@@jamesstevens351 The idea that consciousness underlies everything else is hard for me to grasp. The world maintains a continuity that seems totally wrapped up in unconscious processes. The rain falls. The grass grows. How does that fit in?
I admire a scholar who can pause mid sentence to bring clarity to another scholar. That conscious pause is one of the most beautiful things to me. I learned to be this way while tutoring.
Yes. The longtalker simply misunderstands QM. There's nothing but very certain single interactions for quantum particles depending on what particles that are. The simplest are electrons and up/down quarks. They have no inner properties. They're just what they are acting as such with other particles that can have extra complexity of a property or many. This all rides some binary tree wave that's incomprehensive to modern physics. Not to physical ontologies and computer sciences such as that of Meillassoux, Wolfram and me
Our dreams are a metaphor for how 'reality' is created. You dream, you experience realms with their own physics, the characters all think they are separate, yet they are subconscious subunits of your awareness. Everything in your dream from the people, to the creatures to the blade of grass are all composed with consciousness. Now extrapolate.
@chetsenior7253 I'm wondering this as well. I imagine once the fetus reaches consciousness it develops a distinction between wakefulness and sleep, so who knows maybe we do
And yet I am still with Prof. Donald Hoffman when he says the "intellectually" he gets it, he's "there". But, he still isn't able to get it "emotionally". Unfortunately I am on the autism spectrum and I don't, and never have, gotten anything "emotionally" and I doubt I ever will. But, I think he means getting it deeply, profoundly, or intuitively. Because, if you really understand the implications, deep down, "balls to bones", how could you continue to exist as any semblance of what you were prior to such an epiphany?
I thought about this recently and a phrase really stuck with me “ Ignorance is bliss” the more you know how something works the less flare it has. Like seeing a Magic trick for the first time and you are amazed . But as soon as you understand it. Its gone. If us humans overthink too much we fall into a spiral of depression and despair. Because knowledge may be power . But with great power comes great responsibility.
makes me think virtual reality. When you have glasses on it's easy to forget the real world and feel the fear of height f.ex when walking on a plank on top of the skyscraper. But while still being in that vr world you become conscious that you're you and you're just experiencing the vr, in other word you become an observer, suddenly that vr world loses its grip changing the outcome. Translate that to the "real" world which has a much tighter grip of all of our senses to make us believe its realness making it much harder to believe, or should i use word to "see" (to be an observer) it isn't real. That's what Eckhart Tolles of the world are talking about.
As Dr. Peter Attia said in the video: "suffering is optional". One can know the truth and still be positive. Maybe another aspect of seeing through this whole human experience is understanding that emotions are a part of the non-source reality or "matrix."
Can I have your car? I mean since you're not going to participate in life's struggle, you won't need it, right? You fall into a cognitive depression because you're swimming upstream. The goal isn't to eliminate struggle, but to accept it. "A warrior doesn't search for a meaning to life. He is here, and that is enough." - dB Shearson.
I wonder how many people are living in psych wards saying the same shit and whom are put on medicine that really does melt their mind because they didn't have the same environment as this guy did, giving him the proper platform to express the idea
People on psych wards don't socially interact well, that's why they are there and not because of anything they believe. People can believe any crazy crap they like but as long as it doesn't interfere too catastrophically with their social interactions the psych ward is not for them.
I love that most people can come to this conclusion to a degree from weed/shrooms as well. It just clicks after a while. Can’t imagine just playing the game without having awareness that there is a game. It’s what physicists spend their lives figuring out.
Dude, I had a shroom trip like that :) Literally just connected the dots, on a Starry night. It was like a great big zipper, just unwinded reality. It´s been 10 years, still remember it as if it was yesterday.
I place no value in what drug addicts think--just look at how most of them end up like zombies and you can see that trying to alter our minds to achieve higher consciousness does not work.
No. Shrooms or weed don’t help figure this out. It’s an illusion in the high person’s mind that they understand some profound thing. Anybody who has interacted with people who are high can tell you that you can ask them many questions and the answers quickly stop making sense.
Quantum mechanics (QM) does not say consciousness affects reality. It says interaction affects reality, and we need interaction to make measurements. Objects interact all the time without needing to be conscious. In QM, we're measuring extremely small objects, like electrons, protons, etc. Generally, the least destructive method we use to measure these objects it to shine light on them. However, since these particles are so small, the light actually affects what we're measuring, knocking them around or giving them energy. Thus, it's not that conscious observation constructs reality. It's that to figure out what reality looks like, we have to intervene by blasting reality with light (or other small particles). This process alters reality. Reality interacts with itself all the time in this way. It still exists all on its own without the need of a conscious observer. Hope that helps.
