As someone who just discovered your channel and is a long time follower of QRI, this episode was absolutely delightful. I think the circumstance that you conceptually agree in a lot of aspects but don‘t share exactly the same semantics, and also your explanations in between, brought out the best in Andres ideas!
Yeah even though the technology to test wheather these theories are true or not are YEARS away, the models proposed here have so much generative and predictive potential into everyday life, it's insane!
I remember i think it was mckenna talking about top tier tibetan monks that when they died after their organic matter had decayed sometimes small pearls of silicone type material could be found at the base of skull, and the more you had its considered the more enlightened you were/the more advanced practices you had, the more pearls would be on the skull.
Yes, I have read several articles about this phenomenon. One monk who died in the early 2000s was cremated and his remains included hundreds of pearls, a giant chunk of crystal that grew from a piece of his skull, and silver hair. The pearls kept multiplying and the crystal kept growing. His old room has dishes full of pearls everywhere. Then there are monks or lamas who manifest the rainbow body, where the body shrinks away to nothing over a period of seven days. Sometimes hair and teeth are left, and the nasal septum for some reason. Sometimes, nothing is left. The person completely vanishes. These artifacts are sent on world tours, and people report feeling immense peace in their presence. Still higher realization can result in the body disappearing at the moment of death like Yoda. Even higher than that is when the person dissolves into light while they are still alive. This incident, called the Great Transference Rainbow Body, happened once in the 20th Century. The Chinese had captured a lama and he was in a cell at a concentration camp. Then a snow leopard began attacking the camp on the other side, and the guards went to investigate. When they returned, the man had vanished from his cell. The leopard was an illusion conjured by the man. My dad knew a highly advanced lama who had settled in Toronto. He was the very incarnation of all these stories we've heard. My dad asked him, "Can you walk through walls?" The man said, "Yeah...but I'd rather use the door." XD
Excellent point Justin, re: that any regularity of consciousness would seemingly imply a platonic mathematical truth. But then, I could see the Rupert Sheldrake argument applying, where “laws of nature” (i.e., “regularities”) are only ASSUMED to be constants, whereas they could be *habits* of nature. Apparently the speed of light observably changed numerous times, so there is support for this.
I also got caught by Justin's reassertion of the platonic, and had a similar reaction. Like, sure, have your platonic realm, but seriously consider that it's as emergent and mutable as the rest of reality, not static and discovered! Also consider that you don't need to appeal to anything as technical as the speed of light to feel assured on this point; all we have to remember is that science is what happens AFTER you assume that there are such things as "laws" of physics. Jacques Monod, a french molecular biologist and Nobel winner, called this the "postulate of objectivity" and described it as an ethical choice; it's a philosophical position-an axiom of science, not a product of it. (Of course, neither can we prove that there aren't immutable constants governing reality, but it so often seems that folks-both experts and non-put the science cart before the objectivity horse-even after the QM donkey came along and knocked over the cart!)
Interesting conversation. Both the discussion about altered states of consciousness being indicative of alternate geometries, as well as positing the potential of meta-levels of computation beyond digital and quantum. Very thought provoking..
Justin, congrats on the awesome show! I can't wait to binge on your material. Please can you tell me what is the song in your outro? It's a stompy teeth clencher I dare say.
Excellent. This interview was certainly useful at helping understand Andres. Curious how Andres view of universe as a field of consciousness relates to panpsychism. he says it's necessary to solve the binding problem but I was under the impression that quantum theory of the brain could also solve it through superpositions. He also sort of sidestepped the binding problem with his discussion of the triangle in that our brain gives us the illusion of a bound experience.
Yes he does support panpsychism, his solution to the binding problem approaches it more as the boundary problem. Here is a video where he explains his solution. ua-cam.com/video/g0YID6XV-PQ/v-deo.html
Saying there are no platonic values sounds like Donald D Hoffman's "interface theory of perception", where the platonic values are a fictional interface of consciousness.
Mathematics is the language of science and science is the poetry of reality. It would appear that the portion of mathematics describing consciousness resides in the dimensions provided by imaginary numbers. What multiplied by itself becomes its opposite? That is where the essence of consciousness resides.
