Daniel Dennett Investigates Artificial Intelligence

Question: Are you an advocate of furthering AI research?

Daniel Dennett:    I think that it’s been a wonderful field and has a great future, and some of the directions are less interesting to me and less important theoretically, I think, than others.  I don’t think it needs a champion.  There’s plenty of drive to pursue this research in different ways. 

What I don’t think it’s going to happen and I don’t think it’s important to try to make it happen; I don’t think we’re going to have a really conscious humanoid agents anytime in the foreseeable future. And I think there’s not only no good reason to try to make such agents, but there’s some pretty good reasons not to try.  Now, that might seem to contradict the fact that I work on a Cog project with MIT, which was of course is an attempt to create a humanoid agent, cogent, cog, and to implement the multiple drafts model of consciousness; my model of consciousness on it. 

We sort of knew we weren’t going to succeed, but we're going to learn a lot about what had to go in there. And that’s what made it interesting; is that we could see by working on an actual project, what’s some of the really most demanding contingencies and requirements and dependencies were. 

It’s proof of concept. You want to see what works but then you don’t have to actually do the whole thing. 

I compare this to; imagine the task of robotics, of designing and building a robotic bird which could fly around and you know, weigh three or four ounces, could fly around the room, could catch flies, and land on a twig. 

Is it possible in principle to make such a robotic bird? I think possible in principle. 

What would it cost? Oh much more than sending people to the moon.  It will dwarf the Manhattan Project. It would be a huge effort and we wouldn’t learn that much.

We can learn by doing the parts, by understanding bird flight and bird navigation, we can do that without ever putting it all together, which would be a colossal expense and not worth it. 

There’s plenty of birds, we don’t need that, we don’t need to make any and we can make quasi birds. In fact, they are making little tiny robots surveillance flying things, they don’t perfectly mimic birds, they don’t have to.  And that’s the way as I should go as well.

Recorded on Mar 6, 2009.

Daniel Dennett with the argument against humanoid robots.

A psychotherapist explains why some adults are reacting badly to young climate strikers

When adults are challenged to behave like adults, by a child, they can go in one of two directions.

Barbara Alper/Getty Images
Politics & Current Affairs

Young climate strikers I spoke to recently are confused and distressed about the things adults are doing.

Keep reading Show less

34 years ago, a KGB defector chillingly predicted modern America

A disturbing interview given by a KGB defector in 1984 describes America of today and outlines four stages of mass brainwashing used by the KGB.

Politics & Current Affairs
  • Bezmenov described this process as "a great brainwashing" which has four basic stages.
  • The first stage is called "demoralization" which takes from 15 to 20 years to achieve.
  • According to the former KGB agent, that is the minimum number of years it takes to re-educate one generation of students that is normally exposed to the ideology of its country.
Keep reading Show less

Why should you always assume you're wrong? Science.

When it comes to scientific theory, (or your personal life) be sure to question everything.

Videos
  • The theories we build to navigate the world, both scientifically and in our personal lives, all contain assumptions. They're a critical part of scientific theory.
  • Cognitive psychologist Donald Hoffman urges us to always question those assumptions. In this way, by challenging ourselves, we come to a deeper understanding of the task at hand.
  • Historically, humans have come to some of our greatest discoveries by simply questioning assumed information.
Keep reading Show less