What is an observer? Quantum mechanics does not say anything. The interpretation is the declaration. And the 'measurement problem' has not been solved by any of several interpretations
As soon as I started listening to the video I immediately thought that it made sense from my own (mildly psychedelic) experiences with weed and meditation, and also from recurring dreams from childhood where I could 'see' a huge, never ending fractal-like thing which moved at weird paces, totally alien. When I've thought about this stuff recently, I've realised how similar it is to people's experience on DMT and strong mushroom trips. It also aligns with a concept I've felt in recent months that we are just extremely well-developed nodes/nerve endings within some infinite 'thing', we're all part of the same thing, but because our senses are so well developed, they've taken on an ability to simulate a reality that makes sense to 'us'. A good thought experiment is to think of how dense and completely connected everything in our existence is. Like, we know there is space between every atom so nothing is truly 100% 'solid', but also, how we see space between things which we perceive as air - that's still 'stuff', but just less dense. It's extremely difficult to describe, but perhaps think of a painting where there are sections of very dense, thick strokes, then other areas that are very thinly-painted. The canvas as a whole is completely covered and is 'one', but the nature of different parts of it are very different.
Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you.
What blew my mind is that he believes that someone talks to insects; and they talk back to him. I would not be taking advice about reality. From someone who believes that they can have conversations with insects.
Once upon a time, I dreamt I was a butterfly, fluttering hither and thither, to all intents and purposes a butterfly. I was conscious only of my happiness as a butterfly, unaware that I was myself. Soon I awaked, and there I was, veritably myself again. Now I do not know whether I was then a man dreaming I was a butterfly, or whether I am now a butterfly, dreaming I am a man.
@@TheHiveMecha Never met anything like that, but my experience was intense, becoming vibrating spheres locked together - all colours but mostly purple, green and orange - vibrating without a boundary in time or space, just becoming more intense as I "went into it further" but like a fractal, self-similar although there was a sensation of the magnification becoming finer and finer and I "knew" the noise that the experience is characterized by was saying "I you we you it I you we" etc just over and over again, although there was no "voice" translating or actually saying it. Completely incredible! And I thought I'd "done psychedelics" before, rofl. Have a good one!
My take is that it's much simpler. I agree with the initial lines he's pulling up; we are simplifying our perception of reality. But when he moves on to comparing human interaction with simplifications of the underlying wealth of knowledge and experience... that's where my idea of our existence starts to diverge. It is very, very simple, at the end of the day: Yes, humans do embody those concepts; knowledge, experience, behaviors, current state of mind etc etc. What we do when we interact with people is apply the simplest rules possible to safely navigate the interactions. In other words, when you are interacting with a guy on the street, you start taking safety into concern, you use guarded/neutral language, your movements and stance go in a certain way, and so forth. You know nothing about this person (presumably) and you, the individual, don't want to increase the likelihood of harm coming to yourself. On the other hand, when you're interacting with your spouse, you will be much more open. You won't need to use neutral language, there is no reason to maybe clench your keys "just in case", etc. We are, as I am fond of saying, heuristics machines. In the same way beetles are heuristics machines; but they are far simpler and have a less costly life cycle, so they can take more risks and still have their genetic code spread. And so we come to the psychedelics. What happens is that some of the reality filters we have in place get knocked out, or skewed, or however you want to think of it. The world gets more tricky to navigate, but we also get to see more of it. Often enough, anyway. In much the same way, if you have a little something to drink, or maybe something to smoke, your outgoing filters may become loosened or disabled. Call them filters, call them rules, call them shortcuts... whatever you choose, it is, at the end of the day, rules upon rules upon rules. That's my take, at any rate. :)
You believe that someone who believes that insects and humans can have conversations. Is the best that the Internet has to offer? Maybe the best that the mental asylum has to offer. But definitely not the Internet.
I have synesthesia and I only just found out recently because I thought everyone had the same sensations. For me when I hear sound I can physically feel it, like its an object in front of me, every type of sound has a very defined shape and texture that I can "feel". Musical harmony feels especially nice too and as it turns out I am very passionate about music production too and have always been interested in anything music related all my life.
I have it too. I see the shapes in my minds eye. They spin and morph into more complex shapes depending on the melody and tones and grooves. Psychedelics intensify it and add layers of different sensations like taste and tactile. Sometimes it seems as if it’s reality breaking in and music is an archaic recollection of some sort of objective truth from some deeper reality poking through. I’ve never found anyone more adept at connecting me to that reality than Miles Davis. No one has been able to pick up where he left off.. as far as I know.
That’s so cool!! I am a non-synesthetic jazz musician and aspiring cognitive scientist, so I am super curious about this. I have a request: If I listed some different songs, like 5-6, would you be willing to listen to them for 30-60 seconds and write me a brief description of the “feel” that you experience? They will all be jazz songs that I have transcribed, so I know them in my heart and soul. You don’t know how curious I am to see how they physically “feel”! Let me know :) thank you 🙏
@@ParallelNewsNetwork Yes thats a good way to describe it, in the minds eye. And also for me, the object can get bigger when the sound gets louder, so at concerts what I feel in front of me feels gigantic lmao. I've never done psychedelics because I was always scared of them, but lately I've been wondering how it would affect my senses with music.
