The Royal Institution
Daniel Dennett explores the first steps towards a unified theory of information, through common threads in the convergence of evolution, learning, and engineering.
Subscribe for regular science talks: http://bit.ly/RiSubscRibe
Watch the Q&A now: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=beKC_7rlTuw
The concept of information is fundamental to all areas of science, and ubiquitous in daily life in the Internet Age. However, it is still not well understood despite being recognised for more than 40 years. In this talk, Daniel Dennett explores steps towards a unified theory of information, through common threads in evolution, learning, and engineering.
This event was the first in a series on the theme of ‘Convergence’, exploring the links between neuroscience, philosophy and artificial intelligence. If you’re in London, look out for more events later in the year: http://rigb.org/whats-on
We are grateful for the help of the Real Time Club in organising this event.
Daniel Dennett is known as one the most important philosophers of our time, with controversial and thought-provoking arguments about human consciousness, free will, and human evolution.
He is also a writer and cognitive scientist, using neuroscience, linguistics, artificial intelligence, computer science, and psychology to inform his philosophy, particularly his philosophies relating to evolutionary biology and cognitive science.
Subscribe for regular science videos: http://bit.ly/RiSubscRibe
The Ri is on Twitter: http://twitter.com/ri_science
and Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/royalinstitution
and Tumblr: http://ri-science.tumblr.com/
Our editorial policy: http://www.rigb.org/home/editorial-policy
Subscribe for the latest science videos: http://bit.ly/RiNewsletter
Source
The human is the only one who can do intelligent design. That is why human can build a structure same as the termites did.
Thanks God there has natural selection and two cells instead to eat each other join in one organism that develop up to a human been.
Highly intelligent and even more arrogant, but as convincing as a flat Earth theorist 😀
species could not evolve into another completely new species. Darwin did not have the benefit of DNA and that is what kills his natural selection theory.
Our transition in merging with machines over the next 50 years is like a modern version of Prokaryotic transfer to Eukaryotic.
WE DEVELOP INTELLIGENT DESIGN SO FAR SOON THAT IT CREATES SIMULATIONS LIKE THE ONE WE ARE IN. DUH! INTELLIGENT DESIGN ACTING OUTSIDE SPACE/TIME.
That was very funny Mr. Dennett… thank you for the good time 🙂
"Think about the billions… trillions, of lives lost due to bad trials."
And yet, not an iota of evidence of this joke of a theory can be seen in the fossil record. Zip, zero, nada!
From the billions of fossils uncovered today, the best they can come up with is a few scattered bones of incomplete fossils through which they can spin a story out of. Every relatively complete fossil they've found shows fully functional body structures that fulfill a purpose, regardless to how deep in the "record" they go. No scales becoming fur, no flippers becoming legs, no legs becoming wings, etc… No creatures becoming anything other than what they were created to be. As counterintuitive as it is, and as much evidence as this theory lacks, many are buying it; "Hey guys, forget everything you know through science and repeatable, testable experiences… all this mind-bogglingly complex information required to build organisms can easily happen by chance… Afterall, if we simply fiddle randomly with programming code, we are confident we can create the world's most advanced operating system… eventually!"
I jest, but that's the king of argument reputable people use to support Darwinian evolution. That is both utterly sad and amazing at the same time – that a theory can be so blatantly falsified, yet still going strong through tactics ranging from efforts to silince any opposition, to outright deception in textbooks and museums.
But, to everything there is a season and a time. More and more scientists are finding it increasingly difficult to defend this foolish theory in the light of todays growing knowledge of microbiology. It's time will come…
I like this.
When is he talking about information?
It's fascinating how he manipulates the hardwired intelligence of an insect that works in
incredible harmony with something like a soul ( which i assume he means simple human behavior and not the many complex behaviors that encompass many areas of
human sciences that any evolutionary speculation fails to explain in every aspect where
it intersects these areas of science) .
Unfortunately , people like Dennet , Dawkins and the Coynes are still referencing
most of the earlier evolutionery speculations from 30 or 40 years ago , while
science passes them by.
The only area that they can accurately reference proven science is on issues such as
variations or adaptions that they falsely claim as micro-evolution.