Thank you for introduce Andres and his work! Great episode! His view remind me Bernardo Kastrup's ideas of one mind as ontological basis and us as dissociations of that mind and whole world as we see it is made of excitations in that mind. I like that you can entertain ideas without fully subscribe to them or go against them. But I got a feeling from your conclusion that you are still immersed in neuroscience's paradigm where scientists have pre-assumption about treating matter and spacetime as fundamental. You are still looking for couses in digital realm of computations. Donald Hoffman in his fresh and recent paper talk about it, how this is outdated but still shared view. I am seriously considering idea that brain can't create consciosness as it don't have casual power. Neuroscience in the future will be still important but for different reasons (working on different assumptions). Those patterns of brain activity are valid but not literal, it's only interface for our own consciousness. But this analogy also might turn out to be false. Stuart Hameroff in his theory show how it could be possible for mechanism of Orch OR to fully reconstruct experience as it is even if we know that our brain don't process all that data like for example camera. I might misinterpreted something. I would like to read your thoughts! :)
I am finding the volume a little low, almost any background noise is drowning out Andres, though your voice comes through Ok. Will have to try with earphones, a better computer, or maybe the podcast.
Life functions consciously and unconsciously simultaneously. Therefore, consciousness is how something does something (adverb) - not what something is (noun).
I just discovered your channel, but I am a huge fan of this conversation that you had with Andres.
I appreciate what are you doing here, but I watched your " #1 six arguments for QC" video, and I have a big issue with your assumptions in point 6 of that video. That theory of consciousness should address: Sense of self Free will Meaning (of life I assume) My problem is that none of these are essential to consciousness. I'm going to be a little bit critical here, but I'm hoping this helps you.
If by "sense of self" you mean what Andres calls "binding problem", it's kinda ok. But a sense of self with the meaning: "I am human having experience of self, so I'm self conscious" is absolutely not essential. You can have an experience where everything "just is" with even a very moderate amount of meditation.
Same goes for free will. I actually personally feel like I don't even have it (in terms of my own experience). I would say free will exists in the sense that the qualia of "choosing something" appears in my consciousness, but when I examine the qualia of choosing, it also "just appears" in my consciousness. And I have no say over what qualia appears next. So if you don't get what I'm saying here, just try to very carefully examine your experience when choosing something. Also try the "Waking up app" by Sam Harris for further assistance in meditation. I think it's crucial for your work.
And when it comes to the question of meaning of life, I don't think there is any evidence that suggest that life ought to be meaningful. If you feel like life is meaningful, it's just qualia appearing in your consciousness that feels like "life is meaningful". For example if you had a particularly hard life (think soviet russia gulag) and you say to yourself, "all those bad things that happened, happened for a reason" you have a way to cope with negative valence qualia, by attaching meaning to them. Also "it's all part of a god's plan", "I'm here for a reason", "It happened the way it should have happened" All these are just tricks to make your negatively valenced experiences into (at least somewhat) positive ones. Furthermore, if you feel like life is meaningless, you either can totally not care or have negative valence effects from this. But either way it's just an appearance in consciousness.
I'm hoping to start a youtube channel after finishing my research as well, because frankly I think a lot of people either needlessly mysticize the topic, or reduce it too much into "it's just computation bro" don't worry about it. We need more people seriously examining this to maximise our valence. So I thank you for your contribution.
It’s called the astral plane guy. It’s the only way to fly. I just think we gotta lighten up man, ya know unplug? No seriously though, cool channel ya dig.
Oh Andres.. so much energy trying to refute the reality of experience. But math isn’t real either? Why do you keep defaulting to it for examples to make your points? Pure unity gives birth to math. Math is nothing more than finite shards of the infinite. Topology is what happens when unity breaks, and physics falls out with it, but accept that and you must accept unity to begin with. Being will always be, even if the young newbies on the scene believe they are having unique thoughts, and making proclamations about the nature of being that haven’t been explored for millennia. Cool hat though.
Is that mullet on purpose? If so, no problem. But I think what bugs me is its on accident. It just sort of "happed". But unlike a new born baby, you can still abort it. (Althlugh in some states you can "abort" a newborn. 🙂🥳🥴
As someone who just discovered your channel and is a long time follower of QRI, this episode was absolutely delightful. I think the circumstance that you conceptually agree in a lot of aspects but don‘t share exactly the same semantics, and also your explanations in between, brought out the best in Andres ideas!
Yeah even though the technology to test wheather these theories are true or not are YEARS away, the models proposed here have so much generative and predictive potential into everyday life, it's insane!
I think I just discovered the cutting edge of psychedelic/consciousness/geometry research!
YES! have you found anything more cutting edge since?
