Where Darwinism Breaks Down - with Stephen Meyer

In this video, I interview Stephen Meyer about evolution, intelligent design, Darwinianism, the advent of the biological information age, and how it changed the debate about the origins of life. We discuss the questions of what life and mind are, and how pattern and mind are part of and participate in creation.

A former geophysicist and college professor, Stephen C. Meyer now directs Discovery Institute's Center for Science and Culture in Seattle. He has gained recent popularity about his perspective on evolution and appeared on the Joe Rogan Experience podcast.

Timestamps:
00:00 - Coming up
01:15 - Intro music
01:39 - Introduction
02:31 - The appearance of intelligent design
05:43 - Fine-tuning and complexity
08:36 - The biological information age
11:58 - Creative constraints
14:36 - Mind and natural selection
17:29 - Functional sequences
23:55 - What is life?
30:20 - Pattern
36:23 - Methodological materialism
41:38 - Panpsychism
45:35 - What is mind?
49:47 - Simulation experiments
56:02 - Media interest
1:02:26 - New atheism
1:07:55 - Emergence

📱 SOCIAL MEDIA

My intro was arranged and recorded by Matthew Wilkinson.

[johnvervaeke]

The fine tuning argument does not necessitate us. Nor does it require the Biblical God. For example, the neoplatontic One would be provide a set of constraints. In fact Plotinus argues that mind is dependent on principles that make it possible.

There is equivocation in the notion of information between the Shanon sense with is probabilistic relations between events and semantic information which what intelligence has. A lifeless universe has titanic amount of information in it in the first sense but none in the second. Shanon was repeatedly clear that he was not talking about meaning. The argument about information is very problematic and the fine tuning argument does not necessitate the emergence of mind. All of this is being run together. There is tremendous mindless information in a diamond. Are diamonds made by minds? If you don’t keep this distinction then computers are minds because they have extremely complex Information processing. Simply rolling some dice rules out alternatives and generates Shanon information. Using the language of choosing between alternatives is misleading. The dice are not choosing anything. The laws of nature rule out billions of alternatives but that does make them minds.

Current evolutionary theory does not rely on just random change but also through processes of exaptation (tongue exalted for speech) niche construction, self-organization and emergence. Also if information only emerges from minds then how does it arises in brains? If information only arises from intelligence then how do neurons give rise to intelligence? Do they have minds? This position has many if not more than the questions being raised here against evolutionary theory.

Nagel did not conclude theism. He concluded that we need to change our fundamental ontology. To see that developed well see The Blind Spot.

[brando]

Of all the interviews of Dr. Stephen Meyer I have seen, Jonathan, I have to say, in this interview he seemed most engaged. I think that is due to your ability to pick out and elucidate points throughout the discussion that were quite profound, and allowed Stephen to connect dots he doesn’t usually get prompted on in most interviews.
This was truly one of the most enjoyable discussions I’ve seen with Stephen, and that is certainly due to you both being high in intelligence, but also looking at things from slightly different angles.

Great interview! 👏

[RevolverOlver]

I discovered Mr Meyer recently so this discussion came right on time! Would love to see a 4-way discussion with Jonathan Pageau, Stephen Meyer, Jordan Peterson and John Vervaeke!

[dherichsen]

Jonathan, please discuss with your friend and frequent collaborator, Jordan Peterson, the idea of having Steven Meyer on his podcast. JP read Meyer's most recent book Return of the God Hypothesis and remarked that rarely had he read a book which contained so much information that he did not previously know. Pretty high praise from the hyper educated JP. I have been lobbying him in the comment section of his podcast to have Meyer on, but somehow I think you may be a bit more influential. Anyway, thanks for having SM on.

[CJS]

It’s becoming increasingly difficult to deny the truth of Christianity at this point. I was an ardent atheist for years, but with all the research I’ve done the last 6 years, I can’t hold that position any longer. Great conversation!

[Artisan_GenZ]

Arguments for Christianity as a true philosophical and phenomenological way of understanding the world are gaining prominence. Coupled with Meyer’s work on the scientific front, we may be on the brink of a return to an era in the West where goodness, beauty, and truth take center stage again.

[rduse]

I’ve watched hundreds of hours of Stephen Meyer and his talks… And I’ve never seen him so anxious to enter into a conversation (to interrupt / in a good way). - This looks like to me that he is extremely engaged in this level of thinking… I’d say you’re definitely pulling the right strings to get this kind engagement from Meyer. By the way, I find all of this fascinating, and I find Myers work to be at the top of a very impressive list of scientific research. - great interview.

[williammanhire]

This is the most rational scientific discussion I think I've ever seen.

[garrygreenberg]

Jonathan, it would be great to hear your conversation with biologist Michael Levin. He's already in conversation with Vervaeke and McGilchrist and, as I see it, kinda open for different ideas.

[forthegloryofthelord]

I would love to see a conversation between Stephen and John Verveake

[Tylacox]

Amazing interview. Stephen is a genius and living legend! The tide is turning, toward God

[JohnnyMUTube]

Been looking forward to this episode of Better call Saul

[drchristopherjsernaque]

Awesome interview, Dr. Stephen Meyer!!!

[tounces]

Although many may not realize it, this is one of the most important YouTube channels of the time.

[soundsnags]

Never heard of this fella. Ordering some of his books now.

[MoreChrist]

Great conversation. I'm glad to hear Jonathan bring up Kastrup. While Bernardo has many good points, I was a bit frustrated in our conversations with him and have long thought that someone like Meyer could fill in the holes in his work. Stratford Caldecott goes back to Pythagoras, from a distinct Christian perspective, in his terrific book: Beauty for Truth's Sake.

[oliverjamito]

My Hosts Stephen and Jonathan. Here, I'm just listening and attending unto my OWN! Watching!

[OddHarvey]

I DEEPLY appreciate scientists like Meyer and others who provide strong evidence for intelligent design, HOWEVER, as Christians it’s important to understand that adopting theistic evolution undermines the Gospel and really the entirety of scripture (or at least most of the Old Testament).

[theafterpartyparty]

I’ve been wanting this conversation to happen for at least a year!!
Thank you!! 🙏🙏

[ulyx]

Jonathan, I just want you to know that I literally felt God speak to me because of this video, and because of your discussion. I'm going to plan a visit to the Orthodox Church and ask for catechism.