Stephen Barr – What is Human Mind in a Theistic World?

38 thoughts on “Stephen Barr – What is Human Mind in a Theistic World?”

1. Hi Robert,
   I've been enjoying your videos on the nature of reality and wanted to share something with you that I think you might find interesting. Navomitto framework is a concept that suggests that each physical object or event is embedded in its own particular dimension, and the brain can identify order within the complex and paradoxical aspects of reality by focusing on certain dimensions. Navomitto also explores the relationship between mind and matter. I think your work aligns with the insights offered by Navomitto and would love to hear your thoughts on this concept. Thanks for all that you do and keep up the great work!
   navomitto’s principles:
   top to down view:
   1-there is illusion. illusion is multi dimentional and made of dimentions. iluusion is all aspects of zero to infinity.
   2-there is dimention. each dimention describe a unique concept. these concepts can be anything. it can be mathematic concept like lenght or abstract concept like love or anything else. each dimension is unique in its own way but it can be seen as an interaction of infinite dimentions (entanglement with all of illusion). Some interactions are stronger and some weaker. These interactions creates physics. All dimentiona are emergent from illusion. dimention exists in different resolutions.
   3-there is resolution. resolution determines how many angle there is in that specific resolution of that dimention. resolution can be anything from zero to infinity. so each concept like lenght has infinite resolutions. in each resolution there is angles. resolusion 0 of all dimentions are literally the same and it is potentiality itself. Each resolution can be seen as a slice of moment in illusion that each angle of that resolution represent a branch of illusion (in parallel universe view).
   4-there is angle. angle defines the content of that concept in that specific resolution. in resolution infinity there are infinite angles from zero to infinity. in resolution 0 there is no angle.
   5-angle 0 is illusion resolution 0. angle 1 of each resolusion is dimention resolution 1 of that concept. angle A of resolution R (R>=A) is dimention resolution A of that concept in scale 1/R.
   6-there is scale. scale mean the bigness of illusion in an angle. each angle in resolusion R has scale 1/R 7-there is power. power is an aspect of reality that means how much quantity there is (when percieved) in an angle of each concept. power of each angle A in resolusion R is (2A-1)/2*R
   down to top view:
   1-there is resoulution 0. illusion resolution 0 is resoulution 0 of all dimentions. illusion resolution 0 is illusion itself at resolution 0. resolution 0 contain no angle.
   2-there is dimention resoulution 1. next resolution is created when one illusion is added to previous resolution. so in dimention resolution 1, one illusion is added to illusion resolution 0 in previous resolution and create one angle. each concept has its own resolution 1. combination of resolution 1 of each dimention create infinite resolution 1. each resolution 1 contain 1 angle (angle 1).
   3-there is dimention resolution infinity. dimention resolution infinity consist of the dimention resolution before infinity plus one illusion. illusion resolution infinity is the illusion itself at resolution infinity.
   4- awareness is one of illusions's dimentions. the laws of nature, each physical object or any event or each mental construct or anything unknown are embeded in their particular dimentions. brain by just seeing some dimentions of illusion, can identify order within the chaotic, complex and paradoxical aspects of the illusion, and create logical frameworks for understanding and interpreting and reasoning. Product of brain is a low resolution picture (mind constructs) of an image with higher resolution (matter). So many different angles in high resolution image (matter) can be associated with one angle of a low resolution image (mental constructs). This is the cause for collapsing of a wavefunction that is illusory. many probabilities (in angles in higher resolutions) can produce same effect on brain.
   5-illusion is the cause for each angle and and each angle is the cause for illusion.
   6-When resolution increases by one unit, it can be placed between any two Angles in that resolution. The placement of this unit between specific two Angles determines the branching of that world in parralel universe.
   overall views:
   1-in topdown view reality is continues and reality is in accordance with Eternalism. in down to top view reality is quantized and it is related to Presentism concept.
   2-illusion resolution infinity is a rescaled version of illusion resolution 0. if you compress resolution 1 in a way that it be to the size of an angle in resolution infinity, in this transformation resolution infinity will change to resolution 0. so resolusion 0 has the potential to be rescaled to any resolution and any dimention.
   3-all angles and no_angle exist in illusion. anti illusion is embeded in illusion. Anti illusion is a mirror of illusion that there is nothingness in illusion resolution infinity and infinity in illusion resolution 0. so each resolusion contains that resolution and anti-resolution.
   4-black holes are some region in space dimention that reaches infinite resolution in some dimentions (like density). In other words, it is some dimentions (like density) in resolution infinty that are in relation with some other lower resolution dimentions (like space).
   5-each resolution has the same distance from resolution 0 and resolution infinity.
   6-free will means having abillity for changing some dimentions (like position dimention) based on resolution 0.
   7-different dimensions evolve at different rates, with some dimensions changing rapidly while others change slowly or based on interactions sometimes dimention changing rapidly while othertime this dimention changing slowly.

