Transcript
Speaker: Hello and welcome to Pursuit of Infinity, a podcast where we journey into the landscapes of consciousness and beyond, diving deep into the realm of psychedelics, metaphysics, and more. This is episode 76, where Joe and I delve back into our list of metaphysical questions, and I have to say this might be my favorite segment yet.
Speaker: We explore fascinating topics like the existence and nature of the soul and the essence of consciousness, subjects we are especially passionate about. These big, thought -provoking questions lead to rich discussions where Joe and I uncover new insights from our differing interpretations and beliefs. If you like these type of episodes, let us know wherever you listen or reach out on our website. Speaking of our website, you can find us at pursuitofinfinity dot .com, where you can not only listen to the podcast through our integrated media player, if you'd prefer that over Spotify, Apple, Audible, or any of the other podcast platforms,
Speaker: You can also find all the places you can follow us and you can reach out using our email form or our audio feature, which allows you to record a little audio clip and send it to us via email.
Speaker: Give us a follow on Instagram. We're at pursuit of infinity pod, and you can head over to our YouTube channel at youtube dot .com slash at pursuit of infinity, where we post all of our episodes and shorts. If you love the show and you want to show us some support, please consider giving us a like a sub and a five star rating wherever you listen or watch and leave us a comment or a review as these things really help us to conquer these algorithms and spread our conversations far and wide.
Speaker: If you really love the show, then you want to show us some extra support, visit our Patreon at patreon dot .com slash pursuit of infinity to become a patron. We appreciate each and every one of you. Thank you so much for listening and I hope you enjoy today's episode.
Speaker: Hey everyone, welcome to Pursuit of Infinity. I'm Josh and this is Joe. Welcome to the episode. Today we are going to be picking up our metaphysical questions. We got through 42 of them.
Speaker: Um, and it's been a little while, but you know, it's interesting. We've never actually started off any of these episodes by just kind of defining what metaphysics is. So I'd like to ask you, Joe, to you, cause I know the definition can probably vary between person to person. Uh, but to you, what is metaphysics?
Speaker: and Okay so to me I guess I'd say let's look at it physics is the job of physics is to describe how nature behaves. So metaphysics isn't the description of how nature behaves but what nature is. So metaphysics is actually what is reality whereas science that we normal normally deal with in physics is Really, the job of it is to describe the behavior of nature or and predict future events in reality, that type of thing. Whereas metaphysics is actually answering the question, what is reality? So it's meta, it's ah like one layer deeper. It's more fundamental to the existence of what reality is. What do you think? you Would you agree with that description?
Speaker: I think I would definitely agree with that description, yeah. When I think of metaphysics, I just kind of break down the words, meta and physics. And as you said, physics is essentially like the description of our material world um in terms of what we can measure and see with the scientific method. And I think about like, what would it mean to say the meta version of that?
Speaker: like a level broader than that so you know it's as you said describing what reality is that's definitely one way to look at it but you can even look at it as like as we always bring up you know the the holons it's just like an outer level of the fractal It might not, like metaphysics might just be another fractal. And then outside of that, there might be another version of something that you may call meta metaphysics. And you know what I mean? And it could probably go on forever. But to me, metaphysics is like reaching past the understandings that physics allows us to reveal and sort of going one level deeper or going out one meta level broader.
Speaker: I think it's also worth saying that like I don't appreciate that nowadays, in our modern culture, it seems like metaphysics is almost categorized as woo -woo, or it's not really taken too seriously by a lot of you know the famous minds of our time. ah I think that's changing to an extent, but it kind of has a woo stigma around it or it's not taken as seriously as like hard physics. And the irony of it is that being the case, we are kind of, since we're not like investigating metaphysics in its own right,
Speaker: Now it seems that like physics and science is kind of stepping out of its bounds and trying to pull metaphysics into it. So like a lot of scientists instead of they're getting it mixed up with instead of.
Speaker: ah having their science just describe nature and predict outcomes, they're kind of mixing metaphysic metaphysics in with their standard physics. You understand what I mean? It seems like they're kind of mixing a little bit in a way that I don't think is correct.
Speaker: Yeah, i I totally understand what you're saying. I mean, we're we're really just too tied to the paradigms that we currently try to understand reality in. And that's just kind of part of the transition between um like understanding new paradigms. where were We're still going to try to to understand everything that presents itself to us based off of the tools that we currently have until we can evolve those tools. So, I mean, psychedelics are one way of, you know, evolving those tools, ah meditation, you know, anything that, you know, involves the mind and involves consciousness. And so we can sort of adapt our methods of research to some of those newer
Speaker: And actually they're not even newer. They're more primitive tools. Um, I think we're still going to be grasping onto that, that physicalist paradigm that we try so hard to measure everything against. And you know, I think like.
Speaker: psychedelics as you mentioned meditation as well those in my opinion are the ultimate metaphysical tools and you know it's those are totally disregarded in the materialist realm or just standard hard sciences like um In regular physics, a psychedelic trip bears you know no relevance in their minds. So it's, you know, a lot of scientists are using their physics to create their metaphysics where I think they're kind of skipping over using the proper tools for that investigation.
Speaker: Yeah, I a hundred percent agree. Um, so now that we sort of have nailed down a little bit of what we think metaphysics is and how we, how we even go about thinking about metaphysics, why don't I go into the next question here and ask it to you? So it is number 43. And the question is, is there a necessarily existent being upon which the contingent world depends for its existence?
Speaker: Okay. See, that's an interesting question. The way it's worded and what it, the kind of assumption I think that is in there. So reality is, it is contingent upon being, not a being. So when it says a being, it kind of, I think it's inferring to like a version of God that is some uh separate other or you know entity like a Some type of a what we would call being Where what I would say is the proper way of thinking about it is actually just being itself capital B being so not um something with a physical form But the pure experience of being so I think reality is contingent upon being that I think
Speaker: When you go deep and deep beyond all the layers of what we look at as the physical realm all down through the layers of our sense perceptions and our thoughts, you know, mind and matter, you get the fundamental thing that is.
