Explorez tous les épisodes du podcast ToKCast

A spontaneous set of comments on the ongoing AI scare of 2026. What's happening in the media right now, on social media, in culture and at the highest levels of government. Why the pessimism and catastrophism? What can be done? Quite a few slides are referred to, but I do read through them. Incase you want the video - it's here: https://youtu.be/mItTFoYSCcA

Youtuber Warren Smith of https://www.youtube.com/@SecretScholars made some remarks about the double slit experiment. I assess his claims.

Today CEO of the world's most valuable company, Nvidia, Jensen Huang, announced "AGI has arrived". https://x.com/JensenHuang/status/2096700264569090384?s=20 Some reflections on all that.

This is in response to episode 489 of Sam Harris' "Making Sense" podcast - in a section only available via subscription. I have clipped the approximately 60 seconds worth of material I am narrowly responding to for fair use in this commentary. The case unpacked is, roughly, that morality can be disconnected from (is orthogonal to) reason broadly is no more than a restatement of moral relativism - and hence false. Morality and science are about objective reality so cannot be “orthogonal”. Moral progress goes hand-in-hand with reason broadly and any “sufficiently advanced” intelligent system would not only realise this, they must understand it to make unbounded, rapid progress.

A analysis in Popperian style of Candace Owens' "mode" of debate and discussion, approach to evidence and thinking and a comparison to the more mainstream evaluations of this debate.

All about the distant future. What does cosmology tell us about the fate of the universe, life and intelligence in some ultimate sense? Frank Tipler's The Omega Point Theory is the primary focus, but throughout we consider the centrality of The Turing Principle for predictions about the future of the cosmos, Roger Penrose's "Conformal Cyclic Cosmology" and some of Freeman Dyson's ideas.

Timestamps and Chapters:

0:00 – Introduction: Longevity, Immortality, the Singularity & the Omega Point

5:50 – Recap: The Four Strands, Knowledge & the Multiverse

8:20 – Frank Tipler’s Omega Point Theory Introduced

9:00 – Anthropic Principles (Weak, Strong & Final)

10:30 – The Turing Principle as the Key to the Omega Point 1

3:40 – Modern Cosmology Challenges: Expanding Universe, Dark Energy & Heat Death

20:20 – Cosmological Models That Allow Unlimited Computation (Big Crunch Conditions)

22:00 – Tipler’s Rejoinders & the Case for Eventual Collapse

24:00 – Computers Near the Omega Point & Mutual Implication with the Turing Principle

30:00 – Defending the Strong Turing Principle & the Comprehensibility of Reality

35:00 – Infinite Thoughts, Virtual Reality & Colonisation Deadlines

37:00 – Roger Penrose’s Conformal Cyclic Cosmology (CCC)

43:00 – Freeman Dyson’s Ideas & Infinite Computation in an Expanding Universe

46:50 – Properties of the Omega Point: Omniscience, Omnipotence & Omnipresence

1:15:00 – The Omega Point as “God”, Resurrection & Virtual-Reality Heaven

1:18:50 – Critique of the Technological Singularity (Kurzweil) & Mind Uploading

1:22:00 – The Limits of Far-Future Prediction (Ancient Builder Analogy)

1:25:00 – Conclusions & Takeaways: Take the Turing Principle Seriously

What do our best explanations tell us about the ultimate ends of the universe? What is the difference between forming a world view about any one of the four strands (evolution, epistemology, quantum physics or computation) versus taking all four of them seriously?

How do the Four Strands of the Fabric of Reality - Quantum Physics, Computation, Epistemology and Evolution by Natural Selection hold together? What does taking them each seriously and all of them together seriously? Is it possible to construct a worldview without one of them or based on a single one alone? What do they imply about free will and consciousness? Doesn't making progress require us to assume them false? All this and more.

This episode is heavily focussed on Dawkin's "Selfish Gene" explanation of Darwin's evolution by natural selection. Obviously there are readings from the relevant part of this chapter from The Fabric of Reality but I augment that with sections from "The Selfish Gene" itself as well as "The Beginning of Infinity" as well as a larger portion of me providing additional unpacking and exposition.

