He might sound absurd, stubborn and crazy, but the fact is he is following all evidences. 'The rest of the physical world' only exists when my consciousness reaches out to perceive it. Otherwise there is no 'rest of the physical world'.
@ A P... Since I was arguably prolix in my main posted response, I'll be brief here in response to your principle assertion: Rubbish! But thanks for your opinion.
@Al Garnier open your eyes further. See the truth. Your assumption is that consciousness is confined in the brain. Go look at some scientific evidence that allows other wise. Your theory will then be flipped up side down
@Al Garnier From your perspective of consciousness being an emmergent property of the material your argument is sound. BUT, if you turn it around, which is what the video and debate is all about, then consciousness becomes a property which, by necessity, no longer resides purely within the human mind and therefore it is not necessary for an individual to be conscious of all events - only those with which they directly interact. So whilst an individual person may not be aware of the existence of the car that is going to run them over, there is at some level some consciousness which is and therefore both the car and the accident will come into being.
Al Garnier well as someone with a degree in physics and a masters in quantum mechanics I do have a reasonable idea about how physics works. You have completely missed the point I was making and, given your obvious lack of understanding, I guess we won’t get very far. I’m curious as to why you feel it necessary to insult people rather than offer constructive, rational arguments but again I doubt that we will get very far in trying to explore that line. A pity since I would like to have discussed this topic at a sensible level but that clearly is not the going to happen. Enjoy the sunshine.
@@GeoCoppens prove him wrong then since you are so certain. You sound miserable which is why you think people are nutcases for believing in conciousness being fundamental. I mean we are proof conciousness is a real property of reality, and has always existed, you think non concious and non intelligent processes are the bedrock of reality, now that is some very closed thinking, if all scientist thought like that we wouldn't be as advanced.
Oscar Carty A quark didn’t just randomly flip, if I scan a thousand attemp fails and discover the quark flip in my brain and decide to ergo Procto the Big Bang and own the flippin universe via merit. Alter Universe? Not in Kennard.
Nothing that I think is a random quark flip. I do it on purpose. I create reality for myself. Next stop: Sean Carroll, Neil DeGrasse Tyson, Lawrence Krauss, Leonard Susskind, Richard Dawkins, etc. must inform folk that the Big Bang was disproved by Duane Gruber in 2007.
If all consciousness ceased to exist, what would matter be? Well, it wouldn't matter much.
6 років тому+2
IMO Matter would still exist because of consistent preserved histories but in a universe where there was never consciousness, probably the universe would be just tensor networks or matrix product states.
My two favorite people. I love their ideas and the way they explain these topics. Helps make sense of theories, leaves it open to interpretation and further exploration.
"If humanity has any chance of maturing beyond its barely controlled adolescence, we're going to need a much better understanding of what consciousness is, and what it --- and by association all of us --- are really capable of."- Dean Radin (Real Magic 2018)
Congratulations mr Donald Hoffman on your excellent proposition on consciousness . Consciousness includes time and space within itself . It is the grand field in which all the time, space , all the four fundamental forces find their abode . Consciousness not only creates matter but supports it too . Individual consciousness is like cloud drops in the supreme consciousness . In Hindu scriptures Vishnu is the god of consciousness , who is the source of energy , who is much much faster than light and has entered everywhere as the sheet anchor of existence . The Vedic manthras state this and much more . But they are like theorems and parables which only devoted scientists like you can unravel .
Secret societies have known that consciousness causes the Cosmos for thousands of years. I like the tree and its leaves analogy best when it come to perceiving the different types of consciousness. Each person is like a single leaf with a simple awareness of what is around it while the tree itself is aware of far more, from all the leaves, branches and the whole tree including the roots and the whole system that makes the leaves possible. An individual leaf might care most about itself and it's immediate surroundings while the tree itself would care more about the wellbeing of the whole. Leaves could only theorize about the existence of roots which I has never seen and presume they perform their work behind the scenes making it all possible.
@ Guided Meditation... Have you considered that what lends secret societies that nomenclature is that their insider beliefs are, as a rule... *secrets* ?! But, of course, *you* have the evidence of the content and nature of these beliefs for thousands of years... [Sarcasm alert.]
@Al Garnier i dont think you have truely grasped what consciousness is and what this guy is saying. You cant have a universe of matter without some kind of consciousness to observe it or register it. It does not evolve from biology but may use biology to evolve itself.
@Al Garnier"Only believe proven science and nothing else, do not be open to different ideas and if you show me evidence or give me reasons to possibly believe new ideas without empirical evidence i will get extremely defensive and angry" dude you suck
What an awesome concept it is, that the fundamental reality is consciousness, not space, time , matter, or energy - all of those are derived from and secondary to the consciousness. Wow!
@@GeoCoppens it's the explanation that makes the most sense, if you're willing to set aside your attachment to the material illusion and what you think you know
1. Observer effect in quantum mechanics questioning true objective reality 2. Evolutionary argument that concious agents do not see reality as it is. 3. Concious experience of absolute consciousness and selflessness in meditators/drugs(DMT, LSD)/psychiatric states. I feel these three independent observations need to be reconciled in a single model to reach to the answer. The third might seem out of place but such experiential states are how very similar ideas have arisen in older eastern philosophies.
@@MrHardrocker98 “We fancy men are individuals; so are pumpkins; but every pumpkin in the field goes through every point of pumpkin history.” - Ralph Waldo Emerson
The kind of elegance you are looking for may be the Mahayana Lankavatara Sutra ; a discourse between Shakyamuni Buddha and one of his wisest recruits, Mahatmi. ^^
Mael-Strom Totally agree M-S. This is an extremely profound text and one which always makes me chuckle because essentially Buddha is stating that ALL views and models are ultimately void, including Buddhism itself. That, to me, is an impressive claim - one which gives me motivation to sit on my cushion and seek the Silence.
@@SolveEtCoagula93 Indeed, that profound text puzzled a lot of scholars and philosophers until quantum mechanics and the modern study of consciousness came about. It makes me smile every time I sit on my cushion. ^^
Can we skip floating back and forth through the idyllic background setting? Is it not enough to just sit across the table from each other and converse? The interviewer is in love with the idea and success of his brilliance.
absolutely , the problem is most scientist don't understand that our universe is much crazier than we think...And we don't think much..We don't even know why we sleep..Hoffman is daring to think outside the box
Tom Campbell hypothesized that the 'material world' is a virtual reality that evolved from primal consciousness. This would explain why newtonian and quantum worldviews can't be reconciled assuming the materialistic model. If the universe is does turn out to be a VR it would explain stuff like the double slit experiment, why the speed of light is a constant and many other things. Check out Tom's videos on UA-cam. Very interesting.
We evolved to think in terms of cause of effect. This is because of how we perceive time. Except that time does not exist the way we (or to be honest, "most people") perceive it (as something 'linear'). Once it's understood that time is not an actual thing, cause and effect fall through the bottom and new questions can be raised. Consciousness doesn't "cause" anything, it just "is" as much as Gravity "is" and we know about as much about gravity as we do about consciousness. Now you can argue that gravity 'causes' things to fall. But gravity doesn't just appear out of nowhere, it cannot be turned off, and things that fall as an effect of the gravitational field did not just appear there either. We like to create abstract models and calculate and explain things that way but 'reality' is not a closed and limited system. It just 'is'. And it is in motion - a perpetual motion - which because of philosophical victim stances cannot or should not exist (according to what or why not, then? Is there a moral argument in this mix? If so, what does morality have to do with physical reality?) Consciousness just 'is'. It's a system that biology taps into and utilizes as part of survivor mechanisms, just as it utilizes energy from light, chemical processes, physical properties.. brains utilize electrical and chemical processes which are paradoxically beyond comprehension to themselves. Through these processes they tap into consciousness and here we are. Is consciousness CAUSED by the brain? NO. Just as much as gravity is not CAUSED by a thing that falls as a result of being in the gravity field. Does gravity cause the thing to fall> The thing falls as an effect of being in the gravity field. But has to be in the field first, so the first cause is getting into the gravity field. Translated . Consciousness does not cause a brain to exist. The brain has to exist first to be able to tap into consciousness, and the brain evolved to become better at that, just like wings of birds evolved to optimize flight and manoeverability according to the survival needs of the various bird types. I can go on rambling like this. It's all very clear to me and I am convinced it can be clear to anyone who just takes the time (!) to let go of extraneously imposed philosophy and thought patterns.
This is as clearly as I could have expressed this very difficult set of interlaced thoughts, with which I entirely agree. I fully expect you've read Alan Watts, but if you have not, he's also highly articulate on these points. His reputation as a "mystical" thinker is really not accurate, though of course there are aspects/segments of his writings that verge in this direction. Thanks for the nice recitation . . .
I subscribe to all he says - and this is fully aligned with what Idealism postulates. The nature of reality is mental, not material. Read and watch also e.g. Bernardo Kastrup on this topic (PhDs in computer science and Philosophy).
So how can we test this speculation? Logically it is hard to unravel the circular logic whereby matter is a derivative of consciousness but if that matter is a brain, the consciousness appears to be a derivative of matter.
Great guy, relaxed and not too much zealous about his work. For him it's just a intellectual play. Finally we all will die, and possibly get some better explanation;)
Modern science says that from a singular mass that rapidly expanded and cooled, the entire universe and all in it, including the forces of nature that it all operates by, and including you and me and our supposed consciousness', all came into existence. BUT, does the universe and all in it actually exist per se, OR does only this singular mass exist in the form of all things? Same reality, two different perspectives. Which one is really true? Are they both true? Do "I" exist and yet not exist, depending upon the context? How could "I" ever cease to exist if "I" never ever existed at all in the first place? And if this singular mass wanted to exist as you and/or me for literally all of future eternity, couldn't it do so if it chose to do so? (This singular mass having a consciousness as evidenced by the consciousness you and I are supposedly experiencing).
