Welcome to YT

Yep, happens on every video. The people interviewed are morons who can't tie their own shoe laces, and the guy who who votes for Trump knows all the answers.

@@cosmikrelic4815 😂😂😂😂😂

We have solved it, simply by being Conscious, that is Hoffman's point. To wit, what are you doing to "solve" it? So far, I only see another sarcastic commentator and we already have plenty of those...

Hahahaha exactly

Great comment and I agree.

Totally, and if you haven't already make sure to check out some of his other videos where he has a chance to go further in depth. A lot of it is repeating the basics found here--or giving details of this--but sometimes he goes into his forecast and opinion on AI and things like that. They can be fun. Here's some suggestions: - The Consciousness Podcast: Consciousness as Fundamental to Reality with Dr. Donald D. Hoffman - The Money Friends: Donald Hoffman and the way we see the world - BuddhaAtTheGasPump: Donald Hoffman - Buddha at the Gas Pump Interview - The Disruptors - Science, Technology and Ethics: Don Hoffman - Spacetime's Doomed, Quantum Mechanics Falls Short and Reality's Not What it Seems - The Chopra Well: Solving the Hard Problem of Consciousness: A Conversation with Deepak Chopra and Don Hoffman - ZDoggMD: The Case Against Reality | Prof. Donald Hoffman on Conscious Agent Theory - metaRising: Is there an Infinite Mind? | Donald Hoffman Ph.D. | Waking Cosmos

If you want the answers to metaphysics, ask me. He hasn't got them.

@@havenbastion Haha but you are conscious... What possible metaphysical insights could you have if Donald Hoffman is not correct....

Descartes, Locke, Berkeley, Kant & Searle all realised and recognised this truth. We (as consciousness) are completely incapable of directly interacting with *matter* as it really is. We are stuck in the realm of phenomena, ideas, properties, qualities and the such. Matter exists in the realm of quantity, i.e. quantiy of energy/mass/charge/motion etc... and there is by definition, no way to bridge quality and quantity that does not make use of some Code/Language (i.e. interpretative Framework) and thus it is a hard problem that will remain such. There is no reason to believe that any more quantitative or qualitative data will do anything other than serve to further highlight the distinction between ought/is or values/facts or matter/mind etc....

I agree, sad that he got interrupted when things were getting interesting.

If you think about the topic millions of times, probably you'll get to know how to express it. It is the result of his dedication.

Love watching your videos..

Robert seems unreasonably smug about anything beyond materialism given how many show-stopping problems that has; one example being that you have to believe in many worlds, or super determinism to maintain the physical world having fundamental stand-alone existence.

​@@kennysaunders7259Hellos 👋, could you explain more in detail on what your saying, I'm kinda lost😅.

Saaaaame

Yes. I like him and sadguru and eckhart tolle

Where are you now, Kinga?

I highly recommend his interview with Lex Fridman. It’s mind blowing.

There’s something to the idea 💡

Watch Sir Roger Penrose on Lex Friedman. He thinks consciousness is a quantum phenomena and I believe that too. Our brain is a quantum computer influenced by the universe itself.

Judging from his comments here he could not be that smart.

Yes , Hoffman is good . Related , check out David Chalmers and ( speaking of ‘smart’ ) check out J.C. Smart

He's a smart student of sensory perception and its evolutionary character. He has not discovered consciousness, or awareness, as the true Self.

He does a great job of explaining the perspective

Know him, do you?

If you're talking to me, no, I don't know him personally. I've listened to him on dozens of podcasts and I have his book, which is very well written.

@continentalgin That's not good enough. You don't have a degree, do you?

@@continentalgin Yiu have to do better than that

Lots of scientists are beginning to agree that in the beginning was Consciousness and that that Consciousness is God. Sounds like Book of John chapter 1 verses 1 through 5, to me.

Is this an audible ad? AI is getting good...

