I've actually experienced these things for myself, but it's impossible to talk about without sounding like a crackpot. I'm glad there are other, more qualified crazy people talking about this. That said, I'm still a skeptic, only because I believe in the scientific process and likewise don't believe in my own senses, which I know are fallible. The truth is out there.
It's truly heartening to see sincere exploration of fields a concepts such as this, which have, since the rise of dogmatic materialism, have pigeon-holed, ridiculed and villified from the days of DeCarte.
I am a 73 year old great-grandmother and I listen to Bernardo several times a week. (Especially loved the one with he and Rupert Spira) I admit I have to have a Dictionary close by 😉...but I learn so much from him, particularly about the nature of Consciousness. Just something about Bernardo...👍
Absolutely! I've been following him for a little over 3 years and he has COMPLETELY changed my perspective on the nature of reality and the self, religion, consciousness, etc. I'm beyond thankful for his patience, clarity and humility when conveying complex topics to the average layman like myself.
He like all others are working within a confirmation bias created by the Roman slavers What i would like you to know is The universe is a switch that blinks into and out of existence, but whilst within the blink of existence, the universe expands which means FEELS and retracts again a FEELING, so the universe is constantly FEELING a range of emotion Then the universe thinks "thinking is capable without language, a cat , a dog, a insect all think without words , but the noise of something exists" The Druids say "we have the wrong end of the stick" "we cant see past the end of our nose" "there is an elephant in the room" "humpty dumpty ,"rock a by baby" along with many others passed mum to baby orally . whilst the left noise PFC "let its imagination run away with itself" and the right PFC did what it was told without the left being aware of it :) The point is the "the fish rots from the head first" So the noise is the first to go then you are left with FEELINGS , i pray you feel all of the love possible here, the love you have always felt, but if you feel something more overwhelming, its ok, we know, you dont have to tell anyone, we know, Then the light show before the lights are turned off, (time gets a little weird here, but there is no memory , just a ride to the rebirth (your an energy, if you didn't balance your vibration to almost nothing, then the vibration stays)) That's the meaning of existence to have everyone existing within love ,. So the "Bough" does not break
I find the example of metaphysical experience that Bernardo talked about very interesting, the grandma that had a head stroke, and his girlfriend knew about it. When I was still a kid, we had a similar experience in our family. Our family (i.e. me and my parents) moved far away from my grandparents, because my father found work there. Now, after many years, suddenly my mother woke up in the middle of the night and started packing everything we need to travel and put it in the car. My father woke up and asked here what she was doing and why she was preparing for travel. My mother said, she had no idea, just felt that it was important but didn't know why (and normally she didn't do weird stuff like this). So we were all puzzled. Then the phone rang, and we were informed that my grandpa was in the hospital hundreds of kilometers away, and he's about to die, and we should pack our most important stuff and come as quickly as possible. My mother had already done this, and we were ready to go immediately. My grandfather died a few hours later in the early morning.
Bernardo Kastrup IS special. He is easily understood, authentic and humbly gracious. It takes only one time hearing Bernardo speak and most know he is seriously noteworthy.
Bernardo speaks the truth,No Thing happens, or everything is No Thing. The physicist wont be able to understand bernardo as well as the other people who asked questions because they thought, a person is the same as consciousness which is fundamental. Bernardo you,nailed it!!! Amazing.
Bernard means brave as a bear. Now we also know smart and intelligent. I love it. This is incredible conversation. Historical. Both deserve the Nobel Prize.
Well even though this was posted 6 months ago and I am just now watching because I've gotten very interested in Kastrup, because I find him exceedingly intelligent, probably mainly because he is able to observe without judgment and use introspection with what he observes, it seems that very few, especially men, are able to observe without judgment, then use introspection with an honest observational view lacking judgment but including consistent introspection, although posted 6 months ago I feel compelled to respond because I find that I like Mr Carr much more than expected so I thought I'd make a comment or two on Mister Carr's views with which he very consistently implies he knows not whether it is correct or not my implicit comment is that Mr Carr you are much more correct than you realize I'm surprised that your dreams haven't made this clear but perhaps they have and you just can't express it here I think it's interesting how intensely Mr Bernardo listens to you in this video I decided to make this comment to express Mr Carr you are correct how do I know this? My experience in the travel of consciousness yes there is a prism not necessarily a hierarchy that's a convenient way of understanding how a prism works but one would never consider the prism of colors or sound in music for example to be a hierarchy in that you would never omit the wonderful high sounds to the low sounds in a musical configuration any more than you would omit the high and low vibrations of an existence in a hierarchy what we call lucid dreaming today will soon be found becoming conscious in another state in another place we consider it becoming conscious while we are dreaming but logistically it makes more sense that we are becoming conscious in another space that space and Consciousness being a prism of several different stations like a train predicts expresses and mathematically calculates that yes not only are we all one configuration but also a million configurations in order to be an individual you must be a cosmos to be large must be small I wish I could speak more specifically about this in this post but it's just not possible but I can say that I am very talented in the travel of Consciousness and that the dream state is a part of the prism that could be referred to as the seventh dimension I have had the version of my own existence from that dimension appear to me visit me in that state we call dreaming which is actually another state of consciousness she is a faster version existing of me that is able to calculate and see much bigger and faster than I possibly can where I am here in the third dimension. she visited me once for just an instant because in the terms of prisms and Consciousness it's illegal not presentable under the architecture of Consciousness without collapse this means that we are many and one at the same space I get very frustrated with the use of the word time t i m e it's never expressed or explained accurately even by you guys there is an objective reference to time anywhere which is that it is the Rhythm of movement of space therefore to refer to real time as is often specified it must always be either referred to as clock or rhythm of space therefore there is no such thing as a state of time a dimension of time there is perhaps a reference to the rhythm of space movement and that all space movement could be referred to as a state of time but that would only be the references to the rhythm of space moving not a clock any other references that are not to space moving are the references to the imagination produced by the human being of the clock by slicing up those rhythms into numbers this is not a real existence this is a consequence of perception by the human Through Math the only real existence of what we refer to as time is the rhythm of space movement this is why when dreaming time seems to dilate it doesn't dilate it doesn't exist in that state of that consciousness I get very frustrated that no physics people know philosophy people nobody refers to the reference of time as it has been sliced up by a clock being the movement of rhythm of space most of the references of time by human physics psychologist and more are the references of the clock 24 hours and nothing else not even the rhythm of the movement of space this is very disappointing anyway most important I thought that you know Mr Carr if you happen to see this post you are correct there is a version of me in the third dimension there is a version of me in the seventh Dimension there is a version of me in the 4th 5th and 6th Dimension there are three zillion versions of me in the entire existence of whatever might be called universes or Cosmos and those versions of me are all versions of you and therefore are versions of Millions however the concept of being a singular one against those Millions is only a concept to recognize the Millions the same as a plan is an architecture configured in order to recognize the spontaneous random without the architecture of plan you can never recognize random that's why Mr Carr and Mr Kastrup random doesn't seem like an existence to you it is but you can't see it unless you see it against the counter on which everything exists meaning all existence you must see the counter of architecture in order to recognize random or spontaneity ❤GEM❤
These two are some of my favorites!! This makes me SO HAPPY to see them together! Thank you! Bravo! 👏🏻 🌹 More! Also, I think I’ve said this before, but for such an insightful message to be packaged in an absolutely delightful, adorable package as Bernard is just the cherry on top. Really appreciate the guiding questions from Bernardo and his expertise too. Just so happy this is happening and can’t wait for the next one! ETA: I do have to say I’m surprised by how adamantly Bernardo argues against there being meta cognitive faculties in consciousness at large…this view contradicts a mass of observations/reports from NDE data if one is to take that into account (as, arguably, one should). I would love to hear Bernard’s thoughts on that as he is more familiar with the literature than Bernardo is. Please do ask them about this next time! Look forward to it!
