Hello gentlemen. 👋 All of reality, once seen, cannot then be unseen. This is the predicament I face 24/7/365. Brought about, primarily, by my innate sense of hyperrealism for which my Aspergers/Autism aspect of self is either wholly, partly or both, responsible.❤️🔥 This is in essence, or a nutshell if you will, at the core of my personal difficulties with how I interact with the world which others percieve me to share with them. I simply do not inhabit that reality because it simply does not exist. @BernardoKastrup understands.👏 Yeah baby!!! GRRRRRR🤪 ❤️🔥
all i can say is that how quietly amazed I am both my chickens have finally come home to roost, been waiting for this synchronicity for a very long time very very grateful!!!!
@adventuresinawareness I wasn't expecting these conversations..... pretty cool.I love Anthropology mixed with my Research into the Cells. I didn't start in Science...I had to do it through passion. As my son was Serverly Autistic in 2019 Danger to himself and others. Through Passion...I found out the Golden Ratio Of my sons Protocol... Everything I am going through lots of data from the past This brings us back to the 19050s To prove Morden Day Illness and diseases can be prevented. I am the last Michondria daughter of Mt Family. My father was the last GateKeeper of Clongtigora Fairy Ring.....Tuathdannn da dun So why is this Quest in Life so Important Anthropology is the Game of Life. Something is going on World Which is bigger than all of us I am grateful for your Research And the will ....Shear Will To get things done Happy Awaken 2024 Belfast Ireland 🇮🇪
Regarding your final comments... For sure, I have certainly been aware of this ! Having had an 'opening' some years ago I have spent a long time reading, watching, listening with the specific intention to speak about my experiences and make sense of what I perceive and 'understand'. Thank you AWESOME conversation.
SO TRUE!! ॐ ❤ 🙏 1.25.56 :BK:....we never teach anything to anyone and nobody ever teaches anything to us,what actually happens is, that people naturally evolve to a certain place in the palace of mind ,to a certain comprehension of what's going on but if they don't have the language to tell themselves, what it is that they already understand, they will overtly stick to their previous position..........The role we can play ,we can give people that language that they can use to tell themselves what they already know and then they realize that they know...
Great discussion between two of my favourite thinkers. Fascinating to think that a thousand year old spiritual tradition, and modern science can reach the same conclusions. Looking forward to hearing more discussions between Christopher and Bernardo.
I'm always amazed when I listen to an explanation this form of Eastern philosophy how much it reminds me of the Neoplatonism of Plotinus' Enneads. I'm sure that by the 3rd century AD more was travelling along the silk roads than silk!
Definitely tuning in later ...have some paper work to catch up on....inspiration for new year Belfast Ireland 🇮🇪 ❤️ 😎 Flying with the Collective Intelligence
I am very happy to have bumped into this conversation. CW's explanation of the experience of oneness with the Mind at Large is uncannily similar to the experience the physicist Federico Faggin had. Both have indirectly confirmed that BK's deductions are spot on and he only needs to have a similar experience unaided by psychedelics. I found the discussion on 'free will' quite illuminating, especially with the understanding that there is ONLY one field of subjectivity, with the plethora of 'objects' passing on as excitations of the one field!
I really admire both speakers, thank you guys a lot for sharing you wisdom and opening new horizons for your viewers. There is a question which bothers me: If we are ripples, why then we need food, wage wars and have all that Freudian stuff in our minds. If we are parts of something big and “smart”, why is there so much stupidity and wrong doing in this world?
Hi from Brazil and thank very much for this wonderful interview! I am a psychiatrist and love Bernardo’s ideas and how he careful and precisely explains his idealism!!
what a pleasant surprise to find this talk in my recommendations! CW is one of my teachers and it’s really interesting to get a modern perspective from Bernardo.