How long can this type of speculation and pseudoscience continue to be presented
as science when in fact in just about every area it touches , it fails to meet
the requirements of science and yet falsely claims it does as well as stigmatizes
anyone that questions this outdated theory with scientific evidence.
get a clue
What is inconsistent is dude's paradigm is his missing the fact that the termites can be operating as virtual machines too, that is, programmed subunits, no yes? Not clueless.
Gibberish! He gives no supportive anything. Assertive blather.
“Evolution is Unproved and Unprovable. We Believe it because the only alternative is special creation, which is unthinkable." This is what Sir Arthur Keith, the famous British evolutionist has once publicly admitted.
I honour Freeman Dyson's Vacuum Cleaner and Superstructure around Suns-genius. Truly both great achievements.
Damn, I think I once could have seen him in Würzburg… Not that I think it would have changed everything, but it would have been a cool thing to look back to. Either I missed the date or I had to go elsewhere. Or it was one of these creepy things where one is asked to hang out for longer…
The evidence for intelligent design comes right out of the mouths of scientists.
Richard Dawkins stated in "The Blind Watchmaker", Biology is the study of complicated things that have the appearance of having been designed with a purpose.
He also stated in the movie "Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed", *if you look at the details of biochemistry, molecular biology, you might find a signature of some sort of designer…and that designer could well be a higher intelligence from elsewhere in the universe*.
Francis Crick, in "What Mad Pursuit" , p. 138 stated, Biologists must constantly keep in mind that what they see was not designed, but rather evolved.
In a debate in 2004, at New York University, famous creatheist Antony Flew stated, What I think the DNA material has done is that it has shown, by the almost unbelievable complexity of the arrangements which are needed to produce life, that intelligence must have been involved in getting these extraordinarily diverse elements to work together. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SJoOhbf3_Ts
After several decades of promoting atheism and materialism, this man became a deist because of the scientific evidence pointing to intelligent design.
Lastly I'll give this article which shows scientists are willing to infuse evolution with intelligence to explain the AWESOME DESIGNS IN NATURE. https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/12/151218085616.htm Is evolution more intelligent than we thought?
If evolution can learn from experience, and thus improve its own ability to evolve over time, this can demystify the awesomeness of the designs that evolution produces. Natural selection can accumulate knowledge that enables it to evolve smarter. That's exciting because it explains why biological design appears to be so intelligent.
Imagine that! Infuse evolution with intelligence and THEN we will BELIEVE IN INTELLIGENT DESIGN! It's sad that people have to lie to themselves because they don't like something that stands against what they believe. Self-deception to the point of no return is a horrific thought. Have you crossed that line yet?
Information is energy with lower entropy than local environment. Energy comes first.
Check Mate (Game Over)
Atheists think Christians don't understand the basic premise of evolution – because they have asked: "If evolution is true, why are apes still here?"
Okay … first of all – not every Christian thinks the Theory of Evolution postulated humans evolved from apes.
They are well aware the theory has predicted … the (supposed) transition occurred a long time ago – from a common ancestor
Furthermore … there are many Christians who have recognised the Theory of Evolution does not negate scripture – because the scripture does actually say:
These are the generations of the creation – which means a day is most likely a phase.
Here's the thing …
Delusion is when a person believes in information that does not exist – and the Theory of Evolution is a classic for causing delusion.
You see … mutation is direct evidence for adaptation and (only) indirect evidence for transition.
Direct evidence is not subject to interpretation whereas indirect evidence is subject to interpretation.
Thus … when someone asserts evolution is proven – they are, in fact, demonstrating a belief in information that does not exist.
In other words … they are asserting their faith in naturalism is established in fact.
This is to say … those who assert evolution is proven true (demonstrable fact) – are spreading delusion like a disease.
 …
A true-Christian, on the other hand, is a person who acknowledges they do not know for sure if there is an intelligent designer or not – which means they do not assert their faith as fact.
This is because they are aware the knowledge is yet to be verified – which means they are not delusional.
Checking The Position
Some atheists assert: science doesn't try to prove anything – despite the fact scientific enquiry is the pursuit of sanction: and the scientific method establishes demonstrable facts to prove theories.
They claim evolution is a demonstrable fact and not 'proven' – to avoid the reality the theory is without scientific sanction.