@@philosophybabble Oh! I didn’t even know that was a possibility! I’m subscribed here to get all the alerts for your channel; will there be an alert/announcement for when that would happen? Or do I need to sign up to be notified on a different app (Clubhouse?)? Thank you!!
@@surrendertoflow78 Announcement will be on the channel, but you will requires to sign up for Clubhouse audio app. Details are on the channel about page. Let me know if you're having issue. :)
The question at time 54 min. is a great one which I have had talks about with some friends. How does it fragment, but also how does it get back together in the end...and then who are we then. ? Bernardo's remarks at time 1:40 etc....great great stuff about nothing happening in time and everything....keep talking Bernardo....don't stop.
Great conversation but two of Bernardo’s insights stood out: The ‘off the record’ conjecture about time and existence - brilliant. The summation of Jungs insight into the meaning of life in co-creating nature through our accounting of experience.
I chuckled at the moment Bernard said the infinitely small was the same as the infinitely large. I woke from a sleep when I was 15 or 16 with that exact knowledge! And to this day I believe it. Wonderful discussion. Thank you!
Love this dialogue. Listen to it over and over again. I think Dr. Kastrup would be interested in the philosopher Jiddu Krishnamurti who died 1895-1986. Many of his talks and dialogues with for instance the physicist David Bohm are readily available on UA-cam.
My thoughts exactly! K asked, can there be a radical, instant, profound, worldwide change? My clumsy words, not K's. Yes, I heard so much J Krishnamurti in this conversation. I'm glad you heard the same.
I asked my friend a question like this last year and he got mad, thinking I was just trying to intuit the existence of a soul (which I do believe in as an Orthodox Christian, but I refrain from almost all arguments for it and wasn't really trying to argue it at all). My question was "Why am I me and not a rock?" Which was further illustrated with the question "Why am I me and not you, or anyone else in any time period ever?" When I expanded on this concept another friend thought I was just going for The Ship of Theseus, which I wasn't. It's a weird question, especially if you don't believe that preexisting souls/minds come occupy distinct bodies that can be interchanged (which I and most materialists do not). I'm gonna listen to this at some point, but I'm quite interested in hearing the conversation.
I'm not a materialist, but I'm not really seeing Bernard's point discussed around the hour mark. A materialist would argue that Bernard is Bernard (and not Bernardo) precisely because of the particular genetic patterns that make up Bernard's body, the particular neural configurations in Bernard's brain, the particular embryonic (and other) physiological history, and so forth. None of this is "portable" to another person, or even away from Bernard to an abstract space, so in that sense it wouldn't be meaningless in materialism. I'm not saying that I agree with materialism; I'm only saying that I don't really see that point. Of course this also has a "spiritual" version, because even if the brain is just filtering / moulding my consciousness, there is the question of whether any of that filtering or moulding is portable either once the physical system fails. One presumes filtering would end with the collapse of the filter and that moulding would no longer be a force exerted if the mould itself lost all shape and form. There is a question of whether memories can be retained in some form, and there is the interesting question of whether whatever you become can be said to have a unique history in space-time (as Bernard or Bernardo, or whatever). The question of why I am me and not someone else becomes more pressing if consciousness is ever taken to disappear entirely, however, as many people take it to do in surgical anaesthesia. Then it is a deep mystery as to why I should wake back up as the same person. It wouldn't seem mysterious, granted, if I woke up as a different person, because I would have the memories of that person and would be that person. BUT...I *DO* wake up as the same person and, moreover, I seem to know that I do, and that is a mystery...
@Inquisitive Brahmin Well who listens when you voice-instruct a computer to turn on. There's a difference between response and awareness. It's an interesting idea that we are never "not conscious" but I don't know what it means for a state like deep sleep.
Remarkable conversations on the nature of reality as pertains to the human perceptual process interpreting the field of energy we call reality are among my greatest passions since earliest childhood. The rise of modern Idealism and conversations of it by men of such ability to explain and explore the intracies thereof, for me are like encountering a pool of clear cool water in a dry parched desert.
01:11:26 dont know why, but this idea popped to my head when i was just at that timestamp. imagine a 3d object. just one, single object. a bridge like object is best suited. now imagine a huge sheet of paper which cuts through it, i.e. imagine a 2d projection through the 3d object. make it such, that it cuts through both legs only, if you imagined a bridge like 3d object. now all of a sudden have 2 disconnected, 2d objects. i think this is the explanation for multiplicity. its an appearance, an illusion, which happens due to down-projection from higher dimensions. it appears as many, but in the higher dimensions, its just one. consciousness in the highest dimension is one.. when you come down to the 3d world, it has projected itself downwards so many times that it has fragmented itself into innumerable pieces. but only apparently so. not in reality.
After 37:47 The analogy between mental states and thermodynamic states is fascinating: in both cases, if you observe a single entity, it is very difficult to see a governing law. (Single molecules in a gas have a velocity which changes more or less randomly after every collision, a meter cubed of air at normal atmospheric pressure has a distinct temperature). Therefore, I find it of utmost importance to collect as much data as possible about mental states. Unfortunately, under the influence of the physicalist dogma, unusual mental states are often dismissed as being irrelevant.
A stroke of genius. There is no semantic space between randomness, which is not free will, and libertarian free will is not free will because it is determined by preferences and so on. Wow. Yes we are enjoying it
The mental states outside nervous systems that Bernardo mentioned can only be assumed. But that assumption could be premised on the behavior and performance of what we ordinarily assume is a dead, inanimate universe. Seth Lloyd describes a universe that makes quantum calculations, and Freeman Dyson describes how the atomic and subatomic universe makes selections. At least, by what is observable and measurable, what better expressions of consciousness do we have other than selection and calculation? There's definitely something "intelligent " about the universe and from there you can either assume or not assume a subjective, inner world that takes place in that processing. One thing is certain, with what we know about the universe currently, we cannot assert that the universe is without consciousness. That learns towards panpsychism, so I'm not sure how that evidence squares with idealism. I suppose it's possible that those selections and calculations are no less a manifestation of mind at large as are we a part of mind at large.
i will say this about "reality". its a remarkably stable illusion. i am surprised sometimes that we dont skip in time back and forth, or go through walls, or wake up in the body of someone else. i feel as if that would make more sense in a way.
We humans are too much in concepts of words generally. Reality offers its truth quite more tangible when we are just still or in natural flow by action.
You are You, because You is a Life-Unit, and have your own Eternal Consciousness. The I, that You refer to all the time, is the Same I, that all Life-Unit's refer to.
I see a lot of truth in Bernard's theory about the specious present. I think the "fragmentation" problem is just using a very bad word to relate to the real phenomena. It's not a matter of "fragmentation", it's just a matter of structure. Dissociation isn't fragmentation, it's structural hierarchy. It's so simple... Higher structural orders can make themselves into more "concentrated structures" so to say, and then entropy is the natural tendency to fall back into the higher structural unity, hierarchycally. We do the same thing all the time when we concentrate in very specific tasks, getting sometimes to the point of almost completely ignoring our body and external stimuli. And the opposite effect happens when we just relax and broaden up in meditation or certain physical activities. I see a very deep relation between entropy and relaxation. Life is a "pull and push" game. The question is then, what makes this lower structures arise? And I would say it's some kind of "tension" or "resistance" that arises in-between this cosmic mind, at each hierarchycal step.