@@williamesselman3102 Who are these "lots of scientists" who agree that consciousness started the universe and then call it God? And your John reference can be traced back to Hinduism and Brahma. In fact, most world traditions state we come from the cosmos. That's not too mystical. We sure can't come from a parallel universe so the book of John isn't teaching anything different there.

@@andersrahm424 Just make up your own mind about things in life. Turn off media. You never know who's programming you.

@@danielpaulson8838 Just joking around amigo. I’m certain that I have no clue who’s programming me. Whoever they are, I hope they are programming some great things for me. How do you feel about the concept of higher selves?

You forgot Siddhartha...

Hoffman and Chalmers have wildly different approaches. Chalmers is generally taken a lot more seriously. Hoffman is borderline cranky.

You forgot Tononi

@@lemmingdot right on. Lanza and Hammerhoff. I really think those guys are on to something. Be nice to see all these guys discuss the topic.

Heyy how's it going?

I think this guy is on drugs but trying to convince us he contributes to this comment section

Maybe you missed the part where he said he had absolutely no evidence for this assertion.

@@Bandit19990 I didn't. I employees deductive reasoning. Obviously you didn't

@@1974jrod Deductive reasoning? no evidence = it's correct? lol ok

@spredatorify Well ask yourself, did consciousness give birth to materials or did materials (rocks) give birth to consciousness. It's not a hard question to deduce.. I'll wait.

@@1974jrod All evidence points to consciousness as a process of the brain and there's no evidence consciousness is fundamental. Did you watch the video?

It's a huge pile of bullshit.

@@havenbastion Right cause the adequate arguments you have against it is literally zero lol.

@@joeclark1621 I haven't presented any.

no, just intellectually honest, unlike the vast majority who simply idol worship

Totally agree. Outward bond scientific mind can never comprehend inward bound self actualized mind.

That was a complete waste of time, both yours and mine.

But fun, eli

Harris is a neocon zionist shill.

@@louisho7493 wtf?....

@@Quetzalcoatl_86 100%. Before Harris reinvented himself as a some sort of guru, his schtick was basically bashing Islam and making excuses for American imperialism with American exceptionalism. I've seen many of his videos. He won't even condemn Israeli war crimes against the Palestinian people.

@@louisho7493 I have researched Islam myself. The Quran is detestable asf.

@@louisho7493 because he's Jewish, and knows Jewish ppl are the minority in the land around Israel. But I will not excuse any wrong behavior.

Accurate and well said

Is this solipsism or consensual consciousness? I say consensual because I do believe other minds exist and that we share certain objective facts, which is why we follow social conventions. But if they really exist, their consciousness is aware of different objects than my consciousness.

I think the grand consciousness (God) is intrinsically part of the universe (creation).Religion has written it wrong suggesting a separateness.Gnostic beliefs are possibly more in tune to reality

Na ca pumps arent conscious,therefore a neuron isn't conscious give it a 0 value.mathematically you can add any number of 0s and the sum is always 0

नमस्ते सर क्या ये भाई साहब आत्मा में विश्वास रखते हैं या नहीं ? मेरी इंग्लिश थोड़ी कमजोर है इसलिए आपसे पूछ रहा हूं

There is no “right direction “ of science. Most scientists make incorrect hypothesis, but even being wrong in science is a good thing.

@@takingiteasy17 true but I ment the right direction of what I believe. That is not science of course.

@@takingiteasy17 you have to keep in mind science can not without a doubt say that there is not more to consciousness.

Really? How do we start without a background?

@Psicólogo Miguel Cisneros This is actually a Big question. But there are some "freedom phenomena" connected to Truth. As the old saying goes, "the Truth shall set you free." I don't know if it helps, but there it is. :-)

@Psicólogo Miguel Cisneros It's really a Big subject. You are not the first to ask. To be honest, no answer I give will satisfy you. Truth is not something you can put in words.

@Psicólogo Miguel Cisneros I didn't say I don't know what Truth is.