Indeed … it would appear they have lost the power of reasoning – because they refuse to differentiate between indirect evidence and direct evidence.
This cognitive dissonance – arguing over the semantic meaning of phrases – merely highlights their state of delusion.
Direct evidence for adaptation (change in genetic information – resulting in new information) is only indirect evidence for transition (increase in genetic information).
You see … evolutionary processes may (well) be true – but this may be by:
1) natural selection – or …
2) supernatural selection
Every experiment that fails to deliver scientific sanction for evolution confirms the scripture that says a creator is at rest.
Article Prepared By:
Thomas E. Christopher
http://www.kingdom-of-truth.com
My Dearest Friends (Welcome Home)
https://plus.google.com/+whiteFlag/posts/XXBBWbcQdb9
My Dearest Friends (Welcome Home)
https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=1951168138268721&id=173483919370494
Everyone is free to share these articles.
Greetings all. I've read many of Dennetts books, and they are highly recommended. I think a discussion about the nature of structure would be useful.
Structure means all the things like shapes, arrangements, forms, patterns, etc. Structure and information are synonymous. Structure exists everywhere in space-time.
The hardware of any system is made of structure arranged physics particles into the any macro structures we see. Even the particles contain structure. Structure looks like a fundamental substance. Structure of any kind is as real and physical as you get (all objects in space-time have structure).
There are lots of things that only make sense if you view them from an structure (information) perspective…
energy – changing structures.
complexity – the amount of structure in a system.
order – the density of structure in a system.
communications – using machines to move information (copied bits of structure) around.
memory systems – structure (information) storage machines.
software – structure (information) stored in a memory system. Software provides its own separate levels of organization (like a separate universe).
bodies – the bodies structure.
minds – software perception and control systems that do problem solving (and act intelligently).
learning – automatic software building.
genomes – a cellular software manager, that does things like cellular construction and maintenance.
software universes – universes made of software (like a book, literary universes, most games, The Matrix movie, mathematics, etc.).
reality – a mind , plus a sensor/effector informational connection, plus a universe (optionally a software universe).
Thanks for listening. 😉
What R and D means ?
Had forgotten what wonderful company Dennett is.
Dr. DD is the man
…what?
What physical, repeatable experiments does a cognitive scientist perform?
Near as I've been able to ascertain "artificial intelligence" is an oxymoron. Pseudo might be closer to fact.
sniffing in a lot?
Clueless termites that are clever. Interesting.
Dennet is a NPC
If there is anyone clueless here it isn't the ants and to make the assertion that they are is nothing more than an arrogant assumption on Dr. Dennett's Part, based the tacit claim that he is more adept at using his brain than is an ant.
However, while the notion of intelligent design is of little or no value, either, as it arrogantly assumes that there is an infinitely smart creator out there who, while he cannot be known to humans, knows exactly what it takes to design and manufacture, there is another "middle of the road" line of thought which doesn't make either of these assumptions.
Instead, it seems likely that all things possess some level of consciousness and that evolution is guided by an nature's innate ability to decide the next best step. This allows for all sort of permutations where no two things are exactly alike but the manufacture of each is guided from within, rather than being enforced from the top down, or the result of random chance.
In other words, there is no reason to assume that what we were refer to as "instinct" in the lower life forms is a simple of matter of lucky guesses at every turn, anymore than human travel patterns are governed (for the most part) by traffic lights and stop signs rather than a roll of the dice. And evolution, instead of being a purposeless and undirected process, can be seen as the result of "conscious selection" by beings who may not be in anyway maximally anything and instead only have a "feel" for what works and what doesn't. So the word "designed" may not apply to anything and it would be better to say that things can be "rearranged" in all sorts of ways. But to insist that the process of moving toward higher and higher life forms is guided by nothing other than the odds and eons of time is a god claim of sorts, which can only be asserted, although never proved.
Dennett is an incredibly fun orator. I love how he uses voice inflection to elucidate his points and keep the audience attentive.
Don't think you really need to rag on Christians so much to profess your beliefs
He uses alot of big words and yet makes not much senses
I am a Christian and a I would like to thank you for opening my mind. This might sound strange but your creative genius convinces me even more that life is miracles