I would request both to read (Bhagvat Gita, Upnishads (important ones), vedanta) , and then debate on phylosophical science. while west and other religions struggles a lot to understand Atma(consciousness), we are finding quite easy. discussion around 1:36:xx .., about buddhism is ok for person who wants to start because both jainism and buddhism are from Bharat(India) and their thinkers has Indian Philosophical soul. so, Any Hindu strongly belive in rebirth , endless time, universe die and born again and again. So, Prakriti (nature) is for Purush (seer) and not other. Bernardo had conversation with swami sarvapriyanda and that is fruitful. Indians are seeker of truth and not the believer. since centuries our sages and rishi have tried to know the truth brahman and they put their thoughts in sacred texts , that is why hindu text has adwait vedanta, dwait, and vishistdwait. it is all open to you
Yep it seems very complex, and on an analytic way of looking in, it is. However, if it does not come to the absolute simplicity of presence then it is just more mental fooling around. I am me and you are you, because, I am me and you are you. Like the Zen tradition says, in the beginning of the search mountains are mountains etc, then they are not, then they are again. Only wisdom has dawned through the process of that coming to know. Nothing more. If ego fixation has not been transcended then one stays caught up in the searching. Like Hansel and Greta lost in the forest of duality
Ultimately, all of the you's, me's and I's are superimpositions in/as the universal Absolute Continuum of Pure Consciousness, Brahman. It's a vast Ocean of Sat-Chit-Ananda. Everything in the universe is That Consciousness. However, in a conventional sense, there are obviously separate entities like Car and Kastrup. Such apparently separate entities exist simultaneously within and as the Continuum of Pure Consciousness. It's the Buddhists concept of "The Simultaneity of Oneness and difference". The error (Maya) is the false notion that apparently discrete things have an existence apart from Consciousness. I am That, You are That, all This (the entire universe), is That.
2:24:00 the observer creates the observed. if there was "nothing" then there wouldn't be an observer/knower of it. therefore it would not be "known". only "something" can be observed/known. "nothing" only exists as an abstract thought/as the opposite of "something".
While two basket balls may seem the same and even bounce the same, they aren't the same. So, just because you share similar properties doesn't mean those properties aren't actually different. So if you can ask the question why am I me and not you, you can also ask the question, why am I me instead of this rock.
The other guy besides Bernardo kastrup has to read Thomas Campbell's theory of everything book called my big t.o.e. , because his model is pretty much the same.!
Bernard Carr's work is significantly distinct, focusing on unique intersections between cosmology and quantum physics, particularly in higher-dimensional spaces. His contributions add depth to our understanding of the universe that differs fundamentally from the approaches in Thomas Campbell's "My Big T.O.E."
What I find strange is why am I me and why do I completely look different from everyone in a bizarre way I mean you can find anyone look like me something is fishy about this life
No mind, no time. No mind, no distance. No mind, no scale. Unfortunately we have not yet created the mindless micro universe to test it. As soon as The Observer is always there. This is why the great Schrödinger was so dissatisfied with his own theory.
Wrong, the PBR Theorem (2012) & experiment clearly favours the ontological-wave function, finding the epistemological wave function wanting at best and refuted at worst. Whatever that ontological wave truly is, who knows, but without its structural anti-symmetry matter, would collapse. Maybe Everett multiverse or a Bohm field? For only Everett & Bohm interpretations have been fruitful, bring out experiments in entanglement & quantum computation, which ought to tell us something.
I like Bernardo but he is wrong about the wave function not being ontic. If you send electrons or photons one by one through the double slits the observed pattern will be an interference pattern. That shows that the electron IS the wave function since it wouldn't describe the interference pattern not being that wave function. Our knowledge about it doesn't create interference and is irrelevant.
There are no problems. The unconscious protection of a believed in 'me' produces so much waffle and banter it clearly demonstrates the ignorance of those who are happy to take on the labels like 'expert' or 'philosopher' when it is nothing but 'knitting a woolen jumper for a lamb'. True investigation appear out of 'I don't know'. BS spouts out if 'I know something you don't know'.
Bernardo is correct but he expressed it unfortunately: There is no world without perceiption but the world doesn't depend on subjectivity either. The underlying world is invariant (unchanging) but it does include us. Therefore the Term objective seems somewhat unhelpful.
You raise an interesting point about the complexity of perception and reality, and the limitations of the term "objective." It's important to explore alternative ways to describe these intricate concepts.
You don't exist, and you have never existed. You are not a person or something one could point to. You are an occurrence. What is happening gets influenced by what has happened through previous events, and this continuous and ongoing change in outcome will believe itself to be an individual person as it's happening. You are not a noun but rather a verb that is continuously expressing itself through an adjective. I would like to transform this famous proverb into: I think, therefore I am HAPPENING.
I like very much the profound analysis of the speakers in this video. Let me add that the question of why I am me and not you, as well as other related topics, are discussed from somewhat different perspective in the video "Biocentrism: A Physics Perspective" ua-cam.com/video/3LgGv4jb3sU/v-deo.html. I am a theoretical physicist, interested, among others, in foundations of quantum mechanics and its connections to consciousness. My talk offers an impartial and unbiased analysis of the implications of quantum mechanics.
Don't miss out on our live session on March 4th at 17:00 GMT on Clubhouse! For the second half of this episode, we'll have the pleasure of hosting Bernard and Bernardo.
A bit sad about the ghost powers.. it renderes evolution worthless. Ive dreamt like 200 times my stepdad died very deep weird dreams hes a live and well had he died bernardo would tell me yesss of courrrrse. Hes also a ufo boy. I thought bernardo was special but this just absolutely degraded him 25 levels
The intro is horrible. If I can listen and learn to speak Italian, German and French like a native, why can't people who speak in videos or on the radio learn to speak English to at least an understandable point?
On a bigger scale, why am i me? Because you are the expression of the universe unfolding. It's nothing special, though. There are sick kids born and dying every day. It's just the way the universe is. It was invitable that you'd be you. In short, you are you because of the big bang.
Starting at 55:26 , Bernard Carr sets up his argument that brains aren't the generators of consciousness because of the "why am I me, and not you?"... Listening to his argument, all the sudden it clicked for me... holy crap he's right i thought... It only lasted for a second though... But I do really think there is something there with that argument. I'll be thinking about that idea more.
Bernard talking about the specious present changing was interesting. Time seeming to speed up when doing something fun etc. The opposite seems to happen when you do something like extreme sports when heart is racing and adrenaline flowing. I have had experiences whilst surfing, where you ride a tube and time 'seems' to slow down, where an instant in time becomes etched in your mind..i can remember vivid details of individual water droplets from waves ridden 30 years ago, seeing the colours, roar of the wave sound..probably fight or flight response and from adrenaline. I think the same must happen for skiers, race car drivers, mountain climbers..where your on the edge of disaster and your senses become hyper alert,,or something. This was a very interesting discussion.
Oh wow - Bernardo went full non-dualism on us there! 😂 Fantastic conversation! Thank you so much. Can’t wait for part 2. Hopefully with shorter answers from Carr and more questions from the audience 🤞😄
The triangle analogy reminds me of Kandinsky’s and Maslow’s triangles. Fascinating discussion. I am an artist who is studying the role of consciousness in art. Big fan of these brilliant men. Thank you for this very informative and interesting discussion.
Thank you Great fully aware of One pristine infinite eternal magnificent beautiful loving graceful being consciousness you are That Open ur eyes see. Beloved all over Rumi
this is so incredible, it's the first time I hear someone else talk about that question,the question I asked myself when I was a kid " If I weren't I would I still exist? " and then my brain 'froze', cause I was a child of 5 or something, that's so cool to hear about these things, I'm not even interested in the answer, but to hear someone else has asked the same questions,that makes me feel less lonely. Another experience I don't feel any longer is when I was younger,then I Looked at my hands And felt completely alien to myself, as if I were looking from outside.