I'd synthesize what is *will* by saying that *there's something it is like to be nothing.* The state of "absolute rest" is a very nice pointer to unravel the mind, but it's purely hypothetical, that state never happens. You can meditate on it, but once you get to that "void", then you feel how it suddenly and spontaneously is turned into a boundless, infinite, pulsating, living force that goes all the way up from a fundamental self-knowing to the upper layers of mind, and you can feel how that living force spreads throughout everything, giving birth to every single atom in you body and the entire universe along with your thoughts, sensations, emotions and beyond.
This was such an illuminating conversation. I couldn't help thinking of Heraclitus and Parmenides the whole "time," if I can use that expression. Heraclitus's ideas always seemed obviously true to me, but now I'm more and more convinced that Parmenides got it right. I used to think he was nuts. The metaphor of the radio station's underlying frequency, with modulations to the frequency superimposed by a particular radio program, was extremely helpful. And now I understand the reason for the drone that underlies Indian music. Many thanks.
RE: the last couple minutes. English DOES have a second person plural, ya’ll. Brought to you courtesy of the American South. Embrace it! And be grateful you can avoid the American Northeast’s “you’uns”. You’re welcome.
I see free will as more of a marriage. Between what we make of the story we tell ourselves about the will at large and the will at large in itself. The more we see, or allow ourselves to see, the better narrator we become. it's a form of free will. And isn't it the basic message of successful gurus and more. Look at all the different views (view -points) there are, so the narrator part is real. Also I think decisions about the possibility of two centres of consciousness in one mind have to address Iain McGilchrist's left-right brain findings. My balance improves so much by shutting one eye when I'm on the treadmill, it's the difference between having to hold on or not. My whole demeanor changes, go figure.
Samadhi is an experience of alert awakeness. It has no content but you don’t experience any lack of qualities or attributes. There is no sense of lack in deep meditation 🧘♂️ to me it’s being at one with the universal mind but being aware of a vast realm of potentially almost womb like space of unmanifested possibilities. In this space all sense of personal identity dissolves- but you merged with the unbounded substrate of existence 🙏
Hi all I need help understanding there being no time from a practical pov. I get Donald Hoffman’s assertion that it’s a headset along with space. I understand that distance between past , present, and future can be reduced to being non existent (Its akin to me saying , “the future is..NOW! And NOW! And etc, etc.” But then why do we and other living things grow, age and die? Are we dead and alive at the same time in this infinite present ? Before coming to Bernardo’s Analytical Idealism pov I was briefly playing with the notion that God is Time and we are all in its Flow. Now need to relearn and toss that notion.
Well, you don't actually experience growing and aging. You just have, here in this present moment, images & thoughts which you call memories, on the basis of which the narrative of time passing (growing and aging etc.), seems convincing. And we shouldn't bin that narrative, it's a perfectly useful one. But we can't verify its veracity, since all we ever have is phenomena appearing in the present moment in such a way as to make the narrative seem plausible, especially if it's the one that's assumed a priori. By the way, FWIW, in Classical Tantra the supreme Goddess Kālī is called "She Who Devours Time".
I was reminded of BlackHoles when they were speaking of Mind-at-Large in that nothing escapes or apparently exists at all outside of some event horizon. Also chaotic bifurcation into new whirlpools of disassociation is an ongoing evolutionary force.
I have got a question for B.Kastrup and, maybe, if you find it worthwhile, for the March interview? I know Kastrup respects E. Swedenborg, and I know, by reading Swedenborg, that he believes that, beyond this dissociation, the individual consciousness will ‘take with it’ the love experienced in the dissociated state. So if we agree on what it is the core of Swedenborg’s ideas, we could say that there will still be a ‘whirlpool’ after this biological dissociated state. By definition if each keeps the unique love experienced in biological life, the whirlpool cannot entirely cease to ‘make a ripple’ in consciousness at large.
Good question! Will you be joining the March series? Anyone joining can submit questions and also ask them yourself if you join the meeting live Hope that helps!
