Dr. Robert Davis, Consciousness Connection |563|

[Alex]

Dr. Robert Davis, Consciousness Connection |563|
by Alex Tsakiris | Aug 2 | Consciousness Science
Share
Tweet
Dr. Robert Davis, is a scientist who has deeply explored extended consciousness.

 

[J Randall Murphy]

Good show

I really liked the issues Alex brought up about the effects of technological breakthroughs in consciousness studies on the population at large. I thought the analogy to society adapting to the personal computer revolution was really good. It all ties in with AI, but goes way beyond that. We're looking at genetic enhancements that are akin to perceptual superpowers.

I feel obligated to point out that if accessing these experiences can be made possible by genetic modification, then right there and then, all the views on a mystical non-material explanation go right out the window. You cannot get much more "material" than genetics.

As an aside, I wonder how he'd handle the Pirc Defense?

 

[Michael Larkin]

I watched this after the Skeptiko episode and wished I'd watched it before:

Why? Because it would have helped me appreciate Alex's interview somewhat better. Sometimes, being prepared by "first and second" level information maybe helps with understanding the "third level"?

 

[J Randall Murphy]

I watched this after the Skeptiko episode and wished I'd watched it before: Why? Because it would have helped me appreciate Alex's interview somewhat better. Sometimes, being prepared by "first and second" level information maybe helps with understanding the "third level"?

Some rather scary commentary that was just casually dropped into the conversation was the mention of how a scientific understanding of PSI phenomena could be used as part of national defense or control of the population. Most people are already blissfully unaware of the extent that we're already being manipulated by the science that we do understand e.g. surveillance capitalism and the use of computers and AI by intelligence gathering agencies.

The stuff they're talking about here is a whole other level again beyond that, and only a few thousand people in the world ( if that ) are well informed enough on the subject to even begin to understand it. With these technologies combined, it would be basically game over for humans as the dominant intelligence on this planet. I mean — AI alone could do it, but combined with direct remote mind control? We're done for !

What if that's what the alien agenda has really been all about? This makes you wonder about stuff like META and The Singularity and high powered cell towers everywhere transmitting waves known to interfere directly with our circadian rhythms — the very thing that regulates our sleep/wake cycle, which for all practical purposes is the on/off system for our consciousness.

 

[David Bailey]

I feel obligated to point out that if accessing these experiences can be made possible by genetic modification, then right there and then, all the views on a mystical non-material explanation go right out the window. You cannot get much more "material" than genetics.

Sorry - that simply doesn't follow, regardless of how obligated you may feel!

The genetic modifications may have operated by changing the brain in a way which makes it more easily aware of a larger reality - just as some people clearly have more access to the larger reality than others, and psychic abilities often run in families.

David

 

[J Randall Murphy]

Sorry - that simply doesn't follow, regardless of how obligated you may feel!

The genetic modifications may have operated by changing the brain in a way which makes it more easily aware of a larger reality - just as some people clearly have more access to the larger reality than others, and psychic abilities often run in families.

If a physical thing ( like genetics ) can affect the detection of a particular stimuli, then by logical extension, that makes that stimuli in question physical as well, because by definition, if it weren't also physical, then our physical brains would have no ability to detect it.

If you choose to argue that point, then you just don't get that by the very nature of their definitions, the physical and the non-physical are mutually exclusive. Consequently if the phenomena does interact with the physical, then it too must be physical — but just not understood ( yet ).

Now, it may be the case that genetic modification will never yield enhanced PSI abilities, but then we're still left with the same problem in non-genetically enhanced individuals. If the phenomenon is real, and their very physical brains are able to detect the phenomena, then by extension, that phenomena must also be physical.

Arguing otherwise would be like arguing that squares can have 3 sides or H2O is made of methane or 2+2=5. Try to get past your dislike of logical deduction. It's a very powerful tool in the truth seeking toolbox. Ideas that make sense are always going to be more likely to be the case than ones that don't make sense.

The key to explaining mysteries that don't make sense is in finding ways of interpreting them that do make sense. That's how the heliocentric model of the solar system was worked out. It's how determining the world is a sphere was worked out. It's how virtually every scientific principle we know of has been worked out.

