If Brains are Computers, Who Designs the Software? - with Daniel Dennett

  görünümler 814,149

The Royal Institution

The Royal Institution

5 yıl önce

Cognitive science sees the brain as a sort of computer, but how does education redesign these cerebral computers? Cognitive scientist, philosopher, and expert on consciousness Daniel Dennett explains.
Watch the Q&A: trshow.info/watch/0GJa0xKKSOU/video.html
Subscribe for regular science videos: bit.ly/RiSubscRibe
Buy Daniel Dennet's most recent book "From Bacteria to Bach and Back: The Evolution of Minds" - geni.us/4pTW46
There is widespread agreement among researchers in cognitive science that a human brain is some kind of computer, but not much like the laptop. If we look at perceptual experience, and education in particular, as a process of redesigning our cerebral computers, how does the software get designed, and what are the limits of this design process? Daniel C Dennett finds out.
Daniel C Dennett is a cognitive scientist and philosopher with a particular interest in consciousness, free will and the evolution of minds. His newest book, From bacteria to Bach and back, explores how thinking minds could have evolved due to natural selection.
The Ri is on Twitter: ri_science
and Facebook: royalinstitution
and Tumblr: ri-science.tumblr.com/
Our editorial policy: www.rigb.org/home/editorial-po...
Subscribe for the latest science videos: bit.ly/RiNewsletter
Product links on this page may be affiliate links which means it won't cost you any extra but we may earn a small commission if you decide to purchase through the link.

YORUMLAR: 1 860
Dorian Philotheates
Dorian Philotheates 9 aylar önce
“Science done right is one of the humanities.” That’s an epic quote: have long thought it and never expressed it. Thanks, Professor D.D. (and anonymous high school physics teacher)!
Dorian Philotheates
Dorian Philotheates 16 gün önce
@hypehuman - Entirely agree. I have written of my own field, archaeology as: “the most scientific of the humanities, the most humanistic of the sciences.”
hypehuman
hypehuman 16 gün önce
And the humanities done right is one of the sciences! Any field of study can benefit from applying the best practices of both traditions.
Dorian Philotheates
Dorian Philotheates 6 aylar önce
Christopher Ellis - mea culpa - quite right: “done right”. Thanks, I will edit.
Christopher Ellis
Christopher Ellis 6 aylar önce
Science done right...
technics6
technics6 2 yıl önce
"Thinking tools" approach/idea is amazing. I never thought about this in that way. Thank you sir!
ioannis I Mansola
ioannis I Mansola Yıl önce
Excellent thinking. I always say , even with common daily software that this is the case. Each computer's suffers as much as his programmer
Tom Beall
Tom Beall 6 aylar önce
9
Na No
Na No 3 yıl önce
Lately I started to consider the brain as a giant filter/processor that delivers our consciousness (whatever it may be) the best statistical predictions for certain information patterns in this universe. E.g. we tend to predict human beings as being human with near to 100% accuracy, but we are pretty bad at predicting certain other things (like how we are preceived by others, cause we are often diluded due to self-doubt and other things - or e.g. optical illusions, since our brain is trained to expect certain outcomes). So basically all the brain does is it predicts certain events, it recognizes patterns, and it makes all this data somewhat interpretable. We don't know where consciousness itself comes from.. we just know how to deactivate it like a switch, when deactivating certain neurons, but that isn't proof that certain brain regions create it.
bobbg
bobbg Aylar önce
@origano no clue right?
Jeanne Meger
Jeanne Meger 6 aylar önce
Could be consciousness, being aware of self as the same person from an earliest memory to the current older self, is our connection to the Source of life, physical and spiritual. Read lots. Checked out the history of the Pineal body as the Seat of visualization, called the Third Eye, an endocrine gland in the head, the 6th Chakra of 7 major energy wheels in the body. The body is believed by many to be made in the image of the Creator. We humans are remarkably complex creatures. Now there is more food for thought, revealing stunning possibilities of mankind's history in the movie, "A Tear in the Sky." (As a rip, hole, or portal.) Who really are us humans? What is our connection to the stars? Intriguing. Want to know more. What possibilities will we discover?
Dan dan
Dan dan 9 aylar önce
@origano Darwin's evolution? haha.
Dan dan
Dan dan 9 aylar önce
@fillinman1 the quantum is also a useful simplification. We are not meant to understand these things and we will never understand them. We humans are built for a purpose and that's it.
Dee J'ann E Mei & Urff Nicht
Dee J'ann E Mei & Urff Nicht 9 aylar önce
Some good points there I think. Also, adding to something you point to is the fact, or apparence that just as you can develop muscle memory, so, with the brain also we have a parallel to this, which we could call memory memory, or brain muscle memory. An example is the amount of times I have been in meetings, and the person hosting it is so used to pushing a particular agenda, or to clients who say the same thoughtless things, can usually fall into the crpappy useless habit of NOT LISTENING to the person present, and is answering via ''muscle memory'' of the brain in what they have been taught to say and think, based on the common muddle they are daily subjected to. They are actually NOT hearing you, and NOT answering anything you needed to know. remindfs me a bit of how China's power brokers ''listen'' to their people.
wildthing72
wildthing72 10 aylar önce
Appreciate the lecturer and his views given here and I believe that computer engineers have simply in effect been so far too busy to solve the 'build a human brain in software' problem. Brains are not computers due to their evolutionary nature, they were built for throwing spears and visual acuity, naming objects with language, story telling, humour, philosopy and yes, finally building and testing abstract concepts(science). But I believe computers will be made to work like brains, firstly, in their visual processing and then their ability to understand and finally explain abstract concepts. There has thus far been too many problems looking for solutions required to assist humans with all the things that we cannot do quickly and visually or computationally. Plus, engineers even posessing the flaws and critiques aimed at them as being awkward or anti-social are creating a new social oriented universe, where future experts can learn at home equally as they could in universities using new techologies. Political activism and the nature of human behaviour has become part of a global understanding, repressed countries can now access science and view points that traditional experts cannot teach them. Geniuses with future ability to contribute massively to human development have to find each other. Computers on Earth and the moon and the other planets when landed on will need their own internet. Science and space exploration will need a method to capture every abstract concept so it's not lost or so a ship's computer travelling into deep space will be able to advise humans on repairs and science. We would not want to avoid building a ship's computer simply because we possess a natural fear of computers. So I believe in 50 years we will have to have a computer that can explain most abstract concepts as good as Dennett or Penrose. Consciousness may really be the final problem to solve, if it's even necessary. It has after all, evolved relatively late in animal development compared to all the other aspects of animal nature such as social behaviour and hierarchy.
dippingbird
dippingbird 6 aylar önce
No one knows when consciousness evolved. They can't even have an informed guess.
Tim Smith
Tim Smith 11 aylar önce
What a fascinating and informative talk. Early in the lecture he asked the question, 'Are our brains computers?' and even before he answered I was saying, 'Yes! of course they are." I also thought as he continued, that if your definition precludes it from being a computer, it is your definition that needs looking at. I remembered back to when I was an apprentice at Lucas Aerospace in the UK many (many, many) years ago. One item of aviation hydraulic equipment they made was the wing sweep controller for the Panavia Tornado. This was a computer but entirely hydraulic (in its decision making). It took control inputs and sensor readings and calculated the appropriate output. You could not find within it a 'program'. Sure, there would have been a written algorithm during its design. A list if logic statements and tables of data to inform the output, but you would not find a 'program' stored in the unit anywhere. It is still a computer though.
