Let’s get more eyes on this. Like, share and subscribe so the algorithm fans it out beyond this little corner.

Once again, sterling work Karen. These collaborations are at last moving the conversations in this “Little Corner of the Internet” forward, thanks to you. I’m hoping now that more and more people can see how all these seemingly unrelated aspects of the meaning crisis are in fact related and complimentary to our understanding. I was SO looking forward to seeing Johns’ reaction to the Xenobots. I wasn’t disappointed. Looking forward to the comments. Thanks for realising and producing this wonderful collaboration Karen!

You're truly soaring, Karen! Extremely intriguing dialogue.

The hypnotic suggestibility angle causes me to point out how dangerous it is for us to suggest things to others as impossible.

What a surprising treat :)

Karen's contribution to the conversation regarding transformational physical realignment through body work was a nice touch in a conversation that was already delightfully fascinating.

As John said thank you very much for introducing these gentlemen to each other Karen, being able to see where the threads in the fabric run together takes a special sort of attunement, thank you Michael, John and the wonderful host Karen. Looking forward to the fruits from this tree. Peace

Very interesting, there's quite a lot packed in here. Lots of implications... probably need to listen twice

Man Karen--you are getting down to (or up to!) they way Logos works. I love how your mind works, tracking down these foundational concepts and asking these important questions. Ever since I tried to grok the double slit experiment, I've tried to follow some of these threads, but you have really tracked down some great guests that have pushed the conversation and at least my understanding WAY forward here. Great work! Great great work. Thank you!!!

Thank you all very much John, Michael, and Karen, I was really looking forward to this conversation, like the guys said we're just scratching the surface of this relationship. Once again thank you Karen. Peace

Wow!!!! Beautiful conversation!!!!!

Big discussion and my first time listening to Michael Levin, thanks Karen! 4:21 biology was on the verge of becoming philosophically dominant after Dawkins introduced the 'meme' concept in Selfish Gene. But models of cultural evolution couldn't get off the ground because it was deemed impossible to ascertain the boundary conditions of an equivalent 'unit of culture' to match the gene. It's been stagnant ever since but I agree with John's view on this. (maybe Wolfram wouldn't!) 14:49 the computational answer to 'how we become minds' would involve computational irreducibility, i.e. that we just have to progress through computations and see what happens. Similar to the German concept of Bildung perhaps, in terms of higher cognition. 25:27 Michael's right on the money, and the Principle of Computational Equivalence supports this. 28:02 John is also on the money. Western Culture needs to re-encounter its divine origins and purpose. 48:47 Even though John recognizes this as one of the great 'gifts' and also one of the great 'flaws', I would suggest that we are all struggling to understand the 'gift' view. The scientific worldview is founded on exposing flaws in the woo-woo, but how can it possibly expose the strength of woo-woo without simultaneously destroying its own credibility?

Thanks for bringing these two together, Karen! This was a fascinating video, and I will re-watch it a couple of times because there's a lot here.

Very stimulating for me, since this conversation approaches the theory of life which I advance (but can't name or link without fear of removal of my comment). I expect that I will produce a brief video reply to JV's “I’ve been looking for ontologies that … have both bottom-up emergence and top-down emanation, top-down causation.”, since my work stands in such an ontology. Thank you Karen for the carefully prepared show notes. I've printed out and expect to read Erik Hoel's first-listed paper with math. The link you give, leading to Hoel's work, didn't work for me till I deleted the semicolon at the end.

wow that was definitely stirring up lots of concepts I held. I am very interested how this will continue!

This was a wonderful conversation I was very excited to see these two together and they didn’t disappoint. It feels like we’re accelerating towards a major shift in the foundations of science and philosophy. Keep it coming. 🙏

Thanks Michael, John and Karen!

Facilitating a Fringe Encounter like a boss, wtg Karen :)

Kudos to you Karen for bringing two to the smartest people on the planet together. Awesome! I for one want to see these two continue to talk.

thanks for this very interesting conversation, Karen, and for posting the background material, I'll follow your channel.