So if science is going to have any chance of explaining these phenomena, that's how it's going to get done — not by nonsensical wishful thinking that caters to our cherished beliefs in magic and dogma. I suspect Dr. Davis would be onboard with that.

 

[David Bailey]

The key to explaining mysteries that don't make sense is in finding ways of interpreting them that do make sense. That's how the heliocentric model of the solar system was worked out. It's how determining the world is a sphere was worked out. It's how virtually every scientific principle we know of has been worked out.

You keep oscillating back and forth about this issue. If we assume standard materialist concepts every paranormal phenomenon is impossible by definition. If you stick with that line of thinking, you have to either explain every phenomenon or deny it exists.

You yourself have said you believe in ESP. Well we only talk about ESP if there is no conventional physical explanation. ESP performed with a mobile phone just isn't ESP!

You know (I think) that there are phenomena that don't fit with materialism, but you can't help slipping back into pretending that there are no such phenomena.

David

 

[J Randall Murphy]

You keep oscillating back and forth about this issue. If we assume standard materialist concepts every paranormal phenomenon is impossible by definition. If you stick with that line of thinking, you have to either explain every phenomenon or deny it exists.

That's exactly the point. I wouldn't call my view of physicalism "standard", but it still ends-up in the same place, where because the phenomena exists, we're forced to either upgrade our view of what we mean by "physical" or accept that it's all just imaginary. Physicalism has been evolving out of old school materialism for a couple of centuries now, but there are still hangers-on to the idea that the mental and the physical are fundamentally different, when it seems to be the case that one naturally emerges from the other.

You yourself have said you believe in ESP. Well we only talk about ESP if there is no conventional physical explanation. ESP performed with a mobile phone just isn't ESP!

Right. There's no "conventional" explanation. But that doesn't mean there isn't a physical one. In fact, given that the brain is a physical construct that facilitates the emergence of mental phenomena, then ESP must also be physical in nature. So maybe if we start there, we can make more progress. That's what experiments like Persinger's and Radin's do. They employ scientific principles and equipment to detect anomalous mental phenomena.

You know (I think) that there are phenomena that don't fit with materialism, but you can't help slipping back into pretending that there are no such phenomena.

Like I keep saying, it's not that I don't think the phenomena exists ( it does ). It's the interpretations of the phenomena that are in error — or perhaps a better way to put it — logically incoherent. They might sound great in a paranormal fiction drama, but they're nonsensical. Instead of going that route, we'd be further ahead if we upgrade our notions about what constitutes the physical, and then adapt the scientific method to accommodate those upgrades.

If we keep insisting that the phenomena is something "paranormal" or "supernatural" it will always carry the stigmatization that goes along with those interpretations. On the other hand, by accepting that its as "physically real" as any other phenomena, but just not understood ( yet ), then that opens the door for serious scientific exploration.

 

[Silence]

If we keep insisting

You seem to do plenty of that in your posts, Randall. Makes it sorta hard to find credence in your use of this accusation as a criticism. For example: "In fact, given that the brain is a physical construct that facilitates the emergence of mental phenomena, then ESP must also be physical in nature."

 

[J Randall Murphy]

You seem to do plenty of that in your posts, Randall. Makes it sorta hard to find credence in your use of this accusation as a criticism. For example: "In fact, given that the brain is a physical construct that facilitates the emergence of mental phenomena, then ESP must also be physical in nature."

What "accusation" are you referring to? The example you gave seems more like a logically coherent statement than an "accusation". Also, what "criticism" are you referring to? Maybe if we can get this cleared-up, other stuff will follow.

 

[Silence]

What "accusation" are you referring to? The example you gave seems more like a logically coherent statement than an "accusation". Also, what "criticism" are you referring to? Maybe if we can get this cleared-up, other stuff will follow.

You were making a point to David regarding certain positions you see him taking that you don't believe to be true. (i.e., assertions of paranormal or supernatural)

Yet, you yourself have many seemingly sacred cows that aren't objectively true (or provable) such as the one I provided (ESP must be physical in nature).