When they get to around 1:22.xx I almost had a heart attack! Bernard seemed to be articulately describing the same talks I have heard in esoteric Buddhist contexts talking about how the 'Buddha' is all one in a way and has been every single person that ever was and every sentient being that ever was.. that we ourselves also are this one person and we have been every person and sentient being ever etc. I got the chills. (I have heard this from a number of highly respected Buddhist scholar.practicioner-teachers.
2:23:20 yes, I think this too. If the universe is mind like, and we are smaller versions inside of it, doesn't it make sense we would be able to harness whatever information it has, and probably even its processing power. There may be barriers and difficulties, due to our current limitations of consciousness, but possible. In fact, I think we do do this all the time, but we are oblivious to it. We assume we are on our own, but truth is our minds are connected to something much greater and unfathomably capable, that we barely use because we dont know any better.
Some thoughts FWIW: We live in a construct that is the physical world. I call it the 'Pain Plane'. (I coined that phrase, so if you hear it elsewhere it was me!) There are many other 'planes' but we can only guess of them; and physics, however enlightened, won't make a lot of progress in the understanding thereof. The only way to true enlightenment is either, a) to die, whereupon we will be shown whatever is appropriate for us, or b) to embark on lifelong meditation and spiritual devotion ala Buddha. Anything less will only scratch the surface. (NB Occasional meditation practice will help a bit). Time as we know it is part of the physical construct and exists only here. It measures change within the construct. Time, as we understand it, probably doesn't exist in the universe. The reasons for this elaborate physical construct to which we bring part of ourselves (i.e. consciousness, spiritual existence being the other part) can only be guessed at. My best guess is that it's part of a Universal improvement programme. (Capital 'U')
Omg I want another podcast with these 2 wonderful men!! I could sit here for hours upon hours listening to their thoughts and theories. Please get these guys back again. I found this to be extremely interesting and massively intriguing!! 👍👍❤️
The answer is… Because we are not the body! We are the spirit and consciousness! The body belongs to the family call of that comes from the DNA of the family!
My great gran Dad reminded me yesterday that I asked him this question when I was 7 years old going on 8. I was looking out the 10th storey of our apartment building, to my friends and my mom riding bikes around Central Park. Wondering why I wasn't them riding their bikes but I'm upstairs with him when he was younger. Then I realized in my dreams, they were me, dreaming about being them riding bikes. This would happen nob stop since. 👊🥰
Absolutely incredible discussions that spans both Eastern and Western cultures and traditions. I just wanted to add that perhaps the only part I think Bernardo isn't correct is when he said that the SUpreme Mind/Cosmic mind/God cannot be and isn't metacognitive in his opinion. He says that God is intelligent but not meta cognitive. There are a couple of reasons why that cannot be the case: 1. We are here, we are relatively metacognitive creatures. We are essentially and fundamentally speaking nothing but God in an ineffably profound manner (e.g. you are THAT as it's said in Advaita Vedanta). So, how can God NOT be metacognitive? ... In other words, why Godhead with its incomprehensible intelligence "intended" to spontaneously manifests as us private/canonised consciousnesses who are obviously metacognitive? 2. How do we define metacognition fundamentally speaking? From the very deep level, for example when experiencing the Samadhi state of existence, all such attributes and qualities we know as facts and as our human experiences totally vanish and one begins to experiences an ineffable reality that stands beyond any form of conceptualization and dichotomised cognition (e.g. seer and the seen, knower and the known, etc...), and yet the one who is meditating is still having its own identity intact in a profoundly mysterious way. 3. In almost all mystical traditions in both East and the West, metaphorically speaking we have a level that represents the cognition/rationality and self-awareness that is the source of our own cognition and rationality as well. For example we have the 'Logos' in the West, and 'First Aql' (absolute awareness mind/intelligence) in Sufi traditions, and also the profound notion of 'Ishvara' in the Vedantic traditions. These are the very first manifestation right after The One as Plotinus for example name it, or Parabrahman as Hindus call it. Hence based on almost all mystical traditions the absolute reality is also cognitive, but not in a way we define and experience it ourselves. All in all, I think Godhead/Absolute Reality stands BEYOND both any attributes and concepts including any form of cognition, intention, and even intelligence. It ineffably stands beyond and is transcendent from all such notions, and yet seemingly paradoxically is also immanent in them all. In other words, Godhead stands beyond knowledge and knowing, beyond even consciousness and intelligence simply because it is primary to them, hence all such things are secondary to its nature, hence Godhead cannot ever be defined or explained by anything that is secondary to its nature, period. God is ultimately ineffable, and beyond language. It even stands beyond 'isness' and 'being' itself, simply because it stands beyond both nothingness and everythingness, hence perhaps only silence is the answer...
The reason I assume you can't create a symphony from scratch with an infinite thought is because our brain states are not in the right configuration to accept such a symphony or to record it as a memory or to be able to decipher it. A well-trained musician with a specific creative disposition (openness) will be able to create that symphony from the momentary glimpse because they will have already configured their brains to understand sounds and the relationship to the rest of our cognition/perception/emotions and have the general cognitive capacities (openness and high intelligence as well as a degree of conscientiousness necessary for working at one art consistently).
![[UA] Eternal Fire проти NAVI | EPL Season 20 Malta](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/chvlsDygrZM/mqdefault.jpg)
Wow! Can't quite believe academics are vocally addressing these topics which I've intuited since childhood. Thank you, feeling such gratitude 😍
Amen!!❤🙏🙏
I've done the same since the 1970s...it's great to see this
I've actually experienced these things for myself, but it's impossible to talk about without sounding like a crackpot. I'm glad there are other, more qualified crazy people talking about this. That said, I'm still a skeptic, only because I believe in the scientific process and likewise don't believe in my own senses, which I know are fallible. The truth is out there.
It's truly heartening to see sincere exploration of fields a concepts such as this, which have, since the rise of dogmatic materialism, have pigeon-holed, ridiculed and villified from the days of DeCarte.
@@Ksvtjhyb7 Huh? Not smarter ofc. Childhood intuitions don't need to have much to do with smarts imo.
I am a 73 year old great-grandmother and I listen to Bernardo several times a week. (Especially loved the one with he and Rupert Spira) I admit I have to have a Dictionary close by 😉...but I learn so much from him, particularly about the nature of Consciousness. Just something about Bernardo...👍
Absolutely! I've been following him for a little over 3 years and he has COMPLETELY changed my perspective on the nature of reality and the self, religion, consciousness, etc. I'm beyond thankful for his patience, clarity and humility when conveying complex topics to the average layman like myself.
More power to you!
Respect and Love dear Maam!
He like all others are working within a confirmation bias created by the Roman slavers
What i would like you to know is The universe is a switch that blinks into and out of existence,
but whilst within the blink of existence, the universe expands which means FEELS and retracts again a FEELING, so the universe is constantly FEELING a range of emotion
Then the universe thinks "thinking is capable without language, a cat , a dog, a insect all think without words , but the noise of something exists"
The Druids say "we have the wrong end of the stick" "we cant see past the end of our nose" "there is an elephant in the room" "humpty dumpty ,"rock a by baby" along with many others passed mum to baby orally . whilst the left noise PFC "let its imagination run away with itself" and the right PFC did what it was told without the left being aware of it :)
The point is the "the fish rots from the head first"
So the noise is the first to go then you are left with FEELINGS , i pray you feel all of the love possible here, the love you have always felt, but if you feel something more overwhelming, its ok, we know, you dont have to tell anyone, we know,
Then the light show before the lights are turned off, (time gets a little weird here, but there is no memory , just a ride to the rebirth (your an energy, if you didn't balance your vibration to almost nothing, then the vibration stays))
That's the meaning of existence to have everyone existing within love ,. So the "Bough" does not break
Thanks I am so glad to know another 70 + is hearing Bernardo the way do. His clear insight both settles and and 😂excites me.
