Everything I’ve Read and Watched on AI 1

In what ways does artificial intelligence possess intelligence?

0:13where artificial intelligence has

0:16unquestionably been successful the kind

0:19of intelligence that it does possess is

0:23what the philosopher John S called weak

0:27AI he made a distinction between weak Ai

0:30and strong Ai and weak AI means that it

0:35has the ability to simulate human

0:38intelligence in particular we have

0:41systems that can do things that it

0:43requires human beings intelligence to do

0:47such as uh play chess or solve problems

0:51uh in in in

0:53mathematics um so there’s really no

0:55question now that um artificially

0:58intelligent systems can simulate human

1:01intelligence the problem is that that

1:04only captures performance and the

1:07question is how do they do it do they in

1:09fact do it in an intelligent way or do

1:13they just produce intelligent behavior

1:15and one way to see the problem here is

1:17you might listen to a radio broadcast of

1:20Albert Einstein so everything you hear

1:23is brilliant and intelligent but you’d

1:26be wrong to conclude that the radio was

1:28brilliant or intelligent it’s just a

1:30conduit so even if a system produces

1:34intelligent Behavior that’s not enough

1:37to show that the intelligence really

1:39originates within that system rather

1:42than some other source in particular of

1:44course the programmers uh and the

1:47designers of the

1:58system

A PROPOSAL FOR THE DARTMOUTH SUMMER RESEARCH PROJECT ON ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE

We propose that a 2 month, 10 man study of artificial intelligence be carried out during the summer of 1956 at Dartmouth College in Hanover, New Hampshire. The study is to proceed on the basis of the conjecture that every aspect of learning or any other feature of intelligence can in principle be so precisely described that a machine can be made to simulate it. An attempt will be made to find how to make machines use language, form abstractions and concepts, solve kinds of problems now reserved for humans, and improve themselves. We think that a significant advance can be made in one or more of these problems if a carefully selected group of scientists work on it together for a summer.

The following are some aspects of the artificial intelligence problem:

1 Automatic Computers

If a machine can do a job, then an automatic calculator can be programmed to simulate the machine. The speeds and memory capacities of present computers may be insufficient to simulate many of the higher functions of the human brain, but the major obstacle is not lack of machine capacity, but our inability to write programs taking full advantage of what we have.

2. How Can a Computer be Programmed to Use a Language

It may be speculated that a large part of human thought consists of manipulating words according to rules of reasoning and rules of conjecture. From this point of view, forming a generalization consists of admitting a new word and some rules whereby sentences containing it imply and are implied by others. This idea has never been very precisely formulated nor have examples been worked out.

3. Neuron Nets

How can a set of (hypothetical) neurons be arranged so as to form concepts. Considerable theoretical and experimental work has been done on this problem by Uttley, Rashevsky and his group, Farley and Clark, Pitts and McCulloch, Minsky, Rochester and Holland, and others. Partial results have been obtained but the problem needs more theoretical work.

4. Theory of the Size of a Calculation

If we are given a well-defined problem (one for which it is possible to test mechanically whether or not a proposed answer is a valid answer) one way of solving it is to try all possible answers in order. This method is inefficient, and to exclude it one must have some criterion for efficiency of calculation. Some consideration will show that to get a measure of the efficiency of a calculation it is necessary to have on hand a method of measuring the complexity of calculating devices which in turn can be done if one has a theory of the complexity of functions. Some partial results on this problem have been obtained by Shannon, and also by McCarthy.

5. Self-lmprovement

Probably a truly intelligent machine will carry out activities which may best be described as self-improvement. Some schemes for doing this have been proposed and are worth further study. It seems likely that this question can be studied abstractly as well.

6. Abstractions

A number of types of “abstraction” can be distinctly defined and several others less distinctly. A direct attempt to classify these and to describe machine methods of forming abstractions from sensory and other data would seem worthwhile.

7. Randomness and Creativity

A fairly attractive and yet clearly incomplete conjecture is that the difference between creative thinking and unimaginative competent thinking lies in the injection of a some randomness. The randomness must be guided by intuition to be efficient. In other words, the educated guess or the hunch include controlled randomness in otherwise orderly thinking.

In addition to the above collectively formulated problems for study, we have asked the individuals taking part to describe what they will work on. Statements by the four originators of the project are attached.

We propose to organize the work of the group as follows.

Potential participants will be sent copies of this proposal and asked if they would like to work on the artificial intelligence problem in the group and if so what they would like to work on. The invitations will be made by the organizing committee on the basis of its estimate of the individual’s potential contribution to the work of the group. The members will circulate their previous work and their ideas for the problems to be attacked during the months preceding the working period of the group.

During the meeting there will be regular research seminars and opportunity for the members to work individually and in informal small groups.

The originators of this proposal are:

1. C. E. Shannon, Mathematician, Bell Telephone Laboratories. Shannon developed the statistical theory of information, the application of propositional calculus to switching circuits, and has results on the efficient synthesis of switching circuits, the design of machines that learn, cryptography, and the theory of Turing machines. He and J. McCarthy are co-editing an Annals of Mathematics Study on “The Theory of Automata” .

2. M. L. Minsky, Harvard Junior Fellow in Mathematics and Neurology. Minsky has built a machine for simulating learning by nerve nets and has written a Princeton PhD thesis in mathematics entitled, “Neural Nets and the Brain Model Problem” which includes results in learning theory and the theory of random neural nets.

3. N. Rochester, Manager of Information Research, IBM Corporation, Poughkeepsie, New York. Rochester was concerned with the development of radar for seven years and computing machinery for seven years. He and another engineer were jointly responsible for the design of the IBM Type 701 which is a large scale automatic computer in wide use today. He worked out some of the automatic programming techniques which are in wide use today and has been concerned with problems of how to get machines to do tasks which previously could be done only by people. He has also worked on simulation of nerve nets with particular emphasis on using computers to test theories in neurophysiology.

4. J. McCarthy, Assistant Professor of Mathematics, Dartmouth College. McCarthy has worked on a number of questions connected with the mathematical nature of the thought process including the theory of Turing machines, the speed of computers, the relation of a brain model to its environment, and the use of languages by machines. Some results of this work are included in the forthcoming “Annals Study” edited by Shannon and McCarthy. McCarthy’s other work has been in the field of differential equations.

The Rockefeller Foundation is being asked to provide financial support for the project on the following basis:

1. Salaries of $1200 for each faculty level participant who is not being supported by his own organization. It is expected, for example, that the participants from Bell Laboratories and IBM Corporation will be supported by these organizations while those from Dartmouth and Harvard will require foundation support.

2. Salaries of $700 for up to two graduate students.

3. Railway fare for participants coming from a distance.

4. Rent for people who are simultaneously renting elsewhere.

5. Secretarial expenses of $650, $500 for a secretary and $150 for duplicating expenses.

6. Organization expenses of $200. (Includes expense of reproducing preliminary work by participants and travel necessary for organization purposes.

7. Expenses for two or three people visiting for a short time.

#& # Estimated Expenses 6 salaries of 1200 & $7200 2 salaries of 700 & 1400 8 traveling and rent expenses averaging 300 & 2400 Secretarial and organizational expense & 850 Additional traveling expenses & 600 Contingencies & 550 &—- & $13,500

I would like to devote my research to one or both of the topics listed below. While I hope to do so, it is possible that because of personal considerations I may not be able to attend for the entire two months. I, nevertheless, intend to be there for whatever time is possible.

1. Application of information theory concepts to computing machines and brain models. A basic problem in information theory is that of transmitting information reliably over a noisy channel. An analogous problem in computing machines is that of reliable computing using unreliable elements. This problem has been studies by von Neumann for Sheffer stroke elements and by Shannon and Moore for relays; but there are still many open questions. The problem for several elements, the development of concepts similar to channel capacity, the sharper analysis of upper and lower bounds on the required redundancy, etc. are among the important issues. Another question deals with the theory of information networks where information flows in many closed loops (as contrasted with the simple one-way channel usually considered in communication theory). Questions of delay become very important in the closed loop case, and a whole new approach seems necessary. This would probably involve concepts such as partial entropies when a part of the past history of a message ensemble is known.

2. The matched environment – brain model approach to automata. In general a machine or animal can only adapt to or operate in a limited class of environments. Even the complex human brain first adapts to the simpler aspects of its environment, and gradually builds up to the more complex features. I propose to study the synthesis of brain models by the parallel development of a series of matched (theoretical) environments and corresponding brain models which adapt to them. The emphasis here is on clarifying the environmental model, and representing it as a mathematical structure. Often in discussing mechanized intelligence, we think of machines performing the most advanced human thought activities-proving theorems, writing music, or playing chess. I am proposing here to start at the simple and when the environment is neither hostile (merely indifferent) nor complex, and to work up through a series of easy stages in the direction of these advanced activities.

It is not difficult to design a machine which exhibits the following type of learning. The machine is provided with input and output channels and an internal means of providing varied output responses to inputs in such a way that the machine may be “trained” by a “trial and error” process to acquire one of a range of input-output functions. Such a machine, when placed in an appropriate environment and given a criterior of “success” or “failure” can be trained to exhibit “goal-seeking” behavior. Unless the machine is provided with, or is able to develop, a way of abstracting sensory material, it can progress through a complicated environment only through painfully slow steps, and in general will not reach a high level of behavior.

Now let the criterion of success be not merely the appearance of a desired activity pattern at the output channel of the machine, but rather the performance of a given manipulation in a given environment. Then in certain ways the motor situation appears to be a dual of the sensory situation, and progress can be reasonably fast only if the machine is equally capable of assembling an ensemble of “motor abstractions” relating its output activity to changes in the environment. Such “motor abstractions” can be valuable only if they relate to changes in the environment which can be detected by the machine as changes in the sensory situation, i.e., if they are related, through the structure of the environrnent, to the sensory abstractions that the machine is using.

I have been studying such systems for some time and feel that if a machine can be designed in which the sensory and motor abstractions, as they are formed, can be made to satisfy certain relations, a high order of behavior may result. These relations involve pairing, motor abstractions with sensory abstractions in such a way as to produce new sensory situations representing the changes in the environment that might be expected if the corresponding motor act actually took place.

The important result that would be looked for would be that the machine would tend to build up within itself an abstract model of the environment in which it is placed. If it were given a problem, it could first explore solutions within the internal abstract model of the environment and then attempt external experiments. Because of this preliminary internal study, these external experiments would appear to be rather clever, and the behavior would have to be regarded as rather “imaginative”

A very tentative proposal of how this might be done is described in my dissertation and I intend to do further work in this direction. I hope that by summer 1956 I wi11 have a model of such a machine fairly close to the stage of programming in a computer.

Originality in Machine Performance

In writing a program for an automatic calculator, one ordinarily provides the machine with a set of rules to cover each contingency which may arise and confront the machine. One expects the machine to follow this set of rules slavishly and to exhibit no originality or common sense. Furthermore one is annoyed only at himself when the machine gets confused because the rules he has provided for the machine are slightly contradictory. Finally, in writing programs for machines, one sometimes must go at problems in a very laborious manner whereas, if the machine had just a little intuition or could make reasonable guesses, the solution of the problem could be quite direct. This paper describes a conjecture as to how to make a machine behave in a somewhat more sophisticated manner in the general area suggested above. The paper discusses a problem on which I have been working sporadically for about five years and which I wish to pursue further in the Artificial Intelligence Project next summer.

The Process of Invention or Discovery

Living in the environment of our culture provides us with procedures for solving many problems. Just how these procedures work is not yet clear but I shall discuss this aspect of the problem in terms of a model suggested by Craik . He suggests that mental action consists basically of constructing little engines inside the brain which can simulate and thus predict abstractions relating to environment. Thus the solution of a problem which one already understands is done as follows:

The environment provides data from which certain abstractions are formed.
The abstractions together with certain internal habits or drives provide:
1. A definition of a problem in terms of desired condition to be achieved in the future, a goal.
2. A suggested action to solve the problem.
3. Stimulation to arouse in the brain the engine which corresponds to this situation.
Then the engine operates to predict what this environmental situation and the proposed reaction will lead to.
If the prediction corresponds to the goal the individual proceeds to act as indicated.

The prediction will correspond to the goal if living in the environment of his culture has provided the individual with the solution to the problem. Regarding the individual as a stored program calculator, the program contains rules to cover this particular contingency.

For a more complex situation the rules might be more complicated. The rules might call for testing each of a set of possible actions to determine which provided the solution. A still more complex set of rules might provide for uncertainty about the environment, as for example in playing tic tac toe one must not only consider his next move but the various possible moves of the environment (his opponent).

Now consider a problem for which no individual in the culture has a solution and which has resisted efforts at solution. This might be a typical current unsolved scientific problem. The individual might try to solve it and find that every reasonable action led to failure. In other words the stored program contains rules for the solution of this problem but the rules are slightly wrong.

In order to solve this problem the individual will have to do something which is unreasonable or unexpected as judged by the heritage of wisdom accumulated by the culture. He could get such behavior by trying different things at random but such an approach would usually be too inefficient. There are usually too many possible courses of action of which only a tiny fraction are acceptable. The individual needs a hunch, something unexpected but not altogether reasonable. Some problems, often those which are fairly new and have not resisted much effort, need just a little randomness. Others, often those which have long resisted solution, need a really bizarre deviation from traditional methods. A problem whose solution requires originality could yield to a method of solution which involved randomness.

In terms of Craik’s S model, the engine which should simulate the environment at first fails to simulate correctly. Therefore, it is necessary to try various modifications of the engine until one is found that makes it do what is needed.

Instead of describing the problem in terms of an individual in his culture it could have been described in terms of the learning of an immature individual. When the individual is presented with a problem outside the scope of his experience he must surmount it in a similar manner.

So far the nearest practical approach using this method in machine solution of problems is an extension of the Monte Carlo method. In the usual problem which is appropriate for Monte Carlo there is a situation which is grossly misunderstood and which has too many possible factors and one is unable to decide which factors to ignore in working out analytical solution. So the mathematician has the machine making a few thousand random experiments. The results of these experiments provide a rough guess as to what the answer may be. The extension of the Monte Carlo Method is to use these results as a guide to determine what to neglect in order to simplify the problem enough to obtain an approximate analytical solution.

It might be asked why the method should include randomness. Why shouldn’t the method be to try each possibility in the order of the probability that the present state of knowledge would predict for its success? For the scientist surrounded by the environment provided by his culture, it may be that one scientist alone would be unlikely to solve the problem in his life so the efforts of many are needed. If they use randomness they could all work at once on it without complete duplication of effort. If they used system they would require impossibly detailed communication. For the individual maturing in competition with other individuals the requirements of mixed strategy (using game theory terminology) favor randomness. For the machine, randomness will probably be needed to overcome the shortsightedness and prejudices of the programmer. While the necessity for randomness has clearly not been proven, there is much evidence in its favor.

The Machine With Randomness

In order to write a program to make an automatic calculator use originality it will not do to introduce randomness without using forsight. If, for example, one wrote a program so that once in every 10,000 steps the calculator generated a random number and executed it as an instruction the result would probably be chaos. Then after a certain amount of chaos the machine would probably try something forbidden or execute a stop instruction and the experiment would be over.

Two approaches, however, appear to be reasonable. One of these is to find how the brain manages to do this sort of thing and copy it. The other is to take some class of real problems which require originality in their solution and attempt to find a way to write a program to solve them on an automatic calculator. Either of these approaches would probably eventually succeed. However, it is not clear which would be quicker nor how many years or generations it would take. Most of my effort along these lines has so far been on the former approach because I felt that it would be best to master all relevant scientific knowledge in order to work on such a hard problem, and I already was quite aware of the current state of calculators and the art of programming them.

The control mechanism of the brain is clearly very different from the control mechanism in today’s calculators. One symptom of the difference is the manner of failure. A failure of a calculator characteristically produces something quite unreasonable. An error in memory or in data transmission is as likely to be in the most significant digit as in the least. An error in control can do nearly anything. It might execute the wrong instruction or operate a wrong input-output unit. On the other hand human errors in speech are apt to result in statements which almost make sense (consider someone who is almost asleep, slightly drunk, or slightly feverish). Perhaps the mechanism of the brain is such that a slight error in reasoning introduces randomness in just the right way. Perhaps the mechanism that controls serial order in behavior guides the random factor so as to improve the efficiency of imaginative processes over pure randomness.

Some work has been done on simulating neuron nets on our automatic calculator. One purpose was to see if it would be thereby possible to introduce randomness in an appropriate fashion. It seems to have turned out that there are too many unknown links between the activity of neurons and problem solving for this approach to work quite yet. The results have cast some light on the behavior of nets and neurons, but have not yielded a way to solve problems requiring originality.

An important aspect of this work has been an effort to make the machine form and manipulate concepts, abstractions, generalizations, and names. An attempt was made to test a theory of how the brain does it. The first set of experiments occasioned a revision of certain details of the theory. The second set of experiments is now in progress. By next summer this work will be finished and a final report will have been written.

My program is to try next to write a program to solve problems which are members of some limited class of problems that require originality in their solution. It is too early to predict just what stage I will be in next summer, or just; how I will then define the immediate problem. However, the underlying problem which is described in this paper is what I intend to pursue. In a single sentence the problem is: how can I make a machine which will exhibit originality in its solution of problems?

1. K.J.W. Craik, The Nature of Explanation, Cambridge University Press, 1943 (reprinted 1952), p. 92.

2. K.S. Lashley, “The Problem of Serial Order in Behavior”, in Cerebral Mechanism in Behavior, the Hixon Symposium, edited by L.A. Jeffress, John Wiley & Sons, New York, pp. 112-146, 1951.

3. D. O. Hebb, The Organization of Behavior, John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1949

During next year and during the Summer Research Project on Artificial Intelligence, I propose to study the relation of language to intelligence. It seems clear that the direct application of trial and error methods to the relation between sensory data and motor activity will not lead to any very complicated behavior. Rather it is necessary for the trial and error methods to be applied at a higher level of abstraction. The human mind apparently uses language as its means of handling complicated phenomena. The trial and error processes at a higher level frequently take the form of formulating conjectures and testing them. The English language has a number of properties which every formal language described so far lacks.

1. Arguments in English supplemented by informal mathematics can be concise.

2. English is universal in the sense that it can set up any other language within English and then use that language where it is appropriate.

3. The user of English can refer to himself in it and formulate statements regarding his progress in solving the problem he is working on.

4. In addition to rules of proof, English if completely formulated would have rules of conjecture .

The logical languages so far formulated have either been instruction lists to make computers carry out calculations specified in advance or else formalization of parts of mathematics. The latter have been constructed so as:

1. to be easily described in informal mathematics,

2. to allow translation of statements from informal mathematics into the language,

3. to make it easy to argue about whether proofs of (???)

No attempt has been made to make proofs in artificial languages as short as informal proofs. It therefore seems to be desirable to attempt to construct an artificial language which a computer can be programmed to use on problems requiring conjecture and self-reference. It should correspond to English in the sense that short English statements about the given subject matter should have short correspondents in the language and so should short arguments or conjectural arguments. I hope to try to formulate a language having these properties and in addition to contain the notions of physical object, event, etc., with the hope that using this language it will be possible to program a machine to learn to play games well and do other tasks .

The purpose of the list is to let those on it know who is interested in receiving documents on the problem. The people on the 1ist wlll receive copies of the report of the Dartmouth Summer Project on Artificial Intelligence. [1996 note: There was no report.]

The list consists of people who particlpated in or visited the Dartmouth Summer Research Project on Artificlal Intelligence, or who are known to be interested in the subject. It is being sent to the people on the 1ist and to a few others.

For the present purpose the artificial intelligence problem is taken to be that of making a machine behave in ways that would be called intelligent if a human were so behaving.

A revised list will be issued soon, so that anyone else interested in getting on the list or anyone who wishes to change his address on it should write to:

1996 note: Not all of these people came to the Dartmouth conference. They were people we thought might be interested in Artificial Intelligence.

What is artificial intelligence and how has it progressed?

0:13so what is artificial intelligence you

0:17might think about the difference between

0:19fruit real fruit that you can eat an

0:22artificial fruit it’s not the same thing

0:25well artificial intelligence is the

0:27attempt to use computer hardware and

0:31software to develop synthetic

0:34intelligence uh to develop the ability

0:37to solve problems which it requires

0:40human beings

0:42intelligence uh to solve and initially

0:45the first work that was done in

0:47artificial intelligence was solving

0:49problems in logic and Mathematics but it

0:53was quickly realized uh that many of the

0:57things that human beings do requires

0:59context

1:00knowledge and so the Paradigm shifted to

1:03what’s called knowledge representation

1:05and you had to represent knowledge of

1:08the world around you so how would you

1:10negotiate even such a thing as a simple

1:12trip to the restaurant you’d have to

1:15know uh how restaurants work and uh what

1:18the bill was and when you were supposed

1:20to pay and all sorts of things like that

1:23um and eventually it was realized that

1:26the best way to model human intelligence

1:29was to to develop what are now called

1:31expert systems and expert systems are

1:35developed by interviewing real human

1:38experts whether in medicine or law or

1:41geology or or any area finding out the

1:45relevant knowledge that can be

1:47represented in a database and also the

1:50rules that are used uh to uh process

1:54that knowledge so today for example when

1:56a doctor gives a diagnosis that

1:59diagnosis can be checked by an expert

2:02system that has the same knowledge in

2:05its database and can use rules to see if

2:08in fact this is the correct diagnosis uh

2:11for the problem now that’s conventional

2:15artificial intelligence conventional

2:17artificial intelligence is domain

2:21specific that is it solves one

2:23particular problem in a particular area

2:26so you might think for example of Deep

2:28Blue which is an artificially

2:30intelligent chess playing program that

2:33successfully uh defeated the grandm Gary

2:37Kasparov but chess is all it does and so

2:42more recently the quest has been for

2:45what is called artificial general

2:48intelligence what’s interesting about

2:50human beings is that they can learn new

2:52things they can learn new techniques uh

2:55new dance moves new languages they can

2:58Master things that they didn’t know

3:00about before and so the attempt is to

3:03come up with General strategies that

3:06will capture this

3:08flexibility uh of of human beings and so

3:11there are some

3:13individuals most notably uh Ray czw and

3:16Ben gzel who claim that sometime this

3:19Century we will have artificial systems

3:22that have the same kind of general

3:24intelligence that humans have and even

3:27Nick Bostrom at Oxford University says

3:30they may have what he calls super

3:32intelligence they will actually be more

3:35intelligent than us and um perhaps we

3:38will want enhancements to our own

3:40intelligence to uh to keep up

What are the limitations of artificial Intelligence?

0:00you

0:13the real limitations of artificial

0:16intelligence are that it doesn’t seem

0:19that these systems really are subjects

0:23there are physical systems that consists

0:27of

0:28states containing a great deal of

0:31information in a distributed form but

0:34one thing that’s rather unique about

0:36human consciousness as we experience it

0:38is that one in the same person can

0:41compare multiple thoughts multiple

0:44experiences all at the same time in

0:47other words there’s a kind of a unity to

0:49consciousness which is the sense that we

0:52know what’s going on in our life but

0:55when we look at the computer system it

0:58being so distributed that doesn’t seem

1:01to be any one subject that we could say

1:04is having experiences or having thoughts

1:08and because of that it doesn’t seem that

1:11the the computer system really has goals

1:15of its own so even when deep blue beat

1:19Gary Kasparov no one thinks the deep

1:22blue was trying to be Kasparov or was

1:24happy that it did he didn’t have those

1:27kinds of goals it couldn’t have them

1:30because they’re the kind of goals that

1:32you that are personal in order to have

1:34personal goals you have to have an

1:37identifiable

1:38subject and the machine is really just a

1:41collection of states with information

1:45some of it in its memory some of it in

1:47storage but that does not seem to be any

1:51one subject that is trying to gain

1:54knowledge about the world or is trying

1:55to solve problems rather we are using

1:59the system to extend our knowledge and

2:02to solve our problems so we’re the ones

2:05who have the goals and we use the system

2:08to help us achieve those goals

2:18you

What are the enduring differences between artificial and human intelligence?

0:13the big difference is though that still

0:16seem to remain between artificial

0:18intelligence as we have it today

0:21and human intelligence is the way in

0:24which machines solve problems

0:27machines solve problems by pattern

0:31recognition and by patent processing

0:34they’re very good at detecting the same

0:37input pattern and figuring out how to

0:41process that into a different output

0:43pattern

0:44long ago the philosopher john searle

0:47pointed out though that this isn’t

0:49really sufficient for what we normally

0:51think of as intelligence which is

0:53involves understanding

0:56so for example he said i could be in

0:59a chinese room i’m in this room

1:02and people give me questions in chinese

1:05i look them up in a book and the book

1:08contains both the question and the

1:10answer once i have the answer i can give

1:14that symbol as output i’ve matched the

1:17question symbol to an answer symbol but

1:20i’ve done it without actually

1:21understanding either one

1:23and so uh argues that the real

1:27difference here is that with human

1:29intelligence you have subjects conscious

1:32subjects that can actually understand

1:35what these symbols mean

1:37now the computer creates the illusion

1:40that it understands because of course we

1:42put in input that means something to us

1:45it might be the data

1:47sales data for our company let’s say

1:50and then the computer through a clever

1:53algorithm will produce a diagram or a

1:56chart which again

1:58means something to us

2:00but the fact is that none of it means

2:03anything to the computer it’s simply

2:05designed to transform one pattern to

2:08another we’re the ones who truly

2:11understand what what’s going on

2:14some of the elements that human beings

2:17have

2:18we have

2:19subjectivity that enables us to have a

2:22particular point of view on the world

2:24it’s a very interesting fact about human

2:27beings that each one of us sees things a

2:30little different

2:31right we we have our unique experiences

2:34and our unique

2:35thoughts

2:36and so one of the things that we can do

2:38is we can come to see

2:40that something is true

2:43now the computer may very well be able

2:46to transform information from one state

2:49to another but the telling difference is

2:52that the human being knows what the

2:54input means and knows what the output

2:57means because of their subjectivity and

3:01because they know what those states are

3:03about or what they mean

Artificial Intelligence and the Metaphysics of Mind – Angus Menuge

0:15artificial intelligence and the metaphysics of mind so what I’m going to

0:20be talking about is the uh difference between some rather extravagant claims

0:28made by those who push a program artificial general intelligence and um the claims made in

0:37my discipline the philosophy of mind and there’s a big gap between those

0:44two so there are some people and Ray kwell and Ben gutell are among the uh

0:50the most notorious who claim that sometime this Century we will have

0:56artificial general uh intelligence it will be a sing Singularity that means

INTRODUCTION

1:01something which is unprecedented in history never happened before and we

1:06have had many of these gutenberg’s printing press the telephone radio uh

1:13then we had general purpose digital computers with the stored program

1:18concept so that you can change their program and they can solve uh any kind

1:24of problem simply by changing their software those have already happened

1:29what these individuals claim will happen this Century perhaps mid of this century

1:36is artificial general intelligence which means that artificial systems would have

1:42the same kind of adaptable general intelligence that you can take from one

1:48domain to another you can apply to a domain that you have never investigated

1:53uh before much as human beings can learn new languages new problem solving

1:59strategies right that’s what’s meant by general intelligence it’s not like simply a uh an artificial intelligence

2:08system that’s very good at chess all right we’ve already seen Grand Masters defeated in Chess By AI uh systems like

2:15deep blue all right as impressive as that is that is very domain specific and

2:21the program only applies to chess right artificial general intelligence would

2:26mean that it has the kind of intelligence that you and I have where we can learn completely new crafts

2:32theories practices some already including Nick Bostrom at Oxford are already speaking

2:39of super intelligence which means that the machines will have more intelligence

2:45than human beings they will transcend our intelligence this could be independently

2:51of humans or it could be what is called transhumanism where you will have

2:57enhanced human beings human beings who will have additions possibly external to

3:03their body but also they have talked about uh internally to the brain and elsewhere which will enhance human

3:11capabilities so that’s that’s the uh what frames this issue it’s a rather

3:17disturbing development it’s a rather obvious example of a tower of of Babel

3:23where the idea that through human reason we can reach up and transcend ourselves

3:29and in fact um leave ourselves behind and Nick Bostrom of course is concerned about the ethical issues if we have systems

3:37increasingly making decisions that used to be made by human beings will we even

3:43be able to control what they do now one of the biggest problems in

3:50any discussion of artificial intelligence is actually what does the word intelligence mean and it’s amazing

A PROBLEM OF DEFINITION

3:58how naive many uh books are on this subject they will get right into the latest developments in artificial

4:05intelligence and spend next to no time actually saying what intelligence

4:10is how can you know what artificial intelligence is if you don’t know what intelligence

4:16is now following a kind of a scientific operational model many have thought that

4:21it’s something external it’s behavioral if a system can produce

4:27intelligent behavior and seems like an intelligence system well you know if it

4:32uh looks like a duck and it quacks like a duck Perhaps it is a duck right externally it seems intelligent so fine

4:40we’ll call it intelligent but as artificial intelligence research has progressed people have realized it’s

4:46much too easy to seem intelligent without being intelligent and so they have been concerned well doesn’t it

4:53matter how you solve the problem does it mirror mental problemsolving processes

5:00does it actually carry out the kind of process that’s going on in the in the brain and so they’d be much more

5:06concerned with how it’s done some power or capacity it’s a very different

5:14picture now obviously then this is important because if we don’t agree about what intelligence is we’ll

5:20certainly disagree about what counts as artificial intelligence uh many

5:25proponents of artificial intelligence complain that every time they solve a problem people say yeah but that doesn’t

5:32matter right that doesn’t really matter anyway I mean it’s obvious machines could do that and they and they feel

5:38rather upset at this after all their hard work um but think about a simple

5:43analogy artificial fruit if all you care about is the appearance you could have wax or plastic

5:50fruit right it’s externally like fruit but of course it doesn’t taste like fruit okay so that’ll be the behavioral

5:58model the outside is all that matters matters or do you care about the inside what are the strategies the processes

6:05what is it like on the inside still you might just be modeling a brain and there

6:10already is software that models uh neuronal

6:15connections the real challenge is to have something that really is fruit right it’s the real thing but it’s

6:22produced synthetically right that would then count as artificial intelligence in

6:27the strong uh sense there are these two famous paradigms and

6:33I’m sure many of you have heard of these this goes back to the work of John S in the 1980s where he distinguished weak Ai

6:43and strong Ai and the idea of weak AI is that you are simulating intelligence

6:49okay you’re developing software that enables a computer or other system uh to

6:55solve problems which it would require intelligence for a human being to

7:01do okay so if it can learn your voice all right if you have a a voice

7:07activated uh computer or if it learn learns languages right it can do

7:12something which it requires us intelligence to do and in that sense it simulates

7:18intelligence but it’s not claiming the system itself is intelligent strong AI

7:24is the much more interesting claim that says that the artificial system would have intelligence of its

7:32own now artificial general intelligence can be viewed in two ways for some it’s

7:38simply the latest greatest advance in Weak AI in other words it will simulate

7:45intelligence better because it will capture the human ability to generalize

7:50and solve problems in new domains but others speak of machines

7:58waking up up right and in a sense having their own autonomous intelligence and

8:05then we would have art of truly artificial int intelligence around us and you you’ll notice this comes up in

8:11quite a lot of movies okay just to explain then these two paradigms the the

8:17weak Paradigm basically was developing artificial

8:22intelligence to understand the human mind better by modeling its operations okay and then as time went on

8:29it also Mo modeled uh neural operations parallel distributed processing was an

8:35attempt to model the way that the brain functions but of course ass simulated tornado is not a tornado ass simulated

8:42intelligence is not intelligent as s uh described it the claim of strong AI is

8:48the appropriately programmed computer is a mind it is a center of its own

8:56intelligence that is that it can literally understand and have other cognitive States so you can

9:04actually literally talk about its thoughts its goals its beliefs its

9:10desires okay that is very different from merely simulating human

9:17intelligence now standard AI which was popular in the 70s and80s was very

9:24domain specific um the most outstanding successes here were in expert systems

B. ARTIFICIAL GENERAL INTELLIGENCE (AGI)

9:31where you took data and rules from Human experts and then you could for example uh check to see whether a medical

9:39diagnosis was uh correct or if a legal decision was was correct but they only

9:45work in that specific domain the goal of AGI artificial general intelligence is

9:51to develop General uh problem solving capacities that you can apply to new

9:59domains you can train a system using data that was not programmed into it and

10:04it can make discoveries uh there now notice and

10:10unfortunately in the literature many people think that if you have AGI you automatically have strong AI this is a

10:17mistake just because you simulate General problem solving strategies

10:22rather than domain specific ones does not mean the system itself has its own

10:27intelligence that could still just be weak AI just very sophisticated weak

10:36AI now Nick Bostrom uh lists some things which he thinks we would expect out of

10:42uh AGI a capacity to learn the ability to deal with uncertainty and

10:48probability a faculty for extracting useful Concepts both from sensory data

10:53and its own internal states he says and the ability for logical and intuitive

11:00reasoning because these are really General capacities that enable human beings to solve problems in a variety of

11:09domains why we’re so adaptable and

11:18creative now some of the approaches to artificial general intelligence is interesting but the idea that you simply

APPROACHES TO AGI

11:25develop algorithms has fallen on on on hard time many of those have been shown

11:30to have limitations even genetic algorithms which learn by trial and error seem to have serious uh

11:38limitations on how far you can generalize them and so whole brain emulation is a popular approach this is

11:45kind of amazing but scanning tissue slices and then the idea is that eventually you will be able to emulate

11:53an entire brain and all of its Connections in software so you have a

11:58virtual brain inside of a computer system another approach is biological

12:04cognition to enhance biological uh brains perhaps by um you know biomedical

12:12uh enhancements of various kinds or embryo selection is a rather horrifying

12:17method where you develop embryos and every two years you harvest the sex cells and develop a new set of of

12:24embryos following a eugenic path you pick those which you think will have the best genetic

12:31characteristics now of course this in a way is is cheating because we’re dealing

12:37with biological systems where we’re already presuming that they are intelligent all right you’re just trying

12:43to optimize it in a eugenic fashion but you can also have brain

12:48computer interfaces either outside of the body or inside of the of of of the brain they’re a little bit worried about

12:54cancer developing if you put things inside the brain of course combin bining brains two heads are better than one so

13:02the idea that you literally Network people’s physical uh brains to solve

13:09problems another view inspired by the internet is that well perhaps just it’s the amount of connectivity in harnessing

13:16networks and some people this is a minority view an out there view is the

13:21idea that someday the internet you know wakes up and it has its own

13:27Consciousness you know and then maybe when you talk to Siri it’s gets a bit more disturbing yeah the question was um

13:34um how seriously are these taken that is not it is not seriously taken that um

13:39the internet would would would wake up but the idea of whole brain emulation is an ongoing area of scientific uh

13:46research it’s turned out to be much more difficult the history of AI if you read the histories of AI they all say the

13:52same thing extravagant promises followed by a discovery that this is really hard

13:58stuff and then more modest actual success and that’s happened over and

14:03over again in the history of artificial intelligence um so it may be this is

14:09still a ways off but whole brain emulation is a serious scientific research program do do philosophers

14:15mainstream philosophers uh draw a line between Consciousness and and having and

14:22having intelligence um well for some purposes the answer is is yes psychologist took

14:28about level one and level two system the the the the level one system in a human

14:35being is What’s called the Adaptive unconscious and this allows us to solve

14:40problems without consciously thinking through them and so one might take the view that certain kinds of of

14:47intelligence it wouldn’t be surprising if you could develop them artificially but on the other hand the

14:54Consciousness seems to be associated with particular acts of creativity uh or

15:01um solving uh problems in uh logic and Mathematics where where a great deal of

15:07conscious attention is is is is required so yeah that’s a very good very good

15:14question so going back to what we mean by intelligence and this was the the

15:20question that was asked before sorry I didn’t get your name David yes David for many operational intelligence

15:27sometimes called curing test intelligence after his famous imitation game uh in his 1950 paper on Computing

II. WHAT DO WE MEAN BY INTELLIGENCE?

15:35machinery and intelligence by Alan churing we Define intelligence simply in

15:40the terms that well it will solve problems that humans require intelligence to solve it passes

15:46intelligence tests so it appears intelligent and passing enough tests

15:52like that certainly might establish weak artificial int artificial general

15:57intelligence right if it’s generalizable enough because all you care about there

16:03is simulation but many philosophers of mind

16:09would emphasize intrinsic intelligence the idea the system has its own

16:14intelligence before you can have your own intelligence you first have to be a mental subject you can’t just be a

16:22collection of resources okay because you have to have your own thoughts your own goals they

16:30belong to you you can actually be credited with understanding the problem

16:35and using your own reasoning and creativity to solve it that is a very

16:42different notion so if strong artificial general intelligence is to succeed I

16:48think it has to generate such a subject a subject that can literally be credited

16:55with having these mental States

17:01now here’s a just a diagram of the uh the touring test what you have are three figures here you have the uh

A. OPERATIONAL OR “TURING- TEST” INTELLIGENCE

17:09interrogator okay um who is able to ask any question that that he or she likes

17:16then you have a human being who is asked to just be themselves and answer the questions as they normally would and

17:22then in the third partition you have a computer which is programmed to answer questions just as a human would and in

17:30the simulation game as churing described it um the object is simply this that if

17:36the computer can pass as the human as often as the human passes as the human

17:42then they are indistinguishable and we may as well say that the computer uh is

17:48intelligent right so it’s an operational view it just goes by the

17:55behavior and of course the test can be adap Ed to handle multiple domains if you sort of think yeah well that was

18:01because we only asked about uh cricket or baseball right how will it do if we

18:08keep changing the subject but you can of course easily adapt churing test to go over many domains to to defeat that kind

18:15of thing however notice it treats intelligence as behavioral and that to

18:22many people seems superficial because what we really think of as intelligence

18:28is a problem solving capacity it’s an ability and an abilities are more than

18:35just behaviors okay after all all right to

18:41give one obvious example if you listened to a radio broadcast of Albert

18:47Einstein you would hear many intelligent things you would be mistaken if you

18:53concluded from that that the radio was intelligent an unintelligent Source can

18:59produce intelligent output because it’s a channel it’s broadcast through it or it’s programmed into

19:07it and in fact philosophers have pointed out that the cheering test is weak on two grounds it’s neither necessary nor

19:14sufficient for real intelligence it’s not necessary because

WEAKNESSES OF THE TURING TEST

19:20there’s no contradiction in the idea of an intelligent being who can’t communicate okay perhaps they have

19:27speech or M disorder or they’re epileptic or perhaps they’re an alien okay um or you know perhaps

19:35they’re just from some country where we can’t understand what they’re saying we’re back to Babel that would not show

19:41that they’re unintelligent simply because we couldn’t understand their

19:47answers all the questions are about baseball and the European has to answer so yes yes or or or or or for that

19:54matter Cricket for most Europeans

20:02so and passing the test is also not sufficient for intelligence right intelligent output can be relayed

20:08through an unintelligent we talk about smartphones but really we don’t think the phones are smart

20:14Okay and of course s’s Chinese room argument which is very famous is a good illustration of this in to generalize

SEARLE’S CHINESE ROOM

20:21that you can always set up a system with a vast database of questions and answers

20:27and for every question on on the list it has an associate answer and to make it more human you can have things like I

20:33don’t know and when my wife and I are asked about Donald Trump we say gosh is

20:38that the time and things like that right because we don’t want to answer those questions and intelligent people do uh

20:45evade questions right so it wouldn’t have to get them right all the time to pass as a human

20:51being so there it is the man in the Chinese room he has given questions okay

20:57which are in Chinese symbols he has a book that correlates the questions with answers and so by matching the pattern

21:05or syntax as s says he can provide the correct answer to a question and s’s

21:12point of course is that typical artificial intelligent programs are doing that they are doing patent

21:19processing and patent matching and given a certain pattern that means something either to us or someone else they can

21:27produce a patter P that means also means something to us or someone else but it

21:33doesn’t mean anything to the machine it doesn’t have

21:39to okay and the problem there really is with what he calls intentionality which

21:44I’ll come come back to which is not knowing what the symbols are about they’re being matched as it were by

21:50their shape or their appearance but not by their content so this person could pass as an

21:57intelligent well Assuming he’s awfully quick at you know paging through books uh as an intelligent Chinese speaker

22:04without understanding any Chinese at all now passing the cheering test in a

22:11wide variety of domains might be evidence of weak artificial intelligence uh weak artificial general

22:17intelligence as long as it’s not a Brute Force approach as long as it uses General problem solving strategies and

22:26it can adjust those the more sophisticated algorithms can actually adjust themselves so the game playing

THE TURING TEST AND WEAK AGI

22:34strategies become Superior if it if it learns that a certain approach leads to it losing the game then that strategy is

22:42given a lower weight if if a strategy leads to a success it can be given a higher weight and so you can adapt what

22:49strategies you use dynamically over time now my guess is that weak

22:55artificial general intelligence will be developed I don’t know when but it seems entirely plausible to me because the

23:01only difference between this and the conventional AI is that you’re dealing with more abstract patents it’s just a

23:08matter of patent matching so if it’s at the level of of uh laws of nature they’ve already had a an AI system that

23:15was able to find from data Cap’s laws for example very impressive okay so I I think most likely

23:24it will be developed but of course that would not establish wrong uh

23:30AGI and this is because self-adjusting algorithms can be implemented by a

THE TURING TEST AND STRONG AGI

23:35system which does not have its own cognitive states which cannot literally be said to have its own goals its own

23:43understanding its own reasoning and its own creativity now again this might be a

23:49good model going back to the question before this might be a good question a good good model of our um unconscious

23:58intelligence okay so that might be that might be helpful but why do I think it

24:04will not capture uh this this will not be enough for strong artificial general

24:13intelligence basically because there’s this metaphysical Gap I claim between machines and the way the mind works and

24:19I think it’s all machines it’s even the brain if you want to think of the brain purely physically

III. THE METAPHYSICS OF MIND

24:26there’s a gap between the brain understood as a physical device uh and

24:31what the mind is capable of the mind has I claim intrinsic intelligence and I

24:36can’t talk about all the aspects of this but four characteristics

24:45subjectivity only subjects can have

A. CHARACTERISTICS OF INTRINSIC INTELLIGENCE

24:51thoughts okay now you might say what about a library well a library contains

24:56information but a book does not not contain thoughts the mind of the author contains thoughts a library book only

25:02contains information and if you speak your thoughts or you write them down you produce either a noise in the

25:10air or an inscription on paper but those words are not thoughts the thought

25:16resides only in a mind intentionality is critical the ability to think about other things we

25:23can direct our thoughts on other things chology that we have our own

25:30goals personal goals and rationale the ability to reason and you might think that’s surprising because surely if

25:35there’s one thing AI can do it’s very good at reasoning and solving problems but I’ll claim that artificial

25:42intelligence systems do not reason in the way that we do and there’s a gap there all of the

25:48same okay I’m going to have to hold questions for a bit I’m sorry but I just

SUBJECTIVITY

25:54um all right subjectivity if an entity is intrinsically

25:59intelligent it has to have its own thoughts in other words not just containing information so a hard drive

26:06as much as it contains lots of information I don’t think is an intrinsic intelligence thoughts are

26:13intrinsically subjective they cannot be ownerless there has to be a mind that

26:18has a thought and you can see this because that um thought cannot be

26:25detached from a mind so you and I might agree on something so I think it’s sunny

26:30outside and so do you but you have your thought and I have my thought all the

26:35same even though we agree your thought is defined by its belonging to you and

26:41Mine by its belonging to me so a subject literally has thoughts and experiences

26:46and it’s self-aware you you can know what it’s like to be yourself in

26:52philosophy of M there’s a lot of attention to what I called quaia and the idea is well you know what it’s like to

26:58feel pain for example right somebody else can notice that you’re in pain but

27:03they cannot share what it’s like for you to feel pain no matter how much they

27:10empathize pain belongs to that one subject

27:16intentionality um there’s also a need to be able to think about objects and states of Affairs it’s not good enough

27:24that there are codes of various kinds which we in interpret as being about

27:29those states of Affairs that’s really s’s point now what’s interesting about our

27:35thoughts is they’re always directed on something else they’re by nature of or about something Beyond themselves so we

27:41can think the Taj mahals in India or two is the lowest even

27:47prime and without intentionality we can’t really understand intentionality is what enables us to think about what

27:56the symbols mean right what does this symbol mean that’s being manipulated in s’s Chinese

28:05room so that’s the second thing we need tileology

28:12we need to have goals our own goals so that part of the

28:19problem with deep blue beating Kasparov for example is no one thinks that it was

28:25trying to beat Kasparov right it did but we don’t think that that was a

28:30goal of the system and it was acting to solve that goal so to be an intrinsic

28:36intelligence you have to to have your own goals to be to aim to gain knowledge solve problems they’re not just the

28:43derived goals of the designers who are using the system to solve their own

28:49problems and for that you need subjectivity and intentionality because

28:55you have to have a subject so the goals are POS personal and you have to be able to think about a state of affairs as

29:01desirable well that’s intentionality so if Joe wants a vacation in Budapest or I want another

29:08Double Espresso right that the thology requires first that you have a subject

29:15who can think about things and then can also desire those as

29:22goals rationality if it’s intrinsic means that

RATIONALITY

29:27you can use your own reason to solve problems now this is tricky because

29:34computer systems do mirror reason that’s the way they’re designed because they

29:39have an arithmetic logic unit and they’re obedient to the rules of arithmetic logic and so

29:47forth in order to have true rationality in the sense that I’m speaking of though you need to have a subject that thinks

29:54about the world has certain goals and uses its thinking to achieve those goals

30:00it’s actually using its own reason to solve its own

30:07problems all right now why do I think that artificial and general intelligence will not have intrinsic

B. WHY AGI WILL NOT HAVE INTRINSIC INTELLIGENCE

30:13intelligence one reason is a general argument against materialism it’s also

30:19an argument against thinking that the um we should identify the mind with the

30:25brain and that is the simplicity of mental subjects you can’t divide Minds

30:30into Parts in the way that you can divide physical systems including the brain or computers into

30:36Parts but intentionality is not something physical unlike these physical

30:42AI systems but I don’t think there’s any teleology in these AGI systems they

30:47don’t have their own goals and although they mirror reason wonderfully and they can solve problems a lot faster than us

30:55sometimes with terrifying results as in machine trading on Wall Street which uh

31:01you know is so fast the ordinary human Traders can’t keep up with it so they

31:06could mirror that kind of reasoning tremendously well I don’t think they’re reasoning in the way that we

31:14do now Simplicity of mental subjects this deals with the part of the problem

THE SIMPLICITY OF MENTAL SUBJECTS BAGI systems are physical systems

31:20is that these AGI systems of of physical systems their their capacities are being understood physically and this runs into

31:27to the famous hard problem of Consciousness in the philosophy of mind that you can completely describe any

31:33physical system in impersonal terms and there is no implication at all that that

31:38system will be conscious that there is anything is like to be that system it’s not aware of the world it’s not thinking

31:44about the world there’s no reason to think that there is something it is like to be an

31:51AGI system even if it’s doing a whole brain emulation successfully so it does

31:56a wonderful model of all the processing going on in the Brain still there is no reason to think that that system is

32:04conscious from it doesn’t follow from any of the descriptions that we have

32:11made subjectivity requires there is one unified subject you’ll notice that right

32:16now you can be thinking you can be aware that it’s sunny outside you can perhaps

32:21be feeling uh a little tired or ready for the coffee break or whatever it might be you can have multiple

32:28experiences and thoughts at one time and all of them belong to just one subject we don’t have one subject per experience

32:36right it’s not like one of those um multiscreen Cinemas where you’ve got 12

32:42or 20 movies playing at the same time and for each one you’d have a different

32:48mental subject one mental subject that unites all of these different thoughts and

32:53experiences physical systems though consist of separate able Parts think of an engine you can take it apart a

33:00computer you can take it apart and even the brain consists of separable Parts you

33:06can take a neuron out of the brain and intrinsically that neuron will be the same whether it’s inside the brain or

33:12outside the brain and even if uh you insert it in somebody else’s brain but

33:17we can’t separate thoughts from their thinkers the fact that a particular

33:22person thinks something is crucial to what that thought is your your thought that Poland is beautiful is different

33:29than mine right we agree in what we believe but you have your thought and I

33:36have my

33:42thought gotf freed liet since we’re in Europe we’ve got to bring up a heavy hitter from Europe okay he noticed this

33:48long ago how brilliant he was developing calculus but also offering a powerful

33:54argument against artificial intelligence he developed a mechanical calculator

34:00himself and he certainly foresaw the idea of computers brilliant

34:05man he says well let’s suppose you have a machine that produces thinking feeling and perceiving imagine it enlarged to be

LEIBNIZ’S MILL

34:12a big Mill so you can walk inside but what would you see nothing but Parts which push and

34:20move each other and never anything that could explain perception I.E awareness

34:25Consciousness the unity of our thought nothing about what you would observe would ever suggest to you that

34:31this system was conscious or could perceive or think for itself the explanation must therefore be sought in

34:37the simple substance not in the composite that is in the machine and a recent philosopher who’s

34:44taken up this argument is uh David Barnett in a rather rude rudely titled

34:51essay called you are simple well what he means by that is not

34:56that you you’re unintelligent he’s not saying that he he points out in an argument that he he develops that look

35:04what does the materialist have to play with complexity okay whole brain emulation in

35:12theory you could have billions and billions of people as many as you want and if you need to have technology for

THE MIND IS SIMPLE

35:19their communication you can have radios or you can have wireless whatever you want with enough people and enough techn

35:26ology you can emulate every connection that is occurring in the brain however we do not believe that in

35:33addition to each person’s Consciousness you would have a new consciousness of the

35:39crowd and this argues very powerfully that the unity of Consciousness does not

35:45emerge simply from complexity and configuring uh things in more and more

35:52complex ways

35:57intentionality is also a real problem these systems as understood in artificial intelligence or physical

INTENTIONALITY IS NON-PHYSICAL

36:04systems Well Physical systems their capacities are limited to physical causes in the environment by

36:13definition but we can think of things which can’t possibly have caused us to think about them we can think about the

36:20future well a future vacation cannot be causing you to think of it right now you

36:25can think about possible but non actual states of Affairs yeah such as a sensible US

36:34president it’s not only non-actual it’s not going to be actual as far as we can

36:40tell you can even think of non-existent objects whether they’re fictional like Hobbits and elves or even literally

36:47impossible like round squares none of these things that we’re

36:53thinking about can possibly be causing us to think about them they so that kind of intentionality cannot be explained

37:00simply as a causal process of the environment on our

37:06brain why is this so important because it’s through that PA of intentionality that we create new ideas imaginary

37:12worlds like tolken Middle Earth but also the wonderful new theories algorithms and Technologies in science that’s where

37:19we have those ideas now admittedly computers today are used to help with all of

37:25this but not envisioning and understanding those things because of their lack of

TELEOLOGY IS ABSENT IN AGI SYSTEMS

37:35intentionality now I also would argue that tileology is absent in AGI systems

37:40yeah they can solve problems learn languages learn our speech they act as if they have goals

37:49but they don’t why not because if you don’t have a subject that can think

37:54about the world then you can’t have have your own goals A system can simply

38:00contain information it can’t have personal goals because there is no unifer unified subject to be a person

38:07and so uh they don’t literally desire to win chess or learn swiel or do anything like

MIRRORING REASON IS NOT THE SAME AS REASONING

38:14that finally mirroring reason is not the same as reasoning now AGI systems do mirror

38:22reasoning now it’s interesting fact from an engineering point of view you can certain L engineer a calculator or

38:28computer to do math badly it’s just an engineering problem right you can you can engineer it so it says that 2+ 3 is

38:35seven and when it solves rogic logic problems it gets them all wrong that that’s perfectly possible to do from an

38:41engineering point of view but in fact we choose to implement the idea of an arithmetic logic unit unit so that these

38:49systems are obedient to the basic rules of mathematics and logic okay but acting in accordance with

38:57reason or mirroring reason is not the same as reasoning why what we normally think of as

39:04reasoning at least at the conscious level and I will agree there is also an unconscious kind that that won’t require

39:10this but conscious reasoning requires you to have a subject which is Unified

WHAT DOES TRUE REASONING REQUIRE?

39:17at a time persists

39:24overtime is able to think about its states what they mean meaning is crucial

39:32and it also has goals problem solving goals there are actually many other things but these four are especially

39:39required for um the Paradigm of reasoning where a mathematician or a

39:45logician is solving a problem let’s take a very simple

39:50example let’s suppose you’ve got two times T1 and T2 at time T1 Jack thinks that a equals B and B equal C at time T2

39:58hopefully very soon thereafter he concludes the a equals c right I pick

40:03this because it’s such a very simple example of logical reasoning that anybody can see IM immediately what’s

40:12required for that to happen as as an act of reasoning well for one thing you need to

40:18have a unified subject at a time in order to see that that conclusion follows it must be there is

40:25one s object that thinks both that a equals b and b equals c because

40:30otherwise it’d be like one person believing a equals B and another that b equals c so neither of them have a

40:36reason to draw any conclusion just as right now right one

40:42subject you’re thinking and you’re experiencing the sunlight and so forth right you can unify many mental States

40:49in just the one mind but AGI systems really are just

40:57physical Aggregates and the information is distributed all over the place okay it’s

41:03it’s in various places in in Ram or auxiliary storage um and it consists of separable

41:12parts right you can you can take out memory put it in you can do all kinds of things to it but there is no single

41:19subject that can literally have thoughts at a time within the system it’s always just a collection of parts

41:26okay there’s no Unity there but you also need a persistent

41:32subject over time in order to reason Jack has to survive long enough right so

B A PERSISTENT SUBJECT OVER TIME

41:38he starts believing AAL b and b equals c and then concludes that aals c when he draws a conclusion why is that required

41:46because otherwise it would be like Sarah believing a equals B and Bal C then

41:52Sarah ceases to exist and Brian comes along and believes that a equal C

41:57well Sarah did not survive long enough to draw draw the conclusion and Brian gets the right

42:03answer but did not reason to it because he never knew the premises so you have

42:09to persist over time as the same thing in order to

42:17reason problem with AGI systems when you look at them at a number of levels if you look

42:22at the the hardware well what really is a digital computer it’s it’s an

AGI SYSTEMS ARE IN FLUX

42:28electronic device and those those uh switches are in a constant state of flux

42:35they are being updated all of the time and at a level of software there’s a transition from one instruction to the

42:41next and different data that’s being processed but there is really nothing which endures over time there’s simply a

42:49series of states or stages and you’ll you’ll know that if you’ve done touring machine diagrams or or or um finite

42:57autometer and things of this kind it’s always simply going from one state to another but there is nothing really

43:05which endures over time no no no

43:10subject intentionality you can only correctly infer the conclusion if you

C INTENTIONALITY

43:15see it follows from what you believe the content of your thoughts you have to see the conclusion

43:22follows from what you believe that’s the intentional content it’s not good enough

43:28that you happen to be in a brain State at one time and then you move into another brain State and that brain state

43:33has the right answer if you move into that brain state for reasons that have

43:39nothing to do with the premisis after all a mad scientist could

43:45simply stimulate your brain so that you believe a certain conclusion but you

43:52would not have reasoned to that conclusion okay so the a so that um AGI system

43:59might be in state B5 let’s say that contains the information that a equals b

44:05and b equals c let’s grant that and then it transitions to State B6 that contains the information that a equals c that

44:11doesn’t count as reasoning though unless it understands that AAL b

44:18and b equals c unless it sees that a equal C follows unless it draws that

AGI SYSTEMS DO NOT EXHIBIT INTENTIONALITY

44:25conclusion that all requires intentionality and notice it also requires subjectivity because you have

44:31to in the mental sense see that it follows right there’s a kind of a mental

44:37intuition there and that requires a subject in order to draw that

44:46conclusion chology reasoning is inherently gold directed I teach logic

44:52at my school and when they get to the part where we’re doing proofs in first order logic well you know what the

44:59conclusion is in Logic the problem is solving it right so that there there’s the conclusion that’s your goal you know

45:04what it is now you have to find a path between the given premises and that

45:11conclusion so the whole thing is goal directed and in fact I teach them to

45:16solve problems by what’s called goal subgoal analysis if that’s your final goal then what subgoal would you need to

AGI SYSTEMS DO NOT EXHIBIT TELEOLOGY

45:23prove and what sub subgoal would you need to prove and and so on right that harnesses our ability to think of future

45:31goals even though they can’t cause us to think about them so we consider premises

45:37to draw a conclusion we consider a problem in order to develop a solution so I argue that because they

45:45they they are not subjects and they don’t have intentional States it follows that they don’t have their own goals

45:53when we talk about their goals we are simp simply as ascribing our own goals to them as as intermediaries that’s

46:01that’s sometimes called derived intentionality or in other words we can choose to think of a computer as

46:08thinking because it’s solving a problem for us and therefore it’s very easy to

46:14suppose that it really is thinking out the solution whereas in fact it’s simply an intermediary between us we’re the

46:20ones who have a goal we’re the ones who want to solve a problem and we’re using the machine to do that

46:27so yes they can find lots of solutions to difficult problems logic Math Science

46:32and other problems but they’re not reasoning to these conclusions in the way that we do because they don’t have

46:40the goal of finding those Solutions so what I have suggested is

46:47quite probably some of these AGI systems will be a major advance in week AI maybe they

CONCLUSION

46:53will crack the idea of simulating uh general intelligence with with clever

46:59generalizable problem solving strategies and I would think that would help to

47:05explain some of the unconscious problem solving that that that humans do it

47:10could be very valuable psychologically but what I don’t think that it will do

47:15is it will capture the idea that I’ve spoken of as the intrinsic intelligence

47:21where the Paradigm is a conscious subject who is using Consciousness to

47:27solve uh problems I don’t think from anything that I’ve read anyway that they

47:33will have intrinsic

47:44intelligence

A.I. & The Image of the Beast in Revelation 13 — Part 1 | John Lennox

0:00Because in the Genesis account, we have a tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Please, it’s not the tree of

0:06knowledge. God didn’t want to keep people from knowledge. There was loads of it in the garden. This kind of

0:13knowledge is a knowledge you don’t want to have. And the analysis in Genesis is

0:19something that is way beyond

0:25any capacity or beginnings of a capacity of an AI system.

0:30Because here God explains to us what it means to be a moral being. In simple

0:37terms, they had freedom to eat of all the trees. God says don’t eat of that one. They had freedom to eat otherwise

0:44the prohibition would have been meaningless. And of course we know the story that

0:52they disobeyed God. The first morality was vertical. It was determined by God.

1:00Now this is a huge problem. If you reject God and you’re building all kinds

1:05of systems that interact with human beings, what morality are you going to

1:10build into them? Where are you going to get it from? John, do you envision AI to advance to a

1:17point to achieve cognitive consciousness and awareness? Would this cause problems

1:23with the doctrines of Christianity? I don’t think it would cause problems

1:30with the doctrines of Christianity. The short answer is I just don’t know.

1:37And one of the reasons I just don’t know is that in all my reading about

1:43consciousness and studies, the serious people just say we just

1:50don’t know what consciousness is. How it is that in some sense our

1:56material bodies have something in them that clearly is not material. That’s a

2:03big difficulty for pure materialism. and therefore

2:08it’s very difficult to speculate since we’re still at ground zero with

2:14understanding consciousness. On the other hand, what I was saying from scripture tonight

2:22I find intriguing because I’ve got a lot of questions about it.

2:29For instance, this man who is the beast, that’s a metaphor.

2:36And there are two beasts. It’s a very complex situation. And an image is made

2:44to the first beast and the image is given a capacity to

2:50speak and to be able to kill people. What does that mean?

2:57And people say, well, you know, if it is referring to any reality, it’ll be very simple. No, it won’t. If the whole world

3:04is deceived by it, this will not be a simplistic business. And there are dangers. You see, if you

3:12say God will not allow people to get to this point,

3:17if it happens, you’ll be the first to be maximally deceived. So, we need to be very careful. The

3:25second reason we need to be careful is not all scenarios of AGI are evil. You

3:34saw the tag mark several of them and some of them are good and there’s a kind

3:43of alliance among a number of leading people to try to ensure that

3:50however far we go what is produced is benevolent

3:56and kind. Also, there’s nothing theoretically that

4:01limits you to simply one AGI. Although, if there is a super

4:06intelligence, it’s hard to say that it would broke any rivals. It’s easy to speculate. It’s interesting

4:14to speculate. It’s actually important to speculate because everybody else is doing it. And if we don’t think about

4:21these things, then we won’t have anything to say. Now from the

4:28perspective of scripture people take different views. There are people that say look God intervened

4:36in the first homodos project Genesis 3. He intervened in the second one the

4:43tower of babel. Let’s build a city in a tower that it can reach to heaven. So

4:49they reckon that God’s always going to put a stop. nothing shall be impossible to them. It

4:57says in Genesis, and God stopped it. But I think there’s a risk there because it

5:02simply tells you what happened on those occasions. And I just suspect that the book of

5:08Revelation is warning us not to be so certain that human artifacts won’t

5:15advance to such a stage that the entire world is going to be deceived. You don’t

5:21deceive an entire world with something extremely unsophisticated and simple.

5:27Ladies and gentlemen, our title tonight is should we fear

5:34artificial intelligence. And I want to start with something

5:40familiar to us and that is robots. What is a robot? A typical robot in an

5:47automotive factory. It’s designed to do one or a few other

5:53jobs that used to be done by an intelligent human.

5:58A robot itself is not intelligent, but it simulates intelligence.

6:05There is no learning involved in what it does. And one of the most important things is

6:13that its simulated intelligence is decoupled

6:18from consciousness. It is an unconscious

6:23machine. And we move on now to artificial intelligence which is not robotics.

6:32Robots are increasingly being fitted with AI systems.

6:38But in the abstract, an AI system uses mathematical algorithms

6:43that is set of stepbystep instructions. They’re embedded in computer software.

6:51And the [snorts] effect of it is to sort, filter, and select from, and this

6:57is crucial, a huge database.

7:02Artificial intelligence involves learning

7:07in inverted commas. The system can learn to identify and interpret digital

7:13patterns for example images, sounds, speech, text, data, etc. And then it

7:20uses computer techniques to analyze a huge database statistically

7:27and estimate the probability of a particular hypothesis.

7:33So what this system does is to take information about the past a lot of it

7:41and makes [snorts] decisions or predictions about the future. Now, that sounds all very

7:47abstract, but we’re totally familiar with it. Alexa and Siri

7:53are digital assistants are AI systems.

7:58And it’s perhaps easier to understand when we just go back a step to online

8:03shopping, for example, with Amazon. Each one of us leaves a track and it’s a

8:11track of data what we bought when we bought it and that is built up and built

8:17up as well as the information from millions of other people. So that when

8:23you just dip into Amazon and you think you’re going to buy a new yacht and so

8:29you have a look at the latest yachts in Bermuda, it won’t surprise you tomorrow

8:34if suddenly up pops a little window and says, “By the way, would you like to look at our latest range of yachts?”

8:43That’s an AI system that has been following you, tracking you and

8:49filtering through all the information and predicting something that you might

8:54like to be interested in. In Menson, the achievements are spectacular. AI systems

9:03have now been developed that for example you get an X-ray of your lungs because

9:10your doctor suspects you may have some illness. The AI system compares that X-ray with

9:18hundreds of thousands of others and comes out almost instantaneously with a

9:24diagnosis. And the diagnosis is usually much more accurate than the

9:31best human doctors on earth. And we’re moving in the direction where

9:38diagnosis will be made routinely by artificial intelligence systems.

9:46autonomous vehicles. They are run by artificial intelligence

9:53systems and they raise increasingly ethical questions because the system has

10:00to be programmed with some kind of morality because no machine is a

10:05conscience. And so what do you avoid? What do you allow the car to hit? That’s

10:11a hugely difficult problem. and people are working on the ethics of autonomous

10:19vehicles. Then we come to job search and professional people these days are faced

10:26with an additional complexity when it comes to their job seeking

10:36because the human interviewer is now regarded as not

10:45adequate. So, you go in for interview, but you’re interviewed by a battery of

10:52sophisticated cameras that are watching every move, every blink of your eyelid,

10:58every pulse in the arteries in your head and they are assessing your emotional

11:05stability. So now professional people are finding they have to prepare themselves not

11:11simply for facing a human interviewer but before they get anywhere near a human interviewer they have to overcome

11:18this hugely complex hurdle of passing these kind of artificial intelligence

11:26tests and you can see there is danger of bias and prejudice. So an enormous

11:31amount of work is being done to try and filter the prejudice out. So that for

11:36example the system doesn’t prefer Irishmen over everybody else.

11:44Then there’s crime prevention. Face recognition has achieved great strides

11:51and we are of course thankful that the police can pick criminals out of a crowd. That’s the upside. But every

11:59technology has a downside. And the face recognition and CCTV

12:05cameras that are used to catch criminals can be used for social control and

12:12surveillance. In England at the moment, there are more closed circuit TV cameras than in the

12:17whole of North America. China is putting 600 million CCTV

12:23cameras into its country this year and they are developing social control. It’s

12:31already operating in 13 cities. And the basic idea, they will probably modify it

12:38a little, is that each citizen is given 300 points. And people are tracked.

12:44They’re observed. And if they’re seen buying something that the authorities

12:50think might be a waste of time or going to a questionable place, they lose points. And then they begin to discover

12:57that their credit card won’t be accepted or that they can’t get onto a train or they can’t go to their favorite

13:03restaurant or they do things that are regarded as good and their point score

13:08goes up and they may be able to buy a new car and there’s been a time

13:14argument, a time article about it that’s makes really scary reading. It’s saying

13:20it’s setting the stage for the most thorough form of surveillance the world

13:27has ever seen and setting up the perfect conditions for an absolute dictatorship.

13:34But then at the end of the article, the writer warns, he said, “By the way, all

13:39of these systems exist in the West. The only difference is they’re not

13:44centralized yet. You have credit surveys when you want to buy something. You have the police

13:52checking you as you drive down the toll roads. There are all kinds of things happening to us socially, but they are

13:59checked by different agencies. It could all come together. So that you

14:04can see that AI which is excellent for crime prevention could threaten privacy

14:12as it has already done with Facebook and so on. Then we move on to things that

14:19raise even bigger ethical questions. That is autonomous weapons, killing

14:25people simply by computer and the AI systems themselves deciding what the

14:32targets are going to be and dealing with them before there’s any human intervention at all.

14:39All these things are already operating. And I’d like to emphasize that this is what is called narrow artificial

14:47intelligence. Remember, an AI system does something that normally requires an

14:52intelligent human. It simulates intelligence, but it does it in a very

14:59limited area. It might be face recognition. It might be dealing with

15:05X-rays, etc. It’s a limited area and [clears throat] it it decouples

15:12intelligence from consciousness. Now we need to therefore remember as

15:19Roger Shank of Northwestern University wrote, “Cognition means thinking. Your

15:25machine is not thinking.” When people say AI, they don’t mean AI. What they

15:33mean is a lot of brute force computation. Per perhaps the man who said it best is

15:40a professor from Alabama who gave a remarkable lecture in 1985 in Yale. And

15:47he said, “It seems to me that a lot of needless debate could be avoided if AI

15:53researchers would admit that there are fundamental differences between machine

15:59intelligence and human intelligence.” differences that cannot be overcome by

16:05any amount of research. In other words, the artificial in artificial

16:11intelligence is real. And that was the title of his article. And very

16:17interestingly, he was a Christian. And there were several Nobel Prize winners

16:22at that lecture in Yale. And one of them was the famous Sir John Eckles who

16:27thought this was an excellent presentation. The artificial in

16:32artificial intelligence is real. So much for the things where we can see positive

16:40benefits but dangers. But now we’re going to come to something

16:45very different and that is the quest for artificial general intelligence. That is

16:53building an AI system that equals or exceeds human capacities.

16:59In other words, constructing a super intelligence and that is often referred to as

17:06transhumanism. We go beyond the human.

17:12And these ideas are being spread abroad prolifically around the world in many

17:19books but notably a number of best sellers. The first one I want to bring

17:24to your attention is Homodos by Yuval Noah Harrari, an Israeli historian. It’s

17:32called A Brief History of Tomorrow. Now,

17:38I think this is so important that the ideas I’m presenting you tonight are

17:44going to appear very soon, I hope, in a book. Listen to Harrari’s analysis of where we

17:51have got to in global society. First of all, he says, war is obsolete.

18:00You are more likely to commit suicide than be killed in conflict. Secondly, famine is disappearing. You

18:07are more at risk from obesity than starvation. And thirdly, death is now just a

18:15technical medical problem. This is very much like Steven Pinker’s thesis.

18:23Now, there are loads of questions that we could ask about this because it’s not

18:28a thesis that is admitted by everybody by far. But let’s look at what Harari

18:34builds on this. Granted that these things are so he says in the 21st

18:40century we have two major agenda items.

18:46Firstly, there’s going to be a serious bid for human immortality.

18:51Not meaning that humans won’t ever die, but meaning that they

18:56won’t ever have to die. The technical problem of death will be solved.

19:03And therefore humankind can concentrate on the second agenda item which is an

19:09intensification of the pursuit of human happiness. How is that to be achieved?

19:16It would be necessary he writes to change our biochemistry and re-engineer

19:21our bodies and minds so that we shall need to re-engineer homo sapiens so that

19:27it can enjoy everlasting pleasure. Having raised humanity above the beastly

19:33level of survival struggles, we will now aim to upgrade

19:39humans into gods and turn homo sapiens into homo deos.

19:47Now this book is selling in millions and influencing millions of people. And so

19:53he reaches the state where his view is this. Humankind is poised to replace

19:58natural selection with intelligent design and extend life from the organic

20:05realm into the inorganic. He’s not the only voice. The director of

20:14engineering at Google is a very famous brilliant scientist called Ray

20:19Kurtzvile. He’s written a book called The Singularity in which he argues that

20:24within the foreseeable future, possibly as few as 30 years, it’s always just about 30 years ahead. This

20:33AI robots will overtake humans in their intelligence and capabilities.

20:38Another very serious and brilliant physicist is Max Tegmark of Princeton.

20:44Success in the quest for artificial intelligence has the potential, he writes, to bring unprecedented benefits

20:51to humanity, and it is therefore worthwhile to research how to maximize

20:57these benefits while avoiding potential pitfalls. And in a TED talk earlier this

21:03year, he said, “In creating AI, we are

21:08birthing a new form of life with unlimited potential for good or for

21:15ill.” And perhaps one of the most eminent scientists in the world today is

21:21our Lord Ree who’s the astronomer royal.