Speaker: contingent upon reality existing, which is being itself. So not a being as in a physical form or some type of higher being that you know creates reality, like maybe what some would envision as like the Christian God, but being itself, more of what the Christian mystics would ah acknowledge as God.
Speaker: So not a being, but being itself, which is our most fundamental experience of reality. It is the closest thing to us. It is us. So I think that is um what reality is contingent upon.
Speaker: Okay. I'm going to take a little bit of a different approach to this question. So I'm going to start by defining some of the terms that the question sort of revolves around. So first, contingent world. I am going to separate contingent world from what you were saying reality is, because I think contingent world is more specific than all of reality. So you're saying earth.
Speaker: Uh, let's call contingent world the physical reality that you and I experience as humans. And if that is the definition of contingent world, then I think it depends upon the existence of a being because consciousness works through us to create the reality that we're seeing in terms of our perceptions. Um, now I'm not saying that.
Speaker: The brain is, uh, creating consciousness. Um, but what I sort of think of it as is again, like the, like consciousness itself weaves its way into, um, a being, and then the projection of reality. Colored by all of our perceptions is what the contingent world depends upon because the contingent world or the material world, as we know, we kind of talk about all the time.
Speaker: is more so created by our brain and our consciousness than is something that is outside of us, I think. So that's the way I kind of want to approach the question. Okay. See, yeah, I think that's great actually because the world as we experience it, this ah this earth and physical realm that we experience is contingent upon our perceptions. Yes.
Speaker: So I was kind of looking at it a different way, but I totally agree with that. That, I mean, all our entire experience of the world is simply perceptions and, you know, it's mind and matter, perceptions and thoughts, perceptions, thoughts, sensations. That's, you know, I, we have our five senses. That's what we experience the world as. So it's not like.
Speaker: ah coincidence that ah we have eyes and we think this is what the world looks like or you know if we had an extra sense if we had a sixth sense it's called X there would be X's out in the world and we would think that's what the world is so yes it's contingent upon our perceptions and us as an apparent separate being um that, you know, creates those perceptions and then creates the world. So, yeah, I agree with that. Yeah, it's a good way of looking at it. The contingent world and its existence also changes according to the type of being that consciousness is inhibiting at the time or at the quote -unquote time um because the contingent world of a dog or a bat or a zebra or an ant is vastly different
Speaker: than it is for you or I so and that's just all that is is just consciousness flowing through a different being but notice it's a being so I do think that the contingent world does depend upon a being. Yeah, I see what you're saying. I still think ah there is a layer beyond that where
Speaker: I mean, there are definitely multiple ways to look at it. I'll just put it that way. I already stated what I said before, but I do agree that it is contingent upon our perceptions for sure. Yeah. I mean, I think really the the the difference is how you would define contingent world and then also the existence of contingent world. You know, if you if you consider contingent world to mean like all of reality, then I think your first explanation of it is spot on.
Speaker: Yeah, and if you want to separate the. ah States of being as like, you know, from the dream state to, you know, altered states of minds, like with psychedelics, entering other realms, like astral projection, stuff like that. ah I see, you know, it's, but if you include it all together as one, as reality, as a whole, that's where I initially came at the question. But I get what you're saying when you really pick apart actually each word and focus specifically on
Speaker: This state, this realm, I see exactly what you're saying there. Yeah. um Should I read the next one? Sure. And what, ah that's, is it 44? Yes, 44. Okay. ah Could there be a person who was not in time? Could there be a person that was not in time?
Speaker: No, I don't think so. um Because no matter what, if you are a person, if we're considering person meaning human, then that would be a person that is grounded within this physical reality. And if you're grounded anywhere within the physical reality,
Speaker: as a person, not as a being not as a consciousness, not as a spirit, and not not as a soul as a person, then you are in time somewhere. Even if you're because you know, have you heard that thing where people say like, ah if there's a person who's in space, traveling at a certain speed,
Speaker: for a certain period of time, you know, they won't age or whatever, or like right age ah slower than somebody who's on Earth here. Still, that is in time. So I know I don't think that there could be a person in time, even if you're traveling through time, you're still in that ah that linearity that we're stuck in as a physical being as a physical person. Right. And part of being A human, part of being a person.
Speaker: is you're wearing the headset that projects time and space. So if you are a person, you have to be experiencing what we feel as, and we experience time as, even if you know you transcend to another state where you're not experiencing time in a linear fashion. um At that point, you can, like during an ego death, you know but in that moment, you aren't identified as a person.
Speaker: your ah your i identity expands beyond just being a person. But if we're talking about being a person, you are necessarily kind of trapped into that realm of apparent space and time. So I think that space and time are illusions, so but illusions are still real things. An illusion is just not what it appears to be. But as a human being, we experience what I think the eternal now
Speaker: With the headset, we we experience it as time, time and space. So I think, you know, person is the key word there. As a person, you must be experiencing, you must be in time, which means, you know, you're experiencing the time.
Speaker: Yeah, i I totally agree. And i I don't really have too much more to say on that one to be quite honest. I think that that's pretty straightforward. Pretty cut and dry. I mean, I'm trying to think of the devil's advocate. What what do you think about that? Is there any a case you could make for a devil's advocate there?
Speaker: Honestly, I, I don't think so just because of the word person. Like there are things that I would want to say if I was forced to be devil's advocate. And if I was forced to be devil's advocate, maybe I would bring up the. Like time travel aspect of it, or, you know, the, the thing I said where like, if you're in space and you're traveling at a certain time, like maybe you're not within the particular timeline that we're defining as time because you're breaking free of it in a certain way, if you're moving through it.
Speaker: I mean, you could say that, right but but I just, I still think you're, you're still boxed into that linearity of time, no matter what, if you're a person. And that being said, even when, even if you time travel were to exist, and like you said, you'd be in a, maybe a different timeline or a different place in time. That's the key word. You're still in time. Um, I think the, one of the.
