The Theory of Anything

Do animals create knowledge? Deutsch claims they don't because all their knowledge is in their genes. Yet he admits that animals do have memes! But aren't memes, by definition, knowledge outside the genome? How does Deutsch attempt to deal with these problems with his theory of knowledge? And how well do his arguments hold up?

The podcast explores the concept of knowledge and its relation to artificial general intelligence (AGI). It discusses counterexamples to Deutsch's theory of knowledge, including trade secrets and animal intelligence. The chapter also delves into machine learning, animal behavior, the immune system, and robots.

In the previous episode, Bruce pointed out an apparent contradiction between Deutsch's criteria for knowledge as 'adapted information that causes itself to remain so' and his example of the 'walking robot algorithm' which is a case of adapted information causing itself to remain so but that Deutsch doesn't consider to be knowledge. This time we consider if we can eliminate the 'walking robot algorithm' from being considered 'knowledge' using Deutsch's and Marletto's Constructor Theory of Knowledge. Does the Constructor Theory of Knowledge save the 'two sources hypothesis'? (i.e. the hypothesis that there are only two sources of knowledge: biological evolution and human ideas)

Exploring Deutsch's Theory of Knowledge and the two sources hypothesis. Discussing the creation of knowledge through artificial evolution. Debating the validity of genetic programming algorithm as a source of knowledge. Exploring the difference between good and bad philosophical explanations. Questioning the relationship between non-knowledge and Deutsch's theory.

Bruce, an expert in machine learning, delves into the "problem of open-endedness" and its connection to evolution, human consciousness, and knowledge creation. He also shares tips on how NOT to argue with a Creationist.

Here we move three arguments from social media to the podcast. 1. Given Deutsch’s universal explainer hypothesis, does it make sense to say that men commit more crimes due to testosterone? Are humans only 'approximately' Universal Explainers? 2. Can anything in reality be simulated? What exactly does it mean to be simulated? 3. Is “heat death” a bummer? What would Conan the Cimmerian say?

Discussion on moral progress, knowledge growth, and tolerance for intolerance using Nassim Nicholas Taleb’s essay as a starting point. Analysis of the influence of intolerant minorities on majority populations. Exploration of GMOs, climate change, and the precautionary principle. Examination of wokeism and its connection to intolerance. Debate on the role of intolerance in moral progress.

Ivan Phillips discusses subjective vs objective morality with a focus on Hume's guillotine and the concept of objective morality in alternate realities. They further explore the origin of human morality, the is-ought distinction, heat death in Star Trek, and the role of objectivity in public policy.

This podcast explores the relationship between ChatGPT and artificial general intelligence. It reviews the famous paper on early experiments with GPT-4 and discusses Melanie Mitchell's criticisms. The podcast delves into the origins and benefits of recurrent neural networks, explores the concept of universal explainership, and introduces transformer networks. It highlights the impressive capabilities of chat GPT and its ability to learn from just a few examples. The podcast also explores the various capabilities of chat GPT, including analyzing absurdity, generating creative content, and solving mathematical problems. It discusses the implications of chat GPT for general intelligence and delves into the vague nature of language and AI concepts. The podcast also discusses the scaling hypothesis and its application to human intelligence, as well as the historical context of artificial general intelligence.

This week we have criminologist Brian Boutwell on again for part 2 of our discussion on critical rationalism and social science. Does all science share the same structure? How do you apply Popper's epistemology to social sciences? Are there laws of human nature? If humans are universal explainers, what does it mean to study our behavior? See episode 68 for a summary of Caldwell's "Clarifying Popper" that we discuss.