Raymond Tallis - What Exists?

Рет қаралды 7,387

6 ай бұрын

Free access to Closer to Truth's library of 5,000 videos: bit.ly/376lkKN
Lots of things exist. But what is so absolutely fundamental in that it cannot be further reduced into anything more fundamental, but other things that exist can be reduced to it? The challenge is to discern the minimum number of basic categories that can explain the entirety of existence.
Shop Closer To Truth merchandise like mugs and hoodies: bit.ly/3P2ogje
Register today for free to get subscriber-only exclusives: bit.ly/3He94Ns
Raymond C. Tallis is a a retired physician and neuroscientist from Great Britain. His resume boasts titles like philosopher, poet and novelist. He is also a member of the Academy of Medical Sciences, the Royal College of Physicians and Royal Society of Arts.
Watch more videos on the metaphysics of cosmos: bit.ly/3SassAy
Closer To Truth, hosted by Robert Lawrence Kuhn and directed by Peter Getzels, presents the world’s greatest thinkers exploring humanity’s deepest questions. Discover fundamental issues of existence. Engage new and diverse ways of thinking. Appreciate intense debates. Share your own opinions. Seek your own answers.

Пікірлер: 211

@KingJorman 6 ай бұрын

Only one thing exists and that is everything. Anything parsing everything into smaller bits is conceptual differentiation.

@andrewmasterman2034 6 ай бұрын

So does that mean the only state that cannot exist is nothing? Or can nothing exist in a structure that contains everything?

@KingJorman 6 ай бұрын

Yes!@@andrewmasterman2034

@David.C.Velasquez 6 ай бұрын

Correct@@andrewmasterman2034 'Nothing' cannot exist in a structure that contains everything, as by definition, nothing is not a thing. To the point, naming it, and even referring to it as 'it' is illogical, and has perpetuated this paradoxical existence. Infinity, although I cannot deny it's existence, presents a similar logical paradox, at least from our dimensionally limited perspectives.

@andrewmasterman2034 6 ай бұрын

@@David.C.Velasquez I tend to agree, it is sometimes tempting to perceive that nothing is still a state that must therefore exist in infinity but I lean towards your view that it simply isn’t a valid question in a sense.

@LivingNow678 6 ай бұрын

What exist ? Here and now: everything 😊

@Ekam-Sat 6 ай бұрын

"Everything in temporal nature is descended out that which is eternal, and stands as a palpable visible outbirth of it, so when we know how to separate out the grossness, death, and darkness of time from it, we find (in it) its eternal state." - William Law (English cleric and theologian)

@siriosstar4789 6 ай бұрын

excellent !

@Ekam-Sat 6 ай бұрын

Yes. I am always surprised that there have been so many (yet unfortunately often overlooked) intelligent people who clearly figured it out a long ago. I mean; this guy was born in the 17th century and he is basically describing the big bang. Awesome. @@siriosstar4789

@theotormon 6 ай бұрын

He has thought out his perspective cleanly and impressively.

@stoictraveler1 6 ай бұрын

I could listen to that dude for hours. Not sure i buy all that though.

@EduardoRodriguez-du2vd 6 ай бұрын

It is easy to determine that it exists. There exists only that which interacts with something else. Only. What does not interact with anything does not exist for practical purposes. Interacting with something does not need any requirements.

@dr_shrinker 6 ай бұрын

Man. If only this were true. I would have a solid plan to avoid paying my bills!

@EduardoRodriguez-du2vd 6 ай бұрын

@@dr_shrinker How would that be?

@dr_shrinker 6 ай бұрын

@@EduardoRodriguez-du2vd I just refuse to interact with bill collectors and they don’t exist.

@EduardoRodriguez-du2vd 6 ай бұрын

@@dr_shrinker It seems to me that it doesn't work that way. It is that which does not interact with anything that cannot be considered existing. All it takes is for the bank to interact with a couple of gangsters and you will recognize their existence.

@OBGynKenobi 6 ай бұрын

I see these as being fundamental, energy, information and apace.

@hunterchristian5927 6 ай бұрын

thats sick man thanks for the input

@EduardoRodriguez-du2vd 6 ай бұрын

Why information? What is information?