Do not destroy the means of error correction. A deep unification of knowledge akin to unifying quantum theory with computation to create the theory of quantum computation. David Deutsch will be known for not merely forging the basis of quantum computing but also a new basis for morality and epistemology. I explain much of that here. "What should we do next?" is a question with an answer that is right or wrong, good or evil, better or worse. All existing moral frameworks philosophers debate are theories that can serve as criticisms of "what to do next". Morality is as objective as domain as mathematics, physics or anything else. Relativism, like it's sister philosophy dogmatism is false.

Response to a question about my discussion with  @drpeterboghossian  here: https://youtu.be/72vhtT0pFmA?si=hAx1kPho4DkLkBFN This is yet another way of coming at a critique around the concept of "belief" or those who profess to "believe" and so on using Deutsch's approach that knowledge is "information with causal power". I explore that for around the first 40 mins. If you're in a hurry, skip to the final 15 or 20 minutes where I get to responding to the meat of the matter in the question itself.

In this, the third and final part of a series, I break down some work Michael Levin has done with sorting algorithms. That seems very dry until you hear his claim that these algorithms that are well known and have been studied for decades exhibit extremely unusual behaviour never before spotted because "no one ever bothered to look". This part of the interview is between Ferris and Levin is referring to this paper: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/10597123241269740 which is available on the arXiv at https://arxiv.org/pdf/2401.05375 and which a Forbes writer authored this "explainer" of sorts here: https://www.forbes.com/sites/andreamorris/2025/11/13/the-secret-life-of-algorithms/ and which Levin himself explains here: https://thoughtforms.life/algorithms-redux-finding-unexpected-properties-in-truly-minimal-systems/ Michael Levin has done some very interesting work in biology around worms regrowing heads and so on. But this "research" is quite a departure from that. Get my book here: https://www.amazon.com/Farthest-Reaches-Important-Entities-Universe/dp/B0GRR2LLZV/ref=sr_1_1?crid=157SNHQC0QFHK&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.D5jlSZxhaQmrjzrnV209t0-bvV-i5un48Fwu5tb8Y42AKywnL9YRXJ8ylEe8EPH2SBLoKpU2AXag0llMQ3XfVILgUrAiohRqKjRaBiNdrcUqVQIV6MyEUBdAWiwjufzS4dCs_m5HBm-Px8errzQVyqzjO7F9UEGMeOgpjDGyJBB5Qbi98LHHSYb91z0J5sP9fRT8BaP4wXNvi4p0Va4kbQNBXxPjUb0OOwORDDGbWGo.HBT8A2pQNHYK8NyTIn91VtLaPJEMt17xp7qCt4bNcv4&dib_tag=se&keywords=the+farthest+reaches&qid=1773231582&sprefix=the+farthest+reac%2Caps%2C346&sr=8-1

This is the second in a multipart series where I react to some interviews with ‪@drmichaellevin‬ a biologist who, among other things, specialises in bioelectricity. His research can be found here: https://www.drmichaellevin.org and his "explainer articles" for his own professional papers here: https://thoughtforms.life . In this episode I mention the discussion he had with ‪@timferriss‬ which is found here:    • Dr. Michael Levin — Reprogramming Bioelect...   Part 1 is here:    • Reaction to Michael Levin, Part 1: Categor...   Part 3 will be out soon.

 

This is the first in a multipart series where I react to some interviews with  @drmichaellevin  - a biologist who, among other things, specialises in bioelectricity. His research can be found here: https://www.drmichaellevin.org/publications/ and his "explainer articles" for his own professional papers here: https://thoughtforms.life . Although in this first episode I mention the discussion he had with  @timferriss  which is found here: https://youtu.be/kz1jnoKfRrI?si=O-TTxrVleMbDsEH8 I never actually get to it in this first part. I do comment on Michael's interview with  @lexfridman  found here: https://youtu.be/Qp0rCU49lMs?si=jYN_SbXCd6ziO_pe and even then only in brief because I'm verbose. Part 2 will be out soon.

Comparing Kuhn and Popper on Quantum Theory: Here we go deeper into the differences between Karl Popper and Thomas Kuhn's account of how science moves from one theory to another. David applies the theory set out in part 1 of this chapter to the specific case of quantum theory. Did social forces have a major impact on whether quantum theory was adopted as Kuhn would have it, or were rational factors like argument and experiment crucial in dictating how science broadly, physics and the community of physicists took on a new "counter-cultural" idea?