@Psicólogo Miguel Cisneros LOL

@Psicólogo Miguel Cisneros Why don't you think about it yourself and then tell me?

The *I* and the Consciousness, is the Living, and the Life-ability, and cant be separated, two eternal sides of the eternal Living Being.

Nope

@@TasteMyStinkholeAndLikeIt if thats your real pic, sign me up for a taste.

@Chopped Wood consciousness is fundamental.

@Chopped Wood this will clarify in details. kzfaq.info/get/bejne/bc6qhs2ftc_PeYk.html

Well put. And a great point.

When you say "They'll never be able to explain" you ignore how discovery works. Be a bit more humble and say perhaps some day we will have a better inderstanding of such and such. It allows you to grow.

And of course it does it spontaneously, irrespective of Anton Zeilinger's 11 billion light-year and 8.5 billion light-year quasar separation. Zeilinger didn't win the Nobel because Roger Penrose speaks to an intelligible univese, despite positing a perptual-motion universe.

Particles DON'T change with introduction of an observer; they don't EXIST until measured/observed. They are waves. So "How does the electron figure out if it's being observed or not?" The electron isn't an electron at that point to even ask. It's a wave, infinite probability.

@@bonniematthews7611 Does that mean a thing only exists only if we make it to be? can you explain it to me more please?

​@@a42lalrinkimi48 Consciousness has nothing to do with the double-slit experiment. Particles are fields, not little balls and not waves (even though everything is described by something called a "wave function".

@@nissimhadar what it unveils it that you can’t remove the observer from the equation, there’s no objective point of view.

A computer playing learning how to play chess is very far away from selfawareness. Not even close. Computer scientists themselves agree that we are still very far away from this kind of AI.

My dog is conscious, but it's never beaten me at Chess :)

A computer can be no more conscious than a toggle switch.

Hi George I think that our ability to notice that we exist and to think about our own behaviour IS consciousness. Animals react quickly to one another. We humans can reflect on our own reactions and on those of other creatures. This increases our ability to survive because we can anticipate what might happen e.g. we can anticipate the likely change in the weather due to the seasons and use that knowledge for farming. We can gather data over centuries and respond to global warming. And we are so self aware that we can discuss all this with one another and even reflect on the progress of our discussions. Each of us can reflect on our own reactions to these discussions e.g. you might think "Tracesprite is carrying on too long about all this. I'll stop reading and get some coffee now." Which means you are consciously choosing your reactions to my thoughts. Later you can even reflect on a larger scale and think "That was an interesting discussion but do I spend too much time on social media? Should I choose to go for a walk instead sometimes?" With our consciousness, we can choose to enhance our lives and the quality of our family life or our community life etc. Animals simply can't reflect enough to make choices on that level.

Nde are just massive DMT dumps, nothing more.

Whoa, that must have been a long lond drag off something cause it made absolutely no sense.

What do you mean by one's "beingness"? Do you mean agency? The soul? If by beingness, you mean having consciousness grants you the privilege to be privy to your subjective experience and thoughts, sure. But that's just circular. You're not providing anything new to bring light to consciousness. Atheists are not stuck in a bubble that restricts their thinking; instead, they've agreed to question and be skeptical of the existence of the supernatural and God. If an instrument of science (i.e., whatever objects or tools necessary to obtain a probable truth) cannot measure or obtain this beingness, then how did you conclude that our consciousness is just an awareness of our beingness? Most likely, your answer will be personal experience. Personal experience of the world is great, but imagine if scientists use only personal experience to explain the universe, you and I to this day might still agree that the morning star and the evening star are two separate things, for example. (By the way, it's Venus, if you're wondering.)

Something like this has occured to me as well. One way or another, consciousness is a direct experience of the stuff of existence. If it exists it must be so.

