Anil Seth on a New Science of Consciousness | Closer To Truth Chats
Vložit
- čas přidán 30. 06. 2024
- Anil Seth, professor of Cognitive and Computational Neuroscience at the University of Sussex, discusses his new theory about how we experience the world and the self. He talks about the "real problem" of consciousness, measuring consciousness, and the brain as a Predictive Perception Machine.
Book tickets to Anil Seth's talk with New Scientist on Thursday, Sep. 9 at 1 p.m. ET and use promo code CTT0909 to receive a 10% discount: www.newscientist.com/science-...
Seth's book, Being You: A New Science of Consciousness, is available for purchase in the UK and the US: amzn.to/3jI9ss7
Anil Seth is Co-Director of the Sackler Centre for Consciousness Science at the University of Sussex. His research focuses on understanding the biological basis of consciousness by bringing together research across neuroscience, mathematics, computer science, psychology, philosophy and psychiatry.
Register for free at closertotruth.com for subscriber-only exclusives: bit.ly/2GXmFsP
Closer to Truth, hosted by Robert Lawrence Kuhn, 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.
© 2021 Closer To Truth
“If the human brain were so simple
That we could understand it,
We would be so simple
That we couldn’t.” Emerson Pugh
That is actually the case however, isn't it?
This topic is bound-up in language. Why assume that what we see is illusion while asserting that language is accurate and descriptive? Complex thought is not possible without language, mathematics not withstanding. Why not ask the same questions of IT?
The more serious the lie, the more words it takes to tell it. Worms see a real world, and so do you and I.
@@brushbros Yes, agree, the principles of things are all that's needed for understanding.
Look at anything and all one sees is a representation.
Even the head of a pin contains many trillions of atoms.
If the brain is the core of what makes us conscious
then only the principles of how it happens is required for understanding.
Me, I think it is in large part an analogy machine and
my self is simply an analogy frolicking within it.
Let me edit that and say instead...
my self is simply an extremely complex analogy frolicking within it.
reality is half hallucinogen(seratonin, indoleamines), thus hallucination is half reality.(seth)
CCD Is "Consensual Collective Disorder ".. or if you prefer the slightly more accurate..." Collective Cognitive Delusion"..😁..The mental condition, whereby there is agreement by the majority on some fanciful theory or hypothesis as being reality, whereas in reality that is not the case. This is always the case in pseudoscience, that is, until some new explanation is put forward as 'the new n improved science' then the earlier explanation becomes old and extinct and the new is propounded with great fan fare. Then, that becomes old n is superceded by another .. lol !! ad boredom infinitum..and thus, the scientific wheel keeps turning n churning out more pseudo intellectual garbage.
Consciousness IS the prima materia, the primum mobile, the infinite & unchanging sub strate of our reality.
This IS, whether or not you, or science accepts believes or understands, this IS. Irrespective.
tantrik t.
✌☝️❤
I was anticipating some new revelations in the study of consciousness, instead of
a rehash of existing information.
Then again there is a new book to promote.
Want something new and exciting? Try Antonio Damasio and Mark Solms.
Just saved me an hour. Thanks.
😂
They're all obsessed with money making these days. No one seems to engage in lofty matters of the mind any more for the love of a subject. Sometimes it's cringeworthy listening to these sorts of offerings, bracketed by money begging and sometimes accompanied by utterly ridiculous ad content (Sean Carrol and his Cat Litter ads springs to mind). Add to that the increasing attraction to unprovable ideas in metascience.
I guess it must suck being an academic in modern times. lol
@@SearchBucket2 the attention seeking you mean is to opportunistically gain an extra buck. You don't really have to sell out in order to do your research and just provide food for your family.
“We are all hallucinating all the time, including right now. It’s just that when we agree about our hallucinations, we call that reality.” Anil Seth … neuroscientist.
Copy cat lol
But who is the one doing the hallucinating?
