Consciousness and its Physical Headset | Donald Hoffman Lecture

Donald Hoffman is Professor Emeritus of Cognitive Sciences at the University of California, Irvine with joint appointments in the Department of Philosophy, the Department of Logic and Philosophy of Science, and the School of Computer Science. He received his Ph.D. from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT). He is an author of over 120 scientific papers and three books, including the bestseller “The Case Against Reality: Why Evolution Hid the Truth from Our Eyes.”

EPISODE LINKS:

CONNECT:

=============================

Disclaimer: The information provided on this channel is for educational purposes only. The content is shared in the spirit of open discourse and does not constitute, nor does it substitute, professional or medical advice. We do not accept any liability for any loss or damage incurred from you acting or not acting as a result of listening/watching any of our contents. You acknowledge that you use the information provided at your own risk. Listeners/viewers are advised to conduct their own research and consult with their own experts in the respective fields.

#DonaldHoffman #Consciousness #ConsciousAgents #ConsciousRealism

[drtevinnaidu]

Chatting to Don soon. Any questions for him for our next podcast, please reply to this comment.

THANKS FOR WATCHING!
If you enjoyed the content, please like and share this video, subscribe to the channel, and turn on notifications for future updates. :)

[AwakingSpirit]

I’ve had psychic visions, at times, since childhood - through space and time - and have seen into things before they manifested decades later. Including seeing world events ahead. I've even had experiences where I have seen into past events, as if they were my own, from what appear to be past lives. I've physically gone to other countries to visit places I remember from those lives I see through. I've seen into the realms of spirit and have had experiences of seeing from the realms of spirit. From all that I have experienced, it seems to me. True consciousness is spiritually based from our souls which are beyond the space of time. Our spirits resonate through spaces of time and manifest physicalities to incarnate these minds and bodies within. Though we are 'alive' before we incarnate in these bodies and are 'alive' when we leave these bodies. How conscious one is within the process of all that depends on the clarity of light within their spirits frequency.

[williamkerr]

I wish good luck to Donald Hoffman and Nima Arkani Hamed, I know the importance of scientific proof, but I prefer the interpretation of Kabbalah plus Panpsychism and Panentheism by Hyman Schipper which explains the Hard Problem of Consciousness and is more accessible and palatable to me and that is fine beyond Space/Time, even considering that Hyman Schipper's Kabbalah cannot be tested.

[shortattentionspantheatre]

This breakthrough in rigorous Science is both breathtaking and truly logical

[mykrahmaan]

Until we interpret the physical meaning of the DIGITS, with which we calculate in our minds (NOT the electrons of the BITs in the chips we manufacture), all the phenomena we describe with mathematical formulae would remain deceptive.

Remember, none of the particles (except THE PHOTON) in the Standard Model of Particles has any direct relevance whatsoever to our perceptions, while there are 5 more senses (including BREATHING as the common sense ~ common to all 3 entities: PLANTS, ANIMALS and HUMANS) unrepresented by any unique particle.

Neither are the feelings of needs (hunger, fear, pain, ...) and satisfaction particle physically interpreted.

Nature can't be so stupid to provide us 6 senses and feelings, if all the rest can be derived as functions of just one sense perception: SIGHT.

This is the reason why human race in its entire history, from antiquity to present day, from Thales of Miletus to Stephen Hawking (and still continuing), is yet to derive the mathematical model for the mechanism of even a single natural phenomenon that could PREDICT accurately when that phenomenon may harm life function, let alone PREVENT such ~ which SHOULD, in fact, be the sole purpose cum criterion of proof af all knowledge.

[mike-qff]

How does anything happen without time? Do conscious agents as fundamental blocks of reality need time?

[Mantramurtim]

Im following, but.... "geometry outside spacetime"...?? Isnt space necessesary for doing geometry???

[richardg.lanzara]

Fascinating talk! My book ("Origins of Life's Sensoria") attempts to explain many of these basic concepts.

[wtfbbqpwnzercopter]

We should think of consciousness as a sort of singularity as important as the neutron or a supermassive black hole.

[Makarios]

Check out the work of physicist Fredrico Faggin. He actually experienced consciousness outside of his body.

[stringsseeds]

I absolutely admire his vision, thinking, and effort in building a theory of consciousness with mathematics, his insight in spacetime which is doomed, and his effort must have been against the orthodox of physics. However, he could have gone further to state as the result of spacetime is doomed there's no physics. His name will certainly be on history books of consciousness, science, humanity and so on as he is the first who tried to build maths on consciousness. I would like to give him all best wishes but that is against my knowledge and I would be hypocritical as I know he is certainly on the wrong path as that mathematics is string theory and he has oversimplified consciousness.

[gireeshneroth]

Consciousness living a mind wake. There wouldn't be a universe if there wasn't mind.

[bobmcfarl]

has anybody seen a podcast with one of these high energy theoretical physicists ?

[bobmcfarl]

I wish DH gave us something new I feel I could name every point he makes and has made for past 9 years in support of his theory Every podcast feel like listening to the same song sung in the same way Very believable but limited
I am convinced of simulation cos it just feels like one

[mattsigl]

Hoffman’s ideas are quite ingenious but I detect a few problems: 1) if his argument is an evolutionary one, such that evolution wouldn’t select for veridical perception of reality we have the problem that the only reason we believe that evolution happened is by observing it in the world, and that’s not, in his theory, a valid inference since our consciousness doesn’t give us access to the truth of “physical” reality. The grounding for his argument argument seems compromised. If evolution happened, we couldn’t know it, because evolution is selecting against direct reality perception! 2) Hoffman just completely mischaracterizes IIT in regards to its ability to describe why the quality of our experiences have the character they do as opposed to some other character. Describing how the shapes of integrated information delineate the phenomenological character of the experiences associated with them is a central part of the theory, though very complicated. Maybe he thinks the theory fails at this effort, but it’s, in any event, not something IIT ignores. Far from it.

[KeefyKat]

Lol...10^-33 cm isn't that small, he says. I wish he would embrace complexity as a source of emergence. Scale matters and explains his issues.

[songsbytomandbetty]

Dr. Hoffman. I am an admirer of you and your work, but could you please rethink your use of the word “doomed” regarding time and space? Consider substituting the concept “levels of abstraction.” For most scientific questions and engineering problems working with three dimensions of space and one of time is the correct level of abstraction. Just because there might be a deeper level does not mean that spacetime is “doomed.” This language is confusing, misleading, and ultimately undermines your credibility. The principles of biology are not “doomed” because at a deeper level of abstraction all biology is a function of hadrons and bosons. Ridiculous.

[suzettedarrow]

hoffman comes off as confused, enraptured by nonsense. :(