Donald Hoffman - Can Religion Survive Science?
Vložit
- čas přidán 3. 06. 2024
- Is science squeezing religion into a smaller and smaller corner, as science explains naturally what religion used to explain supernaturally? How far will this process go? Will religion become less and less relevant?
Click here to watch more interviews with Donald Hoffman bit.ly/29vNjsr
Click here to watch more interviews on religion and science bit.ly/2dWBCwz
Click here to buy episodes or complete seasons of Closer To Truth bit.ly/1LUPlQS
For all of our video interviews please visit us at www.closertotruth.com
"The whole point of science is to get a deep understanding, not to try to defend a position." ...More people need to hear this.
True positions dont rely on falseable statements
@bobo sapiens
So you rely on methodology only ? You can’t have anything without philosophy. Philosophy is powerful enough to dismantle science, make scientists question science. So it’s everything but mental Masturbation. Philosophy is the nearest thing to absolute reality we can have.
are we certain that "The whole point of science is to get a deep understanding, not to try to defend a position."
The point of *whose* science *of_what?
There neither is no could possibly be any collective knowledge let alond understanding of anything.
What a nice outdoor setting. No flies buzzing around, no cars in the background, no planes overhead, no leaf blowers -- just a peaceful setting for intelligent conversation.
Nice . And doesn’t even matter that it doesn’t really exist, physically. Cool ‘nuff
We need more scientists like Hoffman who are willing to push the boundaries of mainstream science in regard to our understanding of consciousness. Even though he may be wrong, his method of looking at consciousness (and other phenomena in this reality) in non-standard ways is what will eventually lead us to greater understanding. Cheers.
Open-minded Skeptic At least he gives a testable and falsifiable hypothesis. I look forward to the refinement of his theory.
I agree, He's amazing I think He's kind of a whitehedian which I found personally fantastic
Tom Campbell.
@@MrCastleJohnny I hope that Tom Campbell could break the materialist paradigm
@@MrCastleJohnny Yeah, Campbell is doing some interesting work. Unfortunately, I think he may have seriously damaged his reputation by fabricating experimental results in regard to the double slit experiment during his early presentations to the public. Now he says that he knows of no data showing that, as he used to say in every presentation on double slit,, "When they left the detectors on but turned the recorders off, they got an interference pattern." Except there weren't any experiments showing that this was true, only Tom's speculation that it should be true. Now he is (hopefully) doing the experiments to show whether that is true or not. He raised almost three hundred thousand dollars quite awhile ago in order to do a series of double slit experiments and a few others, but so far has provided no experimental results. Hopefully he can get the experiments done soon. Because if he doesn't do them, I think it will destroy his reputation beyond repair.
I like Dr. Hoffman a lot: He's my latest science crush. His idea is so bold that it's shocking, although not completely new, of course: Kant theorized along similar lines: Our brains create space-time in order to deal with the world; reality (the "noumenon") exists, but we're stuck here with phenomena, which are an illusion or, as Hindus would say, maya.
Agree. Robert Lanza said same, quite well, decade ago
Hoffman is my favorite scientist ever. Just discovered him 2 week ago. I’ve watched hours upon hours of him. I love his theories, his voice, his mannerisms, everything about him. I truly believe he might be the most important person in science in the last 500 years.. possibly.. ever
I also really like the guy and just found him recently due to this channel. I love what he’s doing or trying to do. I just hope he has big revelations for us over time. Either way, it’s fun to think about.
Me too I just listened to his book on audible
Cool dude…
To be able to state these things, one might think the the person who states them needs to be very intellectual and advanced in his area and so on. But one will miss the fact in that case that actually the primary "trait" needed for stating those things is courage. The thing is that there is always a risk of crucifixion for such people, be it a literal one or figurative one(which is as much serious).
rational thought may be the trait. fear of judgement may just be yours
Reminds me of Plato's cave (Republic). Prisoners giving names to shadows.
Platonism can never be counted out, it seems, in virtually any field of serious inquiry. His philosophy is extremely fruitful.
Fantastic series
3:50 "Our perception of space and time is just a species specific interface". Can anyone explain why this is such a contentious thought? It seems a perfectly reasonable theory to explore.
Not an expert, and two years too late, but I believe that science claims that space-time is real, not an illusion or an interface, in short, if anything exists, it is this world where we act and have our being. To hypothesize another violates Occam's Razor.
@@jimmuncy5636 "To hypothesize another violates Occam's Razor." Does it? I mean from a simplistic view perhaps, but with all the data from quantum mechanics and even his research, I don't think anyone can argue that in any meaningful way. Our perception is limited and does preclude us from determining aspects of ultimate truth. That fact seems self evident no?
What I see is most serious scientists simply ignore that fact and just try to work with what they have knowing it is limited "give me one free miracle and I can explain everything else" or "shut up and calculate". You can certainly argue his conclusions, but to argue that our perception is not limited? I know some make that argument, but it is very ignorant.