Sounds nice and simple but doesnt make much sense Not all living things are conciouss , why and at which state would we evolve ohr brains to escape in to the other dimensions

@@urosuros2072 I agree 100% with this idea. It makes perfect sense. It's unclear what living things are tapped into consciousness. Probably, for sure, anything that needs to be aware of its surroundings in order to survive. I'll go one better with this theory. I believe that there is an, as yet, undiscovered force in the universe that compels matter to combine in extremely complex ways to create useful things such as human brains and parts of the human brain that are able to transcend the physical part of the universe and connect with the conscious part of the universe. And, to go even one better than that, I believe that this undiscovered catalytic force of nature has an intelligence behind it, as does the entire universe. In other words, I don't believe its an accident that human brains evolved and that they are able to connect to consciousness.

That's just a skeptic with a lack of imagination.

Part of the problem is that we use the same word for many different phenomena. I too am usually referring to "the observer" behind the rest of the mind when I speak of consciousness, but this is not always the case for everyone. Also, I would like to point out that "the observer" can be observed by itself. This is quite uncomfortable at first, but can certainly be achieved during various kinds of meditation. And there are many symbols in various cultures throughout history which indicate this has been going on for thousands of years (let alone the reaps of Upanishads and other South Asian philosophy which discusses this). So, I'd argue that something which can be observed must necessarily have qualities. However, what those qualities are my be ineffable-thus the symbolism, icons, metaphors, and so on.

@@RubelliteFae "The observer can be obserbed." Utterly false. (I've been meditating for 40 years, btw.) Please read and actually think about what was written above. Seriously.

@@johnrainmcmanus6319 You having not experienced a thing has no bearing on weather or not it is a real thing. I've seen monkeys relaxing in a hot spring. I doubt you would call that false just because you hadn't seen it. Yet here you doubt. Interesting

You didn't read what I wrote, or at least you didn't think about it. You cannot witness something that doesn't have ANY qualities other than the quality of being aware.

@@johnrainmcmanus6319 Interesting perspective. Tat tvam asi.

Mike - I like the connections you make in how we understand and communicate. The most effective way of communicating is to see the image that you are describing in language because we do communicate telepathically with one another. This is especially true with horses. All you have to do is imagine what you want the horse to do and it obeys. Usually, an existing relationship with the horse is preferred, but I have seen some horses respond like this in my first encounter with them. The point is that we have the ability to communicate with mental images alone, but it requires a calm mind, one that is not full of constant thinking and day dreams. Once your mind is calm, your awareness of intuition blossoms. It takes practice to know whose mind you are reading, and most people disregard intuition. The great doctors have a combination of knowledge and intuition that makes them brilliant. Most doctors rely exclusively on knowledge and only work from within the framework of possibilities.

@@JFairhart I'm not sure I believe in telepathy, but I am not entirely sure I don't. It's interesting to think of the Universe as a single field in which everything is connected. So maybe one region of that field could know what another region is thinking or doing. But I think a lot of what we call extrasensory is really just our brain working behind the scene, in ways of which we are unaware. A thing I encounter caring for stroke patients and their functional deficits is remembering that a weakened right leg, for example, is actually no weaker than their unaffected left leg. Rehab has much less to do with strengthening the muscles than with building new neural pathways. It's just that in normal experience, we don't perceive the work our brain is doing when we walk. Similarly, I think intuition is a form of cognition that goes on outside our awareness. And maybe dialing back our awareness can help access that intuition. Maybe.

@@mikestewart505 - Ever say the same thing as another simultaneously? Ever think of someone and that person calls you in that moment? These are just a few every day examples of telepathy. Don’t take my word for it. Clear your mind and watch what happens.

@@JFairhart I've had a few experiences that felt a bit telepathic, but nothing I have found definitive. It's a real open question, for me. At present, I'm more interested in empathy than telepathy. Setting aside any "paranormal" phenomena, I find it interesting how much we communicate non-verbally. I've also been considering how language may limit us. The saying, "The Tao that can be spoken is not the true Tao," resonates for me. But I think we are on a similar track. Where you saw "clear your mind," I say "turn off the words." But I have a sense that it isn't always a matter of calm--at least sometimes, stress can open another way of cognition. (Which, admittedly, sounds a bit like mental illness, but I don't mean command hallucinations.)