PCap
PCap 6 aylar önce
It's just word thinking, it depends on how you're using the word 'computer' and he just builds his conclusion into his definition arbitrarily, it's just sophistry
Rock Brentwood
Rock Brentwood 6 aylar önce
Actually, the *correct* perspective for the question on the thumbnail ("Is the brain a computer") is: a computer is the means for tabulating the values of the family of functions known as the recursive functions, or anything else that can be encoded by recursive functions. Can the brain tabulate recursive functions? Yes, some of them - and often with a lot of mistakes and interminably long delays. So, it's only a slow, buggy *partial* computer; but not actually a computer. So, the running joke is that a bunch of robots set up a captcha test to determine when the unseen agent on the other end of the line is one of them or just a human, calling it the Turing Test ("is the computer on the other end as flawed as Turing?")
Isabel Hernandez
Isabel Hernandez Yıl önce
When he said "the dream of every cell is to divide" is like an extraterrestrial being looking at us from a distant galaxy with a telescope and saying "the dream of every human is to replicate and die"
Jevon Frost
Jevon Frost 11 aylar önce
If aliens saw what was happening in developed counties they would say that our goal is to make and use toys to avoid the genetic urge to reproduce. We might be gone in the blink of an eye and the same for the aliens so that we never see each other though 😉
JonasRV
JonasRV 4 yıl önce
Good question! I am excited about this talk! A lot of the ancient scientists were mathematicians, philosopher's, yet religious people and I wish there were more people like that in the present. Rationality has not only had positive effects I assume.
Rodney Kawecki
Rodney Kawecki 4 yıl önce
"Cognitive Cerebral Consciousness". Really like your work, sir. Yes, our brains are not computers but they are computerized. Wow, that one's pretty good! ( Universe Consciousness)
Makayla Hollywood
Makayla Hollywood Yıl önce
This gets my attention..makes my brain light up- eyes wide open. Thank you! The programs are downloaded between ages 0- 7 from our parent, teachers, etc.
A Fall of Moondust
A Fall of Moondust 6 aylar önce
@WmTyndale Where is God?..
Robert English
Robert English 10 aylar önce
@WmTyndale Danial Dennet strongly disagrees with you, and so do I! If you believe there is a god despite a complete lack of viable evidence, then your software is millennia out of date, and the data corruption accumulative! You have no evidence for your claim! The time to believe is when there is sufficient evidence, and well, you can pile layer upon layer of bad evidence onto a mountain of bad evidence (mere anecdote and false attribution in god's case), and it will never amount to a single shred of good evidence! No amount of faith based belief can make truth.
WmTyndale
WmTyndale 11 aylar önce
You are forgetting about the BIOS. The original was given by God and reproduced.
CelestialMedia
CelestialMedia Yıl önce
Great session sir 👍🏼
Justin Lee Miller
Justin Lee Miller 5 yıl önce
What a great explainer! Thank you for the upload.
Daniel Röder
Daniel Röder 2 yıl önce
If we define a computer as some machine that calculates nearly 100% perfectly and mathematically, then no our brains are not computers. But what is logic? Logic is some kind of programming language we can use in our minds to try to "simulate" a computer that calculates nearly perfectly. If you are awake and careful you can with near 100% accuracy calculate additions of two one digit numbers for example (and many people do this in some kind of visual way "simulating" a computer in their mind). But most of us are not good in doing this accuratly when the numbers get bigger and you have to remember more numbers. But i think we can only simulate a computer in our brains that helps us use logic. It's amazing that we were able to make machines that work on our rules of logic we discovered and with such a precision,reliability and speed which would never be possible for any biological thing to naturally evolve (and since nature is analog and not digital computers dont really work there with higher complexity)
wade5941
wade5941 11 aylar önce
I love Daniel Dennett because he makes me think. The more I listen to him the more I realize how much I disagree with what he is saying. At times it even sounds like mush. But, I have no doubt that he is much smarter than me, so I just write it off.
Nathan 'Nate' Whitehat
Nathan 'Nate' Whitehat 4 yıl önce
As a computer science student I really appreciate the "evm" english virtual machine comparison because that's pretty much how java works. Jvm knows how to talk to your cpu and the java applet knows how to talk to Jvm, in that way jvm is a "translator" or in other words an interpreter. the further down you go the closer you are to speaking the same language as your cpu, c is compiled to before you send the app (message) to the computer, so it's "translated" before you post the letter and the compiler knows the the address for you. if you go further down to assembler now you're writing a letter that's mostly in computer language and you need to know the addresses before you post the letter. When you compile (translate) to bytecode your computer can understand the information, it knows what to do with it.
G K
G K 9 gün önce
So what? There is no evidence that that computer is conscious.
bobbg
bobbg Aylar önce
Computers can do many things but they need directions. Humans can do many thing but do not need directions but operate better with them. I buy something I've got to assemble i dont often read the directions I go by what I know, and learned in the past. As I age I get wisdom as computers age they get slow and outdated. That pc you bought yesterday is out of date. The man that developed thd microprocessor has a new revision thats better. But it uses a new socket so you need a new main board different memory and a different file storage system its 50 times faster. In 1974 a hand held calculator was the modern personal computer. Unless you owned a pressing center. When I was 9 I visited US computer lab It was around 1969. The room to me was as big as a football field full of reel to reel tape machines solving complex equations my 1974 calculator did in 1/100 ,of the time. In 2022 this cell phone im using can out do a computer from the 1990s thats how fast technology evolves. My figures may not be exactly right but its the basic idea I'm trying to make. What you learn today for programming will be different in 4 years. Maybe 2 years. At some point it will be speech driven you talk the computer learns. But it will never be concous. Its still a machine. You can turn it off or unplug it.
TheShermanTanker
TheShermanTanker 2 aylar önce
That is not a good analogy at all, coming from a maintainer of the official Sun HotSpot JVM
inyobill
inyobill 10 aylar önce
@Jonathon Dilworth To paraphrase: "Is an entity in question aware?", that is exactly the Turing test, not just the "real".
Good Dog Training Services
Good Dog Training Services 10 aylar önce
@inyobill our brain is electrons bouncing around wires too. Just organic vs copper.
Star Mayhem
Star Mayhem 4 yıl önce
A funny little story during my school life. A instructor separated us in to two groups. Told us to tie our legs to other people in the group. Then we will have an extreme edition of a 3 legged race. In practice run, many people had topple over, obviously. The other group's leader told them to synchronize the movements by shouting 1,2 & so on. I simply told mine to keep moving forward & don't fall down. You know what, we across the finish line at same time. The instructor baffled, said cooperation is the key to success & apparently "just do it" also works. The game was outplayed and the monologue was ruined.
fillinman1
fillinman1 11 aylar önce
This is apparent with tradesmen. I would always plan carefully. Sometimes best. Others would just start but fail midstream at unforeseen obstacles. Often. Best would briefly survey the task then go, solving problems that came up on the fly and were invariably the fastest. Saw this many times. They intuitively avoided dead stop roadblocks without exactly identifying them beforehand. Now I have a better understanding of this. And I have something to think about. Thanks.