The answer to the "why there is something rather than nothing" is that because there is Will. Now, the question is: why there is Will rather than nothing :)
Fascinating. Only 15 mins in and getting clarity. There's something about lifebuoys that language throws to us. Why the need to enumerate being as 1 being. Isn't it that anything that be's, be now. How many now's are there?
Bernado's presentism is not justified fully within his metaphysical framework. Even if the past memories exist as mere aspects of present experience, our present experiences and actions are always already determined/constrained by past experiences that have crystallized into certain configurations/structures of information. We don't even have to experience these memories for them to have causal efficacy in the present. The realist account of temporality would stress that structures are pre-experiential, in the sense that we don't have immediate awareness of our own memories and experiences from childhood which are instantiated in the present mode of filtering our experience.
That's a perfectly valid interpretive model (I use it myself), but it's not verifiable. We can only say that phenomena appear (now) in such a way as to suggest such a conceptual model to us.
@@christopherwallis751I appreciate your work, sir. Thank you for the comment. I'm however skeptical of the way epistemic relativism is conflated with ontological relativism under many idealist schools of thought. Scientific practices presuppose a certain realistic account of its objects of investigation. So, going beyond appearances (in the present) and postulating structures (of past configurations) in order to deduce facts about the world, is core to scientific enterprise. I can't say that the Newtonian physics is only real insofar as I can understand or perceive it now. No, it describes a world (albeit incompletely) with structures that endures over time and its dynamics that is independent of perceptions and phenomenal experiences..
@@lokayatavishwam9594 that's a perfectly legitimate perspective. I would just gently suggest that it reifies conceptual models of reality beyond the point that direct observation warrants. It's not epistemic relativism that I espouse, but rather a strong kind of skepticism about the degree to which conceptual models can be seen as ontologically 'true'. Lastly, with the Newtonian comment, you seem to be conflating idealism with solipsism, a misunderstanding that Bernardo has addressed at some length already.
@@christopherwallis751 Interesting. I'm just unable to understand how direct observation wouldn't warrant a view of time as ontologically real. Every conscious organism, I believe, has some direct awareness of the flow of time. That's why they prepare for the future in many ways. Of course you could say it's just some kind of internal modelling and consequent responses going on in their experienced present. But the modelling itself presupposes a real structure, from which the conceptual foundation is derived and revised. If you start from the premise that there is only the eternal now, you're discounting quite a big part of what our direct experience tells us about the world and the pre-existing conditions for such an experience to be possible and necessary.
there is one correction here. The sentence in Shankar's Advaita is 'Brahm Satya, Jagat Mithya', the word 'Mithya' is not illusion. it is not what is in real that appears to you. so, all foreign who read Sanskrit with direct translation to English makes such error which takes whole discussion to other level. One has to be an Indian at least to study these words. because in Sanskrit every name is selected according to its property for a given subject or object. only Elephant has 72 names. For example People create huge misconceptions about 'Indra' , thinking that is a king of devlok. but in vedas 'Indra' means great, powerful. so, we need to do 'Dhyan', 'Dharna' and 'Samadhi' to reach to that highest level of pragna which these sages had and then only we can grasp the meaning of a word or sentence for a given context.
thanks for this comment - I didn't understand the sentence "it is not what is in real that appears to you." - could you explain? Is there a better translation for 'Mithya'?
This seems like a vacous language game. "Nothing moves since we are also moving with time.". You dont need a Cartesian ego to have presentist intuitions. My reasoning is about having an open future for free will.
I find Bernard’s position unsatisfactory for explaining how determinate, finite beings emerge out of undifferentiated formless consciousness. Also to say that reality is fundamentally consciousness is just as arbitrary and reductionistic as saying it is fundamentally physical. It really just seems like sloppy thinking
The difference between saying everything is consciousness is that we know consciousness directly, whereas physical things are only a concept based on perceptions known by consciousness
@@adventuresinawarenessThen the concept of consciousness would have to be abstracted from itself. That seems like a vicious circle or just a form of question begging. Kastrup believes in a “subjective experiential field”. The physicalist believes in objective, physical quantum fields. The disagreement is nothing but a dispute over arbitrary worlds. This is what happens when scientists attempt to do metaphysics
@@Eudaemoniac says this while directly experiencing a subjective experiential field, haha ;) But srsly, read Bernardo's books to get the full argument, it's well thought-out.