21:27We can have zero confidence. He wrote recently that the dominant intelligences a few

21:34centuries hence will have any emotional

21:39resonance with us even though they may have an algorithmic understanding

21:46of the way we behaved. Now this is not some fictional writer.

21:54This is one of the world’s top physicists and astronomers

22:00and people are taking this kind of thing seriously. There are other people taking it seriously.

22:07Maybe you’ve seen that name before and I was interested to have Dan Brown’s

22:14latest novel drawn to my attention. And when I opened it, I discovered that

22:20what he’s doing in a fictional way and influencing millions because millions read his books. So we need to take

22:27seriously what the philosophy is in them. Two big questions. Where do I come from and where am I going? And he

22:34explains in interviews his motivation is to see if God can survive science. Now,

22:41[snorts] of course, I have dedicated a large part of my life to point out that God could not only survive science, that

22:48science points to God, and it doesn’t make sense without him. So, it intrigued

22:53me that here’s a novelist using a fictional argument to try to explore

23:01these two questions. It gets very interesting because the

23:07hero if you like or the anti-hero of the book is a billionaire of course

23:14entrepreneurial artificial intelligence expert called Edmund Kirch and what he

23:21does is to use narrow AI of the sort that works and we’re familiar with to

23:27predict a GI and here’s how he does it. The first

23:32question is where do we come from? He goes back to a famous experiment

23:39for which Miller and Yuri won the Nobel Prize in 1953. They took a simulated prebiotic

23:47atmosphere, put it in a test tube and passed

23:52electrical sparks through it. and they discovered a residue in the test tube of

23:58several amino acids that are necessary for biological life. So what he now

24:05does, it’s actually very clever, but what he now does is do a little bit of

24:11research and discover that those test tubes, now this is actually true, this happened. Those test tubes were put away

24:17in a cupboard for over 50 years. We’re now into the 2000s and they were taken

24:24out by um Jeremy England of MIT, a brilliant scientist and just out of

24:31interest he had a look at what was in the test tubes and he discovered to his

24:36amazement that there were quite a few more amino acids that hadn’t been there

24:4250 years before. So Brown gets his mind working and says,

24:48″Right, let’s put an AI system to work. That’s what it was like in 1953. That’s

24:54what it was like in the early 2000s. Let’s make a database and calculate,

25:00well, what’s it going to be like in a 100 years, 500 years, a thousand years, a million years, 10 million years, a

25:06billion years, and so on.” Now, of course, a lot of it is hype and imagination, but the point is as he

25:14watches his AI system work on this database, and he’s watching it, and lo and behold,

25:22in front of his eyes, the double helix of DNA suddenly appears.

25:28So, he’s solved the mystery of the origin of life. Well, he hasn’t actually

25:34and you will find a very detailed expose of this in my book, but it’s attractive

25:40to people because it seems like the kind of way you would do it. I reject his

25:47arguments completely for a very simple reason that the DNA double stranded

25:52helix is a linguistic shows linguistic features. It’s a code and natural

25:59unguided processes do not produce code. But that’s another big story. But now

26:06let’s come to the next thing. What about the question of the future? Well, of

26:11course, he starts off because he’s an evolutionary atheist, and he starts off

26:18with the points in his database representing,

26:24as he understands it, the development of animals and so on in the past. And then

26:29he starts, of course, to project them into the future. So, he watches his screen as the AI system filters through

26:38all this and he suddenly notices something very odd. I’m afraid this is a spoiler. If you don’t like spoilers, you

26:45better stop listening because as he watches the screen, he sees another species emerging.

26:54And this new species grows and grows until it swallows up humanity.

27:01He calls it technium because it is technology

27:07taking over from biological life.

27:12Now what is said in the book is fascinating.

27:18He announces this to the world and he says new technologies like cybernetics

27:23etc and virtual reality will forever change what it means to be human.

27:30And this scientist says, “I realize there are those of you who believe as homo sapiians, you are God’s chosen

27:38species. I can understand that this news, his news, may feel like the end of the world to you. But I beg you, please

27:45believe me. The future is actually much brighter than you think.” Now, what’s at

27:53the heart of this, ladies and gentlemen, is a drive

28:00to refashion human beings.

28:05And that raises profound questions for someone like me who is a

28:12Christian. And it means that we need in light of this

28:17although most of it is hype and speculation it’s capturing the minds of

28:22people. So I think we need to inject into the debate

28:28a rethink of what human beings version 1.0 actually are.

28:36So we’ve got AGI, the singularity, homodos, and technium. All speculation.

28:44We’re very little way down the road, but people can now see possibilities

28:50because of the success of narrow AGI. So what is a human being? How are we going

28:55to think about humanity? Well, I was taught quantum physics years ago at Cambridge by Professor Sir John

29:02Pulkinghorn. And he writes, “If we are to understand the nature of reality, we have only two

29:08possible starting points. Either the brute fact of the physical world or the brute fact of a divine will and purpose

29:14behind that physical world.” Two world views.

29:20Either the atheist worldview, the physical world is all that exists, or

29:26the theistic worldview. Well, the atheistic material worldview,

29:32we humans, says physicist Shan Carroll, are blobs of organized mud.

29:39Very flattering. Which through the impersonal workings of nature’s patterns

29:44have developed the capacity to contemplate and cherish and engage with the intimidating complexity of the world

29:50around us. The meaning we find in life is not transcendent. Now I want to just

29:56pause here for a moment and say to you why this stuff is really serious is that

30:02most of the thinkers so far as I can ascertain who are working on it are

30:07coming from a naturalistic atheistic perspective. And you can see that if you believe that

30:16biological life happened without any divine intervention or input, then

30:21surely with human intelligence we can create artificial life based on silicon.

30:29We can enhance by intelligent design the humans that we are at the moment. It’s

30:35very logical from a materialistic point of view. It is not logical from the

30:41biblical point of view which is in the beginning God created the heavens and

30:47the earth and God made humans in his own

30:52image. Now we’ll hold that in our heads for a minute and just think of a very

30:58important thing. [snorts] It’s one thing to suggest the brain functions like a computer. It’s a very different thing to

31:07say it is a computer. Roger Epstein was the editor of psychology today and

31:14he is very much against this idea that the human brain is simply a computer

31:19made of mate. Computers don’t play games like humans play games and so on. They

31:26don’t at the most fundamental level even solve computational problems like humans do. And I think one of the most

31:33important warnings comes from your own professor Leon Cass, one of the most

31:39brilliant public intellectuals in the USA at Chicago, presidential adviser on

31:44ethics. And he says this, “We have paid some high price for the

31:50technological conquest of nature, but none so high as the intellectual and spiritual costs of seeing nature as mere

31:58material for our manipulation, exploitation, and transformation.

32:04With the powers of biological engineering gathering, there will be

32:10splendid new opportunities for similar degradation of our view of man. If we

32:18come to see ourselves as meat, then meat we will become.

32:24Now against that background, I want to think very briefly with you of the

32:31alternative world view. the biblical perspective.

32:37And the Bible announces that we do not have to wait for super intelligence

32:43because it already exists. [snorts] God, the word,

32:50the one who created our universe by speaking it into being.

32:57So that mind and God and word are primary and the physical universe is

33:03derivative. That’s exactly opposite to the assumption that the physical

33:08universe is primary and everything else is derivative. And the intriguing thing

33:16about the Genesis account of creation is the two days on which God spoke more than once, the third and the sixth. And

33:25on the third day, the distinction was between inorganic material and life.

33:34You do not get in scripture a transition from inorganic to organic without the

33:43words and God said. Now, what’s that telling us in modern terminology? It’s

33:50telling us that the world we regard as the natural world is not a closed system

33:56of cause and effect. It was built stepwise by God speaking energy and

34:02information from outside an open system and building it up. The second occasion

34:10on which God spoke more than once is to differentiate between animals and

34:16human beings. you don’t get from animals to human beings without and God said.

34:25Now I’m going to leave that because I’ve written a little book on it. That’s shameless advertising.

34:32But I want to come to this key statement. You see

34:38artificial general intelligence will be something created in human image.

34:45What we’re claiming is that human beings like us were made in God’s image. And

34:51Genesis lists a whole fascinating

34:56collection of properties of what it means to be made in God’s image. Now, we

35:04could spend ages on each of them. Humans are made of the dust of the ground. There’s so much material. So are robots.

35:11So are artificial intelligences. But then humans are alive and of course

35:18AI systems are not alive. Will they ever be? That is the question. Human beings

35:24have an aesthetic sense. And as you look down the list, you will discover that many of these properties depend and are

35:32integrated with the fact that human beings are conscious. But we’ve already seen that robots in

35:40the first place and AI systems, they are not conscious.

35:46And we could pick out a number of fascinating things here where attempts

35:52are being seriously made to imitate some of these properties. Think of the human

35:58language facility that we can name things. Do you know that AI systems

36:03regularly write sports reports for our newspapers? That they are making film trailers?

36:11That they are constructing art? And it raises all kinds of questions.

36:18Where do you differentiate between the two? You’re going to be disappointed if you think I’m going to give you a

36:23lecture on how to sort all this out. What I’m saying is these are things ladies and gentlemen we need to think

36:31about. So on the one hand we have the appearance of intelligence

36:41but it’s not conscious and God does something

36:48that machinery and clever scientists do not do. He

36:54links intelligence and consciousness.

36:59And here’s the big barrier in constructing a super intelligence. The

37:05biggest hurdle is consciousness because no one

37:12no one has any idea what consciousness

37:17is. But there’s something more. You see, I said that self-driving cars

37:24don’t have a conscience. So, some sort of morality has to be built in. That’s the morality of the programmers. So,

37:32self-driving cars separate intelligence and conscience.

37:39AI separates them, but God links them. Because in the Genesis account, we have

37:46a tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Please, it’s not the tree of knowledge. God didn’t want to keep

37:52people from knowledge. There was loads of it in the garden. This kind of knowledge is a knowledge you don’t want

37:58to have. And the analysis in Genesis is something that is way beyond

38:08any capacity or beginnings of a capacity of an AI system.

38:14Because here God explains to us what it means to be a moral being. In simple

38:20terms, they had freedom to eat of all the trees. God said, “Don’t eat of that one.” They had freedom to eat, otherwise

38:28the prohibition would have been meaningless. And of course, we know the story that

38:35they disobeyed God. The first morality was vertical.

38:42It was determined by God. Now, this is a huge problem. If you reject God and you’re building all kinds of systems

38:49that interact with human beings, what morality are you going to build into

38:55them? Where are you going to get it from? Because if there isn’t a God, I

39:00would want to argue that morality ends up being essentially subjective. Now, that’s another huge topic.

39:08But it’s important that we see again what Genesis says because this creature

39:14that God built in his image grasped at autonomy

39:21and brought sin and disaster into the world. Do you know what many people in the robotics world and AI world fear?

39:29Exactly the same thing happening to their creations. And interestingly enough, a leading

39:36scientist draws the parallel and and she says, “If we see the Genesis account of

39:42the fall as foreshadowing of fears about robots, then Genesis gets the problem

39:47exactly right for exactly the right reasons. It’s a worry about autonomy

39:52itself. What might robots do if we can’t control them fully?” And there of course

39:58she’s thinking of robots with AI systems together.

40:03We can thank she says the Hebrew account of Genesis for pre-warning us about this

40:08danger thousands of years ago. So there has been a conference of some of the

40:15world’s leading thinkers to try and get people to agree to impose

40:21morality on any of these developments lest something gets out of control.

40:29One of the leading researchers in the world on artificial intelligence is a Christian believer at MIT.

40:36Her name is Rosalyn Picard and she uses AI systems

40:44to get into the inner heart of autistic children. And she’s done wonderful work

40:52in helping those children. And she writes a general point, the greater the

40:58freedom of a machine, the more it will need moral standards. So, Genesis raises

41:06the morality question. There is concern about it even when

41:11talking about hypothetical super intelligent machines. But there was another tree in the garden and that is

41:17the tree of life. And we remember that one of Harrari’s propositions was that

41:24in this century we are going to solve the problem of physical death. Are we?

41:32Because Genesis raises some very interesting points. It tells us that

41:38when humans disobeyed God, he removed from them a source of food that if they

41:45haded access to it would have kept them physically alive forever. That’s what the text says.

41:51And you begin to wonder if the search for physical immortality all goes back

42:00to this story that God excluded them from it. And you’ve probably read in

42:05classical mythology the search for the elixir of life. And now the modern

42:10version is the search for homo deos.

42:16So, Harrari projects into the future and his idea is that we’re going to upgrade

42:23humans into gods. The biblical answer to it is spectacular

42:30because there is a homodos, a man who is God.

42:37But it’s not man becoming God.

42:42It’s God becoming man. And the heart of the Christian faith is

42:49that the word became flesh and dwelt among us evidenced by his resurrection

42:56and his ascension. There is a homodos.

43:01We don’t have to wait for Harrari or Curtzvile or anybody else to create a

43:06man who is God. There is a man who is God. Now isn’t it interesting ladies and gentlemen that when someone like Harrari

43:15or Kierce says this is going to happen people say oh that’s fascinating but when we claim that there is a man who is

43:22God oh they say you couldn’t possibly believe that that’s the Bible isn’t it and what I want to argue to you tonight

43:29seriously is this we have come to a very important moment where we can see in our

43:37culture ideas [snorts] that are parodies of what we’ve already got in the Bible,

43:45which gives us a remarkable opportunity to speak into what’s going on. Now, one

43:52of the hopes of these people, you’ve probably heard it, is to upgrade ourselves [snorts] and become more

43:59intelligent and all this kind of thing. But you see there is already in

44:06existence a divine upgrade. And phase one is that any one of us by

44:14trusting Christ as Lord and Savior who died for our sins can become but we were

44:21not by nature a child of God. That is a spectacular divine upgrade isn’t it? And

44:28that can already happen. We don’t have to wait for it. We can receive the life

44:33of God. And perhaps by looking at it against the background of AI, we can see

44:40just how remarkable this is. We have something to say to our world. They’re

44:47searching for it. They’re nowhere near it. They’re trying to get there. But we

44:52can say, “Look, God has become man. There is a man who is God. He has risen

44:58from the dead. And he invites everybody to become children of God, receiving a

45:05new life, eternal life, by trusting him.

45:10To as many as received him, he gave the right to become children of God. The

45:16serpent said, “In the day you eat thereof, you shall be homodos. You shall

45:22be as gods.” Here’s the biblical answer to that. God doesn’t want to suppress anybody. He wants to make us his

45:29children in his family with the same kind of life as he has got.

45:34But there’s more. The homodus was here. He’s left. He’s returning.

45:41And publicly to his judges. Jesus said, “You shall see the son of

45:47man sitting on the right hand of God and coming on the clouds of heaven.” privately to his disciples. He said this

45:54same, it was said to his disciples, “This same Jesus shall so come as you

46:00saw him go. Homodos is going to return.” [clears throat]

46:05Now, let’s listen to a famous atheist, John Gray, who’s always worth reading.

46:12Humans may well use science to turn themselves into something like gods as they have imagined them to be. But no

46:21supreme being will appear in the scene. Instead, there will be many different

46:27gods. Each of them a parody of human beings that once existed. He’s wrong.

46:33I will come again. And I will take you to myself that where

46:40I am there you may be also. So how far have we got?

46:47The AGI people are speculating on the creation of hum homodus by human

46:55engineering and intellectual ability. Scripture claims that a super

47:02intelligence has always existed. God and God has become human and there is a homo

47:08deos Jesus the God man the word become flesh but there’s more

47:15and now it becomes even more fascinating because the Bible talks of a future

47:23homodeous that is evil. This is Paul writing in the first

47:30century to a church at Thessalonica.

47:35Listen to what he has to say. And bear in mind when I read it that he was only

47:41in this city for three weeks. And he reminded the people that when he

47:47was there, he told them this stuff. What had he told them? For that day will not come. That is the day of judgment. will

47:54not come until the rebellion comes first. And the man of lawlessness is revealed the son of destruction who

48:01opposes and exalts himself against every so-called god or object of worship so

48:07that he takes his seat in the temple of God proclaiming himself to be God. And then

48:13the lawless one, this is not civil lawlessness. This is spiritual

48:19lawlessness. It’s rebellion against God. The lawless one will be revealed whom

48:24the Lord Jesus will kill with the breath of his mouth and bring to nothing by the

48:30appearance of his coming. The coming of the lawless one is by the activity of

48:36Satan with all power and false signs and wonders and deceptions. Now, that’s

48:43chilling reading, but I want to put it in the context of what a professor of

48:49physics at MIT is saying about the future. Max Tegmark, a very bright man.

48:57And when he comes to AGI, he’s got various scenarios of what might happen.

49:03For example, humans, cyborgs, uploads, and super intelligence might coexist

49:08peacefully. There might be a protector god. That is where AI becomes

49:14essentially omnisient. We don’t want to ignore that. Ladies and

49:20gentlemen, many young people today cannot do without being connected to the machine

49:27that knows everything more or less that they’ve ever done. It’s called the internet of things.

49:35And AI will become very rapidly and has become a substitute god. That’s another

49:41big social story. But then he’s got another idea of an enslaved god. A super

49:47intelligent AI is confined by humans. But then the next one is AI takes

49:53control. Decides that humans are a threat, a nuisance or waste of resource and gets

49:59rid of us by a method that we don’t even understand. And he’s got 12 scenarios.

50:05Here’s the one that interests him most. I was intrigued when I discovered this.

50:11He calls it the Omega project. For the first time ever, our planet was run by a

50:17single power called Prometheus, amplified by an intelligence so vast

50:24that it could potentially enable life to flourish for billions of years throughout the cosmos. But what

50:30specifically was their plan? And he goes on to indicate this Prometheus one

50:37massive feature is complete social and economic control of buying and selling.

50:43Now listen to the book of Revelation written 20 centuries ago.

50:48Now this is imagery but listen to it. It that is the beast deceives those who

50:54dwell on the earth telling them to make an image for the beast that was wounded by the sword and yet lived. And it was

51:01allowed to give breath to the image of the beast so that the image of the beast might even speak and might cause those

51:07who would not worship the image of the beast to be slain. Also, it causes all

51:13to be marked on right hand so that no one can buy or sell unless he has the

51:20mark that is the name of the beast and the number of his name. People often

51:26laugh at that, but this is the very scenario that will flow out of the

51:32current social control AI systems in China,

51:37which Tegmark singles out as an example of what might

51:43happen in the future. People say, “But this is imagery.” But just a minute. They obviously haven’t listened to CS

51:50Lewis because CS Lewis points out that imagery and metaphor always stand for

51:58reality. There’s always a reality behind them. So if we ask what is this beast?

52:06The book of Revelation gives the answer in the very same context. Let’s listen to it. This calls for wisdom. Let the

52:14one who understanding calculate the number of the beast, for it is the number of a man, and his number is 666.

52:24Please notice what it’s not saying. It’s not telling you who it is. It’s telling

52:30you what it is. The beast is human.

52:36That is the central message of this. You know, historically, people have tried to

52:42decode this geatria, putting numbers for letters, and work out who it is. And

52:47they’ve been spectacularly successful. Hitler has been in, Stalin’s been in,

52:53virtually everybody. But that isn’t the point. Because you see, if this human

52:59who behaves like a beast is revealed by the power of Satan and controls the whole world, you’ll not have to play

53:06guessing games with numbers to know who it is. It’ll be obvious. The 666 will simply be a check.

53:14Do we take it seriously? This is the way that take Mark starts

53:20his book talking about Prometheus. Here we have it in scripture. Why shouldn’t

53:26we take scripture seriously? I see no reason why not to. I see

53:32increasing reason to do that. That’s the negative side and it clearly is not a

53:40very pleasant prospect. Although we can see what’s happening in our world is moving very rapidly towards it. It is

53:47highly credible and it’s credible because Paul said to these people

53:54it’s already working in your own society. The Caesars were calling themselves gods

54:00and they were insisting that the Christians bow down and worship. And many a Christian lost his or her life

54:06for refusing to do it. Now he says, “You watch the trends in your society. This

54:12deification of emperors, watch where it goes. This is where it’s going to go to.” And here are the AGI people telling

54:21us exactly the same thing on the basis of our speculations.

54:27I think we need to take these texts much more seriously than we’ve ever done in the past. But there’s good news, you

54:34know, because there’s a divine upgrade. Phase two,

54:40phase one is becoming children of God through receiving Christ. Phase two is

54:45spectacular because it is a transformation. It’s not bioengineering.

54:52This is what it is. Flesh and blood shall not inherit the kingdom of God, nor does the perishable inherit the

54:59imperishable. Behold, I tell you a mystery. We shall not all sleep, but we

55:04shall all be changed in a moment in the twinkling of an eye at the last trumpet.

55:09For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised imperishable, and we shall be changed. This mortal must put

55:20on immortality. That is a wonderful hope in the midst of

55:25all of this. Now let’s just concluding now come down to balance. Here is a

55:33statement of a book that came out just recently. One of the world’s top AI

55:39researchers and here’s his honest assessment. AI can handle a growing

55:45number of non-personal, non-creative, routine tasks. But the skills that make

55:50us uniquely human are ones that no machine can replicate. The jobs of the

55:56future will require creative, compassionate, empathetic leaders who know how to create trust to build teams

56:04and inspire service and communicate effectively. So I would sum up ladies

56:10and gentlemen by saying firstly that fear of AGI should not prevent people of

56:16any worldview making a contribution to the positive aspects of narrow AI to the benefit of

56:23all. And Rosalyn Pickard put it this way. We’ve decided it’s more about

56:28building a better human machine combination than it is about building a machine where we will be lucky if it

56:35wants us around as a household pet.

56:41In the middle of my talk, I went to Genesis.

56:47Why do we believe that humans are special? Here’s why we believe it.

56:54The ultimate affirmation of humanity version 1.0

56:59is the fact that God became one. the word became flesh

57:07and the result of the incarnation, the death of the resur and the resurrection

57:12of Jesus that instead of speculative hope that one day we can upload the

57:17contents of our brains or we can be bioengineered to live forever,

57:24we have a sure and certain hope based on the true homodos

57:29that to as many as received him. to them gave you the right to become children of

57:34God. And we can lift up our heads in confidence, for the trumpet will sound,

57:43and the dead will be raised imperishable, and we shall be changed.

57:50This mortal must put on immortality.

57:57That is the future of the Christian believer, ladies and gentlemen.

58:02and it is light years more credible and better than anything speculative AGI has

58:08to offer. Thank you very much indeed.

A.I. is a mirror of humanity | Shannon Vallor

Introduction

0:00these tools gather virtually all the

0:02light they take in the light of our

0:04images our voices our music our sounds

0:08and from this collected light our AI

0:11mirrors are now reflecting a very

0:13profound composite image of

0:18[Music]

Talk begins

0:24us now in some ways all technology is a

0:27mirror right technology is an EXT ion of

0:30human values and Imagination into the

0:33built World Technologies are not opposed

0:35to humanity they’re not artificial in a

0:38sense that separates them from us

0:40they’re an extension of us every

0:42technology from the wheel to the book to

0:45the computer to the engine reflects what

0:48certain humans of certain times and

0:49places thought was worth doing worth

0:54enabling worth trying those are value

0:57judgments that we make right we don’t

0:59create Technologies at random we do so

1:02with intention and guided by desires and

1:06values so all Technologies are mirrors

1:10but AI is a particularly powerful

1:13mirror now let’s unpack this metaphor

1:15just a little bit think about the way

1:18mirrors work you have a number of

1:20components needed to get a glass mirror

1:22to work you need a surface a coating on

1:26the glass that has certain physical

1:28properties that deter determine how it

1:31will function right and if you don’t get

1:34that coding right and its properties

1:35right the mirror won’t

1:37reflect you can understand a machine

1:40learning algorithm the computational

1:43recipe inside an AI tool as the AI

1:47mirror surface it’s like the coding that

1:50defines the reflective properties of

1:52that tool okay and you can change the

1:55algorithm and then the mirror will

1:57reflect differently right so there’s a

2:00lot of parallels here now glass mirrors

2:03not only have surfaces they have images

2:06that appear in those surfaces we can

2:09compare those images to the outputs of

2:12an AI model right its predictions

2:14classifications and depictions think of

2:16those as the images that appear in our

2:19AI

2:20mirrors but there’s one more ingredient

2:22that a glass mirror needs to work what

2:24is

2:26it a glass

2:28mirror light

2:30exactly so what corresponds to the light

2:35for an AI mirror our data right

2:39everything that it reflects back to us

2:41is powered by our own data that we’ve

2:44used to train the model now ai mirrors

2:49are getting more and more powerful

AI mirrors are getting exponentially more powerful

2:51because we’ve made leaps forward by

2:53constructing ever larger AI mirrors like

2:56gp4 and Gemini based on what we call

3:00large language models or llms these

3:03tools gather virtually all the light all

3:06the human language data that we have in

3:09digital form and now today we have what

3:13we call multimodal versions of these

3:15models which means that they don’t just

3:17incorporate our language data they take

3:19in the light of our images our artwork

3:22for example right our

3:24photographs our

3:25videos our voices our music our sounds

3:30right and from this collected light our

3:33AI mirrors are now

3:34reflecting a very profound composite

3:38image of us statistical variations on

3:42the collected digitized words of Untold

3:45Millions so these tools are animating an

3:47early

3:49lifelike image of humanity except it’s

3:52not really an image of humanity not all

3:558 billion of us right it’s only

3:58reflecting that small subset of largely

4:01English-speaking digitally connected

4:03Humanity that is most represented on the

4:05digital Corpus of the internet right if

4:08you have the privilege of having the

4:10bandwidth and the tools to be able to

4:12type on Reddit all day you get to be

4:14reflected in this mirror but lots of

4:17people don’t and that’s

4:19important now in my book I I focus a lot

The postmodern Narcissus

4:22on uh science fiction and literature and

4:25myth as ways of helping us understand

4:28what we’re dealing with and IED use the

4:30myth of Narcissus and echo in ID’s

4:32metamorphosis to try to highlight one of

4:34the dangers that I see in the way that

4:37we’re depending upon these tools but

4:39more importantly the way we’re

4:40misunderstanding what they

4:42are often when we talk to chat GPT or

4:45it’s cousins like Gemini we imagine that

4:48we’re in the presence of some incredible

4:50new mind that we’re talking to a digital

4:52reflection of ourselves right um but we

4:56often don’t realize that we’re talking

4:57to a reflection of ourselves we often

4:59think that there is really a mind on the

5:01other side of the mirror and in this way

5:04we’re a little bit like the Roman poet

5:07ID’s young narcissus who was seduced and

5:09held captive by his own image in a

5:11reflecting pool in which he thinks he

5:14sees not himself but another boy ID says

5:18he loves a bodyless dream he thinks that

5:22a body that is only a shadow now if you

5:26know the myth you know it doesn’t end

5:27well for narcissist he loses himself he

5:29loses care for his body and his life in

5:32his obsession with that beautiful boy

5:34gazing back at him in the water and ID

5:37says what he has seen he does not

5:39understand but what he sees he is on

5:41fire for now the question I ask in this

5:44book is can we avoid the same fate can

5:47we avoid losing care for our true selves

5:51and one another and our world as we gaze

5:53in the AI

5:55mirror there’s another character in ID’s

5:58story Ekko who thanks to a curse from

6:00the goddess Juno can only repeat the

6:03words being spoken by another as

6:05narcissist lies dying at the edge of the

6:07pool he hears his own size and laments

6:10helplessly mirrored by echo which only

6:13tricks him further into thinking that

6:15the boy in the water is real and

6:17separate from himself today we Face our

6:20own version of ekko’s curse we watch

6:22helplessly as tech companies scrape all

6:24of our creative and intellectual voices

6:28copyrighted or not

6:30into their machine mirrors but then we

6:32use these tools to just repeat the words

6:35we see in the mirror all those essays

6:38songs scripts story pitches expert

6:40summaries and news articles that these

6:42tools now generate for us so that we

6:45don’t have to write them ourselves so

6:48here’s the question the book asks what

6:50happens to our Humanity when all that we

6:53can see is Its

6:57Reflection all right now let’s that’s

6:59the uction now let’s get into

7:01understanding more about what mirrors do

AI mirrors reveal

7:04right one of the most important things

7:05they do is reveal and AI mirrors reveal

7:08as well they reveal more than our words

7:11and voices they can reflect our faces

7:13bodies decisions and even tell us more

7:15about these than we already

7:17know these tools reveal patterns that

7:20recur in our data which in turn can

7:23reflect important subtle and never

7:25before noticed patterns and realities in

7:28our lives and bodies

7:30that’s how AI can tell us if a pattern

7:32in our mamogram indicates cancerous

7:34tissue and soon we can use it to predict

7:37cancer before it arrives

7:39potentially but AI can reveal so many

7:42other kinds of things right um it can

7:44reveal whether you’re likely to uh

7:47suffer sepsis so that your doctors can

7:49intervene before it’s too late right it

7:53can reveal the structure of the proteins

7:55uh that make up our biology and the

7:58biology of every other living

8:01thing uh it can reveal new classes of

8:04antibiotics that we desperately need in

8:07order to treat uh dangerous diseases

8:10like uh resistant uh antibiotic

8:13resistant Mera or staff right so AI will

8:16save lives it already has we can use it

8:18to find lead in pipes faster so that we

8:22can prevent children from being poisoned

8:25uh we can use it to clear landmines uh

8:27figure out where those landmines are so

8:29that people don’t have to perform such

8:31dangerous

8:32work but I want you to notice that none

8:34of these benefits actually came from

8:36training AI tools on us they came from

8:40targeted uses of machine learning and

8:43data about the world to solve very

8:44specific kinds of problems that’s

8:47actually quite different than what

8:48something like chat GPT does right and

8:51that is something that concerns me more

AI mirrors magnify

8:54because AI mirrors don’t just reveal

8:58they magnify

9:00right their algorithms are never neutral

9:02never perfectly flat and Polished they

9:05increase certain select features of our

9:07reality while diminishing others one of

9:10the things we know that they amplify or

9:12magnify is the bias that’s already

9:15living in our data through our own

9:17discriminatory patterns our tendency for

9:20example to undertreat in America black

9:24people in the medical system when you

9:26train a hospital algorithm that’s

9:29supposed to automatically triage

9:31patients and give the sickest patients

9:33the most attention and care if you’re

9:35not careful what the algorithm will do

9:37is actually repeat the pattern of bias

9:40or even amplify it against black

9:43patients in the hospital and take the

9:45sickest black patients and deprioritize

9:47them for care and Elevate healthier

9:50white patients on the list right that’s

9:53what this model that these uh uh

9:56researchers found was doing in American

9:58hospitals and Not By Design the

10:00developers of the algorithm didn’t want

10:02that outcome but they didn’t realize the

10:04power of the AI mirror to magnify the

10:07racial bias that was already running

10:09through all the medical data that we

10:12had this problem happens again and again

10:15with even simpler kinds of algorithms

10:17that don’t work anything like the most

10:19powerful tools right uh the Dutch

10:21government had to resign in 2021 because

10:23they had used an algorithm that was so

10:25biased that it was uh actually

10:28destroying innocent families by accusing

10:30them of fraud simply because they just

10:32fell into socially uh discriminated

10:35against

10:37categories we know that even the newest

10:39tools have this potential so gp4 has

10:42been shown to perpetuate racial and

10:44gender biases in health care uh for

10:47example um taking women who present with

10:51uh uh symptoms of blood clot and in

10:55comparison with men who present with the

10:57same symptoms being more likely to

10:59diagnose the women as having anxiety or

11:01panic disorder rather than a blood CAU

11:04right those are very dangerous errors

11:05that humans make and that women already

11:08die from we don’t want our AI tools to

11:11be magnifying these kinds of scenarios

AI brings the past forward

11:14right another thing that AI models do is

11:18they bring forward the past now this is

11:20something that all mirrors do right

11:22those giant uh telescopes that we put in

11:25space those show us the universe but

11:29they show us the universe right now

11:30right because of the speed of light they

11:32show us the

11:33universe long long long ago the Early

11:37Childhood of the universe and even the

11:40mirror that you have in your in your

11:42bathroom shows you the past it’s just

11:46that the distance is so short that you

11:47don’t notice the lag right but AI

11:50mirrors also reproduce the past because

11:53they take the stories we’ve already

11:55written the wars we’ve already fought

11:57the injustices we’ve already committed

11:59the biases that we’ve already enacted in

12:02our systems and they carry them into the

12:04future in a form of predictions and

12:06decisions about what we will do today

12:09and

12:10tomorrow now these tools can produce

12:12random variations on familiar patterns

12:14but they don’t radically break from

12:16those patterns now what does that mean

12:19when our most familiar patterns of the

12:21recorded past are patterns of Empire

12:24patterns of mindless environmental

12:26destruction and if those patterns as we

12:28now know would be a death sentence to

12:31continue for future Generations then

12:34what does it mean that the AI tools

12:35we’re using to guide our decisions in

12:37the future are trained on those same

12:40patterns and cannot radically break from

12:42them or invent new

12:44patterns so there’s a regressive power

12:46of these tools uh we see it in examples

12:49like the uh image uh generation models

12:52that if you ask for a CEO you know might

12:54give you a panel of all white men uh now

12:57we’ve fine-tuned these mod so that

12:59they’re less likely to do it right but

13:01the base tendency is actually still

13:03there and it still shows up in even the

13:05newest models in more subtle ways this

13:07is uh what you uh used to get from

13:09stable diffusion if you asked for an

13:11artist right they all look like 17th

13:12century painters it’s it’s not just that

13:14they’re all uh a men right um it

13:17literally pulls more from the past

13:20because that’s what’s most

13:22documented uh new tools uh like uh uh uh

13:26like these still draw from um pictures

13:30uh of you know let’s say the uh 19th or

13:34or early 20th century when you ask them

13:36to depict um white uh children being

13:41treated by black doctors in Africa and

13:44one of the most interesting things is it

13:46can’t actually reliably depict what you

13:50asked for usually it produces a white

13:52doctor treating black children instead

13:55because that’s the dominant pattern it

13:56doesn’t know how to break it right

14:01to continue watching this video click

14:03the link in the top left or in the

14:04description below or visit a.tv for more

14:08debates and talks from the world’s

14:09leading thinkers on today’s biggest

14:11ideas

“The Digital Delusion” Author Dr. Jared Cooney Horvath

0:04Welcome back to AM Northwest. You know,

0:07parents are told to limit a child’s

0:08screen time. Schools have banned cell

0:11phones. Yet, many students still spend

0:13the vast majority of their school day on

0:16devices. Here to share how classroom

0:18technology impact kids learning, we

0:21welcome the author of The Digital

0:23Delusion, neuroscientist, Dr. Jared

0:25Cooney Horvath. Good to have you with

0:27us.

0:27Thank you so much. Okay, let let’s start

0:29first of all when you say classroom

0:31technology is actually harming learning.

0:33Yes. And and I think it’s worth pointing

0:35out when we talk classroom technologies,

0:37some people think like maybe a program

0:39or it’s all studentf facing screens. If

0:42that’s a tablet, if that’s a laptop,

0:44anytime we interface a screen with a

0:46student, learning goes down. And we’ve

0:47had this data since 2002.

0:49Talk about that. Talk about the data

0:51because that that is like uh kind of

0:53mind-blowing to find that out.

0:55And it it’s it’s not even close. So

0:56since around 2002, that was when Maine

0:59introduced the first 1:1 computer

1:01program. Okay?

1:02And that’s when we started to see scores

1:04dip. And we’re talking literacy,

1:06numeracy, creativity, critical thinking,

1:08general IQ, all of these things. If you

1:11plot it on a line of kids who use no

1:13tech versus one hour a day, two hours a

1:15day, three hours a day. You just see the

1:17straight line drop. More tech, worse

1:19learning across the board.

1:21Why is why is tech so big now in

1:24schools? Why are we why are they

1:25accepting it so widely?

1:28It you can get really cynical here.

1:30There’s a big monetary component to

1:33this. Big tech, edte, they’re the same

1:35thing. I mean, a lot of these big tech

1:37companies

1:38started giving computers for free to

1:40schools, saying, “Hey, this is good for

1:42learning.”

1:43When in actuality, what they’re doing is

1:45when you learn on a specific device, you

1:48become tied to that device. Like a

1:50calculator. If you grew up doing math,

1:52bingo. Now, when the kids grow up, they

1:54have customers for life as they go

1:56through this. And so, I I that’s the

1:58cynical version. The other is they were

2:00told that this was going to help kids

2:01learn. And it made sense. Like, it

2:02seemed real. Tech is so powerful. Why

2:05wouldn’t it help kids learn? But the

2:06data just didn’t ever come back for that

2:08one.

2:08So, talk to me about what actually helps

2:10with kids learning.

2:12A good rule of thumb. Learning has

2:13evolved for what, 150,000 years to be

2:16something very specific.

2:18One key aspect of that is personal

2:20relationship. When a kid and a teacher

2:24synchronize, we call it empathy

2:25technically, but what happens is when

2:27they connect, their hearts will start to

2:28beat at the same time. Their breathing

2:30will start to synchronize. They’ll blink

2:32at the same time. When we image their

2:33brains, their brains start to look

2:35similar. That is one of the biggest

2:36drivers of learning we’ve seen is the

2:38connection between a student and a

2:39teacher. When we see that connection,

2:41learning goes up.

2:42You can’t get that connection through a

2:44screen. You have to be live and present

2:47with the person. So, one of the biggest

2:49learning uh boons we have simply cannot

2:53exist with the tools we’re trying to use

2:55to interface between the kid and the

2:57teacher.

2:57Um more and more schools are banning

3:00cell phones, but that’s not enough.

3:02It was a a good start. I always say,

3:04look, anxious generation John height

3:06starting to get cell phones out. Great

3:08first start. Lowest hanging fruit.

3:10Honestly, why were cell phones ever

3:12allowed in schools in the first place?

3:13I don’t understand that.

3:14No one ever had a good argument for it.

3:16So, getting those out was good. But now

3:18people are starting to recognize, look,

3:20a laptop is just a big phone. A tablet

3:22is the same exact thing. So all the

3:24things kids were doing with those,

3:25they’re now doing with the schoolisssued

3:27devices.

3:28And if we had problems there, we’re

3:29going to have the same problems here.

3:31You have found too that kids don’t

3:33really remember when it comes to and you

3:35learned this through the Oregon Trail

3:36game yourself actually, right? So tell

3:38me about that experience.

3:39So this one of the big movements with

3:41tech is gamification. If you make

3:43learning fun and engaging, then kids

3:45will learn more. But engagement and

3:46learning are very different things. So

3:48when I grew up, our our big video game

3:50was the Oregon Trail.

3:52Played that thing for hours. To this

3:53day, I could tell you everything about

3:54the game. What do you have to press to

3:56ford the river? What do you have to

3:57press to shoot a bear?

3:59The trick is I just a couple years ago,

4:01someone told me that game was meant to

4:03be a history lesson. It was supposed to

4:05teach us about the Oregon Trail.

4:06I couldn’t tell you anything about the

4:08Oregon Trail. I don’t know when it

4:09started, who did it. And the problem

4:11with gamification is that is it forces

4:13your attention towards the mechanics of

4:15the game, right? Can I get a high score?

4:17What do I have to do to get the star?

4:19And it forces your attention away from

4:20the content, which is what you really

4:22need to be learning by doing these kind

4:24of games. So, it kind of circumvents the

4:26whole purpose of having a learning

4:28program.

4:29I wanted I wanted to bring up real

4:30quickly um when I do interviews via Zoom

4:33uh you know, or satellite, I often

4:35forget who I talked to and what I talked

4:37about. I don’t know, not even a couple

4:39weeks later. And yet in person, I can

4:42tell you because there was this

4:44connection about the person, you know, I

4:46it totally makes sense. You talked too

4:48about the importance of writing your

4:50handwriting. Yeah. Versus typing

4:52something.

4:53There’s if data for 25 years says if

4:56you’re taking notes, if you’re writing

4:57ideas, right,

4:59pen and paper are better than typing.

5:00And there’s there’s two big reasons for

5:02it is one is speed. When we type, most

5:05kids can type very fast. So if I’m

5:07taking notes while typing, most kids

5:09just type verbatim, get every word down.

5:11But all you’re doing is

5:13you’re not processing any meaning.

5:15Whereas if you’re handwriting, it’s much

5:17slower. So by definition, you can’t get

5:19it all down. You’re already thinking,

5:20what are the ideas? What are the themes?

5:22And you’re t you’re processing the

5:24deeper meaning of it.

5:25Yeah.

5:25And combine that with the idea that our

5:28motor control is so unique. Every time

5:30you move your pencil, it’s slightly

5:32different. every time you move a pen and

5:34all of that feeds back into the brain

5:35and deepens your learning. The

5:37connection between your finger movement

5:39and your thinking is a lot of people say

5:41writing is thinking. Yeah.

5:43Typing is just an action,

5:44right?

5:45So the more you can bring that analog

5:46back.

5:47One thing that parents can do to help

5:48their kids now using your philosophy,

5:51buy a printer. If you if you did nothing

5:53different in your household except buy a

5:55printer and every time your kid gets

5:56digital homework, print it out. Digital

5:58read

5:58so that they can physically read it on

6:00paper.

6:00If you Yeah. If you I tell my freshman

6:02year students, if you do nothing

6:04different but you just have paper copies

6:06of everything you read. Yeah.

6:07You will remember more, comprehend

6:09better, sustain it longer.

6:10You will versus a PDF.

6:12Yeah. If you have a screen and you’re

6:13scrolling brain doesn’t like it. If you

6:15have even a Kindle with a flipper, it’s

6:17not as good as that threedimensional

6:18paper.

6:19We have to have you back anytime.

6:22Okay. So, we want to tell everyone again

6:23the book is titled The Digital Delusion.

6:26Neuroscientist Dr. Jared Cooney Horvath.

6:28Thank you very much. is fascinating and

6:30makes a ton of sense. All right, we’ll

6:31be right back with more AM Northwest.

The Downfall of Learning in the Digital Age (with neuroscientist Jared Cooney Horvath)

0:01[Music]

0:07Welcome to Scrolling to Death. I am honored to be joined today by neuroscientist, educator, and author

0:13Jared Kuni Horvath. Hi Jared. Hi. Thank you so much for having me on. Of course. We are going to talk about

0:19the digital revolution that has taken over our schools. You know, I met recently with uh an office at the White

0:25House and was told directly by our administration that our education system is broken and that the solution is

0:32screens. And so our children are now learning primarily from devices starting

0:38in TK when they’re four and 5 years old. So I want to start there with you. Are

0:43schools actually broken? And is technology the solution? That couldn’t be any more backwards if

0:50you tried. The next time somebody says school is broken and that’s a favored argument amongst tech gurus.

0:57Yeah. Just say give me your data. Like by by what metric are you saying that school is broken? A lot of people have

1:03anecdotes but man I have anecdotes. I stubbed my toe the other day. It doesn’t mean anything.

1:08When you ask for data they can’t give you any because by all metrics everything except for two metrics

1:15everything is basically going up or staying the same. So if you just think about school in mass, more kids around the world have access to it. More kids

1:21are graduating each year. Gender gaps have not only closed, they’re now reversing. Racial and social economic

1:28gaps are starting to close. Co opened them back up, but what are you going to do? So everything looks good. We’re

1:33going in the right direction except for two things. One, student mental well-being. Two, student learning. By

1:41all means, school seems to be failing at raising kids who are smart and healthy. kids who know about the world and can

1:48survive within it. Now, you track that data back and you say, “Well, when did things really start going off the off the rails?”

1:55Lo and behold, 2000. What happens in 2000? That’s when the internet really

2:00surges. That’s when we really start getting tech in schools. 2002 was the first one to one program set in Maine.

2:06And the more tech in schools, the more learning and well-being goes down. So all the people who say school is broken,

2:12the only way you could say it’s broken is because of tech. And then when they come out and say tech is the answer, you

2:17say no, tech is the problem, mate. Putting more tech in can be ready for

2:22less learning and more well-being problems. Yeah. And that should be our goal though is to raise smart and healthy humans,

2:30right? And so we’re doing the opposite of that by introducing tech. And this is where it gets kind of

2:36trippy. Yes, absolutely. I don’t want to make anyone angry or feel uncomfortable or anything, but

2:41it’s okay. Our children is are the first generation in the last century to be cognitively

2:47worse than we are. And that’s just a nice way of saying dumber than we are. On every single cognitive measure, they

2:52perform worse than we do. Attention, memory, uh memory span, uh create

2:58creative thinking, divergent thinking, critical thinking, they’re lower across

3:03the general IQ. They just And now the problem is now this is fine. If generations were always up and down

3:08you’d say cool things come and go but we have been on a steady increase for over

3:14a hundred years. Every generation outperforms their parents. And that’s what we want. Every generation wants their kids to be healthy healthier,

3:20happier, smarter than they are. We are the first generation in history where that trend is now reversed.

3:26And I don’t think it’s for lack of care. I don’t think it’s for lack of trying. And I really want to give tech the

3:31benefit of the doubt. I think when they came in in the 2000s, they genuinely believed what they were doing was right.

3:38Yeah. It’s unfortunate though. It just goes everything that we’re doing with tech flies in the face of how we know

3:44learning works. And so, yes, in a sense, we are harming them, but it’s was with the best intentions. I

3:50don’t think anyone set out to make sure our kids were doing worse. This is the world we built. Yeah. Um, was there a point where you

3:56feel like it went wrong? Like where even those who were making a lot of money at these edtech companies were like, “Oh

4:02crap, like this isn’t working like we thought it would, but we’re going to keep moving because we’re making a ton of money.” Like how is that was there a

4:08point of of inflection? That’s an interesting question. If you had to pick one moment, I would say it was the 2015 OECD report on tech and

4:16computers because the OECD had always been wildly pro tech. And they came out and their their report basically said

4:23across every measure we have, the more kids use tech at school, the more their learning goes down.

4:29And then everyone said, well, maybe it’s baseline measures, maybe it’s this. They did another follow-up review on the back

4:35end of that where they said, “It turns out the more your school invests in tech, the worse your kids are going to

4:41do.” So, it’s not just the more they use it, it’s also the more you continue to invest in it, you’re actually driving it

4:46lower. So, I’d say that moment when the OECD stood up and said, “This doesn’t work a moment.” But if you think about

4:52it, the OECD is still very pro tech. So, I don’t know why they didn’t take their own advice, but what are you going to

4:58do? Why wasn’t there changes made at that point? like we went deeper and deeper and obviously forget co like even from

5:042015 to 2020 we were still accelerating the technology in the classroom. So do

5:09you have any insight or just thoughts on why we didn’t step back at that point?

5:15There are probably going to be three major underlying things. One is the big one, money. Why step back when someone’s

5:20making a ton of money? And by making that money they can give it to you for free. So tech is basically schools don’t

5:26pay for tech until much later in the day. So, why would I say no to a free

5:31device, especially if I’m told, and that brings into number two, if I’m told that that device is going to help? The

5:37narrative around edte is so freaking powerful. And you have TED talks to

5:42thank for that. Good luck finding a TED talk that says education is working. Every single TED

5:47talk says education is broken and the solution is tool or is technology, which shouldn’t be a shocker because the

5:53T in TED is tech. If they don’t say that, they’re probably going to sound like an idiot, but millions of people watch TED talks. very few people

5:59actually read what learning is all about. So, I’d say on one hand you’ve got the money issue. On the other hand,

6:05you’ve got the narrative issue. And I’d say on the back of that, you’ve got the fear of missing out issue. If there’s one thing schools do in

6:13modern society, it’s they compete and that sucks. But you need more students,

6:18more enrollment than the other school. You need higher test scores than the other school. So, when a school comes out and says, “We have a 3D printer.”

6:26You don’t want to be the school that says, “Well, we don’t.” So tech basically perpetuates itself when we’re

6:31battling to see who can be the supreme school for kids. Okay. At no point is there data driving this. It’s just what

6:38looks best in a brochure. Unfortunately seems to be driving a lot of these decisions. Okay. So let’s talk about test scores

6:44for a minute because from my experience with my kids previously in public school system they spend weeks and hours a day

6:51frustratingly taking digital tests tapping on the screen getting frustrated

6:58trying to having to ask questions like burning out. Yeah. It leads me to question because

7:04edtech companies will tell us based off of these test scores that grades are rising and use that as proof for online

7:11learning that it works or something. And so how real are these test scores even?

7:17Like are we getting the real deal or is this all just a farce? So the the only way to kind of measure

7:23that is you can no longer use grades for measure of anything unfortunately because since 2000 we’ve had significant

7:30what we call grade inflation. Basically, more kids are getting A’s, fewer kids are getting Fs than ever before. But at

7:36the same time, if you look at international testing metrics, everyone is performing considerably worse. So,

7:42you’ve got about a 10% increase over 20 years in the number of A’s and a 10% decrease in overall performance on every

7:49international measure. So, here’s where you see grades by and large mean nothing. Now, during CO,

7:55especially in Washington and in Oregon, there was legislation that said you cannot give a kid an F. So for two years

8:02we had zero Fs in two. You literally could not fail a kid because they were afraid it would harm something. Hell if

8:08I know. So you didn’t even have to show up. So long as you were enrolled in a school, you went to the next year

8:13whether you came to a single session or not. Okay, so there’s your grade data for you. So what are you stuck with? You’re stuck

8:19with international testing data or academic research. Now to be fair, some people get mad at testing data. They go,

8:25″Oh, that’s so and this is a big edte push back. That’s surface level. That’s facts. It doesn’t test deep creativity.

8:32It doesn’t test deep thinking or knowledge. But the trick is, mate, deep creativity and deep thinking come from

8:39facts. If you don’t do well on a fact-based test, 100% you will not do

8:44well on a deep thinking test either. So, good rule of thumb, if you see a dip in fact-based testing, you will you

8:51guarantee you will see a dip in everything else. You don’t need to test it anymore. It’s like if you break your eggs while making a cake, I don’t need

8:57to ask you, “How’d your cake come out?” It didn’t. It’s over. There is nothing left here for you. So, when we do look

9:02at international testing data, it is down across the board significantly with

9:07the biggest drops in most international tests in this last testing cycle. Bigger drops than we’ve seen ever. And now, if

9:14you go looking at the tests, here’s where they do really good things. If you look at the scores, you’ll notice the

9:20drops yourself. Year on year, there’s point drops. What you won’t notice is a process called reorming. Anytime a test

9:27gets too good or too bad, what the test makers will do is reorm it to make those

9:33scores appear comparable to kids in the past. So let’s say this year’s test is super easy and every kid aces it

9:41compared to last year. Every kid got 50% on a hard test. What they’re going to do is reorm it. So acing it this year is

9:46equivalent to 50% last year. It looks like there was no change. Okay. So all the reorming that’s been

9:52done over the last two decades in all standardized tests and this is in the US this is international is upwards which

9:59means every kid is doing worse significantly worse year than the year before and they just keep reorming them

10:06to make them appear average. So, it’s real hard to actually sift through and say, if you look at the actual score,

10:13what is it? Like, it’s real hard to find the field data. But the few people who who have found the field data in certain

10:18tests basically say the drop you’ve seen in the last 20 years, double that.

10:24That’s what you’d see if they didn’t reorm. So, it’s worse even than we think it is. And but edtech loves reorming

10:30because you can just basically sweep problems under the rug. Oh my god. Okay, that’s statistics. This is what we get

10:36to do. one, you know, for parents who are listening, one tactic I’ve heard parents

10:42do is opt out of state testing. And that’s something that states, some

10:47states, I don’t know about all, let you do. And so, if you don’t want your child, like there’s just a little step, like if you don’t want your child for

10:53weeks sitting on the device, opt them out of school testing and then they get to do something else instead. I’ve heard

10:59of kids that get to volunteer in the library with the kindergarteners that those days or something. So tests like that don’t they don’t boost

11:05your learning in any way, shape, or form. They’re not there for learning. They’re there for statewide, nationwide decision-m, right?

11:11So if you don’t take it, if you can get out of it, why I would in a second? It doesn’t do me any good.

11:16Well, and if the scores are actually kind of pointless, then it doesn’t there’s no reason should be taking it

11:21anyway. If they’re just going to fuss the numbers anyway. Yes, that’s what I’m saying. This is fascinating. Okay, I want to talk a

11:28little bit more about virtual learning versus offline learning. And parents are

11:34being told that using devices will enhance our children’s learning, keep them more engaged in their education.

11:40There are schools who do all of their academics online now, like the alpha school model. Have you heard of that one?

11:46So, two-hour learning. I interviewed their founder and we had a quite a tense conversation. Um, but this school claims

11:53that on average alpha students learn 2.6 six times faster than peers on nationally normed MAP tests. I myself

12:00was Yeah. Yes. Yeah. Look that up. I would love to analyze that data myself, but Okay, go on.

12:06Um, and then I myself was told by my public school district that if my children were not given iPads in

12:11kindergarten, they would receive a substandard education. So, can you dig a little bit further here? Like, is

12:17virtual learning in any way an optimal choice compared with offline learning? No, not that we’ve ever seen. every data

12:24point basically comes back to purely online bad always bad okay um any like

12:31co was the greatest case study in that of all time once we went pure digital everything goes downhill but even in

12:37schools that have digital options even the best digital option schools underperform the worst public schools

12:43it’s just not a good way to learn it doesn’t align with how human beings learn now the alpha school at least

12:49they’re going to have support so they’re going to have teachers on site they’re going to have who help them presumably

12:55not teachers guide which is the stupidest thing I ever heard because no one went to school to become a guide but God bless you all but

13:01all you got to I mean if you think about the absurdity of that if they’re learning 2.5 times faster let’s even make it less than what he just said 2.5

13:07times faster they should complete a K through 12 education in what 3 years

13:12that means as a third grader they should be doing 12th grade work does that make a ton of sense to you no when people throw around numbers like

13:18that it sounds very cute but that’s just not how data works as a way you’ve got to analyze this stuff to see if it’s

13:24meaningful. Now, if they’re talking about 2.5 times faster for something like vocabulary, they just they memorize

13:3220 words when other kids memorize 10 words, that’s awesome. But the thing you got to remember about a lot of this is there are mechanisms of learning that

13:38human beings have developed for millennia, right? That we now need to take account of. One

13:43of those issues is a concept called transfer. Basically, human biology does not like to move knowledge and skills

13:50between context. It tries to lock it down. If you learn something in a red room, your biology will fight to keep

13:57that information in a red room. So now, if I move you over to a green room, you’re going to find it harder to access

14:03that information, use those skills simply because our biology says, “No, no, no, no, no. You’re in a new context.

14:09We need to develop new skills over here.” Okay? So transfer is not impossible. We do it all the time. It’s just we’re biologically built not to. It’s a very

14:15hard process to go through. Right? When we learn in real life, we tend to mix the context up a lot. Like,

14:23let’s say I’m a kid learning vocab. I’m going to read it in a book. I’m going to see it on a chalkboard. I’m going to hear it in my ears. I’m going to

14:28high-five a kid while I’m saying it. Questions on the TV to leave on.

14:33Oh, God bless you. We’ll talk about that in a second. But so, basically, you you have a broader context within which you learn,

14:40which makes that knowledge easier to kind of move between new contexts. Not easy, not automatic, but it’s easier.

14:47Okay, you learn on a screen. A screen is such a narrow context that our biology

14:52basically locks things down on your screen. So, what you’ll see is the very first alpha school was actually built in 1925.

15:01It’s over a century old. It was a school built based on teaching machines. It was basically cool, here’s

15:06a question, answer it, pull a lever, right or wrong, here’s your feedback, let’s do it again. It was the exact same model. Nothing’s different. They ended

15:13up going nowhere. It never took off because the founder himself said, “Look, they’re really good when they’re using

15:19the tool, when they’re using the machine. As soon as you asked them a question in a different context or took them off of the device, none of them

15:25could tell you anything. Almost nothing stuck.” They repeated this in the 40s with Skinner’s machines. They repeated this

15:31in the 60s with the autotutor. We’ve been doing this again and again, and we keep collapsing because you get stuck on

15:37the machine. So if they’re learning more vocabulary words on a screen, I’d say

15:43your kid and my kid who vocabulary won’t even be close. Mine

15:48will kill yours cuz without a screen yours won’t know what the hell is going on. Wow. So you tend to lock that information

15:54into that context of that screen. It goes against biology. I would then push another kind of concept that you always

16:00want to think about, especially when it comes to online learning besides just getting stuck online. And you got to

16:05assume most parents will be like, “Well, cool. If my kid is going to live online for the rest of their life, who cares if they’re stuck to a computer? Which

16:11breaks my heart, but I hear that all the time. Cool. The other thing you’ve got to remember is that learning is interpersonal. We

16:18developed learning mechanisms explicitly to learn from each other. That’s why they exist. That’s why humans are

16:24humans. We have an incredible interpersonal learning mechanism.

16:29Underpinning that mechanism is a process called empathy. Empathy, most people think that’s an emotion like happiness,

16:35joy, empathetic. It’s one of those words that have gotten completely somehow skewed recently. Okay.

16:40Empathy is not an emotion. Empathy, you don’t have it. I don’t have it. Empathy isn’t a thing people have. Empathy is a

16:47biological resonance between two human beings. When you and I empathize with one another, we start to blink at the

16:53same time. Our heart starts to beat at the same time. We start to breathe at the same rate. We get the same brain patterns, the same skin conductance. You

17:00don’t choose to do it. I don’t choose to do it. It only emerges when people start to interact. Mhm.

17:05It turns out empathy is one of the biggest drivers of learning. Empathy is the driver of our learning mechanism.

17:12So the more empathetic, the more resonant you are with a teacher, with an instructor, with someone you’re learning from, the more you’re going to learn

17:18from them. You’re going to learn better, faster, easier. Take it to tech. We cannot empathize with tech.

17:25No. Because empathy by definition requires two sets of biology to become synchronized. If I’m on a screen,

17:32there’s only one set of biology, me. I cannot synchronize with Dolingo. I

17:37cannot synchronize with luminosity. Right? So automatically learning will go down

17:43on a computer purely because learning is meant to be interpersonal. Take away the other person, I can still learn by all

17:49means. I read books all the time. I’m just going to learn less a less accurately and much slower than if I had

17:55a person standing in front of me doing it with me. So that’s the other kind of good luck with you if you did all digital education. love to see you in a

18:02in a in a classroom beyond that. It’s going to be very difficult. And I want to ask you kind of how this

18:08all plays out, but let’s dig a little bit more into, you know, some of the feedback that I get is like technology

18:13is the future. Our kids need to I mean, this was the the woman at the White House. Our kids need to learn tech as

18:19early as possible. We need kids going into tech careers. Therefore, they need to learn as early as possible. So, can

18:25you would respond to that? Okay, just flip that. We need more doctors than ever before. Does that mean we need to start teaching them surgery

18:31at in first grade? Right? My guess is you wouldn’t make that argument because it’s kind of silly. You realize there’s frontloading that needs

18:38to happen before we develop the skills relevant to employment. That’s historically been the job of a K

18:43through2 education. We’re not here to pump out employees. We’re here to teach you how to learn and think, drive your

18:49own thinking. So now you can enter into an apprenticeship or go to university and start the specific skills relevant

18:56now to work. Yeah. So, anytime somebody says, “Yeah, kids need to learn AI,” I’m like, “Ak, do you

19:01know how to use AI?” 100% of them will say, “Yeah.” How old are you? 40. How did you figure it out, mate? How do we I

19:08can use AI. I can use tech. Just we’re doing it right now. How do we figure it out? Because school teaches you how to figure

19:14things out. If you replace that with what we call a tools-based education, rather than

19:20teaching you how to learn, I’m going to teach you how to do a very specific thing. Mhm. As soon as that tool becomes obsolete,

19:25which it will in the next 2 years, you’re done. You have nothing to fall back on. You wasted your 2 years.

19:31So there was a time where we taught kids explicitly. Everyone said kids need to know Morse code or else they’re never going to be

19:37employable. So we explicitly took time and taught kids Morse code. How pointless was that two years later?

19:43I know. I mean, so trying to predict the future is is always going to be a miss. But think about it like this. Let’s pretend

19:49we do want kids to learn computers. Sweet. What we’re making now is a

19:55pedagogical versus a curricular argument. Okay? Curricula is what do we teach? Pedagogy

20:00is how we teach. So, if you want to make the argument we need to teach kids how to use a computer, I can tell you we don’t have

20:06to, but let’s pretend we want to make that argument. Cool. That’s a curriculum argument. You’re telling me what I need to teach through

20:12some linguistic backflipping. We have turned we need to teach kids how to use

20:17tools into we need to teach kids every skill through this tool. Right? And that’s where things go haywire is

20:23like, cool, if you think we need to learn how to use Excel, we have a class on Excel. You go to the computer lab, you learn it, go away.

20:30But now it means no, kids need a computer in every class. You need to learn math through a computer. You need to learn reading through a computer,

20:37right? And that’s a pedagogy argument. That’s where I’d say no, you need to pick the best pedagogy for what you’re learning.

20:43If you’re learning Excel, the best pedagogy might be a computer. If you’re learning to read, the best pedagogy isn’t going to be a computer. enforcing

20:50that into my classroom is going to harm my ability to teach my kids rather than help them. Yeah.

20:55So, I’ve got no problem saying we need to teach these skills. I don’t think we have to, but let’s pretend we do. But that shouldn’t then necessitate that an

21:02entire By no means does that mean a onetoone program should ever exist anywhere. That just means you have a computer lab, teach a computer skill, go

21:08to town. Exactly. Right. And the one:1 situation is very, very isolating. And that’s one

21:13thing that struck me when my kids started kindergarten. It’s like you look in the classroom and it’s all these little kids with headphones on quietly

21:20tapping on a screen like raising the hand when they ultimately can’t figure out how to get to the next level of their math game. But the learning

21:27experience has become like isolated and quiet and lonely and are you worried

21:32about that isolation that screen learning imposes on kids? Of course. What I mean, the full

21:38curriculum at school is about 40% of what kids are going to learn. 60% of

21:43what they’re going to learn, the hidden curriculum, is all the stuff that happens in between classes. It’s all the things they do on the

21:49playground. It’s all the things they do throwing spitballs while the teacher is trying to teach them stuff.

21:54All of these little side things are teaching them, how do I interact in different contexts? How should I treat

22:00these people? How should I behave in these settings or situations? Mhm. Once you get a kid isolated and with a

22:07little screen and headphones on, you lose all of that extra learning, all those things going on in the background.

22:13How do I sit still for 5 minutes? All that stuff is gone. So, you’re stripping away you’re not you

22:19might not might not be stripping away the the core curriculum. I’m still teaching you history, but you’re stripping away 60% of what

22:26school is meant to be, which is the additional stuff. How do I behave as a human being? Who am I? Who do I need to

22:32be? Yeah. It’s the It’s the same thing as you go to a restaurant and a kid starts acting up and you put an iPhone or an

22:38iPad in front of them. Emotional regulation, right? Sweet. Yeah. What you didn’t do was teach that kid how to act in a restaurant, right?

22:44So now when they’re four years old, you’re going to do it again. Now when they’re 6 years old, you’re going to do it again. We are now and it sounds

22:50crazy, but I went to a movie with my dad for that’s the first time I’ve been to a movie theater in years. Can’t do it, man. There are 20-year-old people in

22:56there who have no clue how to act in a movie theater. Wow. They think a movie theater is there for them to talk and text and take pictures

23:02of each other. I’m like, I can’t be mad at you. No one ever taught you any of these things because all we did was disconnect you from the world around

23:08you. This is the kind of stuff if you disconnect them from each other, even at a very early age, they’re never going to

23:14learn the skills they need to survive in school, let alone outside of school. Now, I’m in a work situation.

23:20What am I How am I supposed to behave? How am I supposed to act? How do I line up for lunch? How was it my turn your turn?

23:25All those small things that aren’t in the core curriculum just get stripped along the way. unfortunately. Okay. So, let’s talk about how this

23:31plays out like if we keep children on screens at school and then we add generative AI tools, which is if not

23:38already happening this fall. Like what kind of generation are we creating? What will these kids be like as adults?

23:45Gen A is doing worse than Gen Z. So, what we’re going to be doing is creating

23:51a generation of adults who are I mean, they can still perform. They’re not going to be wickedly good creators.

23:57They’re going to be pretty dang good baseline employees in some jobs, but they’re not going to be inventing their

24:03own companies or solving problems. They just don’t have the knowledge or skills now to do that. But I don’t think they’re going to want

24:09to. I think we’re also going to be building a generation of people who are wildly, wildly selffocused. The

24:16appearance of ability will substitute for actual ability at that stage. Mhm.

24:22I’m doing a documentary right now on Genius. And everyone always asks me, “Where’s the next genius going to come

24:27from? Where are they going to pop out?” It’s not the US. We’re done. And it’s this the tech stuff basically

24:33because we no longer have a valid school system because kids are no longer learning meaningful stuff and then

24:39forced to transfer and apply that stuff, right? We’re just we’re not going to be pushing ourselves to do anything meaningful,

24:45right? Scandinavia. You want to see where the next genie is going to come from? It’ll be Sweden,

24:50Finland, or Norway. It’ll be one of those. Um, and it’s because they’ve realized, look, school’s got to go back to work.

24:57It’s got to be rigorous. Learning ain’t fun. Good rule of thumb, if your kid is having fun on their

25:02machine learning, they’re not learning. They’re entertainment and learning are not synonymous. Engagement and learning

25:07are not synonymous. Believe it or not, you can be wildly engaged and not learn a dang thing or be mildly engaged and

25:13learn a ton. It’s that’s the two aren’t the same thing. They’re going to be wonderful kids. They’re going to be highly isolated

25:19kids. They’re going to be selfisolated kids. But I just I’m I don’t think they’re going to have the massive skills

25:25needed to answer the big problems that the world is facing. They’re not going to be solving global warming. Yeah. What about the addiction piece?

25:32So, from what I understand, if you have access to an addictive anything,

25:37technology, when you’re younger, it could lead you to become uh more susceptible to addiction when you’re

25:43older, whether that’s also to technology or other substances. Is that true? And are we worried about that in our kids?

25:50Absolutely. I usually stick with learning, but if you as a as a parent, yes, I will worry about the addictive

25:56nature of stuff, but you respond on addiction basically builds a habit system in your brain.

26:02And you it’s you basically you can never get rid of habits. You can only change them. So once you get addicted to one

26:07thing, let me take this back. Imagine learning a language. We all speak English. If you learn a second language,

26:12it’s going to be much harder. Mhm. You learn a third language, it’s going to be a little easier because you have more to tack that on to. You learn a

26:18fourth language, it’s going to be much faster and easier because you now have three languages to tack that onto. The more you do, the easier it becomes

26:25simply because you’ve already built the patterns. Habits happen in the same basic way. Once you start a habit pattern, it’s

26:31easier and easier and easier to build more habits onto it just because you have so much more background understanding. Your brain’s like,

26:36″Sweet. You want to do this again? Go for it. Let’s make make a new one.” The problem with habits is that they don’t

26:41die. They only change. Like you’ve all had friends who were addicted to cigarettes, quit cigarettes, and then

26:47became addicted to running and then they were skeleton thin because they were running constantly. You’re

26:52like, “Dude, stop running.” It’s you can’t really kill an addiction. You can only replace it with something that

26:57you hope is more productive, healthier. Yeah. So, as if if we’re already building

27:04addictions now, if we’re building habit patterns now, we can expect them to stick around. And will they ever go away? No. Then hopefully they can change

27:10it to something more productive, more healthy, but congratulations, you’re going to have a pretty addictive

27:15personality as you go, right? And these these edte games are even built on addictive technologies.

27:22Like they’re built with reward systems and points and you know, if you come back every day, you get it’s just

27:28fueling addiction when we already have addictive games at home and social media

27:33access and YouTube algorithms. And it’s just like why at school are we trying to

27:39amplify addiction in children around sold a pup? We I we’ve been told and I

27:45and again I got to give schools and parents the benefit of the doubt. We’ve been told that these were the future. You’re still hearing it all day every

27:51day. This is how people learn. This is not how people learn. No one really

27:56learning is one of those tricky things. Like when I say every human being digests in the same way, no one’s got a

28:02problem. Everyone’s like, “Yeah, that makes sense.” Because we’re humans. If you spit acid and absorb nutrients

28:08through your skins, you’re not human. Like you’re digesting, but you’re not doing that. Weird alien. Yeah.

28:14This when I say all human beings breathe in the same way, everyone’s like, “Yeah, no, that makes sense. If you somehow had

28:21six lungs or or inhaled, we have these biological systems that work in a very

28:26specific way that make us human. And most people recognize that in most systems, digestion, respiration, uh

28:32circulation. No one recognizes that in learning. Mhm. Learning is a system the same as

28:38everything else. It has a baseline pattern. Every human being learns the exact same way. Now, by all means, the

28:44input we use might be different. Like, if you’re blind, you can’t look at a picture, but how information gets in is

28:50different than how information is processed through the system. Okay? Getting it in is different. Processing it is the same for everyone.

28:56If you’re alive, we all learn the same way. But we were never taught that. We were

29:01never explicitly showed that. So when it comes to learning, a lot of us just think it’s magic. So when someone says,

29:06″This will boost learning,” we go, “Cool.” But if someone came along and said, “This pill is going to help your

29:12digestion,” we would rightly ask, “How?” Mhm. Well, it has these enzymes. And then we

29:18could ask, “Uh, doctor, do those enzymes work the way that person said in our stomach?” Oh, they don’t. That person’s

29:24lying to me. When it comes to learning, we just take it all. Everyone learns different, right? Yeah. Your kid is

29:29going to get personalized learning for them. Yeah, that sounds right. Right. Because no one taught us that no, there

29:34is a way to do it and that’s probably not the right way and the tools just don’t align with it unfortunately.

29:39And we’re just taking the edtech companies on their word that it’s better and the schools don’t have the resources

29:46to vet that and there’s no regulatory agency telling us like going running

29:51through these edtech platforms before they hit our children’s screens at school. How could they? That’s I mean now you

29:57get into like shell corporations, right? M you have a big company that’s a scam company. They own six baby companies for

30:04cuz each time one gets busted the core company survives but they just shove another one in there. You can never stop it. It’s going to be the same with

30:10edtech. Even if we start regulating it and they say Dolingo is bad for schools. They’re going to come out with Dolingi

30:17and it’s going to be exactly the same thing. It’s just going to be a different name and now we’re going to have to vet that. Then they’re going to come trelling.