Senator Joseph McCarthy
Senator Joseph McCarthy 2 yıl önce
There were many more factors in play than the few mentioned.
Marc Lepage
Marc Lepage 10 aylar önce
Thank you Professor Dennett.
Margaret Pypher
Margaret Pypher 2 yıl önce
I see the brain like the circuit board with knowledge being the software. Our brain holds the software
Randomous Jam
Randomous Jam 11 aylar önce
Thanks for the great talk Daniel. Two errors I found, anyone please feel free to comment. 1) 1:15:20 "genetic, deep learning algorithms ... sift through data and come up with new ideas", these algorithms do not come up with new ideas, they learn to replicate training labels specified by humans. 2) 8:57 "brains are not serial they're parallel", false, brains are both serial and parallel. For example, the series retina, optic nerve, LGN, V1, etc... is well known.
Francis Lewis
Francis Lewis 7 aylar önce
I thought the idea with new deep learning was that with enough hidden layers the algorithim will find it's own groups/categories?
Juhan Leemet
Juhan Leemet 10 aylar önce
I tend to agree, having studied some GOFAI decades ago. IMO "modern" methods ML and "AI" seem to merely be "trainable classifiers". They make "decisions" based on training, from predefined data sets, by choosing one (or more?) labels from those determined by some algorithms from the training data. IMO they do not "reason" at all, which I thought was a goal of original AI research. Early on, we were hoping to build "intelligent" reasoning machines which we can understand, and where one can explain the reasoning to arrive at their conclusions. ML has no reasoning, and no explanations, merely "because" (philosophy joke?) that is the emergent behaviour from that particular training algorithm and that particular data set.
Dr. Ibnseena
Dr. Ibnseena 11 aylar önce
@J Elliott I totally agree on the parallel concretions definition as used by physicists.... Most of parallel circuits have series branches within them but still called and described as parallel type.
J Elliott
J Elliott 11 aylar önce
Parallel connections can be defined as serial connections running concurrently. A brain simultaneously processes information from multiple streams, even if some interfaces run in 'serial.' I don't know much about genetic algorithms but calling it replication of previous specified labels is just kicking the can down the road. At some point an original 'label' had to be created.
Retsa Games
Retsa Games Yıl önce
Amazing talk. It challenges the way we think of complex systems on the whole
Judith *
Judith * Yıl önce
My brain/computer struggles to follow the thinking of this brilliant man, but it's also very fascinated because I always tried to figure out why I don't like computers.
PCap
PCap 6 aylar önce
You struggle to follow because his conclusion does not follow from the various observations he tosses out in the air
Dan dan
Dan dan 9 aylar önce
Did you ever think that your brain/computer is able to grow new alive cells each second of your life and it is able to make them communicate one with the other and is able to tell them what to do to keep you alive against everything that's against you. Those are infinite more complex to follow than someone else's thinking. We are amazing machines. Imagine our tools of the year 2022 trying to make a board with 80 to 100 billion neurons and this would only be one brain. Imagine those machines trying to build the vast amount of billions of cells that make the human body. Now imagine someone or something programmed this to grow up from two cells. Now THAT is a master program.
god
god Yıl önce
Computers do one thing well, combine several engineering disciplines (electronic, software, mechanical) as well as several scientific pricinpals (thermodynamics, electromagnetism, chemistry, geology, art)
Jevon Frost
Jevon Frost 11 aylar önce
In the strictest sense that is tru but the lines are blurring and that is what dr Dennett is saying.
BulletBoy97
BulletBoy97 Yıl önce
This topic just randomly popped in my head and my first reaction was to look it up on here. I'm glad I did.
Robert English
Robert English 10 aylar önce
I'm so glad the EVM between my ears is working well, up to date and malware free!! I love Daniel Dennet, and everything he has done for this world in educating so many people by explaining intricate scientific and philosophical concepts in ways less learned people can understand, and especially for exposing the foibles of harboring unsubstantiated often dangerous beliefs such as religious fundamentalism.
Dee J'ann E Mei & Urff Nicht
Dee J'ann E Mei & Urff Nicht 9 aylar önce
''Malware free''? I doubt that VERY MUCH! The brain, for instance, has been hacked for millenia. religion? Gladiatorial/sports? What has become known as propaganda? Tabloids? And elite-leaning press? Any-leaning press. certain styles of drug communities (they got hacked by initially the U.S. legal/political monster to MAKE IT DANGEROUS.) So it is popously RIDICULOUS to make your point beyond humour.
joel jelliff
joel jelliff 6 aylar önce
So I come across a video from 5 years ago? Interesting how algorithms are themselves evolving. But does this parallel the way the brain operates? Conciousness is a complex arrangement of electrical, chemical, energetic, stimuli, a physical body producing immeasurable inputs to a neural structure. Computers may have the ability to store large amounts of information and retrieve it via a request or program/algorithm. But they lack a complex imput system. The idea that we could recreate the brain is sort of absurd. Maybe we have reduced many humans to near automatons with a repressive cultural structure, but this does not mean computers are capable of human process.
Damian Butterworth
Damian Butterworth 11 aylar önce
Nature choose a neuron to detect light in the first place then it moved on to do other things. And here we are with consciousness.
inyobill
inyobill 3 yıl önce
I am under the impression that Groves was certainly the administrative controller, but the physicists and engineers actually were in control of what got built and how (explicitly, Oppenheimer was in charge of the technical and creative work).
Grant Hurlburt
Grant Hurlburt 10 aylar önce
@Juhan Leemet Relates to the question: If you're a highly intelligent person, how do you deal with administrators who are stupidr than you and judge you based on their inadequate understanding? Oppenheimer was denied security clearance by FBI agents (I believe) who put him into simple-minded categories and thought no more about it.
Grant Hurlburt
Grant Hurlburt 10 aylar önce
There's a great TV film about Oppenheimer and Groves. In one scene he says "I played him like a fiddle".
Juhan Leemet
Juhan Leemet 10 aylar önce
relates to the conundrum of how do you control or manage poeple smarter than you are? or how we choose specialist professionals?
Donk
Donk 2 yıl önce
Love this guy, he reminds me of the kind geologist in Big Bang, voice, mannerisms, looks.
Jester123ish
Jester123ish 4 yıl önce
Raymond Tallis' point was that having grown up in modern technological society when we come to try to imagine what the brain is and how it works we readily adopt the model of the computer, that is what is familiar to us. Tallis being a neuroscientist (and a polymath) does not believe that the model is the correct one and that there are many important and profound differences we need to not overlook. But hey, if you mentioned him in another talk we can just ignore all that, right?
PCap
PCap 6 aylar önce
@Oberon4278 Dennett has built a whole career on dismissing actual questions and problems by people who are trying to understand the real mechanisms behind these things using slippery and vague language. It's really gross behavior.
Oberon4278
Oberon4278 Yıl önce
Yeah, I was pretty disappointed in this talk. Apparently the presenter is a philosopher, not a computer scientist or a neuroscientist. So why should we give his opinion any weight? The definition of "computer" that he gives is incomplete and inaccurate. A computer is a well defined machine, and the definition is not "a thing that can process information." I'm disappointed that he didn't even attempt to provide the proper definition of a computer (that is, a Turing machine,) but then again maybe I shouldn't be surprised. After all, if he had, he would have had to explain how the human brain is a Turing machine, and there is very good evidence that it is not. Perhaps he avoided the rigorous definition of "computer" on purpose rather than out of ignorance.