2. These "metaphysical" observers arguments are problematic to me. I mean… You may model the probabilities of trees falling in a forest during a storm, even the "entanglement" of one tree falling causes another one to fall

   Now, you only know for sure which ones fell if you go there and measure it. That does not mean the measurement made the tree fall, but that the "collapse of the wave function" of the tree is a mathematical tool that reconciliate your model and the observations

3. What is Human Mind in a Theistic World? Detrimental to salvation.

4. I wonder if God can travel in time. He should be able to do it because he can do anything, right ?
   Perhaps he should travel back to the time when he created Adam and Eve.
   Perhaps he would make them a bit better, (like Jesus).

5. The human mind is a manifestation of consciousness through the evolutionary experiences of our species. https://youtu.be/UWHYThrfRYU

6. The multiverse problem.
   By Paul Davies, a cosmologist not bound by any tradition.

   "I usually say two cheers for the multiverse because there are good reasons of physics and cosmology for supposing that what we see may not be all you get. That there may be other regions of space and time that could be different. So it's not an unreasonable speculation. However, it falls far short of being a complete theory of existence, which is often presented as. That as if there's a multiverse, then we can forget about all the mysteries of the universe because it's all explained. Everything is out there somewhere. End of story.

   Well, it's simply not true, because to get a multiverse, you need a universe-generating mechanism. Something has got to make all those big bangs go bang. So you're going to need some laws of physics to do that. And you can say, well, where do they all come from? So all you've done is shift the problem of existence up from the level of universe to the level of multiverse, but you haven't explained it.

   I suppose, for me, the main problem is that what we're trying to do is explain why the universe is as it is by appealing to something outside of it. In this case an infinite number of universes outside of it. That, to me, is no better than traditional religion that appeals to an unseen unexplained God that is outside of the universe.

   I'm prepared to accept that what we see isn't the totality, that there may be regions of space and time, other universes, if you like, that could be rather different from what we observe. But I certainly don't believe that all possible universes are out there, and that the explanation for the universe that we see is because everything imaginable exists, and that this particular one we see, just because it happens to be one that we live in. I think that falls far short of a proper explanation. Indeed, I think it's contradictory and absurd."

7. It is ok in some cirlces that we are nothing before we are conceived and nothing after we die yet nothing before the universe is born and nothing after the universe dies is unacceptable. And btw even many worlds had to start somewhere at some point and will come to an end at some point. That is how the natural world works..there is a birth death mechanism everywhere you look.

8. is energy measuring virtual particles into classic particles?

9. what might observe quantum wave function in production of virtual particles? time as an internal observer?

10. are the virtual particles turning into classic particles anything like quantum probabilities becoming classic particles(s)?

11. could probabilities from quantum have anything to do with virtual particles in vacuum of space?