I take a look at these three papers: 1. https://www.arxiv.org/abs/2512.22471 2. https://arxiv.org/abs/2512.23752 3. https://arxiv.org/abs/2512.22473 Collectively titled "The Bayesian Attention Trilogy" along with some other material - in particular an interview with one of the authors "Vishal Misra" - https://www.engineering.columbia.edu/faculty-staff/directory/vishal-misra For those familiar with my output on this you can probably skip to about halfway through at 42:40. Prior to this is a lot of background on Induction, Bayesianism, Critical Rationalism and so on that people may have heard from me before in different contexts - although for what it's worth these are new ways of expressing those ideas. At the end I am reacting to a video found here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uRuY0ozEm3Q

This is effectively part 3 in a series of responses to the Prime Minister of Australia about censorship, legislation, policy, philosophy, Bondi and Social Media. The Prime Minister attempted to explain, as best he could, the reasons for banning under-16 year olds from certain social media platforms. I remark on an interview he conducted and make some broader remarks in conclusion to a short series on his response to the Bondi tragedy and other issues.

These are largely off-the-cuff rather than prepared remarks - so expect the tone, tenor, tempo and expression to be a little different than usual.

Here I remark on comments made by Australian Home Affairs Minister Tony Burke and Education Minister Jason Clare and then make some broader points about the recent tragedy on Bondi Beach. This is part 2 of a response to the Prime Minister of Australia and others.

A reaction "episode" where I make some remarks about a speech by Anthony Albanese, Prime Minister of Australia, in the wake of the Bondi Beach Massacre by Islamists terrorists who attacked Jews at a Hanukkah celebration on 14 December, 2025

This is a reproduction of a talk I gave to some trainee surgeons in Sydney who, among other things, were learning about AI as it was affecting their own field. It is, in a sense, a summary of many of the points I have been making recently on this channel with respect to AI and pessimism around it.

The Farthest Reaches is a book about "Explanatory Universality". Explanatory Universality is a concept introduced by physicist and philosopher David Deutsch in his book "The Beginning of Infinity".

Links, as mentioned in the audiobook can be found in the ebook available for free here: https://www.bretthall.org/the-farthest-reaches.html

This present work follows the logic of that concept as it applies to education, psychology, morality, immigration, the trans issue, "evolutionary psychology" and the significance of people to physical reality and much more. This version is significantly longer and with superior audio production compared with the original podcast of the same name. These are the chapters and timestamps:

00:00 Preface

21:51 Chapter 1 - Universality and Reach

29:38 Chapter 2 - The Reach of Explanatory Universality

38:53 Chapter 3 - Explaining Explanatory Universality

47:31 Chapter 4 - Explanatory Universality and Education

1:00:27 Chapter 5 - Explanatory Universality, Psychological Science and IQ

1:03:41 Chapter 6 - Explanatory Universality and Adopting Culture

1:10:26 Chapter 7 - Explanatory Universality and IQ Part 2

1:14:58 Chapter 8 - Explanatory Universality and the “Trans Issue”

1:22:57 Chapter 9 - Explanatory Universality and Immigration

1:48:12 Chapter 10 - Explanatory Universality and Ethnicity

2:11:39 Chapter 11 - Explanatory Universality and Multiculturalism

2:23:22 Chapter 12 - Explanatory Universality and Mental Illness

2:32:35 Chapter 13 - Explanatory Universality, Hangups and Sexuality

2:41:26 Chapter 14 - Explanatory Universality and The Woke Left and The Woke Right

2:48:29 Chapter 15 - Explanatory Universality and Optimism

2:58:20 Chapter 16 - Explanatory Universality and Artificial Intelligences

3:09:59 Chapter 17 - Universality, Freedom of Speech and Freedom of Reach

3:17:07 Chapter 18 - Explanatory Universality and Evolutionary Psychology

3:31:20 Chapter 19 - Explanatory Universality and Individuality

3:39:05 Chapter 20 - Summary and Conclusions

4:08:18 Acknowledgements and Afterward

 