@@lilliansmith8444 Humans are all hallucinators. We are the only animals that hallucinate that good souls will be rewarded in an afterlife, and evil souls will be punished in an afterlife. How's THAT for hallucinating? lol
@@junevandermark952 But my question is, who is doing the hallucinating and not who believes in the afterlife or not. For instance who is the hallucinator in you who came up with that statement. That is the crux of the problem.
@@lilliansmith8444 I didn't come up with that statement, I just simply agree with the statement that we are all hallucinators.
Do you think that you are not a hallucinator?
As a young student who was interested in pursuing neuroscience, I went to see a Christof Koch lecture at UC Berkeley 20 years ago. The room was so full I sat on the ground. It was fascinating! Back then, ONE description of consciousness was that it's an emergent property or phenomenon of the complex interactions between neurons and groups of neurons. I remember there were different ways of thinking of consciousness.... seems like there still might be!
This was an absorbing discussion. More of philosophy than neuroscience. Thanks to Aniljee and ctt.
I love Closer To Truth. The Science of Consciousness is very interesting. I think that consciousness is extremely simple. However, the consequences of consciousness are very very complex.
Absolutely brilliant interview. Thank you. 💕
Amazing interview, enjoyed it a lot. I saw Anil's ted talk a few months ago, didn't know he had written a book. Going to order and read it. Thank you so much for bringing brilliant minds together!
I enjoyed this conversation and what a relief Anil sees the glaring problems of functionalism! It was amusing when Roblert asks "What's new?" in regards to Anil's claim of a new science of consciousness. The answer - well its not new, its just a shift from correlation to explanation LOL! Again Robert asks the fundamental scientific inquiry question of 'what' is the thermometer of conscisousness? Anil's resoponse "That's the question, is there one?"
Anil is focusing on the scientific method - where any question can be asked (Why something is or How) for explanation, prediction control. However, this tends to fashion the 'truth' rather than discover it... The real problem is the hard problem What is consciousness, not why it is or how it is those questions can be approached after, assuming that conscioussness is not metaphysical...
Finally an approach I'd agree with in terms of "graspability" - not simply ignoring the fact of consciousness as a hard problem.
Grateful for your persistent pursuit of truth.
About consciousness, forgive me for I haven't yet watched the whole series and this may have been covered, so, about consciousness, right, we can define it, but, little else. How about focusing, for an instant, on what consciousness is not. 😘👍🏽
Thanks for giving us access to those fantastic interviews
Thanks for having Anil on you video. The interview was awesome.
Thanks. A very rich summary of consciousness research from neurosciences point of view. 🙏
Oh, wow, this looks good! I'll just make a mug of tea first.
Great discussion, enjoyed it very much
"I cannot grasp all that I am." Saint Augustine of Hippo wrote those words in the fourth century c.e. Now, fourteen centuries later, after a science revolution, and an Enlightenment, our "best" minds are still grappling with it. I'm going to look somewhere else.
Whenever there is something that humans cannot understand completely, many will leap to pseudoscientific solutions (consciousness is fundamental, etc.) instead of admitting that we just can't know yet.
Robert please buy an actual microphone for these interviews.
Why doesn't anyone ever mention Hoffstedder? His book "I am a Strange Loop" . An interesting view of consciousness.
Excellent I am listening you from Iran continue please and GOD bless you 🌺🌺🌺
Mr Kuhn's interviews of Profs Chomsky and Penrose throw more light on the riddle of "consciousness". 🙂
In Dialog closer to truth, what a brilliant concept!
Wonderful talk.
The self is not the thing that does the perceiving. It is a perception, a collective of multiple levels of different perceptions. It is not a single indivisible thing. It seems that for him this perception called the self or the illusion of a Self, is a mechanism of survival, that perception that provides the continuity that allows us to be functional in time and space, in what we named reality. The self (a perception ) is a collection of perceptions on multiple levels. In my primitive mind, consciousness is a mental state of awareness of that perception called self in its integrated multiple levels of perceptions based on our physical structures, capable of perceiving and creating what we consider to be reality. I will continue learning to improve my knowledge about the Cosmos, Consciousness and God.
