Is consciousness an illusion? 5 experts explain 

... You're thinking either way. You are currently thinking, therefore you exist.

Oh, Wow!

Wtf

Billl Nye would tear this pseudoscientific, "spriritual", woo-ey piece down. The Templeton Foundation are, among things like climate change deniers, absolutely biased due to religious beliefs.

*Bill Nye the pseudoscience guy

External reality isn't an illusion, our perception of the outside world is a cobbled together electrical representation of the external world. I'd argue 'yes' bits and pieces are illusory because the brain is constantly editing our awareness but the majority of what we experience isn't an illusion.

@@CaptApril123 Are you positive external reality isn’t an illusion being created by your singular mind?

@@Null_Simplex if its an illusion being created by an internal part then its not an "external reality" then is it and if it was truly the case it wouldn't make sense how any of our complicated devices work on their own outside of any of us interacting with them

@@Null_Simplexour minds constantly process this reality allowing us to perceive this physical realm, with vision, touch, smell and scent other than our fundamental senses the actual foundation of reality is beyond comprehension, why would we need to comprehend what cannot be perceived ?

​@DiogenesNephew If by 'support' you conflate that with 'absolutely infallibile, omnisciently certain proof'...but, that would be _stupid_

thank you so much

@@underastar 😎🖖

Hero~!!!

@@HomoCognitus 😁👍

I ended up watching it because of your comment, so thank you! You helped deepen a strangers view of life!

Dumb 😂

I can't help but wonder how a blind person might interpret that though tho. Consciousness as a concept seems much more reductionist and foundational to me than independently illuminating. Like the canvas of thoughts.

Swami Sarvapriyananda is a great spiritual orator . 🙏🕉️

Mysticism is the dark of darks.

Religious gibberish. I could just as well say a banana is the light of lights.

Probably a fan of this sort of questions. I too, in my free time I tried to read books I'm currently reading "Intelligence: A very short introduction" by Ian J. Deary

⁠@@RU-vidArtProjecthe said early on that this was something he thinks about a lot. I wonder why its something we think about so much. I do because i think im a bad person lol. I dont read any books about it though im trying to find my own reasons for these things. Probably not good but another brain on the subject couldnt hurt.

Indeed!

@@Iamthatguypal820 Laughing out loud. It's amusing to witness a brain attempting to comprehend itself. It's insane that the most complex thing that we know in the universe, resides as a mass within our skull.

@@Iamthatguypal820 Knowledge, or books, is shorthand, or shortcuts on what others have figured out (or, at least, has tried to). Why not avail yourself of their experience? We cannot experience/know all things ourselves; there's not enough time in our lives for that.

My humps, my humps, my humps. My favorite beat for conscious strippers

Actually, It is when IT is Known for What IT is, Crystal Clear Clarity Knowing IT Self.

There is no "I" who thinks. Thinking is just happening just like everything else is.

Us

U

@@piRatCaptainwhat is you, me? 😛

Reality, kinda obvious

Read Bhagavat Gita

Just stopped at it, saw you, had to intervene, well spoken doesn't mean correct, there is a correlation, because to be well spoken you need to have studied more on manners which requires discipline, so you should be able to study more, but to be correct you need half of it, but with more knowledge. Whether that is the case, i have not seen it yet to judge for myself.

He's well informed philosophically, but very, very wrong about science. He said science claims absolute truth. But fallibility is a critical component to how science progresses. Understanding that our best theories can be replaced by better ones, is opposite to the idea of absolute truth.

@@uninspired3583 Well only genuine scientists understand that. Newton, Einstein after being hailed as some of the greatest scientists to be ever born, had the childlike simplicity and honesty to admit how little they and science actually know about the nature. Do you expect this straightforwardness and honesty from every so-called scientists to admit their flaw and to accept their shortcomings? Actually people who are mediocore scientists are always bullying religion and the idea of god, claiming that science is all powerful and all knowing. In that respect where true scientists are ever inquisitive and open to any possibility but where today's most so-called scientists are just dismissive about anything except materialistic science, the monk's comment is apt.

He said a lot of nothingburger

Yet not a shred of proof outside of the religious babble.

Does people not being able to imagine something have any effect on the truth value of that claim? This piece is gonna be a good study on fallacious reasoning.

@@tempestive1 western dumbbells are pretty good in fallacies

Whom do you suppose to be an expert in what and why?

I couldn't agree more.

Read philosophy of mind.

