Idealism and the Nature of Ultimate Reality: Are We All in a Shared Dream? With Dr. Bernardo Kastrup

Рет қаралды 29,615

Күн бұрын

Are we all in a shared dream? Is the world that we perceive truly the world as it is? Dr. Tony Nader sits down with Dr. Bernardo Kastrup to discuss Idealism and the Nature of Ultimate Reality.
The world we generally take to be real is only one version of the world, the one our senses and our minds allow us to experience, and that experience is different for every single human being. Do you think we’re stuck within the limitations of our senses, which can only deliver impressions within the range that they were designed to recognize?
Dr. Bernardo Kastrup is the executive director of Essentia Foundation. His work has been leading the modern renaissance of metaphysical idealism, the notion that reality is essentially mental. He has a Ph.D. in philosophy (ontology, philosophy of mind) and another Ph.D. in computer engineering (reconfigurable computing, artificial intelligence). As a scientist, Dr. Kastrup has worked for the European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN) and the Philips Research Laboratories, where the 'Casimir Effect' of Quantum Field Theory was discovered.
His books have explored topics such as Carl Jung, Schopenhauer, the Nature of Reality, and Why Materialism is Baloney. His ideas have been featured on 'Scientific American,' the 'Institute of Art and Ideas,' the 'Blog of the American Philosophical Association' and 'Big Think,' among others.
Dr Bernardo Kastrup | Website
www.bernardokastrup.com
Dr Bernardo Kastrup | KZfaq
/ bernardokastrup
Dr Bernardo Kastrup | Twitter
/ bernardokastrup
Dr Tony Nader | Books
www.drnaderbooks.com
Dr Tony Nader | Website
www.drtonynader.com
Dr Tony Nader | Instagram
/ drtonynader
Dr Tony Nader | Twitter
/ drtonynader
Dr Tony Nader | KZfaq
/ drtonynader
Dr Tony Nader | LinkedIn
/ dr-tony-nader
Consciousness Is All There Is | Podcast
iTunes: podcasts.apple.com/ca/podcast...
Spotify: open.spotify.com/show/0xeUiVx...
SoundCloud:
/ drtonynader
Timestamps
0:00 Introduction
2:53 What is the Ultimate Reality?
3:27 Why Materialism is “Baloney”
7:05 Dr. Kastrups Explanation of What Consciousness Is
12:07 Subjective Realism vs Objective Realism
15:06 Berkeley’s Subjective Idealism vs Modern Objective Idealism
17:48 Decoding Spinoza’s View of Reality
20:54 Consciousness Becoming Conscious
22:00 Meta Consciousness
26:10 Discussing the Dynamics of Consciousness
37:51 How and Why Does Consciousness Manifest?
39:58 Disproving the Decomposition Problem Against Idealism
45:08 Why Does Consciousness Splinter and Manifest?
51:09 The Anomaly of Meta Consciousness
56:54 Does Meta Consciousness Liberate Us From Instincts?
1:03:59 Archetypes Within Consciousness
1:08:27 Decoding Carl Jung’s View of Archetypes
1:14:13 Dr. Nader’s on Maharishi and the Structure of Consciousness
1:18:52 The Structure and Function of the Veda Reflected in Human Physiology
1:21:35 Complexity Arising From Simplicity
1:26:08 Evolution Beyond Meta Consciousness
1:30:06 Potentiality and Actuality
1:31:31 Our Responsibility of Reaching Higher States of Consciousness
1:38:02 Rising in Consciousness: Going Beyond Materialism and Suffering
1:46:57 Dr. Kastrup’s Closing Points

Пікірлер: 118

@leandrosilvagoncalves1939 2 жыл бұрын

I'd never thought I would became fan of a philosopher. Bernardo Kastrup is the Einstein of philosophy!

@Dhorpatan Жыл бұрын

Can you stop kissing Bernardo's behind all the time? Thanks a bunch!

@HeronMarkBlade Жыл бұрын

he's my pin-up philosopher :)

@david203 Жыл бұрын

@@TheWorldTeacher I agree that Kastrup does not understand nonduality. However, "a demonic mentality, as demonstrated with his support of all things contrary to Dharma (the law, and societal duties), such as egalitarianism, feminism, homosexuality, and socialism"? Who established you as the authority on Dharma? And what is wrong with any of these 'isms'? I think they are all fine examples of good human thinking and behavior. Right dharma leads to peace, happiness, productivity, and stability of life and society. All of the demonic concepts you mentioned can contribute to right dharma. I think there may be good reason why you get blocked.