Consciousness is just function of everyday life
Adapting to every new day and challenges ahead
It's all a learning curve and over coming the unforseen
So yes it's not just the singular it's a combination that some brains can adapt quicker than others in different ways
Anil Seth is great, probably one of the best placed people to talk about consciousness.
Bravo! Thank you for a fantastic discussion. So many open and fascinating questions and things to reflect upon. Anil, I'm a scientist - an immunologist and clinical researcher- and thus can appreciate the sophistication that you have brought to this most essential of subjects. You have certainly elevated the discussion from the coarse description of consciousness as different levels of awareness from comma to the waking life to a more profound paradigm that imparts a higher level of resolution in the understanding of consciousness as well as pragmatic implications in the clinic for example, that thus far have been abjectly absent in the discussion. My two cents on this (I've pondered the subject for a few years) comes from a dual perspective, that I believe is very pertinent to adding a necessary level of discrimination: One is that of mere scientific concern, ie, the conceptualization of consciousness, the rational analysis of what it might be. This approach is necessary for the things you mention in your conversation regarding therapeutic interventions, understanding psychotic states, etc; a deterministic approach that assumes that consciousness is dependent on the biological substrate that sustains it. Then there is the poetry of consciousness. This approach does not attempt to explain what consciousness is but rather to experience it. In Spanish we have two words for consciousness (conciencia and consciencia) which discriminate between these two approaches. The first, related to the biological phenomenology associated with consciousness and the latter to the subjective experience. You must be familiar with the Buddha's dissertation on the non-Self. The Buddha stipulates that anything that is subject to change and interpretation (our perceptions, thoughts, emotions body, mental formations and consciousness, is not the self). In this context, he is referring to the fleeting awareness of x,y,z, - a discrete moment to moment, consciousness - what we would call in conciencia in Spanish. Beyond this rather limited and simplistic concept, there is an invitation in the Buddha's doctrine to an exploration of the nature of real Self, ie., the self that is not related to the content of perception. This is in my mind what in Spanish we call consciencia, the experience of the self, ie, I Am that I Am. A self-evident truth that cannot be proven or disproven by deterministic experimentation and measurement, but rather can be experienced. This is an expanded state of consciousness that transcends biology, that elevates humanhood to spirit. It is all-encompassing and is mysterious by nature, therein lies the poetry of Self.
Sister my english is not good pls tell me what he say about consciousness ?
Fundamental or brain product ? Pls sister reply 🙏🙏🙏🙏
A bit of feedback for this channel. I’ve followed and enjoyed this content for a couple years. Thank you for that. The quality of the production helps tremendously.
Poor audio quality in a professional series will send me away very quickly. Consciously of course. This CHAT series seems to have skimped on the most simplistic tool - a good microphone.
Maybe I’ll buy Anil’s book and use this hour differently.
Thanks for this really interesting conversation with another highly fascinating guy. I have read so much on Idealism, dualism and Idealism and would love to see a one on one debate between Anil and perhaps Bernatdo Castrup Leo Gura or Donald Hoffman?
These guys are equally intelligent, knowledgeable and have brave new ideas about consciousness.
Anil is a serious scientist. He is doing science, he is not interested to promote a death denying ideology or to compare science to those pseudo philosophical views.!
@@nickolasgaspar9660 You have no clue as to what you are talking about. Shup up.
@@johnnastrom9400 🤣
Imo, consciousness needs to be explained in terms of evolution and natural selection. At least as a start. For example, begin with how the simplest of organisms flinch away when touched. Or are drawn toward certain molecules in the environment that might give it nourishment.
Edit _:_ Also one of the best interviews and guests in a long time. More like these would be great.
Good for Dr. Seth! It's wonderful that he is still seeking and exploring. I don't agree with him on his interpretation of what consciousness may be and its source, but I love that he is creating new ways of studying reality.
What about it do you not agree with?
What do you believe the best explanation of consciousness is?
Just as a side note, I think neuroscience will show that things like the perceived color of red are "baked in". But that STILL won't demonstrate that the red you see is the same as the red that I see.
