Constructive criticism for the professor: this guy needs to take a year away from academia and talk to regular people about these ideas. Students are forced to care and take notes because of their grades, and just the context of being in class. But this man has a very, very serious problem motivating you to care about these ideas, or seeing their relevance at all. He had the same problem on Joe Rogan's podcast. He needs to come out and say, "This is my theory of the world. And this is how your perception of things would change if you saw the world through my eyes." The best philosophers are very striking in their ability to do this. If you read Plato, you feel very differently about people and things and the world, and what your goals should be. If you read Schopenhauer, same thing. It's not fair to compare this dude to those titans, of course. But he really, REALLY needs to hammer down why any of this is relevant. Because it seems like none of it is really relevant at all. Basically, you go about your life as usual. You just replace what you would colloquially call "life" or whatever, "consciousness." But you could easily also call it, "blahblah-ness.",(reply>), asked Jocha Bach x2 Lex Fridman for a reading list hasn't responded 'yet',(reply>), This is why Bernardo Kastrup (and eventually Rupert Spira) should be invited to these things!,(reply>), You are not having an experience, you are the experience.,(reply>), The guy's metaphors and analogies are terrible holy cow.,(reply>), 1) Piaget theory of intelligence<br>2) Vgtosky mind of society<br>3) Nietzche- anti-education, thus spoke Zarathustra &amp; beyond good &amp; evil<br>4) Pragmatism William James<br>5) Thomas Kuhn- structure of scientific<br>6) Russell History of Western philosophy<br>7) Galton 1869 heridatary genius