@OBGynKenobi 6 ай бұрын

@@EduardoRodriguez-du2vd In quantum mechanics, the concept of quantum information arises from observations that particles can exist in multiple states simultaneously (superposition) and can be entangled, meaning the state of one particle is directly linked to the state of another, regardless of distance. This interconnectedness implies an inherent information-sharing aspect of quantum systems. In thermodynamics, the link between information and entropy is expressed through the concept of entropy as a measure of disorder. Information is associated with reducing uncertainty, and the decrease in uncertainty corresponds to a decrease in entropy. These connections suggest that information is not just a byproduct of physical processes but a fundamental aspect woven into the fabric of the universe, providing new insights into the nature of reality beyond traditional views of matter and energy. The exploration of these ideas is ongoing in the realms of quantum theory, thermodynamics, and the broader field of theoretical physics.

@Littleprinceleon 6 ай бұрын

@@OBGynKenobi yep, I once listened to a presentation by Sean Caroll on Quantum statistics just to realize how "small" I am 😳☺️. The concept of quantum coherence in regards "Schroedinger's cat" made me doubt if I ever develope at least a naive intuition of the dynamics at quantum level. Have you looked after or thought about how information (in general) relates to everyday probabilities? A Veritassium video on the Sleeping Beauty Paradox comes to my mind: I'm a bit puzzled by the reasoning and exact math there, but nevertheless an interesting take on how the shift in POV might change the assessment of likely outcomes of the same random event

@sjur434 6 ай бұрын

You were probably hoping for feedback on the new format (filming, angel, zoom etc), and I can say: I didnt like it. The angels and camera standing still had more class over it. Also: I dont know if you made the cuts (cut frames) earlier this time to make the dialog thighter and more compact, but this way it all seemed to be more staged and scripted in a way. Love the show tho

@rishabhthakur8773 6 ай бұрын

Only 'Existence' exist. Existence is appearing as things, mind, consciousness, universe, etc .

@misterhill5598 6 ай бұрын

What exists? You, me, the Internet connection and KZfaq.

@turnerthemanc 6 ай бұрын

All that is very interesting, but what I would like to know is why someone is having a very slow game of air hockey off camera

@siriosstar4789 6 ай бұрын

existence exists and the entire relative field exists inside of that existence that is awake to itself ,,,,, as that .

@tedgrant2 6 ай бұрын

If you really want to get closer to truth, read Bertrand Russell's books. He answered all your questions a long time ago.

@Littleprinceleon 6 ай бұрын

Which one would you suggest for starters? (Familiar with basic concepts specific for philosophies in general)

@tedgrant2 6 ай бұрын

@@Littleprinceleon "Why I am not a Christian" is still my favourite. "A History of Western Philosophy". "Religion and Science".

@tedgrant2 6 ай бұрын

@@Littleprinceleon "Bertrand Russell's Best" is not by him, of course. It's a very good stocking filler.

@kitstamat9356 6 ай бұрын

Being!

@catherinemoore9534 6 ай бұрын

We are story tellers. Our own personal story being continually updated.

@ironmikehallowween 6 ай бұрын

I am not sure about the time thing. If there was no conscious thought, and there is no real beginning and no real end, only endless cycles, with no one to measure, it seems a meaningless thing.

@andrewmasterman2034 6 ай бұрын

I believe it is true that every single event that does occur had to occur exactly that way and there is no deviation (i.e our whole path through life is predetermined.) Despite this, because we can (at least appear) to act with intention it gives us an illusion of agency. If you knew your whole life was fixed to a single path would you value it less?

@digitalfootballer9032 6 ай бұрын

@@andrewmasterman2034If the universe is an infinitely repeating loop that is identical every iteration, then yes, our lives must follow a fixed path each and every time, or else one small variation could throw the whole thing off like a butterfly effect. However, I only believe this to be the case in a repeating identical universe scenario. If this is the one and only universe we are in for all of time, OR, there is an expansion/contraction/rebirth but is different each time, then our lives and actions being fixed and predetermined would have no purpose. In these scenarios freewill is possible. In the former case, it is not.

@Arunava_Gupta 6 ай бұрын

I think the following can be said to be the main categories of existence: 1. Material objects / various substances 2. Conscious thinkers / experiencers 3. Concepts (that are thought of in mind) 4. Time

@willasacco9898 6 ай бұрын

I agree. Those first categories seem to cover all of our reality.

@Arunava_Gupta 6 ай бұрын

@@willasacco9898 Yes, I think so too. Thanks for the reply. 🙏

@deanodebo 6 ай бұрын

You have to assume the material world. Otherwise what’s your justification?