THAT is the hard problem! Because consciousness isn't a physical thing. You can't detect it, hold it, weigh it, or translate it from one person to another. Even if conscious experiences are 100% in, by, and for the brain, that STILL doesn't EXPLAIN it!
Donald Hoffman and Bernardo Kastrup already explained really well what consciousness is.
Except that this guy actually is a brain professor
@@Robinson8491 that means nothing. He can't tell us the source of consciousness. Which means if the brain isn't the source, then he may as well be a foot doctor trying to explain consciousness.
They merely said that consciousness is everywhere. That doesn't define consciousness.
22:00 that's a driving function/transfer function dynamic right there. The cingulate cortex builds a meaningful driving function every 10 or 20ms or so.
Great conversation...
The measurement of Temperature as a reflection of the average kinetic energy of the particles produces an emergent statistical quantity. The measurement of temperature or pressure, is not an intrinsic fundamental property of matter, unlike the quantification of say electron charge or the up/down characteristic of a quark
Describing phenomena as Emergent quantities also applies to the notion of consciousness.
An attempt to quantify or measure a complex phenomenon such as consciousness is almost a tautology in itself.
Sort of like using a ruler to measure the length of the same ruler and pretend it’s a valid, objective and independent measurement (even though the measurements or scale divisions are already stamped on the ruler - get it?)
It's the WAVE, not the PARTICLE, and the coherence of the "jiggle" which forms consciousness, and that jiggle came with the Big Band. Why does something smell like mustard when it is not mustard at all?
@@nuqwestr It would be surprising if Nature didn't create other plants smelling like mustard that are not mustard, and with chemistry it is possible to create artificial scent of mustard. I don't understand your reasoning I regret to say. Who were you addressing?
@@marcobiagini1878 could you clarify who is "totally wrong"? Not being a mathematician or physicist, I can but be surprised that an average can be defined for a single particle. That seems to contradict what we, the laymen, 'understand' what an average is. How does that work?!
@@marcobiagini1878 I can understand it can mathematically be done, but is it significant??
@@marcobiagini1878 it carries no meaningful information, a bit like saying: this is the most beautiful schlump, but there is only one schlump in the universe, pretty meaningless. Apologies for my limited expression.
I'm so glad he is around and seeing the weaknesses of AI and the outrageous claims they make complete with a very limited view of humans that reduces us to task oriented, problem solving biological "machines". I subscribe to everything he said in this very enlightening conversation and Dr. (Prof.?) Seth's work confirms many of my own musings when thinking deeply about body and mind. I liked how he deconstructs the notion of self and splits this umbrella term up into various "flavors" or categories of self hood. I also liked how he shared his insight that levels of consciousness seem to persist in all aspects of body and mental processes. A very exciting candidate to further illuminate this still poorly understood experience of consciousness! What a gem this interview is, many thanks for this!
The self is an isolated perspective. Your self is your perspective and is a “possibility” among others. Like the self/perspective of your mother is and must also be a possibility next to yours.
The term “possibility” is key to the solution. It sets the discussion in another domain namely higher dimensions.
Indeed. The fact that the self can choose to take on whatever identity it wants means the self doesn't really exist.
@@thomaskerans8294 this is a nice way to look at it
This is all very interesting! But I am still confused. I love "Closer to Truth" ...very happy with it. Consciousness is still a big mystery to me. I may read the book!
Try Mark Solms book or Academic Moocs on the mind and consciousness. He is the author of a ground breaking paper on the mechanism of dreams and he has the latest theory on consciousness. Seth and Solms are really great communicators of science.
Bravo, Anil!
Co-science is the foundation of science.
i love the intro music so much
Would love to hear a conversation between Dr. Seth and Bernardo Kastrup. I suspect Dr. Seth has read Kastrup - his point about weather simulations not creating weather seems like an unattributed quote of Dr. Kastrup’s. These two are yin and yang, each making the same arguments but one from a materialist perspective and another from idealism. Dr. Seth seems at least open to idealism in principle.
