Understanding Consciousness | Rupert Sheldrake, George Ellis, Amie Thomasson

30 thoughts on “Understanding Consciousness | Rupert Sheldrake, George Ellis, Amie Thomasson”

1. Only Dr. Sheldrake seems to have an extended mind and intelligence, the rest has intelligence confined only in their academic- conditioned minds. Dr. Sheldrake is an artistic scientist, very free, creative yet grounded. That's a good breeding ground for new developments.

2. I'll take what Rupert SPIRA has to say on this which is that Consciousness is all there is, a pre-existing "qualityless" phenomenon and is stated by Rupert Sheldrake around 22:00.

3. if scientists can't take risks in the search for truth, but must stick to their "pretty good ideas" due to practical reasons or what ever, it sounds like finding anything "new" will be rendered rather difficult.

4. I think the way they spoke over Sheldrake's ideas did such a good job in illustrating the point about dogma, that it became more clear than if he would've been allowed to explain it himself.

5. Would of been great to get Donald Hoffman in on this…

6. WHO IS THIS MORON MODERATOR?! Kind of stunned here.

7. Sheldrake speaks well, Amie Thomasson seems to say nothing

8. I can only understand how sheldrake explains everything …

9. Consciousness is simply an environmentally reactive process. Human consciousness is an extreme example of this.

10. Boy, this host is a pompous ass contributing nothing to this discussion. I will make sure to avoid watching anything in the future in which he is a participant. Good God! (I wonder if he’s ever watched himself on video to discover what a negative impact he has on conversations like this?)

11. Note to Mr. Sheldrake : I send well wishes to those who will need them always as we all do in our quest for love and happiness. Maybe that will be a talk someday, how we found complete happiness on earth in every relationship. Speaking with those that are entrenched in the rewards of the current world situation of squelching creativity and especially family love, may not further or multiply the results of those seeking goodness. Some just do not want to encourage others to feel good which I think comes directly from being abused children. Not always only physical abuse, but being taught through one's direct interaction with the people that raise us who belittle one's infinite value and potential. The reason for that happening started long ago and has been passed down through the ages. I think such abuse is going away quickly though for it is directly opposed to love and humanity that most all people feel the desire for at birth I would suggest. The world's people are finding out with the increase of our interactions with people of all different cultures, backgrounds and national origins making it increasingly clear very naturally to see that we all have a desire for love and affection and so have come to the conclusion that those desires are the basis of our most essential motivation and purpose. Science needs to first include such discoveries or be left alone in the darkness which it purports is everything. Suddenly it is becoming obvious what is the desire of those most outspoken about what is given as "mainstream science"and why it is painful to watch them attack others, especially those that wish well and to discover more in their interactions with everyone as opposed to being laughed at and disrespected. Silence is beautiful sometimes all the more for this reason; it rewards and frees the thinking given by another. Rest is underestimated or misunderstood. As a friend pointed out to me something he received from the spirit realm (a physical person did not tell him this), the name of the highest place on earth is called Everest or ever rest. To rest upon what is given by another is very empowering. By empowering even lies, we bring a liar or better said, someone who has based their life on a misguided path of thinking or intention lovingly to the truth. How this might look in an interview and discourse such as the one in the video here could be by one simply saying : "You know, I never in my life thought of the world that way. It will take me some time to digest such an all encompassing world view and universal truth." and then just stay silent and continue recognizing each speaker NOT FOR WHAT TRUTH THEY GIVE, for there may not be much of it to repeat, but BECAUSE EACH OF THEM HAS INFINITE VALUE AND AN INFINITE ABILITY TO PROVIDE LOVE AND HAPPINESS TO OTHERS IN RECOGNIZING THEIR VALUE even before a word is spoken. This is the open door that love is providing in our age, that we each have the ability and key to entering a realm of satisfaction for all people. Radical, but so gratifying ! Many good parents do that for their children and it works to give people encouragement and raise them to ever higher levels daily of inspiration and hope. Adults are not immuned to it is the good news ! All people can unfold like a flower with such treatment. Some must grow buds first, but all will reach fruition on this path of intention it will be made clear. Thanks to all for their participation in the meeting ! Here is a very interesting audio you may like along the lines of news that we are not accustomed to : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WP3TZh6A6Vg&t=3650s