im incredibly confident that synesthesia as you guys describes now is on top of the hierarchy of the most intriguing concepts or things next to narcissism/mental illness. This from the Neoplatonism framework reasoning, and very few have the capacity to understand why, basically you're positing the idea that consciousness is primary (sort of lol)and that it has a evolutionary element to it that thus is the primary of importance, i also think that processing limitations of the human brain vs higher dimensions is important and localized higher neuromodulatory density of savants and einsteins Corpus callosum and neuroplasticity/neurogenesis lol
We already only assume the person we talk with has the same "red apple" in his mind that we have in ours. So it doesn't matter if a person sees, feels, knows the same concept of "pretty" or "mysterious", or "bicycle" that we have when we use those words, as long as our concepts are close enough to communicate. The blind men describing the elephant were not successful in communicating the whole object they were touching, but they would eventually, if they kept exploring and communicating, come to a mutual understanding of the object they couldn't see.
An interesting flavor on the nature of reality, as interpreted by a programmer. Thanks for sharing. It all adds to the personal view of how everything functions.
this sounds similar to something I heard about the brain being nothing more than a holographic receptor of quantum waves racing through ether of reality and our perception of these "waves" based on our "mapping", create our reality. This allows us to tap into higher states of "consciousness", experience ESP and telepathy, etc. I have a feeling what is discussed here is just scratching the surface and many monks and esoteric people have discovered this through DEEP meditation, which could explain so many EXTRAORDINARY reports. DEEP, love the video!
I have had a very similar theory for years, I convinced myself that the answer to the last question "why can't you lift this bottle of water with your mind" is because the collective consciousness (not individuals) make up the rules. However because we are still part of the collective consciousness, we can hack some mild elements of reality, such as when we have the placebo effect which science has been unable to explain. It also gives credence to group praying, since the more consciousness attempt to hack mild elements of reality, the more likely they would succeed. I also think this opens the door for another phenomenon, which is holistic evolution, that is species not evolving independently through Darwinian forces but instead evolving holistically since they all have different levels of consciousness that effect the construct of reality. Holistic evolution implies some level of communication across living species that allows them to evolve as a whole, in knowledge of other living species, instead of individuals.
I agree. And even if we could move the water bottle with our mind then we would be able to tase the water remotely or interact with it while it's inside the bottle. We would be able to do so without directly seeing it and the rabbit hole should go farther of sensing particles and planc length ect. I do like to call reality experiences because even if we dream those are still experiences. I think it sums things up better then hologram ect. But just my opinion.
“All models are wrong, but some are useful” - coined by the statistician, George Box. Even though GB was a statistician and was talking about statistical model, we must remember that quantum mechanics and indeed much of fundamental physics is also nothing more that models generated by statistical data. I think this fits most of science, which is statistcal based, extremely well!
Early in life, I aspired to be a physicist, so this stuff fascinates me. Through a convoluted series of my own choices and seemingly random events, I wound up a nurse. Not at all what I expected, but it has worked okay for me. I can't help but try to consider how to apply the concepts you discuss to healthcare, and while that's a stretch, it does seem to fit some ideas I have had through the years. I don't want to go all Deepok about it, but I have a strong feeling that prayers matter, and as an extension of that, that our expectations and our will can influence reality--that it matters whether we want Schrodinger's cat to live. I also feel like intuition has an important place in this as a function of the central and peripheral nervous systems that goes on largely outside awareness. I believe that's a lot of where the art of nursing (and medicine, too) occurs. But I think it's necessary to apply critical thinking to differentiate between "critical feeling," and magical thinking.
Are you aware that they did actual studies on prayer on sick people. Those who were made aware that they were being prayed for had a significant reduced chance of recovery. Those who weren't told only recovered at a rate consistent with random chance. I am not trolling, just trying to spread facts.
@@hymenpierce I am not aware of the studies you mention. Indeed, the reports I read about seemed to reach nearly the opposite conclusion. But what I read were news stories, not peer-reviewed papers, so I have always taken them with a grain of salt. Similarly, I read your comment as something to think about, and maybe look into further. But in matters of faith, I tend to rely more on my own experience than scientific method. And my own experience has been mixed. Sometimes prayers seem to be answered, but often they aren't. I don't know why, and any guesses I might venture about how prayer or will might influence physical phenomena seem fairly far-fetched. Am I delusional? I don't think, because I am open to the possibility I could be wrong. Am I unreasonable? That's a harder question. I am convinced that there are very real limits to reason, which, I believe, is a reasonable conclusion. And as much as I respect the power of intuition, reality is often counterintuitive. It seems to me that a lot of the history of science, at least since Galileo, has been overturning what formerly passed for "common sense." It leaves me in an uncomfortable position. I see myself as an agnostic in the truest sense: there is much I do not and probably cannot ever *know*. And I am a true skeptic , in that I am very cautious about believing anything. And yet, it seems important to believe something, one way or another. I believe my cats love me, but I can't actually prove even that I love my cats. It could all be neurochemistry. My consolation is in the Puritanical roots of a Fundamentalist upbringing: no one ever told me this was supposed to be easy.