@deanodebo 6 ай бұрын

@@Arunava_Gupta You can claim matter exists, but you cannot justify that claim. All you can appeal to is immaterial experience.

@Arunava_Gupta 6 ай бұрын

@@deanodebo Oh, but what about the data pertaining to the objects of the senses that the neurons are carrying in to me? I am experiencing the material objects.

@monkerud2108 6 ай бұрын

there is but one category of existence, it is the universal substance that transforms in accordance with its internal relations. its internal relations are structured by a process of increasing entropy as it moves towards equi-distribution but can never get there. structure on all scales equally fundamental, emerging out of its own relations all the way down to 0 scale variation, such that no level is more or less fundamental than another, no structure needs be assumed, it all arises and stabilizes and changes itself not according to some assumed law but its own internal relations. you do need to assume the whole structure, but there is only one such object that can exist. this is semi mystical, but it is how the world works. and in detail the hypothesis gives a basis for getting at real effective laws at any level of description, for example applying in naively to the vacuum leads directly to unification of all known laws and predicts expansion in a much more natural way through dissipation rather than some silly assumption of correlation between geometry and energy density.

@EduardoRodriguez-du2vd 6 ай бұрын

But if reality is finally composed of a single type of entity, it must be homogeneous. Without differentiated parts. So what is the driving force behind the changes? Something of a single nature, homogeneous and indistinct, has no structure that can undergo any change. There must be at least two distinct entities.

@myles5158 6 ай бұрын

What?

@theotormon 6 ай бұрын

I'm being both sincere and complimentary when I say that is some pretty impressive navel gazing.

@PaulHoward108 6 ай бұрын

Souls exist.

@kipponi 6 ай бұрын

Two categories Energy and Information covers everything. And those are first things which happened "somewhere past"😂. Maybe...

@charleswood2182 6 ай бұрын

Personal identity must be a bedrock fact if relativity applies to experience. The primitive coordinate system which is the theater for experience or mind conveys ordinal; and yet could no since among dynamics, there is is no fixed point of reference by which to determine whether one thing is going or coming in a relation. A relativistic invariant in a reference frame we make only by presumption and can only do so from personal identity as at absolute rest in a primitive coordinate system's observational reference frame. Thus experience or mind is modeled scientifically. Empirically, look to Denis Noble who thinks it is an anthropomorphism when he speaks of physiology as directed. A person, a personal identity as an invariant cannot derive from dynamics. The third law forbids such. The way C. G. Jung put an epistemic is thus: VOCATUS ATQUE NON VOCATUS DEUS ADERIT, Called or not by whom? A me. Jung put in stone his epistemic, then. I am real and god is real.

@caractacus22 6 ай бұрын

My dog lives in a material world..I know she has sentience.she knows she’s she. She lives her doggy life authentically, but has little thought as to the past and future. She just is.

@Resmith18SR 6 ай бұрын

Humans will never fully understand how a dog or cat or any other living organism experiences their consciousness or awareness. I think they may have some sense of future events and remember things that have happened to them but nowhere to the degree that we do.

@longcastle4863 6 ай бұрын

Your dog has memories of past events and hopes for the future. She builds up a body of knowledge, some of which have predictive value. She has things she likes and things she dislikes. We relate so well to our pets because we are really so much alike. Even if a case can be made for our consciousness and experiences of the world being more intricate and complicated than theirs.

@caractacus22 6 ай бұрын

@@longcastle4863 that’s true, walks she likes and doesn’t dogs she likes or avoids if she’s been to one area only once, she has it mapped forever. I’m glad she likes me, but as for her conchiousness , I do t know. She’s a dog, and wants nothing to do with god, society or politics. She just want her dinner, and smells

@caractacus22 6 ай бұрын

@@Resmith18SR all I know is, I do t try and rollerblade in a buffalo herd, and that my dog doesn’t lie ( not do horses) , and that people lie all the time. I spend the vast majority of my brain trying to work out when they’re pissing up my shirt and telling me it’s raining.

@papalaz4444244 6 ай бұрын

definitely autism

@jeffsimoneaux5968 6 ай бұрын

Not persons - conscious agents

@jamesruscheinski8602 6 ай бұрын

person has awareness of free will and consciousness?

