Video

I have the answer

How to become a shaman. Never a truer word spoken. From hamster-consciousness to hari krishnerman. Snakebit from a token. Black lives matter. Mohammed and his blessings but what a childhood oy vey. Did you see his wife recently? Stunning what a picture she puts Christian in the missionary

I think Joshua Rasmussen was being very disingenuous in this interview, hiding the fact that he's starting from an evangelical Christian faith perspective. That was obvious to me from the beginning, but Daniel Kaufman seemed to be oblivious to it.

Because you have to have these types of discussions it just shows there is a contradiction. Thanks for making it so confusing All knowing God.

Very limited knowledge or discussion of all the ways mindfulness can be applied. That said- the wellness industry in general is crap consumerism.

Q. If nothing ever happened, no cause or effects, no events at all. Would time still exist? Or is time simply an artifact to measure a series of events as they occur?

Why dont they just set up a camera to record the measurement with no one in the room? If the wave collapses still, then it's just the act if measuring. If it's still there, then consciousness, or internalized observation is involved.

We have to love ourselves before we can love others

I think a civilization advanced beyond death AND with that beyond emotions. Those go hand in hand. To break up the monotony of forever, they go into a hyper realistic simulator with pain, suffering, emotions, mortality and live a life just as we are now.

Nirvana.

Why have a guest on the show if you’re never going to let him speak 😅😅😅😅

Sam Harris is dead wrong

Brilliant discussion, thank you

Not all women have children.

No..........., not fully accurate even in the first five minutes.

Very enjoyable and informative ... thank you

Why can’t we all have such discussions, putting aside that few are as intelligent and well spoken on the subject as these two? Great debate/discussion. I sit on Sam Harris side of the argument.

Seems inefficient, if not stupefying, not to think of other things while your walking or sitting, etc. And she divorced another meditation teacher? What gives?

Seems like the bait is the loss of suffering. The switch is you just get to look at suffering long and more closely, and describe it more charitably, if pretentiously. Kinda lame. Anyway, sorry this is 4 years late but I'm half way through Bob's book now, and came to her part. Anyway, giving the book a 5/10, her testimony here a 2.

Why did she change her name? Oh, Kundalini, lol, interesting cult. Did you know they literally chant Satans name? So weird

Is she liberated? Sounds like no. Same as Joseph Goldstein. Lot of double talk in this religion. Anyone else notice?

How in the world can he say rebirth is not easily naturalized?! The rebirth of egoic delusion or appropriative grasping happens even multiple times within one day of living life, not to mention a week, a month, a year or a decade. Rebirth is one of the easiest ideas to psychologize and thus naturalize. Not sure how one does not see that.

Can I be a a physycysist?

Physics is dull.

Evidently she and Ram Dass' guru hasn't read the Vedas. In it, it's clear that spirituality most certainly came to India in the form of a substance as well. Seems to me meditation has been riding psychedelics skirttails ever since. Not to say meditation is of no value, but this whole self-annihilation talk, and having "a separate self you put forward" makes Buddhism sound like an acquired dissociative disorder. I can't help but notice that enlightenment seems a fool's errand. And, obviously, meditation retreats didn't stop Goenka from overeating.

Nowhere in the Bible is universal salvation taught. Quite the opposite even from the mouth of Jesus himself.

Bob the Nonzero party candidate? Slogan: It’s all negotiable!

Always fun to hear from these apostates

Spirit of Judas...www were all in...Huck Tuck soft disclosed....Tman talk to The Queen of Heaven.

It's all a delusion. Blackrock-Larry Fink is running the USA.

16:43

So, I _am_ some weird guy who "just woke up thinking this" (prior to philosophical training), and even after digging into these concepts for years I still have the same questions. How do oughts obtain stance-independently? What could that even mean? You don't even need to say, "I _deny_ that oughts are doing anything." The realist is not substantiating normativity, or even a fictionalist utility of normativity (and of course they couldn't promote the latter). What does an antirealist need to do to get an explanation beyond simply, "it seems like moral normativity is non-naturalistically real"? Antirealism is exhaustively explanatory and elegant. It also seems more accurate. It makes me question myself constantly to see that realism is the majority view among so many well-respected thinkers in philosophy. I agree entirely with the notion that realist terminology is simply rhetorical persuasion speech acts based in wishful confidence.

If I remember right this dude is creepy.

agree its bad news. i doubt aliens want to hang out w us having observed us. aaand what do they make of what they observe. here's the likely situation, some humans have had contact w aliens in an official capacity and were admonished to never confirm their existence to society or humanity will face mortal consequences. what if those who are denying their existence and running interference against disclosure are actually saving humanity from destruction?

I find him an annoying interviewer

I recently asked ChatGPT to create the rules to the game of life. The parameters I gave it were that the aim of the game is to evolve, the rules can be made up as you go along and the game board is infinite in all dimensions. The resulting conversation was quite profound! czcams.com/video/60IPkzydX2M/video.htmlsi=vq-G3WjxbHRxopuF

Every complex problem has a complex and imperfect solution. There will always be unsatisfied people on both sides, leading to a continuation of the debate and perhaps creating a new conflict. We're screwed...

This one's incredibly good of Sam.

Resting pouty face.

Occulms Razor

Thanks. That's as clear as it gets when it comes to Whitehead philosophy and theology. 👍🥹

“When we want to believe something, we ask ourselves, "Can I believe it?" Then, we search for supporting evidence, and if we find even a single piece of pseudo-evidence, we can stop thinking. We now have permission to believe. We have justification, in case anyone asks. In contrast, when we don't want to believe something, we ask ourselves, "Must I believe it?" Then we search for contrary evidence, and if we find a single reason to doubt the claim, we can dismiss it.” ― Jonathan Haidt, The Righteous Mind: Why Good People Are Divided by Politics and Religion

George W Bush Dallas 2016 Too often, we judge other groups by their worst examples, while judging ourselves by our best intentions. And this has strained our bonds of understanding and common purpose. But Americans, I think, have a great advantage. To renew our unity, we only need to remember our values. We have never been held together by blood or background. We are bound by things of the spirit, by shared commitments to common ideals.