@DaraCraul 2 жыл бұрын

A truly fascinating conversation by Dr Nader & Dr Kastrup. Life will never be the same after hearing this, and if you can, listen in 1 sitting for maximum effect. Very beautiful meeting of minds and mind altering in the best possible way!

@garybusey7625 2 жыл бұрын

Agree, Dara. I actually sped it up to 2x to match my uptake rate. Both of the interlocutors are non-native English speakers, so they can be forgiven for their slow delivery.

@dsalijani 11 ай бұрын

Both are sacrifying the fact to the complexity and exaduration of semantic in the language.

@kamivelasquez3119 2 жыл бұрын

Dr. Nader, I just graduated from Maharishi International University from their AyurVedic Wellness and Integrative Medicine Master of Science Program and have enjoyed listening to the pundits chanting the Rk Veda. I love watching the lights in the various subsystems of the physiology light up during the chanting during the power point presentations created based on your research. Jai Guru Dev. Thank you for your hard work. I wish to help get a Panchakarma clinic going in my area. Oklahoma truly needs this.

@VanEazy 2 жыл бұрын

Absolutely love listening to Bernardo talk about idealism. I tend to put on his videos or audiobooks while I play video games, work out, or clean. Always eye opening !

@billgough867 9 ай бұрын

Sometimes I think that pure common logic and sense, is the evidence in its self, as Bernardo Kastrup and Tony Nader relays in this conversation.

@johnpersad5557 2 жыл бұрын

I really enjoy this conversation between these two Conscious beings! ❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️🤩🤩🤩🤩🌷🌷🌷🌷🌷

@ancientmartianunderground 6 ай бұрын

Thank you for your introduction...and for your esteemed guest.

@Heli221 2 жыл бұрын

The second half of the talks were sprinkled with stimulating new conscious wonders and was exquisite! I recommend seekers to tune in and shower themselves with it 🙂

@innerlight617 2 жыл бұрын

Thank you so much gentlemen for this so interesting discussion. Yes! Consciousness is working through you ॐ ❤. Just felt like posting this: "All that lives, works for protecting, perpetuating and expanding consciousness. This is the world's sole meaning and purpose. It is the very essence of Yoga - ever raising the level of consciousness, discovery of new dimensions, with their properties, qualities and powers. In that sense, the entire universe becomes a school of Yoga" ~Sri Nisargadatta

@steveflorida8699 2 жыл бұрын

The high purpose of life is more than just "raising the level of consciousness". To embody goodness, share beauty, and serve each other as you want to be served. To discover and uphold the eternal truths of the universal family. A living spiritual brotherhood.

@spiritfilled5758 2 жыл бұрын

Wow, this was such a profound conversation. Humanity, as a whole has the potential to either build heaven or hell. Let's not wait for someone ealse to fix the problem it is up to each individual to benefit the whole. Be what youl want to see in the world. I wish men who think like this ran the world.

@angelotuteao6758 Жыл бұрын

Nader describes the triple nature of consciousness as having a reflexive capacity, the dynamic creation of object and the process of observation which makes a more sense to me

@James-ll3jb Ай бұрын

He's a phony

@Sethan777 Жыл бұрын

Thought is *not* subject, it is object.

@user-tp4fw2yl7m 2 жыл бұрын

Thank you dr Tony for introducing dr Bernardo. The conversation between both of you is extremely interesting 🙏🙏

@denisewildfortune4058 2 жыл бұрын

Tony, you were a great stand-in for me asking all the questions I would have asked! You were wonderful!