1. There is no "explanatory gap." Reality is just contextual, depending on your context, point of view, you can perceive it differently, and perceive different things. The first guy just dislikes the fact that viewing the neural structure of his own brain from his context is different than viewing that same brain through some other context, such as neural imaging. There is no "gap" here, just someone disliking how reality works. 2. The second religious guy argues "consciousness is fundamental" then waffles on about irrelevant things regarding raw sensual experience. Consciousness is a complex notion involving cognition, minds, subjectivity, the self, etc. It is not merely raw sensual experience but is a more complex conception derived from raw sensual experience. Yes, raw sensual experience, what I would just call *reality as such,* is self-evident, but that does not mean everything derived from it is self-evident. We both agree we live on a spinning ball orbiting a star, but that does not mean this is some sort of self-evident innate knowledge. It is knowledge derived from our experience. If you deny all concepts derivative of our experience, you also have to deny the self, minds, cognition, thought, "consciousness." 3. Penrose is right that the "hard problem" parallels the "measurement problem" in quantum mechanics, but for the wrong reasons. The two parallel each other because both are pseudoproblems which presume the existence of some sort of reality independent of all possible observation even in principle. The Kantian mind-body problem calls this reality the "noumenon," while certain interpretations of quantum mechanics view it as made up of unobservable "probability waves." In both cases, there is an explanatory gap of how the noumenon is transformed into the phenomenon upon observation/measurement. But both are pseudoproblems because there is no reason to presume this unobservable nature actually even exists. Read Carlo Rovelli's book *Helgoland: Making Sense of the Quantum Revolution* and Francois-Igor Pris' book *Contextual Realism and Quantum Mechanics.*

@@amihart9269 this is a great take

@@amihart9269 I think of reality as everything that exists that is subject to the laws of physics. Wether I’m there to observe it or not it’s still subject to physics. I get frustrated with pseudo realities when people become invested in the potential of existence over the thought challenge they are. I’m not a great philosopher & probably won’t be until I’m well into my old age lol. That sounds like a good time to ponder the extents of reality in make believe scenario expressions of existence more deeply. Right now I’m thinking about how reality is working & where we as societies/cultures are failing to achieve something future people will thrive from. Things like religion, eliminating people types from existing as equal people, it weakens the gene pool and variation that has been the source of our evolution and advancements, and potentially could lead to the extinction of the species if allowed to continue unchecked. Never mind the ideas that we stem from two extreme bottleneck events in the narrative and yet do not show the incestual effects in our genetic codes, should be enough for us to establish laws based on human rights instead of religion. Sorry for rambling lol

That's because sleeping is a very complicated process and reduced consciousness is only one part of it. There are people that in certain circumstances wake up to discover that their bodies are still sleeping while their mind is fully awake. Sleeping is an optimized way of resting out bodies, settle in our memories, and solve our subconscious (though dreaming). And the thing is that we can do all those things while we are conscious, just not as well as when we are sleeping and our consciousness is reduced.

I know how dreaming works: there is a membrane that separates surface reality and internal reality. All impressions are embedded into the membrane from the surface and then the internal eye aka Internal awareness processes these impressions aa dreams. Internal awareness is a blind eye to surface reality. The blind eye exists in a higher dimension, hence the reason for strange dreams. Any commints? ?? ???

@@An_Escaped_Mind I would say your explaination is a philosophical one. You might wanna check out some neuroscientific findings about the topic and compare them to your view, if you are interested in the topic.

@@4_P3R50N Thanks for your feedback but those findings exist on the surface layer. Philosophical, yet the truth is what matters. Can you disprove my explanation?

consciousness is a spectrum

I guarantee that all it takes is an encounter between two material entities (e.g., a baseball bat and an occiput) and all certainty about consciousness evaporates.

@@MaciejCzub becoming unconscious doesn't mean its still not there just temporarily turned off due to a knock out

@@starc. I don't see the difference between disabling and absent. The fact that after waking up, we have the sensation of returning to the same consciousness is only the result of memory access. In people who have a damaged memory after such an event, they also have a disturbed sense of identity.

@@MaciejCzub did we ever leave just because the lights get turned off? Dreaming throws a wrench into that logic implying a continuation. One can be consciously aware, subconsciously aware or they can be unconsciously aware such as when sleeping a loud noise wakes them from an unconscious state. Its like if the software on the hardware of a computer crashes and stops working blue screen or black screen of nothing yet the hardware the computer the process is still running and recovers

Not really. If everything external to you can be fake, how can you truly know that your selfhood isn't? This is the problem Rene Descartes ran into. What is stopping an evil deceiver, who is capable of faking everything else, from tricking you into believing you have consciousness and free-will as some sort of sick cosmic prank?

Thank you for watching, we're so glad you enjoyed this episode!