@@christopherwallis751 To describe something as a field is to objectify it and treat it in a quasi-physical sense. Tantric philosophy seems much more metaphysically sophisticated. Closer to Hegel’s idea of absolute spirit becoming its own object only in order to recognize its own identity like an image reflected in a mirror.
@@Eudaemoniac correct! 'field' is just a figure of speech. and, it's indeed a pity that Hegel had no access to Tantric philosophy. there are some startling parallels.
It's deeply fascinating, but perhaps doesnt graduate beyond deepity. We seem incapable of falsifying such hypotheses. In my book it makes them no more practical than any other mystical claim. If I'm a node in a universal mind, a brain in a vat, a hologram, an avatar or any such thing, in the sense that the experience I have is one constrained by physicality (simulated or brute matter) makes not a stich of difference when, say, I suffer. You can blind with science of philosophy (or illuminate alternatively) but you can't remove the illusion of soteriological consideration, as the pain of being is acutely felt (qualia?) If it's technically 'real' or otherwise. I'd like to hear these ideas promulgated whilst burning at the stake or even having the thumb screws tightended on your imaginary substrate. I love this stuff as thought sport but the term sophistry haunts me when I try to get to bedrock.
Bernardo, everything is mental, so is evolution mental too? Evolution is a purely physicalist theory, why do you use in your ideas about dissociation? It seems you pick and choose the science which makes your analytical idealism a logical whole.
Hellooo, I can hear you, you know. ;) FYI, I was speaking about the classical / premodern formulation of Advaita Vedānta, not the version gurus today teach. And of course my comments were a simplification, but they were accurate enough.
I'm a fan of Bernardo too! Christopher was invited to share a summary of the tradition he studies so that they could have a meaningful dialogue, so he's only doing what he was asked. Bernardo stayed for an extra two hours after this for extended q&a, as he almost always does at these events!
Worlds are colliding! I’m a fan of Kastrup and Wallis, it’s great to hear them in dialogue.
I’m quaking with bliss 🎉watching this channel
Amazing! ♥️
Thank you so much for putting together the slide show.
Immediately subscribed after your own first 15 min. Thanks for this awesome content! 👽
Awesome! Thank you!
Hello gentlemen. 👋 All of reality, once seen, cannot then be unseen. This is the predicament I face 24/7/365. Brought about, primarily, by my innate sense of hyperrealism for which my Aspergers/Autism aspect of self is either wholly, partly or both, responsible.❤️🔥
This is in essence, or a nutshell if you will, at the core of my personal difficulties with how I interact with the world which others percieve me to share with them. I simply do not inhabit that reality because it simply does not exist.
@BernardoKastrup understands.👏
Yeah baby!!! GRRRRRR🤪
❤️🔥
... and I sense that subtle pervasive beingness by DEFAULT. Please can you advise me?
all i can say is that how quietly amazed I am
both my chickens have finally come home to roost, been waiting for this synchronicity for a very long time
very very grateful!!!!
Ha that's so cool!
Wow...5mins in and I am loving it
Belfast Ireland 🇮🇪 ❤️
Welcome Belfast!❤️
@adventuresinawareness I wasn't expecting these conversations..... pretty cool.I love Anthropology mixed with my Research into the Cells.
I didn't start in Science...I had to do it through passion.
As my son was Serverly Autistic in 2019
Danger to himself and others.
Through Passion...I found out the Golden Ratio
Of my sons Protocol...
Everything
I am going through lots of data from the past
This brings us back to the 19050s
To prove Morden Day
Illness and diseases can be prevented.
I am the last Michondria daughter of Mt Family.
