Daniel Dennett | From Bacteria to Bach and Back | Talks at Google

How did we come to have minds?

For centuries, this question has intrigued psychologists, physicists, poets, and philosophers, who have wondered how the human mind developed its unrivaled ability to create, imagine, and explain. Disciples of Darwin have long aspired to explain how consciousness, language, and culture could have appeared through natural selection, blazing promising trails that tend, however, to end in confusion and controversy. Even though our understanding of the inner workings of proteins, neurons, and DNA is deeper than ever before, the matter of how our minds came to be has largely remained a mystery.

That is now changing, says Daniel C. Dennett. In From Bacteria to Bach and Back, his most comprehensive exploration of evolutionary thinking yet, he builds on ideas from computer science and biology to show how a comprehending mind could in fact have arisen from a mindless process of natural selection. Part philosophical whodunit, part bold scientific conjecture, this landmark work enlarges themes that have sustained Dennett’s legendary career at the forefront of philosophical thought.

[dl]

Dan Dennett is a treasure. Clearly under-appreciated with only 360k views!

[iainsimpson]

It's great that we can still listen to his talks & read his books, but I will miss hearing his takes on new ideas & events. Such a sad loss for us all.

[Sxzod]

47:03 What a simple and accurate explanation of evolution here

[FeedBackLoop]

Dennett delivers again. The master of cross-discipline explanation.

[pathologicallyfriendly]

The guy at 1:02:55 is Dennett's caricature at 42:40

[AngeloXification]

It's amazing that almost anyone can have access to the fundamental constants of the universe. We have many great mathematicians and scientists through the ages that have granted the every day person the privilege of this knowledge

[zeldaoot]

Never get tired of listening to Dennett!

[morn]

One of these cases where I want to give more than one like.

[theultimatereductionist]

So many questions to ask Dr Dennett... I would need to sit down and hammer them out with him for hours..

[DieMasterMonkey]

Epic, and very inspiring if you're into GA/EC/Machine Intelligence.We're all lucky to have Dennett around.

[ErikCBruce]

thank you for posting this
. . . genuinely appreciate being able to return to this (over & over)
beyond words

[Dayglodaydreams]

How would you establish music as a physical phenomenon. Thought is based on the physical brain and it arises from the physical. Thought about music is about organized sound, that is an organized set of vibrations in the air. Hearing is something that relates to the set of physical sounds. A physical ear drum is being aroused. Perception is what...of physical things. The process of writing involves material things. Recording is translating physical to digital (and digital devices are based on electronic activity that is physical), back to physical. The mental is grounded in the physical, and perception is rooted in the physical brain.

[racecar]

8:40 is totally mind blowing ! Excellent talk 👌

[Mortum_Rex]

An absolute pleasure listening to Dr Dennett. I wish this talk was 10 hours long. Not sure I felt satisfied with the last answer though, which of course dodged the question after the contradiction was revealed. Ok, we don't know how the consciousness trick is done yet. That's why it's called a hard problem of science! And yet there is an assumption that it's Newtonian and it's all just qualitative and merely a sophisticated computer. To make that assumption when we have no idea how consciousness works yet and then to talk about respect for the truth in the same breath is just intellectual dishonestly. The bit about programming a funny bone is just bollocks. He is anthropomorphising a simple algorithm. That wouldn't constitute pain or give a machine rights if it got sophisticated enough. There is clearly something more at work here when it comes to consciousness. I'm not implying it's hocus pocus and woo, but rather a quantum layer underneath that makes minds more than just a collection of atoms. The Physicist Roger Penrose is worth listening to on this. The experiments with the carbon nanotubes at the base of neurons in particular are real interesting. They could be serving to somehow contain a quantum state that can be collapsed into a superposition at some triggered time. As of this time, I don't believe this has gone through a peer review process yet, but it's getting there. The experiments are showing that it's these nanotubes that are being affected by anesthesia, which has been a mystery for a long time. If this turns out to be true, then we may finally have a small foothold when it comes to the problem of consciousness.

[daithiocinnsealach]

Trees have reasons. Split brains show that humans often come up with ad hoc explanations for the things they do. This is why the scientific method is so essential. It gives us a verifiable and testable way to ensure the thing are we doing are truly rational and beneficial.

[Vladasization]

Following the comparison between a termite colony and a neural network, could it be proposed that the former should posses, although somewhat bare, but still subjective consciousness? What about humanity as a whole? Could it also be subjectively conscious beyond what we, acting as single cells in the human society, could perceive?

[Thamerlife]

I learned that it takes little more than to be a con artist to be given the podium at Google, ever since they invited Anita to talk.

Dan Dennett, however, is an excellent choice; he is someone who demonstrably knows what he is talking about and has the achievements to prove it. Thank you for this.

[arthurwieczorek]

52:45. My answer to Chomsky's quote: I can't understand all of science but I trust it because I have studied it enough to feel I understand some things to some extent.

[TieXiongJi]

I am so glad I listened to the whole explanation of memetic evolution.

[Dayglodaydreams]

I was wondering when we would stop getting Dennett doing science and start getting Dennett doing meta analysis of science (philosophy according to Dennett, more or less). It's within the first four minutes (and I think that's more interesting than whether Creationists got Schooled....Religious Naturalist-Evolutionist here).