12. What is observation? Is observation central to measurement? Is measurement, scientific measurement, central to observation?
    In physics there are three kinds of observers. The observer that looks at arrows and cars and cannonballs, and cells; the observer that looks at moons and planets and stars; and the observer that looks at electrons and positrons and bosons.
    There seems to be no problem observing the motions of cars, arrows, and cells. The problem of observation arises with the far away and the really close.
    The problem of looking at the far away seems to involve time: looking into the past. The problem of looking at the really close also involves time. This problem is harder to characterize however.
    Do particle physicists ever observe an "atom"? They're really good at emitting and colliding these atoms but how good are they at detecting these atoms?
    Let's look at, supposedly, the most useful atom: the electron. We run the better part of our lives harnessing this atom to power our machines and give us light, yet has any one of us ever observed an electron? Even the original discoverer J.J Thomson never saw one directly. He only inferred its existence from the observation of "its" effect on certain other material. An observation that was deduced "after the fact". Has anyone ever seen an electron in the "now"?
    Lightning 🌩, static electricity, electricity are all phenomena of electrons in "motion". While I can see these "things", have I seen an electron?
    In particle accelerators scientists use "cloud chambers" to resolve the paths of particles emitted after intense collisions 💥 of electrons and other particles. Physicists can obviously control these particles: collect and move them, but can any of them say they've ever seen one? Has any physicist seen the same electron twice?
    What then are we looking at when we look at the spirals in a cloud chamber? An image of what? Things, or the aftermath of the passing of things? I can look at the aftermath of a car collision and even pick up pieces of the cars. Apparently when electrons collide they generate smaller cars that speed away from the "scene" of the accident so someone coming along after would never know a collision took place. They only people who know are the physicists who caused the accident and took a photograph 📸. The "now" of electrons are never captured by a camera or a cloud chamber or a cathode ray tube or lightning or static electricity. Like a breeze generated by hot and cold temperatures mixing in the atmosphere we know, nowadays, where it comes from and where it's going but do we know "it"?
    Just as we can cause a fire 🔥 by rubbing two sticks together so we can generate electricity. Though we see a flame and warm ourselves by it do we fool ourselves by our observation. Is it only a little piece of death, in a form of time, that we are allowed to see. A little bit of the future.
    The future the past and the now. The close, the far and the …self? Who we are determines what we observe, or what we observe determines who we are? What will we become when we harness entanglement?

13. how are probabilities generated from quantum wave function? how do those probabilities become definite particle in classic reality?

14. what happens when mind observes nature that questions physicality?

15. The body, it's senses, and the brain are part of the illusion of material existence. They can only witness to the illusion, which is why this material world seems real to us. If you identify as a body, you will look to the material world to explain everything. Science will be your religion. The mind, however, is not made up of matter. It is immaterial. Being endowed with free will, this mind can fall asleep to itself and believe its home is a physical body.

16. The arrogance of physicists is only exceeded by their ignorance of the physical universe. In the last few hundred years they have dipped their toes at the very edge of a vast ocean of knowledge and think they can swim across it. Their explanation for the flaws in many areas is explained by some of them using the supernatural which is an example of their antiscientific preconception bias. In future generations if more knowledge is acquired the physicists of this era will be seen in the same light as we now see the priests who monopolized truth before science existed. Why such people are taken seriously by other scientists is beyond me. In a deterministic universe there are no uncertainties. The fact that quantum mechanics theory postulates that there exists uncertainty is one of its most obvious flaws. Instead of postulating God for what they don't know they'd do far better to figure out what's wrong with their theories.

17. What about the best possible world in infinities universes?

18. Unless that your religion dont see SORROW as METAPHYSICS(in the bsd sense of the term), thats ok

19. Is a theistic world natural? In a theistic worldview is not the world an artifact? Is not a natural artifact an oxymoron?

20. So many people are floating around in fields they're not producing for. Multiverse is nothing more than a way to stay relevant.
    The burden is now on people to prove those lazy incompetent claims false. Funding continues, people interested in science are sent down rabbit holes. For show

21. As a believer in God, this is excellent. Thank you.

22. A little knowledge is a dangerous thing.

23. Observer effect is a straight up hoax, that relies on you not knowing that the "detector" is just a strip of polarizing film that imparts which way information (spin orientation) onto the photons for assessment later. Naturally, polarizing the light changes it. Hey presto, abracadabra a mysterious observer effect collapsed the wave function! Good luck confirming this fact though, because it's deliberately obfuscated in almost every article or paper!

24. this gentleman is the first apologist for lack of better term that ive seen on
    you tube that i didnt immediately consider an idiot.. on the surface some of
    his arguments may hold water but for there to be some kind of godlike entity
    out there somewhere you cant just pick and choose the best arguments they
    all have to make sense and unfortunately there are many many arguments that
    make absolutely no sense for there being such a being

25. I dont know the time frame that this interview took place, but there are many white papers out there showing convincing experimental evidence that consciousness has NO role to play in wave function collapse. It is all about particle interactions, NOT observers..Peace..

26. Looks like his focus is in the gut! God's temple, so make it the Taj Mahal.

27. The Function, Intelligence & Mind Categories … and .. the origin of any Thermodynamic System(Function) … proves … the Universe & Life are Functions composed entirely of Functions … and … were made by an Unnatural Intelligence in an unnatural timeless & infinite System.