Why does that matter who cares

@@danielkerr4100Why does that offend you?

me too for me it's go back to where we came from

Look up the Gateway Project.

@@Bradleyey seen it bro

@@siwaphol7323 yea man. The source

You can see it without DMT.

Have you come down yet ??? 🙂

"Mmmmmmmkay" - Mr. Mackey

@@michaeldillon3113 mostly.. 😏

You experienced it

No one knows what consciousness is but those vibrating high can feel it. Interestingly, no one knows God too

what a gift you found! Enjoy your new perspective. And remember to remember this point of view, because your body will take over from time to time. But you can return easier with practice.

You are becoming an adult🤝

Basically im from a country where most peoples didn't even know about these things....like about cosmos...consciousness... I mean they don't have deep thought everyone's life is living them

@@mike7755 thnx Mike

Khud ko janna hi zindagi ka maksad hai

Nonsense. Your ordinary self may be qualia, but you need to look deeper.

This is such an interesting take that I agree with. I think part of that is because of the evolution of humans. If we find out exactly what consciousness is, what does that mean for our purpose? What does that mean for our drive for survival? It’s uncomfortable to think about reducing our experiences to a simple answer. Consciousness IS subjectivity. We would be reducing subjectivity to objectivity. Which isn’t entirely true as the answer would have been discovered through subjective consciousness. Which is why a Nietzsche didn’t believe in wasting time with discussions like these. There is no such thing as objectivity so it is not our place to even try.

Why assume it is a brain thing?

@@ToriZealotThe brain is an manifestation in consciousness, like everything else that is ever experienced.

@@walking-man-uk I know ...

"Consciousness and the universe is under no obligation to make sense to us" -I love this sentiment so much, as it removes the primacy of the tiny slice of everything that is human experience from these larger questions. Perhaps it is the limited consideration of these concepts from our unique human experience that holds us back from comprehending these things that are inarguably greater forces than ourselves... ❤

That depends on your perspective. For some it may be a gift, but for others it's a curse. Also don't think the universe is some separate entity from us. We are the universe experiencing itself.

​@@EgoChipMuch much more important than us. We barely understand this universe from our perspective and your assumption is based from the only viewpoint You or all of us can discern. We don t really understand that whole lot we think we do.

@@Zero4Infinitives But what else is there other than our subjective consciousness?

I feel like when most people say "X is under no obligation to make sense," it is always just a license to then say the most nonsensical things possible, justifying woo and mysticism specifically under the guise that it's justified because it makes no sense, so it must be real because reality makes no sense. People do this with consciousness, the divine, quantum mechanics, etc. I think we _should_ actually attempt to make sense of the universe and reject this kind of thinking as detrimental.

Too open, one might argue. So open your brain might fall out. It's ok to have standards of evidence.

The connection has always been God. He put us in our mother’s wombs. It’s simple and all in the Bible. Repent of sin and turn to the Lord Jesus; the living God came to us and died on a cross because He ever so loves us, and forgave those who turn to Him so that we may enter an eternal presence with Him. He defeated death three days later, and is coming back soon. Our conscious is not made from the material, because I have yet to see a computer come just to be in the wild. It takes an intelligence to make intelligence, otherwise if we came to be out of no particular order or design how can we trust our conscious but to know it to just be? Why do we conform then with rules and have morals? Because our eternal God made us, and has told us in Genesis 1:26 has said “Let us make man in our image.” ē'nu the plural for 3 or more showing our Triune God has made us in His image, and He is a loving and good God. Which is why through God we are able to exist and exist with each other. Our God is perfect, which is why we can even trust our own conscious, and why we can trust for the existence of morals. Morals are not subjective, because then how can we judge Hitler if it was in his belief of his morals that killing millions was justified? There must be a moral standard of perfection, and there is, God, and we know morals because we are made in His image. Why we don’t all object to those is due to knowing good and evil, and knowing sin that is death. But we can’t be perfect because of sin, so we needed one that could be, and that is when the Father sent the His only begotten Son to die on that cross. No one is perfect but God; no one is righteous, no not one but Jesus Christ, fully man and fully God. But He so loved the world that He gave His Son that no one may perish who comes to Him. And for those who may think well who created God? Understand that God is beyond creation, He is eternal, and while the universe had a beginning, and time, space and matter had to begin at the same point, then if God is the one that created beginnings He is beyond a beginning. Meaning He has no creator He is the Creator. But when we die our consciousness will return back to an eternity, but whether it is with God or in the absence of Him (A.K.A Hell) it is up to our choices and freewill God has given us in order to truly have choices and ability to love.