@susanwoodward7485 2 жыл бұрын

Resonance, reflection, relationship, reality. Superb conversation - need to listen many times. *** I would like to see Dr. Nader do a video where he reviews this one with his expanded opinions, insights, perspectives to each of Dr. Kastrup's assertions. We need Dr. Nader to clear up the, in my opinion, muddied thinking of Dr. Kastrup. ?Consciousness is the ability to experience change/difference/duality, (without necessarily recognizing subject-object)? It's all due to geometric parsing into perspective unless one has transcended to wholeness with no limitation/boundaries (?resonance?). ***What is the source of the dynamism and how is it achieved? If in resonance there is no difference/separation. Something must "break" this resonance for conscious duality to emerge. How does consciousness "limit" itself to simulate "otherness"? Need a clarification of what each of you means by LIFE - may I suggest the first POLARITY/difference as the beginning of life, as it initiates MOVEMENT (IN SPACE) which everything, including rocks and subatomic particles, posses. I disagree with Dr. Kastrup on his explaining of life, and of meta-consciousness and its role in "destabilizing the environment". The "environment" from the human perspective (which is of course the only one we have) has gone through numerous upheavals/catastrophes/re-arrangements that preceded human consciousness as defined by Dr. Kastrup. ?"Nature" is an expression of feedback of all karmas, and it is fractal at its foundation?

@johnbaker5565 Жыл бұрын

Movement in space is how it is perceived. Kastrup explains all are mental processes. It is his dashboard of instruments model. Meta conscious human beings according to Kastrup who also act from instinct are a danger to the continuity of life on this world. All other beings act from instinct, which is for the benefit of the whole, but people acting from instinct and also being meta cognitive are a real threat. Kastrup using the nuclear bomb model, he could have used Putin and his behaviour. T)he upheavals are how they appear on the dashboard of instruments.

@david203 Жыл бұрын

I think I spotted "I Am That", a book by Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj, on Kastrup's shelf behind him (it has a distinctive cover design in yellow and black). This is relevant to their discussion, because Nisargadatta explained nonduality using two words, 'consciousness' and 'awareness', having very different meanings, as opposed to their being considered synonyms, which Kastrup and Nader seem to do (although with moments of confusion and ambiguity). My discussion here will be based on the philosophy described by Nisargadatta only, which was based on his own self-realization. The fundamental concept (for Nisargadatta, remember) is awareness. Awareness has no form and no dimension; it does not exist in space or time and is simply the only Observer who exists. The world, and minds and bodies, are all manifested or simulated within Awareness. As to what pure Awareness is aware of, the answer is itself. Being infinite, it is not aware of anything else. It is not aware of what to us is reality, the Universe, matter, energy, space, time, events, sensations, thoughts, feelings, and so forth. 'Consciousness' simply means whether an individual mind is functioning and alert or not. When a mind is conscious, it has many components, ego, memory, decision-making, beliefs, thoughts, and so forth. Sleep and samadhi (Self-absorption) are exactly the same: the mind and senses associated with a body are not functional, but awareness is fully experienced. There are three states of consciousness in ignorance. These states have finite extent (limitations) that result in chronic dissatisfaction and the search for lasting peace and happiness. There are also three states of consciousness in knowledge (that is, after self-realization). These states have direct contact with the awareness that has manifested them, so they are satisfied with whatever happens. The contact between an apparent individual mind with its own awareness results in experiences of peace, happiness, creativity, intelligence, love, productivity, and a cessation of seeking.

@James-ll3jb Ай бұрын

😅

@laika5757 Ай бұрын

Bernardo is fantastic 👍

@ljohnson7124 2 жыл бұрын

Wonderful interview I agree Dr. Bernardo is a hero to me! I’ve been waiting all my academic years (about to retire) for this proof (feels like proof!) to emerge. Now I so wish for a bridge between this and where Rupert Spira goes. So many of my young students feel lost and haunted by nihilism.

@normaodenthal8009 2 жыл бұрын

A wonderful discussion that was not just interesting, but also balm for the soul. Bernardo’s book: Why Materialism Is Baloney, says it all, and is a much needed corrective to the corrosive creed of dead matter being all there is.

@normaodenthal8009 Жыл бұрын

@@TheWorldTeacher Look deeply into yourself and into others to find out. It could take quite some time; even if you look, you may not see, but if you do not look, you will definitely not find anything.

@Meditation409 2 жыл бұрын

A great guy to have on here!! Bernardo! 😃❤

@leilagargouri591 2 жыл бұрын

I live with my dreams, my senses, the reality that comes of that But I ‘keep looking endlessly for a new version that gives me more happiness My major tool is my consciousness It’s not being stuck,it’s evolving And that’s my philosophy

@leilagargouri591 2 жыл бұрын

Nice to agree I’m happy

@leilagargouri591 Жыл бұрын

@@TheWorldTeacher Anything that vibrates Or I have not well understood the question

@VitorSantos-ib5dn 2 жыл бұрын

Bernardo's words are a believe. Dissociative disorder doesn't dissociate One conscensiousness, but one ego.