Great questions, and we can only hope that as we explore this train of thought, rather than simply disregard as unprovable, that we can make progress into having a unified theory. It is both a scientific inquiry and a philosophical one.
soakedbearrd Thanks. Two things will be included in this post. First, my latest theoretical idea concerning the "TOE" (Theory Of Everything). Second, how to possibly prove proof of the idea and concept which could lead to artificial gravity and neutrino protections for space ships, bases, etc. And note: while this may or may not be really true, I lack the resources to currently prove it beyond doubt. But, I currently believe it to be true at this time. But of course if really true, then we will also have a better model to work with concerning the very nature of reality itself. First, my latest "TOE": THE SETUP: 1. Modern science currently recognizes four forces of nature: The strong nuclear force, the weak nuclear force, gravity, and electromagnetism. 2. In school we are taught that with magnetism, opposite polarities attract and like polarities repel. But inside the arc of a large horseshoe magnet it's the other way around, like polarities attract and opposite polarities repel. (I have proved this to myself with magnets and anybody with a large horseshoe magnet and two smaller bar magnets can easily prove this to yourself too). 3. Charged particles have an associated magnetic field with them. 4. Protons and electrons are charged particles and have their associated magnetic fields with them. 5. Photons also have both an electric and a magnetic component to them. FOUR FORCES OF NATURE DOWN INTO TWO: 6. When an electron is in close proximity to the nucleus, it would basically generate a 360 degree spherical magnetic field. 7. Like charged protons would stick together inside of this magnetic field, while simultaneously repelling opposite charged electrons inside this magnetic field, while simultaneously attracting the opposite charged electrons across the inner portion of the electron's moving magnetic field. 8. There are probably no such thing as "gluons" in actual reality. 9. The strong nuclear force and the weak nuclear force are probably derivatives of the electro-magnetic field interactions between electrons and protons. 10. The nucleus is probably an electro-magnetic field boundary. 11. Quarks also supposedly have a charge to them and then would also most likely have electro-magnetic fields associated with them, possibly a different arrangement for each of the six different type of quarks. 12. The interactions between the quarks EM forces are how and why protons and neutrons formulate as well as how and why protons and neutrons stay inside of the nucleus and do not just pass through as neutrinos do. THE GEM FORCE INTERACTIONS AND QUANTA: 13. Personally, I currently believe that the directional force in photons is "gravity". 14. I also believe that a pulsating singularity (which is basically a pulsating photon) is the pure energy unit. 15. When these pulsating pure energy units interact with other pure energy units, they tangle together. Various shapes (strings, spheres, whatever) might be formed, which then create sub-atomic material, atoms, molecules, and everything in existence in this universe. 16. When the pure energy units unite together they would tend to stabilize and vibrate. 17. I believe there is probably a Photonic Theory Of The Atomic Structure. 18. Everything is basically "light" (photons) in a universe entirely filled with "light" (photons). THE MAGNETIC FORCE SPECIFICALLY: 19. When the electron with it's associated magnetic field goes around the proton with it's associated magnetic field, internal and external energy oscillations are set up. 20. When more than one atom is involved, and these energy frequencies align, they add together, specifically the magnetic field frequency. 21. I currently believe that this is where a line of flux originates from, aligned magnetic field frequencies. NOTES: 22. The Earth can be looked at as being a massive singular interacting photon with it's magnetic field, electrical surface field, and gravity, all three photonic forces all being 90 degrees from each other. 23. The flat spiral galaxy can be looked at as being a massive singular interacting photon with it's magnetic fields on each side of the plane of matter, the electrical field along the plane of matter, and gravity being directed towards the galactic center's black hole where the gravitational forces would meet, all three photonic forces all being 90 degrees from each other. 24. As below in the singularity, as above in the galaxy and probably universe as well. 25. I believe there are only two forces of nature, Gravity and EM, (GEM). Due to the stability of the GEM with the pure energy unit, this is also why the forces of nature haven't evolved by now. Of which with the current theory of understanding, how come the forces of nature haven't evolved by now since the original conditions acting upon the singularity aren't acting upon them like they originally were, billions of years have supposedly elapsed, in a universe that continues to expand and cool, with energy that could not be created nor destroyed would be getting less and less dense? My theory would seem to make more sense if in fact it is really true. I really wonder if it is in fact really true. 26. And the universe would be expanding due to these pulsating and interacting pure energy units and would also allow galaxies to collide, of which, how could galaxies ever collide if they are all speeding away from each other like is currently taught? DISCLAIMER: 27. As I as well as all of humanity truly do not know what we do not know, the above certainly could be wrong. It would have to be proved or disproved to know for more certainty. Second, a possible proof for the idea and concepts: Create a matrix of laser lights that are directed through an electric field of a polarizer. This should polarize the EM of the laser lights which should also then polarize "G" (gravity, gravity being the directional component of the photon). Depending upon which way the light was being polarized, could potentially have artificial gravity, anti-gravity, or whatever the natural environment was just by flicking a switch one way or another or by turning the system off. And of course, a propulsion unit to help propel space ships too. If true, this could also possibly help with neutrino impacts on the astronauts, ships, bases, quantum computers, equipment, etc., if done right.
Fascinating insights, although I am not a physicist, nor a scientist, I am well read in the area of study and am able to follow what you are saying. Thanks for that info, I need to digest it a little more!
soakedbearrd Thank you again. I believe everything in existence in this universe can be deduced down into pure energy units interacting with other pure energy units at it's most basic level. Hence, consciousness, thoughts, and memories are all just energy interacting with other energy. But, while energy is everywhere and in everything for it to even exist in this universe, it currently appears that consciousness, thoughts, and memories only occur when the energy interactions are arranged in basically a specific way (ie: a physical brain). But, if it happened here on Earth by whatever means it actually did, then certainly it could occur elsewhere in this vast universe. And, as we truly do not know what we do not know, it would seem to leave the door open to the possibility at least that consciousness, thoughts, and memories could occur by other means besides just as related to a physical brain. As a truthseeker, a person has to keep their mind open to other potential possibilities.
taking the above-told theory, this is what eastern way approaching has said to us that consciousness is the main thing that projects reality to us. to see the absolute reality we must have nothing but pure consciousness to see the ultimate truth that reality is. Hinduism says that this really is "The Brahman" which is the source of everything i.e. consciousness everything there is existing is the manifestation of this infinite continuum of consciousness. that is what Hoffman is trying to put in theory. Buddhism says that Consciousness comes from the void. they say that consciousness is an integral element in our experience of reality as it is otherwise they say that it wouldn't be an experience at all. well, the problem is that this is not how science works and that's why one can say that objective way of viewing reality will not show us the true reality when we consider consciousness as fundamental because when we have an objective approach the subjective experience must not be brought as science is a way in which experimental results must agree by many. while one cannot trust other subjective experience as it not measurable by an objective approach this where the study of consciousness is so difficult. while science is objective and Hinduism and Buddhism is completely subjective one cannot know. can they be thought of as the study of reality? is my main question. and I think both have many parallels in them. to have an open mind is what I am trying to do.
1: What he is saying is that there is nothing to separate your consciousness from mine. 2: Because he is saying that there's nothing that separates one consciousness from another, he is saying that there's only One consciousness... 3: This is what is known as Solipsism. 4: Consciousness requires some form of "container" for which it to occur in, otherwise we are saying that consciousness itself is a substance, OR we are saying that No "physical" substances exist, and we are thereby saying that nothing exists - and if we are saying that nothing exists, then there'd be no consciousness.
WHWWD And Philosophy Nope that’s not what he is saying 1. He describes physical reality as icons (Icons on Desktop on your pc doesn’t say anything about reality ) so space and time are just useful tool for conscious agents. ( so there is no space time or 3d world as there is no physical email icon in somewhere your pc ) 2. He doesn’t say there is one consciousness He says these icons represents the conscious agents which build fundamentally the deeper reality ( remember matrix the only difference is that those green 0s 1s are conscious and when you wake up from your dream state you wake up not in another physical reality but in 0s and 1s world) 3. Imagine network of conscious agents just like matrix. Then theses conscious creatures or network create internal icon and some data structure to hide the truth and complexity of these deeper information. (Other conscious creatures) The you as one of these conscious agent or assemble of these conscious agents don’t see the real reality “ the green matrix of conscious agents.” you see desktop background which is constructed by your Perception.
Not enough for the label of solipsism in my view. He doesn’t specify in this video his view of other conscious agents. If they act as a collective consciousness, or are we participators versus creators of the physical.
Consciousness being the cause of our perception of space and time? Wild. Who knows, maybe it’s true. I love Donald Hoffman’s work; there were some very intriguing claims and questions posed here for sure.
Conscious beings come from outside of Time. The Universes were created to house the Holographics of our Worlds and Galaxies and various Dimensions. The Conscious Singularity does Create the Worlds of Creation inside of Time and then parts off "Us" and sends us into the Creations it has created. It is a Miracle and we as Conscious Beings -- keep right on creating once we get into these Created Realms that were created from OUTSIDE of Time.
Truth as a static structure vs a dynamic system. To simplify, think of a stack of copy paper with one word on each page. In time, we see each page one at a time, outside of time all of the words, on all of the pages combine to make a single word. This single word is truth, it is the entire story, told in an instant of time. The fractal version of this story has another feature. As each page is presented to us, our intent creates a slightly new meaning that branches out, changing the story, an effect that turns the stack into a tree like structure. The direction of time's arrow is the breaking of the symmetry of the potential of the boundary condition. In other words, if I toss a coin and it has perfect symmetry of potential it will land heads half the time and tails half the time. The symmetry of the potential is broken if the coin tosses are not 50/50. In a perfectly random system, after a sufficient number of tosses, the symmetry for all even number tosses would always be 50/50. Coin tosses are a lot like squaring the circle. You get closer and closer to the true value but you never reach it, like an infinite recursive iteration. If meaning is always fluctuating then we do not ever really see truth, what we see are truth values. In the example of the coin tosses, We have a resolution that gives us a value something like yes that is definitely heads. But if the time scales are very small, we can't see the result of the toss long enough for it to register, and if the scales are very long. we would not live long enough to see the result of the toss. We appear to be right in the middle of these scales. Is this a coincident?
Because the collective consciounce has a subconscious mutual agreement that it exists it being consciousness. The blind man still lives in the quantum realm and exists simply because he exists.
Hoffman’s TED Talk explains his ideas much better than this. His theory on perception of reality is really smart and refreshing. This makes it sound all over the place. He’s also very open to the fact he may be dead wrong.
Absolutely ridiculous. Post modernism applied to the physical universe itself. Mathematical relativism if you like. A bat see's no light because there is no light, a human see's light because there is light. Both are right. Therefore the bat and the human are sharing 2 overlapping dimensions? Because he can make the maths work
I think that modern physics has definitely decided in favor of Plato. In fact the smallest units of matter are not physical objects in the ordinary sense; they are forms, ideas which can be expressed unambiguously only in mathematical language.” Heisenberg
He is saying that all, you or any one else for that matter, knows of so called reality is the experience in consciousness. No one has ever experienced that what we call reality out side consciousness. So we only presume that there is a independent reality that we observe as separate subjects and that is just a belief or presumption. All we know is this first person subjective experience and the content of that experience being perceptions, feelings, thoughts and sensations. That is what reality is made of and we can not experience it any other way.