My father was the last
GateKeeper of
Clongtigora
Fairy Ring.....Tuathdannn da dun
So why is this Quest in Life so Important
Anthropology is the Game of Life.
Something is going on
World
Which is bigger than all of us
I am grateful for your Research
And the will ....Shear Will
To get things done
Happy Awaken 2024
Belfast Ireland 🇮🇪
Thank you all. Great talk, knowldege and profound insights.
Our pleasure!
Regarding your final comments... For sure, I have certainly been aware of this ! Having had an 'opening' some years ago I have spent a long time reading, watching, listening with the specific intention to speak about my experiences and make sense of what I perceive and 'understand'. Thank you AWESOME conversation.
SO TRUE!! ॐ ❤ 🙏
1.25.56 :BK:....we never teach anything to anyone and nobody ever teaches anything to us,what actually happens is, that people naturally evolve to a certain place in the palace of mind ,to a certain comprehension of what's going on but if they don't have the language to tell themselves, what it is that they already understand, they will overtly stick to their previous position..........The role we can play ,we can give people that language that they can use to tell themselves what they already know and then they realize that they know...
Thank you! ❤🙏
Thanks for your comment! 🙏
Absolutely Bernardo you have hit the nail on the head. Thank you!!!!!!🙃🙏🎶🎶
Great discussion between two of my favourite thinkers. Fascinating to think that a thousand year old spiritual tradition, and modern science can reach the same conclusions. Looking forward to hearing more discussions between Christopher and Bernardo.
YES.. MORE PLEASE
I'm always amazed when I listen to an explanation this form of Eastern philosophy how much it reminds me of the Neoplatonism of Plotinus' Enneads. I'm sure that by the 3rd century AD more was travelling along the silk roads than silk!
Almost certainly
Indeed. Neoplatonism might have influenced Tantra, distantly.
@@christopherwallis751 No way, man!
Definitely tuning in later ...have some paper work to catch up on....inspiration for new year
Belfast Ireland 🇮🇪 ❤️ 😎
Flying with the
Collective Intelligence
how did i miss this
I am very happy to have bumped into this conversation. CW's explanation of the experience of oneness with the Mind at Large is uncannily similar to the experience the physicist Federico Faggin had. Both have indirectly confirmed that BK's deductions are spot on and he only needs to have a similar experience unaided by psychedelics.
I found the discussion on 'free will' quite illuminating, especially with the understanding that there is ONLY one field of subjectivity, with the plethora of 'objects' passing on as excitations of the one field!
Thanks! 🙏🙏
I really admire both speakers, thank you guys a lot for sharing you wisdom and opening new horizons for your viewers.
There is a question which bothers me:
If we are ripples, why then we need food, wage wars and have all that Freudian stuff in our minds. If we are parts of something big and “smart”, why is there so much stupidity and wrong doing in this world?
Great combo!
I am amazed by this conversation.It resonates with the teachings of Ramakrisha and Swami Vivekananda
Yep! It’s wonderful !
13:21 Existence of everything is connected because of being in the field as explained by Rupert Sheldrake😊
Wow, the other day I was thinking about these two meeting!
Hi from Brazil and thank very much for this wonderful interview! I am a psychiatrist and love Bernardo’s ideas and how he careful and precisely explains his idealism!!
Welcome! Thanks for dropping in!
This video is amazing.
Brilliant conversation. ❤
Thank you!
what a pleasant surprise to find this talk in my recommendations! CW is one of my teachers and it’s really interesting to get a modern perspective from Bernardo.
Yeah it's a great juxtaposition !
❤❤❤
Thanks for uploading! Extremely interesting!
Thanks for the encouragement! 🙏
3:15 The direct realisation can be easily explained and integrated with daily living and be in order😊😊
Excellent description/explanation of nondual Shiava tantra by C. Wallis. Very appreciative, I was not familiar with it.❤
Yes me neither
Seems very helpful
So so good
Thank you!!♥️
I'd synthesize what is *will* by saying that *there's something it is like to be nothing.*
The state of "absolute rest" is a very nice pointer to unravel the mind, but it's purely hypothetical, that state never happens.