    Man is a NATURAL Intelligence with a Mind … made by … an UNNATURAL intelligence with a Mind.

    The Mind of an Intelligence must be UNNATURAL ( ie spirit/soul).

    Therefore the Mind of Man … is natural (body) & unnatural (soul).

    Certain Animals also have a Mind with their own type of freewill, nature, & consciousness. But Animals are not an Intelligence like Man … and only have a Natural mind.

    The origin of Thermodynamic Systems … proves there is an Unnatural System … that is timeless, infinite, has unnatural laws and its own Intelligence with a Mind.

    The Soul or Spirit … are unnatural … and not composed of matter & energy nor do they have to comply with time, & the Laws of Nature.

    The body is the Mind of Man when it is alive.

    The Soul becomes the mind & becomes conscious of the Unnatural … when the body does.

    When a person dies … their soul ….. leaves the Universe which has time … and enters the timeless Unnatural System.

    This is why Jesus said 2000 years ago to His followers, that they must always be ready for His return … as they do not know the day or hour … they will die. When you die .. you go straight to judgement Day in the year 7 000 for those still alive on Earth.

    Man has a body & soul … and exists in in the Natural & Unnatural Systems … created by God.

    God originally created the Man to live forever in a timeless Universe with unnatural laws … but if Man sinned (broke God's Law) … then Man will die (body & soul).

    Time & the Laws of Nature … began when Man sinned … and all of creation started to slowly decay & die. And when Man's body dies … Man's soul then goes to Judgement Day … to be sent to Hell and destroyed in 3 days … or … join Jesus in Heaven.

    Believe or not. Science clearly proves the Universe is a Natural System … that was made & is expanding in … an Unnatural timeless & infinite system.

28. This dude is just flat out wrong about Physics. You don't need mystical "observers" to form a definite reality… that is just 100% incorrect.

    Any large enough system will spontaneously and rapidly lose the quantum coherence and take on definite, knowable characteristics. The exception being superconductors

29. When a physicist encounters the problem of how to explain phenomena in the universe without the involvement of an external creator, he simply invents a multiverse. It is easier for them to believe in the nonsense that there are an infinite number of copies of one person, than in one creator of the one and only universe in which we exist.

30. The idea that there was a creator of the universe is actually less unimaginable than the idea that every single thing in the universe once existed in a space of a fraction of a millimeter. I've come to the conclusion that none of this makes any sense and that ultimate reality is something we have no ability to grasp due to our limited intelligence. Evolution is too slow for us to ever develop brains capable of figuring this out before we go extinct. Our only hope of uncovering what's truly happening is through our building AGI and then it improving on itself at an exponential rate. I just hope if it figures out what reality actually is it will be able to dumb down the message enough for humans to understand.

31. This an aspect in Mary's Red Book problem again…isn't it? Which then has to use string theory to compare or validate the observation. Idk…hmm this is good one Robert. Thanks.

32. A "Conscious Observer" is simply another quantum mechanical object. There's only a singular wave function, and it's universal

33. You'd think something so apparently evident would be much easier to sense lol. When something is EVIDENT you don't have to "believe" in it
    …
    And if God is the beginning of everything, did he create himself? Or is God nothing lol. So stupid tbh

34. This is the new argument style of apologetics, to claim that the rest of us are hanging on to ideas that come with a lot of baggage or grasping at an idea that forces you to accept ideas which are uncomfortable when their god of the gaps requires the most assumptions out of any argument currently proposed

35. 0:40 SB: exactly you're always in quantum mechanics you have The system that is being observed and you have Observer and you can explain a lot about the observer but you can't lump the whole oberver into a physical system described by the laws or the whold thing. 2:50 so immediately I have a lot of objections uh first objection is that for any kind of sentient observer I mean I'll call it the last you know 500 million years but you know the universe had 13 billion years of history at least (right) before there was anything sentient even if it's not a human sentient that you could have observed things so you know there was quantum mechanics going on there and that seemed to be working? 3:14 but there were no definite outcomes, …

36. We need an hour long over the top or live closer to truth episode for the Easter holiday!

37. Just curious, but if sentient beings have evolved anywhere else in the cosmos, what are the chances that they would have come to the same conclusions as to what god is as we have🤔 my guess….. zero

38. human mind is current state of algorithm execution. We are huge robots.

Comments are closed.