Has Science Already Proven That Reality Is Aware?

[vibv]

@Princess Arabia https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=dick

[Yimpa]

Science has a real hard time dealing with paradoxes.

SELF is full of paradoxes and is A reflection of LOVE.

This is why science keeps on experimenting with nondual rats! Cus they are f00ls!

Ta-Da!

[newbee]

'proven' probably not, but the scientist who has a scientific theory that comes closest to what non-duality also says, is Donald Hoffman.

(from Wikipedia:)

Hoffman is a professor in the Department of Cognitive Sciences at the University of California, Irvine, with joint appointments in the Department of Philosophy, the Department of Logic and Philosophy of Science, and the School of Computer Science.

Hoffman studies consciousness, visual perception and evolutionary psychology using mathematical models and psychophysical experiments.

In his theory, Hoffman argues that conscious beings have not evolved to perceive the world as it actually is but have evolved to perceive the world in a way that maximizes "fitness payoffs". Hoffman uses the metaphor of a computer desktop and icons - the icons of a computer desktop provide a functional interface so that the user does not have to deal with the underlying programming and electronics in order to use the computer efficiently. Similarly, objects that we perceive in time and space are metaphorical icons that act as our interface to the world and enable us to function as efficiently as possible without having to deal with the overwhelming amount of data underlying reality.[6] This theory implies epiphysicalism, i.e., physical objects, such as quarks and brains and stars are constructed by conscious agents but such physical objects have no causal power.[5] While panpsychism claims that rocks, mountains, the moon, etc. are conscious, "Conscious Realism" in this theory (Multimodal user interface theory) does not. Instead, what it claims is all such objects are icons within the user interface of a conscious agent, but that does not entail the claim that the objects themselves are conscious.

...

Hoffman has said that some form of reality may exist, but may be completely different from the reality our brains model and perceive.[9] Reality may not be made of space-time and physical objects.[3] Through supposing that consciousness is fundamental, Hoffman provides a possible solution to the hard problem of consciousness, which wrestles with the notion of why we seem to have conscious immediate experiences, and how sentient beings could arise from seemingly non-sentient matter. Hoffman argues that consciousness is more fundamental than the objects and patterns perceived by consciousness.[10][better source needed] We have conscious experiences because consciousness is posited as a fundamental aspect of reality. The problem of how sentient beings arise from seemingly non-sentient matter is also addressed because it alters the notion of non-sentient matter. Perceptions of non-sentient matter are mere byproducts of consciousness and don't necessarily reflect reality. This means the causal notion of non-sentient matter developing into sentient beings is open to question.

He says that enough scientists already know that 'space time' is doomed and that means that the objects inside the context of space & time can't be real if space time doesn't exist either.  HIs colleagues tend to be a little slow though it seems as they like to hold onto their materialism (the belief that anything that can be measured, quantified etc is real)

There are many interesting interviews with him (including one with Rupert Spira ) on youtube. Here's a few clips:

 

 

Edited July 12, 2023 by newbee

[Princess Arabia]

4 hours ago, vibv said:

@Princess Arabia https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=dick

Wow. I'm flabbergasted. Didn't realize that word had so many meanings. I thought it's only meaning was "being an ass".

[OldManCorcoran]

No, that is a fundamental misunderstanding of what an "observer" in this experiment is.

In actuality, material science has absolutely zero contradiction with correctly understood mysticism. That is why many serious monks etc can rather enjoy chatting to neuroscientists if they enjoy scientific topics. There is no contradiction whatsoever anywhere between material reality and spiritual reality.

It is as simple as this:

If you have a sheet of fabric, no matter what shape you fold it into, you never create something of substance other than the fabric. No matter how many times you twist and fold a sheet of fabric, you will never magically conjure beside it a sheet of ice or gel or w.e. other substance. It will ALWAYS be substantially fabric and NO other substance will ever be there.

ALL elements of reality are precisely like that. Everything in existence, both things with experienced qualities, and matter without subjective qualities, are SUBSTANTIALLY equal. There is only one "sheet" in different "shapes" and it is the only thing there is... If there is ever anything that is aware, what could it possibly be that is aware other than reality itself?

People are too focused on the micro level, so they say THIS specific tiny portion is aware. But they are missing the substance of that tiny portion. Like folding an origami swan and the wing has awareness somehow, and it might think sure I the wing am aware but no other part of the swan is. Because the wing is completely overlooking the unassailable fact that it is paper, and that the paper is absolutely singular, one.

[Leo Gura]

9 hours ago, OldManCorcoran said:

It is as simple as this:

If you have a sheet of fabric, no matter what shape you fold it into, you never create something of substance other than the fabric. No matter how many times you twist and fold a sheet of fabric, you will never magically conjure beside it a sheet of ice or gel or w.e. other substance. It will ALWAYS be substantially fabric and NO other substance will ever be there.

Well said!