). A substance that has been around and used by humans for thousands of years as a medium into the ‘spirit’ domain and to virtually catapult the human mind into patterns of thought that otherwise remained hidden from consciousness.
Brilliant exposé…..🙏❤️✌️