If anything I would think Occam's Razor suggests he is right about that aspect, however what conclusions you draw from that knowledge is highly debatable. Kind of like folks arguing about a conscious observer collapsing the wave function and others saying that it is just entanglement with the measuring device and consciousness has nothing to do with it, but how do they separate consciousness from the act of measurement?
Consciousness is the elephant in the room, you can try and pretend that it is not there or that it doesn't matter, but...
@@jimmuncy5636 Occam's Razor is not an argument. It's only true in situations where the simplest explanation is correct. But you can't know ahead of time which times it will turn out to be correct. So in practice, it's useless.
@@YTc705 So you believe that everything you perceive is true? Really? There are countless studies that illustrate how our perception of reality is deeply flawed. Take one current example, half the country think Trump is the devil himself, and the other half believe he is one of the greatest presidents we have ever had. And you can't think of a single example where our perception of reality is not true? Really? :)
Have you ever read flat land? Current scientific theory claims there are multiple dimensions beyond the three or four (if you count time) that we can perceive. We cannot even imagine what these dimensions are like because they are completely beyond our perception, and yet the math says they do indeed exist. In fact even the visible universe is only a very tiny percentage of the cosmos, our perception of reality is extremely limited in endless ways.
“Space,” it says, “is big. Really big. You just won’t believe how vastly, hugely, mindbogglingly big it is. I mean, you may think it’s a long way down the road to the chemist’s, but that’s just peanuts to space.”
I think the chances of finding out what’s really going on in the universe are so remote, the only thing to do is hang the sense of it and keep yourself occupied. :)
@@YTc705 Ah I see, it did seem like you were contradicting yourself with the beetle example but... I think what he meant is that our evolved perceptions do not show true reality, only a representative interpretation. For example we see colors and shapes, but in reality they are just EMF at different phases and frequencies. Our optical sensors take in this radiation and we create a perception that is not true reality. The same can be said for all human senses. Just as in his example when you see and interact with computer icons, that is a user interface representation, but it does not show the true reality of logic states in the computers microchips. So in that sense it is a false representation of true reality, and this is true for all of our senses. So it is in that very real sense that our evolutionary perception never resembles reality.
This is why it is so difficult for us to understand fundamental reality, we are not designed to see or perceive it because it apparently has no or very little impact on our survival. So in a very real sense what we perceive through all of our senses is a false reality, but just enough so that we can function and hopefully thrive. Make sense?
I have very similar views like Don Hoffman. This is awesome
Science is pointing more and more to Intelligent Design, but you will never hear the usuals agree.
Excellent cameraman
I love this theory. I love the direction it is going. It seems obvious to me that evolution has produced a perception awareness that is good for survival fitness not for seeing reality as it is. If this wasn't the case, why is it that history shows that people are products of their society, political system,, culture or upbringing. Are they not merely accepting reality as it is presented to them, which is not the truth, but is good for survival fitness because they are unlikely to survive if they did not conform to the social and material reality they were born into?
You understand that to " evolve" means to unroll?
The unrolling of what has "produced a perception awareness"- which can only be described as gibberish. *Whose* reality?-If you hit your thumb with a hammer or more likely get punched on the nose whatever you experience is in all probability whatever-you-mean-by " real" for you, but absolutely nobody else. For example if a man or being of the active sex says something in a forest and there is no being of the pasive sex or woman there to hear him, is he still wrong?
"We can call to god using magnets." Now I really want to ask the infamous question; "Magnets? How do they work?"
put magnet strong one on your head behind the eye near the ear u will fall asleep
Can you indeed "call to god using magnets"? When exactly did you - yes, *you* titch, last do that?
As I observe and follow Mr. Robert Lawrence Khun, these are the best words Mr. Robert wants to hear from anyone in his life time .
He is very happy and I can feel his body language. He wants words favouring God . Donald Hofmann explained things eloquently and also kept distance from both sides ( Atheists and theist)
As self ( Spiritual theoretical Physicist) is working on this ideas of combining consciousness and Quantum mechanic by "Stagnation Mind theory "
"No matter and no gravity theory" and also the theory of consciousness as 5th fundamental and unification force that will never gets into hands of scientists.
can you please elaborate little bit further on those no matter and no gravity theory
If we talk about the explanations about the existence of the Universe, of Life, science has as much value as a little story of an elf in an enchanted forest.
Shocking isn't it?
Do*you*-yes *you "talk about the explanations about the existence of the Universe, of Life"?
What exactly suppose yourself to be "explaining" and to whom?
Presumably you appreciate that whenever you use the term " we", for all practical purposes you are saying*I* simply because " we" means the user of the term and his direct immediate interlocutor, and in the premises or conditions you have no direct immediate interlocutor, so that- by a process of elimination leaves but you,for want of any direct immediate interlocutor
If there was hard proof of God, there would be no need for faith.