It would give some firework.
dude....Anil is a serious scientist. New age sophistry has no place in science.
I literally just searched for the latest "Neuroscience Consciousness" results, and this video was uploaded 3 minutes ago.
Joschu Boch on Lex Fridmans podcast # 101 is outstanding..the new one is excellent but the interview from last year is genius
Think....done
search for another guest in this wonderful channel.
I read his book, pretty good. He does tap dance around consciousness itself.
Just because science doesn't verify your ideology that doesn't make it a tap dance....
@@nickolasgaspar9660 Have you even read his book? I don’t have any ideology regarding consciousness. I am not religious.
@@nickolasgaspar9660 Have you even read his book?
What was he supposed to say about consciousness that he didn't?
@@Vlasko60 Ηe didn't say what he wanted to hear....
The state of consciousness is produced through subjective mind and the development of awareness through experience and direct influence and interaction.
The total sum of ones consciousness is a aspect which requires the ability to calculate and discern and organize ones thoughts, so consciousness is subject to variation and alteration relevant to the individual mind and level of psychological perception.
Thus consciousness is a concept which can only be speculated upon and our understanding of it is rendered incomplete due to factors we are unable to analyze or be aware of and the ever changing nature of consciousness generates a plethora of complex elements and conditions both physical and psychological that we are unable to create a rational conception regarding the full property’s of consciousness.
I first got the idea of a migrating electrotonoic complex maybe ten years ago. I thought, maybe i can see it so; i closed my eyes and waited attentively. Sure enough, slowly migrating fronts of colour appeared and gradually became more distinct. I didn't see them until i looked.
Everyone's identity is "I".
Seems pretty universal in that sense.
great video 👍🏻
"the eye cannot see itseif" we keep talking ABOUT and ABOUT and ABOUT... never hitting the center..
there are these things called mirrors......you should get one.
@@nickolasgaspar9660 Y+THe eye can not see.it is an instrument through which the brains sees..got it genius ?
So.... when scientist sees something he can't understand, he looks the other way. Just great!
Well, we have no deal with infalsifiable theories
Let's ignore the hard problem because I'm a neuroscientist and I want to studiy neurological correlates. ....And in that way the hard problem will just dissolve. He cracked me up!!!!!
No matter how much one studies or how much we can know about the brain, the subjective experince of consciussness cannot be solved.
Best cross over episode ever
I think consciousness has some electromagnetic properties (the motion of neurotransmitters generates a faint magnetic field), and the shape of the brain is probably also a factor. This is just a wild guess.
I've tried to think a lot about the shapes of the brain and nervous system as well. Structure-function relationships seem important in natural systems. I'm curious; what are your thoughts about the shapes of certain parts of the brain?
The brain limits our consciousness in this world, it is not the source of it.
Conciousness is another label for "soul "..in the new science the soul I called Conciousness and it is also used to understand the origin of universe and God and so on...
Small problem. Consciousness is an abstract concept that refers to a specific quality of our brain states. In science we don't verify the claims in favor of souls of gods so we reject them. Consciousness has nothing to do with those two ideas.
czcams.com/video/zqosnJwmZ5M/video.html - Worth watching this as well.
We are all consciousness Having a Human Experience
How can we study consciousness without considering the evolution of the human brain though animal evolution? Don’t animals engage in predictive behavior? Don’t they “think” in ways that are similar our own? Let’s take a step back, and see where our mental process begin, and then follow them to human conscious.
The human brain is able of intuition, which is like a quantum tunneling effect at macro level, taking shortcuts towards discovering and understanding the reality.
In my view, consciousness is the result of positive feedback loops in the brain networks.
I defended that theory at the conference: "Toward a Science of Consciousness" in Copenhagen many years ago.
A positive feedback loop acts as a generator and it activates a selection of neurons again and again creating this inner feeling we call consciousness.
Interesting but how do the firing neurons create inner feelings (subjectivity)? What's the precise mechanism? It could also be that feelings are the mechanism and they are bound in the brain generating positive feedback loops. The positive feedback loops are a good explanation for self-awareness but the awareness part itself as a phenomenon needs a sufficient explanation. It seems to me that accepting subject feelings as primitive and then working out from there would be simpler.