@johnbaker5565 Жыл бұрын

No one is claiming more than one consciousness, the terms Kastrup uses are universal consciousness or mind at large. The term DID has the word identity in it, , that becomes disassociated, not consciousness.

@VitorSantos-ib5dn Жыл бұрын

@@johnbaker5565 Thank you John. each of us corresponds to a phenomenal conscienciousness. The ego is what we think we are. in identity disorder the patient corresponds many egos and only a phenomenal conscienciousness. phenomenal conscienciousness can't divide because is fundamental. so we aren't like the alter egos of metaphor

@johnbaker5565 Жыл бұрын

The example of DID (which I have no experience of in any way)so an element of belief exists is to highlight that from a single body/ nervous system / brain, multiple identities appear in the mind each disassociated from the others. (belief that this actually happens once again) Kastrup's suggestion is that since we know (he claims to know) disassociation can occur within one body, this offers an explanation of metacognitive human beings and their sense of separateness within universal consciousness. His insights are amazing, and he's fast learning the skills of explaining them. thanks @@VitorSantos-ib5dn

@VitorSantos-ib5dn Жыл бұрын

@@johnbaker5565 Thank you John. I think that in DID the phenomenal consciousness is only one. What changes is the egos. Egos aren't fundamental. And I think each One of us corresponds many egos, in DID and in all the cases. Our ego is changing allways. But each One of us is a phenomenal consciousness. There Multiple phenomenal consciousnesses, not only one, as Bernardo says. Thank you.

@brucekern7083 9 ай бұрын

I think of the material world of physics as merely my (or our, collective) perception of difference in the rate of change in and between external substances. Psyche, on the other hand, is my internal perception of the rates by which things change "within me," so to speak, the rates by which "I" change. The only thing static about me is the thing left over after everything else has changed. That is the essential "me." Just as there are external phenomena, some of which remain intact even while everything else with respect to it changes at this or that rate--both within itself (intrinsically) and relative to other things (extrinsically)--so too are there aspects within ourselves that remain in fixed and stable positions--i.e., things constituting what we might call our "character"--even while other aspects of ourselves are subject to more or less rapid change, relative to the rest of ourselves. Hence the uncanny similarity--the strangely near perfect correspondence--between the external world of "mutual" or "shared" experiences of this or that object, and the internal "world" that we each refer to as our inner, subjective experiences. At bottom, therefore, we see that objectivity and subjectivity are only distinguishable by a very thin, barely visible--and no doubt arbitrary--line of distinction. What's more, these two isomorphic "worlds" have far more in common than most people realize. This ubiquitous sense of the relative rates of change--more or less without disruption to the static patterns by which any given object is either typified or subsists, both within and without each subject, the most salient common denominator between all things--is at length that upon which all consciousness rest at the end of the day. These insights came to me by way of my direct experiences as an addict/alcoholic, and as a member of Alcoholics Anonymous, besides many years of philosophical study and speculation. As a result of the above, I realized that my obsession with chemicals was a reflection of my desire to change, pure and simple, to facilitate and accelerate change, albeit not just any change. In my case, as apparently is the case with my fellow AA members, I seem to have a fixation on using chemicals to facilitate Change In the Direction of Improvement!! Thus I became an avid student of CG Jung and Alchemy. Changing the direction of improvement seems to be the common denominator of both the inner world of the psyche and the external world of nature. There are telos obviously at work in both. The 12 steps of Alcoholics Anonymous catalyze and facilitate the tendency of the psyche to want to grow and develop in a certain way--just as the Laws of Physics work to guide change and development of the natural world in certain ways commensurate with growth, even in the case of apparently non-living beings such as crystals.

@chrisvitello338 2 жыл бұрын

Fascinating. Thank you. I very much enjoyed listening to this conversation.

@Self-Duality 2 жыл бұрын

Very intriguing conversation! Thank you for conducting and uploading! New subscriber 😎🌺☘️

@s.p.1536 2 жыл бұрын

Absolutely fascinating and expansive, thank you.

@praveenvarma9107 2 жыл бұрын

Very interesting; many thanks for this dialogue!

@esod6527 2 жыл бұрын

Bernardo and Tony!! Awesome!!

@judyraymond7041 2 жыл бұрын

So enjoyable to hear the truth expounded by two great thinkers!