Awesome episode bro! Greetings from Mexico City :)
I remember i think it was mckenna talking about top tier tibetan monks that when they died after their organic matter had decayed sometimes small pearls of silicone type material could be found at the base of skull, and the more you had its considered the more enlightened you were/the more advanced practices you had, the more pearls would be on the skull.
Yes, I have read several articles about this phenomenon. One monk who died in the early 2000s was cremated and his remains included hundreds of pearls, a giant chunk of crystal that grew from a piece of his skull, and silver hair. The pearls kept multiplying and the crystal kept growing. His old room has dishes full of pearls everywhere.
Then there are monks or lamas who manifest the rainbow body, where the body shrinks away to nothing over a period of seven days. Sometimes hair and teeth are left, and the nasal septum for some reason. Sometimes, nothing is left. The person completely vanishes.
These artifacts are sent on world tours, and people report feeling immense peace in their presence.
Still higher realization can result in the body disappearing at the moment of death like Yoda. Even higher than that is when the person dissolves into light while they are still alive. This incident, called the Great Transference Rainbow Body, happened once in the 20th Century. The Chinese had captured a lama and he was in a cell at a concentration camp. Then a snow leopard began attacking the camp on the other side, and the guards went to investigate. When they returned, the man had vanished from his cell. The leopard was an illusion conjured by the man.
My dad knew a highly advanced lama who had settled in Toronto. He was the very incarnation of all these stories we've heard. My dad asked him, "Can you walk through walls?" The man said, "Yeah...but I'd rather use the door." XD
Fascinating!
I think this is one of the best interview with Andre
Excellent point Justin, re: that any regularity of consciousness would seemingly imply a platonic mathematical truth.
But then, I could see the Rupert Sheldrake argument applying, where “laws of nature” (i.e., “regularities”) are only ASSUMED to be constants, whereas they could be *habits* of nature. Apparently the speed of light observably changed numerous times, so there is support for this.
I also got caught by Justin's reassertion of the platonic, and had a similar reaction. Like, sure, have your platonic realm, but seriously consider that it's as emergent and mutable as the rest of reality, not static and discovered!
Also consider that you don't need to appeal to anything as technical as the speed of light to feel assured on this point; all we have to remember is that science is what happens AFTER you assume that there are such things as "laws" of physics. Jacques Monod, a french molecular biologist and Nobel winner, called this the "postulate of objectivity" and described it as an ethical choice; it's a philosophical position-an axiom of science, not a product of it.
(Of course, neither can we prove that there aren't immutable constants governing reality, but it so often seems that folks-both experts and non-put the science cart before the objectivity horse-even after the QM donkey came along and knocked over the cart!)
Interesting conversation. Both the discussion about altered states of consciousness being indicative of alternate geometries, as well as positing the potential of meta-levels of computation beyond digital and quantum. Very thought provoking..
Justin, congrats on the awesome show! I can't wait to binge on your material. Please can you tell me what is the song in your outro? It's a stompy teeth clencher I dare say.
YAY!!! Another video! Lfgooooo
truly a great interview
Excellent. This interview was certainly useful at helping understand Andres. Curious how Andres view of universe as a field of consciousness relates to panpsychism.
he says it's necessary to solve the binding problem but I was under the impression that quantum theory of the brain could also solve it through superpositions.
He also sort of sidestepped the binding problem with his discussion of the triangle in that our brain gives us the illusion of a bound experience.
his view is a variant panpsychism.
Yes he does support panpsychism, his solution to the binding problem approaches it more as the boundary problem.
Here is a video where he explains his solution.
ua-cam.com/video/g0YID6XV-PQ/v-deo.html
Saying there are no platonic values sounds like Donald D Hoffman's "interface theory of perception", where the platonic values are a fictional interface of consciousness.
Plato is constantly employing irony, taking the forms as literally existing is such a limited understanding
Mathematics is the language of science and science is the poetry of reality. It would appear that the portion of mathematics describing consciousness resides in the dimensions provided by imaginary numbers. What multiplied by itself becomes its opposite? That is where the essence of consciousness resides.
What's that track at the end of the video? I can't find it on Bandcamp.
Can I get ID on the music playing at the end? My Shazam and SoundHound apps are stumped
Thank you
Thank you for introduce Andres and his work! Great episode!
His view remind me Bernardo Kastrup's ideas of one mind as ontological basis and us as dissociations of that mind and whole world as we see it is made of excitations in that mind.
I like that you can entertain ideas without fully subscribe to them or go against them. But I got a feeling from your conclusion that you are still immersed in neuroscience's paradigm where scientists have pre-assumption about treating matter and spacetime as fundamental. You are still looking for couses in digital realm of computations.
