MULTIVERSES

James Robinson
MULTIVERSES

Coffee table conversations with people thinking about foundational issues.  Multiverses explores the limits of knowledge and technology.  Does quantum mechanics tell us that our world is one of many?  Will AI make us intellectually lazy, or expand our cognitive range? Is time a thing in itself or a measure of change? Join James Robinson as he tries to find out.

  1. 35| Hypercomputation: Why Machines May never Think Like Humans — Selmer Bringsjord

    11/08/2024

    35| Hypercomputation: Why Machines May never Think Like Humans — Selmer Bringsjord

    AI can do many things equally well as humans: such as writing plausible prose or answering exam questions. In certain domains, AI goes far beyond human capabilities — playing chess for instance. We might expect that nothing prevents machines from one day besting humans at every task. Indeed, it is often asserted that, in principle, everything (and more) within the range of human cognition will one day fall within the ken of AI. But what if there are concepts and ways of thinking that are off-limits to any machine, yet not so for humans? Selmer Bringsjord, Professor in Cognitive Science at RPI joins us this week and argues we need to rethink human thought. Selmer argues that humans have been able to grasp problems that machines cannot — humans are capable of hypercomputation. Hypercomputation is computation above the Turing limit, as such it can solve problems beyond the power of any machine we can currently conceive. In particular, Turing computation cannot encompass infinitary logic, yet humans have been able to reason effectively about the infinite. Similarly, Gödel's theorem points to a class of riddles machines cannot reach, yet human genius has identified. This is a huge topic, accepting Selmer's arguments entails accepting that human minds work in a way that evades our understanding — their mechanisms obeying mechanics of which we are wholly ignorant. Whether or not you agree with Selmer's conclusions, this is a brilliant exploration of the boundaries of thought. Links * Selmer's Academic Homepage [https://kryten.mm.rpi.edu/selmerbringsjord.html] * RPI AI and Reasoning Lab (RAIR) [https://rair.cogsci.rpi.edu/]

    1h 40m
  2. 34| Animal Minds — Kristin Andrews on why assuming consciousness would aid science

    08/27/2024

    34| Animal Minds — Kristin Andrews on why assuming consciousness would aid science

    There is no consensus on what minds are, but there is plenty of agreement on where they can be found: in humans. Yet human consciousness may account for only a small proportion of the consciousness on our planet.   Our guest, Kristin Andrews, is a Professor of Animal Minds at the University of York, Ontario, Canada. She is a philosopher working in close contact with biologists and cognitive scientists and has spent time living in the jungle to observe research on orangutans.   Kristin notes that comparative psychology has historically resisted attributing such things as intentions, learning, consciousness, and minds to animals. Yet she argues that this is misguided in the light of the evidence, that often the best way to make sense of the complexity of animal behavior is to invoke minds and intentional concepts.   Recently Kristin has proposed that the default assumption — the null hypothesis — should be that animals have minds. Currently, biologists examine markers of consciousness on a species-by-species basis, for example looking for the presence of pain receptor skills, and preferential tradeoffs in behavior. But everywhere we have looked, even in tiny nematode worms, we find multiple markers present. Kristin reasons that switching the focus from asking "where are the minds?" to "what sort of minds are there?" would prove more fruitful.   The question of consciousness and AI is at the forefront of popular discourse, but to make progress on a scientific theory of mind we should draw on the richer data of the natural world.   * Kristin's website [https://www.kristinandrews.org/] has links to her books and papers.  * As an introduction to her thinking How To Study Animal Minds [https://www.goodreads.com/en/book/show/51763564-how-to-study-animal-minds] is a gem of a book.