Both parties seem unaware of an essential (and ancient) philosophical distinction at play here - that between Idealism and Realism. Idealism maintains that reality as a whole is constituted by minds (or mind) and that it has no existence all its own independently of mind. Realism maintains the very opposite - that there is a reality beyond mind and it has its existence independently of mind (regardless of the _nature_ of that independently existing reality and of the various ways we may have of interpreting or perceiving it). On this issue, science is of no help. Science would remain the same in the sense that all the empirical evidence, measurements and observations we could gather would remain the same regardless of which is true. It is a purely philosophical matter - a metaphysical matter. I suspect that Philosophical Overdose (below somewhere) has it right in suggesting that Hoffman is a kind of Berkeleyan immaterialist. But that, too, is a purely philosophical thesis. All the science, again, would be consistent with it. On the whole, this video is about issues where the distinction between science and philosophy is essential but goes largely unobserved, especially by scientific sorts. Its absence plays havoc with their understanding and leads them simply to re-invent philosophical wheels that have already been in place and argued about over many centuries.
Consciousness causes the cosmos is more of a speculative stance that can never be empirically verified. But with the arising of consciousness, the concept of cosmos is constructed, conceived, or manifest in our mind and understanding is our collective subjective reality.
The normal materialistic view is full of holes. Something always existed. In my view it is nondimensional conciousness. We already know there is no self and that energy can neither be created or destroyed, the law of thermodynamics. And to refer to "accidents" seems very childish when we also know everything is moving with precision. Science will never end and continue to revise beliefs w each passing year. Raw experience is our only tool.
right, 'raw experience is our [rather say mine- because it must be individual] only tool'. And in this experience the 'something' that always existed is... nothing. However, nothing IS. This isness makes it be/exist in the impersonal, formless, spaceless and eternal, all pervading Being, which is I [n.b. but not i- this is the paradox: it is i that becomes/has always been 'I' by leaving behind/transcending the body-mind-world that rise together creating the illusion of the universe]. The scientist that puts consciousness under the microscope starts from a false premise that he is in charge of dissecting and analyzing something that is beyond mind. If they were only able to unglue the label they put on themselves as 'thinkers' and just be perhaps they would be free from all the prejudices that their 'scientific' minds limit their freedom to see reality.
J Money it looks like this is an universal issue- understanding the illusion aspect of the mind made reality and yet indulging in the illusion... mindless [mindful?]. Yes, the culture and the practice of it for 2, 3, 4... 44 decades is a real challenge for living in accordance with the reality we know at the intellectual level but once the truth known you cannot fully get back to living in ignorance [i.e. knowingly, this time]. So it appears we are stuck but it is only an appearance as all else... Anyway, i feel that trying to detach oneself from me and mine is another step towards renouncing the lie. Long story short- i'd rather think in terms of mind instead of 'my' mind... getting rid of all the possessive pronouns helps, including yours, ours, theirs.... Because me and mine/you and yours create separation and you get into the situation of the scientist who is stuck within the self-imposed limits of his labels
wow @Daisilui you summed up what l have been tell most people about possession and ownership and the rabbit whole they lead those that indulge in them. I say ownership leads to entitlement,entitlement comes with a title, the title becomes an identity and wherever there is identity there is a fight to keep it. for example 'my' wife [ownership], leads to only l can have sex with her [entitlement].why? because l am 'her' 'husband' [title + identity]...and anything that challenges the wife or husband identity will be seen as a threat and treated as such... the answer l always say to people is 'own and identify with nothing' so that you aren't limited by that which comes with owning and identifying with things. Anyways you sure have an intriguing outlook on things @Daisilui l sure would love to pick your brain on other concepts/ideas. is there a way l can get a hold of you?
This is an ages old question not easily solved. It boils down to Aristotle's inquiry into the subject. In short, the universe IS Consciousness, what Aristotle called "Being-In-Itself". One can easily tap into and merge with That Pure Consciousness by accessing "Mahamritunjaya mantra - Sacred Sounds Choir". Listen to it for 5 min per day for at least two weeks or more. The question of causation was not adequately answered by Aristotle, , who used the exprression "Unmoved Mover" in his books. That's just a talking point, not an explanation. Shankara provided a possible explanation in verse 21 of his Saundarya Lahiri by positing that the Shakti of the Divine Mother was a sort of connecting link to the initial causes. (Again, not completely satisfying). Put another way, how can the '"objects" of the universe be simultaneously Unmoving (Pure Consciousness), and at the same time eternally Moving? This is the Buddhist Principle of the "Simultaneity of Oneness and Difference". The question could very well be unanswerable. It's best to tap into and merge with IT, and explore the Mystery for yourself. Some questions are simply Mysterious.
'Its a free country - say whatever you want.' Right. You can be as big a smug presumptive materialist as you like. Doesn't make you right or even a decent interviewer.
I'll throw another idea into the Reality discussion: Time. Suppose you could see from a different time scale, where eons are seconds, and nothing last long enough to even be called "solid." Same reality, but vastly different. Then there's the ultimate idea of "Block Time", where nothing ever "happens."
Yet, what confuses me is that the only way we know that is because we’ve observed that. I donk think your statement is as conclusive as you think and many physicists aren’t so quick to accept that claim too.
Gonna be hard to see how we can run experiments to test this hypothesis. I think consciousness is an emergent phenomena from just higher forms of complexity. If we ever get to the singularity, then that would be one method of proving this hypothesis.
When you interview someone and end up talking more than them. Now that I've watched a few more of these videos I do really appreciate his probing style. But the beginning of this was a bit much.
Consciousness obviously creates an awareness of one's existence and one's view of the world, but it doesn't follow that consciousness creates the material world. To think this is, ironically, is to actually deny the possible delusions your consciousness allows you to imploy.
Quantum physicists don't say that things don't exist without the act of observation. They say that things don't have specific properties, such a position, mass and movement, until they are observed. I don't think that is quite the same thing.
@@visancosmin8991 So let me get this right, you are happy to be pedantic about the definition of “things”, and whether they exist, but you are fine to make an entirely unsubstantiated statement that “consciousness is all there is” and expecting to get away with that???? Listen, you might be right but it’s pretty flimsy. Reality might be consciousness experiencing itself subjectively. But, even if we could prove that, it doesn’t provide any support for consciousness being “all there is”. IMO.
That is the problem his ideas are unfalsifiable this unscientific. And whether there is consciousness or not changes nothing....the universe doesn't have a point , a purpose or meaning. Those are qualities projected by observers and they need to be demonstrated as Intrinsic features....not assumed.
@@nickolasgaspar9660 his ideas are very much falsifiable, and very scientific. It’s a rigorous scientific theory based on mathematical theorems and proven theories (evolution)
@@cashglobe well a universe exists independently of our subjective conscious states. So what we are subjectively aware of has nothing to do with its state of existence.
@@cashglobe Ok so pls present the falsification method of his "mathematical theorem". Now his supernatural claims are not supported by evolution. He assumes a disconnection between physical structures and how we have evolved to perceive them. We have developed scientific methodologies to verify our perceptions. How can he ever test those methodologies and find them to be inaccurate???? Btw we don't have a mathematical variable for "consciousness" so I don't know what kind of mathematical theorems he is talking about.
The Law myoho-renge-kyo represents the identity of what some scientists refer to as the ‘unified field of all consciousnesses’. In other words, it’s a sound vibration that is the essence of all of existence and non-existence, the ultimate creative force behind planets, stars, nebulae, people, animals, trees, fish, birds, and all phenomena, manifest or latent. All matter and intelligence are simply waves or ripples manifesting to and from this core source. Consciousness (enlightenment) is itself the true creator of everything that is, ever was and ever will be, right down to the minutest particles of dust, each being an individual ripple or wave. The big difference between chanting Nam-myoho-renge-kyo and most other conventional prayers is that instead of depending on a ‘middleman’ to connect us to our state of enlightenment, we’re able to do it ourselves by tapping directly into it by way of self-produced sound vibration. On the subject of ‘Who or What Is God?’, when we compare the concept of ‘God’, as a separate entity that is forever watching down on us, to Nichiren’s teachings, the true omnipotence, omniscience and omnipresence of what most people call ‘God’ is our enlightenment, which exists nowhere else but within us. When the disciples asked Jesus where the Kingdom of God is, didn’t he tell them that it was within them? Some say that ‘God’ is an entity that can never be seen. I think that the vast amount of information that is constantly being conveyed via electromagnetic waves gives us proof of how an invisible state of ‘God’ could actually exist. It’s widely known that certain data being relayed by way of electromagnetic waves has the potential to help bring about extraordinary and powerful effects, including instant global awareness of something or mass emotional reaction. As well as many other things, it’s also common knowledge that these waves can easily be used to detonate a bomb or to even enable NASA to control the movements of a robot as far away as the Moon or Mars. However, none of this is possible without a receiver to decode the information that is being transmitted. Without the receiver, the information would remain impotent. In a very similar way, it’s important for us to have our ‘receiver’ switched on so that we can activate a clear and precise understanding of our life, all other life and what we and all else that exists truly is. Chanting Nam-myoho-renge-kyo helps us to achieve this because it allows us to reach into the core of our enlightenment and switch it on. That’s because the sound vibration of myoho-renge-kyo represents the combination of the three major laws that underlie all existence. Myoho represents the Law of latency and manifestation (Nature) and consists of two alternating states. One state of myo is where everything in life that’s not obvious to us exists. This includes our stored memories when we’re not thinking about them, our hidden potential and inner emotions whenever they’re not being expressed, our desires, our fears, our wisdom, happiness, karma, and more importantly, our enlightenment. The other state, ho, is where everything in Life exists whenever it becomes obvious to us, such as when a thought pops up from within our memory, whenever we experience or express our emotions, or whenever a good or bad effect manifests from our karma. When anything becomes apparent, it simply means that it has come out of the state of ‘myo’ (dormancy/latency) and into a state of ho (manifestation). It’s simply the difference between consciousness and unconsciousness, being awake or asleep, or knowing and not knowing something. The second law, renge, governs and controls the functions of myoho, ren meaning cause and ge meaning effect. The two laws of myoho and renge, both functions together simultaneously, as well as underlies all spiritual and physical existence. The final and third part of the tri-combination, kyo, is what allows the law myoho to be able to integrate with the law renge. It’s the great, invisible thread of energy that fuses and connects together all Life and matter, as well as the past, present and future. It is often termed the Universal Law of Communication. Perhaps it could even be compared to the string theory that some scientists now suspect exists. Just as our body cells, thoughts, feelings and all else are constantly fluctuating within us, everything in the world around us and beyond is also in a constant state of flux, in accordance with these three laws. In fact, more things are going back and forth between the two states of myo and ho in a single moment than it would ever be possible for us to calculate or describe. And it doesn't matter how big or small, important or trivial that anything may appear to be, everything that’s ever existed in the past exists now or will exist in the future, exists only because of the workings of myoho-renge-kyo. These three laws are also the basis of the four fundamental forces and if they didn't function, neither we nor anything else could go on existing. Simply put, all forms of existence, including the seasons, day and night, birth, death and so on, are all moving forward in an ongoing flow of continuation, rhythmically reverting back and forth between the two universal states of myo and ho in absolute accordance with renge and by way of kyo. Even stars are dying and being reborn in accordance with the workings of what the combination myoho-renge-kyo represents. Nam, or Namu, on the other hand, is a password or a key; it allows us to reach deep into our life and fuse with or become one with myoho-renge-kyo. On a more personal basis, nothing ever happens by chance or coincidence, it’s the causes that we’ve made in our past, or are presently making, that determine how these laws function uniquely in each of our lives from moment to moment, as well in our environment. By facing east, in harmony with the direction that the Earth is turning, and rhythmically chanting Nam-myoho-renge-kyo for a minimum of ten minutes daily, anyone can experience actual proof of its positive effects in their life. In so doing, we can pierce through even the thickest layers of our karma and activate our Buddha Nature (the enlightened state). We’re then able to summon forth the wisdom needed to challenge, overcome and change our negative circumstances into positive ones. It brings forth the wisdom that can free us from the ignorance and stupidity that is preventing us from accepting and being proud of the person that we truly are, regardless of our race, colour, gender or sexual preference. We are also able to see and understand our circumstances and an environment more clearly, as well as attract and connect with any needed external beneficial forces and situations. Actual proof soon becomes apparent to anyone who chants the words Nam-myoho-renge-kyo on a regular daily basis. Everything is subject to the law of Cause and Effect, so the strength of the result from chanting depends on dedication, sincerity and determination. To explain it more simply, the difference could be compared to making a sound on a piano, creating a melody, or producing a song and so on. NB: There are frightening, disturbing sounds and there are tranquil and relaxing sounds. It's the emotional result from any sound that can trigger off a mood or even instantly change one. When chanting Nam-Myoho-Renge-Kyo each day you are producing a sound vibration that is the password to your true inner-self - this soon becomes apparent when you start reassessing your views on various things, such as your fears and desires etc. The important way to get the best result when chanting is not to see things in a conventional way (difficult to achieve but can be done), rather than reaching out to an external source, you need to reach into your own life and bring your needs and desires to fruition from within, including any help that you may need. Think of it as a seed within you that you are bringing sunshine and water to in order for it to grow, blossom and bring forth fruit or flowers. It’s important to understand that everything that we need in life, all the answers and potential to achieve our dreams, already exist within us. ua-cam.com/video/6CZ0XJqWRr4/v-deo.html OLIVIA NEWTON-JOHN sings about Nam-myoho-renge-kyo
What I want to know is if there is any empirical evidence with regard to how many angels CAN dance on the head of a pin??? My understanding is that everything is one thing, and nothing is separate, the observer and the observed is only an aspect of that reality.