@@mikestewart505 I naturally like and appreciate the way you think. Something I often say to myself when exploring these thoughts is "No one ever said this was going to be an easy journey." I'm not even sure where I picked up that saying along the way, but it seems to be an almost daily reminder as things progressively get exponentially stranger and deeper in context these days.
Reminds me of something my electronics teacher asked us in trade school: "For all we know, we could just be little specks of shit on the bottom of a test tube somewhere."
You can experience this. Keep on with meditation until you have developed the ability to watch yourself as from the outside. When you have developed that ability you turn consciousness in on itself (use consciousness to look at who/what is doing the looking) and space-time collapses (the GUI) and you merge into the zero point of the “matrix”. This happened to me by “accident” when I was using meditation and yoga to cope with a stressful situation in my life. For this to happen every “object” of experience has to be externalised… including thoughts, emotions and body sensations… in other words not identified with as ME. But, be warned, It’s a profound paradigm shift… and it may take quite some time to realign your cognitive structures and you life to this new paradigm ❤
This sounds truly brilliant! I was also thinking that it becomes interestingly a loop when you get to watch you watching you watching you watching you, that goes on to infinity. In other words, in the meditation practice, the moment we manage to watch ourselves watching ourselves, we touch infinity with our consciousnesses, and that touch is an extremely powerful and at the same time healing moment of (re-)energization.
Interesting. Could I ask you if the "zero point" as you refer to it is in any way "describable"? (although I realize it may really not be "put into words"). Just intrigued, as once, a long time ago, I had an "experience" that seemed to have no distinction of anything, no subject/object distinction, no forms, no passage of "time" - what I might glibly describe as just clear "white light" without any boundary in time or space. When I cognised again I noticed that about 15 minutes of clock time had elapsed between last looking at the clock and then looking at it again but the "white light" experience I "remembered" as actually having "lasted for forever" (which is obviously paradoxical). Indeed, I was left with the lasting impression that it - if I can refer to it like that - was the only thing which "truly" (! lol) existed ie it couldn't NOT exist because of it's nature, although all other experiences/things did not partake of this "necessary-ness" (ah, the unwieldiness of language). The only philosophy that I have come across that comes near to describing the experience is the Shentong school of Buddhism (or Meister Eckhart in the Christian tradition). No worries if you feel you don't want to reply. BTW it happened to me by accident too, on a fairly high dose of LSD when I was alone with nothing really to distract me. Never ever happened again, either, which makes me think that in a sense it had nothing to do with the drug - in a way. Namaste!
@@thebaryonacousticoscillati5679 Yes, that was my first glimpse of it many years ago during prolonged meditation. That zero point that I’m talking about was deeper experience… the nothing that is everything… pure being… the infinite potential. All of these in are ultimately only perspectives of what we are… so are no more or less than the other but this one made the whole illusion unravel.
@ZdoggMD you are Amazing !!! I saw this podcast when it came out almost a year ago. And had an epiphany today! Just had to come back to it and I have soooo much clarity now, I’m so thankful for this discussion it allowed me to straighten my thoughts through and have some kind of sanity in this degenerate world. Thank you so much for this amazing conversation that opens the mind inexplicably 🙏🏽🙏🏽😘
This guy has hit the nail on the head he knows what he's talkin about. If you go deep within yourself you can literally find that out what this guy is saying. You can become consciousness aware of consciousness.
Im a vivid dreamer 80% of the time so i spend my nights in an alternate reality and i test the boundaries and the socialisms of the dream relm alot! For years it been my favorite thing to do ... and from what ive Observed is ,the dream relm is exactly what he is describing???!
@@LilM0ke Yes, everything we can think of exists, and more. Not only is our perception one of filtering, but it's also a matter of creating a model of reality. For example we see the color red, but the reality behind our perception of color is a wavelength of light, that our minds see as color. So our minds do these two things: filter reality, and create a model of the world.
Goes on a full-on rambling monologue for 10mins, manages to interrupt his own sentences to go on tangents, ignores the polite active listening sounds from the other side of the table trying to desperately signal their existence until they fade into resigned silence... And then you drop it "... what do you think?". Amazing!
The master approached the student and asked "Why are you meditating?" The student replied, "I am meditating in order to become a Buddha." At which the master picked up a nearby brick and began to polish it. The student asked, "Why do you polish that brick?" "So that it becomes a mirror." Replied the master. And the student said, "By no amount of polishing can that brick become a mirror." And the master replied; "And by no amount of meditation will you become a Buddha."
The very first thing I recall was total Darkness I was not afraid because I never seen with eyes before. Each new experience of learning was a challenge however deep in my mind I felt a sense of I was. Now that I have heard so much thought from many sources I can make heads or tails of information. I am in awe of the creation of the system we have come to understand. I for one am very close to my creator some would say GOD. I feel as though i am living as part of it.