@timcarney171 2 жыл бұрын

Great content!!!!!! Thx

@Meditation409 2 жыл бұрын

Aware of being aware. 👌👌❤

@sandrashane677 Ай бұрын

He wasn't gaslighting me at all. It was all in my head. 🙊

@andysoul295 Жыл бұрын

Fascinating.

@jimmybolton8473 2 жыл бұрын

Thanks bernardo

@canisronis2753 2 жыл бұрын

Bravo!

@jgarciajr82 2 жыл бұрын

Bernardo has genius 🙏❤️🙏❤️🙏

@JoJo-vg8dz Жыл бұрын

One hypothesis is that meta-consciousness arose to allow humans to practice spirituality and connect to the source via introspection. So it's like a step of a cycle of separation/reintegration. Animals can't meditate and connect to the source. They are separated and can't experience oneness, even if they act according to a holistic natural knowledge.

@saniyagamer-xd2oq 2 жыл бұрын

Love from India ❤️❤️❤️

@selliahlawrencebanchanatha4482 2 жыл бұрын

Dear tony nadar recent meditation. God bless love you sir

@yifuxero5408 10 ай бұрын

The dream (Maya), is that the apparent material Matrix we live in is the ultimate reality. As Kastrup and Nader would agree, Consciousness is fundamental and is the Substance (Spinoza's term) of existence. The most eloquent proponent of Consciousness as the Essence of existence is found in Shankara's Advaita Vedanta but with predicates going back to "The One" of Plotinus, Nargajuna (150-250), and to the Tao of Lau Tzu. However, mathematics and logic will not get you to a direct experience of Consciousness. Various methods of tapping into a merging with Pure Consciousness in the state of Samadhi/Satori have been developed over the centuries by the Buddhists and Hindus. Nader is a proponent o TM, going back to Shankara & using mantras.

@rooruffneck 2 жыл бұрын

Read Eugene Gendlin's A Process Model to see a very beautiful (yet very technical) way of understanding how archetypes form and function.

@MrSimonduan Жыл бұрын

Dr Nader’s question re. How did one consciousness end up appearing as many? How does the material world emerge from the one consciousness? Is so called “Inverse Hard Problem of Consciousness “.

@MrSimonduan Жыл бұрын

as explains in this clip kzfaq.info/get/bejne/iLlga7aCptabmoU.html

@nicknijman2500 10 ай бұрын

I think Bernardo makes a mistake with the example of the ripples in the lake, he says there is only the lake but ignores the fact that the ripples are caused by something separate from the lake. Tony's comment is therefore correct in my opinion. I do not intend to refute Bernardo, but I believe he is overlooking something.

@JoJo-vg8dz Жыл бұрын

The story of the garden of Eden is a good allegory of the creation of meta-consciousness. They tasted the fruit of knowledge of good and evil.

@spiritfilled5758 2 жыл бұрын

Humanity it's realizing we are the light we are looking for. See to serve the whole not the self

@johnbaker5565 Жыл бұрын

Serving the whole is instinctive indicated in this video, the mind of nature as Kastrup defines it. Meta cognitive human beings can burn the world, even by THINKING they are serving the whole., they may be destroying it. This is why Kastrup says it can go either way. Human thinking convinced that it is serving the whole is simply deluded, and there is no way back to living by instinct.

@spiritfilled5758 Жыл бұрын

@@johnbaker5565 understood

@jrocca108 2 жыл бұрын

Love that they made a distinction between Consciousness (the noun) and consciousness (the verb). Consciousness, the noun need nothing else, Its whole in and of Itself, as Kastrup has explained. Whereas, consciousness, the verb, like in any sentence, grammatically needs a "subject" and "object" as Nader has countered. Find it interesting that Nader is left to sing the praises of lower case, consciousness. Guessing since upper case, Consciousness has already been taken by Kastrup he was left with no choice. :)

@rsshaw108 2 жыл бұрын

Good point. I think you meant "conscious" as a verb. (Consciousness is a noun)

@steveflorida8699 2 жыл бұрын

"Consciousness the noun" the human mortal is not perfect. Therefore, human consciousness needs to grow towards higher levels of goodness,. beauty and service.

@benjaminben6200 Жыл бұрын

Good point

@steveflorida8699 Жыл бұрын

@@TheWorldTeacher altruism is a superb service to another, without seeking a reciprocal reward. And surely benefiting the recipient of goodwill, and growing the noble character of the giver. Enhancing the mutual relationship positively.