    1h 15m
  3. Do Electrons Exist? — Céline Henne: Physicist's Views on Scientific Realism & Instrumentalism

    06/04/2024

    Do Electrons Exist? — Céline Henne: Physicist's Views on Scientific Realism & Instrumentalism

    Physics helps get stuff done. Its application has put rockets in space, semiconductors in phones, and eclipses on calendars.  For some philosophers, this is all physics offers. It is a mere instrument, albeit of great power, giving us control over tangible things. It is a set of gears and widgets (wavefunctions, strings, even electrons) to crank out predictions.  In contrast to instrumentalists, scientific realists argue that the success of theories shows that they map onto the structure of the world, symbols in equations carry the imprint of real entities. This is an old debate in the philosophy of science. While we touch on some arguments for either position, this episode focuses on the phenomenology of physics researchers. What do physicists believe?   Céline Henne is a philosopher at the University of Bologna. Alongside Hannah Tomczyk and Christopher Sperber she has fielded the most comprehensive survey of the attitudes of physicists towards the reality of the objects of their study. From looking at the answers to dozens of questions from several hundred physicists, they have distinguished several camps of belief.  It's an elegantly designed survey, simply reading the questions forces a consideration of one's own position.    * Take the survey at Multiverses.xyz [https://scientificrealism.multiverses.xyz/]to see if you are an instrumentalist or a realist (or a bit of both) * Céline's homepage [https://www.celinehenne.com/]

    1h 38m
  4. 29 | What are words good for? — Nikhil Krishnan on Ordinary Language Philosophy

    04/12/2024

    29 | What are words good for? — Nikhil Krishnan on Ordinary Language Philosophy

    Words. (Huh? Yeah!) What are they good for? Absolutely everything. At least this was the view of some philosophers early in the 20th century, that the world was bounded by language. ("The limits of my language mean the limits of my world" to use Wittgenstein's formulation over the Edwin Starr adaptation) My guest this week is Nikhil Krishnan a philosopher at University of Cambridge and frequent contributor to the The New Yorker His book A Terribly Serious Adventure, traces the path of Ordinary Language Philosophy through the 20th century. We discuss the logical positivists (the word/world limiters) and their high optimism that the intractable problems of philosophy could be dissolved by analysis. Their contention that the great questions of metaphysics were nonsense since they had no empirical or logical content. That program failed, but its spirit of using data and aiming for progress lived on in the ordinary language philosophers who put practices with words under the microscope. Hoping to find in this data clues to the nuances of the world. This enterprise left us with beautiful examples of the subtleties of language. But more importantly, it is a practice that continues today, of paying close attention to our everyday behaviors and holding our grand systems of philosophy accountable to these. Listen to discover things you know, but didn't know you knew — like the difference between doing something by accident vs by mistake. Do check out Nikhil's own podcast,  Minor Books, on iTunes [https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-minor-books-podcast/id1725818257]  or Acast [https://shows.acast.com/minor-books]  (00:00) Intro (02:49) Start of conversation: Philosophical background and history (04:47) The Evolution of Philosophy: From Ancient Texts to Modern Debates (16:46) The Impact of Logical Positivism and the Quest for Scientific Philosophy (38:35) J.L. Austin's Revolutionary Approach to Philosophy and Language (48:43) The Power of Everyday Language vs the Abstractions of Philosophy (49:11) Why is ordinary language so effective — Language Evolution? (52:30) Philosophical Perspectives on Language's Utility (53:28) The Intricacies of Language and Perception (54:48) Scientific and Philosophical Language: A Comparative Analysis (57:14) Legal Language and Its Precision (01:07:33) LLMS: The Future of Language in Technology and AI (01:10:33) Intentionality and the Philosophy of Actions (01:18:27) Bridging Analytic and Continental Philosophy (01:33:46) Final Thoughts on Philosophy and Its Practice)

    1h 37m

About

Coffee table conversations with people thinking about foundational issues.  Multiverses explores the limits of knowledge and technology.  Does quantum mechanics tell us that our world is one of many?  Will AI make us intellectually lazy, or expand our cognitive range? Is time a thing in itself or a measure of change? Join James Robinson as he tries to find out.

You Might Also Like

To listen to explicit episodes, sign in.

Stay up to date with this show

Sign in or sign up to follow shows, save episodes, and get the latest updates.

Select a country or region

Africa, Middle East, and India

Asia Pacific

Europe

Latin America and the Caribbean

The United States and Canada