I find the example of metaphysical experience that Bernardo talked about very interesting, the grandma that had a head stroke, and his girlfriend knew about it. When I was still a kid, we had a similar experience in our family. Our family (i.e. me and my parents) moved far away from my grandparents, because my father found work there. Now, after many years, suddenly my mother woke up in the middle of the night and started packing everything we need to travel and put it in the car. My father woke up and asked here what she was doing and why she was preparing for travel. My mother said, she had no idea, just felt that it was important but didn't know why (and normally she didn't do weird stuff like this). So we were all puzzled. Then the phone rang, and we were informed that my grandpa was in the hospital hundreds of kilometers away, and he's about to die, and we should pack our most important stuff and come as quickly as possible. My mother had already done this, and we were ready to go immediately. My grandfather died a few hours later in the early morning.
Bernardo Kastrup IS special. He is easily understood, authentic and humbly gracious. It takes only one time hearing Bernardo speak and most know he is seriously noteworthy.
I'm interested in the cogency of his theories, not fawning fanboys' belief he should be declared a saint lol😅
He knows!
Bernardo speaks the truth,No Thing happens, or everything is No Thing. The physicist wont be able to understand bernardo as well as the other people who asked questions because they thought, a person is the same as consciousness which is fundamental. Bernardo you,nailed it!!! Amazing.
Bernard Carr just unwittingly reinvented the TV show Quantum Leap.
LMAO >D
Bernard means brave as a bear. Now we also know smart and intelligent. I love it. This is incredible conversation. Historical. Both deserve the Nobel Prize.
Nobel Prize! 🥰
Ambos se llaman igual 😂
A mindblowing (and mindfragmenting) conversation.
Thanks so much for this 💎 gem! You guys are infinitely inspiring beyond time and space! Eternally grateful for your work. All of you in this video
The most wonderful and deepest two and a half hours I've spent on youtube! ❤❤❤❤❤❤❤
Well even though this was posted 6 months ago and I am just now watching because I've gotten very interested in Kastrup, because I find him exceedingly intelligent, probably mainly because he is able to observe without judgment and use introspection with what he observes, it seems that very few, especially men, are able to observe without judgment, then use introspection with an honest observational view lacking judgment but including consistent introspection, although posted 6 months ago I feel compelled to respond because I find that I like Mr Carr much more than expected so I thought I'd make a comment or two on Mister Carr's views with which he very consistently implies he knows not whether it is correct or not my implicit comment is that Mr Carr you are much more correct than you realize I'm surprised that your dreams haven't made this clear but perhaps they have and you just can't express it here I think it's interesting how intensely Mr Bernardo listens to you in this video I decided to make this comment to express Mr Carr you are correct how do I know this? My experience in the travel of consciousness yes there is a prism not necessarily a hierarchy that's a convenient way of understanding how a prism works but one would never consider the prism of colors or sound in music for example to be a hierarchy in that you would never omit the wonderful high sounds to the low sounds in a musical configuration any more than you would omit the high and low vibrations of an existence in a hierarchy what we call lucid dreaming today will soon be found becoming conscious in another state in another place we consider it becoming conscious while we are dreaming but logistically it makes more sense that we are becoming conscious in another space that space and Consciousness being a prism of several different stations like a train predicts expresses and mathematically calculates that yes not only are we all one configuration but also a million configurations in order to be an individual you must be a cosmos to be large must be small I wish I could speak more specifically about this in this post but it's just not possible but I can say that I am very talented in the travel of Consciousness and that the dream state is a part of the prism that could be referred to as the seventh dimension I have had the version of my own existence from that dimension appear to me visit me in that state we call dreaming which is actually another state of consciousness she is a faster version existing of me that is able to calculate and see much bigger and faster than I possibly can where I am here in the third dimension. she visited me once for just an instant because in the terms of prisms and Consciousness it's illegal not presentable under the architecture of Consciousness without collapse this means that we are many and one at the same space I get very frustrated with the use of the word time t i m e it's never expressed or explained accurately even by you guys there is an objective reference to time anywhere which is that it is the Rhythm of movement of space therefore to refer to real time as is often specified it must always be either referred to as clock or rhythm of space therefore there is no such thing as a state of time a dimension of time there is perhaps a reference to the rhythm of space movement and that all space movement could be referred to as a state of time but that would only be the references to the rhythm of space moving not a clock any other references that are not to space moving are the references to the imagination produced by the human being of the clock by slicing up those rhythms into numbers this is not a real existence this is a consequence of perception by the human Through Math the only real existence of what we refer to as time is the rhythm of space movement this is why when dreaming time seems to dilate it doesn't dilate it doesn't exist in that state of that consciousness I get very frustrated that no physics people know philosophy people nobody refers to the reference of time as it has been sliced up by a clock being the movement of rhythm of space most of the references of time by human physics psychologist and more are the references of the clock 24 hours and nothing else not even the rhythm of the movement of space this is very disappointing anyway most important I thought that you know Mr Carr if you happen to see this post you are correct there is a version of me in the third dimension there is a version of me in the seventh Dimension there is a version of me in the 4th 5th and 6th Dimension there are three zillion versions of me in the entire existence of whatever might be called universes or Cosmos and those versions of me are all versions of you and therefore are versions of Millions however the concept of being a singular one against those Millions is only a concept to recognize the Millions the same as a plan is an architecture configured in order to recognize the spontaneous random without the architecture of plan you can never recognize random that's why Mr Carr and Mr Kastrup random doesn't seem like an existence to you it is but you can't see it unless you see it against the counter on which everything exists meaning all existence you must see the counter of architecture in order to recognize random or spontaneity ❤GEM❤
I have been asking these questions for many years. Very good to hear them spoken by someone else for the first time! Thank you.
Measure of time is a peculiar topic. I like to see time as laps around the sun and as personal evolution.
These two are some of my favorites!! This makes me SO HAPPY to see them together! Thank you! Bravo! 👏🏻 🌹 More! Also, I think I’ve said this before, but for such an insightful message to be packaged in an absolutely delightful, adorable package as Bernard is just the cherry on top. Really appreciate the guiding questions from Bernardo and his expertise too. Just so happy this is happening and can’t wait for the next one!
ETA: I do have to say I’m surprised by how adamantly Bernardo argues against there being meta cognitive faculties in consciousness at large…this view contradicts a mass of observations/reports from NDE data if one is to take that into account (as, arguably, one should). I would love to hear Bernard’s thoughts on that as he is more familiar with the literature than Bernardo is. Please do ask them about this next time! Look forward to it!
Please come and join us on clubhouse for the next live session.
@@philosophybabble Oh! I didn’t even know that was a possibility! I’m subscribed here to get all the alerts for your channel; will there be an alert/announcement for when that would happen? Or do I need to sign up to be notified on a different app (Clubhouse?)? Thank you!!
@@surrendertoflow78 Announcement will be on the channel, but you will requires to sign up for Clubhouse audio app. Details are on the channel about page. Let me know if you're having issue. :)
@@philosophybabble I’ll look for the alert/announcement! Thank you so much!
What an amazing conversation! Many more please!
For me, the question of “why am I me rather than someone else” is perhaps even more of a mind blast than “why is there something rather than nothing”
The question at time 54 min. is a great one which I have had talks about with some friends. How does it fragment, but also how does it get back together in the end...and then who are we then. ? Bernardo's remarks at time 1:40 etc....great great stuff about nothing happening in time and everything....keep talking Bernardo....don't stop.
Great conversation but two of Bernardo’s insights stood out:
The ‘off the record’ conjecture about time and existence - brilliant. The summation of Jungs insight into the meaning of life in co-creating nature through our accounting of experience.