Faith is for those that lack experience.
The Law myoho-renge-kyo represents the identity of what some scientists refer to as the ‘unified field of all consciousnesses’. In other words, it’s a sound vibration that is the essence of all of existence and non-existence, the ultimate creative force behind planets, stars, nebulae, people, animals, trees, fish, birds, and all phenomena, manifest or latent. All matter and intelligence are simply waves or ripples manifesting to and from this core source. Consciousness (enlightenment) is itself the true creator of everything that is, ever was and ever will be, right down to the minutest particles of dust, each being an individual ripple or wave. The big difference between chanting Nam-myoho-renge-kyo and most other conventional prayers is that instead of depending on a ‘middleman’ to connect us to our state of enlightenment, we’re able to do it ourselves by tapping directly into it by way of self-produced sound vibration.
On the subject of ‘Who or What Is God?’, when we compare the concept of ‘God’, as a separate entity that is forever watching down on us, to Nichiren’s teachings, the true omnipotence, omniscience and omnipresence of what most people call ‘God’ is our enlightenment, which exists nowhere else but within us.
When the disciples asked Jesus where the Kingdom of God is, didn’t he tell them that it was within them?
Some say that ‘God’ is an entity that can never be seen. I think that the vast amount of information that is constantly being conveyed via electromagnetic waves gives us proof of how an invisible state of ‘God’ could actually exist. It’s widely known that certain data being relayed by way of electromagnetic waves has the potential to help bring about extraordinary and powerful effects, including instant global awareness of something or mass emotional reaction. As well as many other things, it’s also common knowledge that these waves can easily be used to detonate a bomb or to even enable NASA to control the movements of a robot as far away as the Moon or Mars. However, none of this is possible without a receiver to decode the information that is being transmitted. Without the receiver, the information would remain impotent.
In a very similar way, it’s important for us to have our ‘receiver’ switched on so that we can activate a clear and precise understanding of our life, all other life and what we and all else that exists truly is. Chanting Nam-myoho-renge-kyo helps us to achieve this because it allows us to reach into the core of our enlightenment and switch it on. That’s because the sound vibration of myoho-renge-kyo represents the combination of the three major laws that underlie all existence.
Myoho represents the Law of latency and manifestation (Nature) and consists of two alternating states. One state of myo is where everything in life that’s not obvious to us exists. This includes our stored memories when we’re not thinking about them, our hidden potential and inner emotions whenever they’re not being expressed, our desires, our fears, our wisdom, happiness, karma, and more importantly, our enlightenment. The other state, ho, is where everything in Life exists whenever it becomes obvious to us, such as when a thought pops up from within our memory, whenever we experience or express our emotions, or whenever a good or bad effect manifests from our karma. When anything becomes apparent, it simply means that it has come out of the state of ‘myo’ (dormancy/latency) and into a state of ho (manifestation). It’s simply the difference between consciousness and unconsciousness, being awake or asleep, or knowing and not knowing something.
The second law, renge, governs and controls the functions of myoho, ren meaning cause and ge meaning effect. The two laws of myoho and renge, both functions together simultaneously, as well as underlies all spiritual and physical existence.
The final and third part of the tri-combination, kyo, is what allows the law myoho to be able to integrate with the law renge. It’s the great, invisible thread of energy that fuses and connects together all Life and matter, as well as the past, present and future. It is often termed the Universal Law of Communication. Perhaps it could even be compared to the string theory that some scientists now suspect exists.
Just as our body cells, thoughts, feelings and all else are constantly fluctuating within us, everything in the world around us and beyond is also in a constant state of flux, in accordance with these three laws. In fact, more things are going back and forth between the two states of myo and ho in a single moment than it would ever be possible for us to calculate or describe. And it doesn't matter how big or small, important or trivial that anything may appear to be, everything that’s ever existed in the past exists now or will exist in the future, exists only because of the workings of myoho-renge-kyo.
These three laws are also the basis of the four fundamental forces and if they didn't function, neither we nor anything else could go on existing. Simply put, all forms of existence, including the seasons, day and night, birth, death and so on, are all moving forward in an ongoing flow of continuation, rhythmically reverting back and forth between the two universal states of myo and ho in absolute accordance with renge and by way of kyo. Even stars are dying and being reborn in accordance with the workings of what the combination myoho-renge-kyo represents.
Nam, or Namu, on the other hand, is a password or a key; it allows us to reach deep into our life and fuse with or become one with myoho-renge-kyo. On a more personal basis, nothing ever happens by chance or coincidence, it’s the causes that we’ve made in our past, or are presently making, that determine how these laws function uniquely in each of our lives from moment to moment, as well in our environment. By facing east, in harmony with the direction that the Earth is turning, and rhythmically chanting Nam-myoho-renge-kyo for a minimum of ten minutes daily, anyone can experience actual proof of its positive effects in their life.