12. Other videos where Rupert Sheldrake speaks of his life's work without having to address others who may not wish people to open their minds to what the world really is or really can be but seem to doggedly attack people that truly have something new and interesting to say. Loud and seemingly charismatic people stand to make huge amounts of money and gain seemingly complete noteriety for using such skills of attack but due to their own situation of being rewarded to control the narrative as is so very obviously the motive in so many of the mouth pieces of the supposed Western view of the world which is really what we are told is everyone's reality but is actually just what those who've hijacked the views of those through their use of universities and news media and even entertainment: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UPccMlgug8A and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1TerTgDEgUE Editing not done here as you see. So who are "they" ? It is a long story but here is some truth to go with you : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WP3TZh6A6Vg&t=3650s

13. The bald head guy sounds boring and superficial.

14. The first half is stupid.. Clearly its got nothing to do with particles or any other thing or vaccums or so forth.. What is "something".. Clearly theres only one answer in this context.. Big bang/universe/spacetime..

15. Dissapointed by this interviewer/host who clearly just couldn't stand Ruperts ideas, he was caricaturing his view and interrupting him in the middle of the sentence. Ending was worst – he stopped Rupert in the mid sentence again and thanked everyone for such a good conversation… He CLEARLY didn't let him finish the though that I was interested hearing. What an INCREDIBLE amateur…..

16. I can't help but notice a simple fact…. Don't bring kids to a Supersayashin fight!!!!!!!

17. Royal Institution just admitted almost NOTHING is correct in atomic model… Electron Flood replaces Bohr. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hk_AHocsk-8&t=15s

18. I dont entirely agree with rupert but I find his theories fascinating and take them seriously.

    But still, in this debate I was rooting for rupert and not george ellis, even though I'm a physicist myself.

19. Getting off drugs or alcohol can also be "life changing"………..so what does that say about psychedelics???

20. I don't think Dawkins or Krauss or "fakes" or intellectually shallow……………that's a quiet stupid statement. Questions are most important, more than answers.

21. Thank you!

22. This is stupid. Debating about something that doesn't exist.There is zero evidence of nothing.
    No pun intended.

23. This debate was interesting, it would have been even better if the moderator was not present though. Pitty and emotional performance.

24. Suggestion, rephrase the question to "Why existence instead of non-existence ?" in these types of debates.

    Instead of "Why is there something instead of nothing ?" and getting a debate about what a "thing" is or isn't, trying to avoid the core of the issue. So , why existence, and why existence prior to the Big Bang ? Imo, the most rational answer is "because it is a must, the opposite is impossible".

    Otherwise complete non-existence (no energy, no potentials, no laws etc) must have transformed into existence. Which should be regarded as impossible, even in a pure metaphysical sense (outside of physics). Or, if you think that is possible (because our brains can not understand such logic), then, why didn't such a transformation occur prior to when it actually did ?What caused it to wait ? And that "what" is not non-existence, it must be some form of a potential (analogy, a cloud forms a potential for a lightning, which then happens).

25. The debate "moderator" has a clear prejudice towards Rupert. CONSCIOUSNESS

26. How easily and misleadingly Thomasson and Ladyman skated over what stubbornly seems to be the impossibilty of anything like consciousness (or even perception) appearing somehow out of dead, inert, matter (as they would see it). As well as skating over the fact that using the word 'emergent' as an explanation as to why minds emerge from complex arrangements of molecules is actually no explanation at all. Again a false claim on certainty or tractability in relation to answering the question. 'Emergence' just covers over the fact that you have no idea how this could even begin to happen in principle. So no Thomasson you do not even have the beginnings of a ground-up theoretical account of reality. And no I don't agree that that approach is the best use of my science dollars. You guys are actually just being dogmatic and hiding it (or not clever enough to realise the holes in what your claiming). At least Ellis is able to hold a partially open mind. I smell something beginning with 'B'.

27. if matter is not divisible to zero level

    how we can say its all virtual reality

28. Brain can not think! utter twats wtf, you have been talking for an eternity and you got wot? overwhelmed by your clever words are we? it remains a political battle between "ego's" (psych term means the energy deposits around your head filled with scientific smut, the lot of you deserve this place. twats.

29. there is 'nothing' to understand you silly scientific twats. It has no wave length, no location in time or space,
    its an energy production unit and it just IS.

30. Hubert is wrong

Comments are closed.