Not really. He’s just being a devils advocate because that’s his job. On the whole he’s quite even handed when he speaks to scientists philosophers etc
If human consciousness creates the cosmos, why are we making some of it so horrible? Does this mean that when perceiving some awful event, instead of thinking its Gods will/fate/bad luck, we should ask - 'why did we create this?'
Knowing precedes the existence of all things...Consciousness is the ONLY thing that is capable of knowing, ergo Consciousness _is existence itself and _*_Knowing is the essence of existence..._*
The Logical Error here is that at 0:40 he mentions "conscious agents" however an "agent" is the medium by which information is transported somewhere or to someOne, we are trying to find that Some-One, the language he uses and the logic he follows is slightly-off, the intention by which he operates is correct, consciousness must be explored.
From where does consciousnesses arises and how it arises cannot be found. Once an organism or species is alive we can see how it behaves and how conscious it is.
Honestly discussing physics is a de facto objective idealist conversation. The materialist must use very careful linguistics like "causal relation" and "spacetime interval" to even cope with one's lightcone's "elsewhere". Physicialism's privilege is only nativity, as in naive realism. Once one begins the metaphysical journey, they must either depart from naïveté OR deeply invest in materialist woo. All objective idealism requires is one recognize that length contraction and time dilation are ongtological. This flattens spacetime to the rest frame. All particles are then "mental" constructs as in they are experienced AS possessing these objective qualities of time and geometry from our A-theoretical phenomenal space, which is an false objective space.
Consciousness has different levels. One level has the ability to assume an identity and observe. This is the lowest level that allows the consciousness to actualize from the energy field. Another higher level has this and also has the ability to act. As you go higher in consciousness, there is the ability to consider, to mentally project choices. Later comes the awareness of self as an awareness separate from that which has been actualized out of the energy field. And so onward and upward.
The laws of physics remain the same for everyone even when consciousness gets altered. That in itself makes these claims problematic. I can't "observe" gravity away, even if I eat mushrooms that make me think I can fly I'll still fall down at the same acceleration of 9,81 m/s2.
Assuming induction, for starters. However, on that track you have to deny knowledge altogether. So that worldview has no explanatory power whatsoever, nor any force in making truth claims.
In the Buddhist teaching known as the Heart sutra it is explained that consciousness is not fundamental, it is still part of the illusion. More ‘fundamental’ still is Shunyata - but this lies ‘outside’ of time/space, outside of dualism and cannot be expressed using words. It follows that anything that can be expressed in words, thoughts or ideas is not ‘fundamental’ but is part of the illusion. Whilst consciousness may gives rise to the material, there is also that which gives rise to consciousness. (I have realsied that I am using the term 'dualism' in a different sense to that which is used in the video. In the video the dualism referred to is that of mind/body conflict - I am using it in the more mystical sense, as say used in the Vedas and Upanishads, that in our perception each property or quality we speak of has to automatically give rise to its opposite eg left/right, up/down, good/bad, existence/non-existence, etc., etc..)
With respect to the physicists, for the record, consciousness does not collapse the wave function. The wave function collapses when IN PRINCIPAL, which path information can be determined from an experimental setup. Of course it is just as strange that nature somehow 'knows' to collapse the wave function in such conditions.
FYI, Jesus... "Cause" (and effect) hasn't been a very useful or applicable concept in physics since smart people realized the fundamental laws are time symmetric... a long, long time ago.
He's incredibly and refreshingly honest about what he's sure about and what he's assuming
He might sound absurd, stubborn and crazy, but the fact is he is following all evidences. 'The rest of the physical world' only exists when my consciousness reaches out to perceive it. Otherwise there is no 'rest of the physical world'.
@ A P... Since I was arguably prolix in my main posted response, I'll be brief here in response to your principle assertion: Rubbish!
But thanks for your opinion.
@Al Garnier open your eyes further. See the truth. Your assumption is that consciousness is confined in the brain. Go look at some scientific evidence that allows other wise. Your theory will then be flipped up side down
@Al Garnier From your perspective of consciousness being an emmergent property of the material your argument is sound. BUT, if you turn it around, which is what the video and debate is all about, then consciousness becomes a property which, by necessity, no longer resides purely within the human mind and therefore it is not necessary for an individual to be conscious of all events - only those with which they directly interact. So whilst an individual person may not be aware of the existence of the car that is going to run them over, there is at some level some consciousness which is and therefore both the car and the accident will come into being.
Al Garnier well as someone with a degree in physics and a masters in quantum mechanics I do have a reasonable idea about how physics works. You have completely missed the point I was making and, given your obvious lack of understanding, I guess we won’t get very far. I’m curious as to why you feel it necessary to insult people rather than offer constructive, rational arguments but again I doubt that we will get very far in trying to explore that line. A pity since I would like to have discussed this topic at a sensible level but that clearly is not the going to happen. Enjoy the sunshine.
Donald Hoffman is underrated! Love his TED talk.
He's a crackpot!
@@GeoCoppens right... And you know... Go make out with a bottle.
He's definitely asking the right questions.
@@visancosmin8991 There is no reasoning against certified nutcases!
@@GeoCoppens prove him wrong then since you are so certain. You sound miserable which is why you think people are nutcases for believing in conciousness being fundamental. I mean we are proof conciousness is a real property of reality, and has always existed, you think non concious and non intelligent processes are the bedrock of reality, now that is some very closed thinking, if all scientist thought like that we wouldn't be as advanced.
The cinematography in this conversation is IN-CREDIBLE!!
Who wants to see a discussion between Hoffman and Sean Carroll.
Yes, that would be entertaining... in the manner of the Washington Generals contesting the Harlem Globetrotters!
@Explicit Relativity why
Oscar Carty
A quark didn’t just randomly flip, if I scan a thousand attemp fails and discover the quark flip in my brain and decide to ergo Procto the Big Bang and own the flippin universe via merit.
Alter Universe?
Not in Kennard.
@@derdagian1 that made absolutely 0 sense. I don't understand your slang
Nothing that I think is a random quark flip. I do it on purpose. I create reality for myself. Next stop: Sean Carroll, Neil DeGrasse Tyson, Lawrence Krauss, Leonard Susskind, Richard Dawkins, etc. must inform folk that the Big Bang was disproved by Duane Gruber in 2007.
If all consciousness ceased to exist, what would matter be? Well, it wouldn't matter much.
IMO Matter would still exist because of consistent preserved histories but in a universe where there was never consciousness, probably the universe would be just tensor networks or matrix product states.
will be like having a hardware without a software
L7 it would not matter at all.
yes it would; no evolution without the universal consciousness. big bang it self triggered by consciousness.
consciousness has an effect even on subatomic particles
My two favorite people. I love their ideas and the way they explain these topics. Helps make sense of theories, leaves it open to interpretation and further exploration.
"If humanity has any chance of maturing beyond its barely controlled adolescence, we're going to need a much better understanding of what consciousness is, and what it --- and by association all of us --- are really capable of."- Dean Radin (Real Magic 2018)
ITs all energy and vibration, see the world from the perspective of love and you will understand consciousness thoroughly.
Also refreshing to have someone questioning Hoffmans assumptions unlike most interviews I've seen.
@@visancosmin8991 where can I find that example?
@@visancosmin8991 touché lol! I was hoping there was a specific video in which he used it you had in mind
He has the intellect to do it .
Congratulations mr Donald Hoffman on your excellent proposition on consciousness . Consciousness includes time and space within itself . It is the grand field in which all the time, space , all the four fundamental forces find their abode . Consciousness not only creates matter but supports it too . Individual consciousness is like cloud drops in the supreme consciousness . In Hindu scriptures Vishnu is the god of consciousness , who is the source of energy , who is much much faster than light and has entered everywhere as the sheet anchor of existence . The Vedic manthras state this and much more . But they are like theorems and parables which only devoted scientists like you can unravel .