In so doing, we can pierce through even the thickest layers of our karma and activate our Buddha Nature (the enlightened state). We’re then able to summon forth the wisdom needed to challenge, overcome and change our negative circumstances into positive ones. It brings forth the wisdom that can free us from the ignorance and stupidity that is preventing us from accepting and being proud of the person that we truly are, regardless of our race, colour, gender or sexual preference. We are also able to see and understand our circumstances and an environment more clearly, as well as attract and connect with any needed external beneficial forces and situations.
Actual proof soon becomes apparent to anyone who chants the words Nam-myoho-renge-kyo on a regular daily basis. Everything is subject to the law of Cause and Effect, so the strength of the result from chanting depends on dedication, sincerity and determination. To explain it more simply, the difference could be compared to making a sound on a piano, creating a melody, or producing a song and so on.
NB: There are frightening, disturbing sounds and there are tranquil and relaxing sounds. It's the emotional result from any sound that can trigger off a mood or even instantly change one. When chanting Nam-Myoho-Renge-Kyo each day you are producing a sound vibration that is the password to your true inner-self - this soon becomes apparent when you start reassessing your views on various things, such as your fears and desires etc. The important way to get the best result when chanting is not to see things in a conventional way (difficult to achieve but can be done), rather than reaching out to an external source, you need to reach into your own life and bring your needs and desires to fruition from within, including any help that you may need. Think of it as a seed within you that you are bringing sunshine and water to in order for it to grow, blossom and bring forth fruit or flowers. It’s important to understand that everything that we need in life, all the answers and potential to achieve our dreams, already exist within us.
czcams.com/video/6CZ0XJqWRr4/video.html OLIVIA NEWTON-JOHN sings about Nam-myoho-renge-kyo
What kind of magnet and how is this done?
hi, what do you mean by physicalism? thank you.
I think we are living in very exciting times!
its getting even more and more exciting! :)
A little too exciting, let's go back to comfortable illusions
@@MrCod18 From The Comfort Of My Home.
nope...see ya in a thousand years...
This is Donald Hoffman happily admitting that he's gone out of his way to create what he deems to be an original theory. He keeps on saying that no one else holds positions x, y, etc. From what he says, it seems very artificial. (Much has been written about the emphasis on sexy and exciting theories in science in order to secure funding, publications, careers, and even fame.) Even Robert Lawrence Kuhn picks up on this when he says that being original "makes you happy". Hoffman tells us that religious people believe x. He doesn't believe x. He tells us also that physicalism is false, but he believes in evolution. That evolution, however, is built upon an idealist ontology. So, sure, one can suppose Hoffman's position is fairly original in that it's an attempt to square religion and science. It's more particularly original in its attempts to square evolution and (religious) idealism. That said, there are six original theories in science and philosophy before each breakfast.
Aldous Huxley made a very similar claim in his book The Doors of Perception.
Really, on which page?
i love the fact that Hoffman has something to piss of both sides.
I really like this channel and it has certainly made me think better about these questions. I rarely comment because I know so little, but at 5 minutes 45 he says; "there are no theories of consciousness from a physicalist's point of view". Did he mis-speak? He may not agree with the theories but he cannot mean there are none, Dan Dennett is interviewed on this channel putting forward a purely physical theory of consciousness and a quick google and google scholar search has enough information on the first page of hits to make his statement false See.Armstrong, 1968, 1984; Carruthers, 1996; Dennett, 1978, 1991; Dretske, 1995; Flanagan, 1992; Gennaro, 1996; Kirk, 1994; Lycan, 1987, 1996; Nelkin, 1996; Rosenthal, 1986, 1993; Tye, 1995. Once again I'm not saying they are correct and consciousness is explained just that this is not settled and his statement that there were no such theories was a mistake.
ok fanriffic He meant scientific theories which are testable to the extent possible.
And what exactly do you suppose or imaging that you are doing when you what-you-call" think"? Talk to yourself or randomly associate?
You have absolutely no idea, do you?
Trans-cranial magnetic stimulation of the temporal lobe.
Does anyone have specialist knowledge in this area?
background keeps moving, Im getting dizzy
Didn’t notice till you said it. Now I’m dizzy... 😂
It was obvious as I listened to other portions of his talk is that his thought is strongly influence by religion.
Uh, no. He is an empirical scientist; he has not a religious bone in his body.
Jim Muncy not disputing he’s an empirical scientist. But his explanation might have a bias.