Speaker: devil's advocate ideas that came to my head was um like deep sleep, for instance, because in deep sleep, you aren't experiencing ah time at all. It's you're in this timeless, eternal state. But also in deep sleep, you're not experiencing personhood. and So from your direct experience in deep sleep, you have no ah idea of being human or being a person at all. But um So yeah, I think it's pretty cut and dry. Yeah, I agree. All right. Number 45.
Speaker: Can persons be analyzed in terms of person stages? So that's person dash stages. I don't even know what this means to be. I don't either. What is a person stage?
Speaker: This might be like a metaphysical phrase as above our, you know, pay grade or something. But so this, I just put it in the chat GPT. Okay. So it says in the context of spiritual growth and self development, personal stages refer to distinct phases or levels of individual evolution that people go through as they grow, learn and transform. These stages often relate to how a person understands themselves, their relationships, their purpose, and their connection to the world or higher consciousness. I'm not sure it really understood, because that's kind of what I would have said too. But I think that it just seems like it's phrased a little differently. Person dash stages. I mean, I mean, I can answer the question, which I mean, it says, can persons be analyzed in terms of person stages? And I think, of course, persons can be analyzed in that way. So
Speaker: You can analyze things however you would like. I mean, I don't know how valuable that is to do, but I mean, you can analyze someone based on, I don't know if it's asking their level of awareness or I don't know. Would you say that the deepest and most accurate version of person analysis would be based off of their spiritual person stage? Like when you're looking at who they really are,
Speaker: In that sense, probably. I mean, I think self -awareness, someone's self -awareness is key. I mean, I think that's like the theyre their core, their being. um I think that affects your behavior in all sorts of ways. ah The more you understand yourself and reality is going to affect how you interact with others, how you treat yourself. It's going to affect your mental health, your physical health.
Speaker: um So I think it's very telling. So I think, you know, analyzing somebody in that sense could be useful. I'm still not sure what exactly it's asking, but in those terms, I mean, sure. Yeah. And if it is asking that, then I think it's most useful to analyze yourself in that way. Agreed. And I think, yeah, that's far more important.
Speaker: But in analyzing others, yeah, I mean I would say in analyzing others. I don't know How useful that is to do but let's move on Is it my turn your turn? Okay um Okay, is there sorry is the self a bundle of experiences Is the self a bundle of experiences that's a good question bundle No Well, I mean, this says, uh, I, I'm going to change this to be capital S self. Um, because I think there's a difference when you speak about capital S self compared to lowercase S self. I'll just quick say both. So in terms of capital S self, no, because I think the capital S self is exists beyond experience. You can.
Speaker: touch it, you can experience it. Your lowercase self can experience your uppercase self, but your lower your uppercase self is not defined by the bundle of experiences. I do think that the lowercase self is because the lowercase self um Is essentially an amalgamation of your experiences that formed and shaped your personality your emotions your subconscious most likely as well um And all of the things that go into defining who you are as a person So I think yeah, I do think that the the lowercase self is a bundle of experiences, but not the uppercase self Yeah, I basically agree with that um like bundle of experiences and
Speaker: is kind of strange. The way I look at it is I'm trying to boil everything down to like you the direct experience, which in the reality of it all, all we have is experience. There's no getting around it. That's all that there is. So I think to a degree, you can say, yes, the self is experiencing. um There's no part of you that isn't experiencing.
Speaker: um So i would it I'm not ah fond of the bundle of experiences because I think that you are far more than just like a bundle of separate experiences, but in your deepest core, you are experiencing itself. I mean, that is what you are at all times. No matter what, you're always in a state of experiencing.
Speaker: Yeah, I totally agree. So fundamentally, I mean, you can kind of interchange experiencing with consciousness, experience with awareness. You know, there are similar types of terms, and I think those are fundamental to what we experience as reality. So to be a self, you must experience. So you ready to move on, you think? Yes.
Speaker: All right, we're going to skip number 47 because it's a little weird and very similar to 46. So 48 is, do humans involve immaterial souls?
Speaker: See, that this is a tough one for me. um
Speaker: because the way I look at it is the word soul. but Let's talk about that first. So for me, I mean, the soul is a hard thing to define. I mean, all words are just pointing to something. So what is that word actually pointing at? The soul. So most people I think would say something unique to you that is ah beyond your body or your physical existence? I don't know. What what do you consider the soul?
Speaker: I like to think of it as Similarly to how we were discussing in the Latin, one of the previous questions, like the way that consciousness inhabits a body. I feel like there is a certain, and I'm going to talk about this in a physical way, because it's the only way that we can really grab onto things. But it's almost as if like, it's my version.
Speaker: or it's like my consciousness, the consciousness that ah that inhibits my body. You know what I mean? the the The thing that connects me or tethers me to the ultimate version of what reality or existence or life or love is or spirit, you know, God, whatever you want to call it, whatever word you want to call it. It's like the thing that tethers each one of us individually to that thing.
Speaker: Because I do think that there is something that that tethers our individuality to it. I think we we have a responsibility as a species that can evolve.
Speaker: to evolve in order for consciousness or intelligence itself to continue moving up the ladder of you know whatever it is it's trying to do, evolution of its own of its own self.
Speaker: you know um And the soul, is it's it's a weird one because a lot of people think of the soul as the higher self right um or
Speaker: Like the good inside you, you know, like the moral compass. But I still just kind of in broader terms, consider it the thing that tethers your individuality to God. Okay. See, I think we'll probably differ on this one, which is it's not like I totally disagree with everything you said. It's all reasonable and makes sense. But for me, I think.
Speaker: The soul kind of, it feels like an extension of the ego or it's like some something that you're trying to hold on to. For me, it feels very similar to the ego. Whereas I think kind of what you're getting at with the soul is like that very thing that connects you to God or that deepest aspect of yourself. I like to call it being. That's what feels right to me, like just your core, your very being.