You can meditate on it, but once you get to that "void", then you feel how it suddenly and spontaneously is turned into a boundless, infinite, pulsating, living force that goes all the way up from a fundamental self-knowing to the upper layers of mind, and you can feel how that living force spreads throughout everything, giving birth to every single atom in you body and the entire universe along with your thoughts, sensations, emotions and beyond.
This was such an illuminating conversation. I couldn't help thinking of Heraclitus and Parmenides the whole "time," if I can use that expression. Heraclitus's ideas always seemed obviously true to me, but now I'm more and more convinced that Parmenides got it right. I used to think he was nuts.
The metaphor of the radio station's underlying frequency, with modulations to the frequency superimposed by a particular radio program, was extremely helpful. And now I understand the reason for the drone that underlies Indian music.
Many thanks.
Great comment! Thanks
Very interesting parallels
I won't allow time. But the Greeks would allow thyme
3:15 This omnipresent omniscient non depleting energy is static. This coexists with matter that is in continuous change.
RE: the last couple minutes. English DOES have a second person plural, ya’ll. Brought to you courtesy of the American South. Embrace it! And be grateful you can avoid the American Northeast’s “you’uns”. You’re welcome.
🙏🙏🙏
I see free will as more of a marriage. Between what we make of the story we tell ourselves about the will at large and the will at large in itself. The more we see, or allow ourselves to see, the better narrator we become. it's a form of free will. And isn't it the basic message of successful gurus and more. Look at all the different views (view -points) there are, so the narrator part is real. Also I think decisions about the possibility of two centres of consciousness in one mind have to address Iain McGilchrist's left-right brain findings. My balance improves so much by shutting one eye when I'm on the treadmill, it's the difference between having to hold on or not. My whole demeanor changes, go figure.
I can’t seem to find part 2…. Any links?
I'm hoping to get this up in the next few weeks - thanks for the reminder!
Samadhi is an experience of alert awakeness. It has no content but you don’t experience any lack of qualities or attributes. There is no sense of lack in deep meditation 🧘♂️ to me it’s being at one with the universal mind but being aware of a vast realm of potentially almost womb like space of unmanifested possibilities. In this space all sense of personal identity dissolves- but you merged with the unbounded substrate of existence 🙏
Awesome regional history and background information!! ❤
Yes really useful context
Glad you enjoyed it!
Thank you!! I appreciate. 😃❤️
3:15 Every sentient being is unique seperate and a life atom whose structure I have explained .
I would love to hear what Bernardo would think about Walter Russell's work.
Hi all I need help understanding there being no time from a practical pov. I get Donald Hoffman’s assertion that it’s a headset along with space. I understand that distance between past , present, and future can be reduced to being non existent (Its akin to me saying , “the future is..NOW! And NOW! And etc, etc.” But then why do we and other living things grow, age and die? Are we dead and alive at the same time in this infinite present ? Before coming to Bernardo’s Analytical Idealism pov I was briefly playing with the notion that God is Time and we are all in its Flow. Now need to relearn and toss that notion.
Well, you don't actually experience growing and aging. You just have, here in this present moment, images & thoughts which you call memories, on the basis of which the narrative of time passing (growing and aging etc.), seems convincing. And we shouldn't bin that narrative, it's a perfectly useful one. But we can't verify its veracity, since all we ever have is phenomena appearing in the present moment in such a way as to make the narrative seem plausible, especially if it's the one that's assumed a priori. By the way, FWIW, in Classical Tantra the supreme Goddess Kālī is called "She Who Devours Time".
I was reminded of BlackHoles when they were speaking of Mind-at-Large in that nothing escapes or apparently exists at all outside of some event horizon. Also chaotic bifurcation into new whirlpools of disassociation is an ongoing evolutionary force.
