I wonder what your excellent guest thinks about lucid dreaming. I regularly feel as though I become aware in my dreams that I am dreaming and when that “happens” I can often control to varying degrees what happens next in the dream.
The subconscious is neither conscious, nor unconscious: So that, the subconscious is neutral (a psychic regional area where we have an indirect access to the unconscious).
Freud stopped talking about the subconscious very early. He specifically rejects that term. As usual another expert guy here, who knows the number of brain cells but nothing about the mind.
The art of meditation is such that you pay attention to absolutely nothing (in the natural selection environment) and yet you are at your most conscious level of being. So pure awareness is way way way deeper than this rather limited view of consciousness. Consciousness is 100% of yourself and not 0.1%. Hardcore Materialism is pretty sad.
I really need to give meditation a try, my current perspective is it's likely true that I'd be incapable of achieving a state completely void of thought or consciousness.
@@kylebowles9820 I comprehended all of it. And since you have never meditated you obviously have no clue of what I’ve said. His take on consciousness is rather limited and so is yours.
To follow up on Descartes. I think that I am, so I must be. But what is this I that I am? What does the thinking, that makes me? I'm fairly sure being me is 99% illusion. The real me is hidden there, in the 1%. So gossamer, in this infinite universe. Momentary but woven indelibly into the fabric of the whole.
Brains consciousness It is NOT closer questions . First of all neurosience keep out consciousness definitions so far. This guys shows true evidence about consciousness? NOT absolutetly.
It's confusing for students when a teacher lets an explanation run fast and loose without adhering to established language. Mr. Stickgold is sketchy on his "definitional" (good grief) "areas". For example; in traditional terminology, objective sleep is characterized as a lower state of consciousness from which one may be roused to consciousness. In contrast, a person may not be roused to consciousness from a state of unconsciousness. This is the primary objective difference. Subjectively, some unconscious sensory processing needs further subconscious processing aided by Sleep, before it becomes accessible to conscious processing. A Neurologist would not say that a dreaming person is unconscious. I've never heard such a thing uttered.
"Powers of Subconscious?" Awareness or Consciousness is the power of your immortal soul... there is no such thing as sub-soul so sub-consciousness does not exist... ...what is misunderstood as subconscious is just the natural processes of the physical brain which is the natural instincts designed by the Holy Spirit.. .. it is through these natural instincts that the "free aware immortal soul" discovers its limited power and control of the physical body at the start.. In other words, there are no powers of subconscious that does not exist in the first place...
Science is a criterion and must be respected whether or not you like it even if results or findings are contrary to one's beliefs. Such results or findings in teleology have little impact on the principles and universals. Like a puzzle in box of pieces, science affords the researcher many facts and evidences. To put the puzzle together requires another kind of skill that many of these self-proclaimed scientists today lack and have no desire in even making amends. Science, once used for knowledge and understanding, realization and discovery, is now today a limiting factor rather than an aid; a hindering notion than an impetus in liberation. There is something wrong with this mode or tool that is "science." It's not so much science itself that's self impediment but the man who wields this tool that brings a limiting factor. Some such men are so gay & extrovert in their use of science that they no longer can even think rationally. They care more about trite results and focus on only what they can control, manipulate, and exploit, of which they can, too, falsify so truly knowing - so they believe - any such "mystery" or aporia they repudiate; such may be metaphysics, that which is strictly subject and no object, and tho they critize, metaphysics is most logical and rational in comparison to the scientific aporia in: what come first, the tree or the seed arguement?. We know there's issues between people, beliefs, lifestyles, cultures, tradition, religions, political authorities, and parties.... many scientists, too, are no exempt - everything has to be a particular to them; everything must be reified and their relativity confirmed; they only want to deal with what they can control, manipulate and exploit, as this is the only way they know how to be logical, but such information panned out isn't true knowledge of something nor its essence, and this is unwittingly how they affirm their position. Just because this whole thing doesn't work the way they want it to, and because they(materialists/nihilists) haven't absolute power over some things, doesn't merit such folly in men to entire occlude it or run away from it. The 4 pillars of science: observation, measurement, testing, replicating and the 3 modes of materialists for science: can it be controlled, manipulated and exploited - and if it cannot be they preclude it or mystery or ignorance altogether, thus circumscribing themselves to a little box, where little Billy plays with his magnifying glass and toy soliders making a sand castles, never wanting to leave his little condition. Metaphysics doesn't deny teleology or science at all, nor does theology - metaphysics and because attributes can not be without cause, that which is known makes known indirectly the unknown or principle - oh no, this disrupts little Billy in the sand box, better not talk about it guys, because it's not "real science". Metaphysics does check of the first 3 pillars of 4 when it comes to science: observation, measurement, and