I chuckled at the moment Bernard said the infinitely small was the same as the infinitely large. I woke from a sleep when I was 15 or 16 with that exact knowledge! And to this day I believe it. Wonderful discussion. Thank you!
Thank you for your share!
This was exactly what I needed! Much Love ❤️
Love this dialogue. Listen to it over and over again. I think Dr. Kastrup would be interested in the philosopher Jiddu Krishnamurti who died 1895-1986. Many of his talks and dialogues with for instance the physicist David Bohm are readily available on UA-cam.
My thoughts exactly! K asked, can there be a radical, instant, profound, worldwide change? My clumsy words, not K's. Yes, I heard so much J Krishnamurti in this conversation. I'm glad you heard the same.
I am enjoying deeply , these are thoughts that went through my mind decades back as I went in search of truth
Fantastic! From start to finish…
Thank you! Cheers!
I asked my friend a question like this last year and he got mad, thinking I was just trying to intuit the existence of a soul (which I do believe in as an Orthodox Christian, but I refrain from almost all arguments for it and wasn't really trying to argue it at all). My question was "Why am I me and not a rock?" Which was further illustrated with the question "Why am I me and not you, or anyone else in any time period ever?" When I expanded on this concept another friend thought I was just going for The Ship of Theseus, which I wasn't. It's a weird question, especially if you don't believe that preexisting souls/minds come occupy distinct bodies that can be interchanged (which I and most materialists do not).
I'm gonna listen to this at some point, but I'm quite interested in hearing the conversation.
I'm not a materialist, but I'm not really seeing Bernard's point discussed around the hour mark. A materialist would argue that Bernard is Bernard (and not Bernardo) precisely because of the particular genetic patterns that make up Bernard's body, the particular neural configurations in Bernard's brain, the particular embryonic (and other) physiological history, and so forth. None of this is "portable" to another person, or even away from Bernard to an abstract space, so in that sense it wouldn't be meaningless in materialism. I'm not saying that I agree with materialism; I'm only saying that I don't really see that point.
Of course this also has a "spiritual" version, because even if the brain is just filtering / moulding my consciousness, there is the question of whether any of that filtering or moulding is portable either once the physical system fails. One presumes filtering would end with the collapse of the filter and that moulding would no longer be a force exerted if the mould itself lost all shape and form. There is a question of whether memories can be retained in some form, and there is the interesting question of whether whatever you become can be said to have a unique history in space-time (as Bernard or Bernardo, or whatever).
The question of why I am me and not someone else becomes more pressing if consciousness is ever taken to disappear entirely, however, as many people take it to do in surgical anaesthesia. Then it is a deep mystery as to why I should wake back up as the same person. It wouldn't seem mysterious, granted, if I woke up as a different person, because I would have the memories of that person and would be that person. BUT...I *DO* wake up as the same person and, moreover, I seem to know that I do, and that is a mystery...
@Inquisitive Brahmin Well who listens when you voice-instruct a computer to turn on. There's a difference between response and awareness. It's an interesting idea that we are never "not conscious" but I don't know what it means for a state like deep sleep.
awesome talk, thanks PB!
Imagine intelligence without thought. Only doing what is needed when needed without judgement. The Cosmic Mind. This was awsome.
Cosmic Mind, my arse. There is certainly no shortage of pretentious bullshit being spouted by mice (nothings and nobodies) these days.
Remarkable conversations on the nature of reality as pertains to the human perceptual process interpreting the field of energy we call reality are among my greatest passions since earliest childhood. The rise of modern Idealism and conversations of it by men of such ability to explain and explore the intracies thereof, for me are like encountering a pool of clear cool water in a dry parched desert.
Magnificent discussion
01:11:26
dont know why, but this idea popped to my head when i was just at that timestamp.
imagine a 3d object. just one, single object. a bridge like object is best suited.
now imagine a huge sheet of paper which cuts through it, i.e. imagine a 2d projection through the 3d object.
make it such, that it cuts through both legs only, if you imagined a bridge like 3d object.
now all of a sudden have 2 disconnected, 2d objects.
i think this is the explanation for multiplicity.
its an appearance, an illusion, which happens due to down-projection from higher dimensions. it appears as many, but in the higher dimensions, its just one.
consciousness in the highest dimension is one.. when you come down to the 3d world, it has projected itself downwards so many times that it has fragmented itself into innumerable pieces. but only apparently so. not in reality.
This was nothing, which is everything ;) thoroughly enjoyed this conversation
After 37:47 The analogy between mental states and thermodynamic states is fascinating: in both cases, if you observe a single entity, it is very difficult to see a governing law. (Single molecules in a gas have a velocity which changes more or less randomly after every collision, a meter cubed of air at normal atmospheric pressure has a distinct temperature).
Therefore, I find it of utmost importance to collect as much data as possible about mental states. Unfortunately, under the influence of the physicalist dogma, unusual mental states are often dismissed as being irrelevant.
I just realised that these guys have the same name
A stroke of genius. There is no semantic space between randomness, which is not free will, and libertarian free will is not free will because it is determined by preferences and so on. Wow. Yes we are enjoying it
The mental states outside nervous systems that Bernardo mentioned can only be assumed. But that assumption could be premised on the behavior and performance of what we ordinarily assume is a dead, inanimate universe. Seth Lloyd describes a universe that makes quantum calculations, and Freeman Dyson describes how the atomic and subatomic universe makes selections. At least, by what is observable and measurable, what better expressions of consciousness do we have other than selection and calculation? There's definitely something "intelligent " about the universe and from there you can either assume or not assume a subjective, inner world that takes place in that processing. One thing is certain, with what we know about the universe currently, we cannot assert that the universe is without consciousness. That learns towards panpsychism, so I'm not sure how that evidence squares with idealism. I suppose it's possible that those selections and calculations are no less a manifestation of mind at large as are we a part of mind at large.
Good discussion
i will say this about "reality". its a remarkably stable illusion. i am surprised sometimes that we dont skip in time back and forth, or go through walls, or wake up in the body of someone else. i feel as if that would make more sense in a way.
We humans are too much in concepts of words generally. Reality offers its truth quite more tangible when we are just still or in natural flow by action.
You are You,
because You is a Life-Unit,
and have your own Eternal Consciousness.
The I, that You refer to all the time,
is the Same I, that all Life-Unit's refer to.
Interesting to see 2 x Bernard talking about the same things:)
I tell my friends, “ when the moment of my death comes, the next person you meet will be me.”
I see a lot of truth in Bernard's theory about the specious present. I think the "fragmentation" problem is just using a very bad word to relate to the real phenomena.
It's not a matter of "fragmentation", it's just a matter of structure. Dissociation isn't fragmentation, it's structural hierarchy. It's so simple... Higher structural orders can make themselves into more "concentrated structures" so to say, and then entropy is the natural tendency to fall back into the higher structural unity, hierarchycally.
We do the same thing all the time when we concentrate in very specific tasks, getting sometimes to the point of almost completely ignoring our body and external stimuli. And the opposite effect happens when we just relax and broaden up in meditation or certain physical activities. I see a very deep relation between entropy and relaxation. Life is a "pull and push" game.
The question is then, what makes this lower structures arise? And I would say it's some kind of "tension" or "resistance" that arises in-between this cosmic mind, at each hierarchycal step.