Gor Vala
Gor Vala Yıl önce
This guy is awsome, Daniel is funny if you pay attention. Super smart show to watch
Steve Finney
Steve Finney 4 yıl önce
Comparing the brain's function to economics might help if you are aware of the difference between laissez-faire & Friedman, or rather Hayak inspired Neoliberalism - the jury is still out on the latter. As for the comparison with the stock market, it means a pretty shoddy view of the brain as being a mechanism to satisfy insatiable appetite.
Joe Brooks
Joe Brooks Yıl önce
What would happen if we used a software that acted on the Mandelbrot set in a Turing system to rectify the top down hierarchy problem that organic brains struggle with? I’m heavily invested in making a synthetic, organic supercomputer with a QPU.
Grizabeebles
Grizabeebles 6 aylar önce
Consider the Halting Problem and Gödel's Incompleteness theorem for a second. It is logically proven that no system of formal axioms can prove its own consistency. It's a fundamental shortcoming baked into logic itself. It's got nothing to do with the hardware involved.
Austin Julius
Austin Julius Yıl önce
Mind blowing to see we are just neurons working together at the fundamental level
PCap
PCap 6 aylar önce
the "just" part is the mistake
Scott Cupp
Scott Cupp Yıl önce
It really is. Thing of it is, there are just so many of them working together on this fundamental level. Perfect synchronicity. When you think about it, our brain processes information and translates that information in to something useful. So yes, the brain is essentially a computer.
jmoreno600
jmoreno600 Yıl önce
If you watch at 1.25 speed Dennett's speech becomes as brisk and lively as it was 20 years ago.
JiveDadson
JiveDadson 5 yıl önce
Was a time not too many decades ago when every computer was a human. The word pre-dates electronic computers.
Eldon Tyrell
Eldon Tyrell Yıl önce
@Ian Casey Good comment. I think a basic understanding of what a computer is, and of previous “computers” like mechanical calculators and the abacus which are in many ways identical, is enough to prove we are more than computers, and not just in terms of scale/complexity/speed.
Eldon Tyrell
Eldon Tyrell Yıl önce
@Ian Doyle lol
Ian Casey
Ian Casey 2 yıl önce
@JP dJ Thus a computer 'calculates' its inputs and give an outputs! A computer does not 'selects' which inputs it wants but what is given. Else, they would be useless a tool to man who have 'designed' them for his aid. A computer do not possess intelligence. Computers are designed to follow the subroutines consisting of algorithms by which they are programmed! Computers are made up of hardware and software. Man design both hardware and software. Humans may still be functional with a brain tumor until a point. What's the equivalent to 'brain tumor' for a computers brain? Which is more resilient to an attack by a virus? The human brain or the computer [brain]?
JP dJ
JP dJ 2 yıl önce
The word "computer" is the result of linguistically abrasive cultures of who-cares naivety. From Latin "computare" (to count) proper form would have been "computator".
Ian Doyle
Ian Doyle 3 yıl önce
@Gregor Samsa you should never exclaim when making a statement. Another point i would raise is i am personally aware of the history of the word "robot" but entirely ignorant of the play you referred to, and finally if you were attempting to imply you had your own thoughts on anything discussed in this lecture, you didnt. Ffs
zagyex
zagyex 4 yıl önce
Something to think of, and it is paradoxical: How hard is it to define those simple rules that lead to growing complexity of arrangement in matter in a self-replicating manner? We certainly didn't manage to define such laws yet. And we saw it happen only once- as there is no evidence yet that life has emerged more than once in the universe. But here is the most disturbing bit: Imagine the early self-replicating arrangement of matter in the early times - it was some really basic stuff like amino acids or whatnot. Later some bacteria or some other simple stuff. You would imagine that you need very many head starts to reach something like the human brain. But there were no head starts - only one. And those 'simple' rules, say algorithms were not only able to create basic stuff then halt. We see no instances of self replication UP TO a certain complexity than stop. But no, the simple rules were so good for the first try that there is no stopping. It must mean that those "simple rules" are extremely powerful.
Happy Gilmore
Happy Gilmore 3 yıl önce
The brain is like a computer, however the nervous system is what drastically influences how the many functions of the brain reacts to and stored information. The muscles are also store houses for memory and experiences as well. The nerve endings connects to the ligaments and tendons which ultimately influence the actions of the muscles. It's all very neat and satisfying to learn more about.
Juhan Leemet
Juhan Leemet 10 aylar önce
I think you are wrong so called "muscle memory" is likely in the cerebellum and maybe partially the spinal cord, but not the muscles themselves.
lurker1973
lurker1973 5 yıl önce
Excellent lecture.
joseph smith
joseph smith 2 yıl önce
We already have algorithms that come to conclusions and we dont know how they get there we know the basic 1 ands zeros but certain advanced algorithms we dont know the exact route it takes we found flaws in recognition programs bc they were using backrounds in the decision making process for example recognizing wolfs by the snow in the pictures so our computers are already starting to do very unexspecting things he makes a ton of sense since weve had the same hardware for 200 thousand yrs
Bhrigu
Bhrigu 4 aylar önce
I absolutely love your content guys ❤️ Especially this one!!
The Royal Institution
The Royal Institution 4 aylar önce
Thanks so much! We're so happy you enjoyed it
Machine-Learning101
Machine-Learning101 5 yıl önce
This is fantastic!
World Theory
World Theory 3 yıl önce
This seems like a beneficial video to watch, for beginners in crafting neural networks. And even a useful thing for the more experienced practitioners, just to get the creative juices going.
pupperino
pupperino Yıl önce
This does not even touch the subject of neural networks in the machine learning sense
Benedict
Benedict 5 yıl önce
Best talk I've heard in a while. Very interesting stuff.
Gregor Samsa
Gregor Samsa 11 aylar önce
It's amazing how the term "meme" has become such a successful meme. But the actual concepts it was meant to refer to have been much less successful
Rachendra Pyakurel
Rachendra Pyakurel 4 yıl önce
Nailed it Sir! Truth can't be buried.
catascopic
catascopic 4 yıl önce
He really gets to the point at 1:05:15
Leonidas the dog
Leonidas the dog 2 yıl önce
catascopic cat cAt CAt CAT CAAAAAT!!
AnthonyMann Wexford
AnthonyMann Wexford 5 yıl önce
Great talk. Thank you.
Peter Stephenson
Peter Stephenson 9 aylar önce
For me several of the various theories of evolution and their refined versions define the limits of the evolutionary - what works and what doesn't - but within those limits there are other processes going on. In particular I think optimisation is over-emphasised while simple viability, without it being optimal, is ignored. Pairing and linked genetic features, some of which may not be just immediately unnecessary but actually harmful, may accompany more advantageous features and eventually become useful features themselves. And then there are organelles that may have their own evolutionary history before being subsumed into another organism. Darwin's blinding revelation may be a vital part of the process but not the whole of it.
Andrew K
Andrew K 10 aylar önce
Good thing I stumbled upon this lecture, lots of useful ideas for me. Thanks a lot!