@@NAVMAN987 Oh piss off
I have not listened to the interview. But I will answer the question. Yes, religion will survive science because large numbers of people who believe in untenable religions just don't care (and humans are great at compartmentalizing). I know some smart people with some really stupid religious beliefs. Of course, they don't see them as stupid. That's because humans can condition their mind to believe just about anything. And there's not just one reason why people believe. There's fear of the unknown, the need for help from an outside source, and more. We will never all agree on what is our favorite color, favorite ice cream flavor or way to view the world we live in. I believe we live in a natural world, no gods required, regardless of the fact that we don't have all the answers yet (and probably never will). But if religion wants to get along with others of different beliefs or none at all, we MUST live in a secular society.
brigham2250 So, your opinion of people of faith and don’t share your worldview is that “they are stupid”.
The most successful society in the history of mankind is here in the western world. Safe (relatively) prosperous and mostly harmonious.
All built on the foundation of Christianity. Not so stupid...
Your love of a distorted science and worship of secularism is exactly what has led to the modern meaning crises.
what religion are you talking about?
@@bradsmith9189 I'd really hate to read the thesis on that.
There’s nothing worse than a dogma worshipper or a hardcore materialist
I am sick of dogmatic religions and dogmatic scientism
Ange M me too
Well being about science is just trying to understand the world. I like what Hoffman is doing because science is still all good in terms of understanding what is around you. But he is going beyond what people like to focus on. There is nothing saying science won’t lead us to something more aware or intelligent than us that we can’t see yet. But to me, that’s still science. We just want to understand what is happening.
Nor anyone seeking to impose his likes and dislikes dressed up as morals /ethics = religion on others
this already happened in the 18h century.... and it only keeps moving forward.
Kant?
Creatures on the Apex of the Darwinian Process to survive have acceded an Organically Inspired Theology of Salvation.
What exactly did you, yes*you* titch, "survive"?
The Darwinian "process" is hoax. Darwin knew nothing of genetics and thermodynamics which both destroy his theory.
The "god helmet" he mentions is hardly an empirical fact. Several experiments to replicate the effects came to the conclusion that personality traits and suggestability are more likely the reason for these "mystical experiences" (supposedly it was even replicated using a sham helmet). Thinking about criticisms of the Libet experiment - for example in another video from this channel featuring Peter Tse -, it seems like we should maybe generally be more skeptical about the supposed empirical findings of neuroscience. At least ones with very wide-ranging consequences.
ha...how stupid are you? really...i want to know.
Close your eyes to hear Jeff Goldblum.
Concerning our future: Can religion really survive science? I mean the science of the future.
future? whats that? we have every answer already, dont we? are telling me we dont have all the answers?
I have never noticed anyone knowing(what the word science means) anything having any effect whatsoever of the various likes and dislike of others that they dress up as morals or ethic-but for all practical purposes it is religion. What else is religion by that dreadful moralising and seeking to imposes likes and dislikes on others?
The problem will still stay unresolved if you carry on thinking of "God" as an image of "consciousness" or the universe itself. Saying God is like giving an image or a representation to a concept that cannot hold one. If think that the best we can do is to consider the existence of a "source" or an "origine" that we come from. Saying there is a God or not has no sens at all but we need a source to our existence to be there. Nothing is just nothing and we can't exist from nothing. Everything comes from a source that we can't even imagine or understand. Creating religion thinking that this kind of limited believe can explain what is over our understanding is just the proof of the infinite pretentiuousness of human being. On the other, science is a good way to find understanding to our universe but science is only a human creation that can't explain the "source" we're coming from.
The evolution didn't equip us to see the truth. The truth would dismantle us completely and our physical us would stop existing. We will find out the truth after we die. Wich doesn't mean you can't get closer to truth while alive. Stay brave.
Science itself is a religion. Very short term instant gratification kind of religion
the more we learn the less we know...we prove our science facts wrong every day....by the way, what is Gravity? lol.....the correct question is, Can science survive God?
@zempath why do you think that? you must enlighten us with your wisdom hahahahaha
@Rakscha without God there is no science
@zempath that shows your ignorance on the subject...im sure the books you have written on the subject are outstanding lol....religion is science... science has been hidden within religious text for over 3500 years (newtonian)....please do not reply unless it is intelligent
Green screen is not from this reality. Lol.
🤣 it's so trippy too, bc the scenery keeps moving around as if the camera was panning across, but they're always facing it and sitting right in the middle of the frame LoL.
I’ve read a lot of what he’s written, and listened to a lot of what he’s said, and after all that, my conclusion is that his theories make little sense. They seem more designed to stick a finger at everyone else than to be serious on their own.
Human = God + mind
So,. Human - mind => God
If we still our mind we can experience God.
So we're merely a Boltzman Brain after all. Think I'll have a beer
The further down this rabbit hole I go, the crazier it gets. I'll never figure all this out!
@@jimmuncy5636 no you won't
You'll go insane trying to figure it all out then fall into a deep depression then one day you'll wake up and say fuck it and go about your life ignoring it all realizing that torturing yourself about it all is futile
What's the mechanism of this magnetic stimulation? Electrotonics?
electro-magnetic stimulation. primitive.