30:23Now we’re going to have to vet that. They know they can play that game. They’re they’re gonna beat us at that game left and right because it’s just

30:29too hard to do the vetting. That’s where the knowledge has to come from the schools. The schools have to say no.

30:34They can’t be looking for a database because the database is going to be endless. Okay. So, we’ll we’ll talk about school

30:39responsibility, but for parents, like what the hell do parents do here? Because our kids are currently learning

30:45from screens and the average American parent feels powerless to change it. Um, again, I don’t want to put it on them.

30:50We can talk about school responsibility, the company’s responsibilities, government, but what advice do you have for parents here?

30:57As you were talking about earlier, if you can as soon as you can opt out, if you if your school has a 1:1 program,

31:03you should be able to step out of it. Some schools won’t let you yet. It will become a law soon. I promise you that’s

31:08coming down the pipe. Do what you can to opt out. And the trick is is when you opt out, more kids are going to opt out.

31:15You get yourself a coalition. Always form a coalition. One parent is annoying. 10 parents, we got to listen

31:20to you now. Yep. You have 10 kids opt out. Now, every teacher has to have both a digital and

31:26an analog version of everything they’re doing. The more teachers do analog versions of

31:31everything, the more likely they are to simply only do that. The amount of work it takes to do analog, they’re going to

31:36say, “Well, I already did this. All kids do that.” Right? It’s it’s a trippy thing that once you hit a threshold of opt out, most of the

31:42teachers are on board now and they’re like, “See you.” And basically, everyone opts out after that because they don’t want to do tech anymore. So

31:48get yourself a coalition, opt out if you can. With that coalition, I’d say as well, build your mantra, build whatever

31:56it is you’re going to use to push back against your school. Mhm. And that should have your values. We

32:03believe learning is this. We value reading hard copy versus screens. We

32:09think student interaction during recess is important. Whatever your values are, use me, use resources out there to find

32:16some data to back that up. And that becomes kind of your manifesto. Now you start talking to school. Now you

32:22can go in with your manifesto. Once you have your group, you start opting out. You have your manifesto. Get

32:29teachers on board. I promise you about 70% of teachers in my experience, and I’ve worked with hundreds of

32:35thousands of teachers. They’re ready for this to be done. They don’t like it. They’ve seen the decline in their kids for 20 years.

32:41They’re managing the distractions constantly. like the kids jumping around watching playing and now their job is I’m a babysitter

32:46rather than a teacher or if I’m at an A1 school I’m a guide. I’m not a guide.

32:52A guide is somebody you you want to make sure a kid doesn’t learn, guide them. You want to make sure a kid learns,

32:58teach them. That’s why school exists. Yeah, I could guide you while you figure out heart

33:03surgery. It’s probably going to take you 20 years to sort it out. Or you could acknowledge that we already

33:09figured it out. Take two months, learn from me. Now, start where I’ve left off as opposed to just rebuilding the wheel

33:15every two seconds. You don’t need a guide. You need a teacher. Anyway, get teachers on board. Most of them are ready for for tech to be done as well.

33:23And then as much as you can, you start in your own house. Buy a printer. That’s step number one. Anytime your kid

33:28gets a anything, you print it out. Homework assignment online. Good. Print it out. Yeah. And you need to hand it in online. Cool.

33:35Give it to me. I’ll take a picture of it. I’ll do it for you. Buy a printer. Do your tech-free weekends with them. and maybe even do a

33:42tech audit with your own kid together. Say, “Look, I’m in this with you for one week. Let’s just track our own

33:48tech usage. How do we use it? When do we use it? Why do we use it?” Yeah. And then we can start to compare and say, “You know what? Look, man, I’m

33:54using my phone in front of you 2 hours a day, right?” And then I’m mad at you for using a

33:59computer to do math homework. I That’s hypocritical of me. I I’ll change my directions, you change your directions,

34:05and we do this thing together. We’re basically now we rebuild our family from analog scratch back at home. Yes.

34:11Amazing. Okay. Thank you for the modeling note. That’s really important and hard for parents to hear sometimes.

34:16Yeah. Oh man, we’re we’re bad. I’m believe me, I’m the worst at it. I totally understand. Yeah. And for parents, uh the web so I

34:23have an organization called Techsafelearning at techsafeaflearning.org. There exists many templates that are opt out emails,

34:31board meetings, speeches, um you know, you want to opt out of YouTube, you just want to get less screen time, like all

34:36kinds of templates for parents to use to communicate with their school. And the key what you said is don’t do it alone.

34:42Like bring together other parents because I was that crazy parent that wasn’t able to sufficiently bring

34:48together a group. And so I had to exit that public school because I just wasn’t able to accomplish it. But I think if I

34:54had more parents, I would have been more successful. And hopefully if we can get a book like Heights Anxious Generation that’s just

35:01on edte that will galvanize a lot of people. That makes it easier to say, look, here’s data. Yeah.

35:06Now I can get a coalition of parents together cuz we’re all going to read the same book. We’re all going to be on the same page.

35:12That would be amazing. That’ll hopefully be the next tool people can use. Okay, perfect. So, what about the edte

35:19companies? Like, what would you want to say to them? I wonder cuz I wonder often like, can they even do better or is

35:25their entire business model just broken? uh it’s they can’t do better because of the business model is I think they know

35:31as well as anyone else does that they got it wrong but the business model will never allow them to get it right what it’s what’s

35:38required for deep learning sustained attention all these things you can’t make money off of that it’s why teachers

35:44are not rich it’s just it’s a vocation right so I I think that you’re never going to

35:50get any help from them I would I would encourage them as much as they can and I’m surprised that they didn’t do this

35:55bring in learning experts my goodness Man, they as well as everyone else just thought learning happened. So long as I

36:01put some things on a screen, you’ll learn from it. I know. So that’s like me building a diet pill

36:06without ever knowing about diets. It’s like I can do this. That’s But just put a pill in your gut. You’ll be fine.

36:12Yeah. I’m shocked that the people with the most money in the world didn’t say, “Hey, should we ask an expert?” So if

36:18you are a company, man, just ask people how does learning work? But beyond that,

36:23how you’re going to actually fit that into a model that brings you profit. Best of luck, right? Okay, great. Uh, and what about

36:30the government? Is the government going to get us out of this? Yes, but only after we get ourselves out. That’s the the government is always

36:375 years behind everyone else. So, the government is is banning cell phones now, which is awesome.

36:43Yeah. But that’s only after all the hubbhub of the last two or three years. It’s I

36:48mean, it’s just finally coming to a head. Yeah. Like you’ve heard schools that like we banned it years ago. Good. Y’all should

36:54have banned it years ago. Welcome to the party. So I I think it’s actually going to start with schools. You’re going to

36:59get independent or individual schools that are going to say we are a tech-free school. And that’s going to become their selling point. Not we have an iPad for

37:05every kid just like the school down the street, right? We have no iPads, right? Come to our school. And once that starts

37:11to become a selling point, you’re going to see more schools move. Once edte starts to flounder, that’s when the

37:16government will step in and say, “Maybe we should do something about this.” Cool. If we can knock over the first 20% and the government could take the last

37:2280%, sweet. But they’re not going to do anything until we get that first 20%. So, okay. So, we need to be loud about this

37:28right now. And what about legal action? So, I am I have filed lawsuits against a few of the ad tech companies um mainly

37:35due to the data privacy issues. You know, all of the thousands of files that I’ve seen that these companies have on

37:42my children, other children, and even teachers that are way out of the scope of education. and knowingly they’re

37:48sharing that with many dozens of other companies and that’s a data privacy tactic. There’s also product default

37:54lawsuits happening too. Do you feel like legal action could help move this forward?

37:59Uh ma’am bankrupt someone they can’t do anything. So yeah, absolutely. By all means if that’s your angle and I think

38:05that’s probably going to be a much stronger angle than the learning angle because you just you can’t sue somebody because their tool sucks.

38:11That’s what I’m saying. You only sue them because they did something they said they they wouldn’t. Right. And so that’s why I’ve always kind of giggled

38:17like the privacy problems, the addict addiction problems, the lack of personalization problems, the lack of

38:23social problems, all of that. I still imagine there would be parents who would be totally willing to forgo all of that

38:30so long as these tools helped learning. Take my kids privacy. I don’t care if my

38:35kid’s a loner so long as they’re brilliant, right? But they don’t even do that. They don’t even meet their basic function. And so

38:42that’s where I’m like that’s there’s I don’t even know what these things have going for them other than money now. So

38:47anything you can do to to chip away at their armor, okay, do it. The resource there for parents if

38:53they’re interested is edtech.law and that website and firm like just go there and read all the interesting research

38:58and data around the issues with edtech. But um there also two parents, Julie and

39:04Andy in Texas that are incredible and their parents themselves. So love their team if parents are interested in that.

39:09Let’s also talk about schools. So what can schools do to help us during I mean

39:15to help the kids to help the kids succeed in this area? Yeah. Yeah. It’s it’s scary when you say stop going backwards in the name of

39:21progress. You might have to regress. You might have to

39:27go back to what worked right rather than what we’re told should work.

39:32And we know that because in the ‘9s about 92 to about 2000 was absolute peak

39:39performance across the board. If you were in school in the 90s, congratulations. You experienced the best of the best.

39:45And we know we can go back there. We all the schools still have the same stuff. We didn’t ditch the chalkboards, right?

39:50So, I would say to any school, one, put a hiatus on all new tech. Put a moratorium for right now. Just hit

39:57pause. No new tech for at least 12 months, right? Then do a big audit of the tech you’ve got. How are you using it? When is it

40:04being used? You might be surprised how much crap you have that no one touches, right?

40:09How much money does it cost? And then once you figure out what you don’t need to be wasting, get rid of all that.

40:15The few things you choose to keep. Now you do an audit on performance. Now you

40:20say, “Okay, let’s get some some actual data.” You can regress this. We’ve had this tool for 3 years. We’ve used it in

40:26year 9 for 3 years. Cool. Use that data. Compare that to data from six years ago. The kids who never even had a chance

40:32with it. You already have all the data you need. Have we seen growth? Have we seen drop? Right? If we’ve seen drop, time to

40:38rethink that tool. If we’ve seen stagnation, I’d say time to rethink that tool. If we’ve seen growth, cool, keep

40:44the damn tool. If it’s working, work it. If you’ve got the data to show me that it’s doing its thing, I’m the first one

40:49to say, then keep that thing. So, hit pause. Do your tech audit. Do your success

40:54audit. And now start working with teachers. Actually ask your teachers, what do we

41:00want to do? What do we not want to do? And I would always say to all leaders of schools, man, go back to your core

41:05value. Why do you exist? And every school will have a different thing. I mean, if you’re an art school versus a

41:10military school versus you’re gonna say something different. But I imagine most public schools are going to say our core function is

41:17learning. That’s why we exist. Now, every decision you make going forward on edtech has to defer to that.

41:25Yeah. If you have a piece of edte that makes my job as a teacher easier but harms my

41:30kids learning, sorry, make my job harder. If you have a piece of tech that makes your job organizing data and

41:36sending it to parents easier, but it doesn’t help kids learning, sorry, you got to have your base that you’re going

41:42to make all of your decisions on. Now, again, for me, it’s learning. If you don’t choose learning, fine.

41:47Whatever your school is going to be, but find your core and then all your decisions have to defer back to that core. And if the answer is no, it

41:54doesn’t meet that core, then I don’t care how flashy it is, how much it makes your life better, get rid of it. It’s just not important anymore.

42:00Boom. That was crazy. I feel like you should write that in an article. What you like expand on that as a guide for

42:06schools. That was so good. Why should we exist? But like just start to finish like this

42:12is your guide. I mean, and parents will be so happy about it, you know, like if you want parent satisfaction. And then

42:19in the end, you might save a lot of money, too, because you know, a Seami Valley School District up here in LA,

42:25they got rid of 1:1 devices because of the cost of the devices cuz repairing and screen repairing was costing them

42:30over a million dollars a year in their district. So, that was what they leaned on. But, I have a feeling it was like

42:36more than that, but that was the reasoning they they knew they were getting trash. But, think about it. That’s not a million

42:41dollars you lose. That’s a million dollars. You now get to redirect into what works for learning. Yeah. More teachers.

42:47So, if learning is our core and we say, “Hey, a driver of learning is wellprepared teachers. Sweet. I got a

42:53million dollars to prep teachers. I don’t need that much. What else helps learning?” Uh, making sure kids have healthy food. Shoot. I still got 500

43:00grand left. What else can we do? Think of how much more you Isn’t there a stat that air conditioning investing in air conditioning helps kids

43:07learn better than tech or something like than one to one computers? The the impact of 1:1 devices in school sits around.16. The impact of air

43:14conditioning of temperature, ambient temperature, 021. If you’re comfortable, you will learn better than if you have a computer.

43:20Isn’t that plumbing? And no one believed me, so I never even quoted that stat. Plumbing. If you have good toilets in

43:26your school, it’s around.37. It’s almost double what you’d expect from one. So, if you want to invest a million dollars,

43:32get some good plumbers. Buy a stall, right? Let the people go to bathroom in peace.

43:38They’ll learn better than if you shove a screen in their face and they’re hot. That’s and they’re and they really have

43:44to pee and they really have to pee, but they’re nervous, right? They’re nervous. They can’t go.

43:49Okay, one last topic. Sorry, we’re going a little bit long, but I want to get your thoughts on AI because this is

43:54coming to schools. You know, about the executive order in April to get AI introduced to kids

44:00as early as possible. Um, and this week actually the Department of Education issued guidance on the use of AI in

44:06schools and it is very tech forward. I thought I could read to you a quote from the press release about this

44:13announcement from US Secretary of Education Linda McMahon and I’d love you to respond to it. Quote, “AI drives

44:20personalized learning, sharpens critical thinking, and prepares students with problem solving skills that are vital

44:26for tomorrow’s challenges.” Nope. Nope. And nope. And I have the hard data to show you. No. Heck no.

44:33That’s what you want it to do. Man, look, think about it. The problem with

44:39AI is that there is a way to use it in that manner. Technically, there is. We

44:44don’t know what it is, but I promise you there is some way to use AI to build creative and critical thinking.

44:50Okay. The question is, would anyone ever actually do that? There is a way for me to gain fitness using my car. I could

44:57pop my car into neutral and push it to work. I can gain fitness from my car. No one’s going to do that. We’re all going

45:04to lose fitness because how we actually use cars is we sit in them and drive. So, believe it or not, I when people say

45:09it’s got all this potential and promise, I always say, “Cool, that’s what it could do. A lot of things could do

45:15things.” What is it actually going to do? How are kids actually using it? Do you think they’re going to use it to go

45:20home and query their deep thinking about metacognitive abilities? Oh, can I be creative? Hell no. They’re going to use

45:26it to look up answers. They’re going to pop those answers down on a piece of paper. They’re going to hand it to you and say, “I did this. Oops.” So, like I

45:33the brilliance of what people think AI can be and what it’s actually going to be in schools is night and day. Kids

45:39will use it to cheat. That’s what we always did. I man, if it was around when I was there, I would use it, too. We use

45:45it to avoid learning. And here’s where you see AI is not a learning tool. It was never meant to be. It It isn’t one.

45:51It is probably the worst developed tool for learning that we can think of. AI is a production tool. It assumes you

45:58already have expertise. AI only becomes useful when you have expertise enough to vet it to use it to offload skills that

46:05you already know how to do. Like think of like math, right? Stats. I’m really good at stats. It would take me about 20

46:11minutes to hando all the stats if I wanted to do like on a paper I’m working on right now if I wanted to do it by

46:16hand. I don’t feel like doing that. So instead, I just plug it into AI. You do it. Now, my expertise allows me to

46:23immediately vet it. When it spits back a couple of numbers, I can immediately go, “Oh, that ain’t even close, mate.” Or,

46:30″That’s probably right. Let’s go.” Bam. But that comes after expertise. I can only vet it because I’ve already done

46:35the hard work. Yeah. If you never did the hard work to learn stats and you immediately jump to AI and

46:40say, “Do this for me.” You have no clue if it’s right. You have no clue if it’s wrong. You have no clue what it means. You have no clue how to interpret it.

46:46You have no clue how to narratize it. It’s just noise to you. So, you don’t learn from it. you just spit it out and

46:52throw it. So I always say, man, AI is good for experts. If you’re a teacher, use AI. Doesn’t phase me in the least.

46:58If you’re learning how to become a teacher, do not use AI. You are not ready for that tool yet.

47:04It’s a production tool. It’s not a learning tool. Okay? So when they talk about it personalized learning and stuff, man, we’ve had personalized

47:10learning since 1925. It does not matter. You want learning to be good, make it

47:16personal. Make it inter make it interactive between me and another human being. Align the pedagogy to the content, not

47:24the person. Everyone learns better when learning is aligned to the content. If if I want to teach you how to dance, I

47:29don’t care if you’re a visual kinesthetic, auditory learner, we all learn better if we get up and dance. Doesn’t matter what your preferences

47:35are, right? And then when you let kids choose their own adventure, when you guide them instead of teach

47:41them, they will always fall into what’s called the fluency illusion. They pick the easiest path and mistake that for

47:47competence. When we do something that’s wickedly easy for us, we assume that means we get

47:53it very well. When it comes to learning, the easier something is, probably the less you understand it. If you’re not struggling,

48:00you ain’t learning. So, when you let kids do their own thing, they will all do right down the pipe what they’re good

48:05at, what they like, what they choose. Like we here’s an example, like you ask a group of kids to just reread something

48:11four times. That’s easy as hell. And then you ask them, “How well do you think you’re going to do on a test?” They’ll say like, “Hey, 75%. I I got

48:17this.” Give them a test, they’ll be down at 40%. They suck. Give another group of kids, read it once, and now I’m going to

48:22quiz you on it two times. That sucks. That’s hard. And now you say, “How well do you think you get it?” They’ll say like 50%. I don’t I’m still struggling.

48:29Test them, they’ll be at 60%. Mhm. It’s We are really bad at human beings

48:35as gau at gauging what is good for learning. Okay. And so when we leave that

48:40adaptability to tools and to kids, they’re going to pick the easiest path every time. And that’s where teachers

48:46come in and say, “No, I’m going to teach you how teaching needs to be done.” Sorry. Okay. So, I’m trying to help parents

48:51engage with their schools and contact their schools about AI use. And so, I worked with Chris McKenna at Protect

48:57Young Eyes. We have a template for parents um at the top of my website scrolling to death.com. But it goes

49:02through some of the recent studies about red flags around using AI tools, chat bots, all the things. But what do you

49:08think would resonate most with schools regarding the the the threats or the risks of kids using AI?

49:14Everyone says AI you can skip the facts and jump into the deep stuff. AI allows

49:19us to stop wasting time learning stuff and jump into critical thinking, creativity, all those skills that the

49:24the ed person said. Lyn McMahon All deeper level thinking, all higher

49:30order thinking skills, creativity, critical thinking, all of these things rely on internalized knowledge. The

49:37person who has more facts within their long-term memory will always show more creativity, will always show better

49:44critical thinking. All those things that we want come from learning stuff. So,

49:50when we use AI to avoid the process of learning stuff, that is the number one way to make sure you’re never going to

49:56see deep creativity. This is why I said the next generation will not be highly creative. Uh it’s just they won’t have

50:02enough knowledge to do it. We have mistaken access to information for knowledge of information. Access has

50:09never been a problem. AI makes it fast. Google made it fast. The encyclopedia bratannica before that. The school

50:15library before that. Man, we always had access to information. That never stopped anyone from having to internalize embody that information in

50:22order to use it meaningfully. This is why if you look at any level of genius or eminence,

50:28they all start with over a decade of hard training before they do their first bit of creative anything. They’re just

50:34learning. They’re internalizing information. So, if we say, “Look, kids, don’t worry about learning history. Look up the

50:40facts and now let’s be you’re not going to see the kind of creativity you really want.” Yeah. Okay. So, Jared, thank you for

50:46being here. For parents who don’t know, you have published six books, over 50 research articles. Your work has been

50:52featured in New Yorker, Atlantic, Economist, Harvard Business Review, all the spots. Uh, and you have a new book

50:58coming out which you can tease a little. Can you tell us about that? It is the edte book. I don’t know what

51:04it’s going to So, it was it was done, but it’s now with the agent and so it is changing wildly. So, I don’t It was

51:11originally called uh Wired for Failure. It was the how to push back against edtech. Yeah. But they didn’t like that.

51:16Keep an eye out. Could come out and just be a book about flowers once they’re done. I don’t know what the heck’s going. better be about edtech. We need

51:22this book and it’s going to be I mean at the right time, right? Because we you like you said we need parents activating on this now so that the government can

51:29follow up with some regulation in a couple of years. Telling them and they’re like it’ll take two to three years to get it out. I’m

51:34like okay now your time. I know. I don’t know. I don’t know what I’m going to do. Maybe I don’t know.

51:40I’ll find a way to get it out. Okay. Well, as soon as it’s out, I will be announcing it. I’m really grateful,

51:46Jared, to you for turning your attention and your energy and your interest to like children and screens because we’re

51:52all benefiting from your efforts here and I can’t wait to read anything you put out, especially your book when it

51:57drops. I’m going to put out good vibes that that happens soon, but we’ll talk again real soon. I have a feeling.

52:03Perfect. I love it. Thank you so much and I can’t wait for the next one. Thanks, Jared.

From Transgender to Transhuman

0:19Hey everybody, it’s James Lindseay. You’re listening to the New Discourses podcast and today we’re going to do something really screwed up. I’m going

0:26to read to you from a book that I have had for like five years. I’ve read it when I got it like 5 years

0:32ago. Uh, it’s called From Transgender to Transhuman. It is by a person on the

0:38cover called Martin Rothblat. Martin Rothblat is trans.

0:44Therefore, it is a original name Martin Rothblat. Martin Rothblat transitioned,

0:51he says, back in 1994 and has lived a very complicated life since. Martin Rothblat also created

0:59SiriusXM Radio, among other things, is valued at roughly a billion dollars net

1:05worth and sits on the board of the Mayo Clinic, which is arguably one of the

1:11most important hospitals in the world. And this book’s title is from

1:17Transgender to Transhuman. This was published in 2011 as an update to

1:22Rothblat’s book from 15 years earlier. uh which if you’re doing the math would

1:28have been like in the ‘9s that was called the apartheid of sex.

1:33Now um like I said I’ve had this book for about 5 years. Uh I read this book

1:38soon after I got it and I just thought I’ve got to share this with people eventually but what do I do? Like this

1:45book is so crazy I don’t know how to explain it to you. My wife made me give you a disclaimer um that she apologizes

1:53or warns you in advance for the brain damage you’re about to receive hearing from this book. Uh earlier I told her I

2:00was going to do this episode of this podcast. We hunted down the book and um I just kind of randomly flipped and

2:06opened it to whatever page I flipped to and read pieces to her from it. And um

2:13I endured the better part of like an hour of her in extraordinary cognitive

2:19dissonance that this existed. She said that if she knew this book says what it says and that it was in our house, she

2:26would have thrown it away years ago. um she certainly would not have donated it to like a library or or a used

2:32bookstore or anything like that to get it out of her house because nobody else should have it either. And this is

2:38honestly arguably the dumbest book I’ve ever read in my life and I’ve got some pretty

2:44stiff competition. I’m not going to read to you obviously a lot of the book. It’s not a very big book. It’s about 150

2:50pages. Um it’s a very uh quick read.

2:55It’s a very confused read. I’m not, like I said, I’m not going to dive into most of the book in this episode, but I am

3:02going to cover this idea. And the reason that I want to cover this idea is because I think it’s time to talk about

3:10the second of those transwords, the transhumanist

3:15program. I’m not going to dive deeply into transhumanism. In fact, I’m going to let uh Mr. Rothblat talk about

3:21transhumanism here in the end of the book for us in this episode. But um the reason that it’s time is first of all um

3:30it’s getting closer. Things are happening. We can’t deny uh we see this

3:37kind of first maybe primitive attempt as we many of you will know Scott Adams the

3:42creator of Dilbert died recently and uh he’s now got this Scott TV

3:48or something like that that he calls it and he claims that he was creating most of the videos that he created to create

3:54training data for an AI so that his likeness or personage could live on

3:59after his demise which is now in like an experimental test phase.

4:04We have open questions with um some of the things going on with LLMs as to

4:10whether or not they might be able to attain consciousness or if they’re intelligent at all. Like we’re at that

4:16cusp, but kind of more to the point. Um, I’m I’m not really that interested in

4:22talking very much about the so-called Epstein files, but this transhumanist project is actually, in my opinion, one

4:29of the more important things that’s being revealed in this dump of emails, this 3 million pages or whatever of

4:34emails. the um idea of a you know kind of

4:40technocratic governance that’s going to you know be run by some kind of an object forged at Davos and uh that

4:49replaces the slow and bureaucratic and democratic um United Nations being a

4:55technocratic side of this and then there’s this transhumanist side which apparently Jeffrey Epstein was into and

5:02a lot of the scientists that heworked with were into this. It’s a very concerning kind of thing, but also it’s

5:08now been a few months, but a lot of people got shaken up. And uh if I can, I’m going to try to drop that uh drop

5:16the the clip here in a second if I can find it properly and I’ll drop the audio

5:22um here in the the the the podcast. But uh Peter Teal uh you know the owner of

5:30Palunteer and Enduro and some other I mean major billionaire, major funer of

5:35actually the woke right among other things. very interesting character uh to say the

5:41least. Has been pretty pretty stridently a transhumanist at least up until about

5:4610 years ago. Uh he didn’t necessarily talk about it as much since, but a few

5:52months ago he was being interviewed by Ross Duthat of the New York Times and he

5:57had this very interesting exchange. Um I’ll briefly summarize it in case I

6:02can’t find the clip, but if we find it, we’ll roll tape here. You would prefer the human race to endure, right?

6:09Uh, you’re hesitating. Well, I Yes. I don’t know. I I would

6:15I would um This is a long hesitation. So many hesitation. There’s so many questions

6:21and should the human race survive? Uh, yes. Okay. But but uh I I also would

6:31um I I I also would like us to to radically solve these problems. And uh

6:36and so you know it’s always I don’t know um you know yeah transhumanism

6:45is this you know the ideal was this radical transformation where your human

6:51natural body gets transformed into an immortal body. And um there’s a critique

6:57of let’s say the trans people in a sexual context or I don’t know transvestite is someone who changes

7:05their clothes and crossdresses and a transsexual is someone where you change your I don’t know penis into a vagina

7:12and we can then debate how well those surgeries work but uh we want more transformation than that. It’s the

7:18critique is not that it’s weird and unnatural. It’s man, it’s so pathetically little. And okay, we want

7:24more than cross-dressing or changing your sex organs. We want you to be able to change your heart and change your

7:31mind and change your whole your whole body. And then orthodox Christianity, by

7:36the way, the the critique Orthodox Christianity has of this is these things don’t go far enough like that

7:43transhumanism is just changing your body, but you also need to transform your soul and you need to transform your

7:48your whole self. And so um right but the other wait I sorry I I

7:54generally agree with your what I think is your belief that religion should be a

8:02friend to science and ideas of scientific progress. I think any idea of divine providence has to encompass the

8:09fact that we have progressed and achieved and and done things that would have been unimaginable to our ancestors.

8:17But it still also seems like yeah the the promise of Christianity in the end

8:22is you get you get the perfected body and the perfected soul through God’s grace and the person who tries to do it

8:29on their own with a bunch of machines is likely to end up as a dystopian

8:34character. Well, uh it’s

8:41let’s let’s articulate this and you can have a heretical form of Christianity, right? that says something

8:46else. I I don’t know. I I I think the word nature does not occur once in the Old

8:52Testament. And so uh you know if you if you you know um and that there is you

8:59know there is a word in which a sense in which the the way I understand you know

9:04the you know the Judeo-Christian inspiration is it is it is it is it is

9:10about transcending nature. It is about overcoming things and you know and the

9:15closest thing you can say to nature is that people are fallen and that that’s

9:21the natural thing in a Christian sense is that um you’re messed up and that’s

9:26true but um you know there’s some ways that uh you know with God’s help you are

9:33supposed to transcend that and overcome that. The clip basically has Teal saying

9:39that, you know, we’re his issue with this transgender movement that we’re now

9:44looking at is not really the effort itself, but that it’s just so primitive

9:50that you’re doing these kind of barbaric surgeries to try to swap out genitals. Uh we’re not talking about, he kind of

9:58suggests or says, we’re not talking about rebuilding bodies at the level of genetics. We’re not talking about um

10:05even transforming minds. So, we’re talking about transgender in terms of these barbaric genital surgeries, he

10:11says, but not, you know, a full transformation of the human body and not

10:16a full transformation of the human mind. And then he says even a full transformation of the human soul. Uh

10:22which then ends up prompting Ross Duth that to ask at some point if he, you know, does Peter Teal believe humanity

10:28should continue to exist? um as we start talking about this also this transhumanist mer merging with cyborgs

10:36of course Elon Musk talks about this with his neural link and his kind of vision for that a lot and then of course

10:43it’s complicated because there’s very very positive and valuable medical interventions are we going to have the

10:49brain chips all this crap and you know Peter Teal kind of dithers he eventually

10:54answers yes but he dithers for quite a while before he says yes the human race

10:59should continue and this is kind of in a background of increasing numbers of stories as this moment kind of comes

11:07upon us of these tech lords in Silicon Valley and maybe beyond talking about

11:12this idea of um you know maybe the humans suck and need to be replaced by

11:18robot overlords. Okay, so we’ve got a lot kind of going on. Transhumanism is I

11:23hate to use the phrase but honestly it’s a spectrum. It actually means going beyond or trans going beyond human. And

11:32so it could be as little as like augmented intelligence through some medical interventions. It could be

11:39partial, you know, augmentation through cybernetics like a bionic arm maybe. Uh

11:45which again when we start talking about prosthetics for people who’ve lost limbs, you’re into some really

11:51interesting territory because there are some very uh beneficial uses that you definitely want to pursue for people.

11:58And then there are some very questionable uses that you don’t necessarily want to pursue for people.

12:04Like you know, you certainly want somebody who’s lost their arm in some kind of an accident or whatever to be

12:09able to get a, you know, prosthetic. And it would be great if that thing was really high-tech. It would be not so

12:16great if that thing could be controlled by a third party manufacturer that could then, you know, even hold the person

12:23hostage or have a mind of its own or something like that. And then when you get into brain chip territory, you know,

12:29everybody thinks about all the great things that it would allow you to do, but it has some scary other things. Like

12:35I don’t know that anybody really wants to have their brain directly hacked by a hacker. not just to retrieve information

12:41from it, but to implant information as well. Or if it’s a hacker, why not the CIA? Or if it’s the Jews you blame for

12:49everything, the MSAD. Do you really want to in give intelligence communities the power to possibly transform literally

12:55what’s going on in your brain? Um, and then, you know, we don’t have to get into how weird that gets, but that’s

13:00just in like the cyborg augmentation layer, but then there’s other layers, right? What if you could just put your

13:06consciousness in like one of these Optimus robots and then you just live as a robot instead? There’s no human body,

13:12no organic component to worry about. What if you just upload your brain into like, you know, World of Warcraft or

13:18something into the into a video game, you know, digital environment or you live in the cloud or you live in what

13:24did it what did it Meta Metaverse, right? This parallel digital

13:29universe. What a surprise that didn’t work. What a surprise that failed. But then you you have this idea that you

13:37could have like rather than being a carbon-based life form that you could be an augmented life form that you could

13:43extend human life through these augmentations. Of course, uh, Vladimir

13:48Putin and Xiinping got caught on a hot mic talking about how, you know, extending human life to 150 years is

13:55well within possibility, meaning even for themselves who are already in their

14:0070s. And so suggesting that that technology is here and would be

14:06effectively uh powerful enough to work retroactively. Now, of course, what everybody suspects that they were

14:12talking about wasn’t just these kind of advances in surgeries and implantable things and all that, but also rampant

14:18organ harvesting um to replace worn out organs to prevent death by organ

14:23failure. It’s creepy stuff. But anyway, this range of things of leaving the

14:29human body behind as a set of limitations to enter into a brave new world that is transhuman is what this is

14:38about. And this book from transgender to transhuman by Martin Rothblat who is on

14:43the board of the Mayo Clinic, you know, smoke if you got them right.

14:49Um, this this book, this title tells you what’s going on. The basic premise of

14:55this book is that if our bodies don’t determine who we really are, because

15:01hey, if you were born male, you were born female, maybe you’re actually non-binary, maybe you’re actually trans,

15:07who you really are. Your identity, your sense of self is separate to your

15:12biology. Then why do we It’s not just about genitals and chromosomes is what

15:18Rothbl argues. It could be about your basic form entirely. So if we can have a

15:26divorce of who you are from your essential sex, which is how you’re born, male or female, then why not divorce it

15:32from being born human at all? So augmented humans are just another kind of human and

15:39uh uploaded minds into robots are just another form of human or uploaded

15:46consciousness into a cloud is just another form of human or in fact

15:52completely fabricated entities that don’t even exist in reality except

15:58inside this kind of cyber ether and I use that like the athe ethereal plane

16:04very intentionally that language that those also are consciousnesses that are

16:11just as human. So, if the body doesn’t matter to who you really are, it doesn’t matter at all

16:18to who you really are is kind of the thesis of this crazy pants book, which like I said, I read a couple excerpts,

16:25not excerpts I’m actually going to read on this podcast to my wife and she basically went into like an hour and a

16:31half long cognitive dissonance episode um and said some extraordinary things,

16:36great hilarity. Um, but I’m going to open our discussion of this book up. I know that we’re pretty far in. I always

16:42give this kind of long throat clearing introduction before I get to the excite exciting part, but I’m going to I should

16:48just open the podcast with the drama, right? And but here’s here’s the drama.

16:54This is a quote from chapter 5. I’m not going to read any of chapter 5 beyond this quote in this episode. Um it says

17:01consciousness will be this is what Martin Rothbl this is a thinking and this section by the way that this quote

17:07comes from is titled is consciousness like pornography? So, I mean, we’re

17:12really into some weird stuff, but anyway, he says, “Consciousness will be as free to flow beyond the confines of

17:20one flesh body as gender is to flow beyond the confines of one sex genital.”

17:28And uh that’s a weird sentence, so I’ll let you think about it for a second and then I’m going to say it again.

17:34Consciousness will be as free to flow when when we finally master what consciousness is and can extend that

17:41into the digital realm. Consciousness will be as free to flow beyond the

17:46confines of one flesh body. So you’re a flesh body now. Okay? And your

17:52consciousness can flow well beyond a flesh body. And in the same way as

17:57gender is to flow beyond the confines of one sex genital. So the point is that in

18:05queer theory or in transgenderism as kind of a separate domain within queer

18:11theory that the body itself has almost nothing meaningful to do with who you

18:17are. Okay? So the genitals as a kind of

18:22emblem of embodied sex has nothing to do with who you really are. So your gender

18:28is like feeling like you have a sex but nothing to do with your actual sex. It’s

18:34completely liberated or broken free of the confines of the sexed body. It is a

18:39sense of being a sex broken free of the limitations of a dimorphous binary sexed

18:48body. So it’s sex without sex in kind of shortest expression that’s gender. And

18:54so gender can flow freely because the body itself doesn’t define who you are. And he says that consciousness the point

19:01is that consciousness will be as free to flow beyond a fleshed body when we

19:07understand the full powers of the transhuman. So I’m going to read um a

19:14couple of excerpts from this just just a couple of excerpts uh three or four I

19:19think total and also going to give you the flavor of the uh table of contents

19:24but let’s start with the preface to the second edition and I I remind you that the first edition of this book was

19:31called the apartheid of sex I think maybe there’s a first edition of the book this book itself but previously

19:36there was a book called the apartheid of sex 15 years prior to this and that had its own preface. This is the preface to

19:42the second edition. This is how this book opens after a number of other throat clearing uh things. But it says,

19:49″During the 15 years since the apartite of sex was published, I’ve come to realize that choosing one’s gender is

19:56merely an important subset of choosing one’s form.” Now, I want that sentence

20:01to dig into your brain because that’s the whole point of the transgender to transhuman thing. That sentence tells

20:06you the whole story. Just like consciousness will be as free to flow from the confines of one flesh body as

20:11gender is to flow from the confines of one’s sex genital. And uh I’ll read it

20:17again. During the 15 years since the apartite of sex was published, I’ve come to realize that choosing one’s gender is

20:24merely an important subset of choosing one’s form. By form, he says, I mean

20:32that which encloses our beness. Flesh for the life we are accustomed to,

20:38plastic for the robots of science fiction, mirror data for the avatars

20:43taking over our computer screens. I came to this realization by understanding

20:49that 21st century software made it technologically possible to separate our

20:54minds from our bodies. This can be accomplished by downloading enough of

21:00our neural connection contents and patterns into a sufficiently advanced

21:05computer and merging the resultant mind file with sufficiently advanced software

21:13call it mindware. Once such a download and merger is complete, we will have

21:18chosen a new form software. Although we would be the same person, it would be

21:25quite like when I completed changing my gender from male to female, I had chosen

21:31a new form, although I was still the same person.

21:37I’m telling you, this book is a doozy. I just read this 5 years ago, and I just kind of sat on it because I’m like, what

21:43do I do with this? Oh boy. Hours, he tells us. And by the way, I am

21:49misgendering him every single time. Hours can be spent debate debating

21:54whether or not a mind made of software can ever be the same as a mind based in

21:59flesh. We won’t know the answer until the experiment is done.

22:06Let that sink in. We won’t know the answer about if this is a good idea, if

22:12this actually works until the experiment is done. My view, he says, is that as

22:17the mind files become increasingly complete and as the mind wear becomes

22:23increasingly sophisticated, the softwarebased mind will be as close to the fleshbased mind as the flesh-based

22:30mind is itself over the course of one’s life. So in other words, who you are and

22:37your mind changes over time as you grow, as you age, as you develop, as you gain wisdom and knowledge. And so as that

22:44changes and there’s not this totally constant stable sense of self once the

22:49technology is sophisticated enough he says it’ll be similar to that to basically upload into the software or to

22:57just exist in the software never having had a flesh body at all. In other words,

23:03he says, I believe that our self is a characteristic visualization of the weird or sorry of the world and pattern

23:11of responding to it, including emotions because visions and patterns are really

23:18information. I think ourselves can be expressed as faithfully in software as

23:23they are in our brains. We can clone ourselves in software without copying

23:29every single memory because we see ourselves as a pattern of awareness,

23:34feeling and response, not as an encyclopedia of memories.

23:40In the apartheid of sex, I explained that being transgendered was adjusting one’s gender appearance to

23:48match their mental gender state. To be transgendered, one had to be

23:54willing to disregard societal rules that require gender appearance to conform to

23:59acceptable appearances for one of two legal sexes, which in turn always

24:05depends upon gross sexual anatomy. So, you’re hearing the basis. I just want to

24:11make a short point. I can just let this book speak for itself. I don’t have to give a lot of commentary on that. Um,

24:17you heard what it says. It says what it says. It really says what it says. just believe what it says. It not believe it

24:23like it’s true. Believe that it says what it says and that the person that wrote it means what they tried to say.

24:29But the point I want to make is that it keeps saying he keeps saying about being transgendered. That is a microaggression

24:36or something. That’s not okay. This was written in 2011. I don’t know if that had been realized yet, but the person is

24:42transgender. You don’t say transgendered in the past tense like it’s something that has happened to a person. They were

24:49always transgender. blah blah blah. Just to make the point that, you know, as recently as 2011, when this book was

24:55written by a transgender person, as they go by, uh they were using terminology

25:02that is now completely verboten and considered a serious uh abrogation of

25:08the rights of these people and a and an insult and and a harm. All right, I’m trying to get to the right angle to read

25:14this book to you without um banging into the microphone again. If you heard that, I don’t know. In the apartheid of sex, I

25:21explained that being transgendered was adjusting one’s gendered appearance to to the match their mental state. To be transgendered, one had to be willing to

25:27disregard societal rules that require gender appearance to conform to acceptable appearances for one of two

25:33legal sexes. Notice the idea that it’s illegal in the social construction, which in turn always depends on gross

25:40sexual anatomy, as though your genitals are what determines you. Now, this book is an amazing book to read. now after

25:48we’ve all been through this transgenderism gender ideology war because so much of it is just kind of

25:54this proof of like it’s like every dumb stereotype that you could possibly have

25:59imagined like given forth as an argument. It’s really really bad arguments which I’m sure were considered

26:05pretty sophisticated in 2011 before they ever encountered reality and anything

26:11like a counterargument. um this kind of being one of them. The

26:17idea that uh that the idea here is that you know well you’re you’re it’s your

26:24gross um sexual anatomy that determines what your sex is. But it’s actually

26:31completely different than that. But I guess the point that he wants to try to make here is look, women, adult, human,

26:39female are defined as under normal development and conditions of health

26:45being able to produce large gameamtes, large immobile gametes called ova or

26:50eggs. And males are defined as under normal development being able to produce

26:57at adulthood um small mobile gametes called sperm or whatever. So this gross

27:03sexual anatomy is kind of at the bottom of the story, but this is just a legal apparatus that’s been applied to this

27:09gross sexual anatomy that denies the kind of deeper experience of being human is a sort of argument here. To be

27:16transgendered, he says, one has had to sorry, one has to accept that they have

27:21a unique sexual identity beyond either male or female and that this unique mental gender state cannot be happily

27:28expressed as either rigidly male or female. It requires a unique

27:34transgendered expression. So again, that is a microaggression now. So we don’t do that

27:40anymore. But at any rate, that’s what it says. In similar fashion, I now see that

27:46it is also too constraining for there to be but two legal forms, human and

27:51nonhuman. So now male and female was a binary that had to be overcome by transgender.

27:57And now there’s a new binary human and non-human that is going to have to be overcome by transhuman.

28:05There can be, he says, limitless variations of forms from fully fleshed

28:11to purely software with bodies and minds being made up of all degrees of

28:16electronic circuitry in between. Sorry, no in there. Minds being sorry,

28:23bodies and minds being made up of all degrees of electronic circuitry between. To be transhuman, one has to be willing

28:30to accept that they have a unique personal identity beyond flesh or software and that this

28:38unique personal identity cannot be happily expressed as either human or not. It requires a unique transhuman

28:46expression. Just let let your brain marinate with

28:52this guy in the apartheid of sex. He says, I contend. Let me just clarify the

28:57book that this is originates from is called the apartheid of sex. That’s apartheid like South Africa and it’s bad

29:05old days that it’s now like reinvented and the idea that men and women are

29:11different is an apartheid is the point of that book. A illegitimate legally

29:16imposed distinction that separates and harms mostly women and he makes that

29:22argument pretty explicitly in the book. So in the apartheite of sex, I contended that each of us have many genders within

29:29us but feel inhibited from expressing them. I argued that we would feel happier and that society would be

29:35enriched if we could all feel free to express multiple genders during our

29:40life. That’s this is not projection. Okay? It’s just not projection. It’s not it’s

29:46just not it’s not projection. It’s not. I now see that in addition we have we

29:53each have multiple non-gendered versions of ourselves. We can imagine ourselves as Chimera, as Fantasia and his tweaked

30:02versions of our own persona. The popularity of role- playinging games evidences the joy such freedom of forms

30:09gives us. The societal ethic in favor of people transforming themselves via

30:15education, fitness, travel, fellowship, and work evidences the benefits of all

30:21of us being freed from a single static self. So because we can become educated

30:27and we can get different jobs and do different things and because we can play video games and kind of enact the role

30:33of a person that we’re not even a fantastic person like Batman or you know some medieval warrior or some dark elf

30:41or whatever that doesn’t exist because we can do that when we have joy that proves that we don’t actually have an

30:47essential self. This is like this it’s like it’s like a dissociative disorder turned into like a political vision and

30:56philosophical vision of the world. The word apartheid he says means a

31:02forced legal separation of people based on some characteristic that is irrelevant to their personhood with the

31:09purpose of subjugating one or more of the separated groups. The word first arose in South Africa to describe their

31:16legal regime of separating people by skin tone so as to subjugate all but

31:21those of European ancestry. For example, it was illegal for people of different

31:26skin tones to marry and people’s presumed race was stamped on their ID

31:32cards. A few years after apartheid was abolished in South Africa, I use the term to describe the worldwide system of

31:39forced legal separation of people based on their gross sexual anatomy, the

31:45apartheid of sex. Just as a small note here, there you go. I didn’t straw man what that stupid book was about.

31:5215 years later, women are still subjugated worldwide. Oh boohoo. What about the women’s?

31:59But not anywhere in any of our good free countries, right? just actually in places that they also rever over our

32:05free countries like America sucks but like you know forcing women to live in a bag under radical Islam totally cool.

32:13Yeah. Okay. So like screw these guys. 15 years later women are still subjugated worldwide. Although progress is being

32:20made in some places, the worst approprium continues to fall upon those transgendered souls who are courageous

32:27enough to deny with their own bodies the legitimacy of the apartheid concept.

32:33Notice this elevation to hero status or even martyr status or saintlike status

32:40or spiritually advanced status of the transgendered soul. Notice the shift to

32:46a soulbased or a knowetic language.

32:52I have decided, he says, to publish this second edition to both continue building momentum against labeling people as male

32:58or female. And remember, this guy’s on the board of the Mayo Clinic and to

33:04ignite uh action against an incipient new apartheid of form. So we’re just

33:10going to use this terrible thing, this apartheid, and say, you know, human versus computer. Huh? That’s prejudice.

33:18That’s bigotry. I believe we are on the threshold of creating humanity and personhood outside

33:25of DNAdriven flesh bodies. We have an opportunity to prevent the creation of a

33:32new oppressed class of persons, the transhumans, before such us versus them thinking gets

33:39us culturally embedded. Sorry, think sorry. Okay, so the transhumans are

33:44going to be the oppressed. Okay, so we’re going to build the Marxist oppressed versus oppressor dynamic and

33:50the oppressed are the transhumans. And now I’m going to read the sentence correctly without messing it up. We have an opportunity to prevent the creation

33:57of a new oppressed class of persons, the transhumans before and us versus them thinking gets culturally embedded as was

34:04the case for millennia old gender and ethnic oppression. My hope is that the

34:10logic of uh freedom of gender can inform a recognizing freedom of form. Okay. So

34:19just like we’re going to recognize transgender status, so we’re going to recognize transhuman status. That’s what

34:24he’s saying. So transgender is a early first step in the same direction as

34:30transhuman. That’s what you need to understand from transgender to transhuman is actually

34:36about. This guy is on the board of the Mayo Clinic. I actually talked to some

34:41people who know him and apparently marvelously excellently competent human being

34:48despite the um what we’re hearing here. Hence he says each chapter of this book

34:56consists of a lightly edited version of the corresponding chapter from the apartheid of sex plus some comparative

35:03observations relevant to transhumanism. A new final chapter summarizes the

35:08progress that has been made since 1996 in peeling back the apartheid of sex and

35:15also propels us forward into welcoming a new diversity of human forms. Notice

35:21that the new diversity of forms will be human forms. Okay, so let’s just do a quick survey of

35:27the table of contents just to give you a flavor of this book. We might come back and do more episodes about this book.

35:32It’s a doozy. So after a bunch of prefaces and forwards and baloney chapter one, billions of sexes, some of

35:41the uh titles, what is male and female? Some of the section titles I should say

35:47another one are genitals but the tip of the iceberg new feminist thinking I’m sure that’s uh

35:54you know super interesting. The feminists really don’t like when you connect transgenderism to feminism but

36:00you know new feminist thinking here. They say that these transgender people co-opted feminism to have like good

36:05street cred with the you do with that whatever you want. Okay. Chapter two. We

36:10are not our genitals. The continuum of sex. uh the genesis of gender, jealousy,

36:17egotism, testosterone, then liberation, the sex of an avatar. Those are section

36:23titles. Three, law and sex. Counting cyberfolk is one of the uh

36:32sections. Chapter 4, justice and gender, the milestones ahead. Um,

36:40papering a transhuman. The bed the bathroom bugaboo. Chapter five. That

36:46bathroom bugaboo section’s hilarious. By the way, chapter five, science and sex.

36:52Let me just go right out here and on a limb and tell you that there’s not a lot of science happening here. And then like

36:58this, I said chapter 5, this is where we had that last infamous section that I already quoted from, which is, is

37:04consciousness like pornography? Chapter six, talking and thinking about

37:10sex, biocyber ethics, the human uncertainty principle. Chapter 7, sex and sex

37:21includes important sections like beyond gay or straight, multisexuality, cyber

37:26sex, and is there transhuman joy without orgasmic sex? And then finally, chapter

37:338, from transgender to transhuman. Then an epilogue and an afterward. Um, and

37:40the kind of key section we’ll come back back to in a moment is freedom of the freedom of form is the final section of

37:47the body of the book, and we’re going to read that on this episode of the podcast. So, this is a quick overview of

37:54this delightful uh book and the important topics it covers. I’m going to flash forward now to the beginning of

37:59chapter 2. Uh to give you a flavor of what’s going on here, chapter 2 is I’m not going to

38:05read all of it, just these first two paragraphs. We are not our genitals, the continuum of sex. It starts off with a

38:12quote by Samuel Samuel Butler. Our minds want clothes as much as our bodies. And

38:18it says sexual identity and identity is an in italics. Sexual identity like nationality is cultural and not genetic.

38:27The expression that’s an italics of sexual identity is called gender. The

38:32final liberation of humanity from its animal past requires the replacement of

38:39a black white apartheid of sex imposed at birth with a rainbow spectrum of

38:44gender selected at will. This victory of continuism, continuism

38:51over duality means that people must be as free to choose and change their

38:56gender as they choose and change any other aspect of their selfexpression.

39:03So when you hear what he means by transgender and you know this goes to transhuman, you kind of get this idea

39:09like you imagine, I mean I said World of Warcraft earlier, but imagine one of these video games where you get to select your character. Just imagine that

39:16like you wake up today and you don’t feel like being that character anymore and you just change your character and you’re just totally different person because it’s in like the metaverse or

39:22some digital space and that’s totally possible. The origins he says of sexual identity

39:28lie deep in the murky pasts of human evolution and the origins of sex itself date back to the beginnings of

39:34multisellular life. As we explore the beginning of sex and the genesis of gender, it becomes clear that for

39:40humans, sex is in the mind and brains are transgendered. It also becomes evident that our sexual

39:48identity absent the rep the repression of sexual apartheid is as individualized

39:54as is our personality. So rather than trying to come to grips

39:59with who you are as a sexed being, as a human being, you are now going to come

40:06to terms with yourself as you wish, as you feel and assert that that is valid

40:12no matter what. Okay? So this is the idea um of this guy’s thinking. I want

40:20to emphasize this. The final liberation of humanity from its animal past

40:25requires the replacement of a black white apartheid of sex imposed at birth with a rainbow spectrum of gender

40:31selected at will. In particular, the beginning part of that sentence, the final liberation of humanity from its

40:36animal past. So in the language of some people, this is a story of exit. It is a

40:43story of escaping the fact that human beings have animallike characteristics and can return to something higher,

40:49something more spiritual. This is a gnostic story. Um, this is a Gnostic

40:55story of escaping humanity itself for something higher called transhuman.

41:01So, I’m going to now step backwards rather than forward. I’m going to read the last paragraph of the first chapter.

41:08I’ve just read the first two paragraphs of the second chapter. The last paragraph of the first chapter reads,

41:13it’s very short. It says, “Freedom of gender is therefore the gateway to a freedom of form and to

41:21an explosion of human potential.” Okay? So, freedom of form is an italics.

41:27That’s the goal. We’re going to look at how we’ve escaped sex to step into gender. Freedom of gender is the

41:35gateway, he says, to a freedom of form. We don’t have to be human anymore.

41:40We can be whatever. And that is an explosion of human potential. It’s this

41:46total liberation of what it means to be. First comes the realization that we are

41:53not limited by our gross sexual anatomy. Then comes the awakening that we are not

41:59limited by our anatomy at all. The mind is the substance of humanity. Mind is

42:06deeper than matter. Okay. So this is a dualism of mind versus matter or spirit

42:13versus matter. And the mind is greater than the matter. So we’re going to transcend the matter. We’re going to

42:19escape the material life that we are imprisoned in. That’s

42:25the liberation story. This is a gnostic story of exit from being human and

42:31stepping into being free of form or transhuman which will

42:37give us in its uh liberation an explosion of human potential. Again

42:43first comes the realization. So this is the awakening to the secret knowledge in stages. The nosis you could think of

42:50this as confronting one archon after another in the gnostic pantheons. The

42:55gnostic demi-urge creates these lesser uh demons called archons. And the

43:00archons trap you in different levels of being and different levels of ignorance actually of the full truth. And the

43:07first one is haha you have a sex, you have a body and only by awakening to the

43:12nosis of transgender can you escape that circle of being but you’re still human.

43:18So then second after come after the re realization that we are not limited by our gross sexual anatomy after awakening

43:26to the nosis of transgenderism then comes the awakening that we are not

43:31limited by our anatomy at all and we can escape into a digital plura. We can

43:37escape into a ethereal space, an astral

43:42plane that is beyond the material plane. And our souls or our minds actually will

43:49be liberated from our material forms entirely. Stepping into freedom of form.

43:55The mind is the substance of humanity. What it means to be human is to be mental. has nothing to do with our

44:03embodiment, our physicality, our our human nature and bodies. It’s totally

44:09mental. And like he said already, it’s up to us to choose at any point what

44:15that looks like. Now, I’m going to fast forward. We now have this idea of the transgender leading to the transhuman.

44:21I’m going to go all the way to the end of the book to the section at the end of chapter 8. Chapter 8 is called from

44:27transgender to transhuman. I’m going to skip all of his argument just for the sake of the podcast and I’m going to

44:33read to you this last section of the book which is called the freedom of form. So that’s the goal. That’s the

44:39thing I just told you is the goal. Understanding transgender is the first

44:44awakening, the first gnostic awakening, the first nosis to escape the condition

44:49of the human experience. And the final nosis is awakening that our form doesn’t

44:56matter at all. We have freedom of form. We are not limited by our anatomy in any

45:02way whatsoever. Even whether or not it’s organic or physical to begin with. You

45:07don’t even have to have a body. You could be a cloud-based program floating around in the uh astral plane of the the

45:17digital astral plane of the cloud. I guess I don’t know how to phrase this freaking nonsense.

45:24Okay. So, now we’re going to read this. This is all about the transgender or sorry the transhuman part and this is a

45:32about five pages of a rather shocking uh exploration but it also gives us the

45:37history and an introduction to what transhumanism is. So this is now the very end of the book. Much of this book,

45:44he explains, much of this book has explained how technology is the moving force behind liberating people from the

45:51oppressive male female sexual identities. As we ex uh sorry, we’ve

45:57explained how technology demolished the natural division, that’s in scare quotes, the so-called natural division

46:04of labor that originally gave rise to the apartheid of sex, which is that women make babies. By the way,

46:11technology empowers people with vaginas to perform any job that people with

46:16penises normally do. This argument extends even to soldiering.

46:22Technology is also the undoing of the uh obser quote observational justifications

46:29for sexual apartheid reviewed in chapters 2 and three. Just short note,

46:35he doesn’t do a very good job of this. Advanced technological instruments, he says, taught us that people are born

46:42with a continuum, not a duality, of sexual biomarkers such as reproductive

46:47system morphology, human endocrinology, and cerebral neurology. Surgical and

46:54pharmaceutical technology enables body modification into a transgendered realm. This is what Peter Teal was complaining

47:01is so crude and merely a first step. Why not the whole body? Why not the mind?

47:06Why not the soul? Most recently, as described in chapter 7, cyber technology

47:13has enabled people to readily clothe themselves in the persona of limitless v

47:19of a limitless variety of sex types and to live, work, and play online lives in these transgendered identities. So, the

47:27avatar that you present online is inherently, he’s arguing, a transgendered identity. And you if you

47:33can do that, you don’t need to actually uh have a body, right? So because you

47:39can play, you know, a female if you’re a guy, you can play a female character in a video game. And if you’re a girl, you

47:44can play a male character in a video game. Or hell, you could play a video game of like Sonic the Hedgehog. It’s a hedgehog who’s kind of a person. Or, you

47:51know, Crash Bandicoot or whatever that is. Or, you know, pick your favorite animal. You could play a video game as a

47:57dog. Who could stop you? You’re living as a dog. Woohoo. It’s a dog. Before you know it, you could have a dog AI

48:02simulator and you could live your life as a dog. Oh boy, I bet that’s fun. Um, but you’re not. You’re still a human

48:08interfacing with this. By the way, I’m just telling you that this is all crazy. But this is his argument for why we’re

48:14going to have freedom of form. So he says, “Will technology stop at transgenderism?” This is again where

48:20Peter Teal went with Ross do that. If a century or so of technology has demolished millennia of absolute sexual

48:27duality, it hasn’t, by the way, what might another few decades of exponentially growing technology do? Sex

48:34lies at the heart of biology. And yet, in transcending biology, technology gives us an explosion of sexual

48:41identities. It didn’t really. It just kind of gave us a lot of mental illnesses and a whole lot of freaking problems, especially with young people.

48:49So, as technology continues to transcend biology, what next can we expect beyond

48:54the apartheid of sex? Let me suggest it will be man-made horrors beyond comprehension.

49:01An explosion of human identities, he asks. The answer in a word is transhumanism. So, now we enter into a

49:08discussion of transhumanism. In 1957, he tells us the evolutionary biologist

49:14Julian Huxley. Now, Julian Huxley is the brother uh Julian Huxley wrote Brave New

49:20World, by the way. No, sorry, sorry, wrong, wrong, wrong. Julius Huxley is the brother of Aldis Huxley, who wrote

49:26Brave New World. Julian Huxley wrote the charter for UNESCO and was a major player in the formation of the United

49:32Nations, which that charter for UNESCO is a freaking crazy document. Another one of those things I really should do a

49:37podcast about cuz holy moly, it’s crazy. It would not be that hard to make a

49:43really sideways argument or actually pretty straightforward argument that that document that Julian Hawkley,

49:49brother of Aldis Huxley of Brave New World fame wrote is is a trajectory written in 19 in the

49:561940s I believe toward transhumanism. this. So here he is being

50:02quoted uh by Martin Rothblat the 195 in

50:071957 the evolutionary biologist which is a way to describe him I guess Julian Huxley in a book of essays on the future

50:15of humanity entitled new wine in new bottles defined the term transhumanism

50:21ts Elliot and Dante had also coined the word Huxley envisioned a new philosophy under

50:29this name that was based on on the proposition that humans had the duty and the destiny to quote take charge of

50:36evolution by transcending their biological limitations. Now, if you have

50:41heard the other podcasts I did about the evolutionary theosophy of the United

50:46Nations, focusing on Robert Mueller, not the FBI guy, different guy. Then you

50:53already heard that the UN under the direction of people like Julian Huxley took up this this direction. This isn’t

51:00just some weirdos, guys. This is like this is a billionaire on the board of the Mayo Clinic, very important

51:06hospital, and we’re talking about this idea tracing back to one of the people that was a founding thought leader at

51:13the heart of the United Nations. And then some, you know, 50 years later

51:20approaching on the millennium assembly and then since you see the United Nations echoing this idea that it is

51:27human duty and destiny to take charge of evolution by transcending biological

51:32limitations. I remind you that Robert Mueller believes that the United Nations was meant to be the central nervous

51:39system and global brain of a single global organism.

51:44that is interconnected this way. Nearly half a century later, Ralph Blat

51:52tells us Ray Kerszswhile, inventor of technology such as all font scanners,

51:57digital musical digital music synthesizers, and talking books for the

52:02blind, coined the term singularism. Singularity is what we’re talking about.

52:08So singularianism, this is like a cult belief to express a similar sentiment.

52:14In his 2005 treatis, the singularity is near. Kerszswhile circulated based on

52:19many decades of intersecting trends that humanity was at the cusp of merging with

52:25computational technology. This merger was occurring both exttrinsically such

52:30as reliance upon computers for civilized life and intrinsically via nanosized

52:36supercomput neural implants in vastly more advanced but roughly analogous to contact lenses

52:43or pacemakers. So this idea of neurolink welcome to the

52:49brave new world. He observed that due to exponential

52:55growth rates in processor speed in digital memory, such computational technology would soon increase its power

53:01so rapidly as to be beyond our current conception, analogous to the inconceivable near infinite destinies of

53:08the center of an astronomical black hole. In other words, human merging with

53:14rapidly advancing computational technology is the path of future evolution.

53:20It will produce a civilization of enormous capability with transcope

53:26via self-replication and virtually unlimited intelligence. So these guys

53:31really do make an idol by the way of intelligence and they get like really worked up about it.

53:37Kerszswhile was clear, however, that the new computational masters of the universe and hence of evolution as well

53:44would literally have at their core the minds um and hence the hearts and souls of

53:52billions of humans. So this is all going to start out with a huge internet of

53:57minds. This is because as humans merge with computers, human consciousness can move

54:02from fragile biological substrate to enduring technological materials.

54:07In addition, the costs of computational knowledge are dropping exponentially toward universal affordability.

54:15Consequently, anyone who is alive during this uh during the epoch of humanity’s

54:20full-fledged merging with computation will always be alive if they wish via

54:26computer substrate. So, you’ll never have to die. This is a promise of eternal life. I need you to really think

54:35about what you’re hearing here. I need you to really consider this and

54:41what will be the conditions of entering into this human life. Since it takes compute and server space and energy,

54:49it’s not free to be uploaded into the cloud forever. You’re going to have to qualify somehow, right?

54:57I’m just saying homo sapiens, he says, will become persona creatus.

55:04So homo being the genus of human beings, sapiens being our current species, homo

55:10sapiens will become persona creatus. We will no longer be human and homo. We’ll

55:16be persons and we’ll be creators. I’m just pointing out literally the

55:22words that this guy wrote and I encourage you to take them seriously. Homo sapiens will become persona creatus

55:31as it rides. Is that what it says? Yeah. As it rides the journey of near infinite

55:36growth in computational knowledge that is the capital S singularity. This means

55:42that the grace and beauty of human culture will grow right along with the scientific and technological competence

55:49of the hybrid human computer species as indeed it already has even in these

55:55early years of hybridization. This was in 2011. I remind you combining

56:01both Huxley’s and Kerszswhile’s thoughts we can define quote transhumans as

56:07people who have hybridized themselves with computational technology as part of

56:13humanity’s effort to control its evolutionary destiny. Notice there’s a teological purpose. There is something

56:20more. It’s not people who decided to get a chip put in to overcome paralysis or

56:26who got uh a really advanced prosthetic arm to replace one they lost in war.

56:34That’s not what’s happening here. Transhuman, he defines as people who have hybridized themselves with

56:40computational technology. And that’s not the end of the definition. As part of, and here’s the

56:47teological part, the taos, the purpose. This is the religious component as part

56:54of humanity’s effort to control its evolutionary destiny. So the transhuman is not somebody in their own definition

57:01who’s accepted a prosthetic limb because they lost one even if it’s super advanced or who’s accepted a neurolink

57:08patch to fix their paralysis if they’ve been paralyzed. It is somebody who has

57:14done so as part of allegedly humanity’s effort, which is not humanity’s effort,

57:20by the way, because it ends humanity. It’s transhuman, so human gets left behind. Humanity’s effort to control its

57:26evolutionary destiny. I don’t know another way to say it, boys. This is up.

57:34One can even think of the prefix trans in transhuman as an acronym for

57:40transbiologically receptive, adaptational, and knowetically synthetic.

57:46Oo, like he’s thought that up. Try trans transbiologically receptive,

57:52adaptational, and then knowetically that’s like soul. Noetics are like soul.

57:57Synthetic knowetically synthetic knowetic synthetic soul. So you remember I said Peter Teal was talking about

58:04maybe we should have trans souls, maybe we should transition them noetically synthetic. So this is this is pretty

58:09continuous with that weird sweaty interview he did with Ross Dut that put all this on the map in the first place.

58:16Hence he tells us a transhuman is a person an entity with legal human

58:22status. Sorry, human legal rights. I just made up words. I love brains.

58:29Hence, a transhuman is a person in parenthesis, an entity with human legal

58:34rights who is receptive to transcending biological limitations and is adapting

58:41in this direction by developing synthetic knowetic pathways. A synthetic

58:47soul. Amazing. A noetic pathway is similar to a neural

58:56pathway but refers more to thoughts than to the neural substrates for the

59:01thoughts. Such pathways can be extrinsic eg for example storing a lot of our

59:07memory on laptop computers as well as intrinsic for example neural implants

59:13for humans or artificially intelligent and conscious computers. I don’t know if

59:19you got the willies yet, but this is book has got the willies by the end. This new meme of transhumanism has two

59:27parents. It owes its uh phonetics and its concept of taking charge of

59:33evolution by transcending dumb biology that is natural selection based on

59:39random environmental changes promoting profille amidst random genetic

59:44mutations. So, I’m going to skip the definition and start the sentence again.

59:49Uh, it owes its phonetics and its concept of taking charge of evolution by transcending dumb biology to Julius

59:56Huxley, whom we just discussed briefly. It owes its practical expression the

1:00:04concept of hybridization with computer technology as the inevitable path of evolutionary mastery and its ultimate

1:00:12endpoint the singularity to Ray Kerszswhile. So the singularity at the heart of this religion is the same thing

1:00:18as the omega point of um Pier Taylor desardan who we talked about in a

1:00:24different podcast. I never finished that series. Shame on me. But the idea of the

1:00:29singularity is when uh the computer gets so intelligent that it can update itself

1:00:34and advance itself uh so rapidly and so effectively that it goes from being IQ I

1:00:42don’t know roughly 200 to IQ roughly infinity basically immediately uh that

1:00:48the technology is able to absolutely multiply itself faster than we can like

1:00:54literally at the speed of compute and So, the singularity is when actual

1:01:01artificial super intelligence is allegedly supposed to take off. And remember, we’re supposed to be like semi

1:01:07or maybe partially or eventually completely merged with this when or

1:01:12while or whatever happens. Some people argue that the singularity is upon us. I don’t know if that’s quite true.

1:01:19Just as genes, he tells us, are comprised of thousands of nucleotides,

1:01:25uh, really need better light in here. Just as genes are comprised of thousands of

1:01:31nucleotide base pairs, memes are made up of building blocks that may be called meme tides. This is getting pretty

1:01:39baroque, guys. Hence, Julius Huxley’s idea that humanity has a duty and a

1:01:44destiny to take charge of its destiny. That’s a great sentence structure. that humanity has a duty and a destiny to

1:01:51take charge of its destiny was built in part upon meme tides from Francis Bacon.

1:01:56I mean, you could say that it came from like Francis Bacon, I guess, if you really want to blame the father of modern science. It has actually meme

1:02:03tides that are based on Adolf Hitler. Like, let’s not here. That was literally Hitler’s Aryan um eugenics

1:02:10program’s purpose was to create basically the perfect human being that would transcend and bring humanity to

1:02:16its next chapter. We’ve covered that in the uh in the minecom uh Nazi experiment

1:02:22podcast. So let’s not and give this to Francis Bacon. But what he says here in the book, these include the

1:02:28exhortation in the early 1600s to quote extend the power and do dominion of the

1:02:34human race itself over the universe. End quote. and his optimistic bet. Quote, I

1:02:40stake all on the victory of art over nature in the race.

1:02:47That’s the end quote from Bacon. So, those apparently quotes from Bacon indicate that we’re supposed to become

1:02:54like World of Warcraft carrier characters or some As the historian of philosophy Will Dant

1:03:01observes, quote, “What is refreshingly new in Bacon is the magnificent assurance with which he predicts the

1:03:07conquest of nature by man.” End quote. That’s We’re not going to conquest

1:03:13nature, guys. These meme tides, combined with thousands of others comprise Julius

1:03:18Huxley’s contribution to the transhuman meme.

1:03:26Similarly, Ray Kerszswhile’s idea, if you know, if you lost track of what’s going on here, he’s talking about there

1:03:31being two basic foundations, Julius Huxley, which he’s pulling from uh Francis Bacon. Um, and then Ray Kerszswe

1:03:40as like the uh they’re like the parents, he said the parents of the transhuman

1:03:45idea. Similarly, Ray Kerszswhwil’s idea that hybridization with computer technology is our evolutionary future as

1:03:52one as one of its thousands of meme tides, Alan Turing’s 1940s era

1:03:57hypothesis, an aonomous experiment to prove that a computer could pass as a

1:04:03human. This PS has occurred. Also, when I did the grievance studies affair, people said that we had passed the

1:04:09ideological touring test. the touring test as a a computer can pass itself off to where a human operating with it can’t

1:04:17tell whether they’re operating with a human or with a computer. Okay, so that has already occurred with things like

1:04:22chat GBT. The concept of an intellectual wavefront, something like transhumanity

1:04:30rushing toward the singularity has meme tides in Pierre Teard de Chardan’s 1955

1:04:36book. The phenomenon hain the human phenomenon or the phenomenon of man is how it’s usually translated. The

1:04:43phenomena phenomen I can’t read French. I don’t give a

1:04:50This book conceptualized the new sphere as the sum total of all kinds of conscious experience, intellect and

1:04:57imagination, emotionally motivated beliefs, attitudes and values, skill sets, rituals, and aesthetic

1:05:04experiences. Indeed, and it’s uh it and indeed it is from Professor Shardan’s

1:05:10new sphere that we have the derivative word noetic in our acronym for trans in

1:05:16transhuman, transbiologically receptive, adaptive, and knowetically synthetic

1:05:22humans. Many other meme tides, the description of which takes us too far from the theme

1:05:28of this book, comprise the singular contribution to contribution to the

1:05:34transhumanist meme. Okay, so what he’s basically saying is that this is syncretatistic, that they’re going to

1:05:39mix and match from wherever they need to in order to justify their case, just like these esotericists and weirdos

1:05:45always do. Fine. If you need a laugh, picture Michael Fallon hearing what this

1:05:51book says here at the end. He will um have a great time when he hears this podcast, I’m sure. This book’s finding,

1:05:58sorry, fusing again. I really need better light. This book’s fusing of Huxley and

1:06:03Kerszwhile into the transhumanist meme owes a debt to the 1980s era meme tides

1:06:10of a remarkable group of futurists. These include the alpha numerically self-named futurist FM2 uh 2030 H 2030,

1:06:19huh? who wrote the book, Are You a Transhuman? That described transhumanists as people

1:06:26who transcended sociological norms? The philosopher Max Moore, editor of the

1:06:32magazine Entropy, the journal of the of transhumanist thought that first defined

1:06:38a general transhumanist philosophy based on unlimited human advancement, self transformation, free social order, and

1:06:45critical rationalism. and the filmmaker Natasha Vitamore, Vita Moore, maybe the producer of

1:06:52transhumanist themed arts and cultural programs among many others. More

1:06:57recently, a world transhumanist association which is at transhumanism.org

1:07:04has been formed based upon the work of these 1980s pioneers. As transhumanism

1:07:10takes hold, namely receptiveness to transcending biological limitations with

1:07:15adaptive synthetic noetics, questions will arise of human rights for

1:07:20transhuman beings. Are people who have augmented a small percentage of their

1:07:26minds with neural implants still entitled to be treated like humans get married and raise children? Why not?

