Intuition Pumps and Other Tools for Thinking | Daniel Dennett | Talks at Google

Professor Dennett comes to Google to talk about his new book, Intuition Pumps and Other Tools for Thinking. Dennett deploys his thinking tools to gain traction on these thorny issues while offering readers insight into how and why each tool was built. Alongside well-known favorites like Occam's Razor and reductio ad absurdum lie thrilling descriptions of Dennett's own creations: Trapped in the Robot Control Room, Beware of the Prime Mammal, and The Wandering Two-Bitser. Ranging across disciplines as diverse as psychology, biology, computer science, and physics, Dennett's tools embrace in equal measure light-heartedness and accessibility as they welcome uninitiated and seasoned readers alike. As always, his goal remains to teach you how to "think reliably and even gracefully about really hard questions." About the Author: Daniel C. Dennett is the Austin B. Fletcher Professor of Philosophy at Tufts University and the author of numerous books including Breaking the Spell, Darwin's Dangerous Idea, and Consciousness Explained.

[Rico-Suave_]

I loved Dr. Daniel Dennett, very sad to hear about his passing, I would have loved to meet him, he was my absolute favorite, an intellectual giant, a legend, true sage, heard he was also very kind gentle person, huge loss to civilization, I will watch tons of his lectures in the next few weeks in his memory, I made a playlist of his lectures and interviews for myself to work through, listening to Dr Dennett lectures would be my idea of Heaven 1:01:20

[thomasulatowski]

Language gives us the ability to focus on any judgment. Written language lets us examine and re-examine our thoughts. Language gives us the ability to question and to focus on what we don't know.
Dennett mentions that words are thinking tools. I think that this is a major understatement. I want to point out that the written word is the greatest tool for improving our thinking. Scientifically minded -- conscientious thinkers use notes.
In addition, the writen word enables a civilization to accumulate and pass on an ever increasing number of facts. Because of writing, each generation starts off knowing more.

[avinkon]

Daniel dennett is a deep thinker helped me with additional system of tools, ❤️ his talk

[adriansalustri]

Those audience questions were great. Usually there one cringy dude asking about something irrelevant, but today they were all sharp, varied and interesting

[scarboroughyork]

...Additional thanks, you probably couldn't imagine the indirect benefits, access to to this type of thinking provides...useful in application in "real-life" as well as in theory.

[ronaldlogan]

It seems there is a difference between definitions of "free will". On the one hand people can talk about the ability to make a decision based on options available, and then being accountable for the decision they make. On the other hand there is the question of whether an idea, or a choice could have originated in an individual absent any outside influences. The later has more to do with originality, while the former has to do with choice and accountability. The accountability question is sometimes addressed as a question of whether a person had any degree of freedom from emotional responses, physiological conditioning, and priming. A very good case can be made that when it comes to whether it is moral to punish someone for a decision they have made in the absence of a complete history of how they made that decision and why, that absolute free will is an illusion and that it is not ethical to punish someone for a decision they made without taking into account the criteria and the circumstances. But I also think that there is a good argument to be made for holding someone accountable for acts of evil which I define as knowingly and not arbitrarily, or in anyway accidently doing something that will harm someone and doing so knowing it is wrong. In that case, the no free will argument does not hold in my opinion.

[skepticalJones]

This Q&A was really excellent. One of the best I've seen in a public talk.

[arthurwieczorek]

Different kinds of thinking tools. For example, different kinds of lenses, an extension of a receptor organ. A mirror used as a periscope. Thinking tools that facilitate effector organ efficiency.
Is a thinking premise a thinking tool? Yes, I think a very powerful one.

[rv]

34:30 - Oh, I initially understood Lottery B as saying that the winning ticket is chosen, _publicly communicated_ and put in a safe, before tickets are sold ... So in that case, I thought, you _still_ have some chances to win, (maybe even more than for Lottery A): you may be the first who's able to organize a successful heist!

[sanshuma]

Great talk.. one correction;p around 0:40:49 the speaker mentions 100-200 million neurons in human brain on average, while the real number is about 86 Billion! Hope he picks it up some day.

[JohnOhno]

I do consider sentience and consciousness distinct, because sentience is not a hard problem (at least, not unless you mystify it by invoking qualia). Thermostats are sentient, in the sense that they sense and adjust their internal state in response to their senses. If they had a representation of their internal state (including that representation itself) and could enter an infinite regress, they would be sapient... and MAYBE conscious.

[CressyTV]

Interesting talk... the right side comes out. There is of course a link between his belief in freewill and his belief in punishment. If all our actions are determined, then who do we punish? Determinists like myself, believe, we don't punish any one, since no one intends to be bad since who decides what is "good"?

[salasvalor]

I read into both of them on the subject, and then I came across a ten minute video of Dennett talking total sense on the matter. Sam Harris clarified nothing for me- just made me frustrated. Then I watched a Steven Pinker one minute discussion on it, and it made sense.

[DharmendraRaiMindMap]

The explanation for the Flynn effect is brilliant ! What would mankind be without thinking tools ?

[studiotdes]

19:45 "I've installed an app on your necktop." lol

[joelalmon]

I had a highschool teacher who always said that the path to truth is to ask "Why?" 5 times. Even if you ask a teddy bear.

[niemand]

If the algorithm for calculating a percentage is best as a public good, so too are computer algorithms.

The problem with permitting free software copying, however, is that it is a flawless copy. When our ancestors copied their neighbors canoe, their accidental variations either improve or impair the design, thereby exploring the possibility space zeroing in on an optimal design. This process of error-ridden copying is NECESSARY, so the appropriate law regarding software is one that permits absolutely your right to copy anything you see... but you must do so by reverse engineering, or starting on your own with the tools you have at your disposal.

[Howtobe]

I love dennett. Everything made sense. Except for the free will stuff. He's clearly afraid something horrible would happen to society and the law if people came to understand that free will doesn't really exist. I don't share his fear. Most people denying free will seem very sensible grounded individuals. And the reasons they give are much better than the strawman Dennett presents here. I think his fear took him over and much intelligent people have many ways of rationalising their fears to themselves. His compatibilism never really took off outside of academia, and that's probably for the better. Not in the least for all his own other work. It's all genetics and memetics, and the self is a benign user illusion... but it has free will? It is not needed to make this move. But it is very hard to change your mind on something you've written and published a book about. I think his slight of hand on the free will thing will be soon forgotten and all his amazing work on consciousness, the self, religion, evolution and memetics will live on for a long long time. Thank you dennett for being an inspiration for generations to come. You've been thinking.

[zizzlestick]

Talk starts at 0:03:35 (if you want to skip the introduction)

[arthurwieczorek]

Is Lee's Elucidation an intuition pump? LE: A finite number of words must be made to represent an infinite number of things and possibilities. Irving J Lee, language Habits in Human Affairs, 1942.