People will believe in God until science explains why we're all forced to exist in a reality we don't create.
you expect to much from science.
No comment.
If you want to label the fundamental consciousness that Hoffman is proposing as god, you will also need to accept that we're all mini-gods and that god is neither all-powerful nor all-knowing.
The problem is evolution has been debunked by information science, and the community cannot accept it.
You see, science is also actually a religion, it just believes in different things. And as everyone knows, a true believer does not admit that what he believes in is just a belief, so he basically fully believes in the reality of his beliefs. Or does he?😉
Nah you’re missing the point of science. Science to me isn’t believing in anything because your position can change over time. There are assumptions that any theory needs to have. That is true... but let’s say we come to understand over time that there is something more aware or intelligent than us that we can’t see yet - the only way to get to that understanding is through science (as far as we know). But I get why people look at science as anti god. Or they look at it in terms of group think. But to me it’s just about trying to figure stuff out as Hoffman says.
i think you got it right Gregory.
So he says that the physical world is contained in our consciousness. But we come into existence and have a physical reality...so we must exist in a consciousness that contains us? As if God spoke the universe into being.
You're conflating 'physical world' and 'objective reality', which is fair enough, but when Donald Hoffman uses the first term, he's referring to the world studied by physics and perceived by humans, not objective reality.
In Kant's language, the 'physical world' is the phenomenal world, and the world conscious agents exist IN is the noumenal world.
@@joshuaboulton36 there is no such thing as objective reality, I said physical reality
@@gorequillnachovidal "there is no such thing as objective reality" is a logically malformed statement. It doesn't mean anything.
The thing is that not just Dr. Hoffman's research, but the quantum mechanics itself has been giving lot of "tools" for religious groups to run a muck with, since the beginning of the "double slit experiment" or even way before that during the times when Neils Bohr was theorizing the arguments of the early quantum mechanics with his colleagues. Particularly, with the idea of modern 'cosmic consciousness', new age religious groups have been milking it for some time to bring out their arguments into existence.
cosmic consciousness? pla... your confused. just like the new age. Quantum entanglement...is where its at.
Donalds Hoffman is awesome the other guy just annoys me, with all the contrived hand gesture and cut shots to him walking along looking contemplative and all deep in thought, I wonder if he has any other clichés he can get on film.¬_¬
Of course not. And thankfully so.
The brain first evolved as a comfort finder. Only in an apex position does global coherence lead to comfort because otherwise it's too much information. We usually revert to comfort finder so, collectively we're pretty stupid and rely on tradition.
It's surprising that Hoffman mentions the "God Spot" of the brain. Last I checked, the experimental evidence for that was extremely weak.
That exact sentiment you express has accompanied every scientific finding in history
@@bradmodd7856 In this case, they're right. The 'God Helmet' has been all but disproved.
experimental evidence for that was extremely weak....well what do you expect from stupid scientist?
God is love
nonsense. you can't use an emotion to define an entity. provide evidence for god
@@philgray1000. Who said anything about an entity? God has many meanings around the world but people are simply trying to explain the “source of all creation”
@@alloneword154 "god is love" sounds christian to me, therefore "entity". if not, it's still nonsense. it's like saying "god is the universe/nature", "god is my new puppy", etc. kinda silly. as for the "source of all creation" hyperbole, i'm all for explaining how we got here. you explain these things with science, not religion and superstition. science destroyed these primitive notions some time ago
@@philgray1000. Ok follow me for a awhile.
Science says that a particle or photon’s ( which is a a little ball of light), exact location and speed can not be determined until you measure it therefore forcing it to collapse its wave form into a particle. So it is not even in our experience until we look at it or measure it Basically the double slit experiment proves that we bring and this reality into existence. There is no outside world that is separate from the observer (which is us). Look up double slit experiment and get me. I’m waiting for your response. Then if we agree or disagree that we create our reality and materialism is false. We can go further.
@@alloneword154 In physics, a photon is a bundle of electromagnetic energy. It is the basic unit that makes up all light. The photon is sometimes referred to as a "quantum" of electromagnetic energy. Photons are not thought to be made up of smaller particles. They are a basic unit of nature called an elementary particle. a bit more complicated than "a little ball of light". i did a quick scan of the wikipedia article on photons. saw nothing about "god is love". did see many interesting advances in science/quantum mechanics/computing, none of it involved god! In modern physics, the double-slit experiment is a demonstration that light and matter can display characteristics of both classically defined waves and particles; moreover, it displays the fundamentally probabilistic nature of quantum mechanical phenomena. This type of experiment was first performed, using light, by Thomas Young in 1801, as a demonstration of the wave behavior of light. At that time it was thought that light consisted of either waves or particles. With the beginning of modern physics, about a hundred years later, it was realized that light could in fact show behavior characteristic of both waves and particles. again, article doesn't mention god, love, primitive, archaic superstitions, silly flights of fancy, etc. provide evidence for god.