That’s what I love about scientists. They are truth seekers first and foremost.
Unfortunately, Ithink most "scientists" would disagree with him
Truth seeking scientists like Einstein are very rare. Most are just narrow lab specialists.
Finally, someone gets it 100% correct. Well done Mr Hoffman. What is there that is not experienced through our consciousness?
Secret societies have known that consciousness causes the Cosmos for thousands of years. I like the tree and its leaves analogy best when it come to perceiving the different types of consciousness. Each person is like a single leaf with a simple awareness of what is around it while the tree itself is aware of far more, from all the leaves, branches and the whole tree including the roots and the whole system that makes the leaves possible. An individual leaf might care most about itself and it's immediate surroundings while the tree itself would care more about the wellbeing of the whole. Leaves could only theorize about the existence of roots which I has never seen and presume they perform their work behind the scenes making it all possible.
@ Guided Meditation... Have you considered that what lends secret societies that nomenclature is that their insider beliefs are, as a rule... *secrets* ?!
But, of course, *you* have the evidence of the content and nature of these beliefs for thousands of years... [Sarcasm alert.]
@Al Garnier i dont think you have truely grasped what consciousness is and what this guy is saying. You cant have a universe of matter without some kind of consciousness to observe it or register it. It does not evolve from biology but may use biology to evolve itself.
@Al Garnier no you are the stupid one as you still dont get it and by the sound of your arrogance, probably never will or dont want too. So sad.
@Al Garnier"Only believe proven science and nothing else, do not be open to different ideas and if you show me evidence or give me reasons to possibly believe new ideas without empirical evidence i will get extremely defensive and angry" dude you suck
@Al Garnier You don't know what you don't know.
What a great interview, Robert for challenging Donald, and Donald for his well reasoned responses. Love it!
What an awesome concept it is, that the fundamental reality is consciousness, not space, time , matter, or energy - all of those are derived from and secondary to the consciousness. Wow!
It's one stepbeyond dualism.
Complete rubbish!
@@GeoCoppens it's the explanation that makes the most sense, if you're willing to set aside your attachment to the material illusion and what you think you know
@@paulb6805 The material illusion??? What the fuck is that?
@@visancosmin8991 You really don't know what you are talking about. Matter is a set of perceptions? What a load of rubbish!
1. Observer effect in quantum mechanics questioning true objective reality
2. Evolutionary argument that concious agents do not see reality as it is.
3. Concious experience of absolute consciousness and selflessness in meditators/drugs(DMT, LSD)/psychiatric states.
I feel these three independent observations need to be reconciled in a single model to reach to the answer. The third might seem out of place but such experiential states are how very similar ideas have arisen in older eastern philosophies.
Near Death Experiences as well can be included in that.
He talks with so much clarity. Not a moment does he stammer which shows how fluid his thoughts are. Where can i get the full talk?
Donald Hoffman is doing a great job with this series.
The series is done by Kuhn, and I like both men.
This channel is extremely interesting
Until you realize how much is complete fraud.
@@chrisc1257 why do you say that?
@@MrHardrocker98 Without knowing the first cause, everything is laughably plausible; even death.
@@chrisc1257 Couldn't agree more. But this doesn't make this video a fraud.
@@MrHardrocker98 “We fancy men are individuals; so are pumpkins; but every pumpkin in the field goes through every point of pumpkin history.”
- Ralph Waldo Emerson
Absolutely right. Who we really are is beyond the limitations of experience and belief.
The kind of elegance you are looking for may be the Mahayana Lankavatara Sutra ; a discourse between Shakyamuni Buddha and one of his wisest recruits, Mahatmi. ^^
Mael-Strom Totally agree M-S. This is an extremely profound text and one which always makes me chuckle because essentially Buddha is stating that ALL views and models are ultimately void, including Buddhism itself. That, to me, is an impressive claim - one which gives me motivation to sit on my cushion and seek the Silence.
@@SolveEtCoagula93 Indeed, that profound text puzzled a lot of scholars and philosophers until quantum mechanics and the modern study of consciousness came about. It makes me smile every time I sit on my cushion. ^^
And isnt it a beautiful thing when the sound and photography are executed to the highest standards as they are on this superb clip 💘
Yes, you really do feel as if you are sitting at the table with therm.
Can we skip floating back and forth through the idyllic background setting?
Is it not enough to just sit across the table from each other and converse?
The interviewer is in love with the idea and success of his brilliance.
This looks like it was filmed in some kind of heavenscape that their conciousnesses conjured up
absolutely , the problem is most scientist don't understand that our universe is much crazier than we think...And we don't think much..We don't even know why we sleep..Hoffman is daring to think outside the box
mind and matter are not separate substances. Rather, they are different aspects of our whole and unbroken movement
David Bohm
Only mind exists. Matter is a projected illusion.
Tom Campbell hypothesized that the 'material world' is a virtual reality that evolved from primal consciousness. This would explain why newtonian and quantum worldviews can't be reconciled assuming the materialistic model. If the universe is does turn out to be a VR it would explain stuff like the double slit experiment, why the speed of light is a constant and many other things.
Check out Tom's videos on UA-cam. Very interesting.
What's your opinion of Peter Russel?
He's making my head hurt in a wonderful way.
Insightful and refreshing
Buddha knew it too
Kate Stevenson
If you really look at it, Buddha was right all along.
Hoffman is the Copernicus of the 21st century. His model --shared by many-- is THE breakthrough we humans need... and quickly.
We evolved to think in terms of cause of effect. This is because of how we perceive time. Except that time does not exist the way we (or to be honest, "most people") perceive it (as something 'linear'). Once it's understood that time is not an actual thing, cause and effect fall through the bottom and new questions can be raised. Consciousness doesn't "cause" anything, it just "is" as much as Gravity "is" and we know about as much about gravity as we do about consciousness. Now you can argue that gravity 'causes' things to fall. But gravity doesn't just appear out of nowhere, it cannot be turned off, and things that fall as an effect of the gravitational field did not just appear there either. We like to create abstract models and calculate and explain things that way but 'reality' is not a closed and limited system. It just 'is'. And it is in motion - a perpetual motion - which because of philosophical victim stances cannot or should not exist (according to what or why not, then? Is there a moral argument in this mix? If so, what does morality have to do with physical reality?)
Consciousness just 'is'. It's a system that biology taps into and utilizes as part of survivor mechanisms, just as it utilizes energy from light, chemical processes, physical properties.. brains utilize electrical and chemical processes which are paradoxically beyond comprehension to themselves. Through these processes they tap into consciousness and here we are. Is consciousness CAUSED by the brain? NO. Just as much as gravity is not CAUSED by a thing that falls as a result of being in the gravity field. Does gravity cause the thing to fall> The thing falls as an effect of being in the gravity field. But has to be in the field first, so the first cause is getting into the gravity field.
Translated . Consciousness does not cause a brain to exist. The brain has to exist first to be able to tap into consciousness, and the brain evolved to become better at that, just like wings of birds evolved to optimize flight and manoeverability according to the survival needs of the various bird types.
I can go on rambling like this. It's all very clear to me and I am convinced it can be clear to anyone who just takes the time (!) to let go of extraneously imposed philosophy and thought patterns.
This is as clearly as I could have expressed this very difficult set of interlaced thoughts, with which I entirely agree. I fully expect you've read Alan Watts, but if you have not, he's also highly articulate on these points. His reputation as a "mystical" thinker is really not accurate, though of course there are aspects/segments of his writings that verge in this direction. Thanks for the nice recitation . . .
Is gravity a physical or non physical.
Even a single cell organism is conscious. But doesn't have a brain.
We don’t know for sure… but as far as we know, it is “not”physical.
I subscribe to all he says - and this is fully aligned with what Idealism postulates. The nature of reality is mental, not material. Read and watch also e.g. Bernardo Kastrup on this topic (PhDs in computer science and Philosophy).
I wish the interviewer would've let him talk. I'm interested to hear what Donald Hoffman has to say, not the interviewer.
Good lighting and camera work set up in this video.
I think Hoffman is really on to something!
So how can we test this speculation? Logically it is hard to unravel the circular logic whereby matter is a derivative of consciousness but if that matter is a brain, the consciousness appears to be a derivative of matter.
Great guy, relaxed and not too much zealous about his work. For him it's just a intellectual play. Finally we all will die, and possibly get some better explanation;)
human consciousness brings the reality of the physical universe into being glad to see others agreeing with my opinion on that ,
The guy talking to don Hoffman has to be one of Einstein's cousins. I can see the family resemblance.
I was thinking Thomas Kuhn
This is extremely interesting and thought provoking ~~ my question is how does conscientious arise in the first place (particularly human)?
max plank said the same thing
@ earthworm jim... I'll bet he *didn't* ❗ 😣
@@frederickj.7136 Actually, Planck really did say that. Look it up.
i set forth the intention to meet Donald. His preception is purly angelic.
Modern science says that from a singular mass that rapidly expanded and cooled, the entire universe and all in it, including the forces of nature that it all operates by, and including you and me and our supposed consciousness', all came into existence. BUT, does the universe and all in it actually exist per se, OR does only this singular mass exist in the form of all things? Same reality, two different perspectives. Which one is really true? Are they both true? Do "I" exist and yet not exist, depending upon the context? How could "I" ever cease to exist if "I" never ever existed at all in the first place? And if this singular mass wanted to exist as you and/or me for literally all of future eternity, couldn't it do so if it chose to do so? (This singular mass having a consciousness as evidenced by the consciousness you and I are supposedly experiencing).
Great questions, and we can only hope that as we explore this train of thought, rather than simply disregard as unprovable, that we can make progress into having a unified theory. It is both a scientific inquiry and a philosophical one.
soakedbearrd
Thanks. Two things will be included in this post. First, my latest theoretical idea concerning the "TOE" (Theory Of Everything). Second, how to possibly prove proof of the idea and concept which could lead to artificial gravity and neutrino protections for space ships, bases, etc. And note: while this may or may not be really true, I lack the resources to currently prove it beyond doubt. But, I currently believe it to be true at this time. But of course if really true, then we will also have a better model to work with concerning the very nature of reality itself.
First, my latest "TOE":
THE SETUP:
1. Modern science currently recognizes four forces of nature: The strong nuclear force, the weak nuclear force, gravity, and electromagnetism.
2. In school we are taught that with magnetism, opposite polarities attract and like polarities repel. But inside the arc of a large horseshoe magnet it's the other way around, like polarities attract and opposite polarities repel. (I have proved this to myself with magnets and anybody with a large horseshoe magnet and two smaller bar magnets can easily prove this to yourself too).