@NotNecessarily-ip4vc 6 ай бұрын

0D = fundamental and "more real" 1D, 2D, 3D and 4D = not-fundamental and "less real"

@Promatheos 6 ай бұрын

Raymond seems to define person as what I call ego. Ego is the story you tell yourself about who you are. It doesn’t exist at all. It’s just a story. As Alan Watts explained, a person is a persona, “per sona” Latin for “through sound.” A person means a mask and that is exactly right. It’s the mask worn to play a role in the society around us. Of Raymond’s three categories, experience is the only one we know is real. Next, the material world is very convincing, but it can be doubted. Finallly, persons are a complete fiction. They just happen to be useful.

@Resmith18SR 6 ай бұрын

I've read Alan Watts and enjoyed his popular take on Zen Buddhism of which I agree with for the most part. I think he said that our view of Nature and material objects and our selves are fictions which serve some use in our lives but that they are still fictions. The ego or our identity is our story that we tell ourselves and others and our unique experiences in our lives. Nature or the Tao represented by the Yin Yang symbol, the unity of opposites and it's never ending flow of change. As Watts said we are like waves that come from the ocean and inseparable from Nature and it's dynamic processes.

@papalaz4444244 6 ай бұрын

This sounds like the opinion of someone autistic

@longcastle4863 6 ай бұрын

Stories exist.

@longcastle4863 6 ай бұрын

By “personhood”, Tallis seems to simply mean human beings or homo sapiens. His putting “personhood” in a separate category, therefore, from all other living things seems unjustified and questionable to me. And seems to disregard a lot of biology, genetics and evolutionary science showing human beings clear connections and relations to the rest of the animal kingdom.

@dr_shrinker 6 ай бұрын

Right. There’s no defined cutoff for awareness and intelligence. It’s a fuzzy spectrum indeed. Some could argue whales are smarter, with a slight shift in judgment criteria. I mean, whales can survive much better with far less than humans. They communicate with less language, and they have adapted to thrive, not just cope with their world. They are in harmony with the universe. - except for humans hunting them to extinction. Today’s humans (as a whole) are less able to exist in this world than our ancestors. Strip away the tech and humans are unable to thrive. 99% of humans couldn’t even make a fire without a lighter. What is more important to evolution? Hunting/gathering or operating a microwave? Every other animal on earth can survive without electricity and petroleum. Who’s the genius now?

@bozo5632 6 ай бұрын

Then include other critters under personhood

@bozo5632 6 ай бұрын

I don't like it as a fundamental category though. It's like saying there are objects, and hubcaps.

@emptycloud2774 6 ай бұрын

I think you need to re-listen and focus on how he uses the words "being" and "transcends".

@longcastle4863 6 ай бұрын

@@emptycloud2774 Or you could say what those words mean and how they relates to the discussion

@pandoraeeris7860 6 ай бұрын

Fundamentally, one thing exists: light.

@jackarmstrong5645 6 ай бұрын

If nothing else exists how do you know that?

@moemuggy4971 6 ай бұрын

I'm the only thing that actually exists. You and everything around me is just a figment of my imagination. My conscience created reality and the matter it's made of. The sky is only blue because I say it is.

@0-by-1_Publishing_LLC 6 ай бұрын

(4:20) *RLK: **_"Material things, sentient things, and personhood,._* ... At the fundamental level, "conceivability" is the sole arbitrator for what can or cannot exist. Whatever exists must first be deemed *logically conceivable.* That's why square circles, six-sided pentagons, and married bachelors don't exist. So, even if you conceived something that does not exist (i.e., unicorns, God, magic elves), if it is *logically conceivable,* then it necessarily exists as a conception. That means if everything was removed from existence except for that single conception, there would still be the existence of that single conception. That conception (even though it's not attached to anything physical) is *information* that is something *_more_* than total nonexistence.

@r2c3 6 ай бұрын

both order and chaos take the stage, one at a time, but not simultaneously 🤔

@shephusted2714 6 ай бұрын

why does the material world have to be revealed - when we are gone the material world will still exist #i'm not here, i'm gone

@deanodebo 6 ай бұрын

You cannot justify the existence of “matter” without conscious experience.

@kos-mos1127 6 ай бұрын

@@deanodebo You can justify the existence of matter without conscious experience. All experience is made of matter.

@deanodebo 6 ай бұрын

@@kos-mos1127 What is red made of?