Howard Maxwell
Howard Maxwell 4 yıl önce
It could be argued that internet memes are a form of cultural expression, whether you like them or not. They reinforce shared values, thereby making one group more strongly bonded. It’s simply a larger scale version of making a joke to a group of people sitting around a campfire. The evolutionary advantage of having people on your side should be easy enough to work out
Juhan Leemet
Juhan Leemet 10 aylar önce
I disagree somewhat with Dennett when he says memes are created by a "mindless" process. While the actual creation might be random, successful memes do have some "selection" (as he says) perhaps external like "which boats came back", but also cultural. We do not accept ALL memes "just because". We have some choice (insert arguments about "free will" here?) in which memes we like or adopt. We could think of this as possibly a form of "intelligence amplification"? Vague glimmerings of preference are combined in society to choose which memes are acceptable, and then society builds on them, as they form part of the cultural context. The decision making is diffuse and unorganized and bottom-up, but is that totally "mindless"? True there is no "one mind" controlling the process, but perhaps many little minds?
Sentientism
Sentientism Yıl önce
The sense that "I feel too special to 'just be physics' has a lot to answer for". Once we get over our anthropocentric arrogance, things become much clearer - and maybe even more awesome than the "magic" some others prefer.
Sentientism
Sentientism Yıl önce
@GodwynDi Indeed!
GodwynDi
GodwynDi Yıl önce
I think anyone who says that is a lot less impressed by physics than they should be.
Audrey Mciver
Audrey Mciver 2 yıl önce
i absoloutly love your videos!
Israel Grogin
Israel Grogin 5 yıl önce
When he mentioned mindless processes creating things more advanced than themselves it reminded me Stephen Wolfram's study of cellular automata where he demonstrated how simple rules can create very complex systems.
Nathan Stone
Nathan Stone 2 aylar önce
Conway's Game of life is another example of how simple rules can lead to complex outcomes.
ehoworka
ehoworka 3 aylar önce
​ @Machine-Learning101 The two simple rules of Conway's Game of Life generate incredible complexity. My first Fortran programming assignment (as a junior at Universite Paris VII in 1971) was to find all Conway gliders contained in a 20x20 grid. It failed to execute completely for lack of allotted computing time on the IBM System 360 mainframe. This was only two years after the first glider was discovered "manually" by Richard Guy in 1969. In 1973, thanks in part to this humble programming assignment, I became the last postdoc student of Stan Ulam (Conway's mentor). In April 2000, Paul Rendell showed that Game of Life is equivalent to a Turing machine, and therefore is undecidable. The proof uses a reduction of the question whether Game of Life will halt on a given pattern to the Turing halting problem.
Chance
Chance 5 aylar önce
@JES I fail to see how one can so easily dismiss the second law. Whether or not the universe proper is a closed system, you're in an observable universe that certainly is. Things outside your bubble can't ever have an effect on you. That's closed enough for consideration.
innosanto
innosanto 6 aylar önce
@Sum Arbor no we dont as far as I know, Photosynthesis involves many quantum processes and other stuff which we dont inderstand at present how they work.
PCap
PCap 6 aylar önce
It's worth keeping in mind that complexity resides in the observer rather than something in the system itself. There are as many ways to slice and dice a blank grid in the game of life as there are in any other configuration of the grid. We consider some arrangements more interesting than others and try to describe them and sort them into entities and assign names to them and whatever else, but all of that 'complexity' is an aspect of how we perceive the different configurations and not an inherent property of a given grid configuration.
Iain Hobbs
Iain Hobbs 2 yıl önce
Brilliant as the Brain 's software is, it doesn't always get it right. Think Motion Sickness or Creepy Doll Syndrome. Both the results of the software being unable to resolve data conflict.
Neil Lynch
Neil Lynch 11 aylar önce
Computers don't get everything right. Think bugs and patches.
Khalid jj
Khalid jj 4 yıl önce
Great lecture. We have to first access the brin to make any destruction to it. "Upgrades" to brain. We can't even fix mechanical organs yet. Brains will be after we have figure out fixing organs. Brain is th ultimate computer.
Neil Lynch
Neil Lynch 11 aylar önce
We might just need to fix the ecocide first. When you think about it? ;)
J Vincent
J Vincent 3 yıl önce
20.05. I didn't understand why Dennett, when making the point about creating a computer out of things from the 'pre-electronic' age, made it seem as though frontiers were being pushed back. During WWII, Tommy Flowers, working with Alan Turing, built a 'programmable computer' back in '43/'44 as part of the Enigma programme at Bletchley Park. It was called 'Colossus'. Tommy was an engineer at the General Post Office of Britain (the old GPO and forerunner of BT) and he used diodes, switches, nixie tubes and bakelite. He actually built more than one machine. Their pioneering and brilliant work gave the allies a sublime edge in the war. They certainly saved lives and probably foreshortened the war. By the way, there is a lesson here for all such centralist, totalitarian regimes (as the Nazis): vanity and arrogance foster always a sense of destiny and infallibility. And that is always the augur of their demise. Hitler skipped in his 'nest' in the mountains of Berchtesgaden with his black-booted bullies (though the pompous buffoon was scared of heights). Goering pranced like a poppycock with his pretty sky-blue coloured costume stretched tight across his aryan, über-mensch, über-sized bulk. Our two likely lads, Tommy, the son of a bricklayer, and Alan, a the social misfit, cracked their bloody uncrackable code*. We could then read the entire encrypted communications of the entire German war machine as if the 'Oberkommando der Wehrmacht' had placed full page ads of their intentions every day in the Times. You couldn't make it up! Surely there must have been some clever junior officer in the German High Command pushing to have the Enigma machines changed and updated, you know, just to be safe, boss? The British government's obsession with secrecy after the war meant that no one knew of Tommy's and Alan's work for decades. Cometh the moment, cometh the men!
Apurva Sukant
Apurva Sukant Yıl önce
Now its also my favorite diagram of tree of life. Thank you sir!
Mark Lawson
Mark Lawson 10 aylar önce
Dan, Dan, Dan. Dad gone at 5, raised by a Saintly Mom with 3 kids, I used the no Dad excuse for many a year. As a teen JoAnn sat me down, apologized and said to take some responsibility, be happy. Easy enough, I chose my Father figures, gleaned every iota of what I thought was important. I had the greatest adventure and fun. As an old man, I'm more conscious of all the grateful gifts, I would hoe the weeds At Larry Krauss's house, pick apples on Gabor Mate's farm and wash the windows at Noam's house, lastly (or lately), I giggle about camping with Sam, Hitch, Dawkins and you. Well said Dad. Sincerely Lawson di Ransom Canyon
tedgrant2
tedgrant2 Yıl önce
When I was an engineering student, I had a tour around a book printing company. The guide told me that their main business was printing the Bible and the Qur'an. It seemed odd to me that anyone could be happy printing both books. When I queried this, the guide smiled and said one word.
tedgrant2
tedgrant2 9 aylar önce
@Howard Imagine selling both books, door to door. "Madam, would you be interested in buying one of our books ?" "We have a special offer this month, buy one and get the other free !"
Howard
Howard 9 aylar önce
The Bible and the Qur'an are basically the same book. Seems not unsurprising that a printer would be willing to publish both of them. I can understand that some folks say that Bible readers are evil and others say that Qur'an readers are evil but why should we assume that everyone is one camp or the other ? Those two camps of people are actually rather small. Also - book printers work for pay. It's a business. So of course they are paid to print books.
origano
origano 11 aylar önce
@I A he was waiting for someone to ask that 😹
tedgrant2
tedgrant2 Yıl önce
@I A Money.