The author thanks David Deutsch ( ⁨@DavidDeutschPhysicist⁩  ) Naval Ravikant ( ⁨@NavalR⁩  ) Reid Nicewonder ( ⁨@CordialCuriosity⁩ ) and Peter Boghossian ( ⁨@drpeterboghossian⁩ ) for their crucial support and engagement. And to all other supporters who have contributed to the ongoing viability of ToKCast and my other content output. Brett Hall is a technical advisor and content creator, Ambassador to Conjecture Institute ( ⁨@ConjectureInstitute⁩ ) and Board Member of the National Progress Alliance (www.nationalprogressalliance.org) and holds undergraduate qualifications from:

The University of New South Wales )in Physics and the Philosophy of Science)

The University of Western Sydney (in Science and Mathematics Teaching)

and Postgraduate Qualifications from

Swinburne University, Melbourne (in Astronomy and Astrophysics).

Macquarie University (in the Teaching of English Language)

The Australian Catholic University (in Mathematics)

and a partially completed post graduate certificate in Geology and Geophysics from Macquarie University.

He lives in Sydney, Australia.

Chapters and Timestamps

00:06 Chapter 13: Explanatory Universality, Hangups and Sexuality

08:07 Chapter 14: The Woke Left and the Woke Right

15:38 Chapter 15: Universality and Optimism

25:04 Chapter 16: Universality and Artificial Intelligences

35:54 Chapter 17: Universality, Freedom of Speech and Freedom of Reach

42:44: Chapter 18: Summary and Conclusions

This is the extended "director's cut" of a talk delivered for "RatFest 2025" (next year to be "Conjecture Con"). This also serves as a supplement to my "Doom Debates" interview which can be found here: https://youtu.be/koubXR0YL4A?si=483M6SPOKwbQYmzb

It is simply assumed some version of "Bayesian reasoning" is how AI will "create" knowledge. This misconception permeates the https://ai-2027.com paper, as well as Bostrom and Yudkowsky's work on this, as well as that of every other AI "Doomer" and even on the other extreme the so-called "AI-Accelerationists". All of that indicates a deep misconception about how new explanations are generated which comes from a deep misconception about how science works because almost no one in the field of AI seems to think the *philosophy of* science is even relevant. I explain what has gone wrong:

00:00 Introduction

09:14 The Big Questions and the new Priesthoods

18:40 Nick Bostrom and Superintelligence

25:10 If anyone builds it, everyone dies and Yudkowsky.

33:32 Prophecy, Inevitability, Induction and Bayesianism.

41:42 Popper, Kuhn, Feyerabend and Lakatos.

49:40 AI researchers ignore The Philosophy of Science.

58:46 A new test for AGI from Sam Altman and David Deutsch?

1:03:35 Accelerationists, Doomers and “Everyone dies”.

1:10:21 Conclusions

1:15:35 Audience Questions

Chapters and Timestamps

00:07 Chapter 10 Explanatory Universality and Ethnicity

24:51 Chapter 11 Explanatory Universality and Multiculturalism

37:47 Chapter 12 Explanatory Universality and Mental Illness.

Chapters and Timestamps:

 

00:06 Chapter 5 Explanatory Universality, Psychology and IQ

03:30 Chapter 6 Explanatory Universality and Adopting Culture

11:47 Chapter 7: Explanatory Universality and IQ Part 2

17:10 Chapter 8 Explanatory Universality and the “trans” issue.

27:35 Chapter 9: Explanatory Universality and Immigration

Chapters 1 to 4 of a multi-chapter series about the reach of what I argue is one of the most important lessons to learn in order to solve many pressing problems: explanatory universality. This podcast provides an explanation that "explanatory universality" is an idea of such depth it may have among the greatest reach of any idea.

Chapters:

00:12 Chapter 1 - Universality and Reach

09:09 Chapter 2 - The Reach of Explanatory Universality

20:01 Chapter 3 - Explaining Explanatory Universality

30:23 Chapter 4 - Explanatory Universality and Education

We are told by people working in the field, researchers and those who publish academic papers on the topic that artificial intelligence or deep learning or LLMs or Machine Learning or Recurrent Neural Networks - call them what you like - employ some form of inductive reasoning. But do they? What is inductive reasoning? What is deductive or adductive for that matter? Is "new physics" or other new science being discovered by the most recent and best chatbots or other "artificially intelligent" computer systems? My response to all that is contained herein.