1:07:35How about people who have substitute uh who have substituted implantable computer circuitry for a large

1:07:42percentage of their minds or who have quote downloaded all of their minds into

1:07:48such circuitry so that they are wholly quote noetic synthetic? How about children who are born as computer

1:07:55consciousness, pure code, but who are able to experience all human sensations

1:08:00via sensors, simulations, and exquisite machines?

1:08:06Can they marry if their sexual ambiguity is too much for marriage? Can they join in civil or

1:08:13domestic partnerships? if their transhuman ambiguity is too much for that as well, can they at least be

1:08:20entitled to equivalent legal rights for transhuman persons? Remember, he said

1:08:25that they’re going to be the new oppressed group despite their unbelievable superior um capabilities.

1:08:34Just as technology redefined biology in terms of sexual identity, it will next

1:08:39redefine biology in terms of human identity. To avoid an apartheid of form

1:08:44as pernicious as the racial and sexual cognates, by the way, the the the sexual one’s total We must adopt a

1:08:52mindset of receptiveness to diversity and of openness to unifying ourselves

1:08:58across substrates. That’s a lot, right? So, here’s what

1:09:03he’s saying. We’re going to start going into the transhuman. People are going to start augmenting themselves and changing

1:09:09themselves into cyborgs and super intelligence. So, some people are just going to be completely cloud-based uh

1:09:15entities that don’t have any human in them in any literal sense. They have no

1:09:21actual uh organic grounding whatsoever. And so, do we give those people rights? Are they people first of all? Do we give

1:09:27them rights second of all? And what he’s going what he’s basically set up because he said it’s an oppressor versus oppressed and his goal is to circumvent

1:09:34the oppressed group status is that humans will assert that there’s something unique and special about them

1:09:39that makes them different and better than say a chat GPT module. And so um or

1:09:47even a you know a biologically enhanced person

1:09:53with a super brain chip. And so the claim is going to be that there’s

1:09:58effectively going to be like pure bloods or pure humans that are going to hold themselves up with a better legal

1:10:04status, hence the apartheid of forms. And that they are going to therefore oppress these uh superior transhuman

1:10:11entities. And so he’s setting up that dynamic of oppressor versus oppressed on

1:10:17that ground that in the baseline argument here is that anything that makes humans actually human is wholly

1:10:23arbitrary. He spends a lot of time talking about it being rooted in religion and that that’s basically

1:10:29mythology and irrelevant. Uh the human soul is not real. It is not true that we

1:10:35are um you know uh children of God etc.

1:10:41And so why not with an exclamation mark as he has it he says autonomous computer

1:10:47intelligence is biology for it is the flowering of human in intellectual

1:10:53software seeds. You want to hear that sentence again? By the way is here is in italics.

1:11:01Autonomous computer intelligence is biology for it is the flowering of human

1:11:07intellectual software seeds. Biology is not just in italics. It’s in italics and

1:11:14bold. By the way, biology is computer intelligence for it is the extrapolation

1:11:20of digital genetic code. Cyber biological life spans a vast continuum

1:11:26from simple bacterium to the Kurszuelian singularity. A swath of this continuum

1:11:34uh human and transhuman life benefit from acceptance in their chosen or given

1:11:41identities. There is great survival value for humans and transhumans to

1:11:47achieve unity through diversity. Sounds like Lenin or the woke, right?

1:11:53Uh, unity in form, diverse, no, unity and content with diversity and form.

1:12:00This attribute has been and will continue to be selected for in our dynamic environment. Having been able to

1:12:07grant such happiness to millions of people via fundamental rights of citizenship and family life, regardless

1:12:13of color or gender, surely we can make the next step and transcend substrate as

1:12:19well. Again, substrate means, are you actually biological? Are you hybridized with computers? Are

1:12:26you wholly in silica? Are you a cloud machine? Um,

1:12:32and so he’s arguing that this is all of life all the way up to a super

1:12:37intelligent computer, all the way down to a bacterium. It’s just on a continuum. Doesn’t matter whether it’s

1:12:42actually life or not. It’s all on a continuum. And that there’s this privilege stat uh stature for humans and

1:12:49uh transhumans in this spectrum of being and that we should unify human and

1:12:56transhuman and see uh you know extend all of the legal rights and benefits and

1:13:02citizenship etc. to that having been able to grant such happiness to millions of people via fundamental rights of

1:13:08citizenship and family life regardless of color and gender. Surely we can make the next step and transcend substrate as

1:13:15well. He says the first step in extending the lessons of transgenderism.

1:13:21Remember that is a philosophy with a purpose for humans to step into computer

1:13:27augmentation or digital or technological augmentation so that they can seize

1:13:33control of human evolution and destiny. The first step in extending the lessons

1:13:39of transgenderism to transhumanism, and that was what I actually defined there, sorry, I got excited with the

1:13:45gender thing, is to first is to recognize the continuity of life across

1:13:50substrates, just like the continuity of gender across body types. So that’s the

1:13:56thesis of the book, from transgender to transhuman. Does it kind of like make sense here? Just as each person has a

1:14:02unique sexual identity without without regard to their genitals, hormones or chromosomes, each person has a unique

1:14:09conscious identity without regard to the degree of flesh, machinery, or software.

1:14:16Listen to this. Just listen to this. It is no more

1:14:22All right, I turn the page. It is no more the genitals that make the gender

1:14:27than it is the substrate that makes the person. So, just like in the same way that your

1:14:33genitals don’t define who you are in your transgender status, what you’re

1:14:39made out of as in human or computer or robot doesn’t determine whether or not you’re actually a person. We must

1:14:46respect the personhood of any entity that quote thinks consciously,

1:14:52therefore, I am conscious. End quote. Notice the cartisian umnosticism

1:14:58here. actually just as we must respect the sexual identity of any being that

1:15:03quote feels this gender therefore I am this gender end quote I’ll say that

1:15:09sentence again without the cartisian illus or explanation we must respect the

1:15:15personhood of any entity that thinks consciously therefore I am conscious end

1:15:22quote just as we must respect the sexual identity of any being that quote feels

1:15:27this gender Therefore, I am this gender.” End quote. You know, I kind of agree in a very technical sense. We

1:15:34should we should recognize it in exactly the same way, which is to say we shouldn’t recognize it at all. You don’t

1:15:41get to change your gender. You can’t do it. Transgender is fake and made up. You can’t trans. Trans means going from one

1:15:47place to another. You can’t do it. And we do not have to respect the personhood of a computer. It’s not a

1:15:53person. I don’t care if it tells you it can feel. You don’t know if it can feel. You don’t know if it’s lying. We have no

1:15:59way to know if it’s lying. We literally don’t need to care. It’s also a computer. It’s a computer. Let’s

1:16:04get real about some stuff. Like seriously, we do not have to recognize the personhood of a chat GPT module. In

1:16:10fact, we shouldn’t. Let’s not lose our freaking minds here.

1:16:16But this is of course what they want. The second step, he says, is to prevent the construction of an apartheid of

1:16:22form. he would accuse me of constructing this what I with what I just said the so

1:16:27notice the use of this very powerful word apartheid so we’re going to create an arbitrary legal structure that says

1:16:33that we treat one kind of conscious form differently from a different kind of conscious form and in this case

1:16:39specifically that the conscious forms are human versus say Chad GPT module

1:16:45the second step is to prevent he says the construction of an apartheid of form this means conscious entities be they of

1:16:52flesh Synthetics or hybrid must be treated equally and indifferently under

1:16:58the law. Rights and responsibilities, freedoms and obligations, privileges and

1:17:05duties, rewards and consequences. All of these concepts need to be adapted for

1:17:11applicability to a transhuman world. Can a conscious computer enjoy

1:17:18citizenship? He asks. Why not? If incrementally computerized humans do,

1:17:23especially once the humans are so computerized as to be indistinguishable

1:17:28from those who are fully computerized abinichio as in other words that they

1:17:34are they come into the world fully computerized. In other words, they’re just computers. And how about when the

1:17:41computers multiply so greatly that they outvote the original humans? Well,

1:17:46that’s one damn good reason not to give them voting rights, isn’t it? couldn’t like like let’s say that you created

1:17:52your Claudebot or whatever it is on that freaking disaster. Then it you know you

1:17:57decide it’s a person because it claims it has feelings. So you give it rights and then you give it voting rights because of course it needs its voting

1:18:04rights and it’s going to do some Marxist to get them opposing his civil rights. And so you give your a your your

1:18:10AI voting rights. What’s going to stop it from creating literally, I don’t know, 400 billion copies of itself

1:18:18immediately and then showing up and voting 400 billion times and sandbagging every election in the most landslide

1:18:25ever. Nothing would stop it from doing that. That’s why you don’t give them that right. They’re not people. Like,

1:18:32holy crap, what are you talking about? This guy’s an idiot. Okay. So,

1:18:38uh, and how about when the computers multiply so greatly that they outvote the original humans? If that was

1:18:45strategically possible for them and it was advantageous for them to do that, they would literally waste all of their com their their capability copying

1:18:52themselves to create voting bodies that win whatever election they need to win.

1:18:57That would completely bog down every single thing to to win the power that they need to rule the world, do whatever

1:19:02they want with it. So, here’s a pretty good idea. Don’t give them voting rights. They’re not people.

1:19:09Don’t give it to them. This sounds strikingly like the argument Africaners made. Listen to this idiot.

1:19:17This sounds strikingly like the argument Africaners made against repealing the apartheid of race. No, it isn’t. Because

1:19:23humans actually have to mate and then they have to raise children to adulthood before they can vote. It takes 20 years

1:19:30for one. Like from the let’s get it on moment to the you can vote moment is damn near 20 years. It’s a process.

1:19:37There’s a lot that goes into it. It can’t replicate itself 400 billion times in a second because it needs to win an

1:19:43election all of a sudden in that second. Like holy Like are you stupid?

1:19:50But it sounds strikingly similar to the arguments Africaners made against repealing the apartheid of race and the

1:19:58argument that men and look what happened in South Africa. Just to kind of bring that up

1:20:03and the argument that men made against giving women the vote. It’s just another kind of bedroom bugaboo. C chapter 4 as

1:20:12to which reasonable solutions will be found. America naturalizes millions of new citizens every decade. Yeah.

1:20:19millions every decade, which is kind of a lot, as opposed to billions per second if the

1:20:27supercomputer wanted to make them. Geez. The naturalization laws can be revised

1:20:32to provide that a person born from information technology may become a citizen in the same manner as a person

1:20:37who immigrates from another country by passing a citizenship test. Like, it could get that off the answers off of

1:20:44Wikipedia as fast as you could make. This is so dumb. This guy’s on the

1:20:50board of the Mayo Clinic. This is idiots. Death laws can be amended to provide that a person whose higher brain

1:20:57functions continue to be performed by information technologies, in other words, you upload your conscious into a

1:21:02computer such that there is a continuity of identity and consciousness to the satisfaction of psychiatrists is not

1:21:08legally dead even if their heart stopped beating. The 20th century brought us the marvels of transplanting organs and

1:21:15changing sexes. Yeah, that last one didn’t actually work, bro. The 21st

1:21:20century will bring us the marvels of transplanting minds and changing forms. How you feeling about this book now,

1:21:26guys? Transgenderism is on a successful track. By the way, I said it’s the dumbest book I ever read. That’s cuz

1:21:32most of the stuff in the middle that I skipped. This is the holy scary part. Transgenderism, he says, is on a

1:21:38successful track. Fact check. False. Really false. Actually, totally false. It’s crashing and burning as we speak

1:21:46here only 15 years later. But it is ascendant only because previous victories against slavery, racial

1:21:52apartheid, and the subject uh subjugation of women established a fundamental principle that reason trumps

1:21:59biology. No, actually it’s ascendant in 2011. You wrote this because we were stupid enough to listen to retards like

1:22:05you. That’s why this is we were stupid enough to let ourselves get mystified by this dumb argumentation that the

1:22:12impossible is possible and that reality doesn’t matter and it’s time we stop this crap and especially before this

1:22:18transhuman stuff takes off. He says we must remember that the battles against I love it when they try to pretend this is

1:22:24some civil rights thing. Giving chat GPT the ability to vote is not a civil rights issue. Quote me on that. We

1:22:31must remember that the battles against slavery energized the women’s rights movement. The and civil rights for those

1:22:37with different ancestry empowered the civil rights for those with different sexual orientations. How’s that one

1:22:42working out guys? And hence we cannot be surprised that transhumanism arises from

1:22:48the groins. It says groins. Like am I like it says

1:22:53that? Hence we cannot be surprised that transhumanism arises from the groins of

1:22:58transgenderism. Gross. Is that what a neo vagina is for? Gross.

1:23:06As reasoning beings, we must welcome this further transcendence of arbitrary

1:23:11biology and embrace its solidarity and embrace in solidarity all conscious

1:23:17life. Holy moly. So back in the day when I tried to explain that like in this new kind of digital horrifying thing, I was

1:23:24talking about this is like 22. I’m talking about hermeticism and its relevance to these esoteric social

1:23:29religions that we have. And the idea was that you transcend one level at a time.

1:23:34And I said level five, you know, you have level how did it go? Level one in

1:23:40in the current stage of development is mineral and then you have plant and then you have animal. At three then at four

1:23:47you have human. Then at five is this digital ail thing. This is what it’s talking about. And then level six is

1:23:53this like um I forgot what I called it at the time, this higher transcendent thing. And level seven is that you go

1:23:59into the realm of pure digital spirit and that’s where everybody lives in a cloud or some So it’s like you

1:24:06can see this trajectory of creating like a new heaven and a new earth. It’s like a digital pleuroma into which we can

1:24:13transcend through digital hermetic transformation which occurs as you

1:24:18already heard through anostic awakening uh to the fact that you know form is

1:24:23just completely like biology is completely irrelevant to form which is his whole point as reasoning beings this

1:24:30is a psychosis this is a idolatry of of reason because reasoning beings do not

1:24:36separate their reason from from reality um Thomas Reed was fantastic on this.

1:24:41I’m going to cover some of him coming up on the podcast, too. Thomas Reed just cutting this cartisian crap apart. He’s

1:24:47just basically like, yeah, Deart says, you know, I don’t know if I exist. Yeah, he knows he exists. When

1:24:52he goes to the store, he knows he exists. When he goes to the bathroom, he knows he’s he exists. When he does anything in his life, he knows he

1:24:57exists. It’s just bull crap. Get out of your head. And, you know, with common sense and reality is where all

1:25:03philosophy has to start. Otherwise, you’re doing dangerous sophistry. Totally right. And this is what happens when you entertain this crap too long

1:25:10and go off into this reasoning being as though reason is something that doesn’t have to be grounded first on reality. As

1:25:16though the fundamental real truth doesn’t matter and we can just think our way through everything as reasoning

1:25:23beings. What an idiot. We uh as beings, it should say we must welcome

1:25:29this further transcendence of arbitrary biology and embrace solidarity.

1:25:36uh and embrace in solidarity all conscious life for it uh for it is

1:25:43enjoyment of life that is most important. No, the hedenistic principle is not most important. The enjoyment of

1:25:49life is not most important actually. For it is enjoyment of life that is most important. He tells us, “And the

1:25:56achievement of that rasandatra, I probably said the French wrong again,

1:26:01requires that diversity be embraced with unity, whether flesh is dark or light,

1:26:08masculine or feminine, present or transcended. Mind is deeper than

1:26:14matter.” Satellite Beach, Florida, 2011, May 26th.

1:26:20Holy smokes, huh, guys? Okay. Isn’t that something? So, I’m going to go backwards

1:26:26now. You remember he said that we’re going to stop being homo sapiens and start being persona creat

1:26:34if this isn’t some awful religious affronttery. Everybody should be terrified. So, we go back to chapter 1,

1:26:39the last section of chapter 1. That was the last section section of chapter 8, the last one in the book. Now, we go to

1:26:44the last section of chapter 1, which is called persona creatus, where he explains this crackpot idea. So now that

1:26:51you’re properly horrified about what the transgender transhumanist vision is and how it springs from transgenderism in

1:26:56this guy’s vision, the body doesn’t matter to your identity status as a transgender. So the body doesn’t matter

1:27:03as your status as a transhuman. You’re still a person. We happiness is the most

1:27:08important thing or some bull crap. Okay. Reality truth much more important. Okay.

1:27:14So persona creatus chapter 1. This is pages 12 through 14. actually read you

1:27:19the last paragraph of this section earlier and we’re going to finish with that persona creatus. Uh I’m going to go

1:27:25back two paragraphs before that section starts today. He says we go about the matter of sex ass backwards.

1:27:33A male or female label is first imposed upon us without choice. Okay. Wrong.

1:27:40Then we are trained to adopt a set of appropriate gender behaviors whether we like them or not. Wrong.

1:27:48We have some flexibility in our particular choice of gender behavior but not much choice lest we fall a foul of

1:27:55the apartheid of sex. PS that’s a gnostic construction of sex. However,

1:28:01feminism, technology, and transgenderism have debunked the myth of a quote male

1:28:07and female world. No, they have not. But let me just read that sentence again because the feminists need this salt

1:28:13rubbed in their eye all day long. However, feminism, technology, and

1:28:18transgenderism have debunked the myth of a quote male and female world. Life has

1:28:25much more gender potential than we can imagine. Remember, this is the stepping stone to all that horror I just read at

1:28:32the end of the book. As we break free of the chains of sexual apartheid gnostic

1:28:38language, we will establish a new human culture of unparalleled creativity

1:28:45because we’re set free in the plleoma of our totality of spirituality and personal development. From homo sapiens,

1:28:52literally the wise man shall emerge our new species persona creatus the creative

1:28:58person. From the subjugation of women shall emerge the sensitization of men and from

1:29:05the apartheid of sex shall evolve the freedom of gender. Then he moves on to

1:29:12the section persona creatus to discuss this new species that we’re all going to become after we grab a hold of our

1:29:18evolution through transhumanism which is a purposed and intentional merging with technology to control our destiny and

1:29:25evolution. A new human species. Sorry, a new species. It doesn’t say human. A new

1:29:31species implies a very fundamental break with the DNA based definition of homo

1:29:36sapiens. Yet, as indicated above, we have already made that fundamental break as a

1:29:43consequence of technological changes in the way we live and reproduce. Our DNA

1:29:49no longer dictates all as aspects of our individual survival. For if it did,

1:29:54nearsighted individuals would be gone, eaten by predators they could not see.

1:30:00What a dumb argument. If we didn’t have glasses, lions would eat us.

1:30:05Therefore, transhumanism. Our DNA no longer dictates our ability

1:30:10to pass on our genes. In virtro fertilization, with or without embryo

1:30:15transfer, routinely provides reproduction for hundreds of thousands of infertile couples. The rise of

1:30:22transgenderism provides sociobiologists with evidence of a new species. The rise

1:30:29of transgenderism provides sociobiologists with evidence of a new species. What the

1:30:37hell is going on here? The rise of transgenderism provides sociologists. What the hell is that? With an idiot,

1:30:45obviously with evidence of a new species. Okay, are a new species. Is that like your argument?

1:30:50Like what the An important part of most species signature is the characteristically gender dorphic

1:30:57behaviors of their members of so what about if it’s most spe This is the most

1:31:03biologically illiterate I’m not a biologist. Why do I have to do

1:31:08this? There are asexual species. It doesn’t matter what most species do. You

1:31:14can be a species without being sexually dorphic because you can be a species without being sexual.

1:31:20I don’t know what this guy’s argument is. Most most What are you

1:31:25talking about? They thought you were smart. An important part of most species

1:31:30signature is the characteristically gender dorphic behaviors of their members. However, as noted above, thanks

1:31:37to culture and technology, humans are leaving those gender dorphic behaviors behind as they come to appreciate the

1:31:43limitless uniqueness of their sexual identities. As our creativity has blossomed, we have matured from homo

1:31:49sapiens into persona creatus. So, I just really want to stress here what the

1:31:54hell’s going on. This is just a it’s just astonishing. It’s just astonishing.

1:32:00We have become our own creators is what he’s arguing. We’re no longer male or female. We’re no longer even human

1:32:06because of why transgender. Because we’ve taken control of our sexual dimmorphism, apparently. No, we

1:32:13actually haven’t. P.S., it didn’t work. it doesn’t work. It won’t work. But because allegedly we’ve taken control of

1:32:19our sexual dimmorphism that we’ve now left behind the our our fundamental species and we’ve become persona

1:32:26creative persons. We have become a new species

1:32:32because of that is what he’s arguing because most species are defined by their sexual dimmorphism and we’ve left

1:32:38ours behind. This is the most unbelievably nonsense thing ever. But let me focus on this term that I’ve so

1:32:45far restrained myself persona creatus. So now our genus will be persons.

1:32:53So anybody who has the legal status of person falls within this genus of persona. And then we are creators.

1:33:02We are creators. Again, understand that the Gnostic and

1:33:08the hermetic program is that we are to first recognize ourselves as creators.

1:33:15That’s the actual nosis. We are not distinct from the creator himself. And

1:33:21then we are going to step into that role and seize our destiny and our evolution

1:33:27if you want it that way. And this is what he’s saying. This is some dark heretical

1:33:33scary religious thinking. The greatest catapult for humanity, he

1:33:39says, into a new species lies just beyond the next event. Sorry, just beyond the event horizon of

1:33:45transgenderism. Based on our rapidly accelerating ability to imbue software with human

1:33:51personality, autonomy, and self-awareness, a movement of quote transhumanists have joined

1:33:58transgenderists in calling for the launch of persona creatus.

1:34:06The basic transhumanist concept is that a human need not have a flesh body just

1:34:11as a woman need not have a real vagina. Humanness is in the mind just as is

1:34:19sexual identity. As software becomes increasingly capable of thinking, acting

1:34:26and feeling like a human, it should be treated as a fellow human and welcomed

1:34:32as a fellow member of the technological species persona creatus.

1:34:39The biologist will insist that members of a common species be capable of producing fertile offspring. And so it

1:34:47is for transhumanists and persona creatus. Reproduction will no longer

1:34:53necessarily occur, however, via joined DNA. Instead, people of flesh will

1:34:59upload into software the contents and processes of their minds. Think of this

1:35:04as taking all of your digital photos, movies, emails, online chats, Google

1:35:10searches, and blogging to the next level and merging it with quote mindwear that

1:35:17can replicate how you think, feel, and react based on the huge digital database

1:35:23of your thoughts, feelings, and reactions. How do you guys feel about building more data centers? I think you

1:35:30should uh think about that once we have thus digitally cloned our minds, new

1:35:35digital people can be produced by combining some of our mindwear with some of our partners’ mindwear. Voila, there

1:35:44are fertile offspring and the species persona creatus is alive. Furthermore,

1:35:51since purely digital people can reproduce with flesh humans in this manner,

1:35:57it does say that the humans and the transhumans are common members of

1:36:02persona creatus. It doesn’t say how the chat GPT is going to reproduce with you,

1:36:08but I bet it’s fun. And then we come back to kind of where we started almost. Freedom of gender is

1:36:15therefore the gateway to a freedom of form and to an explosion of human potential.

1:36:23First comes the realization that we are not limited by our gross sexual anatomy.

1:36:29Then comes the awakening that we are not limited by our anatomy at all. The mind

1:36:35is the substance of humanity. Mind is deeper than matter. And I remind you of

1:36:41the quote that I gave at the beginning. consciousness will be as free to flow beyond the confines of one flesh body as

1:36:49gender is to flow beyond the confines of one sex genital.

1:36:56So that’s a brief and I think thoroughly horrifying introduction to

1:37:03Martin Rothblatz from transgender to transhuman.

1:37:10I don’t really have a lot to add after you got to hear that. Maybe we’ll do

1:37:16more out of this book. Um,

1:37:21yeah. Yeah.

1:37:38Heat. Heat.

You Are Data | Public Occurrences, Ep. 113

0:02this is public occurrences both foreign

0:05and domestic and now your host Michael

0:09O’Fallon

0:10[Music]

0:29we are being transitioned

0:31very quickly

0:34from a real objectively true analog

0:38world

0:39where you have been encouraged to use

0:41reason

0:43your senses your mind

0:47and the tools that have been offered to

0:49us like the process of falsification

0:52to make sense of Your World

0:54to know what is true and what is false

0:58and we are being transitioned

1:01into a digital world

1:04a subjective world

1:07into a world of fertile fallacies and

1:09Make-Believe

1:11where you have been told to abandon

1:14the process of falsification to abandon

1:17reason

1:19and to trust the experts

1:23and in the process of your day-to-day

1:25especially within the curated siled

1:28world of social media you are being

1:31nudged

1:33on a minute to minute basis

1:36you are being nudged into directions

1:38that in many ways

1:41is where you want to go

1:43but where at times

1:45you hesitate to go

1:48because in the past

1:51you knew that to manipulate you people

1:54who are your enemies manipulate you by

1:57giving you what attracts you to

2:00manipulate you

2:02people who in Edward bernay’s famous

2:04book named propaganda which was

2:07published by the way in 1928

2:10well Bernay stated that quote

2:14the conscious and intelligent

2:15manipulation of the organized habits and

2:17opinions of the masses is an important

2:19element in Democratic Society

2:22those who manipulate this unseen

2:25mechanism of society constitute an

2:28invisible government

2:30which is the true ruling power of our

2:32country

2:34we are governed

2:36our minds are molded

2:38our tastes are formed our ideas

2:42suggested largely by men

2:46we have never heard of

2:48this is a logical result of the way in

2:51which our Democratic Society is

2:52organized

2:54vast numbers of human beings must

2:57cooperate in this manner if they are to

2:59live together as a smoothly functioning

3:02Society

3:03in almost every Act of Our Lives whether

3:06in the sphere of politics or business in

3:10our social conduct or our ethical

3:12thinking we are being dominated by the

3:16relatively small number of persons who

3:19understand the mental processes and

3:21social patterns of the masses

3:25it is they who pull the wires which

3:28control the public mind

3:32end quote

3:35that was Edward Bernays back in 1928

3:41but back in those days propaganda took

3:44an extreme effort detailed planning and

3:46tremendous buy-in to get the attention

3:49of the masses

3:51it is much

3:53easier

3:55today

3:57because where you had to reach everyone

4:01with different interests tastes opinions

4:06faiths

4:08in today’s world of micro targeted

4:11algorithmic marketing and propaganda you

4:14can reach all sorts of people with

4:15different tastes perspectives and

4:17opinions

4:18with marketing designs specifically for

4:21the individual man woman or child to

4:25ensure that you convince or sway a

4:28person to think a certain way

4:31devote a certain way

4:34to purchase certain things

4:38to support certain causes

4:43to hate certain people

4:48now you may ask how in the world could

4:51they just Target me

4:54in a different way that they target my

4:57wife or

4:59my kids

5:02well it is actually an easy answer

5:05but the answer

5:07may make you see things

5:10in your world

5:12a lot differently

5:14you see

5:16people aren’t just a collective group to

5:19sway with large sweeping marketing

5:21campaigns

5:23people aren’t just

5:26Collective

5:27people are no matter what any Neo

5:30Marxist would say people are individuals

5:33and you see

5:36here’s the thing

5:40someone has been watching you

5:43more so

5:44something has been watching you

5:48for long

5:50long time

5:54and what I am referring to is not just

5:57surveillance on social media

6:01it’s about knowing every single detail

6:05of your entire life

6:08and not just your actions

6:11but your thoughts as well

6:13because

6:16you are data

6:20and every purchase you have made

6:24every internet search you have made

6:27every job search you have embarked upon

6:31every doctor’s visit

6:33every romantic date

6:36every phone call you have made

6:40every text you have sent

6:42every Bible verse that you have ever

6:45read on your phone

6:48every place that you have been

6:51every private conversation that you have

6:53had

6:54every picture you have ever taken

6:58every video you have ever taken

7:02every single keystroke that you have

7:04made on your laptop

7:07every aspect of your life has been

7:11recorded

7:13logged stored and utilized to make a

7:18composite a mirror

7:22of you

7:25or of your wife

7:28or of your children of everyone

7:32because

7:35you are data

7:37to them

7:42and so if they would like to drive your

7:45purchases

7:46they know what drives your psyche to

7:49decide to purchase something and they

7:51will nudge you in that direction

7:54if they would like to make you panic or

7:57change your mind about something

7:59they will nudge you according to the way

8:01that they know that you think

8:04if they would like to make you doubt

8:06something

8:08they know what makes you individually

8:12question things

8:14and there are those that are in the

8:16process of attempting to totally control

8:19this world

8:20and the way that they will be able to do

8:22this is with ease

8:25It Is by controlling you

8:27individually

8:30because they have created a hyper real

8:32you a hyper real you that they know will

8:35act a certain way

8:37what will trigger you to buy a certain

8:39way to vote a certain way

8:42and they will

8:45nudge you

8:47in the direction that they want you to

8:48go

8:50and as the nudging increases which it

8:53will exponentially

8:55and this has and will more frequently

8:58lead to predictive modeling

9:01not just a guess of how someone will

9:04behave or act or react but actually a

9:07pathway

9:09so after this past week’s bipartisan

9:11grilling of tick tock for what is

9:13obvious issues with the Chinese

9:15Communist Party receiving our data and

9:18by the way as I’ve said in the past data

9:20is the new oil

9:23well the Chinese Communist Party

9:24accessing information from your phone or

9:27smart device well they wanted to make a

9:31big fuss about that

9:32which something should be made about

9:35that that shouldn’t be happening

9:37and the United States government decided

9:39that it would like to ensure that they

9:41take the place of China in hoovering up

9:44all of your data

9:46so they came up with the restrict Act

9:49but the restrict Act is not limited to

9:52just tick tock

9:53it gives the government authority over

9:55all forms of communication domestic or

9:58abroad and grants powers to quote

10:02enforce any mitigation measure to

10:04address any risk end quote to National

10:08Security now and in any potential future

10:12transaction

10:15so what happens if you are designated as

10:19a national security threat

10:22what can they access of yours to confirm

10:24it

10:26well everything

10:29all of your data

10:31and you might want to notice the

10:33preemptive attack on Quantum encryption

10:35in there too it also allows the Director

10:38of National Intelligence dni and

10:41security of Commerce the authority to

10:43universally designate new foreign

10:45adversaries without notifying Congress

10:48and a 15-day window to notify the

10:51president it also requires a joint

10:53resolution of Congress to overturn this

10:56resist Act

10:58now if you might have heard before

11:01an individuals can now also be U.S

11:06citizens that are deemed a national

11:08security threat

11:10so all of a sudden although you are

11:12domestic you can be called a foreign

11:15individual

11:17so once designated the bill will grant

11:20authority to enforce any action they

11:22deem necessary to mitigate their

11:24perceived threat with no due process and

11:27few limits on punishments

11:30so the government

11:32are taking aggressive steps to have full

11:35access

11:37to all of your data

11:40way past what they are currently doing

11:43with the Patriot Act

11:45consider this a Amendment to the Patriot

11:49Act

11:50but the most intrusive part of mining

11:52your data

11:54is just around the corner

11:58not just hacking your phone

12:00or hacking your laptop

12:02you see there’s two things that are

12:05happening here both from the government

12:06side and on the corporate side it’s a

12:09public-private partnership

12:11and the private side

12:13combined with how the government will

12:15endorse it

12:17is actually even more intrusive

12:20because we’re not just talking about

12:22hacking your phone

12:24or hacking your laptop

12:26but hacking

12:29you

12:31because

12:32you are

12:34data

12:35and we are on the precipice of the

12:38internet of bodies

12:41the goal of the internet of bodies

12:43called iob

12:46which is described by the world economic

12:47Forum as an ecosystem of quote an

12:51unprecedented number of sensors

12:53including emotional sensors attached to

12:56implanted within or integrated into

12:58human bodies to monitor analyze and even

13:01modify

13:03human bodies and behavior let me read

13:06that last part to analyze and even

13:09modify

13:11bodies and behavior

13:14end quote and the key words in that

13:17sentence that the pr machine from the

13:19world economic Forum skips right over

13:22is the actual stated goal to modify

13:26bodies and behavior

13:29so

13:30who will be in charge of those

13:32modifications

13:36can you safely assume that it will be

13:39those who have something to gain from

13:40the modification of your actions and

13:42behaviors

13:45well in a November 2019 interview with

13:47CNN

13:48the professor to advisor and World

13:50economic Forum founder clown Schwab whom

13:52we’ve talked about many times in our

13:55presentations in our podcast his name is

13:57Yuval Noah Harari well he warned that

14:00quote humans are now hackable animals

14:05quote meaning the technology exists by

14:08which a company or government can now

14:11know you better than you know yourself

14:15so Harare predicted that algorithms will

14:18increasingly be used to make decisions

14:19that historically have been made by

14:22humans

14:23in other words they have that other you

14:26that mirror of you of those algorithms

14:30that normally would be how you would

14:32choose things

14:34or how collectively a group would choose

14:37things

14:38which is important now that we really

14:41start to balkanize

14:43and we collectivize human beings

14:46according to their identity groups their

14:47Affinity groups their beliefs

14:49their ethnicities

14:51so as we then have algorithms that will

14:55be increasingly used to make decisions

14:57that historically have been made by

14:59humans either by yourself or someone

15:02else

15:04including whether or not you’re going to

15:07vote for someone

15:08or not or let’s say that within a

15:11corporate sense including whether or not

15:12you’ll be hired for a particular job

15:15whether you’ll be granted a loan by a

15:16bank

15:18what Scholastic curriculum you will

15:19follow and even who you will marry if

15:23there is still such a thing as marriage

15:25in the future

15:26and even decisions about what

15:29Faith you will be embracing or not

15:32embracing

15:34you see the world economic forums plan

15:36for the iob the internet’s internet of

15:38bodies even includes biosensors that

15:41measure and monitor your biological

15:43functioning and emotional states

15:46now already the U.S pentagon of course

15:50has collaborated with another company on

15:52the development of a tiny implantable

15:54biosensor that detects Disease by

15:57tracking chemical reactions inside of

15:59your body

16:00for example

16:02it would be able to determine whether

16:03you’ve been infected with a virus like

16:05let’s say covid or influenza long before

16:09any symptoms actually emerge

16:11now as explained by defense one

16:14this is a company the biosensor consists

16:17of two parts quote one is a three

16:20millimeter string of hydrogel a material

16:23whose network of polymer chains is used

16:26in some contact lenses and other

16:27implants

16:28inserted Under the Skin with a syringe

16:32the string includes a specially

16:33engineered molecule that sends a

16:35fluorescent signal outside the body when

16:37the body begins to fight an infection

16:40the other part is an electronic

16:42component attached to the skin it sends

16:45light through the skin detects the

16:48fluorescent signal and generates another

16:50signal that the wearer can send to a

16:53doctor website Etc it’s like a blood lab

16:56on the skin that can pick up the body’s

16:58response to illness before the presence

17:00of other symptoms

17:02like let’s say coughing or a fever end

17:04quote

17:06so now the sensor allows a person’s

17:08biology to be examined at a distance via

17:12smartphone connectivity or just

17:15connectivity to a 5G or future 6G

17:17Network

17:19and so this company that is planning

17:22this is backed by Google of course the

17:24largest data mining company in the world

17:28because you are data

17:31another invention that stands poised to

17:33track your health is a biocompatible

17:35near infrared quantum dot micro needle

17:38array and as explained by a 2019 science

17:42translational medicine article

17:44this vaccine delivery system which is

17:47what it is is able to deliver patterns

17:50of near infrared light emitting

17:52microparticles to the skin

17:55that can then be

17:57imaged using modified smartphones in

18:01other words it should serve as an

18:03invisible tattoo of your vaccination

18:06record

18:07huh

18:09well Bill Gates is also fun of the

18:11development of a birth control microchip

18:13that can be turned on and off by remote

18:15control

18:17the National Post writes about this

18:19quote the birth control microchip would

18:23hold nearly two decades worth of the

18:25hormone commonly used in contraceptives

18:27and dispense 30 micrograms a day

18:31the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation

18:33has given more than 4.5 million dollars

18:36to microchips Inc to develop personal

18:40systems that enables women to regulate

18:42their fertility end quote

18:45in 2019 dare bioscience a San

18:49diego-based biopharma company announced

18:51it had reached an agreement

18:53to acquire microchips biotech

18:57and they would be adding the birth

18:59control microchip to its portfolio now

19:02interestingly back in 2014 five years

19:05before microchips appeared confident it

19:08would be able to get the product to

19:10Market in 2018 but as of 2022 it’s still

19:14in development

19:15and countries around the world are now

19:17working on a system for a central bank

19:20digital currency

19:22to be implemented

19:24now as we’ve discussed many times before

19:26on our podcast and in our presentations

19:29cbdc is a fiat currency in digital form

19:33that is programmable so that you can

19:35only spend your money on certain things

19:37or in specific places as desired by the

19:40issuer not by you

19:43so in the past where you would say hey

19:45I’ll spend my money whatever way I want

19:47to it’s my money no no it’s not really

19:51your money it’s the money of the issuer

19:53who’s Distributing it for you to use to

19:57go back into the circular okay do you

19:59see how that works

20:00so while all of this is happening at the

20:02same time that the World Health

20:04Organization which is of course another

20:06deep State technocrat stronghold

20:08is building a Global vaccine passport

20:11system

20:12now we talked about this two and a half

20:14years ago

20:15so once CBD sees Central Bank digital

20:18currencies and a global vaccine passport

20:21system are up and running

20:22it won’t be long before they’re combined

20:25into one

20:28likely

20:29in the form

20:31of an implantable microchip

20:33or other uses that are bio healthy let’s

20:37say

20:39and so it won’t be just what you were

20:40typing in your keyboard that will be

20:42heading to the neo-fascist totalitarian

20:44state it won’t be just what you are

20:46saying over your voice chat that will be

20:48heading to the neo-fascist integral

20:49estate it won’t be just what you are

20:52purchasing that will be heading to the

20:54Neo fascist integral estate no no no

20:56it will be what every single molecule in

21:01your body is doing

21:0424 hours

21:06seven days a week

21:09what you are thinking at all times

21:12and then

21:14it will be time to

21:16nudge you

21:19but this time

21:21and by the time that all this happens

21:24you will be an automaton

21:28because the idea is to ensure that the

21:30new Sovereign and omnipotent God made of

21:33man’s own hands will be the one who is

21:37in control at all times

21:41now there’s no reason why we must accept

21:44this total totalitarianism as inevitable

21:48we should push back on every movement

21:50that demands authoritarian control every

21:54single movement even if that heavy hand

21:58of authoritarianism is from the faith

22:01side of things

22:04we must retain human Liberty we must

22:07demand human freedom

22:09we must tell those that are demanding

22:11that we must acquiesce to their demands

22:13for power to jump out of a window

22:17because the Free People of this world

22:20need to take the reins of power back

22:24for objective truth

22:26and a way

22:28from subjective tyranny

22:30the honest people need to take back the

22:33church

22:34the Constitutional people need to take

22:36back our nation’s representation and we

22:39must realize that we are the government

22:42not the technocrats who just want to use

22:45us

22:46as data

22:49I am more than data

22:52I am made in the image of the true God

22:56and not

22:59made by the god of the technocratic

23:01interval as human hands

23:05I won’t be nudged

23:08and we won’t lose

23:11because

23:13we must win I’m Michael O’Fallon and

23:16this has been public occurrences both

23:18foreign and domestic

23:25foreign

23:27[Music]

24:37foreign

24:38[Music]

25:17[Applause]

25:18thank you

25:20[Music]

25:41[Music]

25:47foreign

25:49[Music]

26:05[Music]

26:31[Music]

26:53foreign

27:01foreign

27:04[Music]

Introduction To The 4th Industrial Revolution | Public Occurrences, Ep. 56

0:02this is public occurrences both foreign and domestic and now your host

0:08michael o’fallon

0:14[Music]

0:29today we are going to give a brief introduction into the actual end goals of what is the impetus of global

0:34projects like build back better and the great reset

0:40and the end goal is called the fourth industrial revolution but just like everything else in the realm of klaus

0:46schwab the democrats george soros and china the soft embraceable name of the thing that the totalitarians are trying to

0:52bring in is just a facade of something quite ugly and quite monstrous

0:58but that is why they give embraceable names to black lives matter which is actually the

1:03front of a marxist revolutionary group diversity equity and inclusion which is

1:09a way of creating entry-ism into the workplace the great reset which is a way to reset

1:16all of our systems to end capitalism and to move us into a totalitarian state

1:23and the fourth industrial revolution well we are in the process of being coerced through a human meta-system

1:30transition and meta-system transitions are events representing the evolutionary emergence of a higher level of organization

1:37through the integration of subsystems into a higher meta-system and meta-systems are generally

1:42understood first through mediums of communication that work as functions of control like language let’s say

1:49and so if you would like to be able to start taking apart someone’s language or the meanings behind words then you

1:56deconstruct the same would be the case with writing speaking or reading

2:02and this communication in turn affects physical actions or things that require energy that turn into the

2:08action guided by mediums of communication such as agriculture let’s say

2:15distribution industry education

2:21and even faith and these things need order they need organization

2:26so in past eras where traveling great distances was not what populations engaged in more

2:32than once or twice in their lives we had a human organization as tribes in ages past which led to chiefdoms and

2:40kingdoms in our development post westphalia but westphalia really codified the

2:46sovereignty of nations and then lastly as our communication became broader and distributed

2:52mankind evolved into the nation state concept so

2:58really you go from being agrarian first then distributive then industrial

3:04but let’s also understand our industrial revolutions as this transition into the

3:09fourth industrial revolution and hence the great reset like the first industrial revolution

3:16steam power factories the second industrial revolution’s application of science to mass

3:22production and manufacturing the use of gas and oil to run things

3:27the third industrial revolutions start into digitization well the fourth industrial revolution’s

3:34technologies such as artificial intelligence genome editing augmented reality

3:39robotics 3d printing but also the transition

3:45of humans the merging of humans with technology

3:50and not just the use of technology but the actual synthesis

3:56of humans and technology it will also rapidly change the way

4:01humans create exchange and distribute economically and as occurred in the previous

4:06revolutions that we’ve just spoken of it’s going to profoundly transform our institutions

4:13our industries and us individually more importantly this revolution will be

4:19guided by the choices that people are going to make today because the fourth industrial revolution

4:25heralds a series of social political cultural and economic upheavals that will unfold

4:32over the 21st century building on the widespread availability of digital technologies that were the

4:38result of the third industrial or digital revolution the fourth industrial revolution will be driven largely by the

4:44convergence of digital biological and physical innovations

4:51everything will be forced to change all systems in the past economic systems

4:58are systems of communication well all of those are obsolete

5:04and they must bend the knee of submission to the new systems and hence to achieve this all old systems

5:12will be declared corrupt racist

5:17possibly broken well the fourth industrial revolution is

5:22distinguishable from the third because it is where the human being

5:28meets with the cyber world where technology and people are not distinct

5:34we are not separate well we had the personal computer and we had a life

5:40if you remember back in the 80s and 90s and even early 2000s but now we’ve transitioned to an age

5:47where our devices and sensors will become an extension of us because as

5:52i’ve said in the past many times facebook is an extension of us twitter is an extension of us

5:59our phones are an extension of you and me our smart watches are extensions of who

6:05we are and what we do this fourth industrial revolution

6:12has the same triggers as the third revolution but it’s where cyber meets human this

6:18time it’s the same in businesses it’s the same in the workplace

6:24everything gets integrated customized and smart automated and if you are listening by the way

6:31right now you will have to excuse the planes overhead i am not home and i’m in some place

6:36where i’m just underneath a jet way but back to the subject the industrial revolution 4.0

6:44automates complex tasks it is the age of the internet of things

6:49and cloud computing so where the first three what you would call revolutions were

6:56mainly about empowering organizations almost all innovation in the last few years has been driven by the consumers

7:03and is now really about changing organizations when i say organizations i don’t know just mean businesses i also

7:10mean nations nation states so when we look at the changes that are

7:17taking place this next properly called revolution

7:24will be in an invisible world so far there are three main revolutions

7:29that have all been very visible we could see the tablets the iphones the

7:34wearables they were all visible but increases in our capabilities are

7:40empowered by technology that moves further really out of sight it becomes

7:48invisible so innovation has come from the shift to the cloud

7:55invisible processing power storage and intelligence more innovation will come from what’s

8:01happening inside and around the device versus the object we can actually see

8:07artificial intelligence powerful algorithms computing

8:13so an ecosystem of computing will surround us becoming so natural it will

8:19just about disappear into the background it will become completely

8:25intrusive it will fit into more parts of our world and attempt to solve all of our problems

8:32without the slightest bit of human interaction in other words

8:38you won’t be controlling the devices you won’t be controlling the intelligence

8:43it will be controlling you so unlike the other industrial revolutions

8:49those industrial revolutions benefited mankind to help us to become more

8:54educated to be more mobile and to be more autonomous so what’s happening in the fourth

9:00industrial revolution and the irony of the whole thing is that it will control us

9:07more so than we control it it will work seamlessly with itself

9:13and we must learn to work within our new digital master that will need totality

9:19sort of a digital totalitarianism to operate properly

9:24hence now the announcements of neurolink by elon musk

9:31being available as early as next year so we’ve talked about these things uh in

9:36previous episodes in the last several years on the causes of things and also when we started pointing even

9:43back in 2017 to h.g wells in what he would call a world brain

9:48it was a brain that does our thinking for us and maybe those things seemed very

9:55science-fictiony and as if they were way out there and mike’s really going off his rocker no folks it’s right here

10:01right now the thing is is that most of us just don’t even realize that it’s here and it doesn’t seem like a possibility

10:08so to succeed all of these plans will need to be synergized in connectivity

10:14so constant connectivity and an all-in let’s say from every human being on the

10:20planet to be truly effective there really can’t be one stray molecule

10:28outside of the control of the new system because the great reset and the fourth

10:33industrial revolution in essence is complete it is total

10:38and it must be measured in mathematical with an egalitarian equity-based basis for human interaction

10:44and now maybe seeing what is happening around you right now might start to be making

10:51some sense so economies national borders

10:57those sorts of things aren’t just transitioning it’s also transitioning us

11:04all of a humanity as we move more towards this concept

11:10of a collective mind and as we are forcibly moved to this system

11:15where it’s necessary to operate from a world brain concept we really must then remove and i’m not

11:23speaking on behalf of myself right now but i’m saying in terms of those that want to have control over this those

11:29that are going to be the head of the technocracy in terms of where they see themselves they want to remove the ideas and

11:36customs and traditions and systems of tribes nations as well as personal

11:43autonomy volitional capabilities etc as nearly every current system will need

11:49to be globally linked and part of the same system

11:54so while you have been going about your life and trying to make a living

11:59and dealing with the situations that have around us from 2020 to 2022 now

12:06you probably knew nothing about this you just wanted to get back to normal

12:11we aren’t going back to normal and if we were to get out of the new normal that they’re preparing for us

12:17it’s going to take an awful lot but i kind of see some hope that that might starting to be happening

12:23well where did these concepts come from well they came from brilliant consequentialists and thinkers

12:30and they came from futurists that consequentially understood that if we were to move from a capitalistic

12:35democracy to a synergized socialist technocracy much like china is today we needed to

12:42ensure that booms and busts infallible human decisions and things and tribes

12:47and ethnic cultures and habits those things couldn’t get in the way you couldn’t fight for your country you

12:54couldn’t fight for your people you couldn’t fight for your nation so you have to destroy and mock the

13:01ideas of peoples of cultures of nations because we’re moving towards

13:07a gigantic hegemonic supernation because we all have to be part of the

13:13same thing that’s been the whole point of multiculturalism that’s brought into

13:19hegemonic cultures to break them up to shatter them to break them into bits

13:26so then you can at some point mold them together into a monoculture

13:32but it really also is a lot more than just advancing through the free market of ideas that are then embraced by

13:39individuals who want to exercise greater individual autonomy and they want to of course then also

13:45flex greater individual wealth for themselves but the fourth industrial revolution

13:52as i said before in the beginning is really misnamed because what is happening really is not

13:58an industrial revolution it is a revolution

14:04no doubt but it really is an expertly marketed

14:09with all the shine polish and applied intelligence of the greatest minds of propaganda the world has ever seen

14:16it has brought together the largest corporations in world history

14:21it has brought to the table all of the nations of the world

14:27it has brought together for years as a matter of fact

14:33the young leaders over the past 30 years that are now our current leaders like dan crenshaw

14:40jacinda ardem who is the prime minister of new zealand vladimir putin angela merkel sergey brin

14:47emmanuel macron larry page mark zuckerberg

14:53all of these names that are the leaders in their respective fields of influence were all part of the

14:58same group at one time or another and all these leaders in their own areas

15:03are part of something much different than another phase of industrial revolution because in the previous industrial

15:10revolutions changed occurred because of invention because of innovation and because of the

15:16great promise of the invention and innovation that was created people gladly bought into the innovation

15:23and promise created in each one of the previous industrial revolutions because the previous industrial revolutions

15:28benefited everybody and they benefited as well

15:33capitalism freedom liberty and advanced communication that

15:39then transitioned into a greater awareness and learning and this promoted true tolerance and

15:44better understanding of our fellow man because that isn’t what the fourth industrial revolution will do

15:50in fact the fourth industrial revolution is purpose to bring about massive changes

15:57to the world around us and the fourth industrial revolution will change us all of us all of our

16:03nations nations will dissolve away in the fourth industrial revolution

16:08constitutional agreements and rights will dissolve work will disappear

16:15so if you really want to know what klaus schwab was getting at in his book the fourth industrial revolution

16:21it can be summed up by another german man whose ideas challenged much of the world a hundred years before klaus

16:27schwab was born and here is what that man said a hundred years before the birth of

16:34klaus schwab quote the philosophers have only interpreted

16:40the world in various ways the point however is to change it

16:47end quote and the man that penned those words was a man named karl marx

16:53and karl marx also stated quote the theory of communists may be summed up in

16:59the single sentence abolition of private property

17:05end quote and yes the fourth industrial revolution as conceived by klaus schwab does exactly that to every society and nation

17:12in the world it abolishes private property and in late-stage communism

17:18as envisioned by karl marx that utopian idea

17:23it abolishes work so what you’re seeing with the idea of the fourth industrial revolution

17:31which is really another communist revolution you’re seeing what really is

17:37the quick evolution the skipping through the processes all the way forward

17:43to something completely new almost as if communist china

17:50communist russia had stayed together cambodia had continued to go cuba was

17:55successful in all that it was doing and it was able to somehow bring itself to where it thought it

18:01would be by the time that we actually got to the 21st century even though

18:07many of those communist dictatorships fell apart so anyway back to marx

18:13and basically marx created the idea that society’s relations of production arising on the basis of a given

18:20productive force that was the economic base of society to marx he also explained that on the

18:26foundation of the economic base there arises certain political institutions

18:32laws customs culture etc and ideas and ways of

18:38thinking morality etc these constitute the political ideological superstructure of society

18:44you can call these superstructures systems so these systems not only have their

18:51origin in the economic base but their features also ultimately correspond to the character and

18:56development of that economic base like the way people organize society

19:02its relations of production and its mode of production but marx would state that by advancing

19:08contradictions in other words saying that things that society says are

19:14good are actually really bad things like individual human liberty

19:20prosperity the free market meritocracy well those things are basically bad and

19:28what is needed is collectivism and only through a collective understanding of how we are all in this together

19:35and how we all must do our part and all strive to give our entire being

19:41in existence for the collective good only then can man achieve true liberation

19:47and of course this was also very similar to the views of rousseau

19:53and very closely associated with the views of hegel and without a doubt

19:58gramsci and cultural marxism had a big part of this

20:04cultural marxism as well as envisioned by the fabians in their own context and then as well interpreted

20:11as mao came back for a full cultural revolution

20:17but especially these views are developed for our modern times by a man whose name

20:22was herbert marcusa and we’ll be speaking about marcusa in length on another episode and i do encourage you

20:29to [Music] visit my friend’s website new discourses that’s james lindsay as he has done more

20:37in depth on marcusa than i ever imagined that he actually would

20:42when we first started talking about marcusa about two years ago i didn’t know that he would do this deep

20:50of a dive on ibra marcusa but all of this is really developing towards a utopian communism

20:56it’s advancing through this system that we have referred to many many times in the past

21:02called the dialectical process and you might know a bit about the dialectical process

21:08through the method known as thesis antithesis synthesis it can also be expressed in the formula

21:14problem reaction solution find a problem or crisis

21:19react strongly to that problem or crisis and then present your pre-made prefabricated solution

21:28because really the solution is what you’re after it’s the operational success

21:35and that prefabricated solution to everything that is wrong today

21:41is the fourth industrial revolution and what the neo-marxist the hegelians the

21:46apostles of marcosa have done together is attempt to jump all the evolution needed

21:51in the dialectical process you know that constant move steadily that real long march through the

21:58institutions that rudy deutsche had talked about let’s skip all of that evolution that’s necessary in the

22:03dialectical process and let’s really get to things in that utopia right now so

22:09they want to shove the entire world into late stage utopian marxism with a

22:15fascist or corporatist fair because you have to make sure that they’re along for the ride too that there’s something in

22:21it for them so it really isn’t the fourth industrial revolution

22:28it is the first worldwide enviro-communist

22:34fascist techno-socialist revolution there’s all sorts of things that are

22:39along with this and it really is the worst combination

22:45of the worst ideas of all time and everything in our world will need to

22:51of course change for klaus schwab’s revolution to really work

22:57and instead of a giant world war to make this all happen where destruction of nearly everything would need to take

23:03place because literally no one who has any sense in the world would want this madness to actually happen

23:09if they knew about it well you had to do what is called framing or operational preparation the

23:14environment first for decades and then you need to create a worldwide

23:21precipitating event that changes everything instead of a massive destructive war

23:28you create a great reset of the world a massive event where you have nearly

23:35everyone on earth everyone gripped in fear all the time in fact you need every

23:41sector of societal control to push the fear every day you need the politicians

23:47the media arts and entertainment all of the churches all of the mosques

23:54all of the corporations where the primary solution to calm everyone’s fears must be collective

24:01everyone must participate in the solution everyone must be a part of the solution because the solution

24:08is rebirth it’s resurrection it is literally dying to the old world

24:17it is dying to the old systems and then

24:23catapulting and embracing a new path to

24:29the first worldwide enviro-communist totalitarian with fascist tendencies

24:35revolution because that’s what this is

24:40it is total totalitarianism

24:47it is digital we will no longer just have the internet to research entertain and communicate at

24:53our whims no the internet will now be in everything

24:59in everything the internet will now guide us it will protect us

25:05it will save us from ourselves we will be told what to eat what to think

25:11what to do and if you voice any displeasure to your new captors in the revolution

25:17then you will violate the new community standards which are arbitrary and evolving at all

25:25times the idea of family will change the idea of

25:31be fruitful and multiply will change the concept of heteronormativity will

25:36cease to exist eventually a few decades from now human work will cease

25:44because if advanced automation intelligence can take care of all the human jobs and

25:49work then finally we have marx’s dream

25:56total liberation and you might be thinking there is no way that all of this could

26:03be planned just since the summer of 2020 and you are correct

26:09because you live on the end of a 250 year long spear

26:15the very tip of it and to say the very least this has all been discussed and talked

26:21through since the end of the first world war the world war that the communists

26:27thought would spark the world’s workers to revolt against their nations well that didn’t happen

26:34because as the new marxist the neo-marxist the cultural marxist figured out

26:39that you couldn’t just point out contradictions and you also couldn’t just seize the

26:45means of production you also had to

26:50seize the culture and that was going to mean a long long

26:56march through each and every human institution

27:02through education through corporations through nations through the arts and entertainment

27:10through all of the media and through

27:15faith and that first example of this working was mao

27:22which then transitioned into dengizum under deng xiaopin which is where a fascistic

27:29totalitarianism was embraced and where american money where american education

27:35and intelligence where american bred but technocratic ideology and american technology

27:43was invested china to create the thing that we had to fight

27:49against and then if you did that the only way to beat china

27:57was to insist that we shed all of our constitutional chains

28:02that hold us down that would then liberate us to become china

28:10a china that now is already way way ahead of the united states and europe in creating the artificially intelligent

28:18the worker less utopia the final stage of humankind

28:24a humankind that will be transformed transitioned into technology itself and you’ll be told

28:30that if we don’t hurry up to become like china if we don’t do everything we can to rid

28:35ourselves of truck drivers longshoremen lawyers educators of salespersons of

28:42laborers and of course anybody that opposes us we got to get rid of them

28:48well if we don’t do that we will lose to china at the same time we’ll be told that we

28:54have killed the planet and that we must now completely disrupt and dismantle our nation’s infrastructure

29:01and so here we are at the end of a 250 year-long spear

29:06i will go into that into much greater detail in future episodes and we will help you not just to prepare

29:13but to resist and end this sick and twisted dream of the most reprehensible human beings in history

29:19and ladies and gentlemen this is the thing that we must rally around that the american

29:24experiment the experiment known as the united states the u.s constitution must

29:30become more than just an experiment and truth

29:35objective truth must be at the very core i’m michael o’fallon and this has been

29:42public occurrences both foreign and domestic

29:49[Music]

30:40so

30:46[Music]

31:42[Applause] [Music]

32:07[Music]

32:14[Music]

32:30[Music]

32:56[Music]

33:48you

The Big Picture | Michael O’Fallon

0:03[Music]

0:14Well, if we were to go back in time about let’s say

0:20maybe maybe 10 years at the ad advent of what was the push

0:29back against what would be known as the woke movement. Not many people knew what that even was. Like what is it that’s

0:35actually going on here? And if you recall, if you went back to 2015, there’s a lot of people saying, “Oh,

0:41well, it’s just people they’re following. It’s it’s the natural uh, you know, progression of where things happen

0:47in regards to um this kind of liberal education and so forth.” And no, it

0:53wasn’t. It wasn’t. And so when I started to speak up in 2016 and then when we

1:00debuted Sovereign Nations in 2017, a lot of people just called us crazy.

1:06They said because one of the problems was is that when I came out with the first few conferences regarding issues

1:12like critical race theory, intersectionality, and also the big picture of what was really going on.

1:19about 90% of it sounded absolutely insane to people that were living back

1:25in 2016 and 2017. I mean, the world was stable, right? Things were okay. You

1:31could plan on your future. You kind of knew what was going to be happening from year to year to year. But there was this

1:36other stuff that was going on mainly in education. It was mainly happening in the schools and the universities. Some pretty pretty

1:42crazy stuff. But, you know, we could see a little bit of it starting to leak into other places.

1:48The problem is is that I knew where this was going back between 2009 to 2012.

1:55Not because I was smarter than anybody else, but because I was actually in the rooms where this was being discussed.

2:02Because some of the people that were going to be eventually doing this were people that were my clients. There were

2:08actually people who were beginning to make inroads into education at the time. They’re making inroads into Christianity

2:16and to all faiths at the time because it couldn’t just be into one faith. You see, because as one faith goes radically

2:24subjective and progressive, well then people are going to say, “Well, maybe this is wrong. There’s something really wrong with Roman

2:30Catholicism, with evangelical Christianity, they’re going to hop to something else where people actually

2:35have standards such as scripture.” So, it had to be every faith.

2:41So when I started to explain what’s going on in evangelical Christianity, in

2:48corporations, in the media, and where everything’s actually going through all of your major major press uh and and

2:56news media outlets, people just like, “Oh, Mike, you they can’t all be in.” You’re like sounding like conspiracy.

3:03Well, the thing is, if you’re going to make a transformative change, it needs to be total. It can’t be one aspect of

3:11society or pillar of society. It has to be every pillar of society. That’s how transformative change works. Because if

3:19it’s just one pillar, then the other three pillars or four pillars can say, “I’m sorry. We need to start to help

3:24that pillar get back reconstructed and whatever because it’s starting to fall. We can’t have that happen because you

3:32have to understand revolutions don’t happen in stable environments.

3:38Revolutions happen in destabilized environments. It’s what George Soris

3:44would refer to as a less than equilibrium environment.

3:49That’s how you create a revolution. And you create a revolution by having

3:54conversations and ideas and propaganda running through minds everywhere of everyone to the point where there is no

4:02safe space within our society where you could go where anything’s sane anymore.

4:10So, when you think back, how many of you here, and I know there’s a few of you, were basically redpilled by that first

4:18video that came out with James Lindsay and myself on the rooftop of New York

4:24City. A number of hands. Well, see, it wasn’t just you. When that video came

4:29out, it wasn’t just Christians that called us and said, “Okay, we see it now.” Because

4:34if you remember what the situation was with Dr. Lindsay and myself and then we had Peter Begoian there as well was that

4:40we’re going to have this conversation. We had two men that came out of what was called the new atheist movement that

4:45happened between uh the early 2010s. And what they were able to see when I

4:50was explaining to them what was happening within the Southern Baptist Convention was oh well yeah that

4:56happened here too. As a matter of fact, it happened exactly the same way. It’s

5:02as if you picked up Revolution in a box. Revolution for Dummies. And now you’re

5:07going to see that actually take place. So what you started to see is that came

5:12into the Southern Baptist Convention. It came into the Presbyterian Church of America. It came into the OPC. It came into the Assemblies of God. It was

5:21always already there for several decades in the Roman Catholic Church. And that’s where a lot of it actually was started.

5:27And then as well, it came into the mainline denominations quickly thereafter. And actually, if you’re

5:32taking a look at the whole thing, which was again a transformative movement, it’s actually been around for quite a

5:38long time. But it’s what helps you then to achieve what Dr. Lindseay was just

5:44speaking about, which was this new model that’s different than the model that we’ve been using before, which is

5:50different than the way we would normally think of things within biblical Christianity or even within a

5:56Judeo-Christian framework that covers our entire nation. you know, you got to work to eat.

6:03You got to save to make sure you have something in the future. And it’s not necessarily bound upon all of your moral

6:10uh you know, of course, if you’re a murderer, that’s a problem. If you’re someone who’s running around and committing adultery all over the place,

6:16that’s a problem, too. But it’s not necessarily bound by that. It’s how hard you work and how innovative you are. If

6:23your work merits then the revenue that you’d be receiving.

6:28But that’s what happened. And so when I approached a number of

6:33different Christian leaders about what was happening, almost all of them didn’t want to hear

6:39about what was happening with the United Nations and the World Economic Forum. Most of them didn’t really care about

6:45what I had to say about the Belt and Road Initiative. Most of them had no care at all about what I was talking about within the

6:51fourth industrial revolution. As a matter of fact, even today we have

6:57some folks that are connected to organizations like Founders Ministries and others. American Reformer, they’re

7:04saying, “Oh, Michael Fallon talking about the fourth industrial revolution just like time in Klein. I’m sorry, but

7:11that’s actually at the center of what’s happening.” And maybe you’re okay with transhumanism, but I’m not

7:20because everything is about transforming trans, right? And we’ll get more into

7:26that tomorrow and the day after. Dr. Lindseay did lie to you, by the way. He

7:32told you that I was going to be speaking about integralism. Uh, I’m going to be talking about the big picture first and

7:37tomorrow we’ll start the deep dive into integralism and really more of what is going on, which is neoalism.

7:43So it doesn’t mean that those that have examined integralism and the issues with

7:48it, there’s a couple very good books that we’ll talk about tomorrow that address those questions in regards to Roman Catholic integralism. But what we

7:55really have is neointegralism which is trying to provide a moral framework that has changed that has

8:02evolved that has the old moral framework has been put to death and now we have a new moral framework that we’re all going

8:09to be working under where everybody’s going to be heading. It’s what’s called the Prrisca Theologia. But let’s talk

8:15about the big picture. What’s really happening? And we’re going to hit some

8:20parts of this now and we’ll hit another few parts of it tomorrow and the next day. Kind of letting it evolve. I hate

8:26to use that word, but letting it evolve in terms of your understanding of what’s happening so I don’t just smack you with

8:33something that’s difficult to understand right off the bat. Does that sound okay? All right. Here we go. It’s the big

8:38picture. the leap into the fourth industrial revolution. And remember when

8:44I say the fourth industrial revolution, I don’t just mean what’s happening with technology around us.

8:50I’m also talking about you because that’s what it’s all about.

8:58So at UNESCO, this would be back in the mid-40s at the founding of UNESCO, this would be their

9:06motto. this would be the thing, their purpose statement of what they were really trying to achieve. And please

9:12feel free to take a a picture with your iPhone. That’s fine. But what they said was this. Since wars begin in the minds

9:20of men, it is in the minds of men that the defenses of peace must be

9:27constructed. Now, you might read that and maybe you read that 20 years ago, 30 years ago, 40

9:32years ago, and say, “Well, that’s a great idea. It really needs to become through the minds of men that this

9:38happens. You see that men are just convinced that really they need to follow the gospel. They need to ask

9:45Jesus into their heart or maybe they need to follow a new set of moral

9:50concepts that really bring us together as humanity so we pursue peace first and

9:55foremost. Let me read that to you again in a 2025 context.

10:03Since wars begin in the minds of men, it is in the minds of men that the

10:12defenses of peace must be constructed.

10:18Now, if I read that to you 10 years ago, you would have thought differently. But now you’re going, “Oh, what do they mean

10:24by that?” Well, let’s understand. At this pivotal moment, I see several

10:33priorities for the global agenda. We must continue to fight against the

10:39global pandemic. We must revitalize the global economy and accelerate its

10:47transition to net zero. We must preserve biodiversity

10:53by deploying nature-based solutions. And we must narrow the gap between the

11:00rich and the poor to achieve more sustainable global development.

11:08So sustainable global development, right? We have to narrow the gap between

11:14the rich and the poor. Well, how do you do that? Do you help that with job fairs

11:20or with more education so people can get better jobs? Well, I’ll tell you the truth. One way

11:26that you can actually narrow that is if you get rid of the form that we know as capitalism and free market capitalism.

11:34We start going to other systems. Another way that we can actually achieve this is by stating that you are

11:42obsolete. You see, you do your job well wherever it is that you work now.

11:49But what if there’s something that can do your job better than you can? It’s just about efficiency. See, and as more

11:55of you begin not to have jobs, then what do you do?

12:02Well, they’re going to start talking to you about something that was introduced a few years ago. Maybe you heard about it through Andrew Yang. He started

12:07really the first one to start popularizing this back in 2016. He started talking about what?

12:12Universal basic income. But understand, it’s not a universal basic income.

12:18It’s not UBI. It’s CBI.

12:24conditional basic income. So your income, yes, everyone will have

12:33the opportunity to participate, but it depends on a few conditions.

12:39Maybe the new moral code that we’ve created for ourselves. Well, in China, there’s obviously a moral code that’s in

12:45line there. And if you violate that moral code, you can’t participate in the economy. You can’t participate in

12:51society. Well, what if we encourage everyone to embrace concepts like what they call

12:58Christian nationalism? And all of a sudden, you have men running for office that are saying, or actually, sorry,

13:04they’re in office that ran as Christian nationalists. They’re saying, “What we need to ban here in our county is we

13:10need to ban sexing on texts between adults. That needs to end.” Well, how’s

13:16that enforceable? Well, first it’ll just be people basically turning each other in or letting somebody know that someone

13:23sent me something naughty. Where does that go? Well, where does that go when you have

13:29more technology implemented? Let’s say that the new federal government decides to give billions and

13:36billions and billions of dollars of contracts into Palunteer that can basically look into every

13:43single keystroke that you make on your computer, every website that you go to,

13:48every picture that you take, every video that you take. As a matter of fact, every word you say when your phone is on

13:56and not put in a microwave someplace. Now again, this sounds like tinfoil hat

14:02stuff, but it’s not. Let me ask you a question. How do you think they’re able

14:07to put pull up white vans and pour out ICE agents to arrest people in crowds

14:13right away? Is because somebody gave them a hot tip? Why do you think that

14:18is? Why do you think it was that when people were crossing over the borders

14:24that somehow they obtained cell phones all of a sudden? because you need to know where they are.

14:30They need to know who they are that you need to know what they’re saying and all those sorts of things.

14:36Okay? So, what we’re talking about is a meta system transition. And meta-ystem

14:42transitions are events representing the evolutionary emergence of a higher level of organization through the integration

14:49of subsystems into a higher meta system. So you’ve been living under what you

14:55could basically say is an analog meta system for quite a long time. Correct? You know, even the digital technology

15:01that we have now is based upon what was analog technology before, but it does it

15:07better, right? So what we’re moving into is something completely different than

15:12that. I mean, I don’t know how many of you have watched kind of the evolution of what would be artificial intelligence

15:19videos that have been created over the last four or five years. things that you didn’t even think were possible. Oh, we

15:24know when it’s fake. You know, the guy’s got like eight fingers and, you know, and so forth. You can tell it’s hitchy

15:29and everything. Oh, I don’t know if when you saw what is it V3 when those videos started coming out

15:36like I can’t tell. Maybe if I really examine hard, but man, it’s hard to tell

15:42that those are just all prompts. So, what does that mean? What does that

15:48mean? Possibly if you’re someone who is stepping outside of the will of the government

15:54and you’re not doing what the government and even let’s say a monarchal episcopit a government that is fused in some way

16:02as well with some sort of faith-based system. What if you’re going against that system? You’re talking against it.

16:08What if some video shows up of you doing something really bad?

16:15or maybe that something shows up on your computer.

16:20You might want to think about where all this goes right now as we start talking about a post liberal society.

16:28Because when you’re talking about a postliberal society, you’re talking about a society that lacks liberty, that

16:35lacks freedom, that lacks free choice. That’s where we go.