I have got a question for B.Kastrup and, maybe, if you find it worthwhile, for the March interview?
I know Kastrup respects E. Swedenborg, and I know, by reading Swedenborg, that he believes that, beyond this dissociation, the individual consciousness will ‘take with it’ the love experienced in the dissociated state. So if we agree on what it is the core of Swedenborg’s ideas, we could say that there will still be a ‘whirlpool’ after this biological dissociated state. By definition if each keeps the unique love experienced in biological life, the whirlpool cannot entirely cease to ‘make a ripple’ in consciousness at large.
Good question!
Will you be joining the March series?
Anyone joining can submit questions and also ask them yourself if you join the meeting live
Hope that helps!
OK now😊
Absolutely on point introduction it felt
Thank you!
The answer to the "why there is something rather than nothing" is that because there is Will. Now, the question is: why there is Will rather than nothing :)
Bernardo needs to talk to Jom Newman please
Nice to know I am not the only one with 3 million tabs open.
Fascinating. Only 15 mins in and getting clarity. There's something about lifebuoys that language throws to us. Why the need to enumerate being as 1 being.
Isn't it that anything that be's, be now.
How many now's are there?
No sound!
Sound is working for me - are other videos working for you?
Bernado's presentism is not justified fully within his metaphysical framework. Even if the past memories exist as mere aspects of present experience, our present experiences and actions are always already determined/constrained by past experiences that have crystallized into certain configurations/structures of information. We don't even have to experience these memories for them to have causal efficacy in the present.
The realist account of temporality would stress that structures are pre-experiential, in the sense that we don't have immediate awareness of our own memories and experiences from childhood which are instantiated in the present mode of filtering our experience.
That's a perfectly valid interpretive model (I use it myself), but it's not verifiable. We can only say that phenomena appear (now) in such a way as to suggest such a conceptual model to us.
@@christopherwallis751I appreciate your work, sir. Thank you for the comment.
I'm however skeptical of the way epistemic relativism is conflated with ontological relativism under many idealist schools of thought.
Scientific practices presuppose a certain realistic account of its objects of investigation. So, going beyond appearances (in the present) and postulating structures (of past configurations) in order to deduce facts about the world, is core to scientific enterprise. I can't say that the Newtonian physics is only real insofar as I can understand or perceive it now. No, it describes a world (albeit incompletely) with structures that endures over time and its dynamics that is independent of perceptions and phenomenal experiences..
@@lokayatavishwam9594 that's a perfectly legitimate perspective. I would just gently suggest that it reifies conceptual models of reality beyond the point that direct observation warrants. It's not epistemic relativism that I espouse, but rather a strong kind of skepticism about the degree to which conceptual models can be seen as ontologically 'true'. Lastly, with the Newtonian comment, you seem to be conflating idealism with solipsism, a misunderstanding that Bernardo has addressed at some length already.
@@christopherwallis751 Interesting. I'm just unable to understand how direct observation wouldn't warrant a view of time as ontologically real. Every conscious organism, I believe, has some direct awareness of the flow of time.
That's why they prepare for the future in many ways. Of course you could say it's just some kind of internal modelling and consequent responses going on in their experienced present. But the modelling itself presupposes a real structure, from which the conceptual foundation is derived and revised. If you start from the premise that there is only the eternal now, you're discounting quite a big part of what our direct experience tells us about the world and the pre-existing conditions for such an experience to be possible and necessary.
there is one correction here. The sentence in Shankar's Advaita is 'Brahm Satya, Jagat Mithya', the word 'Mithya' is not illusion. it is not what is in real that appears to you. so, all foreign who read Sanskrit with direct translation to English makes such error which takes whole discussion to other level. One has to be an Indian at least to study these words. because in Sanskrit every name is selected according to its property for a given subject or object. only Elephant has 72 names. For example People create huge misconceptions about 'Indra' , thinking that is a king of devlok. but in vedas 'Indra' means great, powerful. so, we need to do 'Dhyan', 'Dharna' and 'Samadhi' to reach to that highest level of pragna which these sages had and then only we can grasp the meaning of a word or sentence for a given context.
thanks for this comment - I didn't understand the sentence "it is not what is in real that appears to you." - could you explain?