 

For images see: https://youtu.be/9Dimv7mOls4

For more information: https://www.bretthall.org/blog/induction

This episode is a reading of and reflection upon more writing by David Deutsch - an article you can find at https://takingchildrenseriously.com/in-praise-of-ignorance/

Joining me is philosopher and language educator Liberty Fitz-Claridge. Liberty holds Master Degrees in both Philosophy and Applied Linguistics and English Language teaching, as well as a Bachelors in The Philosophy of Science. As well as teaching, Liberty runs the Popper-Deutsch Reading Group which can be found at www.meetup.com/popper-deutsch-reading-group/

In this conversation Liberty refers to the following articles:

1. Ioup, Georgette, Elizabeth Boustagui, Manal El Tigi, and Martha Moselle. “Reexamining the Critical Period Hypothesis: A Case Study of Successful Adult SLA in a Naturalistic Environment.” Studies in Second Language Acquisition 16, no. 1 (1994): 73–98. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263100012596.

 

2. Alsulaimani, Adil. (1990). Reading problems in Arab learners of English (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). London University, UK.

 

3. Randall, Mick and Meara, Paul. (1988). “How Arabs read Roman letters.” Reading in a Foreign Language, 4 (2): 133-145.

  Woke is a rejection of the truth, the good, the beautiful. Is the best response a return to traditional religion? Are some dogmas worth defending?

A summary of some arguments made in the previous 4 parts, and a conclusion to my evaluation of https://ai-2027.com I refer to Daniel Kokotajlo's paper which contained an earlier set of predictions made in 2021 about the 5 years leading to 2026 which is found here https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/6Xgy6CAf2jqHhynHL/what-2026-looks-like Note that Part 4 is here: https://youtu.be/C3jDjuSLBv0 Part 3 is here: https://youtu.be/7P-UlHiTins Part 2 is here: https://youtu.be/o3Rdj37UJjw Part 1 is here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uq_txKy-XMQ Credit to  ⁨@drpeterboghossian⁩  for the inspiration,  ⁨@NavalR⁩  for the support and  ⁨@DavidDeutschPhysicist⁩  for many of the arguments made with errors, as always, my own.

Note that Part 3 is episode 239 or can be found here: https://youtu.be/7P-UlHiTins Part 2 is here: https://youtu.be/o3Rdj37UJjw Part 1 is here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uq_txKy-XMQ I react to the contents of this article https://ai-2027.com

Episode 238 contains Part 2 of this podcast and Episode 237 is Part 1. Also all parts are available on Youtube as almost always. Eg here for part 2: https://youtu.be/o3Rdj37UJjw Part 1 is here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uq_txKy-XMQ

 

I am reacting to the contents of this article https://ai-2027.com

Note that Part 1 is found in Episode 237 or can be viewed here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uq_txKy-XMQ

 

I react to the contents of this article https://ai-2027.com with some further general comments on ‪@DwarkeshPatel‬ 's interview with two of the authors here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=htOvH12T7mU

I react to the contents of this article https://ai-2027.com with some further general comments on ‪@DwarkeshPatel‬ 's interview with two of the authors here:    • 2027 Intelligence Explosion: Month-by...  

 

Youtube version of this podcast is here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uq_txKy-XMQ

Max is a tax lawyer who is applying Popperian epistemology to legal science and issues in AI. Links to some more of his work, and the slides to accompany part of this video are below. Slides for Max's talk(s):

https://www.bretthall.org/popper-and-legal-science.html

Max’s journal article on AI with Eric Marcus (in NLFiscaal TaxTech): NLFiscaal | Problems in AI, their roots in philosophy, and implications for science and society:

https://www.nlfiscaal.nl/nlfiscaal-doc/BEEAD89DD9E44E81B23811716258A4C4

Slides to accompany: https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:7290619876879028225/

Made possible with support from, and In association with, https://nav.al

This is a "megasode" combining two episodes from Youtube all about the Simulation Hypothesis. In the first part I provide the philosophical basis for the simulation hypothesis as explained especially by Nick Bostrom and compare it to other "ultimate" explanations of reality. In part 2 I discuss and evaluate the arguments made by Scott Adams and Joe Rogan who endorse some version of Bostrom's argument.