I have to disagree. He stated Hoffman says our reality isnt real at all., that its all conciousmess. This is a misrepresentation, and a big one at that. Objective reality is real, we just dont see reality as it is. I think you can lose alot of people, from accepting and thinking, on this theory. Im not saying he doesnt have a good grasp of this theory. Its just so complicated of a concept, that unless hearing it from Hoffman(and even then make sure he doesnt slip up and contradict himself) you can get a skewed view listeming from someone explaining these seriously mindboggling concepts. I would suggest ppl take this seriously as well. It took me about a year, after first hearing of Hoffman, for these concepts to click and researching new condepts is pretty much a hobby of mine. It took listening to actualized.orgs “crazy “ concepts on reality for Hoffmans view to finally really click. Ps i know actualized.org has been called a cult but it is def a misrepresentation of a very intuitive( now even a lil crazy due to a growing obsession with dmt and needing use drugs to reach higher states) and determined person. Detremined to try and help ppl see a new kind of reality. If you check him out be warned, you will not relate to his videos if you are closeminded or if you like to watch bite sized videos. It takes watching a full video of his( i measn many more but atleast this) to get his point. He does not use a script and can talk for literal hours on the same complicated concept without using the words uhh or um. He is def a brilliant man but when you go as deep into the “man behind the curtain” bas Leo, its hard not to get lost once in a while.
@@jarrodknight4698 I would suggest you read Hoffman’s book on the subject and get a 4 year education in philosophy at a university, as I have. Because he does a great job of articulating Hoffman’s work on subjective idealism. Your reply to my comment doesn’t make sense, because you haven’t read the book and are bringing some other subject into the discussion. 😊
I'm a (not so old) 64 and find this interaction very educational, understandable and humorous. Terrance McKenna would have made a great triad in this one. 👍😊
Donald Hoffman by stating let's start from the miracle is actually standing on the shoulders of Terrance McKenna who said more than thirty years ago that all scientific theories depart from the premise "grant me one little miracle and I will explain the rest"...
As would the Buddha, some 19th century idealist philosophers, FH Bradley and others with a coherence epistemology, Yeats and Aleister Crowley and the entire Golden Dawn society, the German sex magicians, Austin Osman Spare and all modern chaos magicians. Aldous Huxley might've had something to say too about the sophia perennis. I think this understanding of the world has been taken as a given in the west in the neoplatonist tradition since at least the second or third century, probably much earlier, and certainly in the east it is mainstream. A brute fact. To a reality hacker the question of whether there is a physical reality, Locke's "something I know not what", or whether all that exists is consciousness, though interesting, is subordinate to questions of how to manipulate our evolutionary mechanisms that have developed for succeeding in such a filtered reality. Questions about how to bypass the thinking egocentric, reactive consciousness, which by its very nature invokes a dualism that immediately instills a will to failure, and about how to instead engage the subconscious which can much more easily interact with the collective unconscious - reality - and effect change.
Prime Creator (aka God), created everything to experience itself through reflection. We are all the same thing experiencing itself through a different perspective/point of view. Keep it simple guys.
This is the philosophy I have always carried with me before this video. We can see how human mind similarity is so huge and we can see how our brains work in such formatted ways.
There are moments where I lose track of “reality”. These are fractional instants where there is a cacophony of perception that has not been rationalized into “reality”. This must be what a baby experiences when they are new born have not yet learned what all these sensory impacts mean.
This is what Carlos Castaneda's mentor, Don Juan, referred to as "stopping the world." Using a combination of drugs and clever illusions, he would coax Castaneda into seeing the world without that "cacophony of perception " (and preconception) . Read "A Journey to Ixtlan." It will blow you away.
"Creatures who see reality like it is go extinct" - Makes perfect sense, to me procreating people focusing on secondary things, there brain is selective. They are too caught up in the game and don't experience the unfortunate fates of others, as long as the majority benefits is there rule. Not seeing reality how it is is maybe a good thing for benefitting fitness, but that doesn't make it necessarily good in essence...
Thank you for a cognitive view of the factors that make perception of what is=reality. I will study your video and compile, decompile collate and correct to add to my view of reality. Please note all individuals do note seek the same levels of gratification from reality. Have a good day.
So cool to see the doc handling this so easily. That synesthesia chef may have an unusually symphonised claustrum. The brain's claustrum - being studied by Christof Koch et al - seems to be what connects all (seeming 3D) sense data into one orchestrated experience. It maybe the seat of consciousness for want of a better term.
I just watched Prof Hoffman's Vancouver TED Talk and I I have three issues with his hypothesis. First is that he uses anecdotal evidence of some kind of beetles to illustrate the hypothesis. The second is that when he talks about simulations they used to prove the hypothesis his description lacks any details. He just stated that there are three versions of reality they presented to the subjects and only one favored specimen's survival. Third issue I have with this is the arbitrary nature of the initial assumption that there is anything beyond what senses perceive. It is like asking if all people see the color red the same way. In the essence there is no rigorous way to prove or disprove this notion. Thus, this it is not a falsifiable hypothesis. I guess my main issue with this is: what's the real reality? Can you explain how you see it or measure it? How do you differentiate between reality and perceived reality?
