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 · yt0.767

   Oh, yeah, I know, I know, I like it, but I think for me, if you want to just make it really like a basic message to me, it's just like saying that in idealism we just say that that ocean is consciousness, right? The ocean is the mind at large. You can agree with that on that. Yeah. But I mean, assuming that we will eventually unify, our 17 quantum fields that we need to go into in grand unification theory. Yeah. Then I would say the resulting field is a model of this field of subjectivity. That is the ground our lives. Exactly. Yeah. Yeah. And then I can sort of following that helps me also pe…

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

2. 02 · yt0.759

   I don't think they're going to have to quickly turn on their engines because they see a camera pointed at them. I mean, it's kind of ludicrous. More than that, would they be interested to visit us? We're primitive on the scale of being able to undertake interstellar travel in any reasonable period of time, right? And so any civilization that could visit us presumably is able to undertake interstellar travel fairly easily. That means they're pretty far ahead of us. Would they maybe as an anthropological research project for some alien PhD student? They say, "Yeah, okay. Go visit Earth." Yeah, y…

   yt/I3_me7RqteE-ask-brian-greene-live-q-a-world-science-festival/transcript.txt

3. 03 · yt0.756

   They do not understand that, and uh anyone who's ever tried to uh converse with physicists about this issue will will, I think, confirm what I'm saying. It's almost impossible. And Alfred North Whitehead was one of these. For decades, he went to all the big universities in England and America, and and uh lectured these people on the uh a, the unfoundedness, and b, the the damage to to to physics itself that this postulate uh causes, and there has been almost zero acceptance in the scientific world of what Whitehead had to say. Mhm. Yeah. It's as though a methodological shortcut, which would al…

   yt/V_ZWBkSNMFg-platonic-physics-in-dialogue-with-wolfgang-smith/transcript.txt

4. 04 · yt0.754

   there are no loopholes left so now your option is the following either you acknowledge that there is no physical realism in other words that physical things are not out there until you measure them until you look at them they don't exist as physical things until you measure or you have to believe that at every planck scale of time which is unimaginably small a centos second is much much much bigger than the age of the universe compared to planck time so you have to you have to believe that at every plank time a near infinitude of new physical universes pop into existence which is probably the …

   yt/c6igdqUZ6kM-metaphysical-idealism-dr-bernado-kastrup-interview/transcript.txt

5. 05 · yt0.752

   And they were then, they were not standing out as starkly against what you call the zeitgeist, as they would have been, if they had insisted on normal physics. - Yeah, it kind of reminds me of that famous quote attributed to Steven Weinberg. I think it's actually accurate, where he said something along the lines of, "It's not that we take our mathematical theories..." How did he say it? He's basically saying, "We don't take our mathematical theories seriously enough." It's not that we take them too seriously, it's that we don't take them seriously enough, right? So if you apply that to quantum…

   yt/Af5LICjFIBc-what-is-quantum-mechanics-really-telling-us-world-science-fe/transcript.txt

6. 06 · yt0.745

   You give me the quantum state of the universe right now. This is the equation that tells you what happens next. It is not teological. It is not moral. It does not care what you do. It does not judge you. There is no goal or purpose towards which it strives. There's no causes and effects in this equation. It's just a pattern just like 6 7 8 9 10. Now you might object a slightly more sophisticated version of the previous objection is okay you have equations but I don't believe that your equations are truly fundamental unless they can fit on a t-shirt. So I prove to you that that can happen. Once…

   yt/rqezWO5Yba8-sean-carrol-the-big-picture-on-the-origins-of-life-meaning-a/transcript.txt

7. 07 · yt0.743

   That the theories that were   being developed and the models that were being  developed were by 1980s were pretty much right on. Brian: For instance,   additional data that ultimately was awarded the  Nobel Prize, observations of stellar trajectories   in the center of our galaxy, was that viewed  as just adding to the mountain of evidence? Kip: I think there was   always a worry, I would say, a worry of hope  that there was something wrong. I saw over my   career some huge surprises where we were wrong.  For example, t…

   yt/PTs--eFrzGo-greatest-mysteries-of-gravity-brian-greene-kip-thorne-world-/transcript.txt

8. 08 · yt0.741

   My guess is that he not that he wouldn't have believed my theorem, he would have thought, "Oh, well, that just shows you general relativity is wrong." Curiously, the reaction I got from certain people. I know Bob Dicke in in when I visited Princeton after this, he slapped me on the back and said, "You've done it. You've showed general relativity is wrong." And what what I thought I was doing, you see. But I mean, you see, these things are there wasn't anything definitive in these experiments. You just sort of eventually have enough evidence to push the majority of people in a certain direction…

   yt/OoDi856wLPM-sir-roger-penrose-stuart-hameroff-collapsing-a-theory-of-qua/transcript.txt

9. 09 · yt0.740

   It's just great to have the these theories being so powerful that they're telling us that the that these assumptions are not fundamental. So that's the that's the fundamental orientation that people need to have about this thing. It it's not about shooting yourself in the foot. No theory has the final assumptions. Some theories are so deep that their assumptions tell you that the assumptions aren't true. They're not the final word. But most theories aren't that good. We're going to keep diving into all of that. uh but to to keep making our way through this in a digestible manner. I'm curious b…

   yt/xaeafKPfs1M-the-greatest-discovery-about-reality-the-consciousness-behin/transcript.txt

10. 10 · blog0.740

    This means that (1) , which is motivated by the skeptical scenarios mentioned above and the associated veil of perception view, would be unnecessary for deriving the skeptical conclusion, as are those skeptical scenarios, were it not for the fact that (1) is commonly taken to render perception inferential in such a way as to lend support to (2) . If (1) is true, then, plausibly, (2) is: if our access is mediated by potentially nonveridical appearances, then we should only trust the appearances we have reason to think veridical. And no other reason to endorse (2) is immediately apparent (althou…

    blog/plato-stanford-edu/epistemological-problems-of-perception.md