This was great! The information at 35:30 is fascinating. There is so much that could be explored through that gateway of understanding.

Wow, that was really wonderful!!

Yo, next level convo, thank you!

This is so nice and comforting

Great discussion! Placebo is such an unfortunate word for these effects. Dan Moerman's 'the meaning response' instead of placebo has a lot going for it. Placebo is often coloured with deception and it seems that people need to explain it away. Michael's comment is spot on about what he calls protocognitive features.

~ Have thou heard about our lord and saviour Hermes Trismegistus? ~ But to be serious, the whole discussion was amazing, really big thanks to you. The placebo effect on the small scale level blew my mind. Take care everyone and please keep up the good work. As above, so below.

Please do a follow-up discussion! Such a great video...

Most excellent discussion

Great and extraordinary ! put one on another plays of starting imaging ! Tnx

Extremely cool! Very interesting and cutting edge conversion.

This explains why the Norman kings in Sicily were fascinated with knowledge from the Islamic world and floored their buildings in geometry.

appreciate the references to balancing efficiency vs. resilience in 4E cog sci! these talks are great! Also you 3 should all talk with Daniel Shmactenberger for like 4 hours.

That was a very short hour... I look forward to seeing the next conversation.

My friend Ryder sent me here.

Woo alarm, but your physiotherapy anecdote reminds me of Jerry Tennant’s model where the fascia act as semiconductors carrying charge for each muscle circuit.

Thank you for this! Would love to hear the three of you talk about collective intelligence.

Fascinating discussion, thank you, and Karen I hope you will talk more about your bio electric response to trauma. Interesting connection. It reminds me too of an experience some have in charismatic healing services.

Great combination, Karen!

Very nice interview! Thanks for sharing! To repay the generosity of the three of you, I offer the following ontological perspectives. (1) The referral to “fractal levels of cognition” echos Arthur Koestler’s theory of holons and the holarchy (from The Ghost in the Machine, 1982), and these also carry the connotation of a nested hierarchy. (2) The holarchy is not the same as the hierarchy because that association is by appearance only, and to equate the two is to confuse the appearance with the thing-in-itself (as Kant warned against). (3) I don’t believe I am wrong to assert that the bio-electric field with communicating photons is by definition a quantum system. Hence, what is being described is another example of warm-body quantum mechanics. (4) Quantum systems are innately two-sided, it seems to me, as in standing in front of a mirror and not knowing which side of the mirror you are on. Hence, the middle proto-stuff representing Kant’s thing-in-itself can be well beyond the appearance showing in the mirror. But this two-sidedness implies that causation can move up and down the holarchy, as the proto-stuff awakens. Gone is the blind watchmaker!

Thank you for this. I hope you will get these two together again, preferably for an even longer talk, it would be great. If you haven't checked out Irvin Kirtch's book The Emperor's New Mind, I think you will find it very interesting - it is about placebo.

Levin's discoveries are revolutionary but he plays cool. It is not the time yet.

Regarding "35:30 ML’s study on gene regulatory networks and the placebo effect" the paper he's likely referring to is called "Gene regulatory networks exhibit several kinds of memory: Quantification of memory in biological and random transcriptional networks" by Biswas, Manicka, Hoel, & Levin from Jan 2021. Should be the only result in a Google Scholar search (I'd post a link but I'm not sure how YT filters comments and whatnot)

Thank you Karen, allow me to remind you the wonderful job you are doing.

Tantraloka in sanskrit explains bioelectric pathways. Let us do it again.

Does this mean needs and the recognition of such in oneself and others fine-tunes relevance realization thereby meaning created: Dante and Misericordia: Mercy and the Great Medieval Understanding that practising mercy creates the flourishing city.

I think both are Professors.

@karen What is the name of the "massage therapist" you spoke about? I'd like to contact him to speak about a particular experience of body practice I'm developing.

Could we also get some link for Albert Mason and Erick Hole, I'm struggling to find both scientists unfortunately...

Actually Donalds work in physics is groundbreaking

👏👏👏👏👏

Is relevance realization the same as semantic information content?