Speaker: I think that is what people are talking about ah when they say soul, but I think the reason I have a problem with the whole soul concept is I think that that being that is that deepest part of you, the fundamental aspect of your experience in reality itself, I think it is all one shared being.
Speaker: so i don't think that there's a bunch of ah individual chopped up souls that are, that have, I mean, this is kind of like a, I don't mean it to be like condescending, but that each have their own like personalities or um unique existence. I think that for this experience and for this realm, we are all experiencing each other, but our very being,
Speaker: which is, I think, what people are pointing to when they think of a soul is actually one shared being, which is God itself. So our very being is what connects us to God, and which is similar to what I think people are getting at when they say, oh, we, you know, everything is one, we are all one. I think that gets misconstrued a lot and spoken out of term often, but I think that There's just like essentially one ultimate soul that is all shared more so than each of us have a unique soul that is um that transcends our physical bodies. I think it's more so it's one shared being that we all are rather than we all have unique individual souls or consciousnesses. Like, I mean, I think consciousness comes up
Speaker: later soon So i'll I'll save that for when that comes up. But um I seem to look at it more like an uber soul than individual souls. But again, this is kind of where I started. It's like soul is just a word.
Speaker: So words are just, it's a noise that we make that tries to point at something. I say the word and then you create the meaning in your head. You know, it's just, a it's a noise, you know? So I think soul is a ah complex ah word and a complex concept because people have their own version of it. And based on my experience of reality and experiences I've had and how I think about things,
Speaker: It's a tough one to grapple with ah as far as the unique soul separating that from the ego and also the experience that you can have of oneness and transcendental states, things like that. um It's definitely fascinating and it's not something that I've like just throw away. I like to think about it, but I kind of land on souls really just being the one being. It's just the one.
Speaker: aware presence inside of all of us. the The one spark that brings your experience to life is the same spark in me. It's all the same thing. So I think the reason that the soul is a slippery word and a slippery topic is because it forces us to grapple with the paradox of individuality and then also oneness, because I do think that it is both because I think that there there's there's us, our physical being, and then there's the oneness. And then in between those two things is the place where the paradox lies, which is the soul. right I think the soul includes the ego. I think the the the soul includes all of it because I think, again, it's the thing that tethers us to the one, the all, the God, whatever you want to call it.
Speaker: So I think it just like forces us to grapple with the paradox of trying to find our individuality and where that lies within the relation to the oneness. And another aspect of the question that used the word immaterial, which I think um the most fundamental aspect of ourselves is immaterial. So the immaterial aspect is absolutely fundamental. And I think.
Speaker: As soon as you want to think of an immaterial aspect of yourself, you want to grab onto the word soul because, I mean, it makes sense. It's a good word in, um you know, conveying these ideas. But ultimately, I think that is um kind of and more of ah an ego -driven thing. That's where I'm landing on it for now.
Speaker: Yeah, I think a lot of people do define it a little more toward the egocentric way. um Because again, when we define it, it's a word, like you said, and we when we try to define words, especially in metaphysical concepts, you know, ah we, yeah we have wiggle room, you know, and if you're wiggling toward more toward the physical ego driven definition of soul, then I could see where that could happen. Some people will also go the other way and they wiggle a little bit more toward the, you know, the divine ah definition of it. But I do think that ultimately, you know, soul is, it's almost like defined by the, by the person, by the perceiver, you know? Like I said, it's it's a noise and then you have to create the meaning when you hear the noise. And, um,
Speaker: I don't, for me personally, I don't think it's a needed concept to define reality or my experience. I don't think it's like an individual soul isn't needed. I don't think um that it's necessarily the concept of a soul isn't needed to tether me to the one being. I think the one being is inescapable, essentially, that it's really all that's there at all times.
Speaker: and It's just in this experience, this illusory experience, um, we don't always see it or have the awareness of ourselves to know what's actually happening. It's like, um, if you're watching a movie on, on a screen, you imagine all the characters on the screen. They appear to be separate, but really their ultimate reality is the screen and there's one screen. So it's like, even though they appear to be individual entities and Their only reality is the one screen. They're made of the screen. That's similar to how I look at that the idea of an individual soul or ego versus the one. They're one and the same, essentially.
Speaker: Yeah. Well, I mean, and then then you you could say, you know, just as you were talking about how, you know, space and time are illusions, but illusions are real, right the characters might be part of the one, but they are still real yes at the same time. So their fundamental reality is the screen.
Speaker: Yes, yes, but that doesn't but it but it doesn't negate the reality of them themselves. And if that if the soul is the tether, then that is inescapable as well. You know, it might not be and that it's interesting when you say ah it's not needed.
Speaker: That's an interesting concept in itself because who is determining the need and what are you then describing that where you don't need that part of it? I don't think that it's an it's necessary. Like, um kind of like Occam's razor, um the the least assumptions needed.
Speaker: in order to get to the truth. So I i don't think it's needed to explain reality. um I don't think that it's, the closest thing, and this is where it gets difficult because everybody has a different idea of soul, but for me, it's too attached to ego. When I think of soul, it's just too much of like me as an individual, separate being. my My humanity almost like my being like Joe has Joe's soul. Um, so I don't think it's necessarily needed as in it's, I think it's an an assumption that doesn't have to be there essentially. Yeah. Um, but I could take a different route where I, I don't discount it. Um, and I think that it includes the ego because I do think that the ego is.