@kos-mos1127 6 ай бұрын

@@deanodebo Red is made from iron oxides.

@dr_shrinker 6 ай бұрын

@@deanodebo red is made of every wavelength in the visible light spectrum except except purple, blue, green, yellow, and orange. Did you really need help with that one?

@longcastle4863 6 ай бұрын

Why not just say, what exists is matter. And matter can be broken down into nonliving and living matter. And from living matter emerges consciousness, which includes perceptions and experiences and, at least in higher life forms, thoughts and reasoning abilities (etc), which then become the building blocks for all our abstract ideas and bodies of knowledge.

@jeremymanson1781 6 ай бұрын

Conscuousness 'emerging' from living matter, may be highly probable. However that idea is still far from being conclusively established as fact.

@Resmith18SR 6 ай бұрын

Consciousness is a product of a living biological organism with a functional brain and nervous system. I would regard that as a fact, it's so highly probable.

@nolanr1400 6 ай бұрын

Consciousness is universal and preexists everything including matter

@dr_shrinker 6 ай бұрын

@@jeremymanson1781we all know consciousness emerges from matter. That’s why hospitals exist.

@jeremymanson1781 6 ай бұрын

@@nolanr1400its a lovely idea and very hard to prove

@infinitygame18 6 ай бұрын

Everywhere Higher & Lovver Self Exist and All have their own theories & Laws of their mind Level But their are some basic laws Which Applies on all things , If you understand the real meaning of Exists , when & who so ever created this & that language , that code is Existence & in Existence, evelop Some Mental Temperament to See & understand Things Beyond Minds Level

@jammin8300 6 ай бұрын

I'm starting to think you lot would begin to get a greater understanding while sessioning on mushrooms, having this conversation lol

@richardsylvanus2717 6 ай бұрын

He basically said nothing

@mrtienphysics666 6 ай бұрын

God

@offtheradarsomewhere. 6 ай бұрын

Not all experiences depend on the physical world💫

@dr_shrinker 6 ай бұрын

Cen you list an experience that does not depend on the physical world?

@kipponi 6 ай бұрын

Dreams.

@dr_shrinker 6 ай бұрын

@@kipponi dreams do depend on the physical world. We always dream about something we have experienced.

@David.C.Velasquez 6 ай бұрын

@@dr_shrinker You must have chronically mundane 'dreams'

@offtheradarsomewhere. 6 ай бұрын

@@dr_shrinker It could be argued that nothing is physical only pure energy and information decoded by our minds, just like color is created in our minds, however that said is a different topic. Mathematics is not physical, philosophical ideas are experienced within the mind, a short list of experiences which doesn't rely on external stimuli Meditation Visualization Imagination Dreams OBE experience D.M.T experiences Spiritual experiences I don't claim to experience all But they are all recognized as experiences unique to themselves 💫🙏

@Maxwell-mv9rx 6 ай бұрын

Why guys doesnt show his experiences honestly keep out mediocre Science proceendings? Are He though his experiences has worth Science.? Not absolutetly. Guys experiences with words not evidence nothing.

@christopherjhall 6 ай бұрын

Would like to try that again?

@dr_shrinker 6 ай бұрын

@@christopherjhallhave you considered English is not his native language? Or perhaps he isn’t as able to write as concisely as you want him to? In any case, don’t be so condescending. I’m sure we all have faults, even you.

@christopherjhall 6 ай бұрын

⁠⁠⁠⁠@@dr_shrinkeroh the irony. did you stop to consider that I was interested in the point they were trying to articulate, before you jumped to misplaced, invalid assumptions. Could I suggest that you’d do better to judge people on the basis of the facts presented, rather than hurling insults. I would have thought that comments in this of all channels, would be treated with the respect they deserve

@dr_shrinker 6 ай бұрын

@@christopherjhall nah. That wasn’t what you meant. Why wouldn’t you ask him to elaborate or something less flippant? If you were interested, you’re doing a bad job of asking for clarity. Also, if you feel insulted, check your ego. I never insulted you. I checked you. Big difference. Deserve has nothing to do with it. I do my best to earn respect, I expect others to do the same.