Particles experience; all particles experience. The conscious, lucid, predictive self is an artificially sustained electrotonic particle. The driving function can be measured when you close your eyes; your lucid self is the electrotonic transfer function.
I think if we weren't reminded everyday of who we are we would forget and we would have a different sense of consciousness
Consciousness is that who gives life a testify that life is a life of reality of what you call is real
Please get Joschu Bach on the podcast 🙏
yes
Joschu Bach spent to much time alone with his computer when he was a little boy.
What is consciousness?
Did the first piece of particle or string or whatever the very fundamental of the material/thing when came to existence realize or aware or experience it existence?
This is important because if it did, it means that consciousness is an intrinsic or an innate attribute of a physical existence from the outset of it existence. But that doesn't define what life or a living consciousness is, it only highlights the intrinsic truth of what the matter is, and consciousness is a cognizant quality that able to recognize information because the material entity is a representation of information/knowledge in creative modes.
What about Stuart Hammeroff and Roger Penrose's Theory of Superposition and Entanglement taking place in the Microtubules in the brain. It is a fascinating theory. What are your thoughts on this Theory?
I believe when Lionel messi is at his best the conscious levels will be higher as he’s using both classical and quantum actions - he is predicting moves of others
How are memories stored ? Where do thoughts originate?
Well thought can
Originate depends on what information we see or hear/neural processed/ memories are in the hippocampus
Finally a real Scientist(I mean doing real science) in this Channel!
Mark Solms SHouls be the next one with his latest theory!
a mouse can see, hear, feel, feel afraid, feel warm or cold... i say consciousness is completely common and as no mystery at all.. you have to be conscious to become better, hence evolution.. consciousness is fundamental to all sorts of evolution.. i don't see the mystery... once you develop hands and words an higher level of consciousness evolves, but it would wouldn't it.. I think immortality via the evolution of computers and machines is all higher lifeforms' purpose... so we don't have to pathetically, uselessly keep dying.. I think your great btw, keep up your great work!
this explains nothing. you've explained correlation but NOT causation.
How will we make room for all the new people? Who's to say that dying is useless?
I agree with 16:00, there's nothing new here. An exercise in verbosity.
My guess is that future uploaders will upload minds, brains, bodies and environments. A full-virtual experience. It will all be needed. With that kind of computing power and modeling power, it will be doable. But all of those elements will be needed. The brain or mind won't be enough. They will also need access to the person experiencing, remembering, planning, anticipating, willing over some period of time before uploading. Why? Because we essentially live in the past, present, and future imaginatively at once. So, perhaps what will be needed well before uploading are brain augments used by the person to access information on demand, but the augments would also be learning the person over months or even years.
Dr. Edelman would be proud of you, Prof. Seth.
33:00 Speculation: I'd like to say that we each have the ability to be aware of, and change, the way that we perceive reality. By modifying the "lens", or multiple lenses that we're using to view the world, we can adopt all kinds of strategies to bring us closer to what we want to achieve. Sometimes this is conscious, but I think it's very often subconscious (or habitual? idk). Like people who will gaslight others, and then convince themselves that the false reality that they're imposing is the real one. They're using a perceptual lens to bring them closer to a reality that benefits themselves. I think with modern cognitive science we can begin to change the way that we operate the judicial system in the United States because there may be a lot we could apply with a more nuanced view of consciousness (don't look at me, I don't have the answers)
Gave you perhaps read "Determined", by Robert Sapolsky, or listened to any of his talks about free will (or the total lack thereof) on CZcams?
Great thinker, humble human, and great insights
@@igotbluesdevils I watched his behavior series from Stanford on CZcams several times, and have been occasionally reading from his book Why Zebras Don't Get Ulcers. I'll have to give that other book a look.
@@danielsayre3385 There are bold, very well thought out propositions in there, also about the judicial system, he arrives to the extent of positing the counterintuitive concept of "funishment"
who made the soundtrack at the beginng?