@@mikestewart505I'm late to the party, but I've come to the same conclusion that language is a limiting factor in communication and consciousness and was possibly introduced to us on purpose as a limiting factor. Perhaps we were telepathic before when we look back on ancient man and assume they did not have a verbal language and only pictograms. Language is controlling and constraining on thought.

lol

Quantum fields are an abstract description not reality. 😚

Things get worse when they say consciousness is created by the brain, if thats the case how do you know that a brain exist in the first place, no mind can't make any affirmation about reality.

Beautifully said. The brain receives consciousness and act as a limiting valve. Consciousness itself is fundamental, all knowing and everything is derived from it. When contained in a brain it forgets it’s true self ( a bit of a spiritual perspective I think )

Consciousness is “us”, and perceiving an experience with a multitude of emotions both good, great, bad, awful, and all very intriguing and thought provoking. The name of this theater we, consciousness, are inside of and in at this very moment, is the Universe. Through the magic of the the third dimension (material) and also the forth dimension (time), we are given an experience that comes with a myriad of emotions and feelings and memories which is a good lesson to appreciate our existence in the fifth dimension, where time, aging, and death do not exist. But are only concepts that must be experienced just as it is better to visit Disneyland then it is to hear or read about it. The lessons you learn here are all that you are going to take with you when the lesson is over. Think about it.

Spot on! If consciousness is the ultimate constant out of which everything emerges then science, mathematics, hypothesis and any other form of intellectual understanding is a ‘product’ of that consciousness. The ‘ultimate’ question must then be; is consciousness able to know itself? That is precisely the question the Gautama Buddha said he knew but it cannot be shared from one person to another. It can only be directly experienced by consciousness itself. In practical terms that means each person can only reach an answer to its own existential questions by its own methods of investigation and conclusions. According to the Buddha that is the nature of consciousness. The fundamental reason for this is, according to the Buddha, consciousness is non-dual in its nature and thus cannot be referred to within the constraints of time/matter or any other form of dimensions. It is both the beginning and the end for anything that occurs. Nothing can ever be experienced outside of consciousness. It encompasses everything. And yet it lacks any form of substantiality, size, location or place in time. It is also what gives rise to our experiences of body, space, time, world, universe, etc. Also, the Buddha have said that it can indeed know itself for the precise reason its base of knowledge is limitless and primordial. Every living being (not just humans) got the same fundamental nature since time without beginning. In theory that means any living being can, at any point in time, access its full potential and become completely aware of all its own knowledge inherent in its own consciousness. In spiritual traditions that is usually called enlightenment, or awakening. What prevents us from doing so is a very basic form of ignorance that give rise to a myriad of distorted ideas and views concerning our own existence, which in turn, lead us down the rabbit-hole of misinformed decisions and actions. This, in turn, give rise to a solidification of our distorted views into a type of bodily experience of form and worlds that we must endure. Since these processes have been going on for an eternity very strong mental habits have been established which make us not believe in anything else but our own erroneous set of existential world views. And so our eternal wanderings in the darkness of ignorance continues forever, unless we one day decide to change course towards awakening, or the removal of the basic ignorance that is the illusory foundation for the whole structure of this unnecessary state of misery. The reason awakening is possible at all is because all wisdom and knowledge is already present in consciousness, since time without beginning. It is just temporary covered over by our own ignorance of it and the unnecessary stains of the incorrect ideas and views that spring from that temporary ignorance. The reason we are able to learn, study and reach new insights is because all ignorance is temporary and ultimately non-existent. The fact that we (some of us anyway!) are so eager to find out about the true nature of consciousness springs from consciousness itself wanting to manifest its true potential of awakening. It is inevitable! But we must all go through the process since we all are bearers of the primordial wisdom within us. Because our own personal type of blockages and hindrances are our own ‘creations’ we cannot uproot ignorance through attending lectures or reading books. Our own clinging to ignorance is so deeply rooted that it can only be dissolved through earnest efforts and dedicated inner practices that we know works. Thus we have no choice but to seek out a genuine spiritual path that is upheld by genuine teachers that knows all about this process of transformation. This is an eternal principle throughout all times and all worlds. Nothing new under the sun! And yet, it would be a revolutionary transition for you and me!