@mandelbot5318 6 ай бұрын

@@christopherjhall This person leaves a comment on pretty much every video on this channel, and it’s always negative with terrible grammar and the same handful of words used and misspelled. I admit I’ve been tempted to leave a reply of my own on a number of occasions, but I think it’s fairly clear that there are conceptual as well as linguistic ‘issues’ present here, so I err on the side of tact (at least as I see it). That being said, you are, of course, free to comment whatever you want, but I do find it ironic that your own short reply is poorly worded. You’re missing a subject. No judgement, just an observation. 😊

@browngreen933 6 ай бұрын

What does it mean to say that God exists? Doesn't that mean he's made of the same elements as the rest of the universe? What else is there? 😮

@Resmith18SR 6 ай бұрын

It depends on how one defines God or Ultimate Reality. If you define it as Nature or the Universe as pantheists do and I do as well then God is the one reality that exists.

@dr_shrinker 6 ай бұрын

@@Resmith18SRthen why bother calling him god when “stuff” would be as accurate?

@Resmith18SR 6 ай бұрын

@@dr_shrinker Because physicists study the Cosmos and the Universe. Are you ever in awe of the Universe and the beauty of Nature?

@dr_shrinker 6 ай бұрын

@@Resmith18SR what does my feeling about nature have to do with my question?

@Resmith18SR 6 ай бұрын

@@dr_shrinker Because most people do have an emotional response to Nature and experience humility and awe and reverence for it. Sounds like you don't.

@evaadam3635 6 ай бұрын

"What Exists ?" In this Physical World, only your Awareness, which is your immortal soul, that truly exists and is eternal but you can not know it because your aware soul can not be reached by your limited physical senses.. ...your lost aware soul was only given a chance to dwell here temporarily in this temporary physical existence so to hopefully believe in a loving God without knowing Him for you to return Home - the Original Home that you lost for losing faith in God's love.. ...soon, you will know what truly exist when your temporary life's chance on earth is over...

@David.C.Velasquez 6 ай бұрын

@evaadam3635 You were making alot of sense, up to the second paragraph.

@David.C.Velasquez 6 ай бұрын

@LifesInsight Yeah, apologies... that was meant for @evaadam3635

@evaadam3635 6 ай бұрын

@LifesInsight nothing can be imagined without Awareness that truly exists...

@evaadam3635 6 ай бұрын

@@David.C.Velasquez why ?

@David.C.Velasquez 6 ай бұрын

@@evaadam3635 Because although I trust that you are well meaning, you inadvertently put limitations on god, through misconception of god as a person. Beginnings and endings, creators and creation, are the notions of mortal beings. God is no less than the eternally infinite, omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent, omniverse itself, boundless in measure, and limitless in dimensionality. Any human conceptualization of god, is mere anthropomorphism, and equivalent to idolatry.

@S3RAVA3LM 6 ай бұрын

What things exist? All such things of mass and magnitude, i.e., spatial & temporal, that depend upon existence itself for their sustenance & duration. What is existence itself? Something that has the power to generate. What is this power of generation? Soul. What is Soul? The power to animate. What has this power to animate? That which emanates. What is emanation? Contemplation. What is contemplation? That which reflects of itself by itself and in itself. What? Silence.

@kos-mos1127 6 ай бұрын

The power of generation is creation.

@maxpower252 6 ай бұрын

Weak

@JungleJargon 6 ай бұрын

A Creator exists. We are a temporal fabrication.

@Resmith18SR 6 ай бұрын

Nonsense. Prove it.

@JungleJargon 6 ай бұрын

@@Resmith18SR Matter and energy can’t make themselves so there is a Creator.

@longcastle4863 6 ай бұрын

@@JungleJargon Who made the creator?

@JungleJargon 6 ай бұрын

@@longcastle4863 The Creator has to be eternal. He can't have a day of beginning to exist.

@dr_shrinker 6 ай бұрын

@@JungleJargon so the creator is not matter and energy?

@fortynine3225 6 ай бұрын

Yes. A thought excists since there is activity in the brain when we think! Ultimately we are in the here and now all the time with that likely being the most real thing in our lives.

@andrewmasterman2034 6 ай бұрын

One argument against this proposes that in fact every single aspect of your action upon the world / universe (including every single thought and its consequence) is predetermined and always unfolds in a single path of causation that could never at any point diverge from what occurs.

@fortynine3225 6 ай бұрын

@@andrewmasterman2034 All we do is likely predetermined, in fact it is unlikely it is not, which does not goes against a thought being a brainactivity or us being always in the here and now.