Scientist vs Mystic | A Conversation about Cosmos, Brain and Reality | David Eagleman and Sadguru:
youtube.com/watch?v=aaCTs8oeAh8
Most of what the mystic said was based on yogi metaphysical classification of human mind and rather outdated view of the components of reality through primary classical elements. Some of the things they talked about (mostly yogi mystic):
Dimensions of the mind:
Intellect - quality of the brain - conscious reasoning - slave to arbitrary (social) identity which it protects
Identity - Ahamkara - ego identity - intellect serves identity.
Body memory (genetic/subconscious) - Manas - has more memory than the brain - memory of ancestors all the way back to beginning of life - and beyond! (3:16-4:38)
Pure Intelligence - Chitta - deeper intelligence present in nature - is not dependent on memory - appears to be like that of automatic animal nature (4:38- 6:00)
The question raised by yogi is whether there is a type of knowledge which does not fit into logical framework, that is through intellect, and the consequences of pursuing knowledge only through intellect (science)
On time perception (8:03-12:23)
Acts as psychological filter - Physicality is cyclical/movement - planets, etc. - disassociation with one’s physical nature (time) will negate the consequence of time!
[This naturally begs the question of self identity. The yogi admitted that the brain could be fooled, but the body could not (10:00-10:20), but how does he get his self identity to be independent of them, even as acknowledging them? The answer to that, as I understood it, was the evolution of self-awareness (the breaking off) to be seen as a purely exploratory independent phenomenon (as he believed that the instinctive animal nature would have taken care of itself without awareness), exploring different dimensions of reality, not for its usefulness or survival (as in current science), but for exploration sake only. (12:23-17:00). This led to his critique of science being driven not for the sake of exploration, the need to know, (as he claims is so in mysticism), but primarily for its usefulness/utility (17:05- 18:15).]
Purpose/Point of Life vs Purpose of Science (27:48- 32:13)
Yogi - Life is not about how to use knowledge/its usefulness - this approach will not make life better, because no matter how well you survive it will never be enough to fulfill a human being - the possible alternative presented is perhaps knowing itself is purpose of life because it satisfies the fundamental need to know. He also points to the issue of morality: if science only looks for what it can use (utility), why wouldn’t it also not study humans for their potential uses?
What is life (40:46-46:55)
Everything is life, differentiated by varying degrees of accumulation of information - it’s possible to dissasociate yourself from your genetic memory - it is possible to know a part of self that is beyond your physical nature (47:45-48-55).
[I don’t know what to say on that issue. This is something you either believe in or not. I can only comment by saying that the yogi himself pointed out that science is trying to touch the non-physical with a physical stick, pointing to its limitations, but, somehow, humans themseves are an exception, being able to access the non-physical]