@steveflorida8699 Жыл бұрын

@@TheWorldTeacher "relative" reveals there is growth potential, and higher discoveries to attain goodness and share goodwill. Love is a heartfelt trait, which extends outward beyond self.

@fischX 2 жыл бұрын

A interesting thought is that if some sort of universal consciousness exist without any reality - this consciousness would be extremely simple in its ability for consciousness awareness because the complexity would be basically reduced to 1=1. Thought is only possible with a complex environment. You can't talk about trees and dogs and create analogy about them without trees and dogs. So if idealism is true reality is part of universal thought - without imagine you your thoughts would not be possible.

@MarinTvarog 6 ай бұрын

Why does one infinite consciousness, god, nature "do" what it does is an easy question. Imagine if youre an infinite being whos nature is infinite love, happiness and peace. (sat cit ananda) What would you do? Maybe create something where you are limited to gain other experiences than those you know? Thats why you are here, for your unique experience, wisdom, love etc. It all counts and nothing is lost, only our conceptual image of ourselves, or ego gets obliterated, but dont worry, you merge with everything that is alive. You wont see your dead loved ones upon dying, you will become them. You are a fractal version of divine consciousness that is having a human experience for the pure joy of it. Its the cosmic madness, a celebration. 🎉😊

@ProfessorJWhite Жыл бұрын

1:02 apply simple rule, get result, apply rule to result, and continue in this way. Is this what happens in Fibonacci sequence?

@david203 Жыл бұрын

It's the definition of a "recursive sequence" in mathematics, not just of the Fibonacci sequence.

@poorboi8093 2 жыл бұрын

31:00

@rooruffneck 2 жыл бұрын

Odd when Bernardo gets clumsy. When he was 8 there is no way he thought "I am the tree".

@krakykrake8162 2 жыл бұрын

Archetypes = possibility spaces.

@esod6527 2 жыл бұрын

If we are not meta conscious in dreams how is it that we can have lucid dreams where we know we are in a dream. Isn’t that an example of being meta conscious?

@esod6527 2 жыл бұрын

@@joeredman569 agreed not a typical dream yet when it occurs there is meta cognition

@sxsmith44 2 жыл бұрын

I have been a fan of BK for over two years and I’ve watched over 100 of his videos more than once. I know him well enough to know that he is saying that You… a dissociated alter can be meta-conscious… but you, consciousness itself are not!

@fischX 2 жыл бұрын

Isn't a regular dream a better example? You can have a nightmare where you are unaware of the opportunity to wake up - a property regular realty shares.

@davidmixon7379 2 жыл бұрын

Correction> Maharishi's

@TheSpeedOfC 10 ай бұрын

Im at odds with Kastrup and his dismissiveness toward the simulation hypothesis because even if reality is as he says, there is nothing stopping some civilization out there who has had potentially millions of years to figure out all the laws of physics and went ahead and re-created everything in a simulation. This scenario seems to be equally possible in either paradigm, materialism or analytic idealism.

@Ockersvin 8 ай бұрын

It would be literally impossible to simulate reality under analytical idealism.

@SheldonRokeach-gr7pg Ай бұрын

PLATO ARISTOTLE SCHOPENHAUER DESPITE AYN RAND

@Beyonder1881 2 жыл бұрын

But dont you think there is a widespread lack of metacognition/metaconsciousness among people in general these days? We are not self reflective enough about the urges instilled on us by our senses and just follow them blindly like a reptile. It is good for economic growth, but we end up as useless eaters, i.e. 'I AM the hunger'.

@jamesruscheinski8602 2 жыл бұрын

substantive choice for God's federal hegemony of free will kingdom

@kengemmer 2 жыл бұрын

"It's not my mind but mind -- a transpersonal mind out there" Kastrup

@VitorSantos-ib5dn 2 жыл бұрын

So Bernardo Kastrup Idealism isn't usefull for humanity. Doesn't bring nothing better and new. Is only old words. Doesn't bring meaning and purpose to life. If i'm only an alter and I suffer, and i'm God, so God is masochistic

@david203 Жыл бұрын

It is true, imo, that Kastrup isn't offering any technique for improving life, while Nader most definitely is. But comparing philosophies is a valid way to spend one's time.