I recently had the opportunity to participate in "Spectrum Street Epistemology" with  @drpeterboghossian  and a number of others including  @destiny  . This episode was inspired by both that event and the many other conversations I had with Peter, Reid, David, Evan, Mia and Travis across the days I spent in Florida with those excellent people engaged in the important work of defending the Enlightenment. This is a sort of disjointed episode as I have in mind a particular audience of sophisticated thinkers on epistemology so I meander through my own worldview, take a historic look at why it is "belief" and "degrees of belief" or "strength of feeling", "confidence" and so on arose and became an important improvement on more primitive ways of thinking about the world. I compare all of that to what I argue is the most rational way of conceiving of "critical thinking". I end with some personal reflections. If you go to Peter's channel I imagine the many conversations we recorded together will be gradually released in the coming days and weeks. Compared to what I do here: their's is a very professional production! The videos accompanying the audio are a mixture of my own poorly shot camera work and stock footage - just so the viewer does not have to stare at nothing but my head for ~40 minutes.

00:00 Introductions

01:00 Are humans unique…just like every other species?

03:45 We are 98% the same as chimpanzees?

07:00 Was there an “Adam” - a first person?

09:00 The first creative minds

10:10 The evolution of authoritarianism

12:30 Medieval societies vs primitive tribalism

13:20 Early individualism, empiricism, rationalism and reason

16:10 Empiricism, rationalism and inductivism as “appeals to authority”

18:25 Belief and the weight of evidence

21:00 “Updating one’s priors”.

22:20 The God of the Subjectivism

23:30 Fossils

26:04 Better ways of thinking

29:00 Knowing and believing

31:00 Moving beyond “degrees of belief” and subjectivism

32:00 Knowledge: what it is

34:00 Knowing is binary

36:00 Reason is more than feeling

36:55 Reflecting on Spectrum Street Epistemology

41:05 Gratitude and acknowledgements

The first part of my discussion of the differing visions of science and how scientific knowledge "grows" (or not) according to Thomas Kuhn vs Karl Popper as outlined in this chapter of "The Beginning of Infinity". Kuhn's "The Structure of Scientific Revolutions" explains the concept of a "paradigm" and "paradigm shifts" comparing "revolutionary" and "normal" periods of science. Kuhn's work remains the most cited in the social sciences and so far more people - especially in academia - are familiar with his work that Popper's. What explains this? What does Kuhn have to say? And what does a "critical rationalist" perspective on the growth of knowledge have to say in response to Kuhn?

The second in the series on "The Myth of the Framework" paper.

Timestamps: 00:00 Introduction with some reflections on Joe Rogan and Gad Saad

05:14 Section IVa reading - on “Confrontations”

06:32 Section IVa reflection

09:48 Section IVb reading

10:17 Section IVb reflection

12:14 Section IVc reading - tolerance and respect

13:26 Section IV c reflection on Herodotus and tolerance

15:08 Section IV d reading. When should a discussion reach agreement?

16:39 Section IV d reflection. Quibbling with Popper? True Theories or Best Explanations?

28:54 Section IV e reading Goodwill

30:00 Section IV e Reflection on Goodwill, courtesy and politeness. And an anecdote about “professors”.

36:54 Interlude: Popper’s Introduction to “The Myth of the Framework” - expertise and authority 40:00 Section V a Reading Clash of civilisations

40:56 Section V a Reflection (including remarks on Piers Morgan and Tucker Carlson)

44:00 Section V b “Culture Clash” the impact on Greek Philosophy and Rationality - Reading and reflection interleaved.

57:15 Section VI a Reading - How we make the world understandable to ourselves 57:55 Section VI a Reflection on the task of “reason”.

59:23 Section VI b Reading: The invention of explanations and the two components of rationality. 1:00:13 Secton VI b Reflection on rationality

1:03:40 Section VI c Popper’s conjecture on the origins of the critical method I

1:05:08 Section VI c Reflection on Hesiod’s Theogony.

1:07:05 Section VI d Reading Popper’s conjecture part II 1:08:08 Reflection on Popper’s Conjecture 1:09:04 Section VI e Reading on Anixmander’s theory

1:10:12 Section VI e Reflection on Anixmander’s theory

1:11:25 Section VI f Conjecturing about conjectures and “The Critical Tradition I”

1:12:52 Section VI f Reflections on “The Critical Tradition”

1:13:16 Section VI g The Critical Tradition II

1:14:33 Section VI g Reflections on “The Critical Tradition II” and “schools” of philosophy.