This is what we think and talk about while turning the planet in to a human garbage dump. Sad. 😷
Good God. Get a life. Focusing on gender pronouns is far more idiotic and a waste of time, yet I do not see you complaining about that. There are a lot of people in the world right now starving to death thanks to your nutty views.
actually he really mangles the description here.. stimulating the temporal lobe in this way gives people the felt sense of a "presence" -which they might interpret as a person, an alien, a ghost, a deity or a demon.... what this shows is that we have certain brain states in which we mistakenly perceive presences that actually are not there. this is more related to the delusions of mental illness and epilepsy (the likely origin of claims of full blown divine visitation) than to claims of supposed literal existence of these hallucinations as "god."
as such this helps to explain superstition and the powerful perceptual basis for why we believe untrue things and in non-existent beings..... this goes along with other explanations like the intentional stance, patternicity, mind-body dualism etc in terms of naturalizing explanations viz the brain and evolutionary processes for why we feel emotionally and intuitively compelled to believe untrue things.
as is so often the case in these interviews, false equivalencies and relativist sleight of hand is employed to make it seem as if the differences between naturalistic and religious explanations are simply matters of opinion, each equally likely and impossible to either prove or rule out.
i guess this poor and intellectually dishonest reasoning keeps the theists in the conversation -but very, very weakly! as usual, it is 100% the argument from ignorance fallacy -for example: supposedly atheists say the big bang shows god is unnecessary to create the universe, but theists say the big bang proves a beginning that surely god initiated -who can say who's right?! nobody knows.... counter-argument: by that logic pink unicornists saying the big bang was caused by the fart of the divine pink unicorn have equal claim on a possibly valid explanation we should take seriously.
in terms of the current argument re: the temporal lobe "god spot" -well UFO believers who say that this is where aliens interfered with our DNA so that they can control us when they invade is also a possibility, right? i mean nobody knows, and the naturalist explanation which fits with all the evidence we have and requires no additional make believe (paging occam!) surely is too simple, huh?
***** all full blown "appearances" of god, angels, demons, aliens, ghosts etc have been mistakes of perception, profound altered states, hallucinatory manifestations of mental illness or epilepsy... the fact that, when experiencing them, we find these hallucinations so compelling in no way validates them as not being illusions created by a malfunctioning brain.
what most people refer to are very subtle altered states in which much more mild perceptual shifts combined with often powerful emotions create a convincing (and wishful thinking driven) sense of a presence....
but this is not the full blown experience you are perhaps alluding to, which i would argue only happens to temporal lobe epileptics, schizophrenics, people on potent psychedelics or in the grip of manic psychosis.
the reason these types of claims are so much more rare today than in ancient times is that now those people are getting treatment and hopefully living more normal, healthy, sane lives.
in ancient times we explained mental illness and brain pathology as supernatural in nature. now we know better, but it is hard to accept because of the intersection between our own intuitive mistakes, emotional compulsions, and incorrect but innate sense of mind body dualism, amongst other brain spandrels that make superstition persist.
***** hey my friend,
congratulations on your sobreity and really turning your life around. if the beliefs you're listing here seem to you to be the only way to continue living in this more positive way, i have no further criticisms.
+nadoeloiskat I'm sorry, there's no god.
+nadoeloiskat You changed your life, not some magical Sky wizard.. I'm happy for that, you take care..
`You're right about this. It may be more apt to say this area produces a sensation of something akin to orgasm or other benign states. What identifies this as God?
I like Joscha Bach idea, we are a character in a virtual reality the ape brain creates
Why this dude never talked with Peterson?
You mean Jordan Peterson? He is a brilliant but evasive and dogmatic man.
Why would a human talk with a slug?
Jordan Peterson is an idiot, why talk to him?
Why wouldn't evolution be able to explain consciousness?? Didn't consciousness emerge as time went on and species became more complex??
I don't understand the "hard Problem of consciousness" at all..
Seems to me that billions of brain cells working together equals consciousness..
but whatever, this guy wants to make a name for himself, so he says "our brain isn't real" and "time and space aren't real"
Good luck with all that..
Interesting: God refer himself to Moses as "I am that I am".
*Whose* science *Of_what*?
Quack
God is love - 1 John ch. 4 verse 8
And what is Love.?
god is cancer.
