Bernardo Kastrup on the scientific evidence against materialism

An excerpt from the four-week course with Bernardo Kastrup, "With Reality in Mind" co-hosted with the Psychedelic Society.

WE RUN COURSES WITH BERNARDO EVERY YEAR, CHECK OUT:

If you would like to support future content contributions are greatly appreciated.

LINKS TO PAPERS AND WORK BY BERNARDO:

Scientific American articles:
Academic Paper
The Idea of the World

[tomatoversace]

this aged very well. 2022 nobel prize.

[leandrosilvagoncalves]

It seems a change of paradigm is coming...
More and more incredibly smart people are refuting materialism.

[purpose]

When people learn that psi phenomenons are real (and yes, there is an absurd of scientific evidence for psi phenomenon, it's a fact that its real), there will be a massive paradigm shift.

[arosalesmusic]

How do you explain thousands of cases of NDE´s? Obviously there is consciousness outside your body, but it is still dissociated from the Conscious field, even after death. This sort of conflicts with Bernardo´s point of dissociation.

[vicvic]

I feel fear
I love her

Materialists: nope

[hawkkim]

Exactly! In Matrix, would we be able to prove that body really exist?

[MrWirikuta]

Because the ultimate reality is unkownable through the means we have, what the purpose of a reasoning like this?

[SM-iltx]

Why can't you no longer comment comments here?

[sopanmcfadden]

The only bridge to reality is the mind

[analyticeschatology]

Are the courses Open for all or for academics only ?

[maavella]

Is last year's program archived, available anywhere to stream?

[astralgod]

The notion that physics and more specifically quantum mechanics debunks materialism is based on the misconception that observer means sentient observer. "Observer" in quantum physics doesn't mean sentient observer. It just means something interacting with it.

[theosib]

The success of science doesn't prove materialism; that doesn't make science and materialism incompatible. Quantum physics has NOT thrown physical realism out the window; it's just given us a different perspective. Physical realism doesn't imply defined position, form, etc. It is false to say that physicality arises only upon observation. This is the Copenhagen interpretation, which no physicist believes anymore. Everything is always in a state of superposition all the time, and entanglement only reduces the diffuseness of quantum states. Even AFTER observations, there are no classical defined shapes, positions, etc. Mostly what we do is observe a quantum state through a massively high-gain amplifier, whose results we falsely perceive to be classical in nature. Yes, there is something out there, but saying it's "not physical" is playing semantic games. Absolutely everything in reality that we interact with is made up of these quantum field excitations that are entirely wave-like in nature. Always. Physicality doesn't arise from observation. Observation is nothing more than entanglement between the quantum system and a detector, which is nothing more than another quantum system.

[zakarda]

What can observe ? Do you need a human to observe things for it to exist or will animals qualify? Does the observer need to be conscious? Then what is consciousness ? This is a great video to convince people that do not know better, but it is very unsatisfactory. I must also add that i am open to dualism or idealism if proven, but will not assume that this is the case.

[paulaustinmurphy]

Kastrup spends a lot of time saying that people don't understand things. In this he even says that "materialists don't understand materialism". In the last thing I read he said that Sam Harris doesn't understand either philosophy or idealism. All he means is that these people don't have exactly the same views that he has. He conflates that with not understanding things.

Well, Kastrup doesn't understand materialism. When he describes the position of materialism at the beginning, that is actually metaphysical realism. Some metaphysical realists are anti-materialists and some materialists are anti-realists. It entirely depends on the materialist. Also, it has been mainly scientists who have been realists, not philosophical materialists. Albert Einstein is a perfect example of this and this was his main problem with quantum mechanics.

What materialists do believe is that there is nothing supernatural and that mind isn't literally everything. Kastrup believes that consciousness is everything and also seems to have a belief in the supernatural.

[SM-iltx]

If there is something out there that makes us see the same world, why is that not physical but has necessesarily to be mental? Why needs materialism physical realism? How does your all is consciousness theory explain and interpret quantum mechanics? Has Bohmian interpretation of quantum mechanics been falsified?

Your way of thinking simply is: quantum physics shows that outcomes of experiments are only determined in the moment of measurement. So the measurement has an important roll. So far correct, but the next step contains the fallacy: The measurement only takes place when some body becomes conscious of the result. So the world outside cannot be physical and there is only consciousness.
You just claim or postulate that quantum mechanic mysteries support your ideas. But you give no explanation for that. That's not convincing at all. Instead you only state that empirical results falsify physical realism. But why does that falsify materialism? The many worlds interpretation is still possible. Or even Bohmian quantum mechanics (I don't know). So your theory is not supported at all.

Furthermore you would have to explain how experimental findings are explained and to be understood in your theory. But no word about that.
You only had an argument or made a real contribution to scientific discussion if you could offer a better interpretation of quantum mechanics. But instead you rise even more questions. In what sense is the wave function mental? How and why appear mental processes from the outside view so strange? How do you model that? Why and how decides consciousness about the outcome of measurements. Why is there no superposition in consciousness?

[SM-iltx]

Metaphysical idealism is like religion. You can philosophize endlessly on abstract level how nice and easy to understand the world would be, if it was true. But don't ask annoying detailed questions and for a proof or try to understand it. You have to believe it. Just as you have to believe in Jesus or an immortal soul. But if you can, it's very plesant and satisfying.