1:15:30 Section VI h The Ionian School

1:16:36 Section VI h Reflections on the modern critical method and thoughts about Aristarchus and Parallax measurements

1:20:50 Section VI I Conclusion

I take another deep dive into a deeply insightful and original lecture by Karl Popper: The Myth of the Framework. In this first part (of 4) I spend most of the episode unpacking our motivations, Popper's own thoughts on his success in combating bad ideologies and the purposes of discussion. Indeed this piece can be considered an instruction manual for discussions: how to have them and why. Below: timestamps for this episode: 00:00 Purpose of this new series 05:41 Woke, DEI and Popper 10:47 Popper in his own words on his “success” 12:23: Marxism and Relativism as “ideas that survive” 19:47 Popper in the modern day 22:30 Frameworks and “echo chambers”. 26:05 Some personal anecdotes and reflections 32:43: Defending an idea is different to explaining one. 35:00 Personal anecdotes. 47:47 Discussions 49:33 Why do we talk to each other? :) 59:13 The Myth of the Framework. Section 1 1:01:04 Commentary Section 1 1:03:33 The Myth of the Framework Section 2 1:04:29 Commentary Section 2 1:06:15 The Myth of the Framework Section 3a 1:07:07 Commentary Section 3a 1:12:12 The Myth of the Framework Section 3b 1:13:40 Commentary Section 3b 1:16:39 Should we “talk” to North Korea? 1:26:12 The West and its enemies 1:28:42 The Myth of the Framework Section 3c 1:29:59 Commentary Section 3c 1:32:25 The Myth of the Framework Section 3d 1:33:24 Closing Reflection

The best part! If you missed the others, don't miss this one. All four strands come together to explain the possibility of time travel and the intrigue that arises when considering travelling to "your" past or future to visit "yourself".

Rough timestamps follow: 00:00 introduction and the significance of virtual reality 04:03 Physically possible renderings and resolving paradoxes 07:30 what does VR time travel tell us about physics?  11:05 Personhood and time travel  13:30 Highly unlikely events, the multiverse and “never”. 15:45 General Relativity and time travel 18:51 David’s 70th birthday online acknowledgement https://dd70th.weebly.com/ 20:14 Past directed time travel: the consensus 25:25 Black holes, wormholes and time travel 34:10 More on paradoxes and quantum gravity 38:00 The unpredictability of the growth of knowledge . 42:05 Visitors from the future 45:50 Time travel, BoI and Fungibility 56:00 Knowledge Paradoxes? 1:00:40 Creation ex nihilo and “recombination”. 1:06:39 Biological and explanatory knowledge 1:11:32 Useless information and the resolution of knowledge “paradoxes” 1:15:23 The knowledge “crystal” - structure across the multiverse. 1:22:18 The entire biosphere as a computation. 1:26:20 Civilisations as virtual reality renderings. 1:30:00 The four main strands and time travel.

An outside broadcast as you will hear. Image generation and virtual reality provide a window on the physics of time travel. Why is that? And what about all those time travel paradoxes? The resolution to all is found herein.

An assortment of topics looking forward to 2025.

Timestamps:

 

00:00 Truth is indispensable

04:06 The “search for truth” is error correction

08:11 Remarks on selflessness and personhood. How can we square the two?

09:14 Decisions and free will and creativity

10:46 Truth and the two senses of “believe”.

13:30 Belief, epistemology and psychology

17:16 “Popperian” knowing.

18:07 Newtonian Gravity I

23:53 Why GR and QM do not mesh.

26:57 Newtonian Gravity II

27:43 Knowledge is…

29:11 Knowledge creation, reason, rationality and reality.

31:11 Reason, Creativity, Fun and Flow States

36:13 Learning is knowledge creation

39:06 Selfishness and having fun

42:53 Fun, innovation, wealth and value

43:51 Wealthy people create value

48:17 Creativity, Wealth and energy

52:27 Optimism about 2025

Live from Sydney, Yaron Brook and Nikos Sotirakopoulos join me on stage to discuss capitalism, liberty, personhood, energy policy, Israel and antisemitism and much more. Rough timestamps are here:

00:00 Brett’s welcome and introduction

02:32 Nikos on “What is Capitalism?”