Speaker: integral to who we are and what we are. Um, I think it's more important than we give it credit for, um, because we're so stuck in it and we're so caught in it. And it is the source of so many of our problems. Um, I think that we try, especially in our culture, and I know I do it myself too, to, to kill the ego or to, you know,
Speaker: Dissolve the ego in order to experience what I consider to be ultimate reality But then I realized that I'm doing that like that in itself is an ego game So well that's the thing I feel like like placing yourself in the middle where both things again, it's this paradox of you know, the ego is part of the soul the ego is an extension of God the ego is God and So it's really hard to to nail down what is and what isn't. I think it just it just all is. Well, the idea isn't to kill the ego. It's just to identify it for what it is. That's it's the ego. That's just what it is. And that's not what you are. So you can't kill the ego. You can experience egolessness for like in our human life for short periods of time and transcendental states. But like our reality is
Speaker: We live with the tool of the ego. It's just that's not actually what you are. So you your ego is essentially a tool. And I think that it's something on the screen, but that's what it is. It's part of the screen, but it's fundamental reality is the screen. And you know, if there's a soul, then it's just another the thing on the screen. um I could see that as well, but um For me, I think it depends how how many layers you're going deep, really. Yeah, especially using, I mean, and you could use that analogy of like, maybe the the screen is the soul and the writers and the producers of the show are God or something, you know what I mean? Like you could really expand ah that that metaphor out too, but yeah, an I don't know. And this is where I come down on it, like,
Speaker: foremost is I have never experienced a soul. So like I can't say it's real if I've never experienced it. It's just another concept added to my lexicon to maybe like convey ideas, but they're so ah conceptual and abstract that it doesn't It doesn't sit with me like it's not part of my direct experience of reality. So it's that's where like for me it just seems like the another layer of the ego. um That's the best way I can describe it the way I think of it at least not to say that there isn't um
Speaker: I mean, wild states that you can experience, like your mind, you know, consciousness is infinite. You can experience infinite things, but I don't know if there's an actual thing that is the soul.
Speaker: yeah Yeah, I totally understand what you're saying, yeah and I think that there are some people out there that would describe some experiences that they've had as nothing but their soul. So again, it's experience is king, as we always say, and um this is just a description of a potential experience. you know yeah So, yeah, I mean, it's it's an interesting concept. I mean, I, it's, I've thought about it deeply, you know, whether or not there is even a soul or what it is, if there is a soul and it's, it's constantly evolving in my mind as well. So I'm open to, you know, anything that could potentially form and color my, my interpretation of the soul.
Speaker: And I just think that it boils down to whether the shared the soul is shared or individualized. And I think the word soul in itself implies individualized. That's why I kind of reject the word soul. I think when people are talking about the soul… that What they're getting at exists, but it's not individual. It is shared among us. So that is basically just God. It's the most fundamental aspect of us and our reality. So instead of— But don't you think it can be both, though? Or it can be your piece of reality or of of God because it it almost seems like— even okay so if you take the concept of like past lives you know so what is i think people think of the soul as the thing that connects all of your lives as well because that like in order to remember a past life there would have to be something in there that continues
Speaker: But something that continues that you hold on to, that you keep, that exists outside of your physical body, your physical life, your physical death, even. And I think that is, that might be what the tether is, you know? Like the tether between you and all of your lives, if that if that does exist. But this is like, as human beings, we have our concepts and then we project them onto nature, like possession,
Speaker: It isn't inherent in nature. It's ah it's a human concept, possession. like we always want like I use this with consciousness, like my consciousness. Possession is isn't it's a human concept. So I think even with like past lives, to say those are mine, you're you're grabbing it for the ego, I think. um That's why I think it kind of boils down the ego. I mean, there cant you can experience past lives.
Speaker: And that's an experience you can have, and it's real because you experience it. But that doesn't mean that it belongs to you. I think that is a human conception, just the ah idea of possession in itself. I don't think possession is fundamentally inherent in nature or in reality. I think that is a ah human idea or ah something of the ego.
Speaker: Yeah, yeah, I, I often feel that myself, but then again, you know, when I do think about the past lives thing, what is it then that connects one to their future and past lives? And also, you know, I think of like the, the, the Hindu and Buddhist concepts of like karma.
Speaker: And the fact that like ah the rebirth and reincarnation um concepts depend upon what you do in your life, say. um And if there is something that connects you to your future incarnation, that could be considered the soul, that constant thing, because I think there is Because you know but possession might not be a human concept. Possession might be a concept that exists beyond our understanding that we're grasping you know from afar.
Speaker: I understand why you would say that possession is ah is a human concept because it definitely seems that way. But it yeah it's like impossible that we're being inspired by and our future incarnations. I don't that's how we understand possession as a whole. I mean, who knows? But I don't think ownership is real. I think it's an agreed upon thing like your car ownership might not be the right way to describe it like I understood like your car yes that's ownership but anything I don't think you i I think the soul owns you more than you own it like the soul owns the ego
Speaker: more so than you would own the soul. Sure. That would make sense. But it all um kind of boils down to my this is my grief with it all. Is it shared? Is there one or are they unique amongst individual human beings? um I think it's both. And i guess's both I think with past lives and all that, it's all possible if it's shared. I mean, if the being that you are is the being that I am, then all you you could it's all you essentially.
Speaker: It is all the one consciousness, the one a aware presence, the one being that experiences all. I think it could be, and of course you could experience past lives because it's you. There's nothing separating you from it or any other life. There's just, it's going to all be that being that is yourself. So i I'm pretty sure I beat this to death. I just, it's a question of,
Speaker: are Are they individualized or is it a a shared immaterial thing? And I think it's a shared immaterial thing, but I do understand where you're coming from, where there could be a layer in between where there is some individualized aspect. Like I totally get that and it could be, you know, but right now that's where i I'm leaning.
Speaker: Yeah, it's really a great question. I yeah i really, really do love to think about it. And I know that you you think about it a little differently than I do, so it's this is a fun one to talk about. Yeah, I agree. I like when we have just like slight differences in opinion on these things. Because I get it too, and it's it's such a ah fascinating one to think about. um it's Yeah, it's ah it's a toughie. Yeah. Is it my turn?
Speaker: I don't even remember, dude. I think you asked me. Okay. um Okay. Do humans involve any properties that are not reducible to the properties that characterize the inanimate world? Do humans involve any properties that are not reducible to the properties that characterize the inanimate world? Yep. And this is kind of what we were just talking about a bit, I guess, right?