The connection has always been God. He put us in our mother’s wombs. It’s simple and all in the Bible. Repent of sin and turn to the Lord Jesus; the living God came to us and died on a cross because He ever so loves us, and forgave those who turn to Him so that we may enter an eternal presence with Him. He defeated death three days later, and is coming back soon. Our conscious is not made from the material, because I have yet to see a computer come just to be in the wild. It takes an intelligence to make intelligence, otherwise if we came to be out of no particular order or design how can we trust our conscious but to know it to just be? Why do we conform then with rules and have morals? Because our eternal God made us, and has told us in Genesis 1:26 has said “Let us make man in our image.” ē'nu the plural for 3 or more showing our Triune God has made us in His image, and He is a loving and good God. Which is why through God we are able to exist and exist with each other. Our God is perfect, which is why we can even trust our own conscious, and why we can trust for the existence of morals. Morals are not subjective, because then how can we judge Hitler if it was in his belief of his morals that killing millions was justified? There must be a moral standard of perfection, and there is, God, and we know morals because we are made in His image. Why we don’t all object to those is due to knowing good and evil, and knowing sin that is death. But we can’t be perfect because of sin, so we needed one that could be, and that is when the Father sent the His only begotten Son to die on that cross. No one is perfect but God; no one is righteous, no not one but Jesus Christ, fully man and fully God. But He so loved the world that He gave His Son that no one may perish who comes to Him. And for those who may think well who created God? Understand that God is beyond creation, He is eternal, and while the universe had a beginning, and time, space and matter had to begin at the same point, then if God is the one that created beginnings He is beyond a beginning. Meaning He has no creator He is the Creator. But when we die our consciousness will return back to an eternity, but whether it is with God or in the absence of Him (A.K.A Hell) it is up to our choices and freewill God has given us in order to truly have choices and ability to love.

Hmmm so good

Most comments are talking about our reality being an illusion. Actually consciousness in itself being an illusion is the title of the video, which they didn’t even discuss that much. Close your eyes, don’t smell, don’t hear, if you actually can stop yourself from sensing everything or thinking (you can’t), you would understand that consciousness is an illusion. The moment you close your eyes you feel less conscious. Your brain detects external information, categorises it, uses these categories to respond to external stimuli with a: bad! Good!, in more complex beings it’s: sad bad! Angry bad! Disgusting bad! (Connected to the neurons of disgust in taste and smell in itself that evolved to make you escape what your body determines to be detrimental to you and not eat it, which is easier)…etc… One other thing is that we don’t actually think that much throughout the day, we just follow habits even in our thinking, like most other animals. That complex productive thinking only results from a very developed brain, activating neurons that are connected to each other, etc, but it only happens rarely throughout your day. Well when you think about thinking you are thinking, so you don’t realise how small is the number of times you used that complex energy spending mechanism. Basically, you’re like most of other animals, you only feel so special and conscious because of the complex integration of all external informations (which obviously is a very beneficial evolutionary trait as you can integrate all of that information simultaneously and categorise it and use it), and because of your language (without language you wouldn’t feel that much different from other animals) and of course because of your mind playing tricks on you, because of you thinking you have an internal spirit that is constantly thinking and performing mental activities, if it was the case we wouldn’t deny your claim, but it’s precisely because you rarely ever think productively in the first place that we believe you are not so « conscious » and « spiritual ». Also, it has to do with your self opinions, as this idea attacks your internal belief systems, as you were probably raised in any average society with a religious majority, and a lot of these ideas might trigger the internal neural circuits telling you: bad, thus creating cognitive dissonance, but that’s a topic for psychology

Agreed. I've had a few experiences (allegedly, lol) under GA. And lots of experience with psychedelics. Both topics are very intriguing to me. 👍

There's a Star Talk episode about that

All that is simply put is introducing drugs into your brain to alter your consciousness.

@@calabrais Which Star Trek generation, and what's the title?

I recommend VICE for exploring the drug side of this topic. There are several fascinating videos about people's experience before, during, and after these experiences

Idealist here. I see bio-chemical processes as a result of consciousness.

@@Null_Simplex well there’s no issue there right nobody has a an issue of consciousness is the origin of all these other things (were it to be prove ) however when the opposite is considered and were it also to be proven then we “lose” something. Why?

The purpose of life is to experience Existence.

It's ridiculously false. Brains, chemicals, and everything conceivable are ideas. There are no physical objects. The idea that consciousness is physical is as wrong as wrong can get.

@@starc. does life have a purpose? Or do you want or need a purpose to make it “worth it”

Disagreed, there's a few fubdamental epistemic issues they don't touch, and even embrace as virtues. Starting at the writers.