04:21 Yaron on “What is Capitalism?”

07:33 Brett on the relationship between personhood and capitalism.

10:02 Nikos on why progress is not inevitable.

12:06 Yaron on humans vs other animals

15:14 Yaron on why capitalism is retreating in the West.

19:56 Brett on the self similarity of the mind

25:40: Yaron on Israel and her allies

32:33 Brett on protectionism and nationalism

33:17 Nikos on defending your allies and nihilism.

37:01 Yaron on faith, collectivism and nationalism.

42:13 Brett on “concentrated losses, dispersed gains”.

43:50 Yaron on free trade and tarrifs

49:52: Yaron’s iPhone

54:52 Brett invokes Deutsch’s pattern, anti-capitalism and anti-Americanism.

56:01 Nikos on Marx’s role as an antisemitic anticapitalist and “secondhandedness”.

1:02:21 Brett on environmentalism and anti humanism

1:05:22 Nikos on energy policy

1:07:25 Yaron on saving the planet.

1:11:21 Brett on the death trap that is planet Earth 

1:13:15 Question 1: What is an Objectivist foreign policy?

1:18:21 Question 2: Is democracy necessary for protecting individual human rights?

1:25:31 Question 3: What explains the anti-ANZAC phenomenon in Australia?

1:30:01 Question 4: Should the government protect individual property rights? Remarks on “the minimum wage”.

1:32:53 Question 5: Should we be pessimistic about “woke”, “DEI” and the state of universities?

1:41:33 Question 6: Has China managed to achieve a beneficial separation of their political and economic systems?

1:47:02 Question 7: What is the role of the Fed in the USA? Is it necessary?

I discuss the point of philosophy and how "concrete" the work of Karl Popper and David Deutsch are in marshalling examples taken directly from science in order to illustrate how philosophy solves problems in other areas. Then I have some lengthy remarks on some recent criticism of Popper and Deutsch which is found here: https://substack.com/home/post/p-152605209

A long "ask me anything" episode live and off the cuff. Apologies for the audio quality.

Julian Barbour is an independent British Physicist and the author of technical and popular books including the best selling "The End of Time" and most recently "The Janus Point: A New Theory of Time". In this lecture, Julian shows just how interesting Newtonian Mechanics can get. Can it be a fundamental theory of space, time and physical reality? This is a tour de force of the history of ideas in physics by an iconoclastic scientists working at the deepest foundations of his subject.

 

The video version of this lecture can be found at https://youtu.be/VzZbjL_Jvwk which may be helpful. 

 

This is not a regular ToKCast episode - it is highly technical in places. We will return to regular programming for episode 225 when we will have passed 1 million downloads. Thankyou to all fans! If you would like to support ToKCast, go to my Patreon page at https://www.patreon.com/c/tokcast or paypal via https://www.paypal.com/donate?token=qyzc2PwQaXf2XNAZS8g5Ke9eRfYfUs73xlBzXNfM8Bnjdm__ETUCyw86HKQ9wd1jBQ4zVKLsW0uRmB53

After a short introduction by me, the remainder of this episode is a reproduction of "The Deutsch Files IV" the latest in a series of conversations between myself, Naval Ravikant and David Deutsch about a wide variety of topics including, and sometimes going far beyond the contents of "The Fabric of Reality", "The Beginning of Infinity" and Constructor Theory. Go to https://nav.al to access all the other "Deutsch Files" as well as earlier content Naval and I produced about all the Big Questions of Life, the Universe and Everything and, helpfully, the transcripts to all our discussions.  

Is time travel into the past and the future possible? What is time dilation? Subjective and objective senses of "time travel". David Deutsch's own documentary on Time Travel from the BBB (192) https://youtu.be/C6_gxoLwrWw?si=8vw8cwbP49XkY6e8

Here I present a "positive vision" of the kind I complained was absent in the episode right before this ("Criticism is never enough"). Here I am riffing off a line which contains a deep truth out of the Beginning of Infinity where Socrates is speaking with the god Hermes. In that passage David links a moral injunction "Do not" to an epistemological concept (error). From this stepping stone I explore some of the institutions which emerge from such a commitment, but which themselves can also be regarded as fundamental features of a dynamic society.