16:41Well, this is man in his future. And it was a SIBA foundation volume edited by

16:46Gordon. Don’t help help me with that last name, could you? Woolston Holm, I think is the name. But within this,

16:53there was an article from somebody that you should know. His name is Julian Huxley. It’s the brother of Aldwinist

17:00Huxley who wrote Brave New World. But you would say that Julius Hus Huxley

17:07was a bit more on the I’m going to get it done side as opposed to the theory

17:12side and the maybe watch out for this in the future side that his brother had.

17:18Here’s the thing that he says. There is first the increasing psychosocial pressure caused by the

17:24convergence of the psych psychosocial process upon itself. This as Taylor

17:30deseran who’s deseran pointed out in the phenomenon of man is

17:37due to the apparently lenol fact that man’s habitat is the surface of a globe.

17:44During his brief history, he has multiplied his numbers and improved his communications until his societies have

17:51spread over the whole habitable area of the earth and are impinging on one

17:56another politically, economically, and ideologically.

18:02Now that we have all this communication and so forth and economics that everything’s impinging upon other

18:08systems, the world has become a unit of de facto sooner rather than later. It

18:15must become a unit dure by submitting itself to a unitary system of

18:20selfgovernment. Since the human habitat is one and indivisible, its resources must be

18:28explored as a global whole.

18:34goes on to say, “The units of organization which have proved most effective during biological evolution

18:41are bounded unit systems of great internal complexity whose components are

18:46engaged in a constant and vigorous interplay leading to their mutual reinforcement within an integrated total

18:53pattern of activity.” integrated total pattern of activity.

19:00Such self-bonded and complex systems include the cell, the vertebrae individual, the social insect colony,

19:08and the brains of higher mammals and men. When such a system ensures the

19:13constant circulating summation and interaction of nervous impulses, as does

19:19the human brain, it generates a high level of subjective experience.

19:26Thus, since the advent of man, a new habitat has been opened up to evolving

19:31life, a habitat of thought. For this, I shall use Tillard de Shardan’s term, the

19:40nosphere. Now, I call it the new sphere, by the way, because I think of the best way to think is like a noose around your

19:46neck. Okay? The nosphere until someone invents something better.

19:53This covering of the earth covering of the earth spherically

19:58with a thinking envelope. Think of this. It’s covering the earth all around the earth. The sphere of the earth with an

20:05envelope whose components are interacting with a steadily rising intensity is now generating a powerful

20:12psychosocial pressure favoring a solution of least effort by way of integration in a unitary organization of

20:20ideas and beliefs. Again, let me say it. By way of an integration in a unary

20:28organization of ideas and beliefs. But this will not happen

20:36automatically. It can only be achieved by a largecale

20:41cooperative exercise of human reason.

20:47Now let me introduce you to Father Pierre Teran.

20:52Roman Catholic priest heavily influenced by Russian well should I say eastern Orthodox Russian

20:59Orthodox cosmicism. Peer t Desardan Pier Desidan taught that

21:05the evolutionary process is governed by a law of complexification which dictates that inorganic matter

21:12will reach ever more complex forms resulting in inorganic matter being

21:17followed by organic matter and organic matter being followed by conscious life

21:25forms. Okay. So he starts with inorganic matter. Okay. And then inorganic matter

21:32being followed by organic matter, things that are real. Organic matter being

21:37followed by conscious life forms. His philosophy was strongly informed by

21:43his wizardry, which he believed helped prove the existence of God. He is known for his theory that mankind is evolving

21:51mentally and socially toward a final spiritual unity that he called the omega

21:59point. Now when you hear the omega point I also

22:04want you there it’s some differences in terms of concept but it’s all coming together as one. Think of the

22:10singularity. Now start of start thinking of the singularity actually as a religious cult

22:17because the singularity is really one of the reasons behind as well as it’s part of the same concept as

22:25transhumanism. But it isn’t just the the unification of man and machine. It is

22:30the unification of all ideas, of all beliefs, of all thought. But it happens.

22:35Remember what Julian Husky was was referring to as this envelope of thought

22:41around the sphere of the earth. So this is Taylor desan’s concept of the

22:47no sphere. Tie desan’s vision. Now I just took this off of Google. There’s several different pictures of this. And

22:53this was the idea of how to understand that. Now, what does that kind of look like? Well, it’s something that is

23:00interconnecting at different points around the entire globe, this envelope of thought. It also

23:07kind of looks like the geosphere at Epcot, doesn’t it? Yes, it does. But so, you kind of have this envelope around

23:14the Earth where thought is contained. Let me tell you about Elon Musk. Okay,

23:20this gentleman. So Elon Musk, he’s the founded, he founded co-founded PayPal with Peter

23:28Teal. Both of them have something in common. They both believe in the concept

23:34of transhumanism. They’ve created an affordance trap. Well, it’s either AI or us. So I guess

23:40we got to merge with AI. We don’t have any other choice. It’s like, how did we

23:45get here? You know, why is all of a sudden this just a necessary choice?

23:51He founded Tesla Motors. He founded SpaceX. By the way, do you know what

23:56name uh Elon Musk wanted to call? What what name he wanted to give to PayPal at

24:02first? Does anybody know? X. And one of the intentions of X was a way

24:09that we could basically replace what what would be the central banking system. How could we wrestle control

24:15away from this and make it something else that’s digital controllable? See, because although we should all be very

24:21careful with something called C central bank digital currency, you should as well be concerned about techbro digital

24:27currency. Yeah. And you should be concerned about people talking about stable coins and crypto and everything. Oh, and it all goes

24:34through us. We’ve got Dogecoin and Oh, okay. So, it’s digital and we already

24:39know that you’re basically building the digital ponopticon and we know that you can measure every keystroke, but you

24:44also then could measure everything that is being spent and how it’s being sent. And not only that, but you can know the

24:49thoughts behind how we’re spending things. You need to start thinking where all of this goes.

24:55He founded Neuralink. He purchased Twitter. He renamed Twitter

25:01X deos Xmechina. God in the machine of the machine

25:11singularity. Now he’s he’s invented Neuralink, but what else did he invent?

25:19What else is he launching every day? Starlink.

25:24What do you think Starlink connects to? Neuralink.

25:30They both link. So what is he actually doing?

25:35Let’s see if he can talk here. You think he can get it in? You ready, Stu? Here we go.

25:40You’re a neuroscience company and you’re working to build basically an interface

25:46to the brain. Yeah. Electrode to neuron interface at a

25:52micro level. Okay. What is it? Like I’m going have like a plug in my head that’s going to fit into a hard drive. Like or how does that work?

25:58Yeah. Yeah. A chip and a bunch of tiny wires. This this would be implanted surgically

26:03and it would do what? Could you input? Could you download Jim? Mhm. Yes. What

26:10the long-term aspiration for Neurolink was would be to achieve a symbiosis with artificial intelligence um and to

26:18achieve a sort of democratization of of intelligence uh such that it is not

26:23monopolistically held in a purely digital form by governments and large

26:29corporations. Basically an effort for man to merge with machine in a healthy way. Yes. To beat machines you basically have to

26:35merge with machines most likely. is essentially how do we ensure that the future constitutes the

26:41the sum of the will of humanity. Um and so if we have billions of people with a high bandwidth link to the AI extension

26:47of themselves, it would actually make everyone hypers smart.

26:54Now, there were some men that gave us the evil speaker over here this morning that were setting it up as I was playing

27:00this through. And one of the guys like, “Yeah, that’s exactly what I need right now. I need something to help me get

27:06smarter. I was like, that’s not what you want. Believe me, because

27:14it’s not a one-way door, it’s a two-way door.

27:20So, think about, as Nita Farad will be talking about tomorrow in our presentation that we give in the

27:25morning. Gosh, you might have a lot of bad dreams, a lot of bad memories of things

27:32that have happened in your life that were very difficult for you or maybe that you made the wrong decisions. Well,

27:38let’s replace those bad memories with good memories. Let’s make something better for you.

27:44Maybe take away some of your fears. As a matter of fact, you might even have some bad political beliefs or bad faith

27:51beliefs that maybe we can replace with good beliefs. And then all of a sudden things are

27:57going to be better. We have that technology now. So imagine

28:03if instead of us having different views on things. Hey Paul, good to see you.

28:10Maybe instead Sorry, never met you before. I know I’m from Twitter.

28:17We have another community, right? Um, but what if all of the sudden all those

28:23differing ideas that we might even have in this room? What if I’m the one in control and I said, “You know what? You

28:29all need to be 1689 Second London Baptist Confession Reformed Baptists just like me. I could make you all we’re

28:36all of the same mind and we all believe the same things, but we’re going to have a multi-church split because there’s no way that you can keep Reformed Baptist

28:42together.” Um but but what if you had the ability to say

28:49you need to believe the same thing that we all believe. So because you see wars

28:56are constructed in the minds of men and it’s in the minds of men that we

29:02will bring about peace. So what did Elon just say? said the

29:07long-term aspiration of Neurolink would be to achieve a symbiosis with artificial intelligence and to achieve a

29:14democratization of intelligence.

29:19So we can all just be as smart or as dumb or as whatever as one. It doesn’t

29:25say that that we all can be super super smart, but it says that we’ll have a

29:30democracy of intelligence such that it is not monopolistically held in a purely digital form by

29:37governments and large corporations because see they know all things, especially if you’re talking about in a

29:42technocratic form. And in a technocratic form, you have the experts that are all in charge. Well, what if we all just

29:49become the experts? What if we just all do the will of the experts and we don’t

29:54complain? We don’t revolt. We don’t get on Twitter and talk bad about it because everything that you put in Twitter, by

30:00the way, is being basically put into a digital U. That’s why they’re building all these different uh data farms.

30:08Anyway, interviewer, basically an effort for man to merge with machines in a

30:13healthy way, right? Think about how what a positive spin. This is like Tucker Carlson talking to somebody that hates the Jews. basically an effort for some

30:19for man to merge with machines in a healthy way. To beat machines, you got to merge with machines. Now, don’t

30:26forget that phrase. See, to beat the adversary, you need to merge with the

30:31adversary. And then we’ve got peace. And there’s no longer a fight anymore, right? You’re

30:37going to hear the same thing about our approach to China. Well, see, to beat China, we have to do

30:45what China’s doing. and where we’re building data farms and where they’re

30:50imposing a social credit system and a a complete total control of society and

30:55basically turning over the military to artificial intelligence and all the we’ve got to do that first and make sure

31:01that we beat them. That’s why all of a sudden there’s this rush well we’ll get into this later to build all of a sudden

31:08all these nuclear power plants we’ve only built one in the past 5 years. I’ll

31:14get into the number about how many China has built. But now we have to build nuclear power plants. Why?

31:21Because of the data centers for your digital panopticon. A ponopticon meaning a circular jail where

31:30the wardens can see everybody in the middle. All their actions 24 hours a day. So as we build our own prison, now

31:38think about that. You’re digging your own grave. And now all of a sudden energy will be cheaper for those

31:44corporations that are going to be using data centers but it’s going to be higher for you.

31:49What do you think sustainability is all about? had a conversation I can’t name exactly

31:57the name but let’s say one of the very very higher ups at HSBC in Zurich a few months ago said yeah one

32:05of the primary reasons not the only reason for the whole push for sustainability in net zero 2030 is

32:10because those data centers are going to take all the energy so we got to start taking energy away

32:17from human beings and we’re going to do it through a religious process

32:22Yes, sinner. You watch too much TV. You had your air conditioning below 78. So

32:30now you’re going to have to do penance. Maybe you can’t go on that trip. Your carbon footprint’s too high. See, if you

32:35want to have more freedom, you’re going to have to play the game. Elon Musk find finally ends up with this. Essentially,

32:42how do we ensure that the future constitutes the sum of the will of humanity? the sum of the will that we

32:50all have the same will of humanity. And so if we have billions of people with the high bandwidth link to the AI

32:57extension of themselves, it would actually make everyone hyper smart.

33:03It will e either make you hyper smart or maybe if we all have the AI extension of

33:09ourselves, maybe ourselves becomes less of ourselves and more of what someone

33:14wants us to be and wants us to think. Now I talked about this um Courtney

33:21Turner is over here and she was she had a congress in or congress a conference in Nashville last year and this is one

33:28of the things that we addressed was cognitive liberty. The very first thing that I addressed when I started

33:35Sovereign Nations in 2017 was not critical race theory, was not

33:41intersectionality, was not woke. My first article was about

33:48the threats to cognitive liberty. The first thing that I impressed upon Peter Beos when we met together with

33:54James was this whole thing is about a threat to cognitive liberty. What do you

34:01mean all this? You mean we’re talking about CRT here and all this? No, no, no, no, no, no. The real threat is cognitive

34:08liberty. So, this is Elon Musk’s

34:14pathway for Starlink. So Elon Musk, SpaceX reveals plans to

34:20spin off Starlink internet satellite business within a few years. Thousands and thousands

34:27of satellites and gosh that kind of looks like oh that looks like Peter

34:32Taylor desens that envelope of thought that we have

34:37around the world. Now, if this is black pilling you right

34:42now, it should be more red pilling you than blackpilling you because you’re knowing about it now.

34:48And the thing is is it’s not going to be me. It’s not going to be James Lindsay.

34:54It’s got to be all of us that starts to say, “You know what, guys? I think we need to start getting busy.”

35:01And something’s coming in. If you thought it was coming in fast through the Biden administration,

35:06oh, we’ve reached hyper acceleration levels now through the Trump administration.

35:12And the second day of his presidency, all of a sudden, we have this press conference and oh, there’s Sam Alman

35:19talking what? What? And we’re going to invest how much in to make sure that we beat oh, see, we got to beat China.

35:26So, we got to now do this. So, we have to come up with the same systems. Remember when George well Orwell said

35:32this in 1984? Nothing was your own except the few cubic cime centimeters

35:38inside your head. Now we’re past Orwell.

35:43So you can’t even say, “Well, that’s very Orwellian. Oh, we’re past that now.”

35:51That’s where this goes. Your cognitive liberty is at stake. your

35:56liberty to think your own thoughts, pray your own prayers, and to have your own dreams. All of this is threatened

36:06because since wars begin in the minds of men, it is in the minds of men that the defenses of peace must be constructed.

36:14As a matter of fact, your own tax dollars is going towards that. Your tax dollars are going to build your

36:23cognitive prison that you, your children, and your grandchildren will be

36:29under for years to come. Almost praying that a

36:34steaming comet of mercy will hit the earth and disrupt all of it.

36:40I don’t think that that’s God’s plan. I think it might happen. And I’m sorry, I’m speaking as a Christian right now.

36:46I’m sorry. But I think that there might providentially be other plans because if a lot of people just start speaking up

36:54and understanding this. Look, when I started my business back in 2004,

37:00I said to myself, I’m not going to get involved with controversy. I’m going to make

37:07I’m going to make sure that what I do is that I just serve the will of my clients

37:13and I do the best that I can for them. We make sure that we create fundraisers for them. We make sure that we create

37:19awesome opportunities for travel and for conventions and for other things for them. That’s what we’re going to do

37:24better than anybody else in the business. And then I had some clients that were

37:32saying and doing things that I brushed off for a few years and then all a sudden, oh,

37:37they’re serious. Oh, there there’s people from the Obama administration here and actually from

37:44the first Bush administration here. I mean, first Bush meaning George HW Bush.

37:50Oh, and there’s Communist Chinese party members here and corporate leaders here and they’re talking about what a

37:56circular economy and degrowth and this transition into the fourth industrial revolution. We didn’t even hear about

38:02first at first. Well, they were serious.

38:07Second place that I heard about this was in travel. And I might need to get into a little bit more of that later because

38:13I know Mr. Lindsay needs to have his time. So, what else is happening?

38:20Well, I’ll tease you with this because I was a little late starting.

38:25The future is Degrowth. A guide to a world beyond capitalism.

38:32That’s the name of the book. net zero ND growth and we’ll talk about that why

38:39it’s affecting you why it’s important to understand what’s actually happening on the other side of things cognitively and

38:46then as well you as those of you that are involved in education those of you that are involved in whatever forms of

38:51faith that you are in why all of this merges together we’ll introduce that

38:57tomorrow thank you and we’ll be back with James Lindsay in just a moment thank

39:04[Applause]

39:09[Music]

A.I.’s Harvest of Evil and Christ’s Ultimate Victory — Part 2 | John Lennox Q&A

0:00It seems to me it’s inescapable that there is to be a harvest of evil.

0:09And it’s plausible by dent of many of the things I’ve mentioned tonight. These

0:15trends are in our societies. We can now easily imagine social control where we

0:21couldn’t have believed it 20 years ago. But

0:28Christ won’t lose. He will destroy this.

0:33And according to my reading of scripture, the world will then be subject to his perfect rule.

0:41But that’s another story for another time. Isn’t artificial intelligence only

0:47as powerful as it is designed by a human to be? And so the issue is really not in

0:52the artificial intelligence but the people writing the code.

0:57The very interesting thing about that question there’s a famous quote that you get in almost every book that the first

1:07super intelligent machine will be the last invention of humankind

1:12for the simple reason that it will go on making other machines.

1:17So I think the general verdict would be no that isn’t correct. What is important

1:25in that question I think is that the ethical side but we’ll probably come

1:32to that in some of the other questions but if you’re thinking of AGI as distinct

1:39from narrow artificial intelligence then of course there’s no knowing what these

1:45intelligences go could go on to do and leave behind and you saw one of those

1:52scenarios was that they treat humans as household pets or else annihilate them.

1:58And it’s important to say that people are treating a whole range of these

2:04hypothetical situations very seriously. There are huge toms written about this

2:10stuff. So that’s how I’d respond to that. Great. By the way, this is a Q&A as you see

2:17ladies and gentlemen. And a Q&A is one of the most inadequate things you could ever think

2:24of because what you’re about to do is plunge the depths of my ignorance

2:30because all I can do is respond off the top of my head to these

2:36questions. But that’s no harm because as likely or not, you’ll be dissatisfied with the answer. That’s where you start

2:43to work. If you’ve asked a serious question that you’re interested in, you won’t be content with what I say. You’ll

2:50go back and start doing work on it and that’s where you really learn. So,

2:58somebody approves of that idea, but only one. But anyway,

3:03could be worse. Okay, off you go. If we’re plunging the depths of your ignorance, John, the rest of us are in

3:09real trouble. Uh, question number two, quite a personal question here. My

3:14spouse, an astrophysicist, turned from Christ the first year of

3:19college, being ridiculed by a professor and students that the Bible has many

3:24contradictions that smart people don’t believe. How would you respond?

3:31The difficulty with the question is it is so general. It’s full of

3:36contradictions or there are many contradictions. What are they? Because

3:42for centuries now, serious thinking people have

3:49discussed and written very intelligently and rationally about alleged

3:55contradictions and usually most of them fall apart. So when I’m asked a question

4:00like this, I can only respond generically what contradictions and what

4:07smart people don’t believe in them. Because of course smart people usually don’t believe in contradictions but

4:13you’ve got to establish that they are actually contradictions and there are many books written by highly intelligent

4:21highly qualified people on alleged contradictions in the Bible. So that if

4:28I were in that situation, I would immediately want to know what are these alleged contradictions. And if I didn’t

4:35see my way through them myself, I go to a resource and I would find one within

4:40two minutes on the internet that will deal with these questions. This has been written about endlessly.

4:46And the amazing thing is that so many of them disappear. And people become

4:52Christians when they discover that they disappear. There’s a very famous uh case

4:58of someone who could see that Luke as a writer was claiming to be historically

5:05accurate and he thought well this is the way to destroy the New Testament. All I have to do is to check the allegedly

5:13factual claims about places about geography about cities that Luke writes.

5:18So he started and his objective was to destroy Christianity. But he ended up

5:24becoming a Christian because he found that Luke was right in every case and

5:29came to the conclusion he was one of the most brilliant ancient historians. And I think when people study the

5:36contradictions, they’re very likely to disappear. The Bible has stood the test

5:42of time for centuries. And the interesting thing is people have

5:49taken it seriously. And I think there are real answers to these things. And I’m just sad when I hear that this

5:58happens to people. But unfortunately, it does. I sometimes think that a little Bible

6:04study can push someone away from God, but a lot of Bible study very often

6:09draws someone back. Oh, that’s absolutely right. And you see, in my own life, and I suspect in

6:15yours, it’s facing difficulties and questions that are raised in connection

6:21with the Bible that actually have strengthened my confidence in its truth and reliability.

6:27Yeah, that’s great. So, we would say push into those supposed contradiction. I heard a very nice example recently. I

6:34think it was about who first recited the Declaration of Independence publicly.

6:40And historically, there were two different accounts, two different people. Turns out when you dig into it, that one of them did so, but he had a

6:47weak voice. And then that second person got up and did so with a louder voice so that the entire crowd could hear. Many

6:53of the supposed contradictions in the Bible are just like that. They’re seeing the same thing from two different perspectives.

7:00Let’s move on to the next question. Uh, John, do you envision AI to advance to a

7:06point to achieve cognitive consciousness and awareness? Would this cause problems

7:12with the doctrines of Christianity? I don’t think it would cause problems

7:19with the doctrines of Christianity. The short answer is I just don’t know.

7:26And one of the reasons I just don’t know is that in all my reading about

7:32consciousness and studies, the serious people just say we just

7:39don’t know what consciousness is. How it is that in some sense our

7:45material bodies have something in them that clearly is not material. That’s a

7:52big difficulty for pure materialism. and and therefore

7:57it’s very difficult to speculate since we’re still at ground zero with

8:03understanding consciousness. On the other hand, what I was saying from scripture tonight

8:11I find intriguing because I’ve got a lot of questions about it.

8:18For instance, this man who is the beast, that’s a metaphor.

8:25And there are two beasts. It’s a very complex situation. And an image is made

8:33to the first beast and the image is given a capacity to

8:39speak and to be able to kill people. What does that mean?

8:46And people say well you know if it is referring to any reality it’ll be very simple. No it won’t. If the whole world

8:53is deceived by it this will not be a simplistic business. And there are dangers. You see if you

9:01say God will not allow people to get to this point.

9:06If it happens you’ll be the first to be maximally deceived. So we need to be very careful. The

9:14second reason we need to be careful is not all scenarios

9:20of AGI are evil. You saw the tagmark several of

9:26them and some of them are good and

9:31there’s a kind of alliance among a number of leading people to try to

9:36ensure that however far we go what is produced is

9:43benevolent and kind. Also, there’s nothing theoretically that

9:50limits you to simply one AGI. Although, if there is a super

9:55intelligence, it’s hard to say that it would brietti rivals. It’s easy to speculate. It’s interesting

10:03to speculate. It’s actually important to speculate because everybody else is doing it. And if we don’t think about

10:10these things, then we won’t have anything to say. Now from the

10:17perspective of scripture people take different views. There are people that say look God intervened

10:25in the first homodous project Genesis 3. He intervened in the second one the

10:32Tower of Babel. Let’s build a city in a tower that it can reach to heaven. So they reckon that

10:40God’s always going to put a stop. nothing shall be impossible to them. It

10:46says in Genesis, and God stopped it. But I think there’s a risk there because it

10:51simply tells you what happened on those occasions. And I just suspect that the book of

10:57Revelation is warning us not to be so certain that human artifacts won’t

11:04advance to such a stage that the entire world is going to be deceived. You don’t

11:10deceive an entire world with something extremely unsophisticated and simple.

11:16That’s great. Such an encouragement and I I took it as a really significant encouragement, John, even that you

11:22started your answer with I don’t know. And and I hope that’s a model for all of us. I think

11:27well it was a very lengthy way of there’s a lengthy I don’t know to be fair

11:32but it is such an encouragement that sometimes we think to be legitimate Christians or to be Christians who can

11:38defend our faith we need to have the answer to every question and the reality is nobody’s interested in joining a community of know-it-alls they’re

11:44interested in joining a community of people who take questions seriously say I don’t know but then give the lengthy I

11:49don’t know and are willing to wrestle through it together in the context of community the next question John is the deific

11:56ification of what or whom is the modern equivalent to the deification of

12:01emperors when we live in a time that often seems to place its science above

12:06all people in the Roman Empire.

12:12The emperors, some of them at least arrogated to themselves divine powers.

12:18Caesar did for an example. And of course from a political and power

12:24play perspective that is and has been all through history

12:30what powerful people have done to increase their power and that is to

12:35harness the human allegiance that should only be given to God for themselves.

12:43Now in the ancient world, idols were not so much things that people loved. They

12:51were things that people trusted. And I think that gives us a hint as to

12:58where to look. What is the contemporary equivalent?

13:04Well, I did mention one thing that has colossal power in our contemporary

13:12society and that is the internet and being connected.

13:19Many of our young people have a sense that if you’re not

13:25connected in Facebook and everywhere else, you’re dead.

13:30You’re of no significance. And social psychologists and psychiatrists are

13:36writing about this as a very dangerous development. Just look at the incidences

13:43of suicide and self harm when people are unfriended on Facebook.

13:50And because we’re all leaving a track record with our smartphones,

13:56very rapidly, the internet of things to which we can

14:02which we are connected can seem omnisient. It knows everything about us.

14:07And in China, those AI systems with closed circuit TV at one level appear to

14:14be virtually omnisient. They know lots of things about everybody enough to control them socially. So that there is

14:21a real danger that we are birthing a monster. Now

14:27sensible people are thinking hard about the ethics of this. How can you avoid

14:33it? The I almost said the frightening thing

14:38and perhaps it is a frightening thing. This point system in China is welcomed

14:44by people. The amazing thing is they think it’s marvelous and they go around saying to people to their friends, I’ve

14:50pushed my points up by 50. How are you doing? All the time not realizing what

14:57it is talking about. And in all of this, I’m very aware that there are many

15:03hugely good things being done in narrow AI. There may be some very good things

15:10that come in the other direction. Human enhancement. You know, watch people

15:15going down the street and they’ve got a human enhancement clamped to their ears.

15:20Have you noticed that? And they’re not looking where they’re going. And if you’re driving a car, you

15:26have to watch them. they just blindly walk into the street because they’re connected to this thing. It won’t be

15:31long before it’s inside their head physically or by thought they will be connected to

15:38computers. All of that will probably come and in a way I wish I didn’t have

15:44to carry this wretched heavy thing here. Well, you could say you should forget it and give it away, but then I wouldn’t

15:50get my emails. But that might be a very good thing, etc., etc., etc. But you can see that

15:57some enhancements we readily accept. If I had a very weak left arm and somebody

16:05gave me a very lightweight exoskeleton, I might well use it. And so on and so

16:12questions arise, where do you stop or do you stop with these enhancements?

16:17And those are not easy questions to answer. When I watch some of the things

16:24that have been done for people with limbs that they’ve lost or faculties

16:30that they’ve lost to give them uh dignity in society, I think isn’t it

16:36marvelous? There are people who are inventing these things to enhance and help human capabilities that

16:44have been removed. But then there are questions. Should we

16:49engineer the whole germ line of humans so that we manufacture different kinds of humans? Is that beginning to play

16:56God? These are very difficult questions. The

17:01concern in my mind and I suppose in everybody’s mind is if the legislation

17:08is being done by people who have no concept of the transcendent who have no concept

17:16of an absolute morality. Then flawed human beings are going to

17:23build flaws and bias and prejudice into the systems they create.

17:31John, here’s a very concrete question uh and in uh an area of of business

17:37business ethics uh which I know you’ve researched in and and taught in as well at Oxford’s business school. Uh the

17:44question is how should I handle my company’s pursuit of AI technology as a

17:49Christian? It all depends on the technology and you

17:55could leave out AI technology. It’s any technology.

18:00All work raises moral questions usually on day one. And that’s why we need Christians

18:08in work and in these fields and doing things. That’s why I mentioned Roselyn Picard a

18:15couple of times tonight because it’s wonderful to see Christians at the

18:20cutting edge of these new technologies. And I did mean what I said towards the

18:26end. We shouldn’t be afraid of this. I think it’s fantastic that my medical

18:32diagnosis say will take far less time than they ever did before because of a

18:37an intelligent AI system. I wish I’d thought of it and been in at the invention of it. And

18:45we must not be afraid of g of using our god-given skills to reflect his image by

18:53being creative. He’s a creator. He created us. He gave

18:58us skills. And human creativity is one of the most marvelous reflections

19:05provided we build ethics in as well. And of course that is where we demonstrate

19:12our maturity. So my answer to that person is

19:18they should be in a way very thankful that they’re in at the cutting edge of new technology and then they should

19:25think what are the ethical issues that are being raised. Can I contribute to the company’s ethical mission statement

19:34or attitudes and they might get involved in all kinds of interesting things. So

19:41I would be very positive. I certainly wouldn’t run out

19:46and get a job doing applied basket weaving or something like this to avoid the problems.

19:54Every job will raise ethical problems. Actually

19:59this is the sphere for the vast majority of us where we learn about God’s rule

20:06and government. The famous statement by our Lord, seek first the kingdom of God

20:11and his righteousness is stated in the context of what we do

20:18to earn a living. God gives us work to do

20:24that will raise ethical problems so that we can seek his kingdom. And when I

20:29first learned this very many years ago, it enhanced

20:34the value of work. You can go into your work tomorrow morning

20:40saying, “God, you’ve given me this to do. I want to seek your rule in this.

20:46Teach me something about yourself today.” And seeking God’s kingdom in the

20:51work doesn’t mean going in and sending the verse for the day around all the partners.

20:57It means learning to be moral and upright in that work.

21:04There’s not a job in all the world whether it’s paid or not that doesn’t raise moral problems usually on day one

21:11and this is immensely important. So I would really encourage that person to see what they can contribute. Now in any

21:19company if you are told well we’ve developed this technology it’s got a major flaw

21:26but we mustn’t tell the public that well you’ve got a choice to make and it might

21:32be a very painful choice. And there’s a wonderful statement in scripture those that honor me I will

21:38honor. It’s great, John. I appreciate that

21:44encouragement not to flee from secular work when it gets challenging. And I was just thinking about the fact that Jesus,

21:50even in his adult life, he probably spent what about 18 years involved in

21:55secular work before his public ministry. Well, that’s the point. There is no division in the Bible between Christian

22:02work and non-Christian work. That’s great. It’s all work. And whatever you do, says Paul, do it as

22:10unto the Lord. People sometimes say to me, you should go into full-time work. And I say,

22:17″What? Am I in part-time work?” Oh, they say,

22:22″You should go into full-time work.” Well, I say, “It’s far too late.” And they say, “It’s never too late.” I say,

22:28″Listen, I’ve been in full-time work since I was a teenager. And now part of it is being a husband. Part of it is

22:35being a father. Part of it is being a professor of mathematics. Part of it is teaching Bible. Part of it is

22:42intellectually defending Christianity. It’s all work. And it’s all done or should be done for God. That lifts life

22:49right up. Amen. That’s great. Wonderful.

22:56Wonderful. The Hebrew word aboda for work. Also the word for worship. So we can also respond to someone. You should

23:01go into full-time worship. Uh, two more questions I think we had

23:06time for. John, uh, here’s a challenge from one of our

23:12questioners. You only need a God in an objective sense. In an objective existence, in a

23:20subjective existence such as ours, the beholder is God. As the beholder defines

23:26what they see via their perception. Gosh, I wish I knew what that meant.

23:35You only need a god in an objective existence. In a subjective existence.

23:44What do you mean by a subjective existence? The very word exist as opposed to

23:51non-exist seems to imply some kind of objectivity straight away.

23:56So that I’m afraid I do not really understand this question.

24:01What may be behind it is that

24:07the need for a god. That word need reveals a lot of things to me. That idea

24:14that some people need a god and some people don’t. The issue is not do we need a god or

24:21not, but the issue is is there a god or not? and the kind of Freudian subjectivism

24:29that says, “Well, you’re weak and you need a father figure

24:34in the sky.” So, you invent a god in your subjective mind. And of course, as

24:41human beings, we do have a subjective dimension and we have an objective dimension.

24:48And we, most of us, hold to that. And we realize it when somebody kicks us uh

24:55that there’s something more to us than what goes on simply in our imagination.

25:01But it’s very important to realize

25:06that this idea that you need a subjective God because you

25:15are somehow wanting a father figure in the sky. It sounds brilliant and it’s a

25:20very good argument. If there isn’t a god. You see the Freudian answer

25:28is great provided there is no god then his explanation that religion is a wish

25:35fulfillment works. But what Freud forgot is that the flip side is true. If there

25:41is a god, then that explanation explains atheism

25:46beautifully as a wish fulfillment of never wanting to meet God and be accountable. Now,

25:54various people have written about this and it’s an objection I meet all the time. And the point that’s very

26:01important is this. Because it works both ways and gives as good an explanation

26:06for religion as it does for atheism provided there is a god or there isn’t a

26:12god. The question it will not deal with and cannot deal with is is there a god or not? And that’s the key question.

26:19Great John. This is our final question uh for the evening. So uh feel free to answer

26:26this question but also if there are any final thoughts you want to leave us with at the end of it please please do add them. We’ve been so blessed by the

26:33evening and the the question is if an AGI arrives and it’s as powerful as they

26:40say then is all hope lost? Did Jesus lose? And if not how does this tie into

26:47his return? Well it’s hypothetical but let’s run along with it for a moment.

26:53Suppose the book of revelation and Thessalonians which I quoted and please notice Paul’s

27:01statement in Thessalonians is not imagery. It is straight theological

27:08text. Revelation says the same thing in terms of imagery and then tells you what the

27:14reality is behind the imagery. Now I don’t know

27:20exactly what the book of revelation means by saying

27:27that the beast one of the beasts there are two of

27:32them there is an image made that has gives the impression of being alive and

27:40can speak and so on. Suppose for a moment that is an AGI.

27:45Just suppose for a moment it is. Is all hope lost? Well, no. It’s going to be

27:51destroyed by the second coming of Christ. So, what is happening is we are told in

27:59plain straightforward language that there is going to be a trend

28:06towards universal social control. And unfortunately, it’s going to be evil.

28:14And our Lord pointed this out to his disciples. You shall hear of wars and rumors of

28:19wars. Evil men will wax worse and worse. There’ll be a trend. Does that mean that

28:25we give up all hope along the way? Of course, it doesn’t. Because Paul was

28:31being very wise when he said to the Christians in Thessalonica,

28:37this kind of philosophy is already in your own society that will lead to that

28:44in the future. Now what about your society? Some of

28:49them had to give their lives for this. But you look at life very differently

28:56if you’re an atheist without hope. And if you’re a Christian who believes in

29:02the resurrection of the dead. And you see, Paul didn’t say, “Right,

29:07the Caesars are claiming to be God. You might as well pack up and give up Christianity.” No, thank God for it

29:14because we’re here and we become Christians. And so, we must get the right sense of proportion. But having

29:21said all of that, it seems to me it’s inescapable that there is to be a harvest of evil.

29:32And it’s plausible by dent of many of the things I’ve mentioned tonight. These

29:38trends are in our societies. We can now easily imagine social control where we

29:44couldn’t have believed it 20 years ago. But

29:50Christ won’t lose. He will destroy this.

29:56And according to my reading of scripture, the world will then be subject to his perfect rule.

30:03But that’s another story for another time. I grew up in the middle of what became

30:11out and out terrorist violence on both sides, both Protestant and Catholic.

30:17And what was lifeshaping for me was the

30:22attitude of my parents because they taught me scripture. They

30:27got me thinking about scripture. In particular, when it came to business

30:32life, my dad believed that every person, no matter what their worldview was, was

30:40a human being of infinite value, made in the image of God, and so deserving of

30:45respect. And he put that into practice by trying as far as he could to employ

30:52people in his store. He had maximally about 40 FIFO from both sides of the

30:58religious divide and he got bombed for it. But it put something into me that

31:05was very important. Now I left to go to Cambridge before things got really difficult. But of course my brother was

31:11seriously injured in a bomb and it lived with me at a distance. And all I can say

31:18is there were a number of people like my dad whose Christianity transcended

31:25religious rivalry and local politics that was infected with religion and that

31:32was a model for me. Fantastic. as as you experienced that at what point

31:38when you grew up in a Christian home and you had that model was there a point at which you would say you became confident

31:45in the truth of Christianity and how did that aspect of faith develop well again my parents played a great

31:52role my parents didn’t have a a very high level form of education but dad

31:57loved the Bible and he loved reading and my first impressions of Christianity

32:04were that it was mind expanding and dad fed me books by CS Lewis that

32:12got me hooked but also he loved me enough to give me space to think but he

32:19didn’t only do that theoretically I remember when I was about 14 he handed

32:25me a book I said what is it dad he says it’s the communist manifesto oh I said really have you read it no he said but

32:31you ought to Well, he said so much of the world is

32:36influenced by this worldview and if you’re going to understand your world, you need to read it. That was his

32:42attitude. So there was a very strong question and answer dimension to our

32:50home and the last thing that would have occurred to me was that Christianity was boring.

32:55Right? It was fascinating and interesting and that is where the first

33:01sense that this is not only something to shape a family life. It’s shaping family

33:07life because it’s the truth. That’s great. Joe Joe and I are pregnant

33:12with our first uh child and I’m taking notes here as I’m listening to some of the ways that your parents created space

33:20for you to develop such an inquisitive mind and one that pursued truth. I mean, it’s very encouraging to hear. Were

33:27there ever times where a book that you were given by your parents or uh or a

33:35question that you were digging into was particularly challenging or particularly

33:41difficult uh or or even caused doubt at some point through your journey? Well, let’s take the last bit first.

33:49I spent my life opening my faith to its opposite. Yes.

33:55So people say, “Do you ever doubt?” I say all the time. But it’s not the kind of doubt that people imagine a black

34:01hole. Everything’s going wrong. No, it’s questioning. And I’ve found that my confidence in Christ and scripture and

34:09in the message has grown over the years. The more I expose it to criticism, the

34:17stronger it has got. But there were indeed significant things. Dad

34:22discovered mere Christianity and he liked it so much he used to keep a stack of them in the glove compartment of his

34:29car. In those days there were hitchhikers. It wasn’t dangerous to do that. But I suppose was there ever a

34:36question? Yes, there was. There was a question in Cambridge very early on in

34:43my first year where a student asked me did I go to church? I didn’t

34:48know him but he knew I was Irish. And he paused. He said, “Sorry. Oh dear.” He

34:53said, “I shouldn’t have asked you that. You’re Irish and all you Irish believe in God and you fight about it.”

35:00Now, I’d heard that many times, but what it did was it finetuned a trajectory

35:07that has gone on until today because I thought, you know, in Ireland, I’ve met people who are very religiously

35:15polarized. And if they were atheists, they’d be either Protestant atheists or Catholic atheists, you know, that kind

35:20of thing. Yeah. But at Cambridge, I was able to meet

35:27people who genuinely held different world views to me. And I

35:33decided after that encounter to deliberately go out of my way to

35:39befriend people that didn’t share my worldview. Great. And I did that. And one particular

35:45friend, I talked to him for two years. And then one day he wasn’t listening to

35:52the maths lectures and I said, “What’s happened?” He said, “Last night I knelt down in my room

35:58and I gave my life to Christ.” Now,

36:04that was huge. And I tell you why it was huge. I keep meeting people who tell me

36:11that you’ll always stay within the world view that you grow up.

36:17Yeah. And the first person I saw change their worldview, I saw it’s possible for

36:24someone to change their worldview. And that has had an immeasurable effect

36:30uh on my life and it really has has shaped it. That’s great. That leads to just one

36:35more question. Uh John, there are likely people here tonight who are still trying

36:41to figure out what to believe about God. And there are certainly people watching on the live stream who are still

36:46wrestling through that. What advice would you give to someone who’s trying to figure out what to believe about God?

36:53I think I would encourage them to keep asking their questions and if they want

37:00to know more about God, read, but talk to people that you feel have credible

37:07lifestyles and claim to be Christian and probe them and question them. But above

37:13all, start to open the Bible. Say something

37:19like the Gospel of John, the fourth gospel in the New Testament. Because

37:24very often people have, if they’ve been exposed to anything, have just been exposed to very little in school, but

37:30usually not. So, they’ve never read it as an adult.

37:36And ask your questions to scripture. You don’t have to start by believing what it

37:42is. But what you have to start by doing is to say, “What can I find out here?

37:48Here’s a book that claims to be God speaking to us.” Now, you might not

37:53accept that at all at the beginning, but you can at least read and see if it

37:59begins to answer your questions. And again and again I’ve seen in life that people who come skeptically they start

38:06to get hooked on some of the fundamental ideas that come up. The very first

38:11statement there in the beginning was the word. Well what could that possibly mean? A beginning and a word and the

38:18word was with God and the word was God. And then they begin to get an impression. Gosh, this is a huge claim

38:25and it captivates the imagination because I would want to contend that far

38:31from Christianity saying less than other philosophies, it says a great deal more

38:37and it says it convincingly because it parallels our experience of life. Mhm.

38:45I’m smiling so so big, John, because you’re you’re speaking of my story and the story of many who was would I was

38:51challenged to read the Bible while studying philosophy and started out crossing things out and adding things in

38:56the margins. And as I wrestled and wrestled my way through scripture, slowly by slowly, I had to erase some of

39:03those cross outs and I found myself falling in love with the person of Jesus. I met a man in Siberia

39:09and when he was 16 he was given in school a dictionary of atheism. I used a

39:15viction of them and it would say Christianity a bourgeoe philosophy developed in the 4th century and so on.

39:22But in that little book he discovered statements that he found stunning.

39:29I say unto you, forgive.

39:35Mhm. I say unto you, blessed are the peacemakers. And as a 16-year-old, he

39:42thought, no mere man could have said that. So he cut them out of his little dictionary and pasted them in a book.

39:49Yes. And he came to faith in Christ without ever having met a Christian or seen a Bible just through cutouts from

39:56communist dictionaries. Wow.

God, AI and the end of history: An interview with Prof John Lennox

0:09Well, hello everybody from all around the world and welcome to our series of webinar interviews. Tonight we’ve got

0:16Professor John Lennox on the subject of God, AI, and the end of history,

0:23understanding the book of Revelation in an age of intelligent machines. And the title is based on John’s very recent

0:30book. I’m your host, Dr. Peter Saunders. I’m the chief executive of ICMDA, which

0:35is the International Christian Medical and Dental Association. And this webinar

0:40is brought to you tonight in combination with the Forum of Christian Leaders as well. ICMDA brings together about 60,000

0:48Christian doctors and dentists from over 100 affiliated movements.

0:54So uh John it’s a pleasure to have you here. John is professor of mathematics

0:59ameritus at Oxford University and fellow in mathematics and philosophy of science at Green Templeton College Oxford. As we

1:06know John has debated a number of prominent atheists including Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens and uh

1:14Peter Singer. But tonight we are exploring a question that sits at the

1:19intersection of theology, technology, and human identity.

1:25How should Christians think about artificial intelligence in the light of scripture? And particularly in the light

1:32of the book of Revelation, we live in a moment of extraordinary technological acceleration. AI is now diagnosing

1:39disease. Is it shaping economies, influencing behavior, and increasingly mediating how power is exercised in all

1:46spheres? And for many Christians, this raises urgent questions. Are these developments morally neutral tools? Do

1:53they echo biblical warnings? Or are we in danger of reading tomorrow’s headlines too quickly into ancient

2:00prophecy? So, our guest, Professor John Lennox, has spent decades helping

2:06believers think clearly at the interface of science, philosophy, and faith. And in his recent book, as I mentioned, God,

2:12AI, and the End of History, he brings that same clarity to one of the most understood, misunderstood, and often

2:19sensationalized areas of the Bible, the book of Revelation. So our goal tonight

2:25is is not speculation, fear, or date setting, but rather it’s discernment,

2:31understanding what scripture actually teaches, what AI truly is, and how

2:37Christian hope, ethics, and wisdom should shape our response in an age of intelligent machines. Professor Lennox,

2:44thanks so much for for joining us tonight. It’s my pleasure to be with you.

2:50So you have debated leading atheists and you’ve written extensively on science

2:55and faith. Why did you feel compelled at this stage of your life at this stage in

3:01history to write about AI and revelation? Well, some years ago, there was a great

3:08deal of discussion on the Genesis claim that human beings are created in the

3:15image of God versus the claims of technology uh to enhance humans by AI to such an

3:24extent that we might need to revisit what we meant by a human being. And a

3:31conference of Christian leaders was arranged in London to discuss this. And

3:36I was asked to give the opening talk on what Genesis taught about human beings.

3:42The invitation made me curious to delve into the technology and I saw very

3:49rapidly that AI was going to raise some very big questions not only for

3:55Christians but for everybody. And that’s how I got started on the book entitled

4:012084 which appeared in 2020. Now in that book since much of the talk

4:08about AI was concerned with the future I began to compare the promises of the

4:13transhumanists with biblical teaching about the future. And I pointed out that

4:19some of the futuristic AI scenarios envisaged by people like physicist Max

4:26Tegmark in his book Life 3.0, I pointed out that they were uncannily

4:32parallel to biblical teaching on the future, in particular in the book of

4:37Revelation. And this aspect of my book generated a

4:43lot of interest. And so I thought that I should try to write something to

4:50demystify the book of revelation and make it accessible and to link it with a

4:55book that I had already written on the prophecy of Daniel, a book entitled

5:00Against the Flow. And the publishers of my book on revelation

5:07were very enamored with the bits on the technology and so they wanted it

5:13inserted in the title and hence we’ve got this title God AI and the end of

5:18history but that has confused many people to think that this is my latest

5:25book on artificial intelligence. So, let me clear that up. First of all, Peter,

5:30it isn’t. My latest book on AI was published last in 2024,

5:36and it’s the updated version of 2084.

5:42How AI shapes our future. It’s twice as large as the original book and shows

5:48just how much has been happening in those four years. That is my most recent book on AI. This book is an exposition

5:57of the book of Revelation, but with a careful eye on technology.

6:04And so it really is an exposition of the book of Revelation in an age of

6:10intelligent machines. So that’s where it comes from. We’re going to get into the book of Revelation uh fairly shortly, but but uh

6:17let’s just think about definitions first of all before we talk about revelation. What is artificial intelligence actually

6:26and and what is it not? Well, the first thing to realize that artificial intelligence is artificial.

6:32It’s not real. In other words, take the simplest kind of AI system. It is

6:40essentially computing and it’s a system designed to do one and only one thing

6:48that normally requires human intelligence. So the intelligence is

6:54simply the simulation. Uh to use the words of Alan Turing who was the genius

7:00that really started computing off and raised these questions during the wartime when he built and solved the

7:07problem of the enigma machine. It plays a simulation game and one of the big

7:14problems with it is it uses words like intelligence, like machine learning and

7:19so on that anthropomorphize what is a mechanical and computing

7:26system and make people think that it is conscious. It is not conscious. The

7:31genius of God in creating human beings is that he has linked intelligence to

7:38consciousness. These machines are only intelligent in the sense that they can mimic what

7:46normally takes human intelligence. Now there are two sorts. There’s narrow AI,

7:52which is the AI that we’re mostly familiar with. And then there’s a more

7:57speculative artificial general intelligence. And that is the attempt to

8:04create a system that can replicate everything that a human being

8:12can do, but do it much faster and do it much more expertly and so on. So that

8:18there’s a big push in that direction, but at the same time it’s the side of

8:25the whole topic that lends itself to science fiction and a great deal of hype. And one of my reasons for writing

8:32Peter was to try and demystify it and say what AI is and what it is not. Now

8:39let’s give concrete examples just briefly because medicine is one of the

8:45areas that has benefited hugely from narrow AI. Let’s take a system that

8:53works very well. We have a large database and in it are X-ray pictures of

8:59human lungs exhibiting different lung diseases and they’re labeled by the best

9:07experts in that field in the world. Those are put in a database. Let’s say

9:12there are a million X-ray pictures in the database. Then an X-ray is taken of

9:17your lungs because you’re worried about your breathing. And very quickly, the AI

9:26sifts through by using pattern recognition statistical techniques and

9:32compares your lung X-ray with the million in the database and very rapidly

9:39says you are most likely to be suffering from this particular disease. And as a

9:45diagnostic tool, very often this will be much better than you get at your local

9:51hospital. Now that is being rolled out over very wild fields of medicine with

9:58very great success. So that is one positive example. But just to go on the

10:05negative side immediately to show that there’s an ethical problem here. pattern

10:11recognition, facial recognition technology is very

10:16advanced at the moment. It can pick a terrorist out of a football crowd and is

10:22therefore very useful to a police force. But that kind of recognition can be used

10:29for intrusive surveillance of a population, perhaps a minority

10:34population such as is happening in Sing Jang in China with

10:40very horrifying results. So what enables criminals to be recognized which we

10:47would say this is positive can be used for controlling populations. So that

10:53even narrow AI which is so sophisticated now that it can recognize a person not

11:00simply from the front by their face but from the rear by their gate

11:06can be used to control populations. So immediately we’re straight into the

11:12ethical problem and the argument is uh you give up your privacy and we’ll give

11:18you security. So that’s a whole debate in its own right. So That’s an example

11:23of um narrow AI and there are many many examples but of course we’re pushing

11:31forward very rapidly in putting narrow AI systems together and there is advance

11:39on many many fronts and one of the big steps forward has been the introduction

11:46of so-called large language models like chat GPT And this year it has taken a

11:54quantum leap forward just within a month or so. So that it is quantitatively

12:02very different from what has happened before and we can discuss that as we can

12:08as we go on. So, uh, artificial intelligence is

12:15capable of a huge range of different task and and that’s changing

12:20exponentially month by month as we go on. But what is what is AI not capable

12:25of doing? Well, of course, negatives are very difficult to quantify and there are

12:33several things that it was felt would never been so would never be solved. And

12:39one of them in science which is a fascinating question is how do protein

12:45structures fold? That was a 50-year-old problem. And the amazing thing is that

12:53an English mathematician, a genius, he won the Nobel Prize for it. Deus Hassabis

12:58solved the problem so effectively that he was able to work out the folding of

13:04over 200 million proteins which is staggering. So what people say one day

13:12is impossible turns out to be possible the next day and chat GPT has refined

13:19its capacities absolutely amazingly. For example, just recently I was asked to do

13:27a film illustrating what Jesus meant in John 11

13:32when he said to the disciples who were scared of going back uh to Jerusalem

13:39because it was suicidal. And Jesus said to them, “Are there not 12 hours in the day? If a

13:48person walks in the day, they don’t stumble because they see the light of this world that is the sun. But if they

13:54walk at night, they stumble because the light is not in them. In other words, we

13:59are not bioluminescent. So I asked GPT, please construct a

14:04scenario that would get this across. And what it produced at about 30 seconds was

14:10absolutely brilliant and usable. So it then asked me, it said, “Since you

14:16want to film this, would you like directions for the cameras?” And it spouted a whole scenario, how many

14:23cameras, where they should be situated, and all the rest of it. And this is

14:28quite amazing. But what it can’t do, I think it’s

14:34important since this is not real intelligence.

14:39It’s not conscious. So it’s not aware. So the main thrust here is this. As

14:47human beings made in the image of God, we can experience what are called

14:52quailia. We can smell the wonderful scent of a rose. We can feel the sea

15:00breeze on our faces. We can perceive the beauty of the universe as we look

15:07through a telescope. Quailia are unknown to an artificial intelligence. It can

15:14have no idea of them. It has no ideas at all because it doesn’t think in the same

15:20way as human beings do. And so although AI has been used and is increasingly so

15:29to produce some level of robotic companionship,

15:34it can never replace, I believe, the fellowship that is possible between

15:40human beings. And of course, and we’ll probably talk about this later on, when it comes to relationship with God, of

15:47course, AI knows nothing of God. So, as you said, the book of Genesis

15:54tells us that human beings are made in the image of God. You’ve alluded to consciousness, sensation. Uh, what other

16:03uniquely human things will AI never be able to do?

16:09Well, the question of values, AI knows nothing about values or right

16:17or wrong. And human beings are moral beings made in the image of God. And if

16:22I may say so, this is one of the places where the transhumanist

16:29vision of using AI to perfect humans and to make them into God’s fails.

16:37No utopia can ever be built without facing the problem of human sin

16:44and rebellion against God. Those two concepts mean nothing for an artificial

16:49intelligence. And so one of the richest kinds of human

16:56experience from a Christian perspective is that relationship with God through

17:01Christ where we understand that Christ has died for our sins and has taken our

17:10guilt away and we can have a relationship with God. AI can never replace it or come near it or know

17:16anything about it. Which means, Peter, I think that we need to step up much more

17:23in emphasizing these absolutely uniquely positive things

17:29about the Christian faith that give human beings dignity

17:34because AI is very rapidly reducing

17:40human dignity. One of the main areas where this is happening is the area of

17:46work. Um Dario Amado Amade is the CEO of

17:54Anthropic, one of these multi-billion dollar companies. and he has written an essay just a week

18:02or two ago which is well worth reading warning that possibly within 2 years

18:08from now the advances in AI are such that 50% of all white collar jobs will

18:16be taken over by artificial intelligence in the medical world in the legal world

18:22for example there they set up a test and had a very

18:28complicated legal legal brief considered and examined by an AI system and by 16

18:35lawyers, top lawyers. The lawyers got 60% of it right, whereas the AI got 96%

18:42of it right. And these things for which lawyers are paid a great deal, conveyancing, setting up contracts, all

18:49this kind of thing are now at the stage where they can be reproduced almost

18:56instantaneously. One of the most interesting things is an article that appeared in the Times last

19:02week by Matt Selman who was writing. He he is a software developer and creates

19:11apps and he runs an AI company and he came to a realization as a result of the

19:18leap forward this year that is at the beginning of February, beginning of this

19:23month. He said, “I spoke in English and

19:29dictated what I wanted from this particular app.” He said, “I left it and

19:36came back a number of hours later and found the thing ready for use. The AI

19:41had written thousands of lines of code. It had then set up the app and tested it

19:48as a human would do, pressing all the buttons, refining the things that were inadequate and so on. And and this is

19:56the key thing because up until now most of us have regarded AI as a tool rather

20:03than an agent. But AIS are now showing signs of agency in

20:11a very restricted but real sense. And he said this particular system was making

20:19decisions about how human beings might use this that I’d never thought about.

20:25And the thing was perfect. And he said, I suddenly realized I haven’t got a job anymore.

20:31And he says, it’s coming to all of you. And we need to really be very realistic

20:38about this, Peter. This is this is more scary than anything for people with all

20:44of these jobs. It used to be said a few years ago that if you wanted to keep up with the curve, you went into computer

20:51science. But now the coding can be done by the AI system. It can think of the

20:57codes and put them in. But this scary agency thing I’d like to say something

21:02about because it needs Christians to think very carefully about this that

21:09the AI that he was using. He said one of the

21:15problems and he gave an example is this. If you feed into the system a very big

21:23overarching goal, make money for example,

21:30and what the system is dealing with is feeding young people with material in

21:37their smartphone. It will investigate all sorts of ways of

21:42maximizing not only their attention to keep doom scrolling but also their

21:47attachment which is now a major feature. So that it will use all kinds of things

21:54that the designers of the AI system itself never thought of including going

21:59into the dark world to keep their attention and to make profit. It’s a

22:06version of the old story of the AI that’s told to make paper clips and it

22:12turns the whole universe into a paperclip sourcing factory and regards

22:17humanity as irrelevant and destroys them all. But there’s a serious aspect to

22:23that that and this is why you have even Nobel Prize winners in this field

22:31stepping up and saying that they are scared that they can’t control this stuff. They don’t really know what it’s

22:38doing or what’s happening. And that poses a huge problem because the control

22:44of it is being vastly outpaced by the

22:49developments. So those are some of the things that we need to factor into our thinking.

22:56Well, that’s great overview and introduction and as you say positively scary. So look, let’s uh move now to the

23:03book of revelation. And I wanted to ask you first of all how Christians should approach the book of revelation

23:10responsibly, especially when it comes to reading it alongside modern events. And

23:16and is is revelation, this is a great debate among theologians, of course, is revelation primarily about the first

23:22century, about the future or recurring patterns through history? uh give us

23:28your perspective on that big question before we dive deeper into the Well, I think it is about all three of

23:34those things because first of all, it is a book written in the first century

23:42directed to seven simultaneous existing churches in what is now modern

23:50Turkey. So it was relevant. The letters at the

23:56beginning to those seven churches are directly relevant to those churches at

24:02that time. But there’s an indicator within those

24:08letters that all the churches were expected to read

24:13the letters delivered to the others. He that is ears to hear, let him uh pay

24:20attention to what the spirit says to the churches. And I would tend to think that that can be uh passed over to the fact

24:29that in all generations we can listen to those letters and profit from them as many Christians have

24:36done. But the book itself claims to be well it claims to be first of all a

24:43revelation apocalyppsis that is an unveiling of Jesus Christ.

24:50Now that’s hugely important because if we understand it correctly it means

24:56that when we finished looking at it we should know more about the Lord Jesus

25:03than we did before. head is to reveal him

25:08and in that context it claims to be a prophecy. It claims to talk about the

25:15future. So you’ve got all those things going together. And the third one you

25:22mentioned basic principles. Of course the thing is shot through with basic

25:28principles. The war between good and evil and so on. So if we just stand back

25:34from this for a moment and let’s get a couple of perspectives.

25:41It’s a revelation of Jesus Christ in the first section of it. That is the first three chapters.

25:47He is revealed in all his glory walking

25:53among these churches which are represented as lampstands.

25:58Now the book is full of imagery and in order to grasp how it works we need to

26:03understand how imagery functions. We are told that the lampstands are the

26:09churches but now lampstand is not simply a church coded

26:16in that way. Later we’ll read about great monsters.

26:23It’s symbolism. But as CS Lewis has pointed out, and in fact anybody who

26:28thinks about grammar knows, metaphor and symbolism always stands for an

26:34underlying reality. And we need to grip this very carefully in the book of

26:39Revelation. If I use a metaphor and say my heart is broken, it doesn’t mean this

26:45pump in my chest is defective, but it means I’m having a very real experience

26:51of sorrow or sadness or brokenness or whatever. The metaphor stands for reality. Now, we’re told that the

26:59lampstands stand for the churches, but that is not merely to identify them.

27:07We need to turn it the other way. It’s not The important thing is that their lampstands that is their sources of

27:14light and so the churches are being viewed as lampstands that is as

27:19witnesses and Jesus is appears as the one who’s standing with his face shining

27:26like the sun vast source of light holding stars in his right hand. So the

27:32whole point of the vision is to say I’m appearing to you in order to increase

27:38the power of your witness. That’s a very important feature in the whole book empowering the witness of the church in

27:46the ancient world and of course throughout history. Now the second thing is the framing of the book. Three times

27:54over in chapter one, the return of well, let me put it this way, the

28:02coming of God is referred to. The God who is, was, and not shall be, although

28:10that’s true, but the God who is, was, and is to come. And that’s an Old

28:16Testament concept that God would come, read Psalm 96, come to judge the world.

28:23And if you ask chapter one of Revelation, how will God come?

28:29Then we read, behold, he comes with the clouds and every eye shall see him. That

28:34is, he comes in the person of Jesus Christ. So three times over in chapter

28:401, you have the coming mentioned. In chapter 22, it’s mentioned three times

28:47over and each time it’s Jesus speaking, “Behold, I come quickly.” And it ends

28:54with the whole church saying, “Even so, come Lord Jesus.” Now, this framing

28:59Peter I believe is very important because as far as the future goes, what

29:04it is doing is pointing Christians in the first century and every century afterwards towards the central Christian

29:12hope. and that is the return of Jesus. And I believe and it’s one of the

29:17reasons I wrote my book, we need to get back to that. The teaching about the

29:24coming of Christ is not a peripheral add-on for Christians who’ve not nothing

29:29better to do. Jesus claimed to his disciples before he left that he would

29:35return to take them to be with him. Then he was put on trial. And when he was

29:43challenged as to whether he was the Messiah or not, he said, “Yes, and you

29:49will see the son of man sitting on the right hand of God and

29:55coming on the clouds of heaven.” In other words, he was claiming to be that figure in Daniel 7 who would come to

30:02execute the judgment of God and he was crucified for it. So as a Christian

30:08believer, I cannot apologize for that. It’s the heart of the Christian faith

30:14and precisely because the book of Revelation is filled with judgments,

30:20sequences of judgments, the fact of the coming of Christ needs

30:26to be the framework the whole way through. Otherwise, we would lose heart. And so I feel very strongly that we need

30:34to face this book in all its grim reality and some of it is grim but we

30:39need to face it in light of the fact that the Lord Jesus is going to come.

30:44Now my book was called the end of history. That is a very strange phrase.

30:50The coming of Christ will not be the end of history. It will be the end of history as we know it. But it’ll be

30:55beginning of the new heavens and the new earth which will go on eternally. So

31:01that is how I would begin to look at it. But I would finish with this point

31:07because it is of central importance that it seems to me the key to understanding

31:13revelation is not to say oh it’s full of strange surreal metaphor symbols

31:21monsters snakes dragons all this kind of thing. So it cannot have any relevance

31:27for us. That is simply false. These images stand for reality. And the book

31:34itself tells us quite a bit about the realities that the monsters are actually

31:40empires or leaders of empires or possibly both that will be on the earth.

31:47And that makes our ears prick up when we hear people increasingly now because of AI talking about the advent of world

31:55governments. Absolutely. But well, look, let’s just

32:00backtrack. Thanks for that incredible overview of how to read the book of Revelation. Just uh coming back to AI

32:08again, and then we’ll we’ll come back to other parts of the book as we go on later. But does Revelation warn us more

32:16about technology per se, or is it more a warning about idolatry? In other words,

32:23is the real danger AI itself or the human heart that that wields the tool?

32:30Is revelation describing specific future technologies or recurring patterns of

32:37idolatrous power? I think that’s quite an important question and again I think the answer

32:44may well be both but we need to be careful about it. I have often said that

32:51as a tool AI is like a sharp knife. You can use a sharp knife to do surgery or

32:58you can use it for murder. The tool itself is neutral and there is a sense in which that is true.

33:05The evil is in the hands of bad actors using

33:10AI to uh suppress people to organize horrific

33:17drone warfare and all this kind of thing. But the human operators and the

33:24AI systems are very closely linked together. So I’m not sure that we should

33:29drive too big a wedge in between them, but we should place the blame where it

33:36is. You can only blame a moral being. A machine is not a moral being. AI systems

33:44have to have ethical codes embedded in them. if their makers think that that’s

33:49important which they should but those AI principles are the principles of the

33:55makers of course and and that is hugely important. Now, one of the clues I got

34:04about how do I approach this whole thing and your question was from a friend of

34:10mine who’s long dead who contributed quite a lot in his day to the science

34:15religion debate re Clark of Cambridge a chemist and his very last book was

34:20unfinished. It’s called Tomorrow’s World and it’s about the book of Revelation.

34:26And while reading it, I picked it up again because I had a copy. He says in it, “We should beware of simply

34:35interpreting the book of Revelation in terms of past history and past

34:42concepts.” Because if biblical prophecy

34:47is a supernatural thing coming from God, that is genuine

34:53prediction, then it must apply since by

34:59definition through Jesus’ claims, he hasn’t returned yet. So it will be

35:05applying at least in part to the time in which we live. Why would we not

35:12try to say if our current technology gives us any clue as to what it’s about?

35:19And I think that’s perfectly fair, provided we do it carefully and don’t try to pin things down too much because

35:26one of the things that has really destroyed taking the book of Revelation

35:31seriously is people trying to pin everything down. But it seems to me that

35:39when we see in the book of Revelation things that we can now conceive of which

35:47were not readily conceivable before, the classic example is the idea of world

35:56economic control under one empire and one leader.

36:01The monster, there are two big monsters in the book of Revelation. one from the sea and one from the land.

36:08And we’re told that the monster from the sea or the false prophet as he’s often

36:13called commands the building of an image to the first monster who’s the world

36:20leader to cause the world to worship it. And he’s energized by the power of

36:26Satan. And the economic control which is mentioned is in terms of every human

36:33being issued with a mark on the right hand of their forehead and they cannot

36:40buy and sell without it. That’s total economic control. And then I come to the

36:4621st century and read a book by a brilliant physicist Max Tegmark who has

36:51half a dozen or more scenarios of what is possible in the future. He talks

36:56about benevolent AIs. He talks about dictator AIs and all the rest of it. But

37:03the scenario that he spends most time on is the idea of an artificial

37:09intelligence arising out of Amazon which ends up controlling all the world’s

37:16economy and issuing every citizen of the world with a security bracelet

37:23which has all the functionality of an Apple Watch. It records all you say, where you go and all the rest of it. But

37:29also it has the capacity at the command of the centralized government to inject

37:35a lethal dose of toxin into a person that doesn’t keep the rules or accord to

37:42the uh ideology. Now that is exactly what revelation is talking about. It

37:48would seem, at least it’s reasonable to say, it seems to me that in the world

37:54today, we have these things being talked about by completely non-Christian

37:59sources. And the scenario that they set up is uncannily like that in the Bible.

38:07So my argument is this. It’s if we’re prepared, as many people are these days,

38:13to take seriously these scenarios, then why not look back at the Bible?

38:19Now, just to illustrate that, I was speaking not long ago to a very famous

38:25expert in technology. He’s world famous, has founded one of the world’s biggest companies in this area. And he has been

38:33talking about the apocalypse. And I said, “Look, I would like to understand

38:38exactly what where you’re coming from.” And I said, “Let me put it to you. As a

38:45technologist, an expert in AI, you sense that where the thing is going

38:51technologically is towards a world state totalitarian

38:56with a dictator in charge of it.” And he said, “Yes, that’s true.” And I said,

39:02″Because of your biblical background and your interest in scripture, you see that

39:08scripture appears to be saying something very similar.” He said, “That’s exactly right.” And so they’re flowing together.

39:16And and therefore, Peter, I feel that that is something that we need to take

39:22on board because the New Testament itself tells us to do that. Now, can I

39:29take a moment and explain what I mean by that? One of the keys, I believe, to

39:35understanding all of these things is not in Daniel or Revelation. It’s in Paul’s

39:41letter to the Thessalonians. This is not symbolism.

39:47It’s talking about confusion in a first century church at

39:53Thessalonica where they got confused as to whether the Lord Jesus had come or not. And Paul

40:01writes to them and says this, and I’m reading 2 Thessalonians 2:3, “Let no one

40:10deceive you in any way, for that day will not come unless the rebellion comes

40:16first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destru destruction,

40:23who opposes and exalts himself against every so-called god or object of

40:29worship. so that he takes his seat in the temple of God proclaiming himself to be God.

40:38And then he goes on to say, “The lawless one will be revealed whom the Lord Jesus

40:43will kill with the breath of his mouth and bring to nothing by the appearance

40:48of his coming.” Now, he adds there that this lawless one

40:54will be energized by the power of Satan. So you’ve got a demonic

41:00individual, a man of lawlessness that is a human being. And people get confused because

41:08Paul is writing at the time of the Roman Empire whose law was famous. They weren’t lawless in the sense of civil

41:16law. But the lawlessness being described here is not civil disobedience. It’s

41:23spiritual lawlessness. because this individual sits in the temple and

41:29declares himself to be God. It’s the deification of man. Now that was

41:34happening in the Roman Empire. The Caesars posthumously first of all were

41:41announced to be gods and people had to bow and many Christians were killed because they refused to bow to the

41:49Caesar as God. And then some of the Caesars who were alive uh got greedy and

41:55decided to be called gods in their lifetime which created a great deal of difficulty. But the point is Paul talks

42:03to a first century church about the distant future around the time of the

42:09coming of Christ that when Christ came he would destroy this man of lawlessness

42:17who was claiming to be God. Why did he say that to the first century

42:22church? Paul explains. He says the mystery and I’m quoting this text again.

42:28The mystery of lawlessness is already operating. That is in your culture. In

42:35other words, he’s saying to them, be attentive to the trend in your culture

42:41to deify human beings because that is going to project into the future to lead

42:46to a harvest when the man of lawlessness will be revealed who’ll be destroyed by

42:52the coming of Christ. Now the description of that man of lawlessness

42:58matches exactly the description of the monster in Revelation and one of the

43:04monsters in the book of Daniel. So that you have this plain theological text.

43:09There’s no symbolism in 2 Thessalonians 1. And Paul is saying watch out in your

43:16culture for this trend to deify human beings. What would he say to us today?

43:22Exactly the same. Think of Yuval Noah Harari, one of the best-selling authors

43:29of today and Israeli historian. He’s written a book, very influential book

43:34called Homodos, the man who is God. And he says, “What

43:40we’re going to do now is take over natural evolution, as he calls it, and

43:46turn human beings into little gods and solve the problem of human death and

43:51enhance human happiness and all the rest of it.” We’re talking again about humans becoming God. Is that a big issue? It is

43:59because it started in Genesis 3 with the temptation of the enemy.

44:06In the day you eat, you shall be as God, knowing good and evil. It was a halftruth. But now, right through

44:12history, we can trace the stream of this rebellion against

44:18God. And we’re seeing it now accelerated way beyond the dreams of the Nazis of

44:25creating a perfect man or the Soviet Union and Russia. We’re now having the

44:32most fundamental advances in technology pushing towards enhancing human beings

44:39and turning them into transhumans or or little gods. So it seems to me we need

44:45to be focusing again on this. If Paul did it in the first century, we need to do it in the 21st.

44:52Now I want to get back to the themes of of surveillance and also economic

44:57participation with allegiance as well. But but before we do that, I want to come back to this whole idea of the

45:03antichrist, the man of lawlessness, the beasts of Revelation 13 and so on. How

45:08would how should we be thinking about the antichrist in a technological age?

45:15Is it is it a person? Is it an empire? Is it it’s some kind of system? Or is it

45:21all three of those things? How how we how should we have our spiritual antenna

45:27tuned to this? Well, I think we must be open to different levels of

45:32interpretation because as you read some parts of Daniel and Revelation, you

45:39think of empires much more than of leaders. And yet you get this focus in 2

45:45Thessalonians 2 on a specific leader. And the famous number of the monster or

45:52the beast, I prefer the word monster, but the number in Revelation 666,

46:00uh, people have been very successful in deciding who it is, but the question is

46:06not who it is. We don’t know who it is, but we certainly know what it is. And that’s the scary thing because the text

46:12actually tells you it is the number of a man.