3. Charged particles have an associated magnetic field with them.
4. Protons and electrons are charged particles and have their associated magnetic fields with them.
5. Photons also have both an electric and a magnetic component to them.
FOUR FORCES OF NATURE DOWN INTO TWO:
6. When an electron is in close proximity to the nucleus, it would basically generate a 360 degree spherical magnetic field.
7. Like charged protons would stick together inside of this magnetic field, while simultaneously repelling opposite charged electrons inside this magnetic field, while simultaneously attracting the opposite charged electrons across the inner portion of the electron's moving magnetic field.
8. There are probably no such thing as "gluons" in actual reality.
9. The strong nuclear force and the weak nuclear force are probably derivatives of the electro-magnetic field interactions between electrons and protons.
10. The nucleus is probably an electro-magnetic field boundary.
11. Quarks also supposedly have a charge to them and then would also most likely have electro-magnetic fields associated with them, possibly a different arrangement for each of the six different type of quarks.
12. The interactions between the quarks EM forces are how and why protons and neutrons formulate as well as how and why protons and neutrons stay inside of the nucleus and do not just pass through as neutrinos do.
THE GEM FORCE INTERACTIONS AND QUANTA:
13. Personally, I currently believe that the directional force in photons is "gravity".
14. I also believe that a pulsating singularity (which is basically a pulsating photon) is the pure energy unit.
15. When these pulsating pure energy units interact with other pure energy units, they tangle together. Various shapes (strings, spheres, whatever) might be formed, which then create sub-atomic material, atoms, molecules, and everything in existence in this universe.
16. When the pure energy units unite together they would tend to stabilize and vibrate.
17. I believe there is probably a Photonic Theory Of The Atomic Structure.
18. Everything is basically "light" (photons) in a universe entirely filled with "light" (photons).
THE MAGNETIC FORCE SPECIFICALLY:
19. When the electron with it's associated magnetic field goes around the proton with it's associated magnetic field, internal and external energy oscillations are set up.
20. When more than one atom is involved, and these energy frequencies align, they add together, specifically the magnetic field frequency.
21. I currently believe that this is where a line of flux originates from, aligned magnetic field frequencies.
NOTES:
22. The Earth can be looked at as being a massive singular interacting photon with it's magnetic field, electrical surface field, and gravity, all three photonic forces all being 90 degrees from each other.
23. The flat spiral galaxy can be looked at as being a massive singular interacting photon with it's magnetic fields on each side of the plane of matter, the electrical field along the plane of matter, and gravity being directed towards the galactic center's black hole where the gravitational forces would meet, all three photonic forces all being 90 degrees from each other.
24. As below in the singularity, as above in the galaxy and probably universe as well.
25. I believe there are only two forces of nature, Gravity and EM, (GEM). Due to the stability of the GEM with the pure energy unit, this is also why the forces of nature haven't evolved by now. Of which with the current theory of understanding, how come the forces of nature haven't evolved by now since the original conditions acting upon the singularity aren't acting upon them like they originally were, billions of years have supposedly elapsed, in a universe that continues to expand and cool, with energy that could not be created nor destroyed would be getting less and less dense? My theory would seem to make more sense if in fact it is really true. I really wonder if it is in fact really true.
26. And the universe would be expanding due to these pulsating and interacting pure energy units and would also allow galaxies to collide, of which, how could galaxies ever collide if they are all speeding away from each other like is currently taught?
DISCLAIMER:
27. As I as well as all of humanity truly do not know what we do not know, the above certainly could be wrong. It would have to be proved or disproved to know for more certainty.
Second, a possible proof for the idea and concepts:
Create a matrix of laser lights that are directed through an electric field of a polarizer. This should polarize the EM of the laser lights which should also then polarize "G" (gravity, gravity being the directional component of the photon). Depending upon which way the light was being polarized, could potentially have artificial gravity, anti-gravity, or whatever the natural environment was just by flicking a switch one way or another or by turning the system off. And of course, a propulsion unit to help propel space ships too. If true, this could also possibly help with neutrino impacts on the astronauts, ships, bases, quantum computers, equipment, etc., if done right.
Fascinating insights, although I am not a physicist, nor a scientist, I am well read in the area of study and am able to follow what you are saying. Thanks for that info, I need to digest it a little more!
soakedbearrd
Thank you again. I believe everything in existence in this universe can be deduced down into pure energy units interacting with other pure energy units at it's most basic level. Hence, consciousness, thoughts, and memories are all just energy interacting with other energy. But, while energy is everywhere and in everything for it to even exist in this universe, it currently appears that consciousness, thoughts, and memories only occur when the energy interactions are arranged in basically a specific way (ie: a physical brain). But, if it happened here on Earth by whatever means it actually did, then certainly it could occur elsewhere in this vast universe. And, as we truly do not know what we do not know, it would seem to leave the door open to the possibility at least that consciousness, thoughts, and memories could occur by other means besides just as related to a physical brain. As a truthseeker, a person has to keep their mind open to other potential possibilities.
taking the above-told theory, this is what eastern way approaching has said to us that consciousness is the main thing that projects reality to us. to see the absolute reality we must have nothing but pure consciousness to see the ultimate truth that reality is. Hinduism says that this really is "The Brahman" which is the source of everything i.e. consciousness everything there is existing is the manifestation of this infinite continuum of consciousness. that is what Hoffman is trying to put in theory.
Buddhism says that Consciousness comes from the void. they say that consciousness is an integral element in our experience of reality as it is otherwise they say that it wouldn't be an experience at all.
well, the problem is that this is not how science works and that's why one can say that objective way of viewing reality will not show us the true reality when we consider consciousness as fundamental because when we have an objective approach the subjective experience must not be brought as science is a way in which experimental results must agree by many. while one cannot trust other subjective experience as it not measurable by an objective approach this where the study of consciousness is so difficult. while science is objective and Hinduism and Buddhism is completely subjective one cannot know. can they be thought of as the study of reality? is my main question. and I think both have many parallels in them. to have an open mind is what I am trying to do.
This is an explanation of what we still don’t understand in the Quantum world, we need sideways thinking a lot now to explain Quantum theories.
It's like the cliche , the more we know , the less we know !
What is consciousness as being defined here?
1: What he is saying is that there is nothing to separate your consciousness from mine.
2: Because he is saying that there's nothing that separates one consciousness from another, he is saying that there's only One consciousness...
3: This is what is known as Solipsism.
4: Consciousness requires some form of "container" for which it to occur in, otherwise we are saying that consciousness itself is a substance, OR we are saying that No "physical" substances exist, and we are thereby saying that nothing exists - and if we are saying that nothing exists, then there'd be no consciousness.
WHWWD And Philosophy
Nope that’s not what he is saying
1. He describes physical reality as icons
(Icons on Desktop on your pc doesn’t say anything about reality ) so space and time are just useful tool for conscious agents. ( so there is no space time or 3d world as there is no physical email icon in somewhere your pc )
2. He doesn’t say there is one consciousness
He says these icons represents the conscious agents which build fundamentally the deeper reality
( remember matrix the only difference is that those green 0s 1s are conscious and when you wake up from your dream state you wake up not in another physical reality but in 0s and 1s world)
3. Imagine network of conscious agents just like matrix.
Then theses conscious creatures or network create internal icon and some data structure to hide the truth and complexity of these deeper information. (Other conscious creatures)
The you as one of these conscious agent or assemble of these conscious agents don’t see the real reality “ the green matrix of conscious agents.”
you see desktop background which is constructed by your Perception.
Not enough for the label of solipsism in my view. He doesn’t specify in this video his view of other conscious agents. If they act as a collective consciousness, or are we participators versus creators of the physical.
Please explain the mathematics of consciousness?
All quantum talk in philosophy turns out to be crap-wrapped juicy soup.
Deep introspection (zen mind) can turn all that crap into fertilizer. 😁🙏🤗
@@mael-strom9707 that sounds like a wishful thought....
I think hes onto something
Kuhn does not let Hoffman express himself. This is the sole occasion in which I've seen him behave that way.
Laureano Luna too much coffee
I agree he was hostile
I think here, he needed to be. He is asking a lot of valid questions!
@@vasishtapolisetty639 What sense does it make to ask good questions if you don't let them be answered?
Consciousness being the cause of our perception of space and time? Wild. Who knows, maybe it’s true. I love Donald Hoffman’s work; there were some very intriguing claims and questions posed here for sure.
Weird world this is for sure :) 🌹
Conscious beings come from outside of Time. The Universes were created to house the Holographics of our Worlds and Galaxies and various Dimensions. The Conscious Singularity does Create the Worlds of Creation inside of Time and then parts off "Us" and sends us into the Creations it has created. It is a Miracle and we as Conscious Beings -- keep right on creating once we get into these Created Realms that were created from OUTSIDE of Time.
Yes. This. 100%.
Beautiful
What is meant by "outside"? That implies something 'external', but wouldn't externality be an illusion?
Truth as a static structure vs a dynamic system. To simplify, think of a
stack of copy paper with one word on each page. In time, we see each
page one at a time, outside of time all of the words, on all of the
pages combine to make a single word. This single word is truth, it is
the entire story, told in an instant of time. The fractal version of
this story has another feature. As each page is presented to us, our
intent creates a slightly new meaning that branches out, changing the
story, an effect that turns the stack into a tree like structure.
The direction of time's arrow is the breaking of the symmetry of the
potential of the boundary condition. In other words, if I toss a coin
and it has perfect symmetry of potential it will land heads half the
time and tails half the time. The symmetry of the potential is broken if
the coin tosses are not 50/50. In a perfectly random system, after a
sufficient number of tosses, the symmetry for all even number tosses
would always be 50/50. Coin tosses are a lot like squaring the circle.
You get closer and closer to the true value but you never reach it, like
an infinite recursive iteration.
If meaning is always fluctuating then we do not ever really see truth,
what we see are truth values. In the example of the coin tosses, We have
a resolution that gives us a value something like yes that is
definitely heads. But if the time scales are very small, we can't see
the result of the toss long enough for it to register, and if the scales
are very long. we would not live long enough to see the result of the
toss. We appear to be right in the middle of these scales. Is this a
coincident?
if reality only exists when being observed, then why does the blind man still bump into things whilst at home alone?
Because the collective consciounce has a subconscious mutual agreement that it exists it being consciousness. The blind man still lives in the quantum realm and exists simply because he exists.
Observation is not exclusive to visual perception. You can “see”with sound and body, etc
Hoffman’s TED Talk explains his ideas much better than this. His theory on perception of reality is really smart and refreshing. This makes it sound all over the place. He’s also very open to the fact he may be dead wrong.
