Is There a Scientific Paradigm That Says Thoughts Are Not of High Value?

2min Snip

00:00

Play full episode

Summary

Transcript

Episode notes

I don't think that anything about the scientific paradigm suggests that thoughts are not of high value. So to me, that's really compatible with viewing the brain as algorithmic. I think where science has the most trouble explaining things is when you get into consciousness. Like, why is there anything at all that it feels like to be you?

Read the full transcript here.

What is a "quasi-monk"? How hard is it to govern one's own speech and thoughts? What is "maximum deep benefit"? And how does it differ from effective altruism? How can we best direct our energy, time, and resources to do good in the world? Should more people become monks and/or adopt a lifestyle of service to others?

Tasshin Fogleman is an extremely online wandering quasi-monk on indefinite pilgrimage for the benefit of all beings. He lives a simple life, dedicating his life to being of service, supported by the generosity of others. He has three main endeavors: spreading love, following his curiosity, and empowering others. Follow him on Twitter at @tasshinfogleman or learn more about him at his website, tasshin.com.

Staff