…fubdamental…starting WITH the writers…

This video is one of the worst actually 😅, when it’s compared to the various videos about consciousness, a very complex topic with various intelligent scientists talking about it. Although as a video on its own without any comparison it seems good 👍😁

Let’s see… So far I have 56 thumbs up… let’s see how many you get.

Highlighted comment

Please share some stories.

​@@void________ my previous response was removed for some reason. I guess we're not allowed to talk about it? 🤔

@@coolbreeze5683 oh no! Okay.

@@coolbreeze5683 Spooky that it was removed.👀

@@void________ I'll write a shorter version and will see if it's removed again. A doctor I worked with in hospice visited a patient who was actively passing away. While they were talking, the patient suddenly stared across the room, said a woman's name and told him to slice the lemons. He held her hand for a couple of minutes and left. She passed a few days later and I told the doctor about it. He mentioned that she said his grandma's name. He didn't remember too much about his grandma because she passed when he was still a kid. He talked to his parents about what the patient said and they confirmed that his grandma used to give him lemon slices when he was a toddler and they'd laugh when he made sour faces. The doctor was unphased by this and just said "strange things happen here..."

If chapter two was actually supported by a scientific instituion, yeah. This is glorified paeudoscience taling advantage of gaps in our knowledge, and atuffing it with vague terms like "spirituality". There are epistemic positions these guys don't even deign to touch.

1. There is no "explanatory gap." Reality is just contextual, depending on your context, point of view, you can perceive it differently, and perceive different things. The first guy just dislikes the fact that viewing the neural structure of his own brain from his context is different than viewing that same brain through some other context, such as neural imaging. There is no "gap" here, just someone disliking how reality works. 2. The second religious guy argues "consciousness is fundamental" then waffles on about irrelevant things regarding raw sensual experience. Consciousness is a complex notion involving cognition, minds, subjectivity, the self, etc. It is not merely raw sensual experience but is a more complex conception derived from raw sensual experience. Yes, raw sensual experience, what I would just call reality as such, is self-evident, but that does not mean everything derived from it is self-evident. We both agree we live on a spinning ball orbiting a star, but that does not mean this is some sort of self-evident innate knowledge. It is knowledge derived from our experience. If you deny all concepts derivative of our experience, you also have to deny the self, minds, cognition, thought, "consciousness." 3. Penrose is right that the "hard problem" parallels the "measurement problem" in quantum mechanics, but for the wrong reasons. The two parallel each other because both are pseudoproblems which presume the existence of some sort of reality independent of all possible observation even in principle. The Kantian mind-body problem calls this reality the "noumenon," while certain interpretations of quantum mechanics view it as made up of unobservable "probability waves." In both cases, there is an explanatory gap of how the noumenon is transformed into the phenomenon upon observation/measurement. But both are pseudoproblems because there is no reason to presume this unobservable nature actually even exists. Read Carlo Rovelli's book Helgoland: Making Sense of the Quantum Revolution and Francois-Igor Pris' book Contextual Realism and Quantum Mechanics.

Thank you for your time, your attention, and your kind comment, Randy! We appreciate you!

​@@amihart9269 shut your yapper

​@@amihart9269u might as well write a book with that long winded comment

The connection has always been God. He put us in our mother’s wombs. It’s simple and all in the Bible. Repent of sin and turn to the Lord Jesus; the living God came to us and died on a cross because He ever so loves us, and forgave those who turn to Him so that we may enter an eternal presence with Him. He defeated death three days later, and is coming back soon. Our conscious is not made from the material, because I have yet to see a computer come just to be in the wild. It takes an intelligence to make intelligence, otherwise if we came to be out of no particular order or design how can we trust our conscious but to know it to just be? Why do we conform then with rules and have morals? Because our eternal God made us, and has told us in Genesis 1:26 has said “Let us make man in our image.” ē'nu the plural for 3 or more showing our Triune God has made us in His image, and He is a loving and good God. Which is why through God we are able to exist and exist with each other. Our God is perfect, which is why we can even trust our own conscious, and why we can trust for the existence of morals. Morals are not subjective, because then how can we judge Hitler if it was in his belief of his morals that killing millions was justified? There must be a moral standard of perfection, and there is, God, and we know morals because we are made in His image. Why we don’t all object to those is due to knowing good and evil, and knowing sin that is death. But we can’t be perfect because of sin, so we needed one that could be, and that is when the Father sent the His only begotten Son to die on that cross. No one is perfect but God; no one is righteous, no not one but Jesus Christ, fully man and fully God. But He so loved the world that He gave His Son that no one may perish who comes to Him. And for those who may think well who created God? Understand that God is beyond creation, He is eternal, and while the universe had a beginning, and time, space and matter had to begin at the same point, then if God is the one that created beginnings He is beyond a beginning. Meaning He has no creator He is the Creator. But when we die our consciousness will return back to an eternity, but whether it is with God or in the absence of Him (A.K.A Hell) it is up to our choices and freewill God has given us in order to truly have choices and ability to love.