Absolutely ridiculous. Post modernism applied to the physical universe itself. Mathematical relativism if you like. A bat see's no light because there is no light, a human see's light because there is light. Both are right. Therefore the bat and the human are sharing 2 overlapping dimensions? Because he can make the maths work
I like alot of what this guy is saying.
1st Hermetic Principle: All Is Mental. And everything that is exists within the mind of the All.
ATUM is God
@Scott Lutz As above so below as below so above as within so without
Meaningless statement
@@jamesstevenson7725 Can you elaborate on that please?
I think that modern physics has definitely decided in favor of Plato. In fact the smallest units of matter are not physical objects in the ordinary sense; they are forms, ideas which can be expressed unambiguously only in mathematical language.”
Heisenberg
This interviewer will understand some day... :)
You mean when and if he starts losing marbles in old age?
all the answers lie within ourselves...
I've always thought I was living in a computer program.
He isn't really saying that consciousness causes reality, but that it affects or causes our perception of reality. Right?
He is saying that all, you or any one else for that matter, knows of so called reality is the experience in consciousness. No one has ever experienced that what we call reality out side consciousness. So we only presume that there is a independent reality that we observe as separate subjects and that is just a belief or presumption. All we know is this first person subjective experience and the content of that experience being perceptions, feelings, thoughts and sensations. That is what reality is made of and we can not experience it any other way.
Both parties seem unaware of an essential (and ancient) philosophical distinction at play here - that between Idealism and Realism. Idealism maintains that reality as a whole is constituted by minds (or mind) and that it has no existence all its own independently of mind. Realism maintains the very opposite - that there is a reality beyond mind and it has its existence independently of mind (regardless of the _nature_ of that independently existing reality and of the various ways we may have of interpreting or perceiving it).
On this issue, science is of no help. Science would remain the same in the sense that all the empirical evidence, measurements and observations we could gather would remain the same regardless of which is true. It is a purely philosophical matter - a metaphysical matter.
I suspect that Philosophical Overdose (below somewhere) has it right in suggesting that Hoffman is a kind of Berkeleyan immaterialist. But that, too, is a purely philosophical thesis. All the science, again, would be consistent with it.
On the whole, this video is about issues where the distinction between science and philosophy is essential but goes largely unobserved, especially by scientific sorts. Its absence plays havoc with their understanding and leads them simply to re-invent philosophical wheels that have already been in place and argued about over many centuries.
Brilliant comment
Now that you have explained the video to yourself, do you understand better?
Consciousness causes the cosmos is more of a speculative stance that can never be empirically verified. But with the arising of consciousness, the concept of cosmos is constructed, conceived, or manifest in our mind and understanding is our collective subjective reality.
“Empirically verified” is a euphemism.
Data doesn’t prove anything. Science doesn’t prove anything. Science makes no truth claims.
The normal materialistic view is full of holes. Something always existed. In my view it is nondimensional conciousness. We already know there is no self and that energy can neither be created or destroyed, the law of thermodynamics. And to refer to "accidents" seems very childish when we also know everything is moving with precision. Science will never end and continue to revise beliefs w each passing year. Raw experience is our only tool.
right, 'raw experience is our [rather say mine- because it must be individual] only tool'. And in this experience the 'something' that always existed is... nothing. However, nothing IS. This isness makes it be/exist in the impersonal, formless, spaceless and eternal, all pervading Being, which is I [n.b. but not i- this is the paradox: it is i that becomes/has always been 'I' by leaving behind/transcending the body-mind-world that rise together creating the illusion of the universe].
The scientist that puts consciousness under the microscope starts from a false premise that he is in charge of dissecting and analyzing something that is beyond mind. If they were only able to unglue the label they put on themselves as 'thinkers' and just be perhaps they would be free from all the prejudices that their 'scientific' minds limit their freedom to see reality.
Agreed. Beautifully put.
That's also the difficult part of our culture and my mind as well, is the me.
J Money
it looks like this is an universal issue- understanding the illusion aspect of the mind made reality and yet indulging in the illusion... mindless [mindful?]. Yes, the culture and the practice of it for 2, 3, 4... 44 decades is a real challenge for living in accordance with the reality we know at the intellectual level but once the truth known you cannot fully get back to living in ignorance [i.e. knowingly, this time]. So it appears we are stuck but it is only an appearance as all else... Anyway, i feel that trying to detach oneself from me and mine is another step towards renouncing the lie. Long story short- i'd rather think in terms of mind instead of 'my' mind... getting rid of all the possessive pronouns helps, including yours, ours, theirs.... Because me and mine/you and yours create separation and you get into the situation of the scientist who is stuck within the self-imposed limits of his labels
wow @Daisilui you summed up what l have been tell most people about possession and ownership and the rabbit whole they lead those that indulge in them. I say ownership leads to entitlement,entitlement comes with a title, the title becomes an identity and wherever there is identity there is a fight to keep it. for example 'my' wife [ownership], leads to only l can have sex with her [entitlement].why? because l am 'her' 'husband' [title + identity]...and anything that challenges the wife or husband identity will be seen as a threat and treated as such... the answer l always say to people is 'own and identify with nothing' so that you aren't limited by that which comes with owning and identifying with things.
Anyways you sure have an intriguing outlook on things @Daisilui l sure would love to pick your brain on other concepts/ideas. is there a way l can get a hold of you?
This is an ages old question not easily solved. It boils down to Aristotle's inquiry into the subject. In short, the universe IS Consciousness, what Aristotle called "Being-In-Itself". One can easily tap into and merge with That Pure Consciousness by accessing "Mahamritunjaya mantra - Sacred Sounds Choir". Listen to it for 5 min per day for at least two weeks or more. The question of causation was not adequately answered by Aristotle, , who used the exprression "Unmoved Mover" in his books. That's just a talking point, not an explanation. Shankara provided a possible explanation in verse 21 of his Saundarya Lahiri by positing that the Shakti of the Divine Mother was a sort of connecting link to the initial causes. (Again, not completely satisfying). Put another way, how can the '"objects" of the universe be simultaneously Unmoving (Pure Consciousness), and at the same time eternally Moving? This is the Buddhist Principle of the "Simultaneity of Oneness and Difference". The question could very well be unanswerable. It's best to tap into and merge with IT, and explore the Mystery for yourself. Some questions are simply Mysterious.
Metaphysical Idealism rules!
IS - BE rules rule.
The cameras moving all the time was distracting. At least have smooth motion if you're going to be constantly moving.
'Its a free country - say whatever you want.' Right. You can be as big a smug presumptive materialist as you like. Doesn't make you right or even a decent interviewer.
Well, Kuhn is a dualist, soooo
... Soooo?
Yeah, no. Kuhn is not smug by any stretch of the imagination.
I'll throw another idea into the Reality discussion: Time. Suppose you could see from a different time scale, where eons are seconds, and nothing last long enough to even be called "solid." Same reality, but vastly different. Then there's the ultimate idea of "Block Time", where nothing ever "happens."
For the record, consciousness does not cause the wave collapse. Quantum phenomena will continue without an observer.
Yet, what confuses me is that the only way we know that is because we’ve observed that. I donk think your statement is as conclusive as you think and many physicists aren’t so quick to accept that claim too.
Do you do readings?
Reality and existence and in particular the qualities of experience are not made of “matter” they are made of (what matters)!!
Gonna be hard to see how we can run experiments to test this hypothesis. I think consciousness is an emergent phenomena from just higher forms of complexity. If we ever get to the singularity, then that would be one method of proving this hypothesis.
how about the double slit expirament?
how would the singularity help?
Because if we can make AI (that is the point of the singularity) then we can really determine whether it is an emergent phenomena.
Which singularity do you mean? For example, every black hole is a singularity. And consciousness, might be - might be - a singularity.
I'm referring to this: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technological_singularity
Not the ones theorized to be in black holes, or at the time of the Big Bang.
When you interview someone and end up talking more than them.
Now that I've watched a few more of these videos I do really appreciate his probing style. But the beginning of this was a bit much.
Consciousness obviously creates an awareness of one's existence and one's view of the world, but it doesn't follow that consciousness creates the material world. To think this is, ironically, is to actually deny the possible delusions your consciousness allows you to imploy.
He's not saying our individual conciousness creates reality
His consciousness is creating the delusion that it is creating the material world.
Actually, he can zap Closer To Truth out of existence, if he feels like it!
Quantum physicists don't say that things don't exist without the act of observation. They say that things don't have specific properties, such a position, mass and movement, until they are observed. I don't think that is quite the same thing.
@@visancosmin8991 Indeed. Ask the video producer. In this context a "thing" is a sub-atomic particle. Probably.
@@visancosmin8991 So let me get this right, you are happy to be pedantic about the definition of “things”, and whether they exist, but you are fine to make an entirely unsubstantiated statement that “consciousness is all there is” and expecting to get away with that???? Listen, you might be right but it’s pretty flimsy. Reality might be consciousness experiencing itself subjectively. But, even if we could prove that, it doesn’t provide any support for consciousness being “all there is”. IMO.
Whether he is right or not, a universe without any consciousness is pretty pointless lol
That is the problem his ideas are unfalsifiable this unscientific. And whether there is consciousness or not changes nothing....the universe doesn't have a point , a purpose or meaning. Those are qualities projected by observers and they need to be demonstrated as Intrinsic features....not assumed.
@@nickolasgaspar9660 a universe without consciousness doesn’t exist subjectively
@@nickolasgaspar9660 his ideas are very much falsifiable, and very scientific. It’s a rigorous scientific theory based on mathematical theorems and proven theories (evolution)
@@cashglobe well a universe exists independently of our subjective conscious states. So what we are subjectively aware of has nothing to do with its state of existence.
@@cashglobe Ok so pls present the falsification method of his "mathematical theorem".
Now his supernatural claims are not supported by evolution. He assumes a disconnection between physical structures and how we have evolved to perceive them. We have developed scientific methodologies to verify our perceptions. How can he ever test those methodologies and find them to be inaccurate????
Btw we don't have a mathematical variable for "consciousness" so I don't know what kind of mathematical theorems he is talking about.
David Bohm talks about the most fundamental particles, which he named Consciousness Units.
well its funny when the intervwer says that don's claim is outrageous, because he must not have read very much into buddhism or hinduism or others..