"All models are wrong, some are useful"... that was a good statement from the guest. We only have models of reality, but reality itself likely isn't something we can articulate without otherwise invoking (mathematical) models. Models can make predictions that can be tested, which does tell us something about some fundamental Truth, but it is still a perception and understanding based on a (mathematical) model. Unless, the universe IS a mathematical structure, then the best we can do is perceive through models. However, physicist Max Tagmark suggests that "our external physical reality is a mathematical. That is, the physical universe is not merely described by mathematics, but is mathematics (specifically, a mathematical structure)."
In relation to the choice vs order aspect: if you scale out to the size of a solar system or the visible universe it might as well be a physical particle to a larger-scale observer.
It just seems that the larger, or more evolved observer that's looking, will see more of how it all fits together and which parts are illusory. I imagine if all this UFO stuff turns out to be real, they see more than us. Also, I think this talk needed to be longer, with more explanation, for him to see the picture being painted
The way I sum up Hoffman's thesis is that we only evolved to experience the reality we needed to survive (3+1), but reality is much deeper (i.e. has many more dimensions beyond 3+1). We don't possess the sensors to experience the expanded reality. This could explain why we can't yet explain the origin of gravity, when in reality it may be emergent from other dimensions beyond our 3+1 reality.
Here is my personal quote that perfectly explains how I feel about the nature of reality - "The only thing in life that I am absolutely certain of is that nothing is as it seems". My whole life I've sensed the deception.
You have to be careful, because this view is extreme. "Things are not as they seem, but they are also not different." Cause and effect works, and you can trust that.
i only have my own basic voice inside of my head. if i binge watch some series, then those voices pop up for some time (like an echo, like a memory). but the vivid dreams that i have when i sleep are something else, the stories i watch, and the series that develop night after night... sometimes it's like living in another timeline, in an alternate reality, because story is continuing to develop night after night. then there are dreams that come true, that send messages/working warnings to other people (i mean, those don't happen often but manage to be timely and saved some people from some troubles), and those make me wonder the most. there is a unified "field" of everything that is, was and every possibility that will be, that we tap into, isn't there? such field needs to be just a compressed "dot" where everything is happening all at once, and we "add" dimension of time to dilute it into space. so that it doesn't happen all at once. but patiently waiting for things to happen/unravel is sometimes difficult.
I think people that meditate a lot know something like this is going on. Meditation when I found it 30+ years ago brought me a great deal of relief and peace as it felt like a bridge to the abstract where my mind is so comfortable. I am elderly now but was a research scientist and when I started out to use a computer you had to program it yourself. When we got a program called Frameworks so we didn't need to go into the operating system to make the computer do its thing anymore I was just mesmerized. I started having ideas that this may be the way the world worked and decades later when I heard Dr Hoffman speak, it felt right, although whether it is right is yet to be seen. I enjoy studying, analyzing, but outcomes are what they are. I am what I am regardless, whatever that is 😊
I’ve been saying for awhile that computers are intuitively based on the story of reality. That’s why people think we’re living in a computer simulation, but it’s the opposite way. We’re living in a spiritual simulation, similar to a dream, and computers are symbolic of that. The more we expand on computers, the closer to reality they become.
@@BigTrees4ever yes but reality is digital too. We are in a dram in a dream in a dream etc. Black holes are good way to imagine it as a worm holes to different reality. Originaly its traced to a supercomputer/quantum supercomputer most certainly, who build it idk, maybe it was always there.
@@SamuelSmith420 I think that it’s not in a supercomputer, but inside a mind. We are all pieces of the overmind. It’s a spiritual simulation not a computational one. When you go to sleep and dream, you are experiencing a simulation of reality, but you don’t need a computing device to make that a reality when you go to sleep, your brain is already enough of a supercomputer. Like I said, computers didn’t come first, reality came first.
I'm in the process of creating a unique VR application known as "Color in Color". The core concept behind this app is to introduce users to an expanded realm of color experiences beyond the conventional norms. By incorporating 'impossible' color combinations into the traditional trichromatic color spectrum, we this app facilitates a finer discernment of subtle color variations. One of the standout features of this application is the "Color in Value" mode. In this mode, each level of brightness or darkness of a particular color can exhibit its own unique hue, rather than just being a brighter or darker variant of the same color. The main insight I've gained through this development process is the direct correlation between the quantity of information I can gather about 'reality' and the degree of realism it projects. Additional details don't necessarily have to reflect 'real' aspects; they simply need to augment my understanding of my environment. The richness and precision of the images viewed through "Color in Color" and its "Color in Value" mode outshine the output of standard vision significantly. In fact, my brain sometimes perceives my regular vision as a form of color vision deficiency in comparison. While a typical trichromat can distinguish approximately 16 million unique color experiences (or 256x256x256 colors based on a standard 24-bit color depth screen), the "Color in Color" app enables us to perceive around 100 trillion distinct color experiences. This figure signifies an increase by a factor of 6,250,000, already considering any duplicate color combinations. With "Color in Color", an object appearing red to the naked eye may radiate a multitude of previously impossible (but now possible) colors, with a brightness level that exceeds the capability of standard trichromatic vision. This realization has underscored the fact that my existing perception of the world, despite being sufficiently intricate for survival, is rather limited in contrast to the vast spectrum I can perceive when I put my mind to it.