Yep, that rock that just hit you never happened. Or and you aren’t here either. Oh my, I think I have dissa………..

1. There is no "explanatory gap." Reality is just contextual, depending on your context, point of view, you can perceive it differently, and perceive different things. The first guy just dislikes the fact that viewing the neural structure of his own brain from his context is different than viewing that same brain through some other context, such as neural imaging. There is no "gap" here, just someone disliking how reality works. 2. The second religious guy argues "consciousness is fundamental" then waffles on about irrelevant things regarding raw sensual experience. Consciousness is a complex notion involving cognition, minds, subjectivity, the self, etc. It is not merely raw sensual experience but is a more complex conception derived from raw sensual experience. Yes, raw sensual experience, what I would just call *reality as such,* is self-evident, but that does not mean everything derived from it is self-evident. We both agree we live on a spinning ball orbiting a star, but that does not mean this is some sort of self-evident innate knowledge. It is knowledge derived from our experience. If you deny all concepts derivative of our experience, you also have to deny the self, minds, cognition, thought, "consciousness." 3. Penrose is right that the "hard problem" parallels the "measurement problem" in quantum mechanics, but for the wrong reasons. The two parallel each other because both are pseudoproblems which presume the existence of some sort of reality independent of all possible observation even in principle. The Kantian mind-body problem calls this reality the "noumenon," while certain interpretations of quantum mechanics view it as made up of unobservable "probability waves." In both cases, there is an explanatory gap of how the noumenon is transformed into the phenomenon upon observation/measurement. But both are pseudoproblems because there is no reason to presume this unobservable nature actually even exists. Read Carlo Rovelli's book *Helgoland: Making Sense of the Quantum Revolution* and Francois-Igor Pris' book *Contextual Realism and Quantum Mechanics.*

@@amihart9269 stick to Vtubing and getting lonely simps to fund ur life... bot

​@@amihart9269Are you saying that, when you throw the dice into the air, the probability of any of all states being possible, doesn't exist?

@@xelasomar4614 in what meaningful way could possibilities that have yet to occur actually be said to exist?

Consciousness has nothing to do with avoidance. It's about being aware and accepting.

Hello avoidance of pain. Are you avoiding pain right now?

@@BrooksGomes the blind leading the blind

Your kindness is appreciated, Andy! Thank you for being here with us!

You *really* don't want mankind to fully understand this. It's the one thing that keeps the A in AI... If man figures this out, they'll figure out how to incorporate it into computing, and then you have HAL. Keep playing with the fire. We're not supposed to understand certain things. There is decent reason for that.

Yes. The only thing that we can say with certainty is an experience is being had. Anything else is just guesswork

"Consciousness is information" or is it what is evaluating/sensing that information? Yes, without information there may be no consciousness, but is the information consciousness or what is activating consciousness?

@@xelasomar4614. Two sides of the same coin. Words are not sufficient to explain. Feeling it is the only way.

Wrong. Consciousness is _a posteriori,_ not _a priori._ You are not born with innate knowledge that you are a conscious being capable of cognition and self-reflection. These precisely are things you derive from thinking about your experiences.

@@QuantumPolyhedron wrong. not all knowledge is derived from thought. Some knowledge and arguably the purest form of knowledge comes from direct experience. You are born having a direct experience are you not?

Please do read: Pancha kosha viveka Saankya: Particularly the philosophy of prakruthi and PuRusha