He characterized the valence of experience as 'good' or 'bad' but that's not the experience itself. That's the overlay of the 'Ego I' activity assigning judgement on the phenomena based on whatever set of attractions and aversions the 'I' is operating with. Perception is shaped by conception, which biases the perceiver towards attraction or aversion to further perceptions, which trigger conception.. this "Ego-animated conceptual-perceptual" feedback loop is the same as the Buddhist concept of 'Karma'. Karma is YOU - meaning, Karma is the "conceptual-perceptual" prison and "Ego I" is the jailer, keeping you convinced you're something other than Consciousness itself. This structure is entirely mental and survives death and rebirth. But can it really be said to be 'you'? No, You have never taken birth, and you will never die. You are always already free from Karma or the necessity for birth, because you're the COnsciousness which is prior to all of that.
So interesting
I think its more like the body is a 3d physical machine, much like a radio that receives a portion of the field of consciousness which gives us a feeling of idividualism.
Very bad audio quality. Investment in $100 microphones would have made a huge difference.
We're just biological machines with continuity of thought. Our consciousness is an extension of brain function. Our brain processes inputs in stimuli from our eyes, ears and other sensory inputs. The processing of these inputs is compared with memories and directives that we've formed over time in an effort largely to simply survive.
There we go, it's solved. Nothing more than that. What a genius you are. I will be seeing you in next year's Nobel laureates list. All of the researchers and scientists working on it are fools to try to understand how this actually works.
I like this episode like few others. More like this.
Chancing nonsense gets way too much attention.
I'm grateful.
It's just a buildup of sensitivity like hearing is. Most life forms have a level of consciousness.
Perception breaks down and we have a psychosis. Parts of the agreed perception of "sane" humans disappears, the lens has a crack.
Brilliant guy, can't wait to read his book. It looks to me like Seth is singing from the same hymn sheet as John Searle (in fact he uses Searle's metaphor about the computer simulating a storm not getting wet) - which can only be a good thing. His likability and humility go a long way too - a reflection of the solidity of his work, I reckon. People can get prickly and arrogant when they're not standing on firm ground (see Dennett and Chopra at opposite, but equally wobbly, ends of the spectrum); Seth has every reason to be gently confident in his down-to-earth and empirically justified position on the philosophical issues at stake.
I respectfully disagree. While Mr. Seth’s humility is as admirable as it is rare, his exploration isn’t particularly enlightening.
What's so brilliant about a guy who doesn't see the difference between mechanism and organism. No matter how complex you make your mechanism, it will still be dead, so it won't have any use for consciousness in any case.
@@caricue thank you. Exactly.
@@caricue The point is that like Searle, (and unlike Dennett) he *does* see the difference between mechanism in general, and the specific kind of very special mechanism that generates an internal experience. But he doesn't go off on any unsupported woo-woo trip (panpyschism, idealism, etc.). What I admire is that he's taking the (hard) problem seriously, but he has the humility to resist attempting to come up with some grandiose big-reveal a la IIT.
If you think he's just supporting identity theory, then listen again.
@@hershchat That's kind of fair, in that he isn't presenting an answer. There is no big reveal here, no theory of consciousness. What he's doing is framing the question in a way which brings it into the scope of science without erasing the the point of the question - a trap many brain scientists fall into (see Graziano).
I love closer to truth with a burning fashion, but the laptop microphone that Robert is using is atrocious.
Do you mean 'passion' ?
@@divinewind7405 thank you for making me feel like the biggest clown on earth
Yes you can pick up a Blue Yeti USB mic for $100.
Sell sell sell THEN new mic😂
Why isn't it already obvious that consciousness is not a thing ? It is that by which things can be percieved as things. There is nothing to ne measured without the measurer.
Emotion and the brainstem, nurses have known for years. :-)
I should qualify, nurses who work with traumatic brain injuries.
Excellent. Anil is a genius.