Speaker: Yeah, well, I mean, it I'm going to say it's essentially asking if there's something that exists beyond the material world. Right. Meaning inanimate objects, you know. Physical. And it's almost as if like, are you defining humans and life based off of just the inanimate, if that's a word, of the physical um being. But yeah, absolutely. Yeah, for for sure. I mean, I think that there are an infinite amount of properties that are irreducible.
Speaker: um Yeah, 100%. And, you know, I think in our culture with like, you know, with reductionism, I think we kind of look at it through one lens. Like what we always do as a, our world is surrounded around the metaphysical reality. Well, not reality, but we look at reality through the materialist lens, the physicalist lens, that there is a physical world. We are all physical beings in space and time, this and that, and that's all there is to it.
Speaker: And then we want to use reductionism to just reduce things to the smallest piece of matter. And I think for a while I was like. Totally anti -reductionism then. I was like, because it's stupid to do that. I don't think something can, you necessarily learn something about the whole by reducing it to its smallest part. But reductionism is great if you think of it in a different way as in like reducing the complex to the simple. You know, reducing things not just based off of physical properties.
Speaker: um Which is what I think is always just the first thing you think about with reductionism. So reductionism can be great when you're reducing, you know, complex to simple. I think that's great to do. But to just pick something apart, like physical matter and reduce that and think you're going to figure it all out, I think is the wrong approach. And as far as... Yeah, go ahead. and Oh, I was going to say, and yeah, and it can also be very useful because when you reduce something down to its smallest parts and you have a ah ah higher understanding of its function, then you can extrapolate the in the other direction. And so to understand things as a whole a little more than you would have if you didn't reduce that thing down to its parts to understand its function. It's absolutely useful. I mean, it's all of our sciences. It definitely has its application.
Speaker: But um I think physicalists get stuck on it um when it comes to their metaphysics. They want to look at the smallest parts and then just, you know, reduce everything down in physical terms. But this question kind of goes into the last question, is the immaterial part, like, is there a soul can that's irreducible? um I would say you can't reduce
Speaker: i was like How was it worded? look at that Do humans involve any properties that are not reducible to the properties that characterize the inanimate world? so i it's to me It's using the word humans too, which is can be interesting. um But essentially, you know I would think you can't – yeah, it's basically what you said I would agree with that.
Speaker: Yeah, I think this is this is like essentially number 48. Right. That's pretty much kind of what we just went into. and Honestly, I think we should move on because this this next question might be the last question we even get to because okay it's gonna be a while, I think. And the question is one of our favorites and that is, what is consciousness? Oh man, where to begin.
Speaker: um And I'm glad that I'm asking you this first. Yeah. See, this is, I want to try to reduce the complex to the simple. um So consciousness, I would say the simplest thing you can, you can say is awareness. I think it is aware presence. It is presence, meaning it is inescapable. It is always present and it is always aware.
Speaker: um I'd look at reality and my metaphysical um framework, not materialism or physicalism. i'm even I struggle to even say idealism right now, idealism meaning that reality is mind because the the dualism with matter in mind, I'd like to call it consciousness first now, the consciousness first model. I heard that and I think that defines it better. So it's like you get the trifecta, mind matter.
Speaker: consciousness first. So um meaning that we look at reality in a sense of like there's how many people on earth now like eight billion or something. So like the standard model is there are eight billion consciousnesses and one physical world. And this is just I'm trying to make it super simple. But imagine that instead of there being eight billion consciousnesses and one physical world that there's one consciousness and eight billion worlds. Essentially that there is one consciousness and then it's all, you know, then each individual perception of the world. So the reason we see the the same world out there isn't because there is a a one single physical world out there. It's because we have a shared consciousness, a shared being.
Speaker: So essentially consciousness is awareness. It's aware presence. I think it's the fundamental, you know, consciousness first model. I think that you could say it's the word that is indescribable. It is God.
Speaker: It is love, you know, it's that that thing that you can't really, um, you can't put to words, but it is fundamental. I mean, and especially if it contains all of reality, which I think is obvious. I mean, you've never experienced anything outside of consciousness. Everything that's ever experienced is within.
Speaker: consciousness That's just unavoidable. That's another issue with the materialist paradigm. it's They want to say that there's eight billion consciousnesses, as far as human beings go, and one physical world out there, but that one physical world has never been experienced because matter is supposed to be it's supposed to exist outside of consciousness. We have yet to find this matter because any matter that is experienced is experienced within consciousness.
Speaker: Um, I think there's a great definition of consciousness and I don't want to mess it up. I want to read it for you because I think this is the best definition. I might've stated it on this podcast before, but it gets to the point of it's as a word. It's, you can't define it, but you can try to express something that brings it about within whoever you're conveying the message to. So.
Speaker: it is as such. Consciousness is that with which our experience is known. It is that within which everything appears and it is that out of which everything is made and of which everything is the activity.
Speaker: I think that is – that's Rupert Spira. I think that is the fullest definition of consciousness that could possibly be stated. I mean there's metaphors that can be used to also evoke this. there's um a lot that can be said, but I think that is the best definition. Everything appears within it. Everything is made of it. You can think of what I said before, the the screen example, the movie on the screen. The movie is like our experience, this we have here, but everything is is made of the screen. Everything is appearing on the screen. The movie is an activity of the screen. Consciousness is the screen. It is the fundamental aspect of reality. It's inescapable. It is being, when I talk about you know the shared thing between us, the very core, the soul, may I say, of our being, you know the it is consciousness.
Speaker: I love that. And man, when i when you were reading that, I heard it in Rupert's voice. What a perfect, gee, he's such a man. That guy just gets it. He does.
Speaker: Now, if I, because I honestly, I do think that definition, his definition is the perfect definition, but if I'm going to just sort of talk about what I think consciousness is, I think that it is the, the driving force behind life.