 

[David Bailey]

An additional problem with 'physical' ESP is that the most popular ideas about memory assume that they are grown as networks of neurons with weighted interconnections (disregarding that Rupert Sheldrake points to all the failed attempts to localise memories as such in the brain). These weights in the network are supposed to form statistically, and one person's neural network for an apple (say) might be another person's network for a frog!

Thus it wouldn't be enough to have a viable channel between two people, because all it would transmit would be noise!

David

 

[Robbedigital]

31:15 - Alex: "...from This Reality, is it impossible to understand that Other Reality?"

I think the answer to that is: It's so impossible to understand, that theoretic opponents like JRM struggle (in good faith) to even agree it a valid concept.

This episode is awesome so far.

 

[Robbedigital]

Almost done with the episode. Top shelf stuff!
I will have to listen at least 5 times just to track to it all.
I really enjoyed that Alex teed off in the front warning the audience incoming level 3 discussion. And he wasn’t joking.

 

[Robbedigital]

Recapping a position I’ve proposed previously:
Regardless whether we/our existence is in a Simulation, or the Creation of an unfathomably higher power, any actual/genuine evidence of such would defeat the mystery. So the question I’d tee up is: If whatever unfathomably higher power actually created this existence - and did so intending the “Other Reality” to be a mystery - either they failed, or what we’ve found is not actual evidence.
My opinion is that we can only reproduce evidence that fits the bio/robot/meaningless-universe bin, and that all the “evidence” beyond that can be argued into the belief bin, regardless how much I personally believe it to be directly connected.

But regarding JRMs assertion that any brain sensation of it would deem external reality to be physical with ours…
To that I’ll insist Nope. If we’re in a simulation (for instance) it (the sensation of connection) could just be a programming change of a 1 to a 0. We could sense that something changed, but never have actual evidence or direct active interaction with said change of programming. The Matrix used deja Vu to demonstrate this. New Agers have latched on to Mandela Effect. But again like my above statement, I don’t think we get hard evidence, but we just get the sense that something did something outside of normal bounds our our realm.

 

[Nelson]

I feel obligated to point out that if accessing these experiences can be made possible by genetic modification, then right there and then, all the views on a mystical non-material explanation go right out the window. You cannot get much more "material" than genetics.

But the brain seems to be acting as a filter to inhibit mystical experience. So if one could alter a gene to stop or reduce that filter... the implication is that the ability to have mystical experiences is non-physical, whereas the physical brain somehow stops this

 

[Nelson]

high powered cell towers everywhere transmitting waves known to interfere directly with our circadian rhythms

Interesting. I didn't know that

 

[Nelson]

you just don't get that by the very nature of their definitions, the physical and the non-physical are mutually exclusive. Consequently if the phenomena does interact with the physical, then it too must be physical — but just not understood ( yet ).

Are say radio waves or wifi 'physical' in your definition though?

 

[Nelson]

Try to get past your dislike of logical deduction. It's a very powerful tool in the truth seeking toolbox. Ideas that make sense are always going to be more likely to be the case than ones that don't make sense.

Some logic can be helpful to buttress one's worldview. But you seem to mainly rely on logic.
I've said how misleading this can be. You make assumptions based on logic, but if one of those assumptions is wrong the whole structure is undermined. This is what Sokrates, Plato and Aristotle also tended to do, and one of the reasons why knowledge in Antiquity and the Middle Ages didn't advance far...

 

[Nelson]

A case in point is in the latter part of Plato's dialogue Phaedo.

Sokrates' hypothesis is that opposites exclude each other. Sokrates says in the dialogue:
''if the non-hot were necessarily imperishable, then when you confront snow with something hot, the snow would retreat out of its way, intact and unmelted'' (106A).

But this is not what we see! When snow is approached by heat it melts - it does not become displaced into another space, while remaining intact. This is a crucial flaw in Sokrates' overall argument, for on it rests his hypothesis that the soul is displaced and remains intact, upon the death of the physical body.

Btw, I pointed this out to one of my philosophy professors, and he dismissed my argument as irrelevant, saying essentially that we're looking for faults within the philosophy itself, not looking for evidence that contradicts it in the observable world(!)...