testing. Observation isn't mere vision with the eye organ alone, but the knowing of this seer that uses the eye organ for sight; too, the minds eye or Intellect in Reason, thought, insight and perspective. Measurement is proximity, genus, inquiring the unknown from the known or principle and attribute, revealing somethings true essence that isn't merely apparent by the naked eye or superficiality and requires 'demonstration', which I argue may be both of the 2 and 3rd pillar, being measurement and testing. Testing here in metaphysics isn't like probing a mouse in the lab, rather by way of scientific dialectic and retroduction based on Reason. I thought science was about expeditions and discovery, curiosity, and a wanting to learn and realize how things work and why we're here....but no, you're all a bunch of boring babies....like in the movie Titanic, where Rose is bored to death mingle with the rich, and Jack takes her to the bottom of the ship where real fun were had. If "science" wants to occlude truth, justice, virtues, harmony, sound, light, life, being, essence, beauty, good, soul, nature(s), theophanies, providence, spirit, and reality and i mean reality not the transistory one these idiots think is reality......"scientists", right, I mean the materialist ones, want only deal with particles and new theories like multiverse, quantum bs, and relativity to reify their transient reality. If science occludes God and the Divine and Soul and Liberation and Wisdom and Truth and Essence and Justice and Beauty and doesn't care about the source and orgin, .....than it isn't science but some mad tyrant who wants to, and it's a high probability, control everything and everyone. Going by their ugly logic: only when we can bring God into the lab and prob the poor guy are we allowed to admit God. Bunch of cowards who have no logic or reason and complain at me for being to deep and profound because they like their dumbed down version and superficiality. Clowns. Liars. They're not men of science but men or material meaning hylics.
Best ever talk on subconsciousness.
This is one of the better interviews and discussions. I highly recommend a follow-up. Very good!👍
Great speaker. Solid thoughts. More of this gent.
This is the perfect retort to the "all is consciousness" argument.
...What a wonderful conversation, thank you, respectfully, Chuck...captivus brevis...you tube...Blessings...
Much love for the conversational participation.
I wonder what your excellent guest thinks about lucid dreaming. I regularly feel as though I become aware in my dreams that I am dreaming and when that “happens” I can often control to varying degrees what happens next in the dream.
Thanks!
The subconscious is neither conscious, nor unconscious: So that, the subconscious is neutral (a psychic regional area where we have an indirect access to the unconscious).
brain handles subconsciously as much as possible from the past and into the future, allowing consciousness / awareness to focus on the present?
consciousness / awareness in the present; past and future in sub-conscious?
This speech belongs in 1924.
Thank you.
Freud stopped talking about the subconscious very early. He specifically rejects that term.
As usual another expert guy here, who knows the number of brain cells but nothing about the mind.
nice. good one.
waking from a dream might mean the dream about something coming in to the conscious present?
Good!
Hundreds of videos on consciousness but all empty I am afraid. I am impressed that people can talk so much with empty content.
0:38 organization of subconscious activities, at that order, vastly exceed our conscious capabilities 🤔
Robert's questions and comments are very deep and clever. I wish he stops reminding us of having PhD...
God is Love. 1 John
Most animals perish due to starvation. Starvation is painful.
@@dukeallen432 Your point?
@@Ekam-Sat, kindly repeat that in ENGLISH, Miss.☝️
Incidentally, Slave, are you VEGAN? 🌱
maybe daydream to stay in situation (past)?
The art of meditation is such that you pay attention to absolutely nothing (in the natural selection environment) and yet you are at your most conscious level of being. So pure awareness is way way way deeper than this rather limited view of consciousness. Consciousness is 100% of yourself and not 0.1%. Hardcore Materialism is pretty sad.
I really need to give meditation a try, my current perspective is it's likely true that I'd be incapable of achieving a state completely void of thought or consciousness.
Lol what? I think the only thing that is sad is your comprehension of what he said, lol!
@@kylebowles9820 I comprehended all of it. And since you have never meditated you obviously have no clue of what I’ve said. His take on consciousness is rather limited and so is yours.
@@andrewmasterman2034 try osho's 'no-mind' meditation.
To follow up on Descartes. I think that I am, so I must be. But what is this I that I am? What does the thinking, that makes me? I'm fairly sure being me is 99% illusion. The real me is hidden there, in the 1%. So gossamer, in this infinite universe. Momentary but woven indelibly into the fabric of the whole.
Brains consciousness It is NOT closer questions . First of all neurosience keep out consciousness definitions so far. This guys shows true evidence about consciousness? NOT absolutetly.
It's confusing for students when a teacher lets an explanation run fast and loose without adhering to established language. Mr. Stickgold is sketchy on his "definitional" (good grief) "areas". For example; in traditional terminology, objective sleep is characterized as a lower state of consciousness from which one may be roused to consciousness. In contrast, a person may not be roused to consciousness from a state of unconsciousness. This is the primary objective difference.
Subjectively, some unconscious sensory processing needs further subconscious processing aided by Sleep, before it becomes accessible to conscious processing. A Neurologist would not say that a dreaming person is unconscious. I've never heard such a thing uttered.
