bucket foundation — inverse omegabucket.foundation

consciousness

Again, because my view is that consciousness is local, that it's something that brains create, my view is when a brain is more sophisticated, if we don't rely on human exceptionalism, but just sort of look at our own brains, then it creates the kind of consciousness that you and I are aware of. When a brain hasn't reached that level of complexity, it has some version of consciousness, but perhaps different from the experiences that we have. But fundamentally, it's just stuff moving in
Concept
consciousness
Score
6 · causes · because · fundamental
Status
candidate — not yet promoted to canon

Corpus evidence — top 10 passages

Most-relevant passages from the entire indexed corpus (67,286 paragraph chunks across YouTube transcripts, PubMed, arXiv, archive.org, Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, OpenAlex, and more) ranked by semantic similarity (bge-small-en-v1.5).

  1. 01 · yt0.875

    Again, because my view is that consciousness is  local, that it's something that brains create,   my view is when a brain is more sophisticated, if  we don't rely on human exceptionalism, but just   sort of look at our own brains, then it creates  the kind of consciousness that you and I are aware   of. When a brain hasn't reached that level of  complexity, it has some version of consciousness,   but perhaps different from the experiences that we  have. But fundamentally, it's just stuff moving in   a coordinated manner

    yt/qFuYUSWwn7s-when-physics-meets-fiction-brian-greene-dan-brown-world-scie/transcript.txt

  2. 02 · yt0.830

    It's not even a thing. It's that within which experiences arise. For this one comes from Sarah's first, * Username* Bernardo, I love your work and your theory. I have a question, though you have argued that consciousness does not depend on matter or bodies or brains by in part, reciting numerous studies that show cognition and consciousness are not always correlated to brain or activity. So, consciousness cognition doesn't need a brain, right? Brains are just what show up on our dashboards. We discuss that extensively. So why then, do you posit that metacognition is dependent on brains, specif

    yt/DyzHYnOqIoU-10k-subscribers-a-q-a-with-bernardo-kastrup/transcript.txt

  3. 03 · pubmed0.828

    Theorists are converging from quite different quarters on a version of the global neuronal workspace model of consciousness, but there are residual confusions to be dissolved. In particular, theorists must resist the temptation to see global accessibility as the cause of consciousness (as if consciousness were some other, further condition); rather, it is consciousness. A useful metaphor for keeping this elusive idea in focus is that consciousness is rather like fame in the brain. It is not a privileged medium of representation, or an added property some states have; it is the very mutual acce

    pubmed/PMID-11164029-are-we-explaining-consciousness-yet/info.md

  4. 04 · yt0.821

    So I would be thrilled if you could   convince me of those anomalies, and I really  mean that seriously, because one point where   I think I slightly disagree with you is I don't  feel like local consciousness is the intuitive   answer. It's like consciousness, at least as  I experienced it and as I've read others have   experienced it across the ages, it feels bigger  than something that can fit inside the human head,   and yet science, as I understand it, is driving  us to that perspective that it's just the chemical&

    yt/qFuYUSWwn7s-when-physics-meets-fiction-brian-greene-dan-brown-world-scie/transcript.txt

  5. 05 · yt0.816

    Now I think I think those are two separate thesis and I think at one point you said that even if the physiological story somehow turned out to be untrue this recognition of these different ways of being in the world is something that is that is undeniable. Right. >> Yes. And some people have said to me you didn't really need to spend 30 years looking at the brain because as you say it's there in the history of philosophy. It's actually also in the history of wisdom traditions I think is the best way to put it from around the world. So it's an intuition about ourselves that is very deep.

    yt/AZj01XPMIyA-648-civilization-s-imbalance-and-restoring-the-humanities-th/transcript.txt

  6. 06 · yt0.815

    I have 20 minutes in order to explain to you 35 years of research and 2,000 pages. Um, so I'm going to do my best. And it's about the brain. Isn't that exciting? Yes, it is. The brain. You may say, I don't mind about what's going on in my brain as long as I keep thinking, as long as my consciousness works. But your consciousness and your brain have an interesting relationship. But it is not one that is reductive. It's not that the consciousness can be reduced to the action of the brain. It's that very clearly when things go wrong with your brain, they change who you are and how you think and h

    yt/FOsX666lCPk-how-left-brain-thinking-is-killing-civilization-dr-iain-mcgi/transcript.txt

  7. 07 · yt0.813

    hello yes I should explain the title here I'm claiming that we need new physics to understand consciousness now well I mean new physics here I mean something outside the physics we know but it's not simply invented for the purpose of explaining consciousness it's something which I think we need anyway for quite other reasons and I'll come to that as part of the talk first of all there are various views about what's consciousness what comes what is the basis of consciousness and the current view is this basically well the brain operates according to a computer and many people believe this and c

    yt/xGbgDf4HCHU-sir-roger-penrose-dr-stuart-hameroff-consciousness-and-the-p/transcript.txt

  8. 08 · yt0.813

    But just for the materialist as well, like there is some sense in which I just am this collection of atoms. You know, I just am the collection of atoms that's in my brain and my body. And it sounds like you want to say that's kind of true, but in the opposite direction where like the materialist says you have a bunch of matter and that just somehow is the same thing as this conscious experience. If I'm hearing you correctly, you're saying you are just this conscious experience. you are just this like mentality. It's just that if you look at that from the outside, it just looks like a brain. It

    yt/DrMEL20o5KE-why-materialism-is-complete-nonsense-bernardo-kastrup/transcript.txt

  9. 09 · yt0.811

    You say, "Many philosophers and scientists believed and still believe that sentience serves no purpose, no physical purpose." Throughout the book, you persuade us of the plausibility of an alternative interpretation. And you suggest that feelings, as I mentioned, are part of nature, that they are not fundamentally different from other natural phenomena, and that they do something within the causal matrix of things. Consciousness Consciousness, you determine and you demonstrate is about feeling and feeling in turn is about how well or badly we are doing in life. Almost like a compass to try and

    yt/JRlS5EY1-zc-mark-solms-the-hidden-spring-part-1-of-9/transcript.txt

  10. 10 · pubmed0.811

    We do not have an adequate theory of consciousness. Both dualism and materialism are mistaken because they deny consciousness is part of the physical world. False claims include (i) behaviorism, (ii) computationalism, (iii) epiphenomenalism, (iv) the readiness potential, (v) subjectivity, and (vi) materialism. Ontological subjectivity does not preclude epistemic objectivity. Observer relative phenomena are created by consciousness, but consciousness is not itself observer relative. Consciousness consists of feeling, sentience, or awareness with (i) qualitativeness, (ii) ontological subjectivit

    pubmed/PMID-23754416-theory-of-mind-and-darwin-s-legacy/info.md

Curation checklist

  • ☐ Verify excerpt against source recording
  • ☐ Tag tier (axiom · law · principle · primary derivation · observation)
  • ☐ Cross-cite to ≥1 primary source (PubMed / arXiv / archive.org)
  • ☐ Promote to bucket-canon/07-mind/