@Miss Equinox Good question. Get to know God and you'll find out...though it will be beyond your language to properly explain it. Just as taste and sound is hard to describe
BUddhism claims this same except consciousness
Both science and religion came from information called the Beast that you can read about in the biblical books called Daniel and Revelation. The Beast is what taught God's people how to build things ( false gods ) with their human hands. Each false god requires different sets of knowledge. The first set of knowledge ( language ) is what is fed into the minds of men called architects, inventors, designers, engineers, artists, musicians, etc. The Beast feeds these men words, various shapes, notes, and other ideas to form images for them to build a new false god with. They usually draw these images or notes or sketches on paper or type them into computer docs as they can today. These ideas are usually kept from anyone else who would steal them.
The next set of knowledge ( language ) that God teaches His people after getting the ideas to build a new false god is how to construct it with various materials found on Earth. These building techniques are written down and kept secret from those who might want to steal their methods, tools and material ideas. This is how secret societies were formed.
The next set of knowledge ( language )for a false god is how to clean and maintain them. There are secrets to maintaining false gods, too.
The last set of knowledge ( language ) comes into minds of those who use the false gods and live around them. They come up with all kinds of words from the Beast to describe them and stories about how they use them and live in them, etc.
This is how God confused all His people ( Tower of Babel parable ) and separated them into millions of groups what we call religions who worship those false gods and the Beast that's responsible for producing them into the world without God's people realizing that all their ideas and thoughts are coming from the computer simulation program we're involved in.
The reason for these false gods was so God had a way to teach His saints who are used to testify to this knowledge via voice in the simulation program that teaches us about the end of this first age when all the false gods will be destroyed in one hour when the Earth begins to shake violently right before hot molten lava bursts through the crust of the Earth and through the already existing cracks in the crust to melt everything on Earth and the crust into a Lake of Fire.
The other reason for building these false gods was to get the modern computers built with simulation games and voice recognition software which God is using to teach me how He was able to use the Tree of Life to convert His thoughts into a computer simulation program called Eternal Life.
Now that we know we're living in a simulation program, this age will end soon when the Earth below your feet starts shaking violently as promised.
Isaiah 24
18: He who flees at the sound of the terror shall fall into the pit; and he who climbs out of the pit shall be caught in the snare. For the windows of heaven are opened, and the foundations of the earth tremble.
19: The earth is utterly broken, the earth is rent asunder, the earth is violently shaken.
20: The earth staggers like a drunken man, it sways like a hut; its transgression lies heavy upon it, and it falls, and will not rise again.
Ezekiel 38
19: For in my jealousy and in my blazing wrath I declare, On that day there shall be a great shaking in the land of Israel;
20: the fish of the sea, and the birds of the air, and the beasts of the field, and all creeping things that creep on the ground, and all the men that are upon the face of the earth, shall quake at my presence, and the mountains shall be thrown down, and the cliffs shall fall, and every wall shall tumble to the ground.
2 Peter 3
10: But the day of the Lord will come like a thief, and then the heavens will pass away with a loud noise, and the elements will be dissolved with fire, and the earth and the works that are upon it will be burned up.
11: Since all these things are thus to be dissolved, what sort of persons ought you to be in lives of holiness and godliness,
12: waiting for and hastening the coming of the day of God, because of which the heavens will be kindled and dissolved, and the elements will melt with fire!
13: But according to his promise we wait for new heavens and a new earth in which righteousness dwells.
You're crazy.
@@Domispitaletti definitely
If we can’t trust our senses (old platonic view) to workout reality or the truth how can we use it to make assumption based on non physical world…you can’t have it both way as belief in god or higher authority could be seen as evolutionary survival mechanism. I didn’t understand the assumption that no evidence that consciousness is a physical thing… that’s unsupported statement as how do you prove the opposite in the absence of human beings
Horrible interviewer!! 😱😱
He's not that bad, but I have to say he acts like he has a stick up his bum in every video with Hoffman. I wonder if he dislikes him.
people take that stupid "God helmet" too seriously it doesnt do anything.
The question about the "god spot" is, how is it *naturally* excited?
Psychotropic substances, if you want to call ingesting or smoking them natural.
@@patrickfitzgerald2861 As part if a natural luturgy, i suppose. Without seems to require hunger or a lack of sleep.
@@patrickfitzgerald2861 nope...he refers to electromagnetic stimulation.
@@gothboschincarnate3931 Nope. What I'm trying to get at is the importance of coherence to a meaningful experience. Your fixation on electromagnetic stimulation grows from a misunderstanding of my comment about the mechanism of action of transcranial magnetic stimulation.
Hoffman is harmful to comprehension of consciousness. Overly confident of what he doesn't have a clue about. Setting forth his comments as an individual thinking he's "close" to discovering consciousness. Alas...his entire opine is profoundly inept.
Religion is what troubled Jesus the most! God is not in a Bible or Pretty White Church! He is within and over every particle and wave He created in the beginning and throughout eternity! So, let religion and science go whatever way they will, and seek for God in all of creation!
Evolution is a temporal theory. If time is not real, then neither is evolution!
Only Buddhism.