Speaker: I think consciousness just is. I think when we think of is -ness, that's just what consciousness is. I think consciousness is God. And I think that.
Speaker: It is what permeates and drives everything to be what it is. I think it is in through and all around all things. um And it creates all things. um It is creation itself.
Speaker: I think that if you want to discuss and talk about our relation to consciousness as individual entities, I think it is if it is the field that connects um us through time and space. um It makes me think of just paradox in general. And when I think of it, it almost makes me think that we are discovering consciousness through quantum mechanics. And let me explain that just a little more. So I think that
Speaker: What consciousness is, or the way that it presents itself in the material physical world, is through paradox. And the discovery of quantum mechanics is the discovery of paradox. We're literally discovering the way that paradox trickles itself into our physical reality in terms of particles and waves um Being fundamentally ah like happening in the same at the same time something can be a particle in a wave at the same time also with superposition things that um Effect like one particle will affect another instantaneously and the distance between them does not matter and These things, they make no sense in the physical paradigm because I believe that what we're touching is paradox. And when we touch paradox, I think what we're doing is we are weaseling our way into discovering or maybe not discovering, but
Speaker: experiencing consciousness. Maybe we are discovering it. I think maybe we are because when we start to go into what quantum mechanics is and what paradox is, the fact that it doesn't make sense and it breaks down everything that is in our material world, I think that we are starting to touch what we are defining as consciousness, what what that thing is. And it's fascinating because with quantum mechanics, it's like a lot of the founders They can't, they basically said what you're saying there. A lot of the founders of quantum mechanics were like, wow, we just discovered like this blows the materialist paradigm out of the water. It's all rubbish now. And they all of a sudden became like mystics. A lot of these guys, like a lot of them, a lot of the founders and see, but we're so attached the materialist paradigm that like,
Speaker: We created like the many worlds theory now. like We have to create something that fits the materialist paradigm to explain this unexplainable thing. And I totally agree. It's like when you're looking at quantum mechanics, it's just like a wink at you that paradox is inherent within reality. That there it's not um a bug, it's a feature. It's part of this thing. And that's the beauty of it also. Without paradox, I mean, there's Where's the mystery? I mean, we talk about the mystery. I mean, consciousness being what it is, and you know, living through this paradigm, the consciousness first, seeing things that way, it just opens up reality in a way that's not, you can't experience it when you limit yourself down to the physical paradigm. I think in, you know, coming to this realization that consciousness is fundamental, that ah reality is not just
Speaker: ah Physical matter it opens up the mystery and I think with psychedelics. It's one of the most amazing things that ah You can get through psychedelics. I mean it its Psychedelics will show you that at the very least if you take it seriously at the very least it'll show you that reality is not what you thought it was and That you are not what you thought you were um And then you follow that rabbit hole. It's infinite um I think it's worth saying that consciousness is infinite and eternal. So it's beyond space and time. I'd say it's dimensionless. um It can't be confined in any way that we that the human mind can try to twist and grapple with. It's just totally beyond human the human mind. So you can't know it like we know facts or concepts.
Speaker: the only way to be in touch with it is to actually be it. So that's why, for me, certain words work better for certain people and evoking that feeling or that, that like,
Speaker: touching it. And for me, it's being. That's why I use the word being a lot. I think awareness is a good one too. But just pure being is what consciousness is. Pure being. And at the same time, paradoxically, consciousness is everything. It's whatever is being presented to you is just an activity of consciousness. So i through what I've found is the
Speaker: The easiest way to get in touch with that is through, you know, doing the work that work that we always talk about, you know, studying it and then contemplation, some meditation, breath work, all that other stuff. And then bringing that to the psychedelic state, it just really opens up all these doors and you can just continue to go deeper into it. And then you realize that consciousness truly is infinite. I mean, and for me, what ah I love about psychedelics so much is that through having those experiences, coming back to my standard, you know, human state of mind, you can bring those ideas back and see that they still exist here. So like, you can close your eyes and experience the infinite depth of consciousness. You can, if you close your eyes and try to find an end to consciousness, you cannot do it.
Speaker: simply that it is infinite and you are constantly experiencing the infinite. There's no edge. It's just awareness. It's purely open. I also like to say with consciousness that it's like a a big yes. It is openness. it Your ego is what's fighting then all the things that you think are negative and you want to say no and resist things. That's not consciousness. Consciousness is purely open And it lets everything in without any rejection at all. It is just yes, yes, yes. Just enter me and I'll experience you experience whatever comes with no rejection. And then that's, I think a lot of people that you would see and maybe call like enlightened or people that really get it. I think that is what somehow they have really.
Speaker: got to that place where they're in touch with their pure being, their consciousness so much that they are just pure openness and just they are so aware of their ego and not identifying with it that they are just open to experience happening.
Speaker: where, you know, the more that you are stuck in your ego and identifying with the ego, the more you want to control things and reject things that come your way. Whereas consciousness, pure, open awareness is just welcoming all.
Speaker: Yeah, man, very well said. um I'll just sort of say, I mean, I just think consciousness, like I, when you were talking, I think you could have replaced the word consciousness every single time you said it with God. Yeah, it just is God. You know, that's just the human word for it. It's the only word we have. and Yeah, we have words like source which I love because source is the it does it it brings it to the Origination of all you know But I think God encompasses more than what we can specify right and when you think about consciousness like to me it's it's God it's it is everything it is all things and Again in through and all around and I think the people that you're talking about that, you know inhabit this openness If you ask them if they believe in God Or spirit or whatever you might you want to call it. They're not gonna be atheists, right? You know what I mean? Yeah, so I do think that the path toward climbing the ladder
Speaker: that ascends into higher levels of consciousness because I do believe that there are lower levels of consciousness and higher levels of consciousness. And I think what defines the higher levels of consciousness is exactly what you said, the openness and also that word love. Yeah.
Speaker: That's another thing. Consciousness and love are directly intertwined and directly connected. And I think that is why love is like the fundamental value that deb progresses all life.