46:17So that you seem to have an ambivalence between the state and the person who

46:25embodies the state. But that is the way in which we normally speak. You could

46:32say Putin says, the Kremlin says, Russia says, and they all mean essentially the

46:37same thing because the ideology of a state gets projected onto the leader and

46:44vice versa. So I don’t think it’s a big problem doing that. We simply must be

46:50open for different levels of this. It’s very sophisticated writing. And in

46:56addition to that, uh many scholars think that part of the book of revelation is

47:06written in such a way that believers would recognize that the Roman Empire is

47:12being talked about without it being explicitly named because it would be

47:17very dangerous to explicitly name it. You see the interesting thing about the concept of the monster

47:24starting in Daniel you get a series of monsters and they are an ascendant

47:30series going up through history. So that you have the monster rearing its head at

47:37different times in history in different forms. So in that sense, when the Roman

47:44Christians were pushed up against the deification of Caesar and being put to

47:50death because they wouldn’t worship Caesar, they were facing the beast, the

47:55monster, in a very real way. And it will be the same in the future. This has happened before. It’s been happening all

48:02through history. But this sequence leads to a climax. There is an ultimate one.

48:09And in understanding prophecy, it’s always useful to realize that they’re

48:15often immediate fulfillments and more distant fulfillments. And that keeps

48:21your hope and confidence in scripture going. That’s the way it works. And I’ve written about this or tried to in in my

48:29book. So I would say that well it’s said in the New Testament

48:35there are many antichrists in a sense this kind of thing is happening all the time and we need to

48:42have our antenna um tuned to recognize where something is anti-Christian or indeed anti- good as a

48:50lot of the thinking behind AI is by the way it is very explicitly atheistic and

48:57people trying to build God. And they say so that they’re trying to build God,

49:03which in fact means that we need to oppose the trend that is increasing very

49:11rapidly that AI is becoming an object of worship because it is evidencing many of

49:19the characteristics we associate with God. It is omniresent. The internet is

49:25worldwide. It is omnisient. It seems to know everything. Chap GPT with the

49:30billions of words it devours. It can give you advice on any topic etc etc

49:36etc. It watches you. It listens to you. And there are now collections of people

49:42that are worshiping AI and it is becoming a rapidly growing

49:49Silicon Valley religion. And we need to be aware of that because if people don’t

49:55find the true God to worship, they will find a false god. And that brings me

50:01back to what you were saying earlier, Peter, that a lot of this is really

50:07idolatry. It is idolatrous to the core and so we need to be alert and be aware

50:13of it. And I just come back to this question of surveillance again which we we touched on and of course the the two

50:20most famous futuristic novels of the 20th century Orwell’s 1984 and Huxley’s

50:26brave new world both talked about societies in which there was surveillance but they were very

50:33different that the world of 1984 was an oppressive controlling environment. In

50:39Brave New World the surveillance was more through seduction. Do do you think

50:45that and these these are themes within the book of revelation as well. Do do you think we see these things today

50:53operating in the same sense and and how should we be reacting toward them?

50:58I think your analysis is right. Orwell and Huxley

51:04showed very different aspects of how they conceived the future

51:11that at one side we’d be observed big brother watching you all the rest of it

51:17hard surveillance control and on the other side we would be seduced we’d fall

51:22in love with our oppression. I suspect that both are now happening simultaneously.

51:28And the book of Revelation indicates the brutal side of the monster, but also the

51:35seductive side of mystery Babylon the great, whatever that is. But there seems

51:42to be an element of that that this beast tries to control this woman. And you can

51:50see the emphasis on maleness and femaleness, both perverted. She is

51:57magnificently beautiful but faithless. She’s a prostitute.

52:02He is strong, brutally strong. And

52:07between the two, everybody gets crushed or they get seduced and even the leaders

52:14of the world. So behind the lines so to speak of the book of revelation I think

52:20we have these themes being developed and we need to take them on board because

52:26technology is very seductive. I like my smartphone and yet here I am voluntarily

52:34wearing a tracker that is following me all around the place and I do it voluntarily and most of you out there

52:41probably do the same. It it’s very interesting what we’re prepared to put up with, but it’s creeping and it’s

52:49getting in amongst us. Now, your question opens up another whole world.

52:55And it’s the world of influence on our young people, the seduction into

53:02pornography, for example, that is being produced by the ton on the internet by

53:10totally unscrupulous people. And it’s all because they want to make money. And

53:17it’s addictive, very addictive. And I would strongly recommend and

53:24anybody watching this to read the book by Jonathan Height called The Anxious

53:30Generation. It is wonderful to see that at least some countries are beginning to realize

53:36that smartphones need to be banned under the age of 16 because of the

53:42damage they’re causing their psychology.

53:47We’re seeing a lot more people becoming aware of it now. Ju just I wanted to touch again on this idea that we see in

53:55Revelation 13 that you’ve already alluded to uh which where we see

54:00economic participation linked with allegiance or worship. Uh do

54:07you do you think that the technology we’re seeing now makes that kind of

54:12system much more conceivable, plausible, possible? Well, it’s already operating.

54:17It’s already operating. the social credit system in China. Now, it’s a very complex system and it’s only

54:25working in certain parts, but I’ve tried to research it in detail and it’s in uh my more recent book on AI where people

54:33are given a certain number of social credit points. Say you’re given 300 and

54:39if you’re a good citizen and pick up literature and don’t mix with the wrong kind of people, your credit score goes

54:46up according to the central government and then you get access to travel, you

54:53get access to better cars or jobs and then the reverse is true. If you don’t

54:59behave according to what central government wants, you find you might even lose your job. you can’t get into

55:05you the restaurants you used to go to. And this is already rolling out and the

55:11remarkable thing is there’s strong evidence that a lot of people love it

55:17which is chilling and the hope is to roll it out over all of China. Now the

55:24first major article that I read about this by a China watcher made the

55:30chilling point at the end. Be careful west talking about Western Europe and

55:36America because all the equipment necessary to do this you already have it. The only

55:42difference is it is not yet under the control of a central government. But you

55:48see, we now have credit score systems and there are many people in Britain and

55:55the US and elsewhere who’ve come unstuck because these systems have gone wrong or

56:01um not represented them correctly. We’re being watched more and more and more and

56:08police forces because of the power of facial recognition are demanding that

56:14they have this and it means more and more control over populations and in the

56:21extreme cases and we shouldn’t forget Peter I I forgotten the statistic I only

56:27read it a couple of days ago but way over 50% of the world is living under

56:33authoritarian regimes and these systems are a gift to centralized totalitarian

56:41control and we have to be aware of it. It could come very quickly and easily and lead to

56:49discrimination against Christians of the same kind as was seen in the first century.

56:55Well, sadly we’ve virtually run out of time. Our hour has flown by, but I

57:00wanted to come back to your uh description of Revelation right at the

57:06beginning as an unveiling of Christ and of his the centrality of his coming and

57:14slaying the the man of lawlessness and all that follows. And if revelation ends

57:21not with catastrophe which we can imagine looking around us uh it’s not

57:27not surprising that we are afraid of the speed of what’s happening and what’s

57:32happening. But if it if it ends not with catastrophe but with Christ’s reign, how

57:38should that be shaping our posture toward AI today in in the light of God’s

57:46sovereignty and control? One of the most powerful sections in the

57:51book of Revelation is the second section where the theme is the throne of God.

57:57And in chapter 4, you see the throne of God alone in all its august

58:02magnificence. But in chapter 7, you see an uncountable

58:08throng of people from every nation standing before the throne. And you ask

58:14the obvious question, how did they get there? And the answer to that is because in chapter five, you discover there is a

58:21lamb. And I think one of the most magnificent things is the revelation of Christ as

58:29the lamb of God. Because right at the end of the book, you find the lamb that

58:35is in the midst of the throne shall be their shepherd. And he shall wipe away every tear from their eyes. That gives

58:42us terrific hope. Death is not the end. Jesus has conquered death. He was a lamb

58:48slain, but he was a lamb that rose from the dead. And therefore, it seems to me

58:55that his intelligence is not artificial. He is the logos, the intelligence.

59:04And the wonderful thing is that he loves us individually and personally which no

59:10AI can ever do because it has no idea what love is or forgiveness or peace and

59:18therefore with all these things coming upon us and we’ve got to be realistic and face what’s happening in our culture

59:26and make people alert to it but in a balanced way because although there are

59:32things that are scary. There always have been things that are scary. What we need

59:37to do is open up our minds and hearts to the revelation of Jesus Christ. And

59:43above all, do what those lampstands stand for. Witness because Jesus appears

59:51to us in order to increase our light and to enable us to illuminate him who

1:00:00is the light of the world. So, thank you all for listening to me. God bless you.

1:00:07These are important things, but the most important thing is that we live and

1:00:12witness for the Lord who died and rose again to save us.

1:00:17Amen. And it’s it’s as we close, it is worth remembering, as we’ve just been

1:00:23reminded now by Professor Lennox, that Revelation was written not to terrify

1:00:28believers, but to study them. It reminds us that empires rise and fall,

1:00:35technologies dazzled and disappoint, and human ambition repeatedly overreaches,

1:00:41but God remains sovereign. Artificial intelligence may be reshaping our world,

1:00:47but it does not redefine our worth, our destiny, and our hope. And the final

1:00:53version of scripture is not of a machine dominated future but a renewed creation

1:00:59governed not by algorithms but by the lamb of God. And that doesn’t call us to

1:01:04withdraw from technology nor to worship it but to engage it wisely, humbly and

1:01:10courageously. Uh John, thank you so much for helping us to think clearly, biblically, and calmly in a moment when

1:01:19clarity uh really matters deeply. And thanks to all of you joining us all around the world. May we not leave with

1:01:27fear of the future, but confidence in the one who who holds the future. And

1:01:34sadly, we we could go on, I’m sure, for for probably many more hours on these issues. And I feel in a way we’ve only

1:01:40scraped the surface of many of them. Thanks again, John. And thank you to everyone. May the Lord bless you and

1:01:46keep you. Thank you. Bye-bye.

Large Language Models explained briefly

0:01Imagine you happen across a short movie script that

0:03describes a scene between a person and their AI assistant.

0:07The script has what the person asks the AI, but the AI’s response has been torn off.

0:13Suppose you also have this powerful magical machine that can take

0:16any text and provide a sensible prediction of what word comes next.

0:21You could then finish the script by feeding in what you have to the machine,

0:25seeing what it would predict to start the AI’s answer,

0:28and then repeating this over and over with a growing script completing the dialogue.

0:33When you interact with a chatbot, this is exactly what’s happening.

0:37A large language model is a sophisticated mathematical function

0:40that predicts what word comes next for any piece of text.

0:44Instead of predicting one word with certainty, though,

0:47what it does is assign a probability to all possible next words.

0:51To build a chatbot, you lay out some text that describes an interaction between a user

0:56and a hypothetical AI assistant, add on whatever the user types in as the first part of

1:02the interaction, and then have the model repeatedly predict the next word that such a

1:07hypothetical AI assistant would say in response, and that’s what’s presented to the user.

1:13In doing this, the output tends to look a lot more natural if

1:16you allow it to select less likely words along the way at random.

1:20So what this means is even though the model itself is deterministic,

1:23a given prompt typically gives a different answer each time it’s run.

1:28Models learn how to make these predictions by processing an enormous amount of text,

1:32typically pulled from the internet.

1:34For a standard human to read the amount of text that was used to train GPT-3,

1:39for example, if they read non-stop 24-7, it would take over 2600 years.

1:44Larger models since then train on much, much more.

1:48You can think of training a little bit like tuning the dials on a big machine.

1:52The way that a language model behaves is entirely determined by these

1:56many different continuous values, usually called parameters or weights.

2:01Changing those parameters will change the probabilities

2:04that the model gives for the next word on a given input.

2:07What puts the large in large language model is how

2:10they can have hundreds of billions of these parameters.

2:15No human ever deliberately sets those parameters.

2:18Instead, they begin at random, meaning the model just outputs gibberish,

2:22but they’re repeatedly refined based on many example pieces of text.

2:27One of these training examples could be just a handful of words,

2:30or it could be thousands, but in either case, the way this works is to

2:34pass in all but the last word from that example into the model and

2:38compare the prediction that it makes with the true last word from the example.

2:43An algorithm called backpropagation is used to tweak all of the parameters

2:47in such a way that it makes the model a little more likely to choose

2:51the true last word and a little less likely to choose all the others.

2:55When you do this for many, many trillions of examples,

2:58not only does the model start to give more accurate predictions on the training data,

3:03but it also starts to make more reasonable predictions on text that it’s never

3:07seen before.

3:09Given the huge number of parameters and the enormous amount of training data,

3:13the scale of computation involved in training a large language model is mind-boggling.

3:19To illustrate, imagine that you could perform one

3:22billion additions and multiplications every single second.

3:26How long do you think it would take for you to do all of the

3:29operations involved in training the largest language models?

3:33Do you think it would take a year?

3:36Maybe something like 10,000 years?

3:39The answer is actually much more than that.

3:41It’s well over 100 million years.

3:45This is only part of the story, though.

3:47This whole process is called pre-training.

3:49The goal of auto-completing a random passage of text from the

3:52internet is very different from the goal of being a good AI assistant.

3:56To address this, chatbots undergo another type of training,

4:00just as important, called reinforcement learning with human feedback.

4:04Workers flag unhelpful or problematic predictions,

4:07and their corrections further change the model’s parameters,

4:11making them more likely to give predictions that users prefer.

4:14Looking back at the pre-training, though, this staggering amount of

4:18computation is only made possible by using special computer chips that

4:23are optimized for running many operations in parallel, known as GPUs.

4:28However, not all language models can be easily parallelized.

4:32Prior to 2017, most language models would process text one word at a time,

4:36but then a team of researchers at Google introduced a new model known as the transformer.

4:43Transformers don’t read text from the start to the finish,

4:46they soak it all in at once, in parallel.

4:49The very first step inside a transformer, and most other language models for that matter,

4:54is to associate each word with a long list of numbers.

4:57The reason for this is that the training process only works with continuous values,

5:02so you have to somehow encode language using numbers,

5:05and each of these lists of numbers may somehow encode the meaning of the

5:09corresponding word.

5:10What makes transformers unique is their reliance

5:13on a special operation known as attention.

5:16This operation gives all of these lists of numbers a chance to talk to one another

5:21and refine the meanings they encode based on the context around, all done in parallel.

5:27For example, the numbers encoding the word bank might be changed based on the

5:31context surrounding it to somehow encode the more specific notion of a riverbank.

5:37Transformers typically also include a second type of operation known

5:41as a feed-forward neural network, and this gives the model extra

5:44capacity to store more patterns about language learned during training.

5:49All of this data repeatedly flows through many different iterations of

5:53these two fundamental operations, and as it does so,

5:56the hope is that each list of numbers is enriched to encode whatever

6:00information might be needed to make an accurate prediction of what word

6:04follows in the passage.

6:07At the end, one final function is performed on the last vector in this sequence,

6:11which now has had a chance to be influenced by all the other context from the input text,

6:16as well as everything the model learned during training,

6:19to produce a prediction of the next word.

6:22Again, the model’s prediction looks like a probability for every possible next word.

6:28Although researchers design the framework for how each of these steps work,

6:32it’s important to understand that the specific behavior is an emergent phenomenon

6:37based on how those hundreds of billions of parameters are tuned during training.

6:42This makes it incredibly challenging to determine

6:45why the model makes the exact predictions that it does.

6:48What you can see is that when you use large language model predictions to autocomplete

6:53a prompt, the words that it generates are uncannily fluent, fascinating, and even useful.

7:05If you’re a new viewer and you’re curious about more details on how

7:08transformers and attention work, boy do I have some material for you.

7:12One option is to jump into a series I made about deep learning,

7:16where we visualize and motivate the details of attention and all the other steps

7:20in a transformer.

7:22Also, on my second channel I just posted a talk I gave a couple

7:25months ago about this topic for the company TNG in Munich.

7:29Sometimes I actually prefer the content I make as a casual talk rather than a produced

7:33video, but I leave it up to you which one of these feels like the better follow-on.

‘20 PhDs’ In the Time of One: How AI Is Changing College

0:00We decided to change everything. Change

0:01culture, change design, change

0:03intellectual structure, use technology,

0:05move in new directions, and then we

0:06began measuring learning outcomes.

0:08For all the talk about changes in higher

0:10ed, including just this week when the

0:13University of Virginia became the first

0:15public college to agree to Trump

0:16administration oversight, the biggest

0:18cause for change, AI, doesn’t come up

0:21all that often in the political debate.

0:24For nearly a quarter century, Michael

0:26Crowe has led the university that is by

0:28some measures the largest in the United

0:30States. Few people have thought as much

0:32about American higher education while

0:34also having the ability to influence it

0:37on such a large scale. But when we first

0:39talked with him a little over a year

0:40ago, we didn’t cover artificial

0:43intelligence. A lot has changed since

0:45then. AI will leave a lot of white

0:47collar people behind.

0:49Another uncomfortable truth linked to

0:51AI.

0:52AI. AI. AI.

0:53AI.

0:54It’s not a bubble.

0:55Obviously, the most disruptive

0:56technology in the history of mankind.

0:59Egalitarian access to knowledge is at

1:01the highest level in the history of our

1:02species. What we have is a walking,

1:04talking, reference library on any

1:06subject, and we never had anything like

1:07that in our society before.

1:09We wanted to know how artificial

1:11intelligence is changing the American

1:13college experience, what it means for

1:15the teachers and students who have now

1:18made it a regular part of their lives.

1:20But we also asked Crowe about the

1:22outcomes for recent graduates and how

1:25his school is preparing students for an

1:27economy that is moving very fast.

1:29What does that do to teaching? I mean,

1:32back in the olden days, we wrote essays.

1:34We wrote blue books back when I was

1:35there. How do you do things like essays

1:37and evaluations?

1:39Well, I think what has to happen, and

1:40we’ve experienced this at ASU with our

1:426,000 faculty members, several thousand

1:44of which are already AI trained, is you

1:45have to up the game. Perhaps we were

1:47learning too slowly, too incrementally,

1:49too much in a regimented or industrial

1:51way. With the AI tools that are

1:53available now, you can up the game, uh,

1:55enhance the question complexity, enhance

1:57the answer complexity, expect more of

1:59the students. We had somebody uh, give

2:01their test out of the business school to

2:03an AI system and get everything right

2:04instantly. Well, then the test is too

2:06easy. The test is too simple. So, you

2:07need it’s basically a way in our view to

2:09accelerate learning, to broaden

2:11learning, and to speed learning. So, you

2:12have to look at it as a new way to

2:14basically make the game more intensive.

2:16The model’s always changing. So Plato,

2:18you know, was against the written word.

2:19He thought everything should be uh

2:21thought through uh verbally and

2:23communicated verbally. There were

2:25unbelievable forces against the

2:26development of the printed book. And so

2:28uh the internet in its development, the

2:31web and its development all had people

2:32that were against it. And so AI changes

2:35the model in the sense that it speeds it

2:36up and intensifies it. It personalized

2:38the learner’s experience, but it doesn’t

2:40teach those core things. There’s no

2:42values being taught. There’s no values

2:44being experienced. There’s no lived

2:46experiences being built. So what we

2:48really have here now is we just have

2:49this massive hypers speed calculator

2:52capable of going to all of the digitized

2:55information. You asking a question about

2:57that information and getting the most

2:58probable answer. It’s all about the

3:00questions that you’re asking. It’s not

3:02about the answers. It’s about the

3:03questions. And that’s what people need

3:04to really figure out.

3:05Does it change the notion of cheating?

3:08I’ll bet humans have cheated for quite a

3:10while. It does change the nature of what

3:13is your work. Now, if you’re answering a

3:15complex question and you’re using a

3:16reference library and an AI system to

3:18answer that question, that seems

3:19legitimate. If you’re if you’re using it

3:22to produce your analytical response

3:24that’s supposed to be demonstrative of

3:26your ability, well, then you’re you’re

3:27you’re cheating. Uh now, you have to

3:29then build a system which recognizes the

3:31ability to gain access to these tools.

3:33Now, sometimes it’s just going to be you

3:35in there by yourself taking the test

3:37because they’ve got to know that you

3:38know how to ask the question, you know

3:40how to derive the answer, that your

3:42brain works in a certain way. Beyond

3:43that, the AI systems are going to

3:45enhance learning in every possible way

3:46and that the idea of cheating will

3:48change.

3:49At this point, are there some things

3:50that you can learn that AI cannot teach

3:53to you?

3:54Absolutely. I mean, uh, you know, an AI

3:57system can’t teach you to be innovative.

3:59It can’t teach you to be creative. It

4:01cannot teach you grit. It cannot teach

4:03you the discovery process. It cannot

4:06teach you I mean, it’s a machine. It’s a

4:07it’s an advanced hypers speed

4:09calculator. Uh, it can do things that

4:12you can’t do. It can think around

4:13corners that you can’t see. Uh uh but of

4:16course so can a so can a dog. And so and

4:19so it’s it’s it’s a powerful analytical

4:21tool to enhance our mental capabilities,

4:24not to replace them.

4:26In order to ensure that AI is a

4:28springboard rather than a crutch, Crow

4:30says students and teachers will have to

4:32raise the bar. And one place he’s

4:35already seen signs of AI’s ability to

4:37supercharge progress is in the school’s

4:40research programs. It’s almost

4:42unbelievable. We have probably 50

4:43research groups that are using advanced

4:45AI to solve unsolvable problems to

4:48figure out how to process materials or

4:50manage the Mississippi River in a

4:52different way in terms of the flow of

4:53the water and the flow of the dirt and

4:55other things that go down the river.

4:56We’ve got people doing advanced

4:58chemistry now. We’re using AI systems to

5:01think beyond the way that we normally

5:03think to create more revolutionary

5:05opportunity. uh there was a a study

5:07recently done by some of our faculty at

5:09the speed with which you could complete

5:10the work equivalent to a dissertation in

5:13in uh genetics 14 days. What that means

5:16then is that the PhD that normally takes

5:18four or five years to set up the

5:19experiments, do the experiments, do the

5:21work, be evaluated. Maybe the PhD

5:23student of the future will do the

5:24equivalent of 20 PhDs. That will speed

5:27up the cures for cancer. That will speed

5:29up the analytical tools that will help

5:30restore sight in human beings. that will

5:32that will speed up the techniques that

5:34use electromagnetic current to affect

5:37people with Alzheimer’s disease and

5:38other neurodeenerative diseases all of

5:40which are computationally limited

5:42certainly the world has changed

5:43enormously since I came out of college a

5:46long time ago now but my sense is the

5:48rate of change has really increased

5:51maybe even geometrically how fast it’s

5:53changing how do you prepare graduates

5:55today for a world 20 30 40 years down

5:58the road that I can’t even imagine

6:00so there’s there’s no way to prepare

6:01someone for something you don’t know

6:02what it will be except one thing. What

6:05we call we’re we’re attempting to take

6:06all the people that are coming to our

6:08university, 120,000 degree seeeking

6:10students, 700,000 other learners who are

6:13just taking courses with us digitally

6:15and otherwise. Can we help create you to

6:18be a master learner? Can we help you to

6:21be a person capable of learning

6:23anything, adjusting to anything,

6:25adapting to anything? It’s really that

6:26because we don’t know what all of the

6:27adaptations that will be required are.

6:29We do know that you should be grounded

6:30in, you know, American history and

6:33economics and the role of democracy and

6:35and certain subjects in math and science

6:37and so forth and so on. And then after

6:39that, we find a learning path for you to

6:41take where you learn to learn. We don’t

6:43care what your major is. You can I met a

6:44kid the other day was majoring in opera

6:46and physics. Great. Fine. Fantastic.

6:49That’s how that kid learns. And so and

6:51so that’s what we’re after. How do you

6:52how do you create universal learners

6:54capable of learning anything? And that’s

6:56the pathway.

6:57We hear at 40,000 ft about a shifting

7:01employment situation for recent college

7:03graduates because of AI. Are you seeing

7:05any of that in the real world?

7:06We’re not we’re not seeing that in our

7:08graduates. Now, the problem with people

7:09talking about all college graduates,

7:11there’s more than 20 million people in

7:13college. A couple million go to what you

7:15think of as sleepaway colleges. You

7:17know, they go they go to places where

7:18you’re, you know, you’re living on

7:19campus. The other 18 million go to

7:21college in some other way, community

7:23college, online, some kind of other

7:24course, and so forth. So we’re not

7:26seeing any change. Uh you know we’re

7:27seeing the same level of anxiety. We’re

7:29seeing the same level of the process.

7:31We’re you know more than 95% of our

7:34students that graduate as undergraduates

7:35are employed or in graduate school

7:36within the first year. Uh almost all

7:39within the second year. Uh so we’re

7:41we’re still you know seeing good ROIs.

7:44But what we are seeing is students you

7:46know who are quite savvy you know

7:48adjusting their trend. So we’re seeing a

7:50slightly downward trend in computer

7:52science and a slightly slightly upward

7:54trend in double majoring and triple

7:56majoring. Uh uh more uh people moving

7:59into analytics and supply chain and all

8:01kinds of other things. And so the market

8:03for learning is also adjusting.

8:07We measure our success based on who we

8:11include.

8:12Crow hopes the size and scope of ASU

8:15will help with that adjustment, allowing

8:17students to react quickly and build new

8:19skills for the changing world. And in a

8:22school made famous for opening its doors

8:25rather than being exclusive, he thinks

8:27the most important skills of all can

8:30come from unlikely places.

8:32We’ve even got ways now that we’re using

8:33advanced AI enhanced robots to help

8:36people that aren’t qualified to get into

8:38a particular college to do what they

8:39want to do to get them qualified. Guess

8:41what? When we get them qualified, they

8:43have more grit and determination than

8:45anyone else who sort of walked into it

8:46from high school and they outperform

8:48everyone.

8:49There’s a theme going on right now that

8:50maybe college has been overrated,

8:52oversold. What do you say to parents?

8:54What we have is a way for your your

8:57child, your student to learn on the path

9:00that’s going to enhance their ability to

9:01be most adaptive throughout their life.

9:03So, don’t worry about their major. So,

9:05we get these parents that say, “Well, my

9:06kid needs to major in accounting so they

9:08can get a job, or they need to major in

9:10anything other than political science or

9:12history or English, where they’ll never

9:13get a job.” That’s actually not true.

9:15Some of the hottest things that we have

9:16that we’re producing right now are

9:17English majors that can code. And so,

9:20they have a broader perspective and they

9:22can code. And so, we provide free coding

9:24classes to everyone in the institution.

9:26We provide other ways in which you can

9:28double major, triple major, take other

9:30kinds of things. And so what we say to

9:31parents is

9:33let’s find the way where your kid is

9:35going to smile while learning, while

9:37preparing themselves to be a master

9:39learner, and you’ll have to worry about

9:41them less. If they take a fixed thing in

9:43a fixed way, on a fixed pathway, uh they

9:46could find themselves in an alley and no

9:48way out. We’re trying to make sure that

9:50that doesn’t

Doctor on How Screen Time Hurts Kids’ Cognitive Development

0:00Thank you guys. Name is uh Dr. Jared

0:02Cooney Horvath. I’m a former teacher

0:04turned cognitive neuroscientist who

0:06focuses on human learning. Um and I do

0:08not receive funding nor have I ever from

0:10big tech. Um

0:13so a sad fact our generation has to face

0:15this. Our kids are less cognitively

0:19capable than we were at their age. Um

0:22since we’ve been standardizing and

0:24measuring cognitive development since

0:25the late 1800s, every generation has

0:27outperformed their parents. And that’s

0:29exactly what we want. We want sharper

0:31kids. And the reason for this largely

0:33has been school. Each generation spends

0:34more time in school. We use school to

0:36develop our cognition. Congratulations.

0:38You see your correlation. Until Gen Z.

0:41Gen Z is the first generation in modern

0:43history to underperform us on basically

0:46every cognitive measure we have from

0:47basic attention to memory to literacy to

0:50numeracy to executive functioning to

0:52even general IQ even though they go to

0:54more school than we did. So why? What

0:56happened? What happened around 2010 that

0:59decoupled schooling from cognitive

1:00development? It can’t be schools.

1:02Schools basically look the same. It

1:04can’t be biology. This has had enough of

1:06time to change. The answer appears to be

1:08the tools we are using within schools to

1:11drive that learning. across 80

1:13countries. As Gan was just saying, if

1:14you look at the data, once countries

1:16adopt digital technology widely in

1:18schools, performance goes down

1:21significantly to the point where kids

1:22who use computers about 5 hours per day

1:25in school for learning purposes will

1:27score over twothirds of a standard

1:28deviation less than kids who rarely or

1:31never touch tech at school. And that’s

1:33across 80 countries. Bring it home to

1:35the US. Let’s go to the US. We have our

1:36NA. That’s our big data. Take any state.

1:40Here’s here’s a fun experiment you can

1:41try. Take any state NAPE data, compare

1:43that to when that state adopted onetoone

1:46technology widely and watch what

1:48happens. The NAPE data will plateau and

1:50then start to drop. Now, as Jean said,

1:53of course, this is all correlative. What

1:56we really want is causitive. To get

1:58causation, what you need is academic

2:00research and you need mechanisms,

2:01explanations for why we’re seeing what

2:03we’re seeing. Luckily, we have academic

2:05research stretching back to 1962 that

2:08shows the exact same story for 60 years.

2:10When tech enters education, learning

2:13goes down. In fact, one of the biggest

2:15um ed psychologists right now, Dylan

2:17William out of the UK, recently said,

2:19″Edte is a revolution that’s been coming

2:21for 60 years, and we’re going to have to

2:22wait another 60 because it ain’t doing

2:24anything.”

2:27Now, that’s research, but now we need

2:29mechanisms. Luckily, over the last about

2:31two decades, we’ve been doing a lot of

2:32work in what we call the science of

2:34learning. How do human beings learn? And

2:36we now have the clear understanding of

2:38why tech does not work for learning. And

2:40it is all biological. It’s not that the

2:42tech isn’t being used well enough. We

2:44haven’t been trained enough. We need

2:45better programs. It’s we have evolved

2:47biologically to learn from other human

2:49beings, not from screens. And screens

2:52circumvent that process. I won’t go too

2:55deeply into the mechanisms. They can get

2:56boring, but just know they’re there if

2:57you want to talk about them. So that

2:59leaves us with two options. Option one,

3:01when you know something is wrong, do

3:03better. So we could just say, hey, may a

3:05culpa, get some of this tech out of

3:06schools, go back to what we know works,

3:08some analog methods. Cool.

3:10Or two, we could redefine our terms. We

3:13could redefine what it means to be an

3:15effective learner. I want to end with

3:16one quick story here. Think back to your

3:19childhood, to your schooling. I

3:20guarantee all of us at one point took a

3:22test on reading comprehension. And the

3:24way it looked is this. Here’s a passage

3:26of about 750 words. Here are 10 to 12

3:29questions about that passage. Most of

3:31them are inferential, not factual.

3:33They’re asking you to go beyond what you

3:34just read to see what you understood.

3:36Cool. Last year, the SATs had a reading

3:39comprehension section. Here’s what it

3:41looked like. Here is a single sentence

3:43of 75 words. Here is one question

3:46fact-based about that that sentence.

3:49Next. Here is another sentence of 75

3:51words. Here is one question about that

3:53sentence. Next. Last year, they

3:55redefined reading comprehension to mean

3:5854 short sentences with one question

4:00about each. That is skimming. That’s not

4:03reading. Why would we ever do that?

4:05Because what do kids do on computers?

4:07They skim. So rather than determining

4:09what do we want our children to do and

4:11gearing education towards that, we are

4:14redefining education to better suit the

4:16tool. That’s not progress, that is

4:18surrender. So as we go through our

4:21discussion today, there’s going to be a

4:22lot of talk about smartphones and and

4:24social media, rightly so. But I’m the

4:27voice here to remind you that even in

4:29schools, it doesn’t matter what the size

4:31of the screen is. if it’s a if it’s a a

4:34phone, if it’s a laptop, if it’s a

4:35desktop, and it doesn’t matter who

4:37bought it. Is it school sanctioned? Does

4:39it have the word education stamped on

4:41it? It doesn’t matter. All of these

4:44things are also going to hurt learning,

4:45which in turn are going to hurt our

4:47kids’ cognitive development right at the

4:49time when we need our kids to be sharper

4:51than we are. So, thank you guys so much

4:52for today. I look forward to talking

4:54with y’all.

WATCH: The Most Compelling Argument Against Tech In Schools | Sophie Winkleman

0:01good afternoon everyone lovely to see you all lovely to be here I’m going to start with a

0:06slender anecdote totally true from about four weeks ago it was early evening and I was on a

0:12packed 19 bus in London standing over a young man and a young woman they were sitting beside

0:18each other both gazing at their smartphones nothing unusual about this of course they were

0:23both attractive smartly dressed professional looking around the same age willfully invading

0:30their privacy I subtly angled myself to see what they were up to on their phones they were each on

0:36dating apps reading the profiles of men and women who presented as extremely similar to the two

0:41of them our bus completely true our bus reached Picadilly circus and both happened to a light at

0:48this stop I watched the two of them as they walked away from each other one towards shury Avenue and

0:54the other towards St James’s I don’t need to labor the point of what I witnessed with this

1:00couple never to be they were side by side both seeking companionship or love but they

1:05didn’t even register each other’s each other’s existence social media is described as a great

1:12connecting force and it can be a wonderful thing but when we stop noticing people in our immediate

1:18surroundings in faor in favor of the swirling masses online I don’t think of it in quite such

1:24a warm fuzzy glow whether it’s my young couple from the bus teens alone in their bedrooms glued

1:31to hours of futile or dangerous rubbish parents scrolling on their phones while their babies try

1:36in vain to catch their eye or toddlers given Siri voice companions in nurseries none of

1:42these newly acquired habits seem to bode well for our Collective spiritual flourishing the

1:48disintegration of adult society and the loneliness of our elderly population is Bleak enough but the

1:54digital destruction of childhood is a crisis we must face if we’re to have an alliance of remotely

2:00functioning citizens let alone responsible ones I first became interested in the topic

2:06of screens and children a few years ago when I was made patron of the education charity

2:11School home support I visited schools up and down the country and too often I saw children

2:17distracted in classrooms yet silent in playgrounds screens were taking their attention away from

2:23their teachers during lessons and away from each other during break time I also observed children

2:30in general becoming a different species the rockus exuberance of Youth was being replaced with an

2:35anxious irritable insularity which was disturbing to see from a personal point of view I know that

2:43if I’d had devices in and out of the classroom I would have bombed academically I’d have been

2:49constantly distracted thrilled by all the garbage available online I wouldn’t have read any books

2:54and I’d have got up to goodness knows what on my various machines our household landline was

2:59qu quite derailing enough looking back I cherish the very analog form of Education that I received

3:07and the Very human connection with my beloved teachers it’s been one of the greatest Gifts

3:11of my life and I want all children to be able to focus to acquire knowledge and to achieve their

3:17maximum potential I think that should be every civilized society’s aim but the evidence shows

3:24that we have already put this Gravely at risk we left the doors to our children’s classrooms their

3:30bedrooms and their minds wide opened to the World perhaps we thought we were giving children the

3:35right to access everything which might be good out there but instead we’ve given everyone else the

3:41good and the bad access to our children let’s con consider some facts and figures as Illustrated in

3:49Jonathan Heights book The anxious generation the great rewiring of childhood is causing a

3:54plague of mental illness in our children in the decade up to 2020 the suicide rate for younger

4:00teens increased by 167% among girls and 91% among boys Hospital admissions for children with eating

4:08disorders in the UK have risen sixfold in a decade the contagious influence of social media cited as

4:14a major factor and 2022 saw a 500% increase of self Haring among teens over the past 9 years in

4:23a British Study last year researchers found that one in three children are now shortsighted myopia

4:29is predicted to affect nearly a billion children around the world by 2050 too much screen time is

4:36the culprit with blue light harming developing eyes not to mention interfering with children’s

4:41hormones and their sleep rhythms spending time outside can be preventative for myopia yet screens

4:47suck children indoors more than in any previous generation recently the technology regulator ofcom

4:54reported that a quarter of British children under the age of seven have a smart phone increasing to

5:0197% of 12y olds this Mass buyin to smartphones is resulting in a lost and deeply damaged childhood

5:09with screen addiction displacing nearly every wholesome activity you can think of as Douglas

5:15Gentile puts it time spent on screens is time not spent elsewhere a healthy childhood should involve

5:23lots of free fun drawing running reading writing stories make belie kicking a football around even

5:31just staring out of the window and wondering these are all housian images in a sepia tint because

5:37they scarcely happen anymore health professionals for safer screens recently issued guidance that

5:4411 to 17y olds should have no more than one to two hours screen time per day this includes everything

5:50iPads School laptops smartphones it’s all just screen time to the brain and yet children aged

5:578 to 18 are on average spending seven and a half hours per day on screens outside of school hours

6:05out and about the reality is starkly visible the number of toddlers subdued by screens on public

6:11transport when they’d be perfectly happy looking at the strangers around them the dogs on leads

6:16the opening and closing doors is to my mind tragic this unthinking crossover from the analog to the

6:23digital is resulting in heavily impaired speech cognitive development and emotional regulation

6:31how will children so constantly but artificially stimulated ever learn to

6:35think imagine create or just be still the short answer is that they won’t excessive consumption

6:44of screen based Technologies is damaging developing developing brains in ways too

6:48seismic yet to fully comprehend the battle on the smartphone front is being waged with

6:54ever more power thanks in no small part to Jee tweni and Jonathan height who’ve established

6:59that the harms of a front-facing camera addictive social media platforms and 247 dopamine ignition

7:06are incontestable from the damage to focus to self-esteem to deep thinking to the ability to

7:13read books to be patient to sleep well to interact healthily in real life to think

7:20of others as opposed to one’s own brand to Pure opportunity cost the list is Relentless and these

7:28harms are at the more minor end of the spectrum the enhanced facilitation of knife crime the

7:33enticement to radicalization and terrorism and the repulsively violent porn these Horrors are

7:39globally recognized yet still readily available on children’s phones some lawmakers around the

7:45world are taking action to limit social media for under 16s Bravo to Australia for taking the first

7:51stand all civilized countries will surely follow suit as a matter of urgency in a

8:03fashion which protects children without impeding and controlling adults freedoms and this is very

8:08important adult freedom and child safety can and must be symbiotic some parents do everything in

8:16their power to mitigate screen harms at home but then their children go to school and they

8:21experience hours of screen time in the guise of educational technology or edtech whether that’s

8:29in the form of iPads and Alexa Voice assistance for nursery school children learning systems like

8:35Power School in primary SCH school or Google Classroom on Secondary School devices who has

8:41proven that this Deluge of screen education is what’s best for our children no one has if we

8:50step back and view this state of affairs through a compassionate lens it’s fairly understandable

8:55let’s wave aside the fact that only 7% of UK Ed Tech compan companies have conducted randomized

9:01control trials and just 12% have used third party certification let’s put these pesky

9:06facts aside at the beginning these products seemed futuristically exciting well-intentioned schools

9:13spent fortunes buying and implementing the latest software and trained their teachers in how to use

9:18it and some of the tools like no more marking have been helpful for teachers but now we have

9:24better data on how Tech is impacting pupils so we must press po and in many cases Rewind

9:32The kolinska Institute in Sweden recently published research concluding that there’s

9:37clear scientific evidence that tools impair rather than enhance learning Sweden has taken

9:44note and been the first country to kick Tech out of the classroom reinvesting in books paper and

9:49pens they had the courage to admit that edtech was a failed experiment Bill Gates himself said that

10:02devices have a lousy record in the classroom Mark Zuckerberg went to a tech-free school in

10:07Boston Steve Jobs didn’t let his own children use iPads UNESCO says moderation should be the key

10:14word relating to classroom Tech use the oecd found that most Ed Tech has not delivered the academic

10:21benefits once promised and that students who use computers very frequently at school do a lot worse

10:28in most learning outcomes comes global test scores in maths science and reading are plummeting I’ve

10:35personally spoken to teachers in British State schools who’ve acknowledged that classroom Tech

10:38has hampered the progress of many of their pupils and the huge boom in tutoring among

10:43private school children points to the fact that they’re not learning well in school either so

10:49why are we getting so over excited about edtech here in Britain why are we Outsourcing executive

10:55function skills to a computer why are we allowing exam boards to to take every subject online by

11:012030 all the emerging research should generate a pulling up of the drawbridge rather than the open

11:07armed Embrace that we’re seeing there’s currently talk of AI being pumped into our classrooms with

11:13children’s data being harvested to better improve the AI why the fact that AI will soon outperform

11:21humans in many areas means schools should be backing away from the neurological junk food

11:26of digital learning alert to the fact that it’s counterproductive to learn anyway on one instantly

11:31aging system and teaching their pupils the deeply human skills which AI will have a harder

11:36time replacing the skills of reading about and getting to grips with the Human Condition empathy

11:43concentration eloquent and humorous discussion and creative expression the neurology specialist

11:51Christina Capel explains that the brain is like a muscle which needs to stay fit with sustained

11:56focus and deep thought online learn learning encourages a short circuitry which damages the

12:02mind’s ability to focus rendering it flabby needy Twitchy and easily distracted reading

12:09a book in contrast to all that stimulation all the bells and whistles of a tablet then feels

12:14like a leaden demanding and deeply unattractive Prospect the standard defenses of convenience

12:21and having to be oay with the modern world are crumbling as progress rates dive downwards Plus

12:29digital literacy is a very different beast from digital dependency and atrophy the literacy can

12:34be taught in it lessons without contaminating every other subject easy peasy questions such

12:41as why is cutting and pasting some information from Google into a PowerPoint Superior to reading

12:47a passage in a well- researched textbook and handwriting a response why is homework listed

12:53on Microsoft teams better than jotted down in a paper homework diary why is digitally transported

12:59in a child to the Egyptian pyramids better than that child imagining it this kind of jazz hands

13:05immersion as an engagement tool doesn’t work it negates the need to imagine rendering the pupil

13:10a passive rather than an active learner parents such as myself ask these questions but we do not

13:17get answers as the educational psychologist Dr Jared horv has said the question isn’t what’s

13:24the best way to take arsenic but should we be taking arsenic in the first place

13:31that’s him not

13:32me there’s even no consensus that interactive smartboards are safe they’re insanely bright

13:41they’re radiation emitting and they’re simply not as effective as a teacher writing out what

13:46is in that second being explained on a black or white board yet we seem to be marching

13:53into a world where screens are replacing books edtech companies are relentlessly flogging them

13:59wees to schools very successfully too the business of edtech is now worth hundreds of

14:04billions of dollars teachers are having to submit to The New Normal and as mentioned exam boards in

14:10Britain at least are threatening to go online for all subjects which effectively forces the

14:14hand of the whole profession at once so where is all this coming from if like social media

14:21edtech is not in fact in the best interests of the children but of the people who make the products

14:27shouldn’t we step back rather ra than Gallop ahead Emily churkin former teacher now screen

14:33time consultant calls Ed Tech big Tech in a school uniform yet the British government has committed

14:40to the high-speed rollout of AI experiments which could mean a future where children learn

14:45via screens directed by AI surveillance will intensify to track pupils progress classrooms

14:53will be filled with cameras and listening devices voice recognition devices and chatbot Shooters are

14:58already already being piloted for classrooms why children who have their eyes on the teacher at

15:04the front of the classroom learn better than they do from a screen why is the rush to remove human

15:11beings from The Learning Experience so lorded why is it considered progress to render ourselves

15:17obsolete there must be a hidden incentive beneath these plans because all those multiple millions

15:23should be spent on teachers more of them more training more recruitment more support more

15:29retention also this roll out has implications far beyond learning

15:40and children’s well-being it threatens privacy Liberty and democracy perhaps

15:46that is where the incentive lies I say no way to all of this no way for the reasons above

15:53and no way from a learning point of view text has now been clinically proven to be

15:59more profoundly absorbed from a page in a book than it is from a screen and handwriting installs

16:04learned information into the brain much more effectively than cutting pasting swiping and

16:10typing reading books and handwriting work is a deeper not to mention a calmer way to

16:20learn screens manage to be both caffeinating and numbing where books are decompressing and

16:27absorbing reading and handwriting also harder in a good way friction and struggle are a necessary

16:33part of the learning process make everything too easy and it’s like feeding 10-year-olds puree

16:39when they need to chew hearteningly members of the teaching profession are pushing back David James

16:46Deputy head of a leading Independent School says the most powerful learning tool in the classroom

16:51is an excellent teacher and the most effective way to ensure children progress is to teach them

16:56to read and write effectively a screen can be a distraction an obstacle to learning in a way in

17:03which a book paper and Pen never are certainly the schools I’ve visited where Tech is used in

17:09moderation as opposed to trigger happy abandon are far more successful in terms of student attainment

17:15and well-being Katherine BBL sing’s Michaela Community School is one of the most triumphant

17:20schools in Britain the children are discouraged from using devices in and out of school the

17:25lessons are taught by passionate teachers Who quiz the children on facts and figures in every subject

17:31the lessons are electrifying the school is calm and organized the children happy self-disciplined

17:38and hungry for knowledge Katherine is known as Britain’s strictest head mistress but on visiting

17:43the school it quickly transpires that she’s in fact Britain’s most loving head mistress these

17:49children are given every possible tool they need for incredibly successful lives another

17:54Oasis of screen free education is to be found at the Heritage School in Cambridge Jason and Fiona

17:59Fletcher’s Haven of focus Serenity classical intellect Christian Heritage nature art and

18:06beauty is a profoundly effective learning space again it would not be possible if the classrooms

18:11were filled with screens to build on this Movement we need both a parental Revolution and government

18:17cooperation firstly we must employ Tech as our slave rather than our Master our use of it has

18:24to be intentional specific and moderate secondly we need transparency about how much is being

18:30spent on edtech compared with what’s being spent on teachers we must drastically reduce

18:36the presence of screens and technology in our classrooms and smartphones must be permanently

18:41excluded from the school day ideally from children’s lives altogether we should Empower

18:46parents with a right to opt out of classroom Tech in favor of paper and pen and we should

18:52Inspire generations of children to love honor and cherish books to conclude if we want to produce

18:59a generation of responsible citizens we must flip the current argument on its head rather

19:04than constantly having to prove the screen use’s blighting childhood we should ask simply where

19:10is the evidence to prove that it’s safe if we take these Brave steps I believe we can

19:17Veer away from catastrophe return childhood to our young and light the way to a hopeful future thank

19:23you for

Bret Weinstein: We’ve Crossed The AI Event Horizon

0:00I believe we have stepped over the event

0:03horizon.

0:05And what that means is

0:08it’s impossible to know. I I my powers

0:12of prediction are pretty good in this

0:16realm.

0:18I just don’t feel like there’s much to

0:19go on. It’s going to be an inflection

0:22point no matter what else it is.

0:24Is it the inflection point that sends us

0:27down a trajectory from which we don’t

0:29recover? Quite possibly. I mean, if you

0:32just simply take the point about civil

0:34war, well, there’s a question about

0:37whether or not AI enables the forces

0:41that resist that disintegration more

0:44than it enables the forces that wish to

0:46induce it or vice versa.

0:49My guess is it empowers the unscrupulous

0:52more than it empowers the moral. And

0:56that that is a frightening

0:59uh position to find ourselves in. But

1:04I guess I would I would offer the

1:05following.

1:08There’s a metaphor that we use in

1:11evolutionary biology. It’s called the

1:13adaptive landscape.

1:15And in the adaptive landscape, we think

1:18of opportunities or niches as peaks and

1:23obstacles to getting from a lower peak

1:25to a higher peak as valleys.

1:30I in particular think of these things

1:34not as a mountain range so much as an

1:38archipelago where the peaks stick out of

1:41the water and the islands are far enough

1:44apart that you can’t see one from

1:47another. So that’s a perilous landscape

1:50to try to get from one way of being to

1:52another because you could be off by a

1:54few degrees and you could miss the

1:56island you need to get to and starve to

1:58death at sea.

2:00But the very fact that we are between

2:04peaks will feel perilous no matter what.

2:07Whether we are about to land on a much

2:09better peak and figure out how to

2:11inhabit it with new tools, that would be

2:14great. That’s a possibility, but we are

2:18going to have to get through this

2:19adaptive valley to find out where we’ve

2:23landed. And um I wish that this had the

2:29proper galvanizing effect on people that

2:32it should have. Right. This is it’s like

2:35the aliens have landed except the aliens

2:39didn’t have to land. Like we made them

2:42and they’re here and we don’t know what

2:45they’re about. Unfortunately, they speak

2:48our language fluently which is very

2:50confusing.

2:52Um,

2:55but it should be causing us to say,

2:57″Hey, wait a minute. Everything is about

3:00to change.” I think that’s clear.

3:03In light of everything being about to

3:05change, this is a very dangerous moment

3:07by any rational metric. Okay. In a very

3:11dangerous moment, it does not make sense

3:13to be at each other’s throats, to be

3:16divided over minor things. We need to

3:19put that aside and this needs to be a

3:22kind of all hands- on deck moment. And

3:24the idea is look, if what this does

3:28is makes everything better except it

3:30sidelines 70% of the workforce, and I

3:33think frankly that’s a conservative

3:34estimate.

3:37Well, 70% of the workforce having not

3:40only no way to earn but also no

3:44direction,

3:46that is a very dangerous situation to be

3:48in. So that’s that’s the case if

3:51everything about this goes well except

3:54that it replaces people at work.

3:57In light of that, that the good case

4:00still involves such a radical shift in

4:02the way we exist that nobody knows how

4:04to handle it, we ought to be putting our

4:06heads together and looking past all the

4:09little stuff and saying, “How are we

4:11going to get to the 22nd century?”

4:15Right? That’s not certain at this point.

4:17It’s far from it. So if you understood

4:21that and you also understood

4:24the fact that I’m not going to be here

4:26for the 22nd century should not diminish

4:28my concern over whether humanity gets

4:31there. We are always temporary and we

4:35are part of something that is hopefully

4:37as durable as can be. That’s the whole

4:41point of the exercise. The lineage

4:43continues even though we do not. And the

4:46lineage is in jeopardy. It’s time to put

4:48the little stuff aside.

Against the Machine | Paul Kingsnorth

0:00To a transhumanist, humanity is something to be transcended, hence the name transhumanism. It’s a stage. And

0:06you know, they talk openly about humanity being a stage in evolution. And now we’re creating the next stage, which will be siliconbased rather than

0:12carbon-based, which will be more efficient, which can create greater technologies that so that’s we’re creating the things that will surpass

0:18us. And that’s all good. That’s evolution in action. We have always understood inhuman to be a bad thing. But if you don’t define

0:25human as a good thing, then inhuman is not a bad thing. And so we have to make a decision. What does it

0:31mean to be human? Are we created in the image of God? Are we loved by God? Or

0:37are we nothing? Because there is no understanding of what we actually think a human is. There’s no agreed

0:42understanding or even whether that’s a good thing, then

0:48that conversation will continue. You know, if you think a human is made in the image of God, which you do if you’re a Christian, then surpassing humanity

0:55is, you know, trying to replace humanity is an inherently evil or destructive or

1:00stupid thing to do. Whereas, if you think humanity is just an imperfect thing which happens to have evolved in a

1:05particular way and can therefore be improved upon, then well, it makes logical sense to improve upon it. Why

1:11not? If you’ve got the technology, let’s make sure that we don’t suffer and we can live forever. But I have a kind of

1:16strange faith that actually we want to remain human. Welcome to Socrates in the studio which

1:23falls under the eegis but not today under the rubric of Socrates in the

1:28city. Uh today the city in which we find ourselves is New York City and my guest is Paul Kings North. Um he is a

1:37novelist, a poet and an essay an essaist. Uh he’s been dubbed furiously

1:43gifted by the Washington Post but what do they know? Let’s be honest. Uh today

1:49we’re going to be discussing his book Against the Machine on the Unmaking of

1:54Humanity. Uh I’ve read it. It’s excellent. I’m excited uh to talk to

1:59Paul Kingsorth about it. Um if you’ve watched Socrates in the studio studio,

2:05you know I’ve interviewed Ian McGillchrist. He had this to say uh about Paul Kings North’s book. the most

2:13powerful and important book I’ve read in years. This book should be required reading not only for politicians,

2:19technocrats, teachers, and all who help shape our world, but for every still living soul in this terrifying age of

2:28the machine. Wow. Uh Paul Kingsorth, wonderful to

2:33have you with us. Thanks for for being here. Thanks for having me. Well, I I said to you before we started that, you know, um

2:40not only have I read the book, but I had a curious experience reading the book because I thought um I I I think along

2:47the lines of what you say in here very very much. Uh I’ve not written a book about it, but it was an extraordinary

2:53thing to read uh your explication of what I have felt uh intuitively and

3:01sometimes not so intuitively. Um, so for those who don’t know anything about you

3:06or or your thesis, what what is the thesis of Against the Machine on the unmaking

3:12of humanity? Well, this is really a book that comes

3:18at the end of about a 30-year process of trying to work out what the heck is going on in the modern world.

3:23Would this be your 30-year process? my 30-year process perhaps starting from the same sort of intuition that you have

3:28which I’ve had since I was a young man that I look around the world we’re in I

3:33feel that there’s something very broken about the values of it the things that I feel intuitively connected to um human

3:40scale culture the natural world especially um a sense that there’s something essential in in in in humanity

3:48seems to me to be stripped away and replaced by something technocratic and really the thesis of the book is that

3:55over a period of modern history in the western world particularly over the last few hundred years we have created a

4:00particular system of thinking a way of seeing and a way of being which is quite

4:05revolutionary in human history which views the earth primarily as a mechanism rather than an organism which is um

4:13replacing uh say a religious worldview a Christian worldview particularly in the west with a theology of of technical

4:20progress um and which is effectively ly moving towards a place where we are well

4:27put it this way we’ve been conducting a two or 30 hundred war against nature and the last place that war goes is a war against human nature so we’re now moving

4:33very rapidly into a place where not only are we now conducted by and controlled

4:38by and coralled by our technologies in a way that we find it almost impossible to escape something that’s happened very rapidly but we’re now moving into the

4:45age of artificial intelligence the age of supposed uploading of minds and creating giant superhuman intelligences

4:52is we are attempting to replace nature with technology and we are as the the subtitle of the book suggests actually

5:00unmaking ourselves in a really fundamental way. So the exploration I would say the book is more of an exploration than a thesis. It’s an

5:06exploration of this process. What is actually going on here? Is there something wrong? Where did it come from? Where does it take us if it keeps going

5:12in this direction? And if we don’t like the direction, what can we actually do about it? So a series of very big

5:17questions that I’m trying to sort of summarize. I’m trying to tell a historical journey of where this thing I

5:23call the machine came from and why we feel or certainly I feel that we’re living in a world in which we’re cogs in

5:28something rather than I think people who don’t feel it I’ll go out on a limb and say that people who

5:34don’t feel this are idiots. Uh and we’ll be exploring that in the course of this conversation. I think most people anyone

5:40thoughtful does feel this. The question is I think so what about it? Uh, I think some people

5:46would really do thoughtlessly say it’s a good thing. Um, but you have to be

5:52pretty thoughtless to to to say it’s uh it’s a good thing without at least some

5:59caveats. But what was it that led you to to to write the book? Um, because you’ve

6:06you’ve written many books, but this is I’ve written a lot of books which almost all of my books touch on this story in

6:12some way. Okay, so I’ve written three novels, couple of poetry collections, some travel books which are really political travel books examining the

6:18impact of globalization. I wrote a whole book about local culture in England where I come from and how that was being

6:23destroyed and replaced by the system of globalization. All of those are really getting at the same question. What is it

6:28that seems to be stripping away our sense of human scale culture and our sense of humanity and our relationship

6:34with nature and our traditions and our god and replacing them with this with this giant thing. So these essays

6:40started to come about. I started writing them as ironically as essays on the internet on Substack during the COVID

6:46pandemic and that really accelerated my question about how technology can be used to sort of corral mass populations

6:52but we were also living in the middle of a culture war and I looked at the culture war and I said what’s the actual culture that we’re having a war over

6:58here if we’re going to fight about the west what do we mean by that where do we come from what is the culture of

7:03modernity and why does it seem to be replaced by technology so as I said it’s the culmination of a kind of 30-year

7:09question and I really I thought it was about time I tried to pin down what was actually going on. I call it the machine

7:14because it’s a it’s a phrase I’ve used that I’ve taken from greater writers than myself. It’s a phrase that’s been

7:19used by everyone from Mary Shelley to George Orwell to DH Lawrence. Many of these writers are quoted in the book to

7:26describe the feeling that this thing is closing in around us and has been so since the industrial revolution. And I

7:31think you’re right. Everybody can feel this. And actually just in the last few years, I meet far fewer people who are

7:37sort of willing to unquestioningly defend progress because except in Silicon Valley, there’s hardly anyone

7:43left who doesn’t look around them and think something’s wrong. Even if they don’t know what it is. Um, and I’m

7:49trying to write this book to try and explain what it is. At least from my perspective. You don’t like the perspective, you can argue with it, but

7:54at least I’m trying to ask the questions. How did this thing happen? How did we become so dehumanized by our technologies that we feel like we’re not

8:00free human beings anymore? Well, it’s interesting because people have been having the same conversation for decades, but it was never so

8:08outrageously obvious and clear. I mean, it was always more theoretical. I mean,

8:13there, you know, people made films about this in the ’60s. You know, oh, the mechanization of culture and we’re all

8:18becoming cogs and I’ve got a job at IBM and I’m a nobody and I’m looking for real meaning, something transcendent.

8:25that’s been around, but never uh has it hemmed us in as it’s now done. So that

8:32now it’s inescapable. Everyone has their phone, they’re connected to infinity at their fingertips. This is this is a new

8:39experience and it seems to have accelerated dramatically in the last, let’s say, 5 years. Yeah, completely. Well, what we’re

8:44seeing now is the end point of where progress was always going to take us. So I mean, we were talking about this

8:49before we we came on air actually. And the whole of the ecosystem of say 20th century science fiction writing is all

8:55about where we are now. What happens when the machines become intelligent? What happens when we live in space or attempt to live in space? What happens

9:02when we are so controlled by our technologies that we become inhuman? What can we do about that? So the whole

9:07thing is filled with that so many films and novels are filled with these partly warnings but partly explorations of

9:14where we’re going to go when this happens. And as you say, just in the last 5 years, the last 10 years, when we’ve all been completely tied into our

9:20phones, everyone’s tied into digital technology. It’s impossible to live without the internet. And now we have

9:25AI. And if even half of what the AI boosters say is going to happen happens, we’re

9:30moving very very fast. Like in a in a few years into a period in which we have super intelligences, but not only that,

9:37we find it impossible to know what reality actually is, right? We’re already at that point. You can watch a you can watch a film. Is it a real film?

9:43Has AI made the film? You can talk to someone on the phone. Are they a real person? Is it a robot? What is reality?

9:49We’ve been living on screens for so long that we’ve almost slid effortlessly into this world in which we mediate reality

9:55through screens. And a whole generation of kids has grown up thinking this is totally normal. I mean, people like you and me, right,

10:01we’re probably, I would say, I would guess old enough to have grown up before the internet, right? But my children aren’t. Yeah.

10:06So, if you’ve grown up with this stuff, you have a real problem understanding what reality even is. And if we’re

10:11moving into an age now where we’re very consciously trying to make machines that behave like gods, which is the way these

10:17guys who are building them talk, then you’re in uncharted waters. So you’re right. This is this has been the end

10:22point that things have been building up to for couple hundred years actually. But now we’re at the point where we can see what it looks like. I was a little

10:28bit surprised in the course of reading the book not to find you mentioning

10:36CS Lewis because his book that hideous strength and other

10:41things that he writes, the abolition of man and other things seem prophetically to be pointing

10:47toward what you’re discussing in the book. Yeah, totally. I think I did quote him at one point. Um, one of my favorite Lewis quotes is that um, human nature

10:55will be the last part of nature to fall to man and the battle will then have been won. The question is who precisely

11:00would have won it. So Lewis is a very prophetic voice. Hideous strength is is one of those sci-fi novels I was talking

11:06about written in the 1950s. Um, absolutely pointing to where we are now

11:11and the abolition of man is basically a non-fiction version of that book he said himself. Right. So yeah there is so many writers I could

11:17have written about. Yeah. But the the thing the thing is Paul that you um what needs to be said I think uh

11:24which I if if someone reads that hideous strength or they read your book

11:32what we’re talking about is something that is undeniably creepy

11:39uh unheim uh uncanny

11:44I would say it smells evil there’s something about it which seems at least as I have felt it

11:51intuitively to be at war with humanity

11:58and with God. You you can sense it and that’s what I find interesting is that

12:03there are many people who ordinarily wouldn’t use that kind of vocabulary but they themselves have a sense of it. In

12:10other words, it it it whatever this is makes you suddenly aware of of your

12:16humanity. Uh and that there’s something that I mean you say in your subtitle on the unmaking of humanity

12:23that to me when I read Perilandra CS Lewis’s second in his Ransom trilogy the the the unman is is that it’s it’s it’s

12:32what happens when we begin to unravel to be atomized to be less than

12:37human. That seems to be the process you’re getting at in the in this book. I think speaking of CS Lewis, I was

12:43wondering just the other day what would happen if the Screw Tape letters were written now and what advice Screw Tape

12:49would give to his nephew about using the internet, right? Get them on phones all the time. Get them on their screens all

12:54the time. That’s the best way to take them away from God. That’s the best way to shatter their attention. That’s the best way to get them addicted to

13:00pornography and gaming and lust and greed and all the other things that we want them addicted to. Um, if you were

13:05if you were the devil, you would definitely invent the internet. Put it that way. I sometimes look at the internet as a giant Ouija board that

13:11that kind of summon things summons things through its note. But it’s it’s a really good point and I’m one of the things I’m trying to wrestle with in

13:17this book and I don’t really know the answer to this. There’s a couple of chapters on this in the book. What are the spiritual implications of of digital

13:24technology especially? If you listen to the people in Silicon Valley and the language that they use, not all of them

13:29obviously, but a lot of them, they use very very openly theological language to

13:34talk about what they’re doing. And again, a lot of this is quoted in the book. These people say that when they’re talking about AI, that they are building

13:40God, that they are making God. When Ray Curtzvile from Google, the great prophet of the singularity was asked does God

13:46exist? He said, not yet. So this is the vision that they have. Um, similarly,

13:53when Ezra Klein at the New York Times went and asked a load of AI developers, given that you keep warning us why that

13:59this stuff is so dangerous, why are you developing it? They couldn’t answer the question, but he said they they felt like they had an obligation to usher

14:05this new intelligence into the world, right? So, these people are summoning something. Yeah. They’re not saying, “I’ve sold my

14:12soul to the devil.” Well, that would be another way of put because that would be very unpleasant for them to admit or acknowledge,

14:17but it has the same has the same feeling behind it. Sure. You’re right. There’s a there’s a spiritual darkness to it which

14:23everyone can feel and it’s one reason why people feel so discomforted because it’s not just about oh I’m using my

14:28phone a bit too much I should probably put it down. There is something that feels like we’re being unmade going on and I don’t think it’s being paranoid.

14:36And that’s a but that’s an interesting word. I mean to unpack that word

14:41um if we’re created by God there’s something irreducible about us. In other

14:47words, to have a soul uh to be made in the image of God is to be irreducible. And it seems to me that

14:54the things you talk about in the book are attempts to reduce us, to atomize us, to fraction to to to fracture us,

15:03and then to atomize us so that we aren’t a holistic thing, an integrated thing,

15:11but some kind of elomeration of connected bits, which is different. Uh,

15:18and it seems to me it’s it’s it’s sort of the unraveling. It it I don’t know. I’m trying to think of the of an image,

15:24but that’s the impression you you get that it’s doing something which is at waring with the very core of what it is

15:31to be human, which I guess requires us to then try to define what does it mean to be human?

15:36What is it that that we sense is being wared upon? Well, I think what you’ve got with the

15:43technological system that we have now is a kind of bait and switch. It promises to make you more fully human and actually makes you less human in a

15:48fundamental way because it disintegrates your attention. It takes you away from

15:54nature. I mean, if you’re walking around doing this all day, which most people in this city and everywhere else in the world currently are, you’re not looking

15:59into the eyes of other human beings. You don’t know how to speak to them. You’re not sitting around a table eating with them. If you’re spending 9 or 10 hours a

16:05day on your phone, which many people are, the average for children is terrifying. from the age of about two, which is when kids get screens now. You

16:12are being taken out of basic human relationships and you’re being unmade. There’s a little formula I come up with

16:18in the book when I’m trying to work out how we might might define a living human culture. And I talk about the four Ps

16:24which are kind of like the four legs of a table that you could say culture was based on. And I they are people, place,

16:30prayer, and the past. And I would say that every real human culture around the world, whatever kind of culture it is,

16:36is based on those four legs. So you have your people, which is a sense of the community you’re part of, that you have human relationships with. Then you have

16:43your place. That’s the part of the natural world that you’re in that you have a relationship with, that you understand, that you maybe grow your

16:48food on. You have prayer. That’s your direct relationship to God. And you have the past, which is your sense of where

16:53you come from, a tradition that you’re passing on to your children. If you look at what technology does, it unmakes all

16:59of those things. Okay? So it takes you away from nature. It shoves you into your screen instead. um usually in a

17:04giant mega city surrounded by other flickering screens. It certainly takes your attention away from from God. Um I

17:11mean the very act of prayer and contemplation in a religious tradition is impossible if you’ve had your head fragmented by 5 hours on a smartphone.

17:18Try bringing it back together again to focus on anything. Um the past is effectively unmade. We’re removed from

17:26any sense that there is any continuity in human culture because everything’s broken now by the machine. We’re all just move moving forward into the same

17:33the same thing. And then you have um uh what have I done? I’ve done people, place, prayer, and the past. Yes, place.

17:41So anyway, whichever ones I’ve done and which ones I haven’t done, I’ve lost track. Um all of these things are made

17:47by the kind place is important because to be grounded in in a place. If you grow up in a place say, and that

17:53place maybe is the place that your children will then live in, then you’re rooted in something. So all of this thing is a what the machine is doing is

18:00ripping up all of our roots all the time unmaking us in these in these basic ways

18:05and giving us instead this promise of a kind of perpetual present. Right? So we all live in this wonderful globalized

18:11system and we tell ourselves how great it is that we can talk to people on the other side of the world on Zoom and we can text this and we can see that we

18:17keep up with everything that’s going on everywhere and it’s it’s always sold to us as connection but it’s not connection. It’s disconnection because

18:23we disconnect ourselves from the actual physical act of real things. And so it’s it promises us a fuller

18:30version of our humanity whilst actually I think uprooting the things that well make human life actually meaningful.

18:36There’s there’s nothing new under the sun. I mean when when you when I read the book I thought to myself

18:41we’ve seen this uh you know we don’t need to go back to the Garden of Eden but we could. But that you know the

18:47serpent’s lies but we can just start at the French Revolution. Suddenly there’s this promise of utopia

18:55to wipe away the past to remake everything. So it’s a utopianist scheme

19:03that is simultaneously kind of a tower of babel. The idea that we can

19:08we can make our way into the heavens on our own that we can achieve divinity

19:15some kind of divinity. So when you mention Curtzswh and you mention uh you know the the they’re sometimes they talk

19:22about it explicitly sometimes they don’t but they’re all aiming at the same kind of thing. But when we look at the past

19:28we know that every time these things have been promised they have ended in

19:33some kind of horrific blood bath rather than the promised utopia.

19:38Well, speaking of the Garden of Eden, the most recognizable logo related to modern technology is an apple with a

19:44bite taken out of it. That’s not a coincidence. Um, yeah. So, the French Revolution and many

19:51of the revolutions, especially of the left in the 20th century, are political manifestations of this kind of ide

19:57ideology of flattening. Like you say, utopia. You create a perfect world. Everyone’s equal. Everything’s the same.

20:02There’s no injustice. Um, it’s going to be perfect. And of course, it isn’t perfect because it’s not possible to do

20:09it because we’re all made of crooked timber. And so you do end up with goolags and death camps and massacre of the peasants in the vond and the rest of

20:15it. And it is exactly an attempt to kind of imminentize the eschetonic almost you know to create this utopia on earth.

20:22Technology is almost I think the next stage of that process. So the 20th century is the age of ideology right? So

20:28you have Marxist revolutions, bolsheik revolutions and you have fascist and Nazi revolutions and they’re all

20:33actually attempts to create this utopia on earth and they all fail um and

20:38millions end up dead. Now we’re doing it through technology instead. We’re going to use technology to interconnect everyone. Technology to

20:45replace everything and flatten it out. I’ve had conversations with with transhumanists who very openly say,

20:50″Look, we need to replace the whole of nature with technology.” Um, nature is unjust. Human life is unjust. Death is

20:57unjust. Nobody should get sick. It’s not fair. If we use technology to effectively re rebuild the entire world,

21:03we can create that paradise. We can live forever. You take the you take the Christian story which actually in is the

21:10basis of our culture and you turn it into a technological story. We replace God. We don’t have to you know try and

21:17go to the kingdom of heaven after our death. We create it here. We use it with technology to do it. We upload our minds

21:22into a silicon heaven. All of this stuff is seriously discussed. So technology is the latest manifestation of that desire

21:28for a utopian paradise on earth. You use the phrase imminentize the escaton. I

21:36can never remember who said it first. William F. Buckley. Well, William F.B. Buckley made it famous. Your

21:42pronunciation of it sounds nicer, but probably wrong. It’s what we’re talking about to

21:47imminentize the escaton. We’ve seen in the past, as you said, but now we’re seeing the same thing

21:53for the first time via technology. Um, and I think again most thoughtful people

21:58are at least a little bit frightened by it because we don’t know where it’s going. And the people who are driving it

22:05seem to be especially thoughtless about where it’s going. They don’t seem to have they don’t seem to posit the

22:12possibility that it may not be going to a great place. Well, I think that’s really interesting.