The Law myoho-renge-kyo represents the identity of what some scientists refer to as the ‘unified field of all consciousnesses’. In other words, it’s a sound vibration that is the essence of all of existence and non-existence, the ultimate creative force behind planets, stars, nebulae, people, animals, trees, fish, birds, and all phenomena, manifest or latent. All matter and intelligence are simply waves or ripples manifesting to and from this core source. Consciousness (enlightenment) is itself the true creator of everything that is, ever was and ever will be, right down to the minutest particles of dust, each being an individual ripple or wave. The big difference between chanting Nam-myoho-renge-kyo and most other conventional prayers is that instead of depending on a ‘middleman’ to connect us to our state of enlightenment, we’re able to do it ourselves by tapping directly into it by way of self-produced sound vibration.
On the subject of ‘Who or What Is God?’, when we compare the concept of ‘God’, as a separate entity that is forever watching down on us, to Nichiren’s teachings, the true omnipotence, omniscience and omnipresence of what most people call ‘God’ is our enlightenment, which exists nowhere else but within us.
When the disciples asked Jesus where the Kingdom of God is, didn’t he tell them that it was within them?
Some say that ‘God’ is an entity that can never be seen. I think that the vast amount of information that is constantly being conveyed via electromagnetic waves gives us proof of how an invisible state of ‘God’ could actually exist. It’s widely known that certain data being relayed by way of electromagnetic waves has the potential to help bring about extraordinary and powerful effects, including instant global awareness of something or mass emotional reaction. As well as many other things, it’s also common knowledge that these waves can easily be used to detonate a bomb or to even enable NASA to control the movements of a robot as far away as the Moon or Mars. However, none of this is possible without a receiver to decode the information that is being transmitted. Without the receiver, the information would remain impotent.
In a very similar way, it’s important for us to have our ‘receiver’ switched on so that we can activate a clear and precise understanding of our life, all other life and what we and all else that exists truly is. Chanting Nam-myoho-renge-kyo helps us to achieve this because it allows us to reach into the core of our enlightenment and switch it on. That’s because the sound vibration of myoho-renge-kyo represents the combination of the three major laws that underlie all existence.
Myoho represents the Law of latency and manifestation (Nature) and consists of two alternating states. One state of myo is where everything in life that’s not obvious to us exists. This includes our stored memories when we’re not thinking about them, our hidden potential and inner emotions whenever they’re not being expressed, our desires, our fears, our wisdom, happiness, karma, and more importantly, our enlightenment. The other state, ho, is where everything in Life exists whenever it becomes obvious to us, such as when a thought pops up from within our memory, whenever we experience or express our emotions, or whenever a good or bad effect manifests from our karma. When anything becomes apparent, it simply means that it has come out of the state of ‘myo’ (dormancy/latency) and into a state of ho (manifestation). It’s simply the difference between consciousness and unconsciousness, being awake or asleep, or knowing and not knowing something.
The second law, renge, governs and controls the functions of myoho, ren meaning cause and ge meaning effect. The two laws of myoho and renge, both functions together simultaneously, as well as underlies all spiritual and physical existence.
The final and third part of the tri-combination, kyo, is what allows the law myoho to be able to integrate with the law renge. It’s the great, invisible thread of energy that fuses and connects together all Life and matter, as well as the past, present and future. It is often termed the Universal Law of Communication. Perhaps it could even be compared to the string theory that some scientists now suspect exists.
Just as our body cells, thoughts, feelings and all else are constantly fluctuating within us, everything in the world around us and beyond is also in a constant state of flux, in accordance with these three laws. In fact, more things are going back and forth between the two states of myo and ho in a single moment than it would ever be possible for us to calculate or describe. And it doesn't matter how big or small, important or trivial that anything may appear to be, everything that’s ever existed in the past exists now or will exist in the future, exists only because of the workings of myoho-renge-kyo.
These three laws are also the basis of the four fundamental forces and if they didn't function, neither we nor anything else could go on existing. Simply put, all forms of existence, including the seasons, day and night, birth, death and so on, are all moving forward in an ongoing flow of continuation, rhythmically reverting back and forth between the two universal states of myo and ho in absolute accordance with renge and by way of kyo. Even stars are dying and being reborn in accordance with the workings of what the combination myoho-renge-kyo represents.
Nam, or Namu, on the other hand, is a password or a key; it allows us to reach deep into our life and fuse with or become one with myoho-renge-kyo. On a more personal basis, nothing ever happens by chance or coincidence, it’s the causes that we’ve made in our past, or are presently making, that determine how these laws function uniquely in each of our lives from moment to moment, as well in our environment. By facing east, in harmony with the direction that the Earth is turning, and rhythmically chanting Nam-myoho-renge-kyo for a minimum of ten minutes daily, anyone can experience actual proof of its positive effects in their life.
In so doing, we can pierce through even the thickest layers of our karma and activate our Buddha Nature (the enlightened state). We’re then able to summon forth the wisdom needed to challenge, overcome and change our negative circumstances into positive ones. It brings forth the wisdom that can free us from the ignorance and stupidity that is preventing us from accepting and being proud of the person that we truly are, regardless of our race, colour, gender or sexual preference. We are also able to see and understand our circumstances and an environment more clearly, as well as attract and connect with any needed external beneficial forces and situations.
Actual proof soon becomes apparent to anyone who chants the words Nam-myoho-renge-kyo on a regular daily basis. Everything is subject to the law of Cause and Effect, so the strength of the result from chanting depends on dedication, sincerity and determination. To explain it more simply, the difference could be compared to making a sound on a piano, creating a melody, or producing a song and so on.
NB: There are frightening, disturbing sounds and there are tranquil and relaxing sounds. It's the emotional result from any sound that can trigger off a mood or even instantly change one. When chanting Nam-Myoho-Renge-Kyo each day you are producing a sound vibration that is the password to your true inner-self - this soon becomes apparent when you start reassessing your views on various things, such as your fears and desires etc. The important way to get the best result when chanting is not to see things in a conventional way (difficult to achieve but can be done), rather than reaching out to an external source, you need to reach into your own life and bring your needs and desires to fruition from within, including any help that you may need. Think of it as a seed within you that you are bringing sunshine and water to in order for it to grow, blossom and bring forth fruit or flowers. It’s important to understand that everything that we need in life, all the answers and potential to achieve our dreams, already exist within us.
ua-cam.com/video/6CZ0XJqWRr4/v-deo.html OLIVIA NEWTON-JOHN sings about Nam-myoho-renge-kyo
@ tyamada21... "Some scientists...". Would those "scientists" you refer to up front be Ph.Dumb and Ph.Dumber, by any chance?
GROW UP!!!
The interviewer is so rude and aggressive. I understand trying to play devil's advocate but there are ways and ways to do it.
yeah. i thought he was overdoing it.
What I want to know is if there is any empirical evidence with regard to how many angels CAN dance on the head of a pin??? My understanding is that everything is one thing, and nothing is separate, the observer and the observed is only an aspect of that reality.
The interviewer sounds a materialist, can’t think outside the box. And never shuts up to listen to him..
Uh oh...herecomes the NewAge again😩
Bruce Gelman new age?? Really? Hahaha you twit
Not really. He’s just being a devils advocate because that’s his job. On the whole he’s quite even handed when he speaks to scientists philosophers etc
I'm not sure what his stance is, but he is asking really valid questions
If human consciousness creates the cosmos, why are we making some of it so horrible? Does this mean that when perceiving some awful event, instead of thinking its Gods will/fate/bad luck, we should ask - 'why did we create this?'
Knowing precedes the existence of all things...Consciousness is the ONLY thing that is capable of knowing, ergo Consciousness _is existence itself and _*_Knowing is the essence of existence..._*
this is such a beautiful statement, and seems to me a reflection of vedantic thought
The Logical Error here is that at 0:40 he mentions "conscious agents" however an "agent" is the medium by which information is transported somewhere or to someOne, we are trying to find that Some-One, the language he uses and the logic he follows is slightly-off, the intention by which he operates is correct, consciousness must be explored.
From where does consciousnesses arises and how it arises cannot be found. Once an organism or species is alive we can see how it behaves and how conscious it is.
Honestly discussing physics is a de facto objective idealist conversation.
The materialist must use very careful linguistics like "causal relation" and "spacetime interval" to even cope with one's lightcone's "elsewhere".
Physicialism's privilege is only nativity, as in naive realism.
Once one begins the metaphysical journey, they must either depart from naïveté OR deeply invest in materialist woo.
All objective idealism requires is one recognize that length contraction and time dilation are ongtological.
This flattens spacetime to the rest frame.
All particles are then "mental" constructs as in they are experienced AS possessing these objective qualities of time and geometry from our A-theoretical phenomenal space, which is an false objective space.
Where is the rest of this interview?
And what causes consciousness?
You're very curious for a conscious being.
Consciousness has different levels. One level has the ability to assume an identity and observe. This is the lowest level that allows the consciousness to actualize from the energy field. Another higher level has this and also has the ability to act. As you go higher in consciousness, there is the ability to consider, to mentally project choices. Later comes the awareness of self as an awareness separate from that which has been actualized out of the energy field. And so onward and upward.
The laws of physics remain the same for everyone even when consciousness gets altered. That in itself makes these claims problematic. I can't "observe" gravity away, even if I eat mushrooms that make me think I can fly I'll still fall down at the same acceleration of 9,81 m/s2.
Assuming induction, for starters.
However, on that track you have to deny knowledge altogether. So that worldview has no explanatory power whatsoever, nor any force in making truth claims.
Good stuff.
I think Chalmers may have suggested consciousness as a fundamental force as well, but it's quite a leap to go from that to subjective idealism.
In the Buddhist teaching known as the Heart sutra it is explained that consciousness is not fundamental, it is still part of the illusion. More ‘fundamental’ still is Shunyata - but this lies ‘outside’ of time/space, outside of dualism and cannot be expressed using words. It follows that anything that can be expressed in words, thoughts or ideas is not ‘fundamental’ but is part of the illusion. Whilst consciousness may gives rise to the material, there is also that which gives rise to consciousness. (I have realsied that I am using the term 'dualism' in a different sense to that which is used in the video. In the video the dualism referred to is that of mind/body conflict - I am using it in the more mystical sense, as say used in the Vedas and Upanishads, that in our perception each property or quality we speak of has to automatically give rise to its opposite eg left/right, up/down, good/bad, existence/non-existence, etc., etc..)
With respect to the physicists, for the record, consciousness does not collapse the wave function. The wave function collapses when IN PRINCIPAL, which path information can be determined from an experimental setup. Of course it is just as strange that nature somehow 'knows' to collapse the wave function in such conditions.
The two are co-dependent, causative and reactive to each other. Unity of opposites should be fundamental.
FYI, Jesus... "Cause" (and effect) hasn't been a very useful or applicable concept in physics since smart people realized the fundamental laws are time symmetric... a long, long time ago.