Has there been an organism that has seen the matrix that actually went extinct? How did they figure out that it was experiencing the matrix in 1's & 0's?
@@ObjectiveZoomer my question exactly...just how do they know this thing experienced the matrix? As far as "experience is" there is no way, because we can not know the experience of the organisms, wether it experiences of the matrix or not. And if it is extinct because it was unable to experience the totality of the matrix, again how would they know? All I know, is that I dont know, A lot.
That was an analog example, not meant to be literal. He does not refer to it as seeing "the matrix" or some other form of ultimate reality. What he says is that our perception of reality is based on evolutionary fitness, which does not appear to rely on perceiving ultimate truth. He does not say that we know some organism has seen ultimate reality and that led to extinction, but that IF we were able to see ultimate reality that would not necessarily lead to the greatest fitness for survival. He then demonstrates examples where a lack of perception actually leads to greater survival fitness, and tries to use the analogy of a computer icon as an example. In where seeing the reality of how the computer functions would not lead to the greatest fitness for a computer avatar to survive. We know that our perception of reality is false, there are countless examples, then he posits that we cannot explain consciousness through any form of physical science. At some point all science must rely on conscious perception with an ontological primitive. Consciousness is subjective, which means it is outside of science, so he posits that consciousness is the ontological primitive (the essential building blocks of reality. So everything we experience is perceptual illusion within consciousness and our perception is based on evolutionary perception survival fitness. It is a rational explanation for ultimate reality. It is a priori, get it? Basically evolutionary perception of reality does not lead to optimum survival fitness. We purposely do not see reality because it does not lead to survival fitness, just like seeing how a computer actually functions would not help you use it to perform complex tasks.
If I'm not mistaken, I heard in one of the videos that Hoffman and his team were experimenting with such organisms. I guess it was like the game of Life.
@Eric Michel thank you. I am one who does not read or hear between the lines, so to speak. You gave me a better understanding of this. Once again, I thank you.
The discussion about the essence of consciousness is of a piece with panentheism. 5-MeO-DMT makes the unitary relational consciousness more visible. Also, I’m reminded of a Philip K. Dick quote (paraphrased): “Reality is what persists when you stop believing in it.”
I swear, I had a visceral reaction when I sat down and starting using Mac computers in the early 90s... the icon interface just "clicked" on such a deep level. I almost wished that Apple designed every interface in this reality. The icons represent the object you want to interact with or modify (file, folder, application). If you had to look at all of the 1s and 0s cascading like in The Matrix, it would be too much. Objects are the rendered in short hand. This is kinda what he's saying. Maybe it brings us back to "reality is a complex simulation program" again?
Reality is subjective to perception of a individual’s account of reality shared with others, and when it’s shared, it’s a collective conscious experience shared with the aspect of the reality.
I’m so happy this exists. It’s a lesson, an exploration, a convo with a friend. I’ve fallen down an evolutionary game theory / Donald Hoffman rabbit hole and this is by far the best video I’ve seen that encompasses the wonder and uncertainty and excitement of it all. Thank youuuuu
This just reminded me of something I would do when I was a kid I would stare into the mirror and just like you said it’s like I would lose my sense of reality. Crazy I would’ve never remembered this if not for your comment lol
"If consciousness is true, evolution is false." "It's not survial of the fittest, it's survival of using what is most useful." -Dr. Hoffman Met him at chaffey college doing a presentation about consciousness for the phil department. Really cool dude!
12:05 An interface in computer science is an API (application programming Interface) we programmers use it all the time. Does not matter who is using the interface of reality all functions will return the same results so all observers (conscious agents) will agree
@@nanaleigh328 All reality goes through the prism of our perception. And certainly we cannot perceive all reality and we all have a different viewpoint of reality. But, as time goes by and we advance, we learn more and more of it. So, if our bodies are an evolutionary mechanism to somehow temper reality for us to survive, then that seems counterintuitive. If anything, it seems we are learning more and more about reality and that's helping us survive.
