Key insights

• ⚛️ Consciousness is irreducibly subjective, making it challenging to discuss scientifically
• 🧠 The first person experiential side shouldn't be dismissed
• ⚖️ Consciousness and fear can't be solely measured objectively; subjective reports are crucial
• 🚶‍♂️ Our sense of being a passenger inside our bodies is an illusion
• 🌌 The feeling of self as the center of experience can be transcended
• 🔗 Science and classic mysticism can be connected through the experience of self-transcendence
• 🌌 The cosmos does not provide insight into events before the Big Bang or the divine origin of religious texts
• 🌍 Experiences of self-transcendence can inform the nature of human consciousness

Q&A

• How can science and classic mysticism be connected?

  Science and classic mysticism can be connected through the experience of self-transcendence, which aligns with neuroscience and brings human consciousness into closer register with how we understand the brain.

• What is self-transcendence, and where is it often described?

  The feeling of self as the center of experience can be transcended, leading to a sense of being identical to the sphere of experience without a center. This self-transcendence is often described in religious and spiritual literature, and it is a real experience.

• Is the sense of being a passenger inside our bodies real?

  The sense of being a passenger inside our bodies is an illusion. Conscious experiences are delivered by various processes in the brain. There is no unitary self carried through from one moment to the next unchanging.

• Why can't consciousness and fear be solely measured objectively?

  Objective measures of fear may not always align with subjective experience. Subjective reports are essential to understand the accuracy of correlations. Consciousness can't be devoid of subjective qualitative experience.

• What makes discussing consciousness scientifically challenging?

  Consciousness is irreducibly subjective, making it challenging to discuss scientifically. Philosophers like Thomas Nagel and David Chalmers emphasize the subjective nature of consciousness, highlighting the limitations of reducing it to neuronal activities.

• 00:00 Discussing consciousness scientifically is challenging due to its irreducibly subjective nature, which cannot be solely explained by physical processes. Philosophers like Thomas Nagel and David Chalmers have emphasized the subjective aspect of consciousness, highlighting the limitations of reducing it to neuronal activities.
• 01:09 The first person experiential side shouldn't be dismissed, even though there are strong third person 'objective measures' of feelings like anxiety and fear.
• 02:06 Consciousness and fear can't be solely measured objectively; subjective reports are crucial. The self is an illusion, not separate from the brain.
• 03:14 Our sense of being a passenger inside our bodies is an illusion. Conscious experiences are delivered by various processes in the brain.
• 04:16 The feeling of self as the center of experience can be transcended, leading to a sense of being identical to the sphere of experience without a center. This self-transcendence is often described in religious and spiritual literature, and is a real experience.
• 05:30 Science and classic mysticism can be connected through the experience of self-transcendence, which aligns with neuroscience and brings human consciousness into closer register with how we understand the brain.