The title is the first question I asked on mushrooms
:)
What would you like the uni verse to be
Instead of all never ending
Debates
I would request both to read (Bhagvat Gita, Upnishads (important ones), vedanta) , and then debate on phylosophical science. while west and other religions struggles a lot to understand Atma(consciousness), we are finding quite easy. discussion around 1:36:xx .., about buddhism is ok for person who wants to start because both jainism and buddhism are from Bharat(India) and their thinkers has Indian Philosophical soul. so, Any Hindu strongly belive in rebirth , endless time, universe die and born again and again. So, Prakriti (nature) is for Purush (seer) and not other. Bernardo had conversation with swami sarvapriyanda and that is fruitful. Indians are seeker of truth and not the believer. since centuries our sages and rishi have tried to know the truth brahman and they put their thoughts in sacred texts , that is why hindu text has adwait vedanta, dwait, and vishistdwait. it is all open to you
Bernardo himself has admitted that his philosophy is identical to the teaching of Upanishads.
The whole idea that the brain is the seat of consciousness. We need to go to the east to the other side. Consciousness is deep within
Yep it seems very complex, and on an analytic way of looking in, it is.
However, if it does not come to the absolute simplicity of presence then it is just more mental fooling around. I am me and you are you, because, I am me and you are you. Like the Zen tradition says, in the beginning of the search mountains are mountains etc, then they are not, then they are again. Only wisdom has dawned through the process of that coming to know. Nothing more.
If ego fixation has not been transcended then one stays caught up in the searching. Like Hansel and Greta lost in the forest of duality
How am I me and not you.
Ultimately, all of the you's, me's and I's are superimpositions in/as the universal Absolute Continuum of Pure Consciousness, Brahman. It's a vast Ocean of Sat-Chit-Ananda. Everything in the universe is That Consciousness. However, in a conventional sense, there are obviously separate entities like Car and Kastrup. Such apparently separate entities exist simultaneously within and as the Continuum of Pure Consciousness. It's the Buddhists concept of "The Simultaneity of Oneness and difference". The error (Maya) is the false notion that apparently discrete things have an existence apart from Consciousness. I am That, You are That, all This (the entire universe), is That.
2:24:00 the observer creates the observed. if there was "nothing" then there wouldn't be an observer/knower of it. therefore it would not be "known". only "something" can be observed/known.
"nothing" only exists as an abstract thought/as the opposite of "something".
❤❤❤❤
While two basket balls may seem the same and even bounce the same, they aren't the same. So, just because you share similar properties doesn't mean those properties aren't actually different.
So if you can ask the question why am I me and not you, you can also ask the question, why am I me instead of this rock.
each brain has different awareness, in particular of mind / consciousness?
Why am I me not you ? Also: why is here not there, and why is before not after ? Normally, people stop asking these "questions " around age 10.
This is my understanding. One person has shadow with buddhism. Other person has shadow wih hiduisam.
The other guy besides Bernardo kastrup has to read Thomas Campbell's theory of everything book called my big t.o.e. , because his model is pretty much the same.!
Bernard Carr's work is significantly distinct, focusing on unique intersections between cosmology and quantum physics, particularly in higher-dimensional spaces. His contributions add depth to our understanding of the universe that differs fundamentally from the approaches in Thomas Campbell's "My Big T.O.E."
What I find strange is why am I me and why do I completely look different from everyone in a bizarre way I mean you can find anyone look like me something is fishy about this life
Is this a recent interview?
Yes, was recorded during our live session on the 28th of April 2023
No mind, no time. No mind, no distance. No mind, no scale. Unfortunately we have not yet created the mindless micro universe to test it. As soon as The Observer is always there. This is why the great Schrödinger was so dissatisfied with his own theory.
Wrong, the PBR Theorem (2012) & experiment clearly favours the ontological-wave function, finding the epistemological wave function wanting at best and refuted at worst.
Whatever that ontological wave truly is, who knows, but without its structural anti-symmetry matter, would collapse.
Maybe Everett multiverse or a Bohm field? For only Everett & Bohm interpretations have been fruitful, bring out experiments in entanglement & quantum computation, which ought to tell us something.
I like Bernardo but he is wrong about the wave function not being ontic. If you send electrons or photons one by one through the double slits the observed pattern will be an interference pattern. That shows that the electron IS the wave function since it wouldn't describe the interference pattern not being that wave function. Our knowledge about it doesn't create interference and is irrelevant.
There are no problems. The unconscious protection of a believed in 'me' produces so much waffle and banter it clearly demonstrates the ignorance of those who are happy to take on the labels like 'expert' or 'philosopher' when it is nothing but 'knitting a woolen jumper for a lamb'. True investigation appear out of 'I don't know'. BS spouts out if 'I know something you don't know'.
Bernardo is correct but he expressed it unfortunately: There is no world without perceiption but the world doesn't depend on subjectivity either. The underlying world is invariant (unchanging) but it does include us. Therefore the Term objective seems somewhat unhelpful.
You raise an interesting point about the complexity of perception and reality, and the limitations of the term "objective." It's important to explore alternative ways to describe these intricate concepts.
Philosophy reaches for the thing physics hasn't figured out yet, kind like the very edge of the pond, growing and shrinking.
You don't exist, and you have never existed.
You are not a person or something one could point to.
You are an occurrence.
What is happening gets influenced by what has happened through previous events, and this continuous and ongoing change in outcome will believe itself to be an individual person as it's happening.
You are not a noun but rather a verb that is continuously expressing itself through an adjective.
I would like to transform this famous proverb into: I think, therefore I am HAPPENING.
I like very much the profound analysis of the speakers in this video. Let me add that the question of why I am me and not you, as well as other related topics, are discussed from somewhat different perspective in the video "Biocentrism: A Physics Perspective" ua-cam.com/video/3LgGv4jb3sU/v-deo.html. I am a theoretical physicist, interested, among others, in foundations of quantum mechanics and its connections to consciousness. My talk offers an impartial and unbiased analysis of the implications of quantum mechanics.
Don't miss out on our live session on March 4th at 17:00 GMT on Clubhouse! For the second half of this episode, we'll have the pleasure of hosting Bernard and Bernardo.
Einstein . You cannot solve the problem with the same kind of thinking by which you created
A bit sad about the ghost powers.. it renderes evolution worthless. Ive dreamt like 200 times my stepdad died very deep weird dreams hes a live and well had he died bernardo would tell me yesss of courrrrse. Hes also a ufo boy. I thought bernardo was special but this just absolutely degraded him 25 levels
The intro is horrible. If I can listen and learn to speak Italian, German and French like a native, why can't people who speak in videos or on the radio learn to speak English to at least an understandable point?
Thank you for your opinion! :) Noted!
@@philosophybabble How kind of you!
Bernard seems to answer his own questions 💤💤
On a bigger scale, why am i me? Because you are the expression of the universe unfolding. It's nothing special, though. There are sick kids born and dying every day. It's just the way the universe is. It was invitable that you'd be you.
In short, you are you because of the big bang.
Newton is wrong??? And you call yourself sciencetist!!!!!!!
50:00 Ja tuurlijk Kastrup, da's allemaal echt gebeurd en is niks bijzonders, gebeurt de hele tijd joh. Bye🤗bye
Nieuwe Nederlandse goeroe 😅
Wordt steeds erger met hem 😂
What a time to be alive where I can read their essays, understand 60% of it, and then watch them discuss it!!!
Starting at 55:26 , Bernard Carr sets up his argument that brains aren't the generators of consciousness because of the "why am I me, and not you?"... Listening to his argument, all the sudden it clicked for me... holy crap he's right i thought... It only lasted for a second though... But I do really think there is something there with that argument. I'll be thinking about that idea more.
I can give you a complete answer. mailed Bernardo but he didn't reply. my head is exploding with these complex topics.
Wow, the last 10 minutes or so Bernardo pulled it all together for me. Like poetry, it was. A moving story he weaved.
Oh, hell yeah. Love me some Bernardo!