​@@freetibet1000Non duality? In Buddhism? Which one Mahayana? Consciousness can contain anything and it can be full only. It's the only thing which can Experience itself.

My consciousness at 61 is exactly the same as from an OBE I had at 4 months old and every point between. It's unchanging. It's brain states that change and by the fraction of a second.

So carefully…………..

I would replace "awareness" with "sensation" and suggest more specifically "tension" and "compression" and presenting as a change in frequency, speeding up in compression and slowing down in tension. Consciousness probably requires some emergent particle since it's the particle that has sensation. ... hypothetically. I think we are an electrotonic pseudoparticle existing between the surface of the cortex and the Pia Mater.

Because if they were we would not be here to discuss about them. A variation on the Antropic principle if you will

A rock exists too.

OK thanks for that, we can forget about science then, we should have asked you in the first place.

@@cosmikrelic4815, Science can never uncover existence with all its limits.

@@everready2903 Rock has consciousness too.

K

From discussion or what? And then, so what? Say something about DMT relevant to consciousness. I mean, I could just throw out any word too. Let's see...um...cabbage. boom, there it is. Why aren't they talking about cabbage. Common now, make some small contribution of your own here.

@@howardrobinson4938 You can learn more about the question this man seeks on a DMT breakthrough than you can with a life time of pondering and discussing with scientists, philosophers and theologians. I love cabbage by the way!! 😍😍😍👍

@@everready2903 Now, can the same be said for LSD? How about for psilocybin? Um...weed? What about yoga? How bout fasting? I don't know, um...tantric sex? Let:s see, ultra running? How bout dying?

@@howardrobinson4938 Yeah they should talk about those things too.

Right. You don't need a brain to have a consciousness. Try removing it from your head and see what happens

@@Aguijon1982 In my case I could manage just as well without. Alright there is a physical component to consciousness as well, but it is not critical. For instance take the scene of a very messy car crash with cars and bodies lying everywhere. There have been cases where the victims are brain dead because their vital signs are gone and yet whilst unconscious in this state they are aware of everything going on around them, as they have recalled later whilst in recovery. How is that possible if the brain was no longer functioning? See NDE accounts on the Internet.

@James Strawn False analogy. That was like saying that heat doesn't arise from the sun. Like I said, try having a consciousness with out a brain. Do the experiment and come with the results.

“Emergence” is an abstract category created by conscious minds. It means absolutely nothing in terms of physical laws. Go ahead, describe emergence in physical terms. Actually even the brain is a creation of conscious minds, attempting to understand groups of cells based on arbitrary value judgments.

@@deanodebo Consciousness is an abstract concept created by conscious minds. It means absolutely nothing in terms of physical laws. Go ahead, describe consciousness in physical terms.

@@KestyJoe There’s a critical flaw with your analogy. I’m not claiming consciousness is purely physical. So if you’re comparing consciousness to emergence, then I’ll ask you - do you think your concept of emergence is subject to the laws of physics? If so, then bad analogy. If not, then is it supernatural?

@@deanodebo Supernatural?? Talk about a false dichotomy!

@@KestyJoe Is emergence explained by the laws of physics ? Do you consider emergence to be a physical phenomenon?

Is it like an OBE?

​@@gustanto1981🎉it's better. OBE seems to happen in times of stress, just happens. But wanting to explore your consciousness as an intension requires a very relaxed state. And that deep relaxation in our hectic word needs practice for many.