Is there a better translation for 'Mithya'?
From the Sanskrit dictionary: मिथ्या mithyā -1 Falsity, unreality. -2 Illusion, error. -3 Inversion. -4 Perversion.
(V.S. Apte's dictionary, the gold standard)
Soooo similar to Lurianic Kabbalah!!
its impressive the hours put into being wrong
3:15 No randomness is there in existence other than the wayward behaviour of homo sapiens on this planet, 🙏🙏🙏
This seems like a vacous language game. "Nothing moves since we are also moving with time.". You dont need a Cartesian ego to have presentist intuitions. My reasoning is about having an open future for free will.
One conciousness 😂
I find Bernard’s position unsatisfactory for explaining how determinate, finite beings emerge out of undifferentiated formless consciousness. Also to say that reality is fundamentally consciousness is just as arbitrary and reductionistic as saying it is fundamentally physical. It really just seems like sloppy thinking
The difference between saying everything is consciousness is that we know consciousness directly, whereas physical things are only a concept based on perceptions known by consciousness
@@adventuresinawarenessThen the concept of consciousness would have to be abstracted from itself. That seems like a vicious circle or just a form of question begging. Kastrup believes in a “subjective experiential field”. The physicalist believes in objective, physical quantum fields. The disagreement is nothing but a dispute over arbitrary worlds. This is what happens when scientists attempt to do metaphysics
@@Eudaemoniac says this while directly experiencing a subjective experiential field, haha ;) But srsly, read Bernardo's books to get the full argument, it's well thought-out.
@@christopherwallis751 To describe something as a field is to objectify it and treat it in a quasi-physical sense. Tantric philosophy seems much more metaphysically sophisticated. Closer to Hegel’s idea of absolute spirit becoming its own object only in order to recognize its own identity like an image reflected in a mirror.
@@Eudaemoniac correct! 'field' is just a figure of speech. and, it's indeed a pity that Hegel had no access to Tantric philosophy. there are some startling parallels.
It's deeply fascinating, but perhaps doesnt graduate beyond deepity. We seem incapable of falsifying such hypotheses. In my book it makes them no more practical than any other mystical claim. If I'm a node in a universal mind, a brain in a vat, a hologram, an avatar or any such thing, in the sense that the experience I have is one constrained by physicality (simulated or brute matter) makes not a stich of difference when, say, I suffer. You can blind with science of philosophy (or illuminate alternatively) but you can't remove the illusion of soteriological consideration, as the pain of being is acutely felt (qualia?) If it's technically 'real' or otherwise. I'd like to hear these ideas promulgated whilst burning at the stake or even having the thumb screws tightended on your imaginary substrate. I love this stuff as thought sport but the term sophistry haunts me when I try to get to bedrock.
Bernardo, everything is mental, so is evolution mental too? Evolution is a purely physicalist theory, why do you use in your ideas about dissociation? It seems you pick and choose the science which makes your analytical idealism a logical whole.
Don’t listen this dude about Advaita Vedanta. He does understand it. He said bullshit.
Hellooo, I can hear you, you know. ;) FYI, I was speaking about the classical / premodern formulation of Advaita Vedānta, not the version gurus today teach. And of course my comments were a simplification, but they were accurate enough.
I would appreciate it if this guy would shut his mouth and let Dr Kastrup speak a bit
I'm a fan of Bernardo too!
Christopher was invited to share a summary of the tradition he studies so that they could have a meaningful dialogue, so he's only doing what he was asked.
Bernardo stayed for an extra two hours after this for extended q&a, as he almost always does at these events!
yup! we all have a long way to go in terms of accepting what is being offered in the particular way it is being offered@@adventuresinawareness