I A
I A Yıl önce
what word did he say?😂
DJ Waterman
DJ Waterman 4 yıl önce
There was a lot of well thought out stuff in this talk, I think he's onto something. I've never been convinced by the Chalmer's declaration that consciousnesses was the hard problem.
goldenphoenixpublish
goldenphoenixpublish 3 yıl önce
To be an expert on consciousness, one would necessarily have to practice "awareness". An expert in this study should be able to do more than map complex neural impulses within others. A true expert should be able to examine those behaviors, emotions and thoughts originating from within themselves. (We might refer to this ability as "meditation".) The question then becomes: Is the brain aware of itself? OR is their an awareness than transcends the apparatus impressing and examining the brain's content? Let those who know how to meditate come to their own conclusion...
goldenphoenixpublish
goldenphoenixpublish 3 yıl önce
However, even if there IS ESP, that phenomenon does not PROVE the existence of the ghost. Why? Because its entirely possible that impulses (in the form of emi) could be emanated from one brain to another -- something that does not rely on a "ghost". To prevent that from occurring, investigators would have to demonstrate ESP within a "Faraday Cage". Such a device shields occupants from emi originating in the environment at large. So, unless you've grounded your aluminum hat, forget it...
goldenphoenixpublish
goldenphoenixpublish 3 yıl önce
Essentially, those who support the notion of the "ghost in the machine" basically believe that the human body is an automata under the influence of an enduring consciousness that simply moves on once the life of that automata is no longer sustainable. Those who support the notion that no such ghost exists, see in consciousness an illusory "epiphenomenon" that arises out of the sophistication of the many neural circuits that comprise the brain. Aside, from the experience of death, those who investigate paranormal phenomenon are most likely to reveal to the world the true nature of consciousness. If there is no such thing as "ESP", there is no ghost...
goldenphoenixpublish
goldenphoenixpublish 3 yıl önce
One final exploration: Imagine that, in some time in the future, it becomes possible to fully replicate every neuron in your brain within a "quantum computer". Ask yourself this: "Would you, or would your memories of you, actually inhabit that computer?" One way to probe at this would be the following mind experiment: "Would you in both "brains" experience cognitive dissonance -- as though you were in two places at once? Or would you experience yourself as yourself in two distinctly different "timelines" altogether? Finally would you continue to experience yourself, as yourself organically, while your quantum doppelganger experiences no sense of self at all?
goldenphoenixpublish
goldenphoenixpublish 3 yıl önce
As to the question of evolution of form, it's entirely possible that the bodies (and brains) we human beings inhabit, "evolved" by way of natural selection (among other purely environmental factors) AND that, at the same time, some "trans-physical" phenomenon participated in both its evolution and exploits it capabilities. For example, imagine a form of AI that is able to "write" its own code. Now imagine that that same AI actually originated from a "nonphysical realm" (one that is not physical whatsoever). This of course, might be described as "the Ghost in the Machine"...
Oauabei
Oauabei 6 aylar önce
i like the idea: words are semi-autonomous informational structures. glad i discovered this lecture
George Steele
George Steele 5 yıl önce
The neurology is quite capable of implementing a general purpose digital computer. All is required is the NAND gate. Neurology can implement NAND. Evolution is cleverer than you are. It even seems to use quantum entanglement in some biological processes. There is no reason evolution could not have built an on board digital computer. Education -- learning -- is programming a subroutine. At first the child has to concentrate and engage reasoning (the on board real time computer) to understand. Once it is learned it is an *un*conscious process. At first time the steps in the dance must be consciously attended to, but when the dance is really learned, no conscious effort is required. Once the fact that 7 x 8 = ? is memorized 8 7's no longer need to be added up. When you learned, well, anything you made a subroutine that operates at unconscious speed. Habits are learned. Language is learned. The on board computer is for addressing novel problems. A situation not previously learned. You engage it to puzzle out what to do. It is new and different, yet thought can reach a conclusion. If you are familiar with the Trolley Problem (if not Bing is your friend) you know that evaluation of moral right or wrong is done unconsciously. It is learned by repetition whatever "it" is. It is familiar due to repetition. When a Toyota is advertised the brand makes another copy in the brain. A big lie told often enough becomes true due to familiarity. Thus propaganda works. Fake news works. Who is Pope? Many people know the answer instantly. What is the capital of Ecuador? Many people do not know that answer instantly. Can you walk and chew gum at the same time? Can you talk and drive at the same time? Can you tie a shoe and carry on a conversation? Can you change the oil and talk about the Packers? Can you multi-task? What is learned initially as a child is simply accepted a true unconditionally. It is difficult to unlearn if it turns out to be not quite correct. In general, the first thing about a subject that is learned is difficult to unlearn even as an adult. When it is repeated often enough from authoritative sources it becomes hard to unlearn. When there is a better way, it is difficult to learn. The most difficult to learn is when I was wrong all along in my prior belief. The hardware (wetware) is "programmed" by evolution to be a problem solving machine. That same computer reasons out just why the unconscious did what it did. It is the justifier of behavior. READ ALL THIS AGAIN. Make another copy in your memory. You can learn it, too.
Matt
Matt 2 yıl önce
In 2020, I thought it was perfectly normal the 'mind' can be equated to 'firmware+OS+software'..... But people think that's an insane idea?
Juhan Leemet
Juhan Leemet 10 aylar önce
@tjbtech in simplistic cases it can be modeled as a computer, but as you and Dennett point out the plasticity of the brain is nothing like (but also has some limitations)
tjbtech
tjbtech 2 yıl önce
It's not insane, but it is silly. The brain has no OS, and it certainly doesn't have firmware, and the hardware and software are one and the same. It's far more akin to a self-modifying, massively parallel FPGA.
Mitch Bogart
Mitch Bogart 9 aylar önce
Professor Dennet, surely you understand that the complexity, flight, takeoff, landing, and evasion capabilities of the human house fly can not be built or even approximated by a team of thousands of NASA engineers. And that is not to mention its energy harvesting from the environment and self-manufacturing abilities!
JonasRV
JonasRV 4 yıl önce
I think differentiating between analog and digital is important. That's my computer science view at least. BTW: There is another explanation, might not be well-researched or true at all, but Erich von Daeniken has the hypothesis that there was 'extraterrestrial help' :D
Danny THE Dog
Danny THE Dog 3 yıl önce
Try watching analogue and CNC lathes and mills. Amaizingly similar results. With similar traits , but, which system is responsable for them?
The Hermit
The Hermit 5 yıl önce
The intuition 'designs the software'... when the intellect will allow it.
Acerbic Atheist
Acerbic Atheist 2 yıl önce
Thank christ there's no Leslie Groves in my head, no matter how good he may have been at completing large projects on time and under budget (witness:- the Pentagon, the Manhattan project... and I'm willing to bet that he and Teller were the core, so to speak, of the H-bomb effort ; who else?). I flatter myself to think that I might have an Oppenheimer up there instead.
OREE AQENARI
OREE AQENARI 5 yıl önce
It seems to be rather obvious: each individual termite working as an element of in what seems to be a colony is in fact independent and entire "colony" in itself. It is a fractal structure not only of matter (physical reality) but also of what makes the internal condition: intelligence, instinct... Every individual organism is the whole structure in which it functions as individual organism or it is the personification, individualization of the reality itself or it is the incarnated information - the LOGOS, the Word, the Substance of All...