Bernard talking about the specious present changing was interesting. Time seeming to speed up when doing something fun etc. The opposite seems to happen when you do something like extreme sports when heart is racing and adrenaline flowing. I have had experiences whilst surfing, where you ride a tube and time 'seems' to slow down, where an instant in time becomes etched in your mind..i can remember vivid details of individual water droplets from waves ridden 30 years ago, seeing the colours, roar of the wave sound..probably fight or flight response and from adrenaline. I think the same must happen for skiers, race car drivers, mountain climbers..where your on the edge of disaster and your senses become hyper alert,,or something. This was a very interesting discussion.
Oh wow - Bernardo went full non-dualism on us there! 😂 Fantastic conversation! Thank you so much. Can’t wait for part 2. Hopefully with shorter answers from Carr and more questions from the audience 🤞😄
Time like curves
A wonderful exploration, thanks.
The triangle analogy reminds me of Kandinsky’s and Maslow’s triangles. Fascinating discussion. I am an artist who is studying the role of consciousness in art. Big fan of these brilliant men. Thank you for this very informative and interesting discussion.
Thank you
Great fully aware of One pristine infinite eternal magnificent beautiful loving graceful being consciousness you are That
Open ur eyes see. Beloved all over
Rumi
this is so incredible, it's the first time I hear someone else talk about that question,the question I asked myself when I was a kid " If I weren't I would I still exist? " and then my brain 'froze', cause I was a child of 5 or something, that's so cool to hear about these things, I'm not even interested in the answer, but to hear someone else has asked the same questions,that makes me feel less lonely. Another experience I don't feel any longer is when I was younger,then I Looked at my hands And felt completely alien to myself, as if I were looking from outside.
I think these are questions that signals an IQ way above average. 🌻
When they get to around 1:22.xx I almost had a heart attack! Bernard seemed to be articulately describing the same talks I have heard in esoteric Buddhist contexts talking about how the 'Buddha' is all one in a way and has been every single person that ever was and every sentient being that ever was.. that we ourselves also are this one person and we have been every person and sentient being ever etc. I got the chills. (I have heard this from a number of highly respected Buddhist scholar.practicioner-teachers.
Ya. BK speaks Eastern spiritual traditions for the Western mind. God knows somebody needs to! Lol
It’s spooky
Parallel thinking is wild
2:23:20 yes, I think this too. If the universe is mind like, and we are smaller versions inside of it, doesn't it make sense we would be able to harness whatever information it has, and probably even its processing power. There may be barriers and difficulties, due to our current limitations of consciousness, but possible. In fact, I think we do do this all the time, but we are oblivious to it. We assume we are on our own, but truth is our minds are connected to something much greater and unfathomably capable, that we barely use because we dont know any better.
Some thoughts FWIW:
We live in a construct that is the physical world. I call it the 'Pain Plane'. (I coined that phrase, so if you hear it elsewhere it was me!) There are many other 'planes' but we can only guess of them; and physics, however enlightened, won't make a lot of progress in the understanding thereof.
The only way to true enlightenment is either, a) to die, whereupon we will be shown whatever is appropriate for us, or b) to embark on lifelong meditation and spiritual devotion ala Buddha. Anything less will only scratch the surface. (NB Occasional meditation practice will help a bit).
Time as we know it is part of the physical construct and exists only here. It measures change within the construct. Time, as we understand it, probably doesn't exist in the universe. The reasons for this elaborate physical construct to which we bring part of ourselves (i.e. consciousness, spiritual existence being the other part) can only be guessed at. My best guess is that it's part of a Universal improvement programme. (Capital 'U')
I have read and given away his books, they are meant for the collective me! (i keep buying them though...)
That was a Higher Dimension conversation
ua-cam.com/video/EfLWQoC4xSk/v-deo.html
Omg I want another podcast with these 2 wonderful men!! I could sit here for hours upon hours listening to their thoughts and theories. Please get these guys back again. I found this to be extremely interesting and massively intriguing!! 👍👍❤️
During the moments of Bernard saying "I don't know", I couldn't help thinking that this man would make a great ⚡🧠 NEURONAUT ❇
Wonderful lecture/discussion
The answer is… Because we are not the body! We are the spirit and consciousness! The body belongs to the family call of that comes from the DNA of the family!
I agree.. it refreshing ❤
My great gran Dad reminded me yesterday that I asked him this question when I was 7 years old going on 8. I was looking out the 10th storey of our apartment building, to my friends and my mom riding bikes around Central Park. Wondering why I wasn't them riding their bikes but I'm upstairs with him when he was younger.
Then I realized in my dreams, they were me, dreaming about being them riding bikes. This would happen nob stop since. 👊🥰
I really appreciated Barnardo’s concise contributions
An explotion in pure consciousness. I am everything. I am nothing. I am. Wonderful conversation😂 Thank you❤
1:25:50 reminds me of John Wheelers idea of how the entire universe could be
created by one single time travelling photon.
Absolutely incredible discussions that spans both Eastern and Western cultures and traditions. I just wanted to add that perhaps the only part I think Bernardo isn't correct is when he said that the SUpreme Mind/Cosmic mind/God cannot be and isn't metacognitive in his opinion. He says that God is intelligent but not meta cognitive. There are a couple of reasons why that cannot be the case:
1. We are here, we are relatively metacognitive creatures. We are essentially and fundamentally speaking nothing but God in an ineffably profound manner (e.g. you are THAT as it's said in Advaita Vedanta). So, how can God NOT be metacognitive? ... In other words, why Godhead with its incomprehensible intelligence "intended" to spontaneously manifests as us private/canonised consciousnesses who are obviously metacognitive?
2. How do we define metacognition fundamentally speaking? From the very deep level, for example when experiencing the Samadhi state of existence, all such attributes and qualities we know as facts and as our human experiences totally vanish and one begins to experiences an ineffable reality that stands beyond any form of conceptualization and dichotomised cognition (e.g. seer and the seen, knower and the known, etc...), and yet the one who is meditating is still having its own identity intact in a profoundly mysterious way.
3. In almost all mystical traditions in both East and the West, metaphorically speaking we have a level that represents the cognition/rationality and self-awareness that is the source of our own cognition and rationality as well. For example we have the 'Logos' in the West, and 'First Aql' (absolute awareness mind/intelligence) in Sufi traditions, and also the profound notion of 'Ishvara' in the Vedantic traditions. These are the very first manifestation right after The One as Plotinus for example name it, or Parabrahman as Hindus call it. Hence based on almost all mystical traditions the absolute reality is also cognitive, but not in a way we define and experience it ourselves.
All in all, I think Godhead/Absolute Reality stands BEYOND both any attributes and concepts including any form of cognition, intention, and even intelligence. It ineffably stands beyond and is transcendent from all such notions, and yet seemingly paradoxically is also immanent in them all. In other words, Godhead stands beyond knowledge and knowing, beyond even consciousness and intelligence simply because it is primary to them, hence all such things are secondary to its nature, hence Godhead cannot ever be defined or explained by anything that is secondary to its nature, period.
God is ultimately ineffable, and beyond language. It even stands beyond 'isness' and 'being' itself, simply because it stands beyond both nothingness and everythingness, hence perhaps only silence is the answer...
The reason I assume you can't create a symphony from scratch with an infinite thought is because our brain states are not in the right configuration to accept such a symphony or to record it as a memory or to be able to decipher it. A well-trained musician with a specific creative disposition (openness) will be able to create that symphony from the momentary glimpse because they will have already configured their brains to understand sounds and the relationship to the rest of our cognition/perception/emotions and have the general cognitive capacities (openness and high intelligence as well as a degree of conscientiousness necessary for working at one art consistently).
@2:07:00 Reminiscent of when Krishna shows Arjuna what fundamental reality really looks like, the theosophony in chapter 11 of the Bhagavad Gita