Ep 247: The Farthest Reaches Part 3

This is the extended "director's cut" of a talk delivered for "RatFest 2025" (next year to be "Conjecture Con"). This also serves as a supplement to my "Doom Debates" interview which can be found here: https://youtu.be/koubXR0YL4A?si=483M6SPOKwbQYmzb It is simply assumed some version of "Bayesian reasoning" is how AI will "create" knowledge. This misconception permeates the https://ai-2027.com paper, as well as Bostrom and Yudkowsky's work on this, as well as that of every other AI "Doomer" and even on the other extreme the so-called "AI-Accelerationists". All of that indicates a deep misconception about how new explanations are generated which comes from a deep misconception about how science works because almost no one in the field of AI seems to think the *philosophy of* science is even relevant. I explain what has gone wrong: 00:00 Introduction 09:14 The Big Questions and the new Priesthoods 18:40 Nick Bostrom and Superintelligence 25:10 If anyone builds it, everyone dies and Yudkowsky. 33:32 Prophecy, Inevitability, Induction and Bayesianism. 41:42 Popper, Kuhn, Feyerabend and Lakatos. 49:40 AI researchers ignore The Philosophy of Science. 58:46 A new test for AGI from Sam Altman and David Deutsch? 1:03:35 Accelerationists, Doomers and “Everyone dies”. 1:10:21 Conclusions 1:15:35 Audience Questions

Chapters and Timestamps 00:07 Chapter 10 Explanatory Universality and Ethnicity 24:51 Chapter 11 Explanatory Universality and Multiculturalism 37:47 Chapter 12 Explanatory Universality and Mental Illness.

Chapters and Timestamps:   00:06 Chapter 5 Explanatory Universality, Psychology and IQ 03:30 Chapter 6 Explanatory Universality and Adopting Culture 11:47 Chapter 7: Explanatory Universality and IQ Part 2 17:10 Chapter 8 Explanatory Universality and the “trans” issue. 27:35 Chapter 9: Explanatory Universality and Immigration

Chapters 1 to 4 of a multi-chapter series about the reach of what I argue is one of the most important lessons to learn in order to solve many pressing problems: explanatory universality. This podcast provides an explanation that "explanatory universality" is an idea of such depth it may have among the greatest reach of any idea. Chapters: 00:12 Chapter 1 - Universality and Reach 09:09 Chapter 2 - The Reach of Explanatory Universality 20:01 Chapter 3 - Explaining Explanatory Universality 30:23 Chapter 4 - Explanatory Universality and Education

We are told by people working in the field, researchers and those who publish academic papers on the topic that artificial intelligence or deep learning or LLMs or Machine Learning or Recurrent Neural Networks - call them what you like - employ some form of inductive reasoning. But do they? What is inductive reasoning? What is deductive or adductive for that matter? Is "new physics" or other new science being discovered by the most recent and best chatbots or other "artificially intelligent" computer systems? My response to all that is contained herein.   For images see: https://youtu.be/9Dimv7mOls4 For more information: https://www.bretthall.org/blog/induction

This episode is a reading of and reflection upon more writing by David Deutsch - an article you can find at https://takingchildrenseriously.com/in-praise-of-ignorance/ Joining me is philosopher and language educator Liberty Fitz-Claridge. Liberty holds Master Degrees in both Philosophy and Applied Linguistics and English Language teaching, as well as a Bachelors in The Philosophy of Science. As well as teaching, Liberty runs the Popper-Deutsch Reading Group which can be found at www.meetup.com/popper-deutsch-reading-group/ In this conversation Liberty refers to the following articles: 1. Ioup, Georgette, Elizabeth Boustagui, Manal El Tigi, and Martha Moselle. “Reexamining the Critical Period Hypothesis: A Case Study of Successful Adult SLA in a Naturalistic Environment.” Studies in Second Language Acquisition 16, no. 1 (1994): 73–98. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263100012596.   2. Alsulaimani, Adil. (1990). Reading problems in Arab learners of English (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). London University, UK.   3. Randall, Mick and Meara, Paul. (1988). “How Arabs read Roman letters.” Reading in a Foreign Language, 4 (2): 133-145.

  Woke is a rejection of the truth, the good, the beautiful. Is the best response a return to traditional religion? Are some dogmas worth defending?

A summary of some arguments made in the previous 4 parts, and a conclusion to my evaluation of https://ai-2027.com I refer to Daniel Kokotajlo's paper which contained an earlier set of predictions made in 2021 about the 5 years leading to 2026 which is found here https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/6Xgy6CAf2jqHhynHL/what-2026-looks-like Note that Part 4 is here: https://youtu.be/C3jDjuSLBv0 Part 3 is here: https://youtu.be/7P-UlHiTins Part 2 is here: https://youtu.be/o3Rdj37UJjw Part 1 is here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uq_txKy-XMQ Credit to  ⁨@drpeterboghossian⁩  for the inspiration,  ⁨@NavalR⁩  for the support and  ⁨@DavidDeutschPhysicist⁩  for many of the arguments made with errors, as always, my own.

Note that Part 3 is episode 239 or can be found here: https://youtu.be/7P-UlHiTins Part 2 is here: https://youtu.be/o3Rdj37UJjw Part 1 is here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uq_txKy-XMQ I react to the contents of this article https://ai-2027.com

Episode 238 contains Part 2 of this podcast and Episode 237 is Part 1. Also all parts are available on Youtube as almost always. Eg here for part 2: https://youtu.be/o3Rdj37UJjw Part 1 is here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uq_txKy-XMQ   I am reacting to the contents of this article https://ai-2027.com