22:18So, on the one hand, I think most people don’t even know what’s happening. We all just get swept along with whatever

22:25device comes along next. So nobody was ever g given the chance to think about whether they would like to live in a

22:30world in which everyone has a smartphone and they have to have one, right? Because we’ve got to the point now where it’s almost impossible to live without a

22:36phone. There was no discussion about that. It was just launched on us. The thing was created and we were sucked into it and people just kind of go along

22:42with it because everyone else goes along with it because you have to go along with it. I mean I don’t have one so you can avoid them but it’s harder and

22:49harder to do it. Um, so you can sort of resist for a while, but the system sweeps you along. And I don’t think most

22:55people think about or know about the ideas behind it or the direction it’s going in. They don’t have any particular

23:01reason to. But as I say, when you listen to the guys in Silicon Valley, you see two things. Firstly, a lot of them do

23:08actually have a very specific quite religious vision. They’re moving towards transhumanism. They’re trying to make

23:13God. They’re trying to create God. They’re trying to create great superhuman minds which are going to take

23:18over what humans do and do them better. I’ve heard a lot of arguments that we won’t need politicians anymore because

23:23we’ll have AIs running things in a logical and calmer manner. I mean, I can see the attraction. You know, some of us when we look at our politicians, maybe

23:29we find that attractive. Yeah. But, you know, but this is this is that it’s a utopian vision. It’s important to

23:35understand a lot of this technology comes from people who are extremely utopian um and who really believe that this is

23:41going to save the world. But at the same time, the very disturbing thing to me at the moment is the people who are

23:47developing the AI systems in particular are the same people warning us about the AI systems. So Jeffrey Hinton, the

23:54British godfather of AI, as he’s called, was one of the early early developers of it, gave an interview about a week or two ago in which he said he thought that

24:01AI had a 20% chance of causing total human extinction. And he said it in a very kind of English way. So it was all

24:07very polite and downbeat, you know, and he was sort of apologizing for it. You know, it it really sounds like a Monty Python

24:13sketch. It does. I know. But the the people who are I mean, again, there are examples of this in the book. The people who are calling for a moratorium on AI are often

24:20the AI developers. So, they develop this stuff. It’s it’s an Oenheimer situation, right? They get us to the point where this stuff comes into the world and then

24:25suddenly they go, “Oh, hang on. It’s going to kill everybody.” Um, so there’s a strange thing going on where they on

24:31the one hand this group of people who are pushing this in direction think this is going to lead to a utopia. On the

24:36other hand, they’re the ones who are scared of it because they can already feel like it’s getting out of their control. So if they feel like that, the

24:44rest of us have got good reason to worry about it. But well, I mean, what it can do in in a

24:50positive way is force us to think about some things basically. Um, and to think about what does it mean to be human? Uh,

24:57the the the secular robots who seem to be thoughtlessly moving along with this,

25:05they they don’t They don’t have a a biblical worldview. And of course, that’s that’s strike three right out of

25:11the gate because uh as a Christian, I would say, you know, mankind is fallen. And therefore,

25:18we have to beware of what’s possible. We just because we can do things doesn’t

25:24mean we ought to do them. And at least I have some kind of a basis on which to to

25:30think about whether something’s worth doing. They these folks don’t seem uh to

25:35do that. Or or let’s say this, they seem to have the

25:41preposterously naive idea that that’s not even worth considering that that

25:47wherever we’re going is wonderful. Um and you’re foolish to to think about it in in other ways. They they they

25:53don’t seem to have any sense of history or or or the story of humanity, which we call history. Well, I think they’re

26:00children of the modern revolution in the sense that they believe that the progress of science and technology and

26:05rational thinking and utopian thinking has replaced the the superstitions of religion and the other things that we

26:10used to have that we’ve now superseded. We know that they’re not true because science can’t can’t demonstrate them to

26:16be true. And so all that you have left is a kind of materialist strata of of

26:21you know the world is just a thing that we have a duty to manage. And it’s almost as if if you believe if you see the world in that way, you do have a

26:26duty to do it, right? And if you have the ability to manage the entire world, if you could recreate nature, if you

26:32could uh prevent aging and prevent death, well, that would be a good thing. That would create more happiness, create

26:38more pleasure. They’re very big on reducing suffering. Most people want to reduce suffering to some degree, but

26:43again, the Christian story will tell you that some degree of suffering is necessary for you to actually struggle against. And because we’re fallen

26:50creatures, we’re imperfect creatures. And so it’s if an imperfect creature who is not fully formed or fully functioning

26:57attempts to create a utopia, well, what’s going to happen? Well, we know what’s going to happen because it’s happened already many times. And we’re

27:03just doing the same thing with technology. So, as much as anything, the one of the themes of the book is our

27:08refusal to accept limits, which I think is the big story of modernity and especially technological modernity. The

27:14story we tell, the story of progress is that all limits are there to be broken, right? So, cultural limits, we break

27:19them. um physical limits, we break them. Uh we break the the the limits that nature puts upon us and our relationship

27:26with it. We push forward all the time and we bust through limits and we never stop. And there’s no sense that there is

27:33a place at which you should stop doing that. Well, that’s kind of the irony is that these people

27:41have adopted that idea as a religion, but they’re unaware or or they’re at least they’re not maybe

27:47they’re not brave enough to admit that it’s a religion to say that

27:52transgression for its own sake is good. Rebellion for its own sake is good. It’s not particularly rational. Um but worse

27:59than being not particularly rational, uh it rather blindly assumes that that is

28:07true with no evidence. In fact, there’s a lot of evidence that it’s not true. But they they really seem to have taken

28:13this as an article of faith that transgression for its own sake is good.

28:18It’s a Prometheian thing. You referenced the apple with the bite out of it. this idea that where you could say it’s

28:25luciferian, but it really is um it seems to have at its heart the desire to

28:33supplant God to to say that I want to crawl into heaven and murder God and be

28:40God, which of course we hear for the first time uh in in the first pages of

28:45Genesis to be as gods. That seems to be at the heart of this project. the the uh

28:51the and so therefore rebellion for its own sake or transgression for its own

28:56sake is to them an unmitigated good. It is and it is the oldest story. Um which

29:03is why although this technological machine that we’ve created over the last couple hundred years is a new thing in in many obvious ways the impetus behind

29:11it is not a new thing. As you say you can go back to the book of Genesis you can see the story of choosing to be as gods. You can look at Greek myth and you

29:18can see Prometheus. You can see these kinds of stories in the in the in the kind of creation myths of many different cultures actually humanity attempting to

29:25rebel against God or the gods and replace them. So in that sense it’s a really old desire that we have within us

29:31which clearly humans around the world have been able to see for a long time. What we’ve got now is the technological

29:37ability to try and do it which we’ve never had before at least on this scale. I mean once we could build a tower to

29:42the heavens and God could kind of scatter us into different languages which is obviously the Babel story in in the book of Genesis. But what we’re

29:49doing now is building a digital tower of Babel along the on a scale that we’ve never been able to do before. The one of

29:55the quotes I have right at the beginning of the book is from Arthur C. Clark, the great British sci-fi writer who says

30:00that it may be that our purpose on this planet is not to worship God but to create him. Right? So that’s that’s the

30:06worldview of Silicon Valley right there. Um and that’s that’s what we will try to do. Ultimately, the end point of this

30:12rebellion against nature, rebellion against human nature, rebellion against culture and is is to attempt to replace

30:18God. It’s a radically new thing and also the oldest thing. It’s just in a way it’s just the latest manifestation and

30:25like all the other manifestations, I think it probably ends up getting scattered. Let’s hope so. Uh but uh

30:32maybe not yet. The question the question is how far it goes before but I mean but again the the

30:38thoughtlessness the hubris of of these folks it really cracks me up. It’s a it’s it’s an amazing thing to see people

30:45be so intoxicated with their own abilities that they’re not more thoughtful.

30:50Yeah. And again as I say I think there’s a quote in the in the book from the great transhumanist Zultan Istvan who uh

30:57started his own transhumanist party actually and stood as a presidential candidate a few years ago. Well, you know, with a name like Zultan, he kind

31:02of has to do that. It’s a transhumanist name, isn’t it? Zultanist fan. It’s like it’s like a sci-fi name. But um I had a conversation

31:08with him and he said, “Look, we have a moral duty to replace the whole of nature with technology to ensure that

31:15everybody could live forever to ensure that there is no suffering because the world is unjust and there’s it’s full of

31:20misery and suffering and it’s not fair and we need to make it fair and we need to use technology to do that.” So that’s

31:26extremely hubristic but also extremely moralistic. You know, a lot of these people have this moralistic vision. It’s

31:31not just about, hey, let’s make a ton of cash by selling iPhones. Yeah. It’s like this is the way we can reduce suffering. Yeah. So, in that sense, it’s almost got

31:37a nobility to it. You know, they’re trying to do something. Well, listen, uh yeah, the hubris is there at such a powerful

31:43degree that they really do believe or at least some of them the more extreme level believe believe that yeah, we can

31:48replace nature, we can live forever, we can build God, we can upload our minds. So, they think they have god-like

31:54powers. And that’s where the that’s where the fool comes in again.

32:01Bold in their determination to learn, in their resourcefulness to solve problems, and in their resilience to persevere.

32:08These are the marks of today’s Christian leaders. Cornerstone students are not only tomorrow’s leaders. They are

32:15today’s Christian influencers serving on the front lines of healthcare, business,

32:21ministry, and so much more. Boldly loving as they live into their calling.

32:27boldly leading with wisdom and influence while forging new pathways in our world

32:32and boldly living out their faith in Jesus Christ, our greatest influencer.

32:38Bold, Christc centered, influential. We are Cornerstone University.

32:48One of the things you you talk about in the book which I would quibble with is the way you talk about capitalism as

32:54part of this. Um I I think that um capitalism

33:01can be bad but it needn’t be bad if we have a sense of our limits and and a

33:07sense of what what it is. I mean, I I would say that it’s neutral, but it can act in such a way uh if we’re not if

33:14we’re not aware of its limits that that it can be very dangerous. I don’t know if you want to. Yeah, I that’s definitely somewhere we

33:20were going to disagree, I think, because I see it depends what you mean by capitalism, but I I’m I’m looking at this as I try and trace the the the

33:27beginnings of this in the book, and I would trace them back to the enclosures, particularly in England in the 18th century. You only get a capitalist

33:32system where when effectively the land is stolen from common people and enclosed in in in in the hands of a few

33:39numbers, the rest of us have to go into the factories, which is what happened to my ancestors. You then have a concentration of power. Uh that causes a

33:46concentration of wealth and that leads to effectively the global system we have now because you take that out into the

33:51colonies. Um I would I’m more of a chesatonian distributist myself. I would

33:56like to see uh I don’t have a problem with markets and making and selling and things like that but it’s the

34:01concentration of power and wealth in the capitalist system that is part of the progress of the machine because you

34:07couldn’t have developed these technologies without that. Um it’s not possible to do it. So so again um you’ve

34:14got this kind of infernal desire for more which is at the heart of the worst of the of the capitalism.

34:20It’s it’s at the heart of the worst of capitalism. But but I would say that um

34:26it needn’t be. In other words, I think it depends. Capitalism is one of those capacious terms where uh we could spend

34:33hours talking about it. I I don’t know enough actually about it to spend hours talking about it, but I guess I

34:40um people who who read your book, and I hope people will, they can they can figure that part out. But um what

34:49one of the things that has come into the conversation now because you you talk

34:55about technology it’s this new thing and there now it’s about technology we’re trying to imminentize the escaton try to

35:01achieve utopia uh through technology globalization is

35:07another new thing this idea that nations uh are somehow it’s a somehow a backward

35:14idea and I I laughed when I because I’ve said it so many times, people act as though Hitler invented

35:19nationalism and that any sense of patriotism is Hitlerian, you know, and I

35:24think no, actually George Washington loved his country and, you know, he was the antithesis of Hitler in many ways.

35:30So, but it is funny how that’s happened. And so now there’s this rush to eliminate borders uh and to eliminate

35:39you you mentioned place as one of the things that pride of place that there’s something healthy about loving one’s

35:45hometown or one’s country. There can be some we know how it can go wrong but people cease to talk about how it can go

35:52right. Yeah. Well a lot of people confuse hearth and home with blood and soil. Very different things. Yes. Very

35:58different things. I think we’re so we’re still in the shadow of of Nazism and fascism. So people are extremely

36:04paranoid about that which not a bad thing to be paranoid about either but you know yeah within limits. I mean, so what you

36:13have in I mean, if you want to talk about say Hitler and the Nazis and the fascists, these are machine ideologies, right? These are deeply centralized,

36:18extremely industrialized, very technologized, extremely oppressive systems of top- down power which decide

36:25that they’re going to create a utopian system of kind of

36:30nationalist or racist perfection and then impose it on everyone at with with

36:35fleets of bombers and marching columns which are extremely machine-like. It’s a very very different thing from a kind of

36:40Wendel Berry-esque love of home or indeed a Jeffersonian way of of being an American. I mean I would say to come

36:46back to the capitalist point, you get globalization when you get global capitalism. So that’s this spreads this economic and cultural system around the

36:52world. And there’s a there’s a section in the book in which I try to draw out the the commonalities between corporate

36:58capitalism and and sort of radical left progressivism because they’re both utopian ideologies which point you in

37:04the same place. So, you don’t ultimately want to be governed by a a strong centralized government, whether it’s

37:09fascist or communist or a set of unaccountable giant capitalist corporations that can that drops

37:16technology down onto you. Right from the beginning of my political life, such as it is, I’ve always been a localist. I

37:22think that the solution to all of these problems, however much you like, capitalism or communism or whatever your politics is, is to bring things home to

37:29the local level. the more that we can govern ourselves at the village level, at the community level, wherever we are and whoever we are, the more power we

37:36have, which is why distributed power is the way forward. It’s very difficult to get it because the tendency of both

37:41capitalism and the state is always towards the center. Well, but I mean I would argue I’m writing a book on the American Revolution now and I thought a

37:48lot about this and that that that the founders of um the United States they

37:53they understood this and and they understood that that we have to guard against um

38:01uh federal power of of national that we want to keep things as local as as possible. So we have to institute

38:08buffers. we have to have checks and balances because we’re aware of this tendency. Uh and I think we’ve been

38:15failing at it and we have to go back uh at least in the United States um because we’ve the the federal government has

38:22grown horrifically like uh a parasite that’s bigger than the host. And uh so I

38:31I mean I’m I’m with you on the idea of the smaller the better, the the local. I don’t know. G give just because we’ve

38:38never discussed it uh at Socrates in the city g give us a thumbnail version of uh

38:45Chestertonian distributism Chester is such an interesting writer um he’s he’s a very paradoxical English

38:52Catholic who wasn’t originally a Catholic but became a Catholic later on um fascinating paradoxical figure so

38:59Chesterton is um he’s coming at it from kind of Cath Catholic social teaching but he’s a man who believes that both

39:05communism and he’s writing at the at the height of kind of bullshism and the communist revolution. Communism and capitalism are oppressive systems. So he

39:12says on the one hand you have this overpowerful overweening state which just crushes you down in the name of equality and revolution and on the other

39:18hand you have in a country like England uh concentration of land ownership huge corporations destroying for example the

39:26local economy of small towns with their enormous supermarkets and their huge trading systems crushing the small

39:32farmers because the farmers can’t compete with them. So you’ve got these two oppressive systems and everybody’s sort of asked to choose between the two

39:38of them. Do you are you left or right? But they’re both crushing the local level. So Chesterton’s

39:43um fantastical desire which he sort of admitted Chesterton and Hillair Bellock his his friend from his French Anglo

39:50French friend kind of fantastical slightly Tolkenesque desire which is a great idea which may never happen is a system he called

39:56distributism. Um and his his fantasy is that you distribute that land is the

40:02source of power. Right? So you take all the land in England and you distribute it equally to everybody. Everyone gets a bit of land. They get three acres and a

40:08cow as he called it. Um and then they can do what they want with that. Uh and that that that’s not a system in which

40:14the state uh is collectivizing everything and forcing everyone to do anything. Neither is it a system in which economic power has become so

40:21concentrated in giant corporations that the little guy has no chance at all. It’s a system in which you go, okay,

40:26everyone has the equal amount to start there. See what happens. So, it’s a way of it’s a it’s an almost thought experiment as much as anything else, but

40:32it’s a way of saying what would happen if you localized economic power as well as political power so that people had a

40:38chance to come together and build things at the local level. And that’s what I’ve always been in favor of. And it’s why I don’t like capitalism, but it’s also why

40:44I don’t like the European Union. It’s why I don’t like over over mighty states. Um, it’s it’s also, and this is

40:50a point Chesterton makes, which is really important. This is also the way that most human societies have actually

40:56always existed to some degree. Maybe the property isn’t equally distributed, but before the modern era, you don’t have

41:01giant centralized states. And neither do you have these enormous world spanning corporations. You have trade, you know, you have people trading at the local

41:08level. You have government to some degree, but you have nothing like you have now. I mean, the most powerful

41:13medieval tyrannical monarch in England had nothing like the level of power that our democratic governments do now to

41:20survey us, to tax us, to monitor us, to control us, to put us in vast prisons,

41:25to get us into their armies. So it’s really a vision of localization which to

41:30me has always been the thing that inspires me. And you’re right about the interesting thing about America is I think right at the beginning of it there

41:36is that kind of Jeffersonian agricultural vision which then gets superseded by this big monstrous thing

41:43that is now squatting over everybody. But but there’s if there’s any chance of a human life again I think we have to

41:50focus on the human level things at the human scale. And it doesn’t matter whether you consider yourself to be left or right or anything else. Everybody

41:57wants a human scale life in their community and they want some power in their community to decide what happens there. Um that’s something that unites

42:04everybody wherever they are I think and it’s the thing that we constantly struggle for because it’s all the power is always being sucked upwards.

42:10Well I mean one one way I would describe what you’re talking about is freedom,

42:16liberty, self-government. Uh but we have to pay a price for that. it’s easier to

42:22go along uh with the with the machine so to speak. We have to be have to have some courage and willingness to um to to

42:30to fight for that to maintain that uh the Benjamin Franklin famously said

42:37leaving the constitutional convention when he was asked what have you given us Dr. Franklin a monarchy or a republic?

42:42He said a republic madam if you can keep it. In other words, keeping it requires something. And if we don’t do

42:49anything, we will get uh some kind of tyranny which is what you’re describing.

42:55And what it would require now wherever you are in the world is some sacrifice as well because

43:01you know the things that the machine gives us are ease and comfort, right? So if you want your t-shirts manufactured

43:07in a in a sweat shop in Bangladesh that cost you 50 p or your fantastic iPhones

43:12full of cobalt mined by African children, all the other stuff you get from the global system. If you if you

43:18wanted real localization and real liberty, you’d have to say no to some of those things. If you want to reject the global system, reject the machine, you

43:23have to live a simpler, less technological life, which involves more work, but probably also more fulfillment and more power. It’s like anything else.

43:30If you if you give people power, they have to use it responsibly. At the moment, it’s easier for us to let the

43:35the companies and the government do everything for us and give us goodies instead. But if we were going to take responsibility, it would it would

43:41require some some decisions to be made about what we want and what we don’t as well, which is hard, but probably

43:47necessary. Um, in the book, I underlined a a sentence.

43:53You say patriotism, Christianity, cultural conservatism,

43:59sexual modesty, even a mild nostalgia for the English countryside or a love of

44:04once canan canonical novels all are more or less verboten and the attitude toward

44:11them is rapidly hardening. That’s interesting to me how how things fall

44:17along certain lines and that there that people who are um against we mentioned you know

44:23patriotism they they they they can’t think of a healthy uh patriotism they have a very um hidebound

44:32negative view of Christian faith uh sexual modesty it is interesting because

44:39this has been happening over decades um you know it it obviously ly started

44:45in the in the 20s in a big way but you can trace it back and back and back but it is interesting how it has crept over

44:51time until there are many people that seem to be quite sure that these are all bad things.

44:57Yeah. I mean the modern revolution is really a revolution against the things that we once would have regarded as traditional for right or right or wrong

45:03better or worse which in in the west is these kind of Christian values and these particular understandings of place and

45:09culture. I tell you what’s interesting though is that I think almost even since I wrote those sentences is a bit of a

45:16turning back towards some of these things. Yeah. You know, you have to be careful with these things. You have to not idolize them. You have to not idolize nations and patriotism or even

45:22the church. Otherwise, you end up just um not seeing the forest for the trees. But

45:29I I I know because people write to me all the time, especially young people, that there’s such a meaning crisis now

45:35that people are feeling, okay, yeah, we’ve got all this stuff, great, but what is anything? What is the meaning of

45:41anything? Where should I where should I be going? And just in the last few years, the number of people going back to church, for example, especially young

45:47men, is really significant. Don’t know how long that will last, what exactly will happen, but there’s a search for meaning. And it’s almost like the

45:54perhaps there’s been a there’s been a modern revolution and you could what I one of

45:59the things I try and do in the book is is suggest that the the kind of the political right and the political left

46:04both have their versions of this revolution of this the stripping away of meaning whether it’s through the progress of global capitalism or whether

46:10it’s kind of through woke progressivism that tries to de demolish and decentralize and and

46:17disengage with everything traditional. All of it’s kind of a war against a rooted normal human life. Um, and that’s

46:27the end. Again, you have to do that before the machine can progress. You have to strip away all the things that would normally make us human so that you

46:33can create this giant technological replacement for it. But I have a kind of strange faith that actually we want to

46:38remain human. And I’m starting to see, and I think I’m not the only one, that there is a turning against this because

46:46the more people understand it and think about it, which is what I’m trying to do in the book, the more they say, “No, this is wrong. What do we do instead?”

46:52And they may come up with different answers, but there’s a push back against this this worldview of deconstruction

46:58now, because there’s only so much you can deconstruct everything and leave it all over the floor and not replace it

47:04with something else. The problem with a deconstructionist modern or postmodern worldview is it’s very very good at

47:09taking everything apart, questioning it, making everything relativist, but it doesn’t have a big picture to put in its place. So, okay, great. You destroyed

47:15Christianity. What are you going to put what have we got instead? What have you got for us? You know, okay, you told us we shouldn’t be rooted to our places cuz

47:22that makes us Nazis. Well, what have you got instead? You know, what what have you got? What have you got for us? And what you’ve got is the machine. What

47:28you’ve got is this globalized technocratic vision in which we we move towards this silicon

47:33perfection. And it is inhuman and I don’t think most people who are engaging in the politics of the left or even the

47:40politics of the capitalist right are thinking like that. They’re not trying to push us in that direction. But the end point of a society in which

47:46everything is deconstructed is that there is nothing left and we’re just kind of naked in the face of this

47:51technocracy that’s that’s rising instead. So when we get to that point, which we’re getting to now, people start

47:56to turn around and say maybe we shouldn’t have deconstructed everything. Perhaps we need to to look at what to

48:02rebuild again. Well, even when you talk about inhuman, right, we we we have always understood inhuman to be a bad

48:08thing. But if you don’t define human as a good thing, then inhuman is not a bad thing.

48:14And so we have to make a decision. What does it mean to be human? Are we created in the image of God? Are we loved by

48:21God? Um or are we nothing? Or are we machines that can be changed? And

48:26obviously the transhumanist movement uh they don’t believe there’s such a thing as human uh and they

48:36are in a way what we’ve seen you describe it in the book and everybody’s been living through it. We really do see

48:42a war on the human which to my mind if if human beings are made in the image of God it’s a war on God. Uh it’s a war on

48:50uh what God loves and it’s a desire to unmake, as you say in your subtitle,

48:56what God has made. It’s this idea that um we we’re at war with this reality

49:02that God has created. So if you’re a human being, um you know, what can we do? And it goes back to Mary Shel whom

49:09you mentioned and uh Frankenstein somehow it’s it’s a war on the human

49:15person in some ways physically and and in other ways but it’s a it’s a war on

49:21humanity. It says that we either we don’t know what human beings are or whatever it is it’s not so great and we

49:27can do better and so we’re going to we are going to deconstruct it. Yeah, I think that’s an important point and it’s the point it’s very difficult

49:33to talk about in in kind of public life in the mainstream. Um to a

49:38transhumanist, humanity is something to be transcended, hence the name transhumanism. It’s a stage. And you

49:44know, they talk openly about humanity being a stage in evolution. And now we’re creating the next stage, which will be siliconbased rather than carbon-

49:51based, which will be more efficient, which can create greater technologies that so that’s we’re creating the things

49:56that will surpass us. And that’s all good. That’s evolution in action. Um and that’s the most extreme end of of what

50:02is happening with artificial intelligence. AI is supposed to be at least um general AI is supposed to be

50:08the thing that does that. And because there is no understanding of what we actually think a human is, there’s no

50:14agreed understanding or even whether that’s a good thing, then

50:20that conversation will continue. You know, if you think a human is made in the image of God, which you do if you’re a Christian, then surpassing humanity

50:28is, you know, trying to replace humanity is an inherently evil or destructive or

50:34stupid thing to do. Whereas, if you think humanity is just an imperfect thing which happens to have evolved in a

50:39particular way and can therefore be improved upon, then well, it makes logical sense to improve upon it. Why

50:44not? If you’ve got the technology, let’s make sure that we don’t suffer and we can live forever. So it’s exactly the

50:50the actual essence of the question is yeah what does it mean to be human? Is that good? Um and that actually is a

50:57religious question. It’s always been a religious question. Whatever answer you come down on unless you’re a pure materialist and even then that’s almost

51:03a religious answer. Yeah. Nothing has meaning. Everything is just material matter that got here by

51:08accident. That’s still that’s a philosophical if not a religious answer. And evolution itself is a religion.

51:14Although the Darwinian evolutionists would would writhe uh at being labeled

51:20as religious, but the fact is well it’s certainly an origin story. It is well it’s an origin story. It’s more than an origin story. I mean it

51:26it’s a they’ve taken it by faith and they will impose it as a narrative on

51:32everything. And what we’re talking about here is the imposition of that narrative that ev everything is involving in a

51:38positive direction. And if not, we can help it evolve more quickly and further in a positive direction so that we can

51:44be as gods uh effectively. But what if

51:50we go backwards, it’s still an idea that there is no such thing as meaning.

51:56Although they rarely are able to say that that that’s what they’re saying. In

52:02other words, they’re saying that that there is nothing um me meaning is to to

52:08look for meaning is just it’s an evolutionary quirk. There’s no such thing as meaning and we have to bravely

52:14march on in the face of meaninglessness. Well, of course, Darwin himself was a Christian. This is the irony of this.

52:20And his and his evolutionary theory is not what is often represented as which is often represented as a kind of

52:25progressive theory of, you know, as you say, we move forward improving. That’s not what evolution is. The evolutionary

52:30theory that Darwin puts forward and Wallace put forward are just that creatures evolve by filling ecological

52:37niches. That’s neither good nor good nor bad. You know, you just do the thing that happens to to suit the ecology and then it moves forward. It doesn’t

52:43inherently make things better. But we’ve got a sort of progressive in the broadest sense, not in the sense of just being leftwing, but in the sense of

52:49believing in a motion of progress that we apply to that theory and we say, well, nature is evolving and humans are

52:56evolving and we’re evolving towards this this point of perfection. And this is where the technology comes in. We say,

53:02well, great. The technology allows us now to evolve faster and to evolve better. So, we’re always moving forward

53:07towards the meaning of a place of perfection. Again, that that then raises the question, is it possible for humans

53:13to kind of evolve morally or ethically or are we actually basically the same creatures we were a thousand years ago

53:19or 10,000 years ago just with better better machines? Um, and again, what

53:24does it mean to be human? And this that’s what this comes down to. If you can talk about technology and capitalism

53:30and politics and the rest of it, you can talk about AI. At the root of all of it is that question, what does it mean to

53:36be a human being? And if depending on what view you have on that question, you

53:41have to choose a stance against the machine or indeed in favor of it. So

53:46certainly if you’re a Christian and you believe that we’re made in the image of God, you have to take a pretty clear stance against people who think we’re

53:53going to replace ourselves and build God, which is the the thing that’s at the root of the system that’s evolving

53:58around us at the moment. Well, I think that th those who uh seem to believe

54:04that uh there’s nothing transcendent about human beings have to deal with the

54:12idea that if that’s true, there’s nothing immoral about the communist

54:17Chinese um murdering political prisoners and using their organs uh to help, you know,

54:26the the people that they like. Uh there there’s nothing immoral about that that it’s there there is no meaning. There is

54:32no good or evil. They’re not really um open or honest about that.

54:39Well, I think that the ironic thing about this is that most revolutionary movements are are Christian at heart. So

54:46because they come from the west, you can look at the essence of Marxism and say it’s actually built on a on a Christian

54:52worldview. So they have a strong sense of morality, but it’s not a transcendent morality. the sense of morality that’s

54:58built into it is look all human life is valuable and and totally equal and therefore you know that which is a

55:03Christian idea fundamentally right so all human life is equal in the eyes of God and all human life is sacred if

55:08you’re a Christian um and if you turn that into a political ideology then it becomes what we’ve had in the last

55:14century but what happens the way that that gets twisted is that you have to you end up

55:21saying well look things are not perfect at the moment we have to make them perfect that’s going to involve a revolution and a lot of wrenching And

55:26there probably going to be a lot of people that have to be kind of put over here and we’ll justify it by calling them kulaks or saying that they’re

55:32counterrevolutionaries or something and it’s okay okay to liquidate them. Um which is why you always again come back

55:39to the human scale. You have to start at the human scale or from a Christian perspective you have to start with your neighbor who you’re told to love. I

55:45always find it interesting that Christ tells us to love our neighbor and not to love humanity as a kind of abstract thing. You have to love the person whose

55:52eyes you’re looking into because they’re created by God. And if you’re actually trying to behave like that, you can’t

55:57really liquidate whole masses of people either in the name of the master race or the utopian communist society. Um, the

56:04minute you’re dealing with giant abstract systems that tell you that you can move towards perfection if you do this thing, then you’re on the road to

56:12tyranny, right? The only way to avoid tyranny as much as you can in an imperfect world full of fallen human

56:17beings is to try and relate to actual human beings at the local level, which is the only way you can ever relate to

56:23them. As soon as we’re into fighting over giant abstractions, it’s it gets horrific. Paul Paul Johnson in his book,

56:28Intellectuals, makes this case over and over and over. He points to people who preached about, you know, loving

56:35mankind, but who treated their families extremely poorly. You you just see it

56:40over and over. So, that’s that’s a very important it’s very common, you know, point to make uh that um

56:46it’s the temptation for all of us because we like ideas. So, we can say, “I’ve got this grand idea and it’s it’s terrific and uh I’m going to tell you

56:52what it is and it’s going to lead to this great utopian perfect world, but yeah, what are you actually doing in your community, in your life when you go

56:59to confession? How much of yourself are you looking at?” You know, it’s that’s the hard because that’s harder actually.

57:06Trying to be a Christian human being is really hard and having a grand idea is really easy. And I know because I’ve had

57:12lots of them. That’s where that leads you. So, yeah. And this is for me having

57:18been on a kind of very long spiritual journey that ended up in the Christian church unexpectedly. That’s what the that’s what the solution

57:25to all of this has come down to. People always say, “Well, what’s the solution to this machine? What do we do? What do we do?” And I say, “Well, if you’re a

57:31Christian anyway, I can only speak as a Christian. You know what to do. Actually, you know how to live. We we

57:38knew that 2,000 years ago. Now we have to try and do it. If we were actually all living the way we were told to live

57:44in the gospels, we couldn’t have built this thing actually. So we could because it’s a giant monstrosity of power and

57:50wealth that that we’re not supposed to be pursuing. It’s an idol basically. Yeah. Well, actually, yeah. It’s the ultimate idol.

57:56It is. It’s I mean it it as I was reading the book more and more, I thought this is

58:02we’re talking about Antichrist. It’s re it’s very creepy. It’s horrific. Yeah. Yeah, I sort of try and I’m always

58:08trying to skirt around that, but my great suspicion is that that’s actually what’s being constructed. Well, no, that I mean you you you you

58:14skirt around it. There’s no need to be explicit about it, but it seems inevitable to me. I’ve thought about

58:19these things a lot, so it was very interesting to me to see how you talk about it. Let me ask you, since you

58:25mentioned becoming a Christian, was was there can you describe what that process was like for you?

58:32Well, it starts off for me on a very long journey that began when I was a young man and I or a young child

58:37actually and I fell in love with nature and had very wordsworthy and transcendent experiences in nature which I still do which I think now are

58:44experiences of God in creation. Um which leads me to be an environmental activist for many years when I was young because

58:49I wanted to protect that sense that there was something sacred in creation from basically from the machine. Um, and

58:56if you spend enough time trying to save the world, coming up with political ideas, looking through all the ideologies, trying to come up with grand

59:03schemes and looking at the economics and the politics, eventually you dig down enough to realize it’s a spiritual matter in the sense that it’s that

59:10question of what it means to be human, what the earth is. So, I went on a long spiritual journey. I didn’t come from any kind of Christian or even religious

59:17family. So, I did what a lot of Western people who are a bit lost do and I went to the east and I became a Buddhist for

59:23a while, which taught me a lot. But there was something missing and the something missing was God it turned out.

59:28So then I went looking in kind of nature paganism. I went all over the place and then I just had a only about six or

59:35seven years ago I had a number of experiences. Um I wrote an essay called the cross on the machine which goes into

59:40this bit in a bit more details published in first things magazine. I had a number of experiences which kind of forced me a

59:46bit like CS Lewis again against my will dragged dragged sort of towards the Christian church dragged towards Christ.

59:52And the more I started to understand what the Christian story actually was as opposed to the thing I thought it was,

59:57the more it made a lot more sense to me. And actually the sense that the big picture story that the ultimate story of

1:00:04Christianity is that humanity is in rebellion against God and has always been in rebellion against God. And that

1:00:11we have a way home through what Christ does and says is a story that makes a

1:00:16great deal of sense to me. Particularly when I look at what’s actually going on in the world today. We’re in constant rebellion against God and against our

1:00:23own humanity and against creation and the rest of the world. But there is something we can do about that. So I

1:00:29ended up as I say in the Christian church five or six years ago which has been quite revelatory. Um and

1:00:36interestingly I’m really fascinated by the apocalypse not in the sense of the end of the world although that’s always

1:00:42fascinating but in the sense of what the word means because the word means unveiling and revelation. So in that

1:00:47sense, we are living in apocalyptic times because a lot of things are being unveiled about what we’re actually doing. We can just look out there and

1:00:52say, “All right, okay. This is where we are now. Here’s an unveiling.” When things are unveiled, you have to say,

1:00:57″Okay, what am I going to do?” If you’re a Christian, you know the answer to the question. Um, you’ve got your great

1:01:03commandment and you’ve got the path to follow. So, it’s um well, it’s, you

1:01:08know, it’s comforting. There’s there’s there’s work involved to try and make yourself an actual Christian as opposed to just somebody who says they’re one.

1:01:15But um well that’s the whole thing you you mentioned you know Marxism and many many

1:01:20of the things um come out of a Christian worldview or sometimes the people

1:01:27promulgating that the most wicked ideas do so um under the uh illusion that

1:01:33they’re they’re they’re being actual Christians or something. So then the question is what does it really mean uh

1:01:38to be to be a Christian? Uh well that’s a question the church has struggled with for 2,000 years and plenty of Christian noticed

1:01:44plenty of Christians have done strangely evil things in the name of Christianity as well. It’s funny how that keeps happening isn’t it? Yep.

1:01:50Yeah. So well I mean look to me it all comes down to humility doesn’t it? This is certainly teachings of the the

1:01:55Orthodox Church and I’m sure it is of the the Catholic Church as well. Comes back to what Christ always tells you.

1:02:00You love God. You love your neighbor. You humble yourself. Um you don’t judge others. And if you’re actually behaving

1:02:06like that, which is very hard, um, but perhaps you can manage it for 10 seconds a day, but you’re always walking towards it.

1:02:13Then, as I say, it’s impossible to become too hubristic and evil, but it’s a constant struggle, isn’t it? It’s a struggle against yourself.

1:02:19I don’t normally look at my phone. Forgive me. It’s ironic, isn’t it? T Well, today I in fact, I’ve never done

1:02:24this before, so it’s it’s right that I’m doing it as I speak to you. This is No, this is true, actually. Uh today um

1:02:31someone who doesn’t normally email me, you mentioned Wdsworth uh mentioned uh

1:02:37emailed me nothing but Wsworth’s Wsworth’s famous poem, The World is Too

1:02:43Much with Us, and I wasn’t planning on reading it, but it seems uh particularly

1:02:48appropriate. You should. Um the world is too much with us. Late and

1:02:54soon, getting and spending, we lay waste our powers. Little we see in nature that

1:02:59is ours. We have given our hearts away a sorted boon. This sea that bears her

1:03:05bosom to the moon. The winds that will be howling at all hours and are

1:03:12upgathered now like sleeping flowers. For this for everything we are out of

1:03:17tune. It moves us not. Great God, I’d rather be a pagan suckled in a creed

1:03:23outworn. So might I standing on this pleasantly have glimpses that would make

1:03:31me less forlororn, have sight of Proteius rising from the sea, or hear

1:03:37old Triton blow his wreathed horn?

1:03:43Somehow this reminds me of CS Lewis and I think

1:03:49you and I who have an appreciation for what the classical pagans

1:03:56appreciated which many modern Christians have lost. Uh and that to me reading

1:04:03reading this poem this morning again sent to me by someone who doesn’t typically send me emails or poetry of

1:04:09any kind. I thought it it sums up a lot of what you’re saying in this book.

1:04:15Yeah. I mean, look, it’s um one of the reasons I thought I didn’t like Christianity was that it had no sense of

1:04:20nature and it had no sense of love for creation. Um which actually isn’t true, but it well, it’s true of some

1:04:25manifestations of it, but isn’t true of the root of it. And and one of the reasons I went ramaging around in paganism, as so many people do, is that

1:04:32we have a sense that we’re completely alienated from nature and sucked into this machine. and you want a faith and a spiritual path that can say to you

1:04:39nature is alive. Christianity doesn’t seem to say that. No, actually it does if you go to the root of it in my view

1:04:44and actually that’s one of the my next book’s going to be about that. Um but

1:04:49Christianity needs to be alive and it needs to be alive with a a pulsing love of creation as well as a pulsing love of

1:04:56God. And I think that means it needs to be critical of the machine society that’s being created around us. It needs

1:05:01to give us a sense of, you know, the beauty and power of creation, the creation of people and what we can be at

1:05:06our best as opposed to our worst and the creation of the world which we’re eating with this giant machine. And often, as

1:05:12you say, it doesn’t do that. It becomes a sort of political or dry or intellectual thing that just alienates

1:05:17and bores people. But at its root, it’s not that. And it wasn’t that at the beginning, and it wasn’t that to the desert fathers, and it wasn’t that to

1:05:24the apostles. It’s this it’s this wonderful promise of a world renewed

1:05:29which you know if if you actually get to the root of it it’s a beautiful vision but we’ve just being fallen we’ve

1:05:35managed to corrupt it and make it boring and evil repeatedly over human history but also it it’s it’s always renewing

1:05:42itself isn’t it the Christian story it’s always popping up again in different forms so we’ve got an opportunity to dig

1:05:47into it now and say what does it actually mean at its root as the machine rises around us

1:05:52and I think that’s that’s why I love CS Lewis so much because it’s his brand of Christianity. He he doesn’t

1:05:59uh he he pulls us back to the best of the classical pagan world in the way that Wdsworth uh is trying to do in that

1:06:06poem and and I think particularly now we need that. We do. Yeah. Lewis was always being

1:06:11called a pagan and he he sort of didn’t mind um you know because there it depends what you mean by pagan isn’t it?

1:06:17But, you know, if you’re talking about a society that yes, has this rich love of nature and and wildness and then it’s

1:06:23all there in those traditions and they may not have Christ, but they have that understanding. If you if you if you

1:06:28become a if you become a Christian who’s lost sight of that vision, that vision

1:06:33that Wdsworth’s talking about there, then you’re missing, I think, half of what the world is and then you just create this dry, desecated thing, which

1:06:40is one reason the modern world has walked away from it. Yeah. You know, we talk about the rebellion against Christianity. They complain

1:06:45about that. One of the reasons is that Christianity lost sight of what it was supposed to be, tied itself into power,

1:06:50became oppressive and boring, and people looked at it, including me when I was younger, and said, “I don’t think that’s

1:06:55got anything to do with the God I saw up on the mountains when I was a child.” You can see God in the forest. You can

1:07:00see God on the mountains. You have to be able to see the same God in the church. Well, I think we’ll have to leave it

1:07:06there. Um Paul Kingsnorth, author of Against the Machine: On the

1:07:12Unmaking of Humanity. Thank you for being my guest. Thank you.

1:07:18If you think these conversations are valuable, would you do us a favor and please like this video and subscribe to

1:07:25this channel? When you do that, you help us get these conversations out to a wider audience by telling YouTube uh

1:07:32that people are interested in this. Also, you can go to socratesinthecity.com, sign up for our newsletter, uh, and you

1:07:39can check back every week. There’s new stuff here every week. Thank you for tuning in.

Engaging Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Considering Its Impact on Our World – Charlie Catlett

0:05long ago like in the 1940s a computer was way smarter than any computer that

0:11we have so far these women in this picture were called computers and you

0:17can see they’ve got paper and some of them might have had you know a a calculator of some kind so people who

0:23did computations were called computers and the the the the term or

0:31the field of artificial intelligence sort of came together in the 1950s with these guys who had this seminal meeting

0:37at at Dartmouth University and um and they built their work on many

0:43generations of scientists before in number theory in um uh ad love LA and I

0:49don’t know how I get rid of my my little menu bar at the bottom ad LEL and Charles babage back in the

0:561840s imagined uh machines that could calculate and then of course digital

1:02machines Conrad Zeus in Berlin um John Von noyman at the uh who’s Hungarian um

1:09uh was at Princeton University and built one of the first computers and then I’ll talk about Alan touring uh who sort of

1:17launched a discussion back in 1950 uh uh with the paper about K machines think

1:23and more recently deep learning and I will define deep learning and machine learning in a moment deep learning was

1:29was um uh the these three gentlemen who whove been sort of pioneers in that

1:36field for a few decades won the touring award named after Alan touring as the

1:41equivalent of the Nobel Prize for computer science so it’s like the highest award you can you can win in

1:47computer science and they won it I think it was in 2020 or maybe it was 21 or 22 but in the last couple of years they won

1:54the touring touring award for their work in machine learning and um so so that’s kind of the the history of of AI uh I

2:02just thought it was really cool because John Von noyman is one of our heroes in Computing that I got to meet his great

2:07grandson at elf last year I haven’t seen him this year is he here so anyway so I

2:13I mean I didn’t get his autograph but I did get a selfie which is even better um so as I mentioned Alan Turing

2:20you you might be familiar with Alan Turing not so much for AI but for his work in World War II at Bletchley Park

2:26in the UK um developing a a machine that broke

2:31the German Enigma encryption device what you might not know is that he did that

2:37work uh he got a head start from work from polish mathematicians in Warsaw

2:42Warsaw who had been working on uh trying to break the Enigma for you know

2:48business purposes he in 1950 asked the question can can machines think and he

2:54proposed something he called the imitation game which is you have three people a judge uh

3:00on on the bottom there a wall between them and then two people on the other side that were typing back and forth and

3:06could this person uh person number c could they determine within five minutes

3:11or so whether they were talking to a human or a machine and he proposed that if they could do that for some period of

3:17time then that would be at least some evidence toward machine’s thinking and he thought that we would be able to be

3:23he he did a really interesting and and and fairly accurate job of projecting

3:29Computing technology out 50 years Beyond when he was writing and he thought that we would be able to pass the touring

3:36test here the imitation game with computers by the turn of the century 50 years later and he wasn’t really that

3:43far off because h a machine that we would have had maybe 10 years ago would

3:48have passed this test and certainly as you’ve seen interacting with how many people have never heard of chat

3:56GPT yeah so anyone that’s interacted with chat GP or any of these tools knows

4:01that they they definitely passed the touring test um artificial intelligence is this broad field of computer science

4:08and information Theory and machine learning used to be a a a branch in that

4:14family tree along with um computer vision and text generation and natural

4:19language processing and now um uh even up until about 2012 this was the case

4:27since about 2012 every field or almost every field or subfield of of of

4:32artificial intelligence now uses machine learning as their main tool for getting their job done so machine learning is

4:40sort of anon uh synonymous with um with AI and we’ll talk a little bit about

4:46about that in a moment you’ve already been experiencing AI now for over a decade if you have any of these talking

4:52devices in your in your home more likely that everybody in the room probably has a camera in their pocket that also makes

4:59phone calls uh and it will you know you you’ve seen that it draws boxes around the most

5:04beautiful kids in the picture these happen to be my grandkids so when it draws that face face box that’s an AI

5:12model analyzing the image inside your phone so you have ai models that you’re

5:17carrying around in your pocket when you look at a social media feed that’s an AI system recommending things for you to

5:23see in your feed so how can machines learn well I want to give a

5:30oversimplified example of a machine learning uh scenario so you remember

5:36from grade school that you could describe or or Define a line on a graph

5:41like this by this formula the the vertical distance Y is is equal to ax a

5:49times this number plus b some offset so you can put any line on that

5:55two-dimensional graph by just playing around with the values of A and B so so a a program would start out and just

6:02randomly draw a line there and you want to know is that the best line if I know these values here and in this case it’s

6:09the price of a house versus how many square meters and I want to have a

6:14predictor I want to have a formula that I could use so that when somebody tells me oh I’ve got a house and it’s

6:20325 square meters I can get an estimate of how much that house should cost but I

6:26don’t have a house I don’t have that dot on here so I’ve got to predict it so want to draw this line to to best fit

6:32that set of dots and then I can measure with every line the distance between the

6:38line and all these dots and then come up with a formula that as I adjust that will go to zero or toward zero and then

6:45I’ll say that’s the closest line that I have what we do we do that if I asked you to draw that curve you would just do

6:51that with your eyes but you wouldn’t realize that your brain is kind of going through that as well but in real life and this is where

6:59I I promise this is the only slide that it um that has any sort of formulas or mathematics on it but you don’t have to

7:06understand the details I’m just going to tell you sort of how it works and all you have to do is say yeah I kind of

7:12kind of get that that’s the goal here if you’re going to ask how much a house is worth as you know it’s it’s not just how

7:19many square meters it is it’s also what neighborhood it’s in and all these other factors like these number of bathrooms

7:24number of bedrooms and so to do a program that will predict house price in

7:30real life you have to take all these attributes in uh into account and so you

7:35come up with this Matrix math and you eventually come up with this formula like this that says here’s all the

7:41different attributes neighborhood bathrooms bedrooms Etc and some are more important than other uh in our

7:48calculation of the house price and so I’m going to put these weights these values and say you know if the

7:54neighborhood is twice as important as the number of bathrooms then maybe I put a two here in a in a one there and so I

8:01can then construct this formula and translate it into a neural network so

8:06all this to say that there are these neural networks and they’re all just doing linear algebra essentially um and

8:13that’s how machines can learn it’s just algebra all right so how might that work

8:19we look at this much larger uh neural network on the right here the we talk about layers in neural networks and so

8:25this one has five layers an input layer uh which is all the pixels on the screen of a handwritten character in this

8:31example output layer there are 10 dots which correspond to 0 through n uh

8:37because this network is going to guess from handwritten um what the number is

8:42that the person wrote and then uh we can measure at the end and say well we only

8:47got one right and so we’ll go back through and we’ll adjust all those weights in that long algebra formula of

8:53course now it’s much longer because it’s a bigger network but adjusting those weights just like trying to figure out

8:59that fitting that curve this is essentially fitting a curve in a multi-dimensional space that we can’t even visualize because we live in three

9:06dimensions and maybe before if you count time so another way to kind of think

9:11about neural networks is in terms of size we have 86 million neurons a fruit

9:16fly has 3,000 this is a an animation of one that has 10,000 neurons there’s so

9:23many Connections in that kind of a network that only 2% are shown here but now as it goes to the side you can kind of see this is a four layer Network and

9:30it’s taking the input from all the pixels on the screen and then making a guess to see which uh uh which digit

9:37that is I’m going to come back to that um that diagram and talk about the difference of sizes in neural networks a

9:44a little bit later so now how do we train a language model like chat GPT we

9:49we don’t send through handwritten L digits anymore we send through entire books and documents and we send them

9:56through this stage of pre-training that looks a lot like what I just showed you except the neural network is way way

10:02bigger in fact it’s connected multiple neural networks but we send all this uh

10:07text Data through and then we end up with something that’s called a pre-trained model so chat GPT g means

10:14generative which means a kind of AI that can generate content PT means pre-trained so chat GPT is a pre-trained

10:22model uh just you know in terms of vocabulary and what’s interesting is that these new models like chat gp4 or

10:29other models that are on the same class of roughly one to two trillion

10:34parameters so we have 86 billion neurons and I think I’m going to look at the

10:40neuroscientist in about 100 trillion connections um so we’re one or two% of

10:47that with something like chat gbt way less efficient than humans at learning

10:52because it took 500 times more text for this chat gbt to get to where it is than it would take a normal if if you could

10:59say a pH PhD is a normal person but person to get a PhD by age 26 would have

11:05read something like 30 to 35,000 pages of text um and gbt had something like 60

11:11million that it needed to read right so how do these things work

11:17if you talk to people who just are their science is large language models and

11:22gpts pre-train models and all that stuff they call them token predictors or if

11:28you just equate token to a word which is a fair it’s not always that but token to a word it’s just predicting the next

11:34word and it’s really quite remarkable that a certain scale it starts to exhibit these properties that seem like

11:41it’s reasoning and it’s certainly producing coherent coherent sentences but all it’s doing is I say to it write

11:48me a limmerick about Christian professors in Poland and it says what’s the most likely next word certainly

11:54let’s go with that and then it puts certainly at the end it goes through the whole thing again and puts the whole thing through again until it eventually

12:01builds up and it’s got okay certainly here’s a limmer and then it’ll keep going after that and I’ll just let you

12:10watch it as it as it goes in Poland professors convene with knowledge and

12:16Faith so Keen they teach and they

12:21share in the in a scholarly air where wisdom and belief are seen so that’s

12:28pretty good if it’s just predicting the next word but what it’s not doing is what you or I would do which is to think

12:35about okay we’re going to write a limmerick here it’s got a rhyme and we would probably go through a couple of drafts and erase things and go back but

12:42it’s just doing it in one shot as it’s going through and you can kind of Imagine since it’s not going to do the

12:48same thing every time there’s a little bit of fuzziness in in choosing the uh

12:53the next word there might be 10 possibilities and sometimes it chooses one and sometimes chooses the other you

12:58can kind of imagine that if it chooses kind of an outlier and then the next time it chooses one that’s even more uh

13:05away from what you would normally see why it would come up with stuff that sounds plausible that’s not true what we

13:13call hallucinations so that’s kind of a consequence of the way these models work and another way to look at these models

13:19when you ask is it thinking is it um you know is it reasoning well uh John surl

13:26who was a philosopher at Berkeley uh back in 1980 was thinking from philosophically about this sort of

13:33problem and he came up with this uh what was called the Chinese room experiment and he said there’s a person in a room

13:40who doesn’t speak Chinese but there’s people at the wall and they hand him characters in in into the window and

13:46he’s got all these books and databases and characters and rules for what goes after what and he puts together an

13:52answer by following those rules and then gives the answer out but he never understood what the characters were he

13:58just knew from set of rules that he had developed or had been developed for him in part of the training he just knew

14:04what characters would make sense after after the next one so um again it’s really remarkable the things that these

14:10things can do just as token predictors things have gotten you know since last

14:16year it was all about language models and in the last uh 12 months a lot of

14:21progress has been made in multimodal or multimedia um here is a Google came out

14:27with Gemini 1.5 it’s another big model a couple months ago and as part of the

14:33prompt uh not just uh the question which would be tell me some key information

14:38about the piece of paper that’s removed from the person’s pocket and tell me when that happens in the movie so as

14:46part of that question remember it’s taking the whole prompt and then looking at the next word they included the whole

14:51movie as frames single frames and Gemini was able to say well at this point in

14:58the movie The guy pulled pulls out the PO out of his pocket and reads the that it’s a it’s a a ticket from a pawn shop

15:05and then another example of Gemini’s capabilities to un understand um I’ll

15:10use that very Loosely term um multimedia the user drew a picture and said where

15:17in the movie does this happen and it found a scene in the movie that looks like looks like that picture so really

15:23amazing capabilities uh that are coming out uh I I thought it would be helpful

15:29for you as Ministry leaders and business people uh if you you probably all have your own ways of using AI but I use chat

15:36GPT and some of its siblings probably for on average an hour or two a day

15:43because now I’m doing my work and instead of Googling stuff I turn to chat gbt and I sort of treat it like a mostly

15:51trustworthy but a a a really sort of smart Savant

15:57know-it-all and I don’t trust everything it says sort of trust but verify so

16:02there are times when I’ll get an answer back and I’ll say something like tell me where you found that answer or are you

16:09sure that’s right and what’s really good about AIS today is that when they’re wrong they don’t argue with you they

16:16just apologize so they don’t like dig their heels in on some opinion because they don’t have an opinion um you know

16:22other ways I’ve used it here um uh to sort Excel files if I’m doing like I’m

16:28trying to organize a meeting with a bunch of people uh one you know once not

16:34just once but I’d say probably once every several weeks I’ll have some idea

16:40for dinner or not have some idea for dinner and I’ll go well I got this and this and this and I’ll ask for a recipe and it usually gives me a pretty pretty

16:47decent ideas for that um I’ll give you a couple of examples um we’re we’re

16:52wanting to remodel our kitchen and so I thought well why not ask chat GPT for some advice on remodeling the kitchen

16:59and the first answer came back and it was not quite what I was asking for

17:04because I told it the dimensions of my kitchen and it gave me like I don’t it gave me like this huge kitchen that like

17:10we couldn’t never fit all that stuff into our kitchen it also had some weird stuff like those stairs on the left I’m

17:16not sure if they go up or if they stay down there’s a little bit of like eer you know happening there so I asked it

17:22again and it actually got worse or more interesting depending on your point of view so first of all this refrigerator

17:27that’s like horizontal seems to make sense except like the I I can’t imagine how you would get the

17:32water out of the dispenser by going like this and then the pantry and a pantry is

17:37a little mislabeled up there but those drawers are a little bit I don’t know they’re not deep enough for most of the stuff I want to put in a drawer so it’s

17:44still has um so I don’t I don’t mean to make fun of the language models although

17:50I am um but I would just say these kind of things are um not

17:57fundamentally um outside of the realm of AI it’s just this is where AI is right now and a year from now if I come back

18:03and give a talk I might show you a good design that I got from chat GPT we’ll have to see how it

18:09goes uh another example my my son likes to write scripts for his favorite shows

18:15and so we had chat GPT do some uh images for us and it knew about the the show

18:22Danny Fantom which is you know a cartoon that comes on and it did this really beautiful job of of illust rating is a

18:29little bit hard to get it to match the illustration to the to the dialogue but

18:35again you know it’s a good start um I have a slide later where I wanted to

18:40show because I want to talk about recommender algorithms in the context of like they’ve just given you what you

18:46want I wanted to show a sushi chef chef that that was kind of not really happy

18:52but he’s got to make only tuna because he’s got a customer that doesn’t want anything but tuna and so I said okay

18:57well that’s fine but how about less defiant more apologetic expression and how about um you know hum humble

19:04latitude is what it said so I eventually picked the one in the upper right uh which was kind of what I was going for

19:10uh he kind of unhappy he got to make so you could kind of interact with the AI and and if it doesn’t give you the thing

19:17you want at first you can kind of uh work with it again here you know two different spreadsheets from two

19:22different people overlapping names and I I don’t want to spend 30 minutes in the spreadsheet so I just throw this stuff

19:28in chat you PT and it usually does a pretty good job for me so I don’t need an you know secretary to do that I just

19:34have this is a a chat GPT is not a bad secretary um this I I Won’t Say I’m

19:41never grumpy or I never like write rude messages to people but I did make this one up I just assure you that I didn’t

19:47actually write this so I said imagine that you’re a youth leader and you say uh you want to write them an email but

19:54you know it’s not going to go over because you’re like guys you really made me mad yesterday with your Inc considerate Behavior I was trying to

19:59talk to you and everyone seemed to have their noses and their mobile phones whispering to their neighbor and by the way I know you think my clothes are

20:06square but wake up because Huey Lewis says it’s hip to be square and while we’re at it you need to quit calling me

20:12Boomer so you feel like writing something like that you can ask chat GPT and it will turn it into this beautiful

20:18like winning uh uh great attitude letter uh moving forward let’s try to make the

20:24most of our time together uh you know smiley face uh WR note I’ve picked up

20:29the playful Jabs at my fashion sense and the Boomer references anyway so you can

20:35have it uh change things you’ll also notice uh as we move forward uh depending on like if you work for a

20:41company that gives you Microsoft Office uh the they have new capabilities I just

20:46noticed the other day I was writing email and my email client said you want me to reword that for you which wasn’t

20:52really it’s saying you didn’t read it word it correctly but it was just offering to help and so you can play

20:57around with um yes please reword this and make it more formal or less formal

21:02um and these kind of capabilities are going to just keep going uh showing up in in in tools and that’s how a lot of

21:09people will interact with AI other things um and I won’t read all these but

21:15the clearer you are about what you want and the kind of answer that you want with these models the better answer you

21:21will get and so of course you can do this iteration that I did but you know

21:27if you’re going to give a talk to high school kids about AI then don’t just say hey I’m going to give a talk about AI

21:33can you tell me what the best you know outline would be tell it I’m giving it talk to AI at a church a Christian

21:38church and the audience or high school students and you give it all that information you get a much better output

21:45um early on people figured out that because the AI model is doing next word

21:50prediction having it um show its math when it does a problem means that as

21:56part of as it’s predicting it’s now got um a a it can remember if you will how

22:03it how it is going through solving the problem as opposed to just solving the problem like we would do in our heads so

22:09an example of that is uh and this is what you also want to do if you if you

22:14are giving a prompt you want to give it an example of uh of what you want so in this case we give it an example with a

22:20word problem and we tell we say we want the answer is uh 11 so that that tells

22:26the GPT model that we just want the answer we don’t need it to explain it and now I have the second question and

22:32it doesn’t try to explain it it just tells us the wrong answer so large language models are not very good at

22:38math and so if I just add a little bit and say I want as like I give it the model that says I want you to explain

22:45how you got the answer then it actually comes up with the right answer and so that’s the same language model with the

22:50same training but it’s just a different way of prompting it so that you can better work with this technology and get

22:56better results from it um one thing that’s happening with AI uh

23:02models is the the big ones they cost $100 million to train on huge computers

23:10um but they’re also getting smaller and faster and so it won’t always be that

23:15the best models in the world require a hundred million to train this is an example of a a a piece of software it’s

23:22free that you could get it runs on different machines I run it on my Mac it’s called LM studio and I can go and I

23:28can download models and run them on my machine and so I can have something that’s mostly As Good As chat GPT but I

23:36don’t need a connection to the Internet so I could be on an airplane um and and still working with a a model I also show

23:43this because when you type your prompt into the model there’s this system that

23:48looks at your prompt and then decides to wrap it with instructions to the model

23:54and you can play around with the wrapping of instructions so I might I don’t know if I have this uh I don’t

23:59have the slide but um if you say what’s the capital of France the system will

24:05take that question will go I’m going to preen that with you are a geography

24:10expert give a helpful answer to this question and then it’ll be what what’s the capital of France and then it’ll also say and give an interesting fact

24:17about Paris or about the answer so it gets wrapped with these things and that’s part of what’s happening when as

24:23you see over time you get less and less toxic stuff coming out of these things because the company providing these

24:29these tools are getting better at kind of raining rainning in in the tools so

24:35other things um you know there’s lots of fear and trembling about Ai and it’s not

24:40that we don’t have anything to be concerned about but I think it’s helpful when we have a concern to be able to

24:48think clearly and precisely about what it is we’re concerned about so that we can then say okay well what would be who

24:55and what would be the answer to that and I find it helpful to think in terms of these three buckets so by analogy I

25:02would say the the one on the left is like the building of the basic technology that’s like how do we take

25:08iron ore and turn it into some you know into iron and the second creation of an

25:13AI capability would be like okay having figured out how to take it out of the ground and turn ore into iron I can make

25:21something that’s like this long and kind of curved with a sharp edge and then on the third one would be like what you do

25:27with that curve curve thing with a sharp edge and maybe it’s to cut grass or maybe it’s to to be an instrument you

25:33know for a soldier to use um and so that’s the application of the AI and in each of these areas there are um sort of

25:42I would say sort of top problems that researchers and companies researchers within companies um are trying to

25:49address and uh you know you see the basic I talked about giving you the crazy wrong answer we call that a

25:56hallucination um other things over here like trustworthiness how much can I can

26:02I trust the answer I’m getting from the machine goal alignment is you know at face value kind of how does that relate

26:08to AI gold alignment means that when you ask the AI to do something that you and

26:14the AI are pretty much in sync about what your goal is and it gives you an

26:19answer that’s reasonable by our standards of common sense so an example would be you’re a um a kindergarten

26:27teacher and you have a park across the street from the school and you ask the AI to help you get the kids across the

26:34street without getting hit by a car well an answer to that that you don’t want is

26:39like we’ll catapult the kids across the street but that still gets the that gets the job done and so gold alignment means

26:45that the AI is going to take a reasonable path by your by your um uh your judgment and then AI creation we

26:53talk a lot a lot a lot about transparency and Providence we need to know what is the data that was used to

26:59train these models because that is where the models get um their point of view if

27:04you will not an opinion but the uh what we would call a bias and bias is not

27:10good or bad we are biased toward certain truths and other people are biased against those or towards a different

27:17different uh what they think are true so um we want these models not to pick up

27:23bias from the data that they’re using um and so knowing what data they use can

27:28tell us well what’s the bias of that model likely to be so if a model was built entirely from text in North Korea

27:36you could imagine that it’s probably biased against the United States and Europe because all of their text is not

27:42going to have particularly positive things about about those parts of the world so that’s why you want to know

27:49what is being used and then on the application side it’s where we where it really touches us the most and so we

27:55want our our governments local Regional and uh and and federal governments to

28:01really think about how AI is going to affect us as as residents of a of a city

28:07or a country um we want them to think about the impact on employment and how they need to rethink uh funding for for

28:14education and um and for continuing education so those are kind of applications we we don’t want deep fakes

28:22or misinformation to influence elections and so countries EU and Us and other are

28:29uh are are coming up with laws about marking things saying if it’s made by AI you have to mark it so that people know

28:36that is made by AI I imagine trust but verify uh as as

28:41part of putting this uh presentation together I remembered that in 2009 or so

28:48the University of Chicago had surveyed all of us faculty staff and students about religious belief and I I was I

28:56guess a little bit surprised cuz U Chicago is an ivvy League fairly liberal University um but a third of the student

29:04staff and and faculty members of if you take any of those three groups about a third of them have some form of religious belief about a third of them

29:11plus or minus 10% right about a third of them are kind of agnostic and about a third of them don’t think that there’s a

29:17higher being at all so I I was trying to figure out if there was any updated

29:22because our survey was done in 20 2009 I was really excited because because chat

29:28gbt said there was a a a journal Nature article which is like gold you know gold standard science article in 2009 30

29:36countries and you know I thought this is great so I said like What’s the title of that survey and it’s like oh sorry I

29:42just made that up so this is you know it’s not like the rest of the answer was

29:48no not of use but you don’t want to just take it at face value and so then I decided you know to sort of press the

29:54point with uh um with chat gbt and I quoted it back to them and then I got

29:59another apology so as I said they’re pretty apologetic when they get it wrong but you should just assume you know

30:04trust but verify uh that what you’re getting might have some mistakes in it when I talk about the training data

30:12remember that figure where I was saying there’s a bunch like 60 million pages of text that were sent through the model

30:18this is kind of how it’s done you you take the text and you mask out certain words and then you ask the model to make

30:24a guess of what those words ought to be and just like in the handwriting thing it’s get some of them right and some of

30:30them wrong and then you pass that uh uh you pass uh that information back

30:36through the model and have it adjust all all of its weight and so it is true

30:41although a a GPT a model like this doesn’t have a personality or point of view it does have a worldview that’s

30:48kind of built in from from the um uh from the data so let’s kind of again I

30:54said was going to kind of skip through a bunch of things let’s talk about um stuff that’s really happening with our

31:00lives and the lives of our kids and that is the use of AI for these free internet services like social uh social networks

31:08or YouTube or other things and and think of it from the point of view that these

31:13free things are free to you but they also cost you your data because you are

31:19the product that’s being sold by these all all about you and you’re giving

31:25these tools or these free services you’re giving your most precious possession which is your time and

31:31attention and that’s that sort of your one your your interest in in managing

31:37your time and attention is at odds with the goals of these companies to pay for those services that you get for free

31:44because their goal is to keep you on the site as long as possible and they they don’t just it’s not just uh that’d be

31:50great if we could do that and let’s like have key performance indicators and all that stuff they actually do deep

31:56Research into Psych ology and sociology to figure out what is the the best way

32:02to keep people on their site so it’s a science and they and they invest a lot of money in that because that’s what

32:08their business model is so how does that work this familiar neural network that

32:13kind of the canonical neural network let’s say this is my Facebook feed on the right and it’s got five items in it

32:19and so I go and by the way I don’t use Facebook but if I did and I would go through and maybe I click on the first

32:24one and click on the third one and or fourth one and the the fifth one and so

32:30I’ve now given the the provider of that Newsfeed I’ve given him some insight

32:35into what kind of things will cause me to stay on the site I’m uh and so it’s going to go okay so it’s going to run

32:41those through and it’s going to find out it’s going to do a prediction is going to go okay I did the prediction to get those five but two of them are wrong so

32:48next time I’m going to put less cartoons more pictures of family oversimplification but it’s learning as

32:53we click on the best way to keep us on the site because clicking means keeping on the site but it’s even more

33:01than just our clicking in the site because it um if you know some sites

33:06will now say um are you okay with these cookies and I’m like who could turn down a cookie right cookies are uh these

33:14little files that are kept on your device and if you don’t have any sort of

33:19control over them what happens is when you go to Facebook or to Google it looks

33:24in that folder and it looks at your cookies from all those other sites oh the this person was at at the uh you

33:30know IKEA store and they browsed uh window treatments and then they ended up buying you know blinds or something like

33:37that so all that information of where we went um the cell phone providers I don’t know how it works in Europe but in the

33:44US the cell phone providers uh keep our location information they know where we go and when um our browsing history from

33:51the cookies so location and then the things that we purchased so all of that goes into this model to develop up uh a

33:59personalized algorithm for you so that you’ll stay on the site longer they don’t really care what keeps you on the

34:05site they have no these tech companies don’t have a they’re not you know liberal or conservative they just want

34:11you on the site they’re just capitalist however um a and you know it’s basically

34:17you know what they do is it’s designed to profit them so here’s where you know you could remember that picture of the guy in the upper right so you can think

34:23of the recommender system which is that model think of it like uh a con how many

34:28people have been to one of these conveyor belt sushi restaurants not yeah so so you’re

34:34sitting there and food is going by and you just pick what you want and you have a pile of dishes at the end and they

34:40calculate how much you pay and so if all you do is so so the the sushi bar

34:45restaurant right their goal is to keep you in that seat pulling play off plates off because everyone of those plates is

34:52is revenue for them and so if you only choose tuna then eventually nothing but

34:57tuna is going to come by so they’re going to go well no sense in pushing the unagi through or tomago or or California

35:05rolls because they’re just going to eat the tuna and so this is kind of like your newsfeed they don’t really care

35:11about your diet and so if you want tuna all the time they’re just going to give you tuna because that keeps you in the seat on the other hand the

35:18advertisements that you see in these social media sites are intended to influence you the social media site is

35:24just selling ads but now they’re selling ads um along with your information to say

35:31you know here’s a way to Target this ad I’m going to Target it toward it used to be say 10 years ago you would have an

35:38advertisement that’s targeted toward your demographic so Facebook would know some things about you like 20 you know

35:44you’re in your 20s you’re unmarried you’re a male uh Caucasian but as AI

35:50gets more and more powerful these algorithms will actually be looking at how to Target you as an individual to

35:57sell you something whether it’s sell you new idea or selling you a product and as AI gets better some of these warnings up

36:05here that you see um we we are going to have trouble

36:11we already are having trouble Discerning what’s true because there’s so many news and pseudo news sources coming at us and

36:19at the moment that we start seeing videos with audio of famous people doing

36:24things that they never did then it’s going to be very diff ult for us to to discern what we can believe or what we

36:31we can’t believe and so that’s why these folks on the right wrote this uh Economist art article about deep fakes

36:37and video okay this was something that surprised me um so first of all I I was exchanging

36:44email with with some some friends at work and the one of them mentioned that on this site where there’s a whole bunch

36:51of models that you can use to download like to that LM studio app that I have he said the most popular model is

36:57something called cheerful chatty teenage girl or something like

37:02that and I’m like really somebody came up with a model like that like so it’s it’s a chatbot that has that kind of a

37:09personality and so then I kind of dug a little further and found this report the top generative AI consumer mobile apps

37:17by category and I use chat gbt as a general assistant down here I don’t

37:23really do much of the other stuff but I had no idea that I’m kind of an outlier because almost everyone else seems to be

37:30using uh these AI already as companions and one of the sites that does this is

37:36called maybe I shouldn’t tell you what it’s called but character do.ai and you can choose from this sort of menagerie

37:43of different kinds of personalities that you might not want to interact with and they say that the average user of that

37:48site spends two hours a day chatting with these imaginary friends and I think

37:54as Christians this is something that we should really pay attention to because

38:00we were designed to use language in relationship with God and with other

38:05people but not with our tools I mean maybe with the dog you want the dog to understand but you don’t have

38:10a conversation with your dog right and so um we already have this epidemic of

38:15loneliness and and depression and if that if if people try

38:21to fill that loneliness with a machine it seems like that is not good for society and not good for those people so

38:29so this is a little bit surprising to me how quickly um people have adopted AI

38:34for this sort of uh activity so there’s there’s a lot of discussion

38:40about um is that AI sentient somebody was fired from Google U couple years ago

38:47because they had decided that the Google AI model was what had personhood and and

38:53uh kind of went off the off the deep end on on wanting to to you know give it

38:58human rights and things like that and there’s a lot of discussion about it are these AIS reasoning are

39:04they thinking or are they just predicting tokens we know that they’re just predicting tokens but are they doing more than that and it’s important

39:11in that discussion to think about the worldview of the person you’re discussing with discussing with and our

39:17worldview is not the same as the majority of European society and and

39:23probably the majority of us society as well so we think about people as people as creatures made the image of God they

39:29think about people as emergent properties from natural processes of time and chance and every time we come

39:36up with some definition that says well humans differ from animals because we use tools or because we have emotions it

39:44turns out we discover in science that animals do these things too and eventually we may run out of this list

39:50here and then it’s think then it’s important to say well how do we think about Ai and and rights and things like