Mike Jovani
Mike Jovani 4 yıl önce
Listening to this in the background I cannot help but picture John C Reilly speaking. Great lecture. :)
Chris Call
Chris Call Yıl önce
First of all you have to know the meaning of "Evolution" and "computer", then you have to know that time and evolution created the software and continues to do so.
Down The Rabbit Hole
Down The Rabbit Hole 7 aylar önce
Emotions are interesting things. Before you feel a certain way about something, say some situation, or some person, your brain must go through a process of assessing the situation, or recognizing the person. In it's most fundamental form, it must go through a quantitative process. It has to literally 'place' that situation or person on a scale that runs roughly like this: from disgust, through dislike, or dissatisfaction, to neutrality, or towards satisfaction, maybe preference, then liking, and up to loving. Your brain has to go through a quantitative analysis, (which is almost instantaneous), before it can truly develop an emotional reaction to something. It has to think, before it can feel.
Saso nilha
Saso nilha 3 yıl önce
wise man. .. and here I was thinking all this time that 'philosophy' is a mere mumbo jumbo, convinced I was based on not very good high school teacher ... but this here is something completely different. ... it's like a creation of a way and through a rough forest; when you see it. you use it for it's been done well. ! hm
Lenn
Lenn 3 yıl önce
That’s exactly what philosophy is supposed to be. Just clear, rational thinking.
Inspiración Original
Inspiración Original 5 yıl önce
Thanks for this video!
Michiel de Ruiter
Michiel de Ruiter 4 yıl önce
I like the idea of various conscious processes ongoing in the body altogether creating the idea of consciousness. It reminds me oddly enough of the conscious agents theory from Donald Hoffman...
Juhan Leemet
Juhan Leemet 10 aylar önce
and Marvin Minsky's conceptual "society of mind", many independent parallel processes through the chaos of interaction result in an "emergent property" we call "the" mind; are Donald Hoffman's agents really conscious by themselves? or is it their community that appears conscious?
Walter Stuermer
Walter Stuermer 2 yıl önce
Three years too late, but I would suggest the lecturer watch the Feynman lecture, "Los Alamos From Below". Feynman visited Oak Ridge during the Manhatten project and told the engineers and scientists there a lot of information they needed so as design their isotope separation to avoid near critical mass events that could have harmed or killed the Oak Ridge staff.
Beux J
Beux J 3 gün önce
I am not impressed by how viral a meme is. I am much more interested in the message it is conveying. As you can imagine, I find 99% of memes utterly dull xD
Eto Hige Gamer Culture
Eto Hige Gamer Culture 2 yıl önce
This makes me realize a few things. 1. Man we must have been dumb back in the day and through sheer luck and animal survival instinct to run away from anything that just killed the guy next to you. 2. Wow lots of us must have died through trial an error. 3. We over wrote our own animistic "software" to become aware free thinking and able to invent everything up to this day. Pretty good video that gets the brain churning. Also Necktop is funny lol
Robert English
Robert English 10 aylar önce
Plenty of really dumb people being born each day, and dying by by trial and error instead of thinking things through first.
KAĞAN NASUHBEYOĞLU
KAĞAN NASUHBEYOĞLU 2 yıl önce
Great content.
Django Peeters
Django Peeters Yıl önce
50:03 Just saying, this man has a great sense of humour 🤣🤣🤣.
Gross Herman
Gross Herman 2 yıl önce
The strive forward of the human race is down to communication and education. From learning those same instinctive abilities of our fellow life forms to education of our specific species and then to the ability to communicate that education. The aforesaid is both why and how modern human beings became so dominant.
Esso Blue
Esso Blue 10 aylar önce
A computer in it's own right. It's got it's own video equipment, dreams. You watch it as it's being made up while sleeping. You concentrate the mind behind the eyelids as you start to go into a sleep the pictures start to come to the front. The quality of the picture is better than what we produce digitally. Copy and paste dreams that can be a mashup that's been taken in over time from the surroundings. Creating a computer to mimic the brain, but taken further. Software, hard drive, memory, sharing information, storing information. Ways of getting around the cons of the brain. We are starting to make sense of our makeup (Big things come in small packages), atoms, energy, protons, neutrons, electrons and so on. The computer being an extension of the minds computer.
xXPORTALXx
xXPORTALXx 4 yıl önce
I'm curious if anyone else was thinking this: if our conscious being is comprised of many unaware entities all doing their independent jobs, then is it possible that other massive systems of subunits could have some form of sense of self??? For instance in his example the Seattle sea hawks, although this system is a tad too small, does the team itself have a desire to win? A better example I think would be things like cultures, civilizations, colonies, economies, etc. Do they have some form of will, and furthermore is it possible for this resultant entity to have a sense od self!? And no I'm not a spiritual person, I'm not talking philosophically or mystically, I am simply positing that if we have a sense of self from the interactions of many unwitting subunits that perhaps other systems of such could have similar manifestations.
Juhan Leemet
Juhan Leemet 10 aylar önce
How can one tell if something or someone is conscious? We infer from behaviour. This may be the crux of the disagreements fomented by Searle's "Chinese Room" argument against computers ever becoming conscious: how to define the agent, and how to determine intention (e.g. desire to win)? Personally, I would argue that Searle's "Chinese Room" actually DOES understand Chinese, because the system as a whole behaves as if it does, even though the books, papers, even the human inside "executing the algorithm" do not. We probably scoff at the idea of a team having a desire to win because we cannot conceive (we have never seen any example) of a disembodied distributed intelligence or mind, so we discount it.
Jack Pullen
Jack Pullen 5 yıl önce
Some theorists say that the DNA has over millions of years encoded the software for our brains and that all living cells can communicate through quantum entanglement. Bit by bit the supporting theorems are proving working science.At 26:40, he states we have 86 billion neurons in our brains, but actual work is being done in substructures of the cells and make up some 100,000 trillion connections or bits, if you will, within the brain. All the heavy work is being done through quantum superposition within these structures. Thanks
Primodernious
Primodernious 4 yıl önce
we are robots on only a crude level. byond that we are everything that the machines are not and can never become as neurons in your muscles and skin also store information in their own cells just like the brain and play a gigantic role in our sensory experience of reality.
Heldon_Tyrell
Heldon_Tyrell 11 aylar önce
When I was a kid I came with the idea that every brain despite their computing power depending of the species were supplied by the same fuel. And what we call mind is the behavior of our hardware capacity X fuel. A commodor 64 was supplied by electricity, the OS is a bunch of strings and bits compiled in the same way a i9 CPU computer is working. We must find the nature of this " fuel ".
wthomas
wthomas 6 aylar önce
Figure out how machine learning actually works and we'll know how the software that runs our brains evolved.
Maggie O
Maggie O 6 aylar önce
Thank you, that was an awesome presentation, I thoroughly enjoyed it. Thanks so much for sharing. ❤️
Nick Barton
Nick Barton 10 aylar önce
In modern computer software design, not only are there abstractions of the language eg. Java but we've developed design patterns. These are standard design solutions to common problems. One of the main advantages of patterns is not only do we have ready solutions but we can communicate that solution to another engineer with a single phrase thus speeding up the development process. "What you want there is an observer pattern". Naming things is one of the things that makes us human. The speed of advancement depends on it.