"Most of what we are is non physical, though, our lowest form is physical. All life on our planet has the lowest form, the Body. Our Body is an Animal and the other type of Body on our planet is a Plant. Bodies are bound absolutely to Natural Law, which is the lowest form of true Law. Natural Law is a localised form of Law and is derived from the Laws of Nature. Natural Law is the finite and specific foundational control structure ordering the actions and interactions of species, members of species, and the material sources of a planet. The lowest non physical form of what we are is the Mind, which is a Process. There are other forms of life on our planet that have both a Body and a Mind, however, so far as we currently know, there are no Plants and only some Animals that have a Body and a Mind. The lowest forms of Mind, Instinct and Emotion, are predominantly bound to Natural Law. The next higher form of Mind is Intellect which is bound predominantly to the Laws of Nature. Intuition, the highest form of Mind, can be bound or not to both Natural Law and the Laws of Nature separately or together, or to higher forms of Law altogether. Intuition is the truest guide for our Selves. The next non physical form of what we are is the Self, which is an Awareness. There are relatively few other forms of life on our planet that have a Self. The Self is not bound to any form of Law other than One's Own Law. It is the only form of Law that cannot be violated. The foundation of what we are is the highest non physical form of what we are. The highest form of what we are is the Being, which is an Existence. The Being is not bound to any form of Law originating within Existence. The Being is bound absolutely to The Law. Existence, and the Laws of Nature which are the finite and specific foundational control structure ordering the actions and interactions of all elements within Existence, cannot Be without The Law being The Law. So, what is The Law? In a word, The Law is options. Definition option: a thing that is or may be chosen. The word 'option' does convey the idea of The Law in its most basic sense but does not clarify all of what The Law is. Free Will does describe how our species experiences The Law but does not convey all of what The Law is. In clarifying what The Law is; The capitalised form of the word 'The' indicates the following noun is a specific thing. Law is the finite and specific foundational control structure ordering the actions and interactions of all elements subordinate. Together, the words 'The' and 'Law' (in that exact order,) is a proper noun indicating; the singular form of Law that all other forms of Law and all other Laws are founded upon, the singular foundation upon which Existence is founded, the singular foundation upon which Non Existence is founded, the singular foundation connecting Existence to Non Existence, the concept of options, and Free Will. However one thinks, believes, guesses, hopes, or "knows", whether by a Big Bang, a creation story, a computer program, an expansion of consciousness, or whatever means by which Existence could have come to Be, the option for Existence to not Be also exists. Existence and Non Existence, the original options connected by the very concept of options, connected by The Law. Outside of space and before time. Extra-Existential. As we experience The Law in our Being, The Law is Free Will. The First Protector of The Law is Freely Given Consent. The First Violation of The Law is Theft of Consent." - Goho-tekina Otoko

An Atheist is simply God playing Hide and Seek with Itself.

@@larscincaid6348 lol. Ok.

​@@larscincaid6348 Please elaborate cuz I wanna know what ur getting at

You're good at deepities

🙏🏻Thank-you

I've had a similar thought before, when contemplating "what it all means". I occasionally arrive at the conclusion that there is no external, objective meaning being imposed on me or my life...but rather that my life, my thoughts - bring meaning to the void. And sometimes, that is a powerful and comforting thought (sometimes, lol)

By universe, I reckon you mean this planet - earth. We are unique in this earth because we don’t originate here, we are not the from this earth. This is not some conspiracy theory from History channel. We are the only specie that has so many physical problems compared to other living things here it seems we are not made or evolved for this planet. We can even get skin cancer from too much sunlight. The body is just a shell. Consciousness is the soul within the body. The soul does not reside in any physical part of the body. The soul is in another dimension. There are different dimensions in this whole universe. Once the body is dead, the soul will return to its dimension and The Source - which some people called God. We cannot explain consciousness or soul because it is beyond us now.

​@craven5328 "comforting thought" "Comforting" That indicates the actual axiological root. Whatever effects _affect_ 'Thoughts' only subserve such, as observed by Hume re: 'reason is and only ever can be, enslaved to passion' Valence = value.

@@AnalyticalSentient I'm familiar with Hume's quote, but I'll admit I'm not quite following the entirety of your post. Would you be able to elaborate?

I'm a stoner too. But do you think the brain working in a state that is not optimal to its proper functioning, in any way reliable to discern the world around us? Heck, we developed scientific methods precisely because brains are fallible and biased! The moment to believe something is when there's sufficient evidence for it - not a second before

I'm curious about this. first of all, though, I want to say that I'm so sorry you didn't have s property support system in place. it must have been an absolutely horrifying experience to try to explain anything to any responders. I feel so anxious just thinking about this situation. are you able to share more about how you determined that this was in fact an ego death?

yeah, he got that right

No proof for any religion

@@threestars2164 Advaita vedanta, Budhism are religion but it asks "Who am I". It is vastly different from faith based religion. Religion is a very generic word

@@threestars2164 this is not about "religion"

How is it well-rounded? Most the screen time is dedicated to idealists and dualists who take the "hard problem" seriously. The video has a bias in favor of Chalmers' dualism and does not bother to do a serious investigation to talk to antimetaphysical philosophers who reject that there is a hard problem at all. Even the few "physicalists" he talked to are really just _promissory materialists,_ people who basically agree with the dualist premises that there is a division between mind and body, but vaguely gesture that "physics will solve it some day (somehow)." It's incredibly ideologically biased towards a single dogmatic viewpoint of Chalmers' dualism.