🤯🤯🤯🤯

I wonder why Platonism always needs reviving.

Wow! Mirror neurons or whatever they would be called at all levels. Imitative behavior.

Physics and biology are both types of philosophy according to the ancient Greeks. I have no idea why anyone would cross the concept of modern philosophy with any type of science, this sounds a lot like the errors of Emmanuel Kant. Scale free principles? I think Taleb puts that to bed, scale doesn't work in the way they suspect even in mathematics. Problem space - as a concept - requires cognition, telos, good vs. bad and measurement at a minimum. This seems like a circular reference to me. Sounds a lot like projecting an Objective Material Reality and trying to start from there. Self making? How does that work? This seems to violate a bunch of science. Some of our knowing? All of our base knowledge and most of our knowledge might be of the embodied type. This would seem to be required, given the constraints of growth from baby to adult. Biology operates at the level of mechanical physics, this is an important distinction. Why does anyone believe that they can discern an ontology which is beyond them? This isn't a philosophical discussions, this is pure religion. Looking for ontologies? What sense of this word? There seems to be quite a bit of equivocation (as there always seems to be) with the use of this word, it has at least five common definitions and people seem to switch between them all the time without even noticing. Why do we think integration of science and spirituality is possible, required, etc? Why do we believe that evolution is the only thing in operation here? All of biology is not explained by evolutionary theories and hypothesis (plus those ideas that are neither). There seem to be adaptations operating at the non-evolutionary scale which are simply unexplained, but no need to invoke evolution for those, it's likely not something working at the same level. Evolution discovers things?! Where did those things come from? Perhaps those 'truths' were created somehow. Hrm. Wait, evolution finds hardware too? Access to things you did not have to evolve seem like it's something which precedes (as Peterson pointed out to Dawkins, rather recently) evolution means that there is a creation process of some kind which evolution is operating within and on. So you don't need a telos for evolution, but you certainly do for whatever it is 'discovering'. Again, why do you need evolution to solve all problems at all scales? This is just a mistaken understanding of evolution. Free gifts?! Who or what provided these gifts? Must have been created somehow. Placebo isn't hard to explain, it has not been explained and likely cannot be explained. Explaining the placebo effect puts the mystery back under science does it? Interesting. So this is just an attempt to use science to understand all the world. Has some attractors? Where are these from? Genetics has three parts at least, genes, epigenetics (which turns genes on and off) and messenger RNA (which transmit the information, likely imperfectly). Evolution 'likes this'? Wow, what an interesting statement. The placebo effect doesn't involve using two drugs, just one inert drug. So this example doesn't at all explain the placebo effect, there is literally zero training involved. So hypnosis (which seems to have many qualities of prayer) works without material interference. Almost as if religions were right all along about how the world works. If your brain can filter down to control cells (which Whim Hoff states rather clearly) then Peterson's proposition to Dawkins is more than merely plausible, that he saw DNA and that ancients would be able to do the same thing. The body alignment is very important, I had a hip out of place for months, but it fixed itself when I was trying out an inversion table (just once, just because it was something new my friend wanted to show off) and I could feel my hip get hot and slide into place. Why do you need to be empirical with a reliable phenomena that works? All this post modern breakdown to isolate something specific, but this is all about the connected relationship. All you need to make this work, and many chiropractors do this type of treatment, is fixing the signaling of your nerves by removing blockages. There is no need to have a single cause for this type of phenomena Science is all about talking, creating propositions and testing them (validating) so I'm not sure why there is utility is going down this road of wanting the science side. Great example of middle out thinking, starting in the middle of the story.

29:50 "As soon as you (evolution) discovered the transistor, you can now make logic gates." Nonsense. Review how the logic gate functionswork which are involved in rotation direction of flagella in chemotaxis. The nano-scale machines which enact the voltage gate/transistor/logic gate functions have an absurdly complexity his statement completely ignores. The Platonic worldview is a mental abstraction/simplification, and does not match the reality.

Scientists speak like mystics when they calculate the math of their own ontology.

30:01 Logic gates lead to xenbots