All those claiming consciousness is produced by the brain, will have to explain at some point, why there are so many situations where the brain is impaired in some way but instead of consciousness dimming or going to a lower level, it augments, goes to a higher level. There's such a high amount of data on this, but still, it seems to get neglected continuously.
This data may be saying consciousness is not produced by the brain. The brain might be not so much more than something like a radio-receiver, filtering out a lot of input data, so the person doesn't get overwhelmed by the world around and is able to focus on itself, being someone instead of being the whole existence in extremis. When filtering halters, more data comes in, more of the world comes in, more insights come through. I believe Donald Hoffman, Bernardo Kastrup... are on the right track in this matter. Mainstream science is not.
Claiming? lol ITs a fact that conscious states are produced by functioning brains. Three are any cases where a brain with a damaged Ascending Reticular Activating system can establish a conscious state or a non functioning Central Lateral thalamus can allow any content in our conscious states.
What you heard here is science...not pseudo philosophy.
-"The brain might be not so much more than something like a radio-receiver,"
-The moment to make that claim is ONLY after you have discovered the circuit responsible for receiving signals, the signal and the transmitter.....not a second sooner.
@@nickolasgaspar9660 I am talking about real science too. It is not because you don’t know about it, it does not exist. Keep on lol. Shows your intelligence.
Sir my english is not good pls tell me what his say about consciousness ?
Fundamental or brain product ?
@@stefcas materialist will not invite you to their party 😆
czcams.com/video/zqosnJwmZ5M/video.html - Hope this session from Sri M give some more clarity or a different perspective to this discussion.
You seem like a good person to ask; Where is "consciousness" found, identified, recognized, that can be considered separate from a living creature? This whole debate about consciousness being the fundamental force in the universe doesn't mention it's common place being within a living sentient creature. The idea of 'functionality' perhaps including artificial intelligence and synthetic beings does point to more consciousness, but....., what is this 'consciouness' present outside of our selves ?
Anil should be put in conversation with Pierre Bourdieu and Niklas Luhmann,.
the concept of illumination through hallucination .
Echoing Julian Barnes, when the end comes there is nothing - really nothing - to be afraid of.
Consciousness is the "jiggle" that came with the Big Bang.
No consciousness existed long before the big bang or any universe and will continue to exist long after they're gone. If you want to even begin to have a true understanding of consciousness just take three or four big hits of DMT. Then you'll see how very little we do understand. I know it sounds crazy to those who've never smoked DMT but only because you've never experienced it.
@@EliteNugz spot on! well put. consciousness is way MORE than brain matter.
@@EliteNugz I did not say consciousness was created by the Big Bang, only that it "came with it", BIG difference. I don't know where the "jiggle" came from or how it was created.
@@Dion_Mustard I did not say the "JIGGLE" was "matter", quite the opposite, the "jiggle" is a WAVE.
@@EliteNugz DMT only distorts your jiggle's coherence, like throwing a rock into a calm pond of water, you are only experiencing disrupted waves. DMT is "material", and you think this matter, which is only affecting matter in your brain, is a window to true "matter-less" consciousness? I don't think so.
Please interview Tom Campbell, author of My big T.O.E.
I love this guy! His sober approach and keeping his ideas within reality is what all these eggheads should aim for.
“I regard the brain as a computer which will stop working when it’s components fail. There is no heaven or afterlife for broken down computers; that is a fairy story for people afraid of the dark.” Stephen Hawking
Please buy a lapel mic to improve the audio for the host. The content is really great, but the audio makes it almost unlistenable.
What is the source of the experience we have of being the observer…? Because that fundamental aspect of consciousness is present in all states of consciousness…in dreams, in hallucinatory states, even for some who are in cardiac arrest,…with zero electrical activity in the brain…(So the claims of NDE researches go). emphasis on “content” is important…as the objects experienced by the observer are really aspects of consciousness…But the essence of the conscious experience is the observer,…and it is present in probably all life to varying degrees…dogs, fish, single cell organisms…I wonder…some say even trees and other plants have a form of consciousness…. I think we need to understand the phenomenon in its most basic forms in order to grasp its more complex states…