@Queenie-the-genie Жыл бұрын

All these are conversations on this with Bernardo are male dominated - let’s get some feminine options into the club.

@nicknijman2500 10 ай бұрын

I thought that male/female was a social construct, not even Katanji Brown Jackson could answer the question what a woman is during the interrogation for her nomination to the supreme court. It's getting more and more confusing. Btw, Bernardo had a conversation with Susan Blackmore.

@James-ll3jb Ай бұрын

Caveat emptor, Bernardo. Caveat emptor😅

@Standownevil 2 жыл бұрын

Not convinced the earth is round and I question every science now as well as history! Sorry geography just doesn’t add up!! UNSUBBING

@zakmatew 2 жыл бұрын

Geography doesn’t add up??? Where have you gotten your education? In the medieval times? Lol

@muneshchauhan 2 жыл бұрын

Bernardo is very intellectual, but I have a different opinion. He is rude and dry in his reply and outwardly it seems that he has a big ego.

@benjaminben6200 Жыл бұрын

You are looking at the wrong things

@david203 Жыл бұрын

Most folks have a big ego; I do. So what? What's important is learning what can bring us lasting peace and happiness. TM is a technique that does this, verified by the experience of hundreds of thousands of practitioners and validated by scientific research.

@Hugon2010 11 ай бұрын

If it's his job to challenge the blockheaded materialists some rudeness can be helpfull - "you can remove a thorn (in the skin) with a thorn"

@david203 11 ай бұрын

@@Hugon2010 Although you may admit that most nonduality teachers interact with kindness and compassion, which aids their effectiveness. "Turn all things to honey; this is the law of divine living. - Sri Aurobindo. "A spoonful of honey will catch more flies than a gallon of vinegar." - Benjamin Franklin.

@Hugon2010 11 ай бұрын

@@david203 Yes, that is very true. I completely agree. Words should be true and sweet at the same time.

@thegroove2000 2 жыл бұрын

This is not science. Has he tested his hypothesis?.

@sxsmith44 2 жыл бұрын

He never said it was. Science can’t tell us anything about consciousness. Science is about the behavior of nature. Consciousness isn’t in nature… Nature is in consciousness.

@fischX 2 жыл бұрын

It's not philosophy of empirical science as defined by philosopher like Popper. It is philosophy, philosophy is a subset of science, it is not bound by the philosophical rules of empirical analysis that's a subset of a philosophical school. Because someone has to define the rules of the rules. Philosophical speaking natural science is limited when it comes to consciousness - because it is the thing you experience any of those products measurements and proofs trough.

@thegroove2000 2 жыл бұрын

Consciousness is a mystery to all. But if someone believes in god, then they claim to have the answer. That’s philosophical. Notice the part term “soph in there. Sophist. That’s philosophical thinking using fallacious arguments, unless one wants to progress and apply the scientific methods to test their ideas, thoughts to see if they exist in known reality. Non-fiction but fact.

@thedarkmikebass8530 2 жыл бұрын

It is indeed not strictly science. It is ontology, the philosophy of reality...what reality is, in and of itself. Ontology heavily utilizes and cites science, but it is not itself science. Rather, it is philosophy. Ontological theories cannot be proven or disproven in the sense that an experiment in science can confirm or refute a hypothesis. Instead, they try to find the reduction base of all reality: that is, the one thing by which we can explain everything else but that which cannot itself be explained. To explain something means to reduce it as far as possible. When you hit the reduction base, you cannot reduce further, therefore you cannot explain the reduction base, therefore it cannot be proven or disproven. So, how do we evaluate ontological theories? Well, science plays a big role. We ask 5 questions of each ontological theory and compare results across theories. 1. Is the theory logically coherent? 2. Is the theory internally consistent? 3. Is it conceptually parsimonious? Read another way, is it the most skeptical option with the fewest assumptions necessary to be true? 4. Is it empirically adequate? 5. Does it have sufficient explanatory power? Science informs all 5 of those questions for each theory, because an ontological theory must account for all of science. But ontology is not science and science is not ontology. Science uses models to predict what nature will do based on our perceptions of nature. Ontology tells us what reality is, in and of itself. Science cannot, by definition, give us ontological answers...it is ontologically neutral. But it greatly informs ontology.

@thegroove2000 2 жыл бұрын

@@thedarkmikebass8530 SCIENCE REVEALS. THE REST CONCEALS. I might put that on a t-shirt.