Nature doesn't give a hoot for higher consciousness like ours. Amoeba brain is good enough.
blah , blah, blah. brain is everything, consciousness is secondary. again no closer to the truth. bleat on sheep.
"Powers of Subconscious?"
Awareness or Consciousness is the power of your immortal soul... there is no such thing as sub-soul so sub-consciousness does not exist...
...what is misunderstood as subconscious is just the natural processes of the physical brain which is the natural instincts designed by the Holy Spirit..
.. it is through these natural instincts that the "free aware immortal soul" discovers its limited power and control of the physical body at the start..
In other words, there are no powers of subconscious that does not exist in the first place...
This guy is not intelligent.
total bs
Science is a criterion and must be respected whether or not you like it even if results or findings are contrary to one's beliefs. Such results or findings in teleology have little impact on the principles and universals. Like a puzzle in box of pieces, science affords the researcher many facts and evidences. To put the puzzle together requires another kind of skill that many of these self-proclaimed scientists today lack and have no desire in even making amends. Science, once used for knowledge and understanding, realization and discovery, is now today a limiting factor rather than an aid; a hindering notion than an impetus in liberation.
There is something wrong with this mode or tool that is "science." It's not so much science itself that's self impediment but the man who wields this tool that brings a limiting factor. Some such men are so gay & extrovert in their use of science that they no longer can even think rationally. They care more about trite results and focus on only what they can control, manipulate, and exploit, of which they can, too, falsify so truly knowing - so they believe - any such "mystery" or aporia they repudiate; such may be metaphysics, that which is strictly subject and no object, and tho they critize, metaphysics is most logical and rational in comparison to the scientific aporia in: what come first, the tree or the seed arguement?.
We know there's issues between people, beliefs, lifestyles, cultures, tradition, religions, political authorities, and parties.... many scientists, too, are no exempt - everything has to be a particular to them; everything must be reified and their relativity confirmed; they only want to deal with what they can control, manipulate and exploit, as this is the only way they know how to be logical, but such information panned out isn't true knowledge of something nor its essence, and this is unwittingly how they affirm their position. Just because this whole thing doesn't work the way they want it to, and because they(materialists/nihilists) haven't absolute power over some things, doesn't merit such folly in men to entire occlude it or run away from it.
The 4 pillars of science: observation, measurement, testing, replicating and the 3 modes of materialists for science: can it be controlled, manipulated and exploited - and if it cannot be they preclude it or mystery or ignorance altogether, thus circumscribing themselves to a little box, where little Billy plays with his magnifying glass and toy soliders making a sand castles, never wanting to leave his little condition.
Metaphysics doesn't deny teleology or science at all, nor does theology - metaphysics and because attributes can not be without cause, that which is known makes known indirectly the unknown or principle - oh no, this disrupts little Billy in the sand box, better not talk about it guys, because it's not "real science". Metaphysics does check of the first 3 pillars of 4 when it comes to science: observation, measurement, and testing. Observation isn't mere vision with the eye organ alone, but the knowing of this seer that uses the eye organ for sight; too, the minds eye or Intellect in Reason, thought, insight and perspective. Measurement is proximity, genus, inquiring the unknown from the known or principle and attribute, revealing somethings true essence that isn't merely apparent by the naked eye or superficiality and requires 'demonstration', which I argue may be both of the 2 and 3rd pillar, being measurement and testing. Testing here in metaphysics isn't like probing a mouse in the lab, rather by way of scientific dialectic and retroduction based on Reason.
I thought science was about expeditions and discovery, curiosity, and a wanting to learn and realize how things work and why we're here....but no, you're all a bunch of boring babies....like in the movie Titanic, where Rose is bored to death mingle with the rich, and Jack takes her to the bottom of the ship where real fun were had.
If "science" wants to occlude truth, justice, virtues, harmony, sound, light, life, being, essence, beauty, good, soul, nature(s), theophanies, providence, spirit, and reality and i mean reality not the transistory one these idiots think is reality......"scientists", right, I mean the materialist ones, want only deal with particles and new theories like multiverse, quantum bs, and relativity to reify their transient reality.
If science occludes God and the Divine and Soul and Liberation and Wisdom and Truth and Essence and Justice and Beauty and doesn't care about the source and orgin, .....than it isn't science but some mad tyrant who wants to, and it's a high probability, control everything and everyone. Going by their ugly logic: only when we can bring God into the lab and prob the poor guy are we allowed to admit God.
Bunch of cowards who have no logic or reason and complain at me for being to deep and profound because they like their dumbed down version and superficiality. Clowns. Liars.
They're not men of science but men or material meaning hylics.
What this poor old dude ever do to you? How is he hindering liberation?
Are your comments made by A.I. gone haywire or are they just religious views meshed over the years with ponderings of scientific knowledge?