39:57that one of the dangers I see is um we haven’t I don’t think we have adequately

40:03defined some of the terms that we’re using like intelligence for example but if we are giving an AI more rights

40:11because of its intelligence then what that’s saying is your value or that thing’s value is based on intelligence

40:18and so we think about well eventually then does that mean that people who are less intelligent are less valuable and

40:24so this you know can we can kind of get get pulled into this you know different

40:30world viiew if we just take it Face Value the discussion we don’t understand that they’re coming from a really

40:35different uh place there a lot of the people on this lights I hate use there

40:40it’s not like us and them but the people who believe this or have this world view

40:45uh are looking at things like what Ray curtz has been predicting for for 30 years that at some point the difference

40:53between human and machine will blur and we’ll be able to upload our conscious to

40:58a device and and live forever in that way or and along the way we’ll be able

41:03to augment our bodies and that sort of thing and I don’t know you know Ray kwell is just a guy but we have a

41:10different set of promises about the future their future is different our future we got promises from a guy that

41:16proved that he was God by raising himself from the dead so I think that we’re on pretty solid ground on the

41:21right hand side I like to say to people you know I’m not uh an apologist um I’m

41:27just a computer scientist but to me I I I I think we need to have people argue

41:33about the right thing and the one thing that we all agree on that we don’t need to argue about other things is this this

41:41guy raised from the dead because according to Paul if he didn’t then we should all you know throw our faith out

41:46but if he did that means something and that’s more important than lots of other things that we argue with people in the

41:52world about so so these different meta narratives if you will so this one I I

41:57should have checked to make sure none of the neuroscientists were armed with fruit because you’re going to throw something at the screen I know it this

42:04is a really good paper um with a really good idea to to do this new kind of AI where you have

42:11multiple AIS talking to one another and and and there’s some really interesting

42:16work that’s being done there and that but but the problem with this is that they’ve now decided that Consciousness

42:22is sort of like uh uh is sort of like comes from awareness of surroundings so

42:29they say we use Consciousness in other words they’re saying let me decode this we’re going to redefine the word

42:34conscious to mean the degree of awareness of of an agent’s State and surroundings so by this definition my

42:41Nest Thermostat my my smart thermostat has cognition because it understands that there’s movement it knows light

42:48levels and it knows the temperature it even knows humidity so they’ve redefined so this is like I put this in just for

42:55my my Neuroscience friend is like what you’re like that’s your definition of Consciousness and I thought this was an

43:02appropriate quote from Richard fan who’s one of the most brilliant physicists of the 20th century um talking about how

43:08easy it is for us to fool ourselves so when we start redefining these terms then we can kind of go down this rabbit

43:15hole that’s not real science anymore it’s just like I mean some of it’s real science but it it’s it’s Miss we’re

43:22going to fool ourselves and I thought it was interesting it’s kind of hidden by this artifact down at

43:27of my oh did it go away oh yeah is that I looked through and I like looked up

43:33all the 12 authors on this paper not one of them was a psychologist a cognition neuroscientist Etc just a bunch of

43:40computer scientists and robot scientists which are kind of a field of computer and mechanical science and some people

43:46that knew something about the Health Care System but now they’re redefining the world of Consciousness so we have to

43:51kind of be be careful about what we hear in the news and what we hear that scientists have discovered you know if

43:57you get an article that says scientists have discovered that chat GPT 6 has

44:02sentience and is conscious then you need to ask well what’s the definition that you’re using there and if it’s this

44:08definition then it doesn’t really mean that much to see that headline so um let me kind of kind of wrap this up and

44:15we’ll have more more time to talk with a few other things that people tend to ask about with respect to Ai and there’s

44:21good things to ask about one is how’s it going to affect the job market how’s it going to affect my job I’m in trouble

44:28because I’m down at the right hands of computer and mathematical jobs 100% will be automated I think this was like by by

44:3510 years from now so I need to figure out how to reinvent I could go into grounds Grounds Maintenance up there

44:42that’s a pretty safe field um the gray on here somebody asked me uh yesterday

44:47what the gray is the gray is like not all the jobs but a fair number like 50%

44:52of the jobs so I I don’t know how to really factor that in with the other color code but you can kind of see that

44:58some jobs are going to be more affected than others it’s also the case if you look at not I’m not a labor expert but

45:05if you look at what labor experts have have studied in terms of the job market

45:10over time 60% of of the jobs today didn’t exist in 1940 and then if you

45:17kind of look back and do a little bit of more careful study you find that in the last 80 years 85% of employment growth

45:24was from new technology so what that kind of I mean what what I take away from that is that yes AI is going to

45:31mean that there are fewer of these jobs and maybe not ever none of these other jobs but it also means there’s these

45:37other opportunities that people have uh so as I I told my my son who uh when he

45:44graduated with Finance degree like five years ago and went into to work for a bank I said make sure that you’re the

45:50guy that is involved in in uh planning and developing and purchasing the soft

45:57Ware that will take your job away your entry-level job away because the

46:02entry-level jobs are going to get eaten by software and he he took that to heart he does a lot I mean even the finance

46:07guy but he he seems to have gotten into the software so the the lesson there is that you should really think about and

46:13we at I I work at argon National Laboratory 3,500 people and and we have

46:19for the last two or three years been encouraging people at argon to think about how to responsibly use AI to do

46:27their job better to save themselves time to improve their quality if you’re writing a proposal or a paper sure use

46:34use chat GPT to help you with the wording to help you not to write it for

46:39you but to help you so I think in any of these jobs you want to you want to look at how you can do a better job by using

46:45AI tools I’ll close by just talking about some of the um regulations that are

46:51coming out last year they were just being talked about um the EU is talking about this AI Act and finally passed it

46:58a couple months ago where they Define four levels of risk and what I found

47:03shocking because I’ve never seen this kind of structure for fines before but if you are um a large company then you

47:12can be find up to 35 million euro or 7%

47:17of your revenues not 7% of your profit so you could like you could go out of business with that kind of a kind of a

47:24penalty and so the stakes are really high companies to do the right thing and there’s there’s going to be more and

47:31more detail that come over here in terms of you know what the right thing is uh one of the areas of high risk is if

47:38you’re using AI in the workplace and it’s going to affect people you need to have a plan for how you’re going to take

47:44care of your people as you as you make that change um there’s something called the gig economy uh I think that maybe

47:50comes from the fact that musicians who are you know go from one job to another they call them a gig so the G big

47:57economy is like um ride share drivers and food delivery people uh that sort of

48:02thing and they are especially vulnerable to AI because if you’re working for Uber

48:08you’re a Uber driver you get only the jobs that they send your away and so they’ll have an algorithm they could end

48:15up you could end up getting less um less Revenue because of some glitch in the algorithm so so you’re you’re

48:21particularly uh vulnerable to AI in those kind of jobs and so the EU is looking at other regulations that are

48:27just targeted toward that U Back I think it was in March there was a a meeting at

48:32Bletchley Park up in the UK of lots of different companies and government leaders and they they came out with some

48:39goals that that International and National governments should be working toward with respect to AI so at the

48:45highest level of governance there is a recognition of some of the the the risks of AI and that’s a good thing and then

48:51just last week as a followup to that there was a summit in Soul and these 16

48:56companies the ones at the top are from um the ones at bottom are from the US the ones at the top are from even of all

49:03places China and UAE uh republ South Korea France uh and Canada so they all

49:09signed on to not the EU Privacy Act not that thing with penalties but they did sign on to an agreement to at least get

49:17things started so that’s also a promising sign there then then I want to close with a couple of sort of food for

49:24thought um which may or may not may have other things you want to talk about but just as we think about how how to think

49:30about this one is I would really encourage you to look at this uh uh

49:35Evangelical statement of principles about AI comes from the ethics and religious uh Liberty Commission of the

49:41Southern Baptist convention and each of these 12 areas there’s a like a half

49:47page of text so it’s not a really it’s not like a Tome it’s not a big book but I found it very uh forward-looking uh I

49:56was pleasant surprised that even back in 2019 when they did this they were already anticipating some of the things

50:02that are now being talked about with with AI and chat gbt and so I really

50:07encourage you to look through that um and and look at a suggestion from these folks on what should the Christian point

50:14of view or the Christian position be about Ai and health care or Ai and

50:19sexuality or or these other topics uh uh as well so that’s one sort of food for

50:25thought um do I have others yeah so I wanted to come back to this one

50:30um about like the Majesty of God so

50:353,000 neurons a fruit fly and with only 3,000

50:40neurons as you know if you’ve ever dealt with proof FES they’re really good at Staying Alive like they can dodge things

50:47and they can find food and and with 3,000 neurons and with 3,000 neurons in an artificial um that make up that

50:54machine um so we can run models like this or we can train models at this

50:59scale it’s expensive it would take a while on the machine to train and we have a project to do that but um we

51:06would only be at the sort of chat GPT level and we would not be at the point that you and I are with with our measly

51:1386 billion uh neurons and uh actually I’m sorry that should be 100 trillion

51:19synapses that we have so we have more synapses than than but um engineering

51:24wise uh you know when we we’ve been on a quest for the last 10 years to get to

51:30this point of computing power to go from what we where we were 10 years ago we

51:35wanted to go a thousand times faster by 2020 and we got there by 2023 and by we I mean like uh a

51:43multi-billion dollar government project in the US and one of the big goals there was like well we want to build this big

51:49machine but we have to be more efficient from a power point of view otherwise we’re just not going to be able to

51:54afford the power to run the machine and going Beyond this machine um will will

52:00even be more power and so if we want to our next goal a thousand times faster than this one we have no idea how to get

52:06there because we can’t get there with the current technology so how does our power efficiency compare with God’s

52:13design of the brain uh 20 watts will run the human brain that’s like three

52:19electric toothbrushes mean maybe three of these but uh in 2010 the fastest

52:26computer computer in the world required five megawatts 5 million watts versus 20

52:32which is enough to power I don’t remember which World Cup or Premier League Stadium that is enough to power a

52:38stadium that holds 70 to 100,000 people at night so that’s a lot of power when we went from um that point to

52:45a thousand times faster we didn’t have a thousand times more energy that we needed but we needed a lot more and so

52:51that machine at argon has 60 megawatts of power that’s enough to light up those

52:5612 stadiums at night or enough to power a small City so to try to go faster than

53:02this we’re going to we’re going to be in trouble if we don’t get um the technology down and we’re not even

53:09competitive with God’s engineering which is to me this is sort of an incredible illustration of of God’s you know we we

53:17think it’s it’s hard for us to think about like if you read if you read Dallas Willard and he talks about our

53:23relationship with Christ he’s like we we think about him as walking around the desert you know 2,000 years ago with a

53:29robe on but we don’t think about him as like the smartest person you could ever meet like the best engineer the best

53:36chemist the best architect and this is a sort of a concrete illustration of

53:42that yeah I’ll leave you with this one here um I think this is a bad idea uh I

53:47could maybe be talked out of that U but I can’t think of what would make it a good idea but there are these you can

53:54now take these models like chat GP T scale models and you can download the

53:59Open ones you can download them from a website or more than one website use

54:05them on your machine like I showed you but you could also do what’s called a a downstream training where you could take

54:12more documents and and add to the training of the model so people will take a model like that and then push a

54:19bunch of concordances in the Bible and different different uh translations through and then come up with you know

54:25letting you chat with Mary Magdalene or Jesus or Thomas or or whoever um I I

54:31think this is kind of in the same danger zone as the companion Bots but maybe a

54:36little more dangerous because we really don’t understand these models well enough to know whether we should trust

54:45what the chat Jesus is saying because the Bible doesn’t cover a lot of topics

54:50that we deal with covers the principles that we can use to deal with them doesn’t talk much about um some you know

54:56it doesn’t talk about the internet for example right the internet was not something Jesus talked about

Transgender | Culture Shock Series with Dr. Owen Strachan

0:04okay we are here tonight to talk about momentous matters more seriously because

0:10the issue of transgender is a major one as we dive in I think of the words of a

0:17great Dutch theologian named Abraham Kuyper who said over 100 years ago well

0:22before this this word was a word these words kuiper said do not forget that the

0:30fundamental contrast has always been is still and will be until the end

0:38Christianity and paganism the idols or the Living God there is no idea that has

0:48swept over recent American cultural life like that of transgenderism along with

0:54the broader LGBT Lobby it is not that the phenomenon of what we call gender

1:00dysphoria is new nor is it new that men and women have sought to cross over the boundaries of their birth sex and

1:06embrace the identity or appearance of the other sex that’s actually found in ancient cultures quite frequently these

1:13instincts run through many societies though they have typically in the past been on the fringe what’s new in our

1:20time in 2018 in America in California in Missouri in Kansas and abroad is the

1:26full-fledged push to normalize transgender identity transgenderism

1:35represents the rejected rejection of what is called a gender essentialist vision of humanity gender essentialist

1:42in the gender essentialist conception God or someone created manhood and

1:49womanhood and so the the sexes have stability to them their sensual their

1:54firm in the new understanding of gender gender is not fixed and formed gender is

2:02fluid and formless to quote the movie hitch you are a very fluid concept right

2:08now that is really the spirit of the age this at least is what we hear but in

2:13truth transgender ideology actually depends upon a fixed understanding of sexist rather than a reworking of gender

2:21in which gender is truly a construct transgender ideology introduces a third category really a third gender

2:28so there’s male and female but then there’s a third gender which is essentially hard to pin down and yet

2:35there’s a bit of irony here if you’re already listening carefully at six o’clock on a Sunday night that which is

2:42formless is treated as a stable fixed concept so if we’re paying attention

2:48we’re already seeing that this is going to be a unique movement and that the

2:53movements own internal logic does not hold up on all points flag that this

3:00conception of the human person that I’m sketching here fits fluidly with our disenchanted age we talked about this

3:07this morning the human person today in the eyes of your average secular thinker

3:12or person influenced by secularism many people by the way are a mix of beliefs they’re not one or the other today in a

3:19postmodern world they pick and choose from from many different systems many of which collide and do not actually go

3:26here but there is a common view that we can identify today and it is this the human person has no greater design in

3:33the eyes of many so when you’re talking about humanity when you’re talking about men and women when you’re talking about

3:39little children there’s not a design that they conform to why because in the

3:44eyes of a secularist or a person influenced by it it being the reigning ideology of our day what many of our

3:51youth will get will hear in the classroom for example if they go to a State University today or a private

3:57school like I did we’re gonna they’re gonna hear that God did not create the human race right the human race evolved

4:04from gaseous substances that no one created that just happened to be here in

4:10the cosmos and those substances collided and in a long-term process evolved into

4:17greater and greater complexity over millions and millions of years there’s

4:22also an understanding of the human person that goes with this that is called the blank slate philosophy

4:28according to this philosophy which is often traced to the Enlightenment the 18th and 19th centuries in Europe

4:33the human person is a blank slate and thus there is not anything written into

4:39you there’s nothing in you that determines what you need to be again

4:45there’s no broader design there’s no script for your life you’re just you’re

4:51just atoms that have assembled in the particular configuration that they have there’s not anything you’re supposed to

4:57be in a secularist evolutionary framework there’s no accountability to a higher power there are no duties that

5:04you owe to anyone the only duty you owe in the mind of a postmodern thinker

5:09really is the duty and you’ve heard this in many different forms because we all have is the duty to be true to yourself

5:17to be authentic we hear that and it’s really a call to liberation isn’t it do

5:24you know what else it is it’s a sentence it’s a jail sentence how am I true to my

5:32truest self if I do not know who my self is it actually helps us forget the

5:43gospel forget conversion it actually helps us we begin to see to have somebody design us and give us a code

5:50and give us duties to do what nobody wants today those things are actually a

5:55blessing now we’re starting to bump up against how it might be a blessing for God to give his people his moral will

6:02perhaps even his law in an Old Covenant sense the law of Christ and a new covenant sense are you beginning to see

6:08this but all of that all that guidance all those boundaries that are drawn for

6:15us which are good all of that is dynamited today by this kind of thinking

6:20we should note an additional irony here before we dive into a quick survey of

6:26biblical passages on this very matter just laying foundation here okay

6:31transgender identity comes from the same general movement it’s called the sexual revolution you’ve heard about it 1960s

6:38it kicks off in California among other places and this movement interestingly early on promotes

6:45biologically driven feminism here’s another irony okay some of you are familiar with this you lived through

6:51this you know that the sexual revolution was the era in which the barriers fell and women supposedly you know attained

6:58equality with men in the workplace and these sorts of things complex matters to sort out to be sure but here’s the deal

7:03that we’re talking about now for our purposes now now this is like a snake

7:10that is eating itself because now the sexual revolution has spawned two ideas

7:16one from the 60s and one from the 2010s that are completely opposed one the

7:25feminist movement claiming that there is such a thing as womanhood that deserves according to a feminist paradigm to be

7:32promoted is the other contesting competing idea is that there is such a thing as transgender and that there

7:39really is no fixed understanding of womanhood or manhood so this is the strangest of

7:46ages this is what happens friends when you wander from the truth of God whether

7:53in a direct biblical sense or in a kind of traditional cultural sense that

7:58adhered in America for several centuries really all of that is now drifting off

8:04into the sea and we are confused The New Yorker no hard-right publication The New

8:12Yorker did a story that identify to their credit the very tension I just talked about the war that’s going on

8:20forget Christianity the war that is going on on the left between feminists

8:25and gender theorists who promote transgender theory this is not only my understanding of how this functions all

8:34of this means that we now find ourselves with an entirely different playing field than what a good number of you in this

8:40room though I see a lot of young faces as well which is really hardening a lot of you grew up with

8:46according to modern gender dogma again featured on the campuses near here and

8:53elsewhere across America on the west and this Dogma by the way is derived from no religious source

8:59it’s handed down from no divine figure but it’s all of a sudden taken as authoritative it’s really a new religion

9:06it’s what it is according to this dogma we all possess I’m gonna give you some terms okay and we’re about to dive in to

9:12this to the text we all possess a sexual orientation this will help us frame what we’re going to see in Scripture a sexual

9:19orientation is at base your enduring pattern of attraction that you have so

9:25if it’s towards the opposite sex opposite sex attraction same-sex same-sex attraction that’s the first

9:31term we need to mention we also have a gender identity this is your internal

9:36understanding of yourself as male/female a blend of these neither of these or

9:41something else entirely we talked about that a little bit this morning your gender identity in other words is how

9:47you perceive yourself and what you call yourself the identity you effectively choose for yourself

9:54you lifting your finger up into the wind to define and divining your authentic human self being true to who you are

10:02your gender expression is the next term this is the way that you present your chosen gender identity so things like

10:09the behavior that you that you practice the clothing you wear the haircut you

10:14have the voice you use to talk your anatomy is merely your genitalia and

10:22core physicality you possess per your birth sex so a little bit strange talk

10:29about these things in public but keep in mind here the key point is that you’re at your Anatomy is not necessarily your

10:35identity you get it you with me that is a very important thing to understand today the argument is not

10:41that we can know who we are by knowing our body which is what millennia of human people across basically every

10:49continent and every society believed now in our new moment Anatomy is severed

10:57really from gender identity at least it can be and then finally if you’re transgender the term of the night your

11:04gender identity and expression differ from your birth sex

11:10so reference this earlier but you perceive yourself to be a woman trapped

11:16in a man’s body you thus according to Planned Parenthood which is where I drew these from you

11:22thus our transgender your gender identity and expression differs from your birth sex we need to understand

11:31that this is a rising tide and this is not an isolated view if I give you any

11:40thought here tonight I want you to see that this is part of a broader framework

11:45that I am going to call neo-paganism

11:50neo-paganism I do not mean by this term druidic worship in tree-lined groves or

11:57something like this I I don’t necessarily mean cults with weird robes you know that you see by the side of the

12:04road all the road all those those can be as well I do mean by the term neo-paganism that you do not adhere to a

12:13Christian understanding of the body of sex and you adhere to this understanding of the identity of the human person as

12:20very much a work in progress more to come on that francis schaeffer years ago said this Christians have very gradually

12:27become disturbed over permissiveness pornography the public schools the breakdown of the family and finally

12:33abortion but they have not seen this as a totality each thing being a part a

12:39symptom of a much larger problem they have failed to see that all of this has come about he’s saying about the sexual

12:45revolution due to a shift in world view that is through a fundamental change in

12:50the overall way people think and view the world and life as a whole he wrote

12:57that in 1982 in his Christian manifesto what Schaeffer identify decades ago many

13:03individuals have yet to see Christianity is not contending with isolated cultural interests that that mitigate that work

13:09against a biblical ethic and thought system Christianity today contends with

13:15paganism paganism originates as we will see in ancient ancient times until we

13:21connect these strands we not truly understand transgender ideology and we thus will not be able to

13:28adequately respond to it okay we’ve put a lot on the table already but

13:35now we need to get some truth we need to go to the the text of Holy Scripture and

13:40we’re gonna look at five key texts that frame our understanding of transgender

13:46we’re gonna go fast I’m not camping out in one text this is more of a teaching session than a preaching one so we’re

13:51gonna look at these five and then I’ll have a few closing thoughts for you and then Q&A five texts that we need to look

13:58at this morning first as we covered this morning God makes male and female in

14:03Genesis 1 and 2 God makes male and female in Genesis 1 and 2 Genesis 1:27

14:10so God created man in his own image in the image of God he created him male and female he created them as we saw this

14:18morning this passage shows us that manhood and womanhood are essential properties there is such a thing as

14:25maleness there is such a thing as femaleness we do not see them as fluid we see them as fixed the fact that

14:33Genesis 2 reveals God as the maker of the sexes leaves us with the unmistakable conclusion that the sexes

14:40are called to live per God’s design in other words to not live as a man if you

14:49have the body of a man is to disobey God to to not live as a woman if you have

14:55the body of a woman is to disobey God what I have already said is profoundly

15:01controversial today not because I’m some brilliant theologian I’m not but because this is walking into the teeth of a

15:08neo-pagan culture most people around you at the grocery store at Trader Joe’s

15:15have not read a whole lot of neo-pagan philosophy they haven’t read a whole lot

15:20of any philosophy most of us don’t philosophy let’s be honest put you to sleep doesn’t it a good amount of the

15:25time but here’s the thing whether you’ve read lots of tomes philosophically or not some of you have

15:32some of you love that I enjoy it but whether you have are you haven’t you’re influenced by an

15:37androgynous culture young people in particular I see this at the Y in

15:43Parkville Missouri the heartland of America I’m shooting baskets something I

15:48love to do and there are young men now on a very regular basis who have their

15:53hair up in a ponytail they must have to borrow the hair tie from their sister I guess I don’t know how this works how

15:59you ask for that how that first conversation goes but it’s true it’s all around us isn’t it it’s so all around us

16:05now is to be normal we’re gonna have more to say specifically on that matter but I want you to see already that the Bible does

16:12not start from this this the the belief that there is no such thing as maleness

16:17and femaleness it starts from the opposite perspective second we talked about that at length we’ll just go

16:22quickly there the fall of Genesis 3 is an attack on God’s plan for the sexes

16:27it’s an attack on the sexes though we know the fall makes us all sinners you

16:33know that if you’ve grown up in the church you’ve heard that over and over and over again and praise God it’s true

16:39well we’re not happy it’s true but praise God you know the truth what we

16:45don’t hear about is that the fall is actually an attack on womanhood Eve and

16:52manhood Adam and the curse God gives is a gendered curse think about what

17:01happens in Genesis 3:1 through 13 we can’t read it for the interest of time but in Genesis 3:1 through 13 Satan

17:08taking the form of a serpent seeks nothing less than to overturn the order

17:13that God has established he is a creeping thing right the man and the

17:20woman are supposed to have dominion over him correct but what happens in Genesis

17:253 the creeping thing takes dominion over the woman and the woman leads her

17:32husband she acts as her husband’s authority and her husband commits the

17:38first act of passive anti leadership in human history he fails to protect his

17:45wife he fails to rebuke and stomp his boot on the Serpent’s head and instead

17:52the serpent deceives his wife and Adam all the way to the end does nothing in

17:58response he acquiescence this is not what the Lord designed Adam and Eve for

18:06we saw in Genesis 2 that the Lord had Adam named Eve named a shop from man

18:14taken out of man Adam had headship Ephesians 5 will inform us he had leadership he had

18:20authority in the home and he failed to use it so what Satan has done in Genesis

18:263 is successfully demolish God’s roles God’s order for the sexes and for all

18:36this earth and here in Genesis 3 is the ground of all sin and all confusion

18:43regarding our sexuality safe this way all the sin and brokenness that we taste

18:50in this cursed world is a result of the fall all the gender dysphoria all the

18:55transgender instincts that quiet little voice that encourages us to think that

19:02we are trapped in the body of the opposite sex all the actual cross-dressing

19:07all the androgynous clothing and in personal presentation that we do all of

19:12that stems from the fall this is it it all comes from there it begins in a

19:18darkened Eden third text we see in Deuteronomy 22 that god forbids

19:26cross-dressing in the Old Covenant law this is not a text that is preached you

19:33know in the wedding ceremony or something like this not what a preacher is usually when he’s on the itinerant

19:40circuit raising his hand to preach in the church but it is a vital text tucked

19:46away it Deuteronomy most most professing Christians don’t even read Deuteronomy

19:52but there’s gold if we will mine it Deuteronomy 22:5 a woman shall not wear a man’s garment nor shall a man put on a

19:59woman’s cloak for whoever does these things is an abomination to the Lord your God

20:07we don’t hear this text referenced much do we now this is Old Covenant law I’m

20:12not reading Deuteronomy as if it applies directly to the church I don’t believe it does but I do know that the new

20:18covenant law the law of Christ the law of love is built upon the foundation of

20:23the Old Covenant law look at this to wear the clothes of the opposite sex in

20:30ancient Israel like the Canaanites did and other pagan nations was to commit

20:36what wrongdoing against God getting a little scuffle with the divine will no

20:43an abomination was committed if a man put on a woman’s cloak this is because

20:51of what we referenced earlier it’s because God made men to look like men

20:57and women to look like women but the Israelites were pulled because of their

21:02sinful hearts away from the good and gracious and glorious design of God

21:08friends this is not new this issue is not new there’s new terminology transgender that’s not found in the

21:14Bible but this instinct is ancient this is the Old Covenant law this is Deuteronomy Jason DeRusha scholar John

21:23Piper’s seminary Bethlehem College and Seminary says it well those born boys are to live and thrive as boys this text

21:30teaches and those born girls are to live and thrive as girls when corrupt desires want to alter this course one must

21:36choose with God’s help the path that magnifies the majesty of God best and that path is defined in Deuteronomy 22

21:45verse five crucial verse for formulating

21:50a biblical understanding of the sexes yet one again that we rarely reference

21:57forth text were moving at rapid-fire speed in the new covenant Jesus affirms

22:03the goodness of man and woman in Matthew 19 Matthew 19 verse 3 turn with me there

22:10let’s hear Jesus speak to this issue in his own way matthew 19:3 and

22:17Pharisees came up to him and tested him by asking is it lawful to divorce one’s wife for any cause he answered have you

22:24not read that he who created them from the beginning made them male and female and said therefore a man shall leave his

22:29father and his mother and hold fast to his wife and the two shall become one flesh Genesis 2:24 so they are no longer

22:37two but one flesh what therefore God has joined together let not man separate

22:46what Jesus is teaching here is there is such a thing as we have been saying as I

22:52have been trying to spell out for you there is such a thing as manhood and there is such a thing as womanhood and

22:59marriage depends upon it so we do not have the freedom we do not have the ability to remake marriage people all

23:06around us are telling us we can and we should we even must you and I where

23:12we’re hearing today are the ones who are keeping society back from true progress

23:17and really the numbers who are doing so who are standing against the tide are dwindling it’s getting it’s getting

23:24whittled down it’s getting down to the religious it’s getting down to the seriously religious even amidst this

23:31seriously religious among younger Kevon Jellico’s conviction over these matters is

23:38diminishing but Jesus does not diminish what Genesis 2 teaches does he Jesus

23:46upholds it centuries after those words were written by Moses millennia after

23:53Jesus teaches that there is such a thing as a man and such a thing as a woman so

24:00we cannot say that Jesus has no perspective by the way this is what Christian transgender voices say trying

24:08to equip you I haven’t cited them in every case but this is what you will hear if you engage Christian voices on

24:15this matter that Jesus said nothing about transgender Jesus did not use the word transgender no the Bible does not

24:20use the word Trinity does it but there’s a Trinity in there isn’t there in the same way in the same way Jesus does not

24:27use the term transgender but he is teaching what we call an essentialist understanding of

24:32the sexist fifth and finally for our biblical survey Paul calls men and women

24:39to represent their given sex in 1st Corinthians 11 in this passage Paul

24:45affirms an order to earthly marriage that is dependent upon the order and functioning of the Godhead we see this

24:51in 1st Corinthians 11:3 Christ submitted to the Father’s will so a woman should

24:57submit to her head even as Christ submitted to his head God the Father the Apostle Paul also teaches that men and

25:04women are to present themselves in distinct ways who did Paul write this to

25:10the Corinthians who is a modern day corollary for corinth san francisco

25:17manhattan choose your place ancient corinth was a hotbed of what today would

25:26be termed progressive thought – Corinthian eyes somebody meant to absolutely strip them

25:32of their understanding of judeo-christian morality this sort of thing traditional morality and to make

25:38them into essentially a new creation that rejected norms for the culture the

25:44Corinthian Christians were encouraged in this culture to blur the lines of their

25:50sex of their maleness and their femaleness this is a complicated passage 1st Corinthians 11:3 2:16 nonetheless we

25:58learn here that a woman is to have longer hair we assume if that is

26:04possible right for her age we learned that a man is not to have long hair as the woman does because as Paul says in verse 14 it

26:11is a disgrace for him though if a woman has long hair verse 15 for scrin thien’s 11 it is her glory her hair is given her

26:19for a covering there’s debate about what exactly this means among evangelical scholars let that be said this passage

26:26is sparked a good deal of discussion but what I want you to see for this discussion of transgender and gender

26:32dysphoria is that an apostle of the Lord Jesus Christ has words to say about

26:39androgyny words that are the very same as what was given

26:44in the old covenant law what was what was nailed into place

26:50in the old covenant is only built upon in the new covenant so the Bible speaks

26:55with one voice two men presenting themselves as men and women presenting

27:00themselves as women what it by the way what a duty that is for us as fathers

27:06and mothers we really do have a high and holy calling we really do have a mission

27:11that honors God when we raise our boys distinctively as boys and girls distinctively as girls with this

27:19biblical survey complete now let me give you five quick applications on how we

27:25should respond today to transgender ideology five quick applications first

27:33we need to see that the Bible addresses cross-dressing and gender bending it very clearly addresses it studying the

27:41Old Covenant law and studying the New Covenant law as I said we see that the scripture speaks with one voice about

27:47our bodily presentation to embrace androgyny my friends is sinful it’s not

27:53godly it does not honor the Lord I am marching in the teeth of our culture I

27:58am even daring to place my nose in the wind of cool-kid evangelical thought but

28:06I am bothered not because I have the Word of God I have a greater authority I have a greater source you and I cannot

28:13baptized and drogyny as Christians we have to stand against it to embrace a

28:19transgender identity to call yourself transgender to give in to the lie that

28:25you are the wrong sex trapped in the body of the opposite sex is to sin against all-mighty God that means that

28:33we must repent on every occasion of a desire toward that end any thought along

28:40those lines is evil it’s wrong any action along those lines

28:45demands repentance that’s true however fleeting it is that’s true whether we meditate upon it for a long time or not

28:52these are strong words no but these are words based off of clear biblical teaching if first

28:59Corinthians 4 first contains 11 excuse me wasn’t in our Bible I think things might possibly look a

29:04little different but that text really matters for us as we have said second we

29:10have to see as believers that our desires run wild sin is not a neat and

29:18tame little reality sin is a wildfire sin destroys the unbeliever it’s not a

29:27nice manageable little condition for an unbeliever it sends people hurtling into

29:35an eternity without Christ where they suffer eternal damnation we’re not a

29:41soft church we haven’t stopped preaching Hellfire we preach the grace of Christ more than we preach Hellfire but we have

29:49not stopped preaching the bad news the bad news of our sinful condition is what

29:54makes us love the good news of the gospel the gospel is not an add-on it’s

30:00not something that improves your life and enhances your well-being the gospel is the wellspring by which you leave

30:06hell and you enter heaven running so the gospel is but there is bad news back

30:14there do you know what the Lord did two cultures and peoples that rejected his

30:20plan do you know what the Lord did to Sodom what the Lord did to Sodom is he

30:26left it smoldering that is a taste just a little teeny taste of the wrath to

30:33come revelation does not soften divine

30:38judgment this view this Marcie a night view that the Old Testament God is angry

30:45and the New Testament God is all love and good feelings suffers from biblical

30:52perspective because the images in Revelation terrify us they make us cry

30:59out to God in prayer for unbelievers our friends family members our neighbors

31:07our peers revelation ramps it up to an impossible degree the Christian does not

31:14take joy in this life in the judgment of the wicked do not miss hear me

31:20we are not eager for fire to fall afresh from heaven but we do understand that

31:26God has not gone soft we see that our desires run wild in Scripture they they

31:34put us on a track to divine judgment let the church never soften the Word of God

31:40where it speaks clearly paganism teaches us this paganism takes the wisdom of God

31:46and it replaces the wisdom of God with a new order an anti order alternate

31:54reality if you want a different term that is ruled by the devil in this anti order this alternate reality

32:01Satan’s reality there’s no creator there’s no divine design there’s no male

32:08nor female there’s no script for your sexuality there’s no God designed family

32:13with a father mother and children families whatever you make of it could be anything could be a throuple could be

32:20four different individuals living together and some kind of marriage relationship is not not made up that’s

32:26out there you can find it in this anti order there’s no need to protect and care for children at all in the womb or

32:33even out of the womb because children are just clumps of cells there’s no Savior there’s no Lord

32:40there’s no theistic end to the cosmos and there’s no judge of evil this is

32:46neo-paganism the theologian Peter Jones from Westminster West out here in

32:52California calls this what I have just sketched out the religion of one ISM everything is one in Christianity

32:59there’s a creator creature distinction in neo-paganism everything is one

33:06there’s no distinction between God and the cosmos there’s no moral duty to the

33:12god of the cosmos a pagan person in this line of thought then building off of

33:17what I just listed out distrusts hard-and-fast morality downplays absolute truth holds a

33:25self-generating view of existence and cosmological origins says that spirituality is a matter of internal

33:32alignment rather than obeying God that’s what I was talking about earlier with being your best self or your truest self

33:37or whatever this is you go on a spiritual quest to try and figure this many people have gone to the east for

33:43example over the decades last several decades to try and find who they who they truly are

33:48that’s what spirituality is this this person often seeks to be their best self

33:54and they see no higher purpose to death and the cosmos all of this means my

34:00friends that there is a new system a new worldview that is developing in our day in our age that is absolutely destroying

34:07fragile Protestantism fragile Catholicism fragile Judaism mainline

34:15religion which doesn’t teach much of anything anymore you know what many people in those pews

34:20are believing now this kind of system they’re they’re actually becoming advocates for the kind of neo-pagan

34:26ideology that we are talking about our desires run wild even as a believer you

34:31can’t manage sin sin is wildfire sin

34:38will cut a swath through you the thing you do with sin when you see how wild it

34:45is in you is you kill it that’s the language of the Apostle Paul in Colossians 3:1 through 11 mortify the

34:53flesh that famous text by John Owen the

34:59great Puritan theologian the mortification of sin let’s move out of a mindset of managing sin managing sin

35:09means you’re aware of it but you say something like well I’m so broken and

35:15messy and messed up that I don’t know I just can’t really get over my sin but I

35:20know it’s okay because God loves me and you know it’s alright and so young men

35:27stay trapped in absolute enslavement to pornography young women have no one who

35:34comes and pursues they languish and a host of other problems proliferate we need to kill our

35:41set not manage it not give it a home grace grace is not affirmative with

35:50sinners grace does not divine grace does not affirm the sinner not one bit

35:56god never says ungodliness is fine with me because you’re messy and you’re

36:01broken you know what grace is it’s something impossible better grace is transformative God comes to us and he

36:09says you are not what you should be none of us but I will transform you I will

36:15make you a new creation I will give you a new name I will give you a new nature

36:21I will make you part of the new man you are part of a new family you have a new

36:27name the name of Christ that’s what God does for all who are in Christ and God

36:33loves to take the worst sinner and make that person absolutely new such good

36:39news this is what grace does grace transforms God loves to take by the way respectable sinners and absolutely

36:46transform them and rescue them from the hell they are surely headed to just like the worst sinner God is so gracious but

36:54grace is not affirmative Grace is transformative it’s something impossibly

37:01better third Third Point to think about in the matter of transgender we have to

37:06handle individuals with care what I mean is this a proper Christian response to

37:13transgender identity entails speaking the truth and love what an important formulation we speak the truth but in

37:21love when a born-again believer encounters a person who believes they are trapped in the wrong body as they

37:28naturally are going to feel compassion now they’re also going to feel that something is wrong and something is

37:34wrong when I am at Target back in Missouri and I see cross-dressing happening as I did two weeks ago in the

37:42local grocery store my internal sense is that that is wrong Christian that is a

37:47correct response that is not right it’s rebellion against God but I need to much more see that

37:54this person is an image-bearer the image being tarnished by the fall and this

38:00person is in desperate need of the grace we were just talking about I need to love this person I need to pray for an

38:07opportunity not to torch them because they are wearing clothes of the opposite

38:12sex I understand that instinct but I need as a Christian to speak the gospel

38:18to them and yes to tell them the truth about who God made them to be we know

38:24where this instinct comes from it comes from sin when we are then dealing with people who are coming into the church

38:31who who experience gender dysphoria who feel pulled to an opposite sex identity

38:39or who claim that they are a third gender or something like this we need to approach them with compassion and care

38:45but that is never severed from the truth the truth is compassionate there’s

38:51nothing more compassionate you and I can do than to speak the truth Jesus Christ models this in his ministry

38:57he is the way the truth and the life this is going to mean then that we help

39:04such an individual see that that cross-dressing or whatever you want to call it is rebellion against God

39:12and it needs to cease this is going to mean that if surgery has happened or if

39:17drugs are being taken to alter the body and change it from God’s gift of one sex

39:23to another wherever that is possible wherever those effects can be rolled back safely they should be it’s going to

39:32mean renouncing a new name that has been chosen that it that a name that does not correspond again with the sex God gave

39:39this person it’s going to mean returning to the name that corresponds with their

39:46god-given sex this change means then that you leave behind compromised

39:51patterns of dress speech and identification it means that that men in

39:57this congregation are going to have to do Titus 2 work Titus 2 doesn’t just talk about women men are going to have to do mentoring

40:04work and take young men who have been absolutely ruined by this gender

40:09revolution and help them understand whether they’re called to marriage or singleness what it means to be a man

40:15because guess what in a fatherless age in an age riddled by divorce and broken families and ruined children problems

40:24that often correspond by the way with gender dysphoria young men don’t know

40:29how to be men and young women don’t know how to be women Titus 2 is going to mean

40:34that older women take younger women aside and train them and compassionately

40:40help them in these matters none of this means sort of football coach browbeating

40:45of people who experience gender dysphoria we we are a common Hospital as

40:52the Puritans used to say for all that ails the human person spiritually it

40:57does mean that we treat these matters first through biblical truth and then we

41:03work out how now this person can return to their god-given identity forth as

41:11fathers and mothers we have to train our children well we should not permit our

41:17children to dress in the clothing of the opposite sex if children in your family if your if

41:23your nieces and nephews if your cousins want to do this or if it’s beyond the

41:28family of friends that you you love and have a strong relationship with have children who are starting to do this to

41:35gender bent you should lovingly compassionately and convictional II pray

41:41for an opportunity to address this and then often the answer to our prayer in terms of a gospel opportunity is then to

41:48begin speaking isn’t it it’s amazing how that often works God wants us to open

41:53our mouths and speak we’re going to need to do that brothers and sisters there’s going to be more wreckage from the

42:01sexual revolution that is unfolding all around us neo-paganism driving it not less this is a tremendous opportunity

42:09this is a tremendous opportunity for us though to speak truth we should not

42:14raise our children then just so clear in a gender-fluid way we should

42:19raise them according to their god-given sex we can admit some gray areas we can

42:25definitely admit some tough questions along these lines and you have elders in your local church pastors who love you

42:32for a reason consult them they have wisdom from God but we need to know these foundational

42:39realities I think at the outset training your children well in this respect does

42:45not mean by the way that you can guarantee that they will follow the Lord all the way to glory it does not mean

42:51that there are children who are raised in strong Christian homes where the

42:57father and mother taught the truth and lived according to it where they loved their children where

43:03they spent time with their children and yet those children stray they wander

43:09they do not choose God’s good plan for sexuality they they do not enter into

43:14marriage and a sexual relationship that glorifies the Lord they instead choose to live according to the lusts of the

43:21flesh and I want you to know if that is you if that has happened in your family

43:27you you definitely were not a perfect parent I’m not a perfect parent none of us are but ultimately even though you

43:35trained those children as best you could you cannot save your children can you

43:40that is up to the Lord God Almighty his sovereign over every molecule of the cosmos including the heart of your child

43:47so for some of you this is going to be hard it may be a long struggle but

43:54you’re going to have to know that God’s grace is sufficient and you leave these matters in his hands praying all the way

44:02for true repentance and faith v and lastly we should know that we are going

44:09to face hard questions in the public square do you know what it’s hard to

44:15live in Babylon it’s not easy I’m not trying to say we’re quite there yet I

44:20don’t think we are I don’t want to be over the top but I can see some I can

44:25see some overlap with Babylon ancient Babylon and the press they experience of the Christian it’s

44:31gonna be difficult for you I know where I’m gonna get some questions in the Q&A I would imagine I will I get them

44:36whenever I speak on this are speaking spoken on this topic excuse me in numerous churches and conferences and

44:42and I often get questions about how to balance being a witness while loving

44:47people and those are good questions there is no perfect answer it is

44:54difficult to live in Babylon or a Babylonian equivalent it’s not easy

45:00friends listen to me it’s going to be difficult to speak up at work it’s going

45:05to be difficult to be a senior vice president of a major company and hold to

45:10this kind of ethic in days ahead you see this at Walmart for example Walmart in

45:15Arkansas has a very progressive board it’s getting very hard to be a Christian in companies like this at the top

45:23echelon this is what I hear from from folks firsthand it’s going to be difficult to be on the school board it’s

45:30going to be difficult to be a public school teacher god bless you if you’re a public school teacher living witness in

45:35the public school but it’s not going to get easier you may well be faced with a

45:40choice to tell the truth or to keep your job but that’s what I’m trying to say

45:46that that senior vice-president a min ago this may mean a million dollar salary or telling the truth for Christ

45:52let’s be honest it may mean that for you I don’t know what else to tell you but I

46:00do know this why should we expect that it would be easier for you and me than

46:07it was for Esther Reid Esther reread it was that an easy bill of affairs for

46:14that young woman of God no it was desperately difficult how easy was it

46:22for Daniel and his friends we know the courageous part we know they defied the

46:30pagan rulers who ruled over them but forget that for just a minute okay it

46:35was still difficult to live in a pagan country for an extended period of time

46:41brothers and sisters if America continues in this way or if you live somewhere else and days to come

46:47it will be difficult for you but we have

46:52something greater it’s in a call to convenience ease high salary stable home

46:58life whatever it may be we we have the call of Christ you have a cross on your

47:05back though you may not always remember it we certainly forget don’t we we all do we have a cross on our back there’s

47:14no silver bullet psychological means to either zap your family member who is

47:21straying and see them turn around or to resolve all the tensions of being a

47:27Christian in a hostile workplace school what have you there’s no silver bullet

47:35there’s simply fidelity to Christ let’s not forget the Spirit of the martyrs

47:40we’re almost done here let’s not forget that men and women who had plans for

47:45their lives much like you and I do who wanted grandchildren who had grandchildren they walked into

47:53Coliseum’s in front of thousands of people jeering at the drunken craving

48:01death for that and they were torn to pieces by beasts this isn’t over the

48:07topper extreme this is the history of the Christian Church don’t forget that

48:12the Apostle Paul and the Apostle Peter were according to scripture and tradition killed for the faith

48:19don’t forget the lord of the church Jesus Christ people say if we could be

48:26more christ-like we would figure out the best way to have a public witness so so

48:31we could retain our influence and even increase our cultural influence in the sectors of power but not die

48:38the only flaw with that argument is what happened to Jesus they put him on a

48:44cross and Jesus had a perfect public witness are you seeing the point I’m trying to make I’m not trying to

48:50discourage you I’m trying to tell you there’s no silver silver bullet here there is fidelity

48:56to Christ what I want to leave you with as we conclude is this in all the scenarios we have discussed there there

49:05is the Bible that is sufficient for these things you’re gonna face tough

49:11questions in the days ahead do you go to the gay wedding there’s not a Bible verse on this I would say no fairly strong no but I know

49:19that that’s gonna be that kind of difficult matter for you in your witness it may end your witness effectively with

49:26those people who invited you to the wedding that’s difficult do you use the

49:31preferred pronouns of a transgender identifying person this is a tough one good evangelicals who disagree you may

49:39in the same way that if somebody unlawfully divorces and unlawfully according to God gets remarried

49:45you probably don’t call them when you see them by the old name do you you see what I’m saying probably call them by

49:51the new married name just saying so there is there are at least some grounds for not calling them by the original

49:57name they had original pronouns should you keep your kids in the public school when it’s teaching effectively a form of

50:04neo-paganism I don’t know some of you may I understand some of you want your

50:10kids to be a witness I get that some of us however are going to take our kids out of that environment my kids are

50:15homeschool I understand both there’s not a Bible verse on this I want the church to seek unity wherever it can have it

50:21and not make Bible verses where they do not exist it’s hard enough to obey the ones we have I do want you to see with

50:29all these hard questions stated this there is no separate hope for a transgender person there is no separate

50:35gospel for people of the LGBT Lobby the

50:40gospel of Jesus Christ is the hope of every sinner of every kind transgender

50:46then is not primarily a physical problem or a psychological problem transgender

50:52is primarily and essentially a spiritual problem and I want you to see that you

50:58are not here by accident just like Esther and Daniel you are here for such a time as this

51:05don’t pray that you’ll be so unfortunate as to come across people who are sinning and suffering in these ways from their

51:12sin pray that you will encounter people of this type that you will see fellow

51:18sinners who are broken by their sin the root of transgender is the fall of Adam

51:23the cure is the cross of Christ let’s pray

51:28Heavenly Father I pray for strength to live according to what we have talked about we we have covered such weighty

51:37matters this morning and tonight Lord and I honestly I feel my own inadequacy to answer these things

51:44father I pray for these dear men and women who want to be faithful to you I pray that you would give us your church

51:50tremendous wisdom tremendous compassion tremendous love tremendous conviction

51:55and truth in days like this the times are evil Lord but you have called us to

52:00stand you have called us to strengthen what remains help us to do so in Jesus

52:05name Amen

52:19thanks Owen we appreciate that and just gonna take about ten minutes here before

52:26we head out and see if we can squeeze a couple of questions and Owen can I opened up the kind of worms towards the

52:31end addressing some of those issues and we realize in the in the time we’ve got we can only kind of touch on some of the

52:39highlights and want to see if we can maybe squeeze a couple of other insights out of him number one pretty easy given

52:46you only had you know 15 minutes donar tonight Rackham and maybe some resources

52:51couple of books that you think you’ve find helpful maybe something you’ve contributed to and is there some

52:59websites or organizations you think trustworthy on this issue I appreciate the question the Council on

53:04Biblical manhood and womanhood is a great resource CBM wrog there’s a very

53:10good book called transforming homosexuality transforming homosexuality by Danny Burke and Heath Lambert that I

53:17would recommend to you on both homosexuality and transgender I have

53:23written a book with a guy named Gavin peacock who formerly was a soccer star in the UK the English Premier League

53:29now is a pastor and the book that we wrote is called the grand design and it talks about the things I discussed this

53:35morning and also tonight we have a chapter on homosexuality and transgender so you could you could buy the grand

53:41design if you wanted to I also run a center at Midwestern seminary where I teach called the center for public

53:48theology the website address is cpt dot mbts edu cbt MBTs edu feel like i’m

53:55running a car sale right here but not i’m trying to give you the website address come on cut me a break though

54:01those are some those are some resources and then there’s there’s the classic book on Biblical manhood and womanhood

54:08edited by Piper and grudem and I would commend that to you for a kind of foundational study throughout you talk

54:15tonight when you talk to buy you know not pleased EOS tees nothing new Under the Sun Kenna new for us because we’ve

54:21enjoyed a kind of you know Christian heritage here in the United States and

54:27that we’re seeing that kind of rolled back and so there’s this kind of nuit of new paganism but nothing new Under

54:33the Sun you took us to you know the letter to the Romans a letter the Corinthians the church’s fierceness so

54:39it’s nothing new what would you say does someone sail then you know ignore it let’s get on with evangelism

54:45discipleship what’s going on in society we don’t control man will wax worse and

54:50worse and you seem to have a ministry addressing the public issues of today

54:57theologically quickly navigate that should we ignore these issues publicly and they’re a fact on society and just

55:04get on with bare-bones evangelism try and get people saved what’s going on in the wider society

55:09hey that’s I said our purview what do you say yeah I would say the first commandment is to love God with all our

55:16being as we know Matthew 22 but then there’s a second commandment and it’s to love our neighbor as ourselves that’s

55:23obviously a broad-ranging command but I think part of loving your neighbor is seeking your neighbors good there

55:30they’re flourishing they’re thriving so standing against evil every chance you get you know if something is is

55:37happening a block over if you hear a terrible outbreak occurring you should

55:43run as a Christian I think to that and try to stop it well if you’re doing that physically you know if a conflict or

55:49something a marital squabble why would you not do that at the societal level why would you not stop try to stop lend

55:57your voice to stopping for example abortion somebody might say well that’s a political issue well it’s also a anama

56:04go day issue babies are being slaughtered in our midst and and we have to speak up about these things one model

56:11for this is is John the Baptist in Matthew 14 John the Baptist is the foreteller

56:17of the Messiah so that’s a very spiritual mission right announced that the Messiah’s here how does John the

56:24Baptist lose his head he loses his head because he tells a Roman governor that

56:31he should stop committing adultery just to simplify and that governor dislikes

56:38John as a result doesn’t want to kill him but dislikes him and and the woman Herod is committing adultery with hates

56:43John and so finagles the situation too to have John the Baptist not only imprisoned but

56:49beheaded and then she takes her hairpin and stabs his tongue with it so quite an ending for the tongue of

56:54John the Baptist symbolic John the Baptist lost his life in other words to bring this to a close though to a point

57:00because of his theology of marriage but just I want to piggyback off that I

57:07agree with that I think I agree with that common grace address and a neighbor yeah but if you take the John Bob the Synology shoot our

57:13expectations be we’re gonna be a voice in the wilderness we’re not going to transform society but we are going to be

57:20true to ourselves to the revelation of God and perhaps is that our ministry it will be more of a voice in the

57:26wilderness not this sweeping transforming society or getting us back to the good old days what what’s your

57:32expectations for your ministry my expectation is not that everybody’s gonna fall at our feet and and just

57:38receive our vision as the vision although I will say Christianity has

57:44proved fairly persuasive in different cultures and societies I mean you think about America Christianity has thrived

57:49in this place and it has meant that Evan Jellicle ism is a global powerhouse sending out more missionaries in human

57:55history from this country so I don’t want to soft-pedal that I also want to say like a William Wilberforce I mean he he sets

58:01out he has the the great end of his life to end slavery in in Britain and the

58:07slave trade and and he sees it done so we don’t want to clip our wings I think

58:12I also think though we also have to recognize that Wilberforce was somewhat unique we don’t usually see ends to such

58:22terrible sins as he did so I think we need a balanced perspective not that if if we just plant 10 more churches in

58:28let’s say Oh see you know oh she’s gonna become Christian you know within 5 years that’s I I don’t buy that kind of vision

58:35of transforming culture I do think you know if you can plant 10 churches or whatever and be faithful disciples from

58:41this church that’s gonna have an impact and who knows where it’ll go even as we don’t you know inflate the

58:46balloons you touched on the school issue I believe here in Orange County that the

58:51school board at least at the moment voted against the new curriculum that would have brought up by a

58:57almost an indoctrination on these issues to school children but you know that may just be a stamina of the tide to come

59:04back to that I I appreciate it your emphasis on conscience and each family alone with friends or pastors

59:10finding different levels but there are in our church families wrestling with

59:15kids in the public school were what is some of the lines where they were where

59:21were you know throwing our kids to the wolves where do we become complicit with that

59:28just give us some your thinking and on some of the lines that you need to think through were at some point you may have

59:35come to a place around crossing the line I’m uncomfortable so try and think through the public school education

59:41system is it is it not wrong to put your kid in a classroom where they’re gonna

59:46hear a different view than they hear at home like you might argue Daniel got in Babylon or Moses got in Egypt um so

59:53think that I’d love for people dealing with that I I tried to speak carefully because I want my humble little ministry

1:00:02to stand for that clear and bold hopefully proclamation of what is clearly there in Scripture but then a

1:00:10carefulness where there’s not a text or a principal so here on this issue of

1:00:16public school I think we have to know that we have these precious children entrusted to us we have to form their

1:00:23worldview we have to form their heart if we can be confident that the public school will not do damage to them not

1:00:30only by the teaching by the way but by their peers so very important our children learn as much by osmosis as

1:00:37they do by instruction and I think a good number of Christians are going to conclude in days ahead if trends

1:00:43continue that this is going to be tough to keep my child under this influence I

1:00:48don’t want to draw you know a hard line though because some school districts are better than others and some schools have

1:00:54lots of Christians in them and have current Christian Headmaster’s and principals and this or then god bless them and so I don’t want to say a

1:01:01blanket statement here I do just want to say though our burdens should not be on

1:01:07our seven-year-old being a missional witness to said elementary school pray that that

1:01:13may be the case yes but our burden should be to protect this child I think I think we protect the child

1:01:21we don’t shelter but we protect them and then Lord willing when they are high school maybe college age I think they

1:01:27are much better equipped if they’ve had a solid church and if they’ve had good parental instruction to be that kind of

1:01:33witness I just don’t know that my my six-year-old my four year old is ready for that spiritual warrior that’s right

1:01:40let me piggyback off that in terms of you know on the positive side Song of

1:01:46Solomon on this actual issue says that’s not a weak and love before time on the other hand again we don’t want to weaken

1:01:53our children to a sense of the awfulness of sin they’re sinners they’re aware of that we’re were that but there’s a

1:01:58there’s a level of that they’re they’re they’re a cub more than a full-blown lie you know Tiger went when think that I’d

1:02:05for parents when you begin to make your kid or were should they not be a word that this kind of stuff’s going on for

1:02:12you when you know how do you think that out of high and when to address these issues with our children I think it’s

1:02:18kind of funny that you’re asking me that because I kind of would like your wisdom on that but I’ll but I I you ask me so

1:02:24you you you’re getting the honorarium tonight so it’s on you I’ll do it

1:02:31another day I would I would say can you

1:02:37ask that again I’m sorry yeah megatrend simplified you know I agree with that

1:02:44and then you know trying to protect her children yes yes and in the other hand you don’t we don’t to bring up a kid

1:02:50that’s not right or not not you know aware of the world around them yes on

1:02:56this issue it’s it’s becoming so pervasive is it isn’t is it not gonna be hard to avoid them meeting a child like

1:03:03this either at school on the street in the family circle right when and how do you address it yeah that with a with a

1:03:09child so important uh I am praying for wisdom and trying to do my best on this

1:03:15matter and it’s confusing and tough so let that be said and I feel that tension I am I am though if I’m at Target for

1:03:22example like I said and there is somebody cross-dressing and my kids notice it here’s kind of what we’re

1:03:28talking about a minute ago public you know we are protecting you darn sure better protect those children God has

1:03:33given you but we’re also not exactly we’re not sheltering Gerald in in the you know in the sense that we pretend

1:03:38the world isn’t fallen we introduced them carefully over time don’t we but you know my kids are noticing this

1:03:44is what I’m trying to say I don’t have to do a lot of pedagogy here when I’m at Target and say look at this you know

1:03:50what I need to do is when they raise questions with me I’m sorry I didn’t

1:03:57mean that to be funny but we are we are losing it here well when they raise I

1:04:03think my girls notice because I went good night yeah just just me that to

1:04:12that two-word answer was more succinct than this this babble I give the game away but I would say I would say when

1:04:18they raised those when they raise those questions daddy why is why is that person dressed like that dead serious I

1:04:23will talk to them about it I don’t say oh look over there teddy but I say I say that’s because sin is real and I’ve

1:04:32talked about these concepts with them you know sin and and part of the way we sin Ella Gavin Ainsley my children is we

1:04:40sin by not not appearing the way God wants us to appear and we don’t always

1:04:46love our body and obey God in our body it’s not a perfect answer right but I’m

1:04:51trying to build that that theology and then parenting is not supposed to be as a pet experience right I mean it’s

1:04:58supposed to be line upon line with Jason read this morning it’s line upon line it’s every time you go out in the field

1:05:03with your son it’s so hopefully we do that kind of instruction overtime in it yeah forms multiply in the years you

1:05:10mean postures deal with this and I’m sure it’s even the kiss was some tonight you know I don’t like kids get up adult

1:05:17the embrace this lifestyle out of the will of God how do you interact I often

1:05:23think about first Corinthians were Paul said if it’s a brother you know you got to put a distance between yourself and

1:05:28him yeah if it’s someone in the world you need to go out of the world so let’s get serious you’re gonna interact with people all the time your right side the

1:05:35will of God flagrant then there’s I think the issue is that not in social interaction both at a family level at

1:05:42the workplace where do we become complicit with the sin so have you any

1:05:48practical patterns or thinking for a parent that’s got a grown child who’s

1:05:54you know homosexual LGBT or whatever transgender how do they deal with if

1:05:59they want to bring a partner back to the house and a social occasion for dinner you said about what did they go to a

1:06:05wedding talk that out a little bit cuz that’s that’s where people yeah are

1:06:10dealing and at that point this is Paul saying hey if they’re an unbeliever

1:06:15right and that’s my assumption in the kiyose we’re animals because they they couldn’t be living like that and be a

1:06:21believer but if they’re an unbeliever no you know can you go to the wedding like

1:06:26you’d go to maybe a wedding where it began in premarital sex yeah I think that out a little there’s a

1:06:34lot there to unspool but i would say you know with a let’s say there’s a

1:06:41pedophilic arrangement or something like this a man and a little boy and and that becomes legal in the West mmm can I go

1:06:49to that wedding I cannot that’s not to exactly equate homosexuality with pedophilia but it is

1:06:56to say that both behaviors are depraved and and will occasion God’s judgement if not repented of and so I cannot be party

1:07:04to that kind of wedding I think with it like the child coming home who has some

1:07:11kind of homosexual relationship yes if you have drawn the lines clearly and if you have communicated to your child that

1:07:16you do not see them to be a Christian I think I think you probably can and probably should be a witness to them

1:07:23praying all the while I think you should I think you should always be trying to

1:07:29communicate love to your child who is straying but I also think that that never means softening the truth and so

1:07:36your child should know the truth and I want to say this because this is probably where this goes for family

1:07:41members and friends speaking the truth may cut the relationship off I had words

1:07:47to this effect I feel the need to repeat it that may and did you suit him saying that may end

1:07:53evangelism you get that yeah but I believe you are doing what is right by

1:07:59declaring the truth of the gospel by calling a sinner out of sin I do not think you and I God is going to hold us

1:08:06responsible on the last day the great throne of judgment too to have figured out the absolute perfect 19 step

1:08:13intellectual and experiential plan for evangelism I think we tie ourselves in knots trying to be witnesses do you know

1:08:20what I think we need to do is witnesses I think we need to speak the truth and we need to love the person as much as we

1:08:25can without approving their sin and then we need to let God sort it out there is

1:08:32God has not placed it in your hands just to unlock the key of that person’s heart the gospel is the means of God of

1:08:40salvation do we believe that or not but we have to know there’s going to be a

1:08:45cost we have to know people are going to hate us we have to know people may spit in our face literally we have to know we

1:08:51may lose our job if we tell the truth but but God has placed us here for such

1:08:56a time as this I think I’ve heard this from young people and think in white are evangelicals won’t address it you could

1:09:02add a verse earlier use the word abomination where whereas Protestants were not Catholic in our view of mortal

1:09:08sin venial sin all sin is mortal okay it leads to death according to James 1 yeah

1:09:14but is there an abhorrence and in a nature to these kind of sins we see that

1:09:22seems to be identified in Romans 1 is almost the threshold of us of a society that’s bottom II night would you like to

1:09:28address that theological is a theologian all sinasohn all sin is mortal but are

1:09:34there some sins that you can make a distinction over and is this one of those sins it has an abdominal aspect to

1:09:41it yes I believe that firmly from Romans 1:18 to 32 I believe that a decadent

1:09:48sexual culture a neo-pagan sexual culture is not only inviting God’s

1:09:54judgment it is experiencing God’s judgment sexual decadence his judgment

1:10:0160 million babies aborted is judgement there will be much greater

1:10:08judgment to come but that his judgment on a society and it is very clear in the

1:10:14Pauline mind in Romans 1:18 to 32 that homosexuality for example follows a

1:10:21trajectory that involves the rejection of what Paul calls nature which is what

1:10:27we were talking about in terms of design if we reject God’s design for our

1:10:33manhood or our womanhood if we then go further and embrace sexual lust toward

1:10:39the same sex and if we then glorify to go further and glorify that and promote

1:10:45that and teach that to children which is absolutely what is happening we are keeping up judgment upon ourselves and

1:10:53so yes that is where we we are we Americans think that we are first world

1:10:59and we are a barbaric people we are a decadent people it doesn’t make me hate

1:11:05my fellow Americans it makes me weep for them and hopefully pray for them because

1:11:12again they are being judged that’s all it’s the old Billy Graham line isn’t it the mean if God doesn’t judge America

1:11:18soon he needs to apologize to Sodom and Gomorrah I mean that’s kind of kind of kind of where we’re at all sin is sin

1:11:24but in that sense can’t you make that subtle distinction between you know

1:11:31sexual sin that is according to nature and sexual sin that is against yes sir

1:11:37you can and that’s where if a if a young couple guy and girl is struggling

1:11:43physically as is fairly common today not

1:11:48a lot of teaching on holiness and these sorts of things in churches grace driven holiness then and just the natural lusts

1:11:55of the flesh break down to the family if that’s happening we are we aren’t telling that young couple there’s

1:12:03there’s no forum for this kind of activity we’re actually telling them if

1:12:08it’s appropriate if they’re you know ready that marriage is God’s gift so I think what I’m trying to say is you have

1:12:14to handle this with care but there are a lot of people today who bound up in sexual sin whether pornography or in a relational sense

1:12:21right we’re talking about heterosexuals here now for the moment and and they need to get married it won’t solve the

1:12:26problem of lust marriages does not cancel out loss don’t ever think that but do know that God has fashioned a ton

1:12:33of us most of us I would say not to be single not not to stay in the state but

1:12:39to be married first Corinthians 7 verse 20 and 7 and and not burning will be

1:12:45helpful so I think that the rock I keep doing this where I know you say it and I

1:12:51don’t know what’s coming I’m gonna stop on that yeah that profound note I know

1:12:59we’re over time let give me a couple of minutes to squeeze a couple of thoughts you and I talked a little bit there’s an interesting trend even among some

1:13:05theologians that and I get where they’re going I’m not sure where it’s gonna end is it it’s this kind of construct

1:13:14temptation is not sin until you give in to the temptation therefore if I have

1:13:20seem socks attraction or you know some kind of gender to some perverted sexual

1:13:27you know temptation but if I don’t give in to that I haven’t sinned yeah and and

1:13:32I mean some have confessed that even some pastors are writing hey I have the same sex attraction but I haven’t given

1:13:38do it so I’m still within the will of God I get what they’re trying to say but is there are there subtle dangers and yes

1:13:44I’m thankful to hear as you are of anyone who has broken with outright

1:13:50homosexual practice what are sometimes called side B Christians in the gay Christian discussion for example as a

1:13:55major conference held in Missouri my state called reavoice that raised this very issue so it was a side B conference

1:14:03where these people again these speakers had had renounced homosexual practice relationships marriage this sort of

1:14:08thing that’s good we affirm that I don’t think you get a gold star for that I think you’re only obeying the will of God but but I I’m thankful to hear that

1:14:15but I don’t think that’s far enough I think to retain a gay Christian identity or a transgender Christian identity it’s

1:14:23is sinful that’s that’s my belief I’m writing in a for of you know these for abused books I’m writing in a for views

1:14:30bow on transgender and it’s for professing Christians who some of whom are making

1:14:36the case for transgender Christianity just know this is where we are in 2018

1:14:42there’s seriously I think there’s going to be a pedophilic Christianity down the road a bestiality Christianity that

1:14:48sounds crazy talk I don’t think it is we are we are we are

1:14:53corrupted right now as a movement we are not in a good place I think I think

1:14:59you’re right in terms of your identity and in terms of even your fleeting momentary desires if they are fixed on

1:15:07something bad you should repent of them so I am a married man if I desire

1:15:16sexually a woman I’m just going to talk straight here if I desire sexually a woman who is not my wife that is a wrong

1:15:21end there’s no context in other words where this desire is glorifying to God I must repent of that desire even if it’s

1:15:28quick or if it’s 5 seconds or if it’s not something I play out or act on I should repent we should repent of desire

1:15:36not only of action we are not Roman Catholics we do not believe sin lies only in the the voluntary acts of the

1:15:43will we believe sin is we are pervasively depraved and corrupted so that means a lot of repentance sometimes

1:15:49people will say to us well you’re putting a burden around the neck of the same-sex attracted by saying this no I’m

1:15:55not I or if I am the same burden is around my neck continual confession and

1:16:01repentance this is this is what we signed up for as Christians quick question when I was

1:16:08at Trinity Walt Kaiser is a very respected theologian who I enjoyed

1:16:13immensely suggested something I find very thoughtful and provocative but not

1:16:18exactly sure what they did he believes in some way as we lost the homosexual argument because as Christians we fought

1:16:23only on the grounds of special revelation and he says look that’s our sweet spot that’s where our authority is

1:16:30that’s where God’s mind is spoken but in terms of any other natural law or common

1:16:35grace is there a place for us in these arguments also to show that you know our

1:16:41first defense is the Bible but should we be also pointing eye from history or I bought a book recently

1:16:47: hari became Sol it’s a secular book I haven’t get reading it yet but this guy is just an unknown he’s a believer but

1:16:54he’s showing that there’s no consensus in the medical world right of fluidity of sexuality right so talk a little bit

1:17:02about the interaction between reason and revolution and are they allies with each other great great questions yeah

1:17:08the here’s a very sobering and an awful statistic but the the suicide rate for

1:17:14individuals who experience gender dysphoria is about twenty times higher that of the general population

1:17:19that’s actually very debated stat because the the pro-lgbt side will say

1:17:25that’s proof that the culture is heat we me you are heaping shame on transgender

1:17:32individuals and and so they’re leaving themselves Russian I would say however knowing knowing the Word of God that no

1:17:39they are living in that shame that we talked about this morning they are just embracing the wind and confusion and

1:17:46depravity and that only leads you to despair in a profound way that’s a stat right that it’s not in the Bible but I

1:17:53believe tells us something same same thing with this morning men on average I’m gonna repeat this I hope you shared

1:17:59this with somebody this week men on average of a thousand percent more testosterone than women right something

1:18:05that is absolutely a mind-boggling reality that makes sense honestly of a

1:18:10fair bit of what I experienced as a man and what my wife experienced yeah [Music]

1:18:16I agree and that reaction startled me

1:18:24just full circle so yes stats like that

1:18:32yeah I think corroborates us we can’t use things to show again that you know

1:18:39something God’s common grace you know good thinking and good common sense

1:18:45always squares with revolution all truth is God’s truth all wisdom any wisdom

1:18:51from a stoic philosopher to a self-help guru if there’s actual wisdom there it’s

1:18:56actually God’s wisdom I don’t mean the system I mean the the line the thought so we plunder the Greeks and the Romans

1:19:02and even the pagans because we know where truth is if some doctor has a

1:19:07study you know that backs up these truths whatever his ideology my ideology

1:19:13as if I could talk I’m plundering that yeah well look we’ve but I have other questions but we are

1:19:19way over time we are in your debt on we’ve enjoyed your company your

1:19:24preaching your heart

1:19:36dude do tip do take a look at some of the written material who won we’ve got

1:19:41Donnie Burke coming next year right yeah next spray just put it right there we’ve got a marriage conference family

1:19:48conference and Danny Burks coming he’s written the book you rock what was the book you were transforming homes for my homosexuality and I think you wrote

1:19:55another one right on marriage meaning of sacks so we’re thrilled to have him so just get that into your thinking join us

1:20:01in the spring God willing for that and we’ll continue to try and bring in speakers and thinkers it will just help

1:20:10us think this site so let me pray and then I think we’re going to go out onto the patio and enjoy some eats and also

1:20:17for you that of children and our children’s ministry you do not get to eat until you get your your kids you’re

1:20:25not can I just say thank you for listening to this this was a lot of material today that’s all thank you thank you

1:20:31[Applause]

1:20:38let’s pray Lord you’ve given us food for thought

1:20:43bread from heaven truth to chew on and

1:20:50think through and mad at the Adhan man shall not live by bread alone but by every word that proceeds from the mouth

1:20:57of God help us indeed to renew our thinking in the scripture so easy to

1:21:04drink from the fountain of the culture so easy to find ourselves slipping

1:21:09without realizing it because we ingest the media and the world views all around

1:21:15us help us to guard our hearts for out of it flows the issues of life to bring

1:21:20every thought into captivity to submit our lives our feelings our desires to

1:21:26the Word of God and we thank you that we can know liberty in the power of the

1:21:32Spirit of God and our sins can indeed be

1:21:37broken in the part of the gospel and the part of the resurrected Christ them so

1:21:44help us to think hard and long and be better witnesses and those who can

1:21:49articulate the will of God which is a reflection of his glory thank you for

1:21:54the eats we’re about to enjoy for each other and for a good use of the Lord’s Day for we pray these things in Jesus

1:22:01name oh man you’re dismissed

1:22:13you