Donald Hoffman in his fresh and recent paper talk about it, how this is outdated but still shared view. I am seriously considering idea that brain can't create consciosness as it don't have casual power.
Neuroscience in the future will be still important but for different reasons (working on different assumptions). Those patterns of brain activity are valid but not literal, it's only interface for our own consciousness.
But this analogy also might turn out to be false. Stuart Hameroff in his theory show how it could be possible for mechanism of Orch OR to fully reconstruct experience as it is even if we know that our brain don't process all that data like for example camera.
I might misinterpreted something. I would like to read your thoughts!
:)
I am finding the volume a little low, almost any background noise is drowning out Andres, though your voice comes through Ok. Will have to try with earphones, a better computer, or maybe the podcast.
It seems fine now, guess it was my phone....
Let’s go, I’m ready for some experiments!
Life functions consciously and unconsciously simultaneously. Therefore, consciousness is how something does something (adverb) - not what something is (noun).
looking at his hat entrains geometrical symmetry in my non-linear wave computing consciousness
😅😅😅
Would love to hear Andrez Gomez to speak with John Verveake
I just discovered your channel, but I am a huge fan of this conversation that you had with Andres.
I appreciate what are you doing here, but I watched your " #1 six arguments for QC" video, and I have a big issue with your assumptions in point 6 of that video.
That theory of consciousness should address:
Sense of self
Free will
Meaning (of life I assume)
My problem is that none of these are essential to consciousness. I'm going to be a little bit critical here, but I'm hoping this helps you.
If by "sense of self" you mean what Andres calls "binding problem", it's kinda ok. But a sense of self with the meaning: "I am human having experience of self, so I'm self conscious" is absolutely not essential. You can have an experience where everything "just is" with even a very moderate amount of meditation.
Same goes for free will. I actually personally feel like I don't even have it (in terms of my own experience). I would say free will exists in the sense that the qualia of "choosing something" appears in my consciousness, but when I examine the qualia of choosing, it also "just appears" in my consciousness. And I have no say over what qualia appears next. So if you don't get what I'm saying here, just try to very carefully examine your experience when choosing something. Also try the "Waking up app" by Sam Harris for further assistance in meditation. I think it's crucial for your work.
And when it comes to the question of meaning of life, I don't think there is any evidence that suggest that life ought to be meaningful. If you feel like life is meaningful, it's just qualia appearing in your consciousness that feels like "life is meaningful".
For example if you had a particularly hard life (think soviet russia gulag) and you say to yourself, "all those bad things that happened, happened for a reason" you have a way to cope with negative valence qualia, by attaching meaning to them. Also "it's all part of a god's plan", "I'm here for a reason", "It happened the way it should have happened" All these are just tricks to make your negatively valenced experiences into (at least somewhat) positive ones.
Furthermore, if you feel like life is meaningless, you either can totally not care or have negative valence effects from this. But either way it's just an appearance in consciousness.
I'm hoping to start a youtube channel after finishing my research as well, because frankly I think a lot of people either needlessly mysticize the topic, or reduce it too much into "it's just computation bro" don't worry about it. We need more people seriously examining this to maximise our valence. So I thank you for your contribution.
👍👍
It’s called the astral plane guy. It’s the only way to fly. I just think we gotta lighten up man, ya know unplug? No seriously though, cool channel ya dig.
Platonism has to be understood in its irony
I want to like QRIs stuff so bad I just don’t quite buy their ontology. It’s overreaching it’s clams
Dude. Some baby just fell into a raging river. What does it please you to do?
Enlightenment does not breed complacency. This is a common misconception.
I snort qualia for breakfast.
I believe in triangles btw
XD
Oh Andres.. so much energy trying to refute the reality of experience. But math isn’t real either? Why do you keep defaulting to it for examples to make your points? Pure unity gives birth to math. Math is nothing more than finite shards of the infinite. Topology is what happens when unity breaks, and physics falls out with it, but accept that and you must accept unity to begin with. Being will always be, even if the young newbies on the scene believe they are having unique thoughts, and making proclamations about the nature of being that haven’t been explored for millennia. Cool hat though.
Is that mullet on purpose? If so, no problem. But I think what bugs me is its on accident. It just sort of "happed". But unlike a new born baby, you can still abort it. (Althlugh in some states you can "abort" a newborn. 🙂🥳🥴
I noticed it in other videos. But I watched this one specifically to get a good look at it.