Consciousness is everything , without it the reality would be totally irrelevant . The consciousness of a dog is more interesting that all the galaxies together
Sounds alot like the last shroom trip i had.i was laying back and i wondered what all of this is. Like what is reality really? And i guess the shrooms decided to answer because as i laid back, closing my eyes, i began to halucinate an incredibly vivid experience. I was God and i was Alone... Literally i was all there was. Not like being alone in an infinite black or white room. I WAS the room. and i distinctly remember not knowing where i came from or why i was all there was. Id love to say that as god, "i eventually got bored and lonely so i made shit," to sum it up. but that would be a huge understatement! The experience of being god was pure insanity. Every emotion and feeling and thought you could ever possibly imagine having was all happening simultaniously. If that word is even valid because there kinda was no time. Its hard to explain what infinity feels like. And i had a sort of understanding that i was a "perfect being" (whatever that means) and yet another understanding that such a thing is completely meaningless. Probably because there nothing to even compare myself to lol. I even remember wondering if it was possible to end myself if i wanted to... And i remember distinctly even considering whether i should attempt to not exist. But i was also afraid of not existing, even as insane and pointless as existence felt. So instead i decided to split in two. I sent my other self "away" like down a hole or through a gateway. Not sure how to describe it. My consciousness was split but still connected, i could feel what the other felt. But as the me that was being sent away fell further into the void, my consciousnes began to truly split. The me who stayed behind became "other", i could no longer know its mind or its intentions. But the last thing it communicated to me was essentially "its better this way." though it wasnt through actual words. I then began to split apart more and more. I really felt myself become the universe. After the trip, i felt afraid, paniced even. I thought to myself. Holy fuck... God was in hell. so to speak. and "he" created and became the creation to get away from that primary existence. If i die and thats whats waiting for me... having to remember that im god, all alone and insane again.... NO THANKS!
Language is often clumsy expressing experience. A rendering engine is a way to think of this idea. To save mental computational resources nothing is rendered for an observer until it is required. This fits well with my own experience.
Was looking for this comment! It's a super common misinterpretation of the observer effect, probably stemming from the fact that laypeople and physicists have a different meaning of the word, "observer." I think Tibees made a good video on this misunderstanding (for laypeople) and provides some academic links in her description box, for those who might be interested: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-yotBpxXiivA.html
@@fuzzylist I think he meant that experience isn't only a limited portion of reality, but a simplified model of the portion, warped to promote our survival.
The RU-vid algorithm hit this perfectly for me and this conversation just gave me chills. The subject is one that is fascinating to the point of obsession for me and the back and forth conversation sounds like one of my internal monologues. Not only that, but the guest is a near doppelgänger of mine.
Anyone who's certain on the hard problem is full of it. No sufficient evidence, and may never be sufficient evidence... That's why it's "hard". That said, to me it seems a whole lot more likely (or at least much simpler) that reality is real, restricting our experience (except in dreams), but that our 1st person experiences are not exactly identical to the 3rd person reality. I can't make a sound argument for this unless the person I'm talking to has practiced meditation and/or done Douglas Harding's 1st person experiments... Here I go trying anyways. In front of me I'm experiencing a computer screen, but I'm constructing it. In reality, all there is is light, in different wavelengths, intensities, and shapes. It's coming from what I call my screen, but of course we could deconstruct that too couldn't we? Is it the same thing at 1 inch? 1 foot? 10 yards? 1mm? At 0 distance? Not in my consciousness...
In order for life to evolve and compete with itself organisms developed more and more complex nervous systems to collect and process information coming in from objective reality. Our entire experience is based some particular arrangement of matter and energy flow that optimized to approximate reality and exist within it. So, our senses do a good job of informing our motor functions to help us exist within the world. But the level of abstraction with which we are able to think in as humans today has enabled us to start detecting things like trace gravitational waves in faraway galaxies, our level of technology having expanded the amount of information we can use to inform our picture of objective reality. But still, no matter what, no matter where it comes from, the endpoint of all the information we experience is our consciousness. In meditation this is described as the awareness. All you are is a web of concepts, connecting all the information you posse encoded in neurons, where one of those concepts is your awareness and its purpose is to understand the information at the highest level of abstraction.
The problem with "observation collapsing the wavefunction" is the phrasing. "Observation" suggests that it is a purely concious reaction. It really should have been phrased as "interaction". Then we wouldn't keep getting people like this making that obvious mistake.
When consciousness is defined in a manner that begs the question if even a serotonin molecule possess it, the ordinary meaning of the word becomes so distorted that an everyday explanation of this idea is prone to misunderstanding.
This is fascinating for me just now. I'm sort of perhaps recovering from epilepsy, T.I.A.s, and C.A.A.'s, and strange things have happened: for example, (I live in Israel), the days following Oct.7th, I couldn't sleep for 3 nights. When I moved to a safer location, I slept but had what I experienced as realer than real, intense dreams (of crawling through wet and very dark tunnels with violent men behind me almost catching me.) I could hardly transition to ordinary wakefulness. Various symptions began, then a 10 days in hospital (Tel HaShomer/Shiba), Neurology, with many tests and brain images showing scars and damage. The answer to my many questions was most often "We don't know''... I'm gradually coming out of it, regaining speech (with laspes), again able to write (as you see!), while often aware of evidence of brain damage, a strange brew of symptoms. As a visual artist, I have just started painting again, after the longest ''pause'' in my life, so feel more like myself. Yet something I can't quite describe has been touched on, which seems important--hence finding this video in searching for understanding. Thank you. Even your hesitations make me feel less alone (while surrounded by helpful family, friends, professionals).
Conscious awareness. Deriving concentration by breaking down what you are seeing by it’s smallest minute nature into simple things and connecting that to make Up your present being here and now