Speaker: the consummation of children, you know, the continuing of the species, the the underlying motivation for all of those things. All that is good. Yeah, for all that is good. And for and I think that when you and also, you know, you speak about the psychedelic experience and you and you know, again, these open and very enlightened people, they all inhabit a very, very high level of love.
Speaker: you talk about like when you hear Ram Dass talk about his guru and when he would be around his guru what he would feel coming from him is just unconditional compassion and love and it would break him down and he would just be a puddle of tears in the presence of that thing yes and when you're in the presence of that pure love That is, I think, a direct route to experiencing a higher level of consciousness that peaks through our reality and and and it it wants to grab us and bring it into itself. I think consciousness wants to evolve the human or the monkey or the dog or the dinosaur. you know, any living being that has ever existed, I think consciousness has a drive or a desire, maybe through love and openness, to grab us and bring it into its dimension, its world, whatever you want to say, it its realm in order to I mean, who knows what its motivation would be. But
Speaker: It almost feels like it wants to evolve itself through us because we are it and it is us and we are all one and it's the creative force of everything, of of complexity. I think a lot of what you're saying there also can be said as consciousness is intelligence too. It's like um certain like it's inherent within the thing. It's built in. like When I see reality, I see intelligence.
Speaker: It's, uh, it's perfect. It's harmony. I think peace is a very good word, um, to equate with consciousness, um, total peace. And that's like a lot of these people like Rondas et cetera, they, they emanate peace. And also with this level of awareness and their understanding of the ego and their true nature, it allows them to like the level of compassion that they have, I think is what ah what you're feeling a lot. If you're around one of these people, because if one of these people has the true understanding that they are not separate, they're not other than you. There's no other, you know, they see themselves as one with you. So it's your levels of empathy skyrocket, you know, see none of this stuff that we're talking about,
Speaker: You can't get any of this through the physicalist paradigm. You just – it doesn't go anywhere in any of these directions. And it's – I think it has the opposite effect. It has like some type of nihilistic effect in a sense. And it's like – I think it's it's not healthy. um And you know, there's no – really good aspect of the materialist worldview, because everything we're saying, this metaphysics that we are discussing, the consciousness first, it doesn't change anything. Like this paradigm still applies to all of our physical science, all the stuff that we do, like all the technology we create, all this stuff, it still applies. It's not like having this worldview changes all the good stuff that we have done through this materialist paradigm.
Speaker: um But I think acknowledging reality as having a true core that is loving, um that you are directly not even connected with, but like you are it. You're not separate. You're not like a separate physical guy in some physical universe. You are nature. There's no separation. You are in it, you know?
Speaker: You're not some, ah we like to think of ourselves as separate things in a physical system that, you know, I am this and everything else is other, but it is all nature. We are all just nature, really. I think um you could use the word nature for consciousness also. See, if you consciousness is everything, so there are a lot of words you can use that like definitely fit in with its meaning. um But I think, you know, it's about time that people start investigating this more. I mean, I like to think about the implications of what this type of worldview could bring to people, all the terrible things that happen in the world and just, you know, how people behave.
Speaker: think would change dramatically if we didn't have this kind of nihilistic metaphysics hanging over us as because this is this is worldwide, this physicalist paradigm. I mean, you have you know niche other worldviews, and then you have like some religions who are kind of halfway in between. They believe in some type of divinity, but still, I think most of these people are living through the materialist lens.
Speaker: seeing divinity as something that is separate from them or something that's waiting for them in the afterlife rather than something that is surrounding them and bursting from within them that's always here and accessible at any given moment.
Speaker: Yeah, man, I totally agree. You know what I'll say, you know, just to sort of end my, you know, answer to what is consciousness, I think it is in through and all around everything. It is, as you said, um it's healing. I think that it heals the elements of the materialist paradigm that we are so far stuck in. It's balancing.
Speaker: grounding, harmonizing. It is the ebb and flow of all things. who And I really like the concept of, of harmony because it's like harmony through complexity.
Speaker: And I think that's very, it's a beautiful thing, you know, and when you can take a psychedelic or when you can sit and meditate and you can experience a little piece of it, I think that's what's going to bring healing to, you know, all of the problems, all the things that you were saying. I think that, um,
Speaker: We're taking baby steps. We are. um And we've taken some really large leaps backward in our history. And I think with all of these leaps backward, now, you know, this is part of the responsibility of our soul, our individual souls to take the steps forward.
Speaker: well that's uh to grasp you know and allow consciousness in so that we can heal all this shit that we're seeing happening in the world that's you said the word responsibility and that's what was going through my head also it seems that it's Our responsibility as humans, I mean, we are so different than everything else. We have the ability to, you know, craft reality and we have the intelligence to investigate the mystery. So it's like, I feel like it's our responsibility to bring harmony in a way that, you know, it seems like we're kind of doing the opposite of that sometimes now.
Speaker: And we have the ability to do incredible things. And I think it starts with the understanding of ourself and in doing that, the understanding of reality as a whole. Then we can, you know, some people think this is what some of the ancients were doing, you know, we can bring some like the hermetic concepts down into reality as above so below. We can try to bring harmony in ways that right now it's just not really what we're thinking about. It seems like most of our inner innovation is purely based off of a profit motive. Um, it'd be interesting to see if we had a motive of just empathy and love, um, all the things we're talking about, what kind of things human beings would be able to create and do.
Speaker: Yeah. And it's, it's our birthright as far as I'm concerned as well. You know, it is a responsibility, but it's also a birthright because it is, it's difficult, but it's also beautiful and we need to do it. We need to investigate these things. We need to do it. And I think we are, you know, as Terrence McKenna would say, you know, the, I think the, the plants are the stewards earth's stewards of consciousness. And I think they're in charge.
Speaker: And they are guiding the earth and its consciousness through this, you know, this labyrinth that we call life. And I think we're headed toward the right direction, man. I think the future looks bright. Indeed.