This is such a kind thing to say, we're so grateful! Thanks for spending time with us!

​@@amihart9269Thank you. I'm gnashing my teeth at people praising this as a balanced and profound piece. It's full of epistemic issues - not only loaded language and misrepresentations.

Trespassing on Einstein's Lawn.

Because we are part of our reality, Its like like been Micky mouse in a film. It is impossible to understand it because we cannot step outside to view it. We are forever in part of the film.

How about 'you' Are Consciousness Aware of IT-Self.

Thank you! You're so appreciated!

Read up on Neuroscience, u wont need ‘gifts’ from the unknown to explain any of this. Heck, they repeatedly said theory when they were speaking of a hypothesis. I dont think this documentary was based much in legitimate science.

YaHU'aH the 4|For power WORDs = tetYHUHgrammarten, in the shortest definition is; SOVEREIGN ETERNAL SUPREME IMMORTAL POTENTATE, and via sonic implosion creates light 🔯, the Star TetYHUHhedron 🔯, YaHs sigNATURE aka sign in nature.. his glory the lilly 🌷 Note sigNATURE of YaH🔯👆 In Geometry 🔯⚛️ 2 Esdras 5:24 “And of all lands of the whole world thou hast chosen thee one pit: and of all the flowers thereof, one Lillie🔯.” MatithYahu 6:28-29 Gift of YaHU'aH🔯 28 And why take ye thought for raiment? Consider the lilies of the field, how they grow; they toil not, neither do they spin: 29 And yet I say unto you, That even Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these. As in the many flowers of the field, the Lilly, Iris, tulip and mulberry, peppers, and many more. All display, Father's Great sigNATURE🔯, in flower form. Psalms 91:4 He shall cover thee with his feathers, and under his wings shalt thou trust: YaHU'aHs🔯TRUTH shall be thy shield and buckler. As King David did, {rather ∆au∆}, placed YaHs sign, on his shield🔯, buckler🔯, & breastplate🔯 Ayob 38:2 words with knowledge As with all beautiful words spoKIN, even eternity, TRUTH, Harmony, Love, and Joy, so each Mandelbrot forms🔯around this sigNATURE🔯 cymatic tone. And no matter how many times, each word is written or spoken, the cymatic image of each, tho unique, still remain in the same form🔯. See Dr. Emoto Masuro & Prof. Luc Montagnier. Ayob 38:22 “Hast thou entered into the treasures of the SNOW ❄️? or hast thou seen the treasures of the hail❄️? As the tears, (RAIN}, of the heavenly hosts fall, through the cold & snowflakes ❄️ are formed, in accordance to their praises, HalleluYah 🔯💜 Yashayahu 55:10-11 Genesis 2:7 And YaHU'aH AllahAYnu formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life🔯......YaH🔯 SPEAKS; EL yoU Cee, EL oM into MoLeCule's, & formation of seMaN! WE Swim to the womb, as Atoms ⚛️ form as 2 SowEL's collide, into DNA 🧬 , by which all cells are made & multiply! Having united, 2 married in2, 1 new sowel, for the making of a zygote, new NaMes, in human form. And the cymatic heartbeat of a FetUS🔯639 hertz, another sown Eloheim, 2 be born, as 1, a marriage & unbreakable bond! Marriage = baby🍼! YeremiYahu 1:5 As in the Ancient Covenant Elders Yahu∆ah, which are called by YaH🔯's Great name. Yahu∆ah = YaHU'aHs🔯,🔺 ∆oor, of IMMORTALITY. The π🔯mi∆! Sonic implosion creates the star tetYAHedron🔯 when speaKING: YaHUaHs Great NAME. In all the above, what do we see? Fathers sigNATURE🔯 is how everything is KINnected 💜, tested, known & proven! Go Look, know & see! Romans 1: 18 For the wrath of YaHU'aH🔯⚛️ is revealed from heaven against all unYaHliness and unrighteousness of men, WHO HOLD THE TRUTH IN UNRIGHTEOUSNESS; 19 Because that which may be known of YaHUaH is manifest in them, {Molecules & Atoms⚛️}; for YaHUaH🔯 hath shewed it unto them. 20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power⚛️ and YaHhead🔯; so that they are without excuse: 21 Because that, when they knew YaHU'aH, they glorified him not as AllahAYnu, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. 22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, 23 And changed the GLORY 🔯 of the uncorruptible YaHU'aH🔯 into an image made like to corruptible man (J.C.✝️), and to birds, ( 🦅,eagle) and four footed beasts, ( 🐂bull), and creeping things, ( 🐍snake- don't tread on me).

Thank you for watching!