Metatron
Metatron 2 yıl önce
Another perspective is to think of the brain like a television set. It receives consciousness from the cosmos and interprets it in a way that is practical for human life and operating on a very narrow bandwidth
Brice
Brice Aylar önce
@Sam Consciousness isn't the sort of thing that can be empirically tested by objective means because it isn't the *stuff* of the physical, objective universe (matter, energy, spacetime, etc.). Consciousness is all of the other kind of stuff, that of subjective experience. Really, all we can know fundamentally as conscious entities is that we are consciously experiencing something, that consciousness exists (Descartes' "I think, therefore I am"). In truth, we can't even know for certain whether the stuff of physical, "objective" reality actually exists. Edit: But, just to be clear, these things are connected by concepts of information, so we can approach some understanding of the connection between physical information systems (like brains and computers) and how they may bring about conscious experience, not to say that we are very close though.
Sam
Sam 6 aylar önce
@Dan Razzell there is no empirical evidence of consciousness existing in the first place. There is no consciousness detector to detect consciousness waves. It is purely through direct, first person apprehension that we know consciousness to exist. So the idea of empirically testing any sort of model of the mind and brain relationship is very silly.
Reverend 11-d MEOW!
Reverend 11-d MEOW! 7 aylar önce
@RAI RADIO cannot refute Hinduism or Brahma or anything at all, so it uses brute-force methods from the 10th-Century.
Reverend 11-d MEOW!
Reverend 11-d MEOW! 7 aylar önce
@Jakub Lizon could use a booster on the IQ Spectrum and\or run a few thought experiments testing its owned belief systems prior to not saying them while knocking someone else.
Reverend 11-d MEOW!
Reverend 11-d MEOW! 7 aylar önce
@Dan Razzell needs to step-up to the plate and explain its point of view before knocking someone else's.
Santy Clause
Santy Clause 2 yıl önce
Nature is the nurturer and the teacher, space time and motion is the stuff of everything ..including the stuff.
Desi Clarke
Desi Clarke 11 aylar önce
The speaker made an observation that intrigues me. He stated that it's possible to benefit from a certain aspect of our nature without understanding how that nature came into being and gave the example of a butterfly with camouflage patterns. This notion can be extended to disease. Presently, we treat "diseases" as if they are bad or harmful, but if we're truly the subject of Biological Evolution then the mutations that are expressed as "diseases" are simply the subtle, biological evolutionary steps towards human betterment. For instance, we may think heart attacks are bad not knowing that they are actually the evolutionary step towards developing a better heart. Or, the elimination of the heart as the fulcrum of the cardiovascular system. Perhaps, as evolutionists we should be thinking twice about treating certain conditions or risk hampering human development?
J. Christie
J. Christie 5 aylar önce
Like feet, our feet are not well suited for us. Due to year's centuries of Shoe's.
Terence David
Terence David 11 aylar önce
The word "computer" etymologically it is a compound word, comprising 'com' meaning with and 'putare' meaning to reckon, to calculate, to metally weigh, sift and sieve. So yes, the brain is the proto typical computer, the CPU of this bio organism, which processes, calculates, sifts n sieves information taken in by the 5 senses. I would argue the above and also that information IS the software. These modern electronic gadgets that we call computers are modelled on the brain, the brain being the most sophisticated computer known to man, and we've only just scratched the surface in our understanding of this super computer.
GaryChap
GaryChap 4 yıl önce
Awww, no Q&A? It's sad that we must, by necessity, place time limits on such talks. This mans ideas deserve neither interruption nor constraint and I'm sure he'd have an audience for as long as he has the energy and will to speak.
GaryChap
GaryChap 4 yıl önce
\o/ Yay!
The Royal Institution
The Royal Institution 4 yıl önce
You're in luck, there is a Q&A - trshow.info/watch/0GJa0xKKSOU/video.html There's a link at the end and in the description, bu they're a bit hidden.
ioannis I Mansola
ioannis I Mansola 2 yıl önce
I had this question from years ago unanswered ! Unless we separate the terms processor and programming there is little to understand and even less to down or up -load
Abnormal Zone
Abnormal Zone 3 yıl önce
If brain is computer, then the consciousness is software which is constantly updated by knowledge and experiences until hard drive crashes and computer dies.
WILLIAM BECK
WILLIAM BECK 3 yıl önce
When DNA divides it must " quantum entangle" the 2nd pair of exact DNA, giving birds the ability to fly in flocks, navigate, fish to swim in shoals and us to play table tennis faster than electrical impulses in our nervous system. It must give the DNA the ability to orchestrate the thousands of chemical reactions going on in each cell of our body at any one time. Gravity, speed of light and dark matter, all of this made possible, if we assume that matter is composed of basic building blocks of quantum fields, discrete and flat, flipping rapidly between 3 dimensions. We see matter only when the fields are broadside but are not seen by any dimension at the event horizon as they flip. Time does not exist at that brief point and thus information can be stored "forever" and accessed via the pineal gland making consciousness possible. Controlled by species specific DNA we never dream nor think in the body of other animals.
Angad Singh
Angad Singh Yıl önce
what?
Melroy Correa
Melroy Correa Yıl önce
Excellent! Profound and Interesting!
a. y
a. y 5 yıl önce
Excellent!
MimiDaisyandFreckles
MimiDaisyandFreckles Yıl önce
Right there in that auditorium, extra-terrestials under cloak walked around and laughed to each others about the lifeforms they had created on "Earth" planet.....just like the numerous electromagnetic waves that travels through the space and people sitting there who are totally unaware because they do not have the right sensors to pick up the various frequencies....
sammy gerbil
sammy gerbil 11 aylar önce
That is really no different from the God Hypothesis. It pushes back the problem to an earlier cause : Who created the Aliens/God? Did they create themselves? If so, wouldn't it be simpler to say that we designed ourselves and are 'cloaked' from seeing it?
The Magic of Consciousness
56:24
Molurus73
görünümler 139 B
Barbaros Hayreddin: Sultanın Fermanı 2. Tanıtım | Yakında TRT'de!
1:08
Barbaros Hayreddin: Sultanın Fermanı
görünümler 510 B
Who Can Make The Best Circle Challenge!
0:35
Jojo Sim
görünümler 25 Mn
Gelsin Hayat Bildiği Gibi - 20.Bölüm
2:18:41
Gelsin Hayat Bildiği Gibi
görünümler 3,7 Mn
What Computers Can't Do - with Kevin Buzzard
1:04:06
The Royal Institution
görünümler 420 B
Why Space Itself May Be Quantum in Nature - with Jim Baggott
1:08:56
The Royal Institution
görünümler 1,1 Mn
The Neuroscience of Consciousness - with Anil Seth
1:00:14
The Royal Institution
görünümler 1,7 Mn
Andrew Szydlo's Chemistry of Coal
1:18:30
The Royal Institution
görünümler 470 B
Artificial Intelligence, the History and Future - with Chris Bishop
1:01:22
How did Michael Faraday invent? - with David Ricketts
56:33
The Royal Institution
görünümler 176 B
iPhone 15 Pro çıkarsa?
0:51
ShiftDelete.Net
görünümler 1 Mn
Sizce Hangi Kombini Seçmeliyim? ✨ #shorts
0:20