Charlmers continues to blow our minds. He might be the greatest philosopher in history

I think Evan just needs a hug...

Word salad interviewer incapacity

You are nuts.

I just don’t understand how this two utterly incompatible expression “quantum” and “mechanics” could ever meet in a single expression. This expression, in itself, has a dual nature:)

China is done bro

The collapse of the wave function is very likely to be a nonlinear process, for which computer simulation is needed. Any simulation needs to make use of a random number generator. I believe I am stating the obvious. I will propose in outline how to go about it. This is likely to be a long posting, I am afraid, but I am going to offer a tentative solution to the measurement problem. Our first difficulty is that the Schrödinger equation, or any equation like it, is extremely accurate at the ensemble level and we can take it for granted that the modification of it is forbidden. There is nothing resembling the viscosity term to be found in the Navier-Stokes equation. And yet we need to inject some randomness. There are two ways to do it. *The first way* is to hypothesise that some nonlocal degree of freedom is involved, so even if we know nothing about Bell's Theorem we could have guessed it anyway. Just playing around with the Minkowski formalism, we notice that there is more than one way to travel faster than light. I suggest that the Schrödinger equation describes an oscillation in one of the ways which is capable of destructive interference with itself. We can have an orthogonal tachyonic Wiener process in the other way, which I will just call tachyonic Brownian motion (TBM). This comes into action during the nonlinear interaction between the wave function and the electromagnetic field, and can then lead to an outcome which does not have an issue with Schrödinger's cat. No aetiology is proposed for this TBM and I am guessing that it is quantified by having the Planck time as its characteristic time. What else? Nitrogen tri-iodide has the unique property that it is so unstable that it can be detonated by an alpha particle from a substance like polonium-210. Nitrogen trifluoride is stable by contrast. A computer simulation of tri-iodide under bombardment needs to have an outcome which is qualitatively different from the trifluoride. In any well-written simulation the trifluoride behaviour will be isentropic, but with the tri-iodide there will be a destruction of unitarity and a substantial rise in specific entropy. It is suggested that the missing ingredient in the simulation is TBM, which being normally orthogonal is dormant in the trifluoride, but is sufficient to detonate the tri-iodide once an electromagnetic field is also present. This is a second order nonlinear effect and is like a random walk along the edge of a cliff. In other cases all this effect needs to do is to disrupt the Poincaré cycle or to initiate the Kelvin-Helmholtz or similar instability. Two molecules of nitrogen tri-iodide are in fact a detector in the classical sense, and constitute the smallest detector that I can think of. What is called the Heisenberg cut comes between one and two molecules of tri-iodide. Maybe in the future somebody will think of a smaller detector, but it won't really affect the argument to be given here. The computer simulation of two molecules of tri-iodide will need to run in at least twenty four dimensions of configuration space, just counting atoms. This is impossible in practice, and gives us a hint of what we are up against. All detectors are just too complicated to model by the formal method using TBM. We really do need a detector to get the collapse of the wave function in our simulation, but we must adopt other ideas. *The second way* to reconcile the immutability of the Schrödinger equation to the need to use a random number generator involves a bit of handwaving. We just throw away the Schrödinger equation and replace it by a classical system with some ordinary Brownian motion for any object heavier than the Planck mass. The Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle is replaced by the Fürth Uncertainty Principle on the same scale, so hardly anyone will notice. Yes, it is indeed cheating, but we have TBM as an aetiology and no known practical alternative. Classical BM will be much more disruptive than TBM and of course we are reinventing decoherence. We shouldn't have much trouble collapsing wave functions using it in our simulations. The usual objection to decoherence is the lack of any means of destroying unitarity in any closed system, which has been answered by proposing TBM as the aetiology. If we have an electron in a potential well, then the electron is modelled by the Dirac equation plus TBM. The electromagnetic field is modelled by correlated TBM so the wave function and the electromagnetic field working together can act like a nonlocal Vernam cipher. The potential well is considered to be a dimple in a heavy object so it is modelled with a bit of classical BM. I have already written a little computer simulation of the Dirac wave packet, and I am guessing that the propensity of the monochromatic wave packet to be a tachyon is also going to be significant. The Courant-Friedrichs-Levy condition could be difficult to deal with in the simulation of nonlocal behaviour, that behaviour being of more significance than just a moiré pattern. Output from any program will be to a cinematic loop display. Buttons will be provided to replay the loop, to do a time reversal, and to do a Lorentz boost. A side effect of pressing any button will be to reseed the random number generator in use, probably the Mersenne twister, by reference to the time of pressing the button. This is the "Protean system" and it ensures that we can simulate nonlocal phenomena without worrying about causality. A Lorentz transformation might give the appearance of being able to swap nonlocal cause and effect, but only on a new random event. I intend to put a series of computer simulations in the public domain which anyone will be able to modify. If they wish, they can rip out TBM and install some other way of doing things. What has been described here is the projected solution to the measurement problem as we start our programming. We will just have to see how we get on. In summary, adding a random number generator to any computer simulation of quantum mechanics is likely to require two different methods in practice. One is pitched at nonlocal work, the other at the collapse of the wave function. The single use of a RNG is conceivable in principle, but we lack the computer power to pursue it. I do not have any new equation to propose, and there isn't one.