"The Science of Information" (Chiara Marletto's "The Science of Can & Can't" (A prelude to Ch 3)
In this the fourth episode about Chiara Marletto's excellent work "The Science of Can and Can't" I discuss the science of information. Chapter 3 of the book is called "Information" but in this episode I do not actually read from the book. This is a broader overview of issues in epistemology, folk philosophy, physics and mathematics that have some connection to the topic of "information". I thought these might be useful contextual remarks before leaping into reading the book. That will happen next episode. ... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s8uTVbdjMy8
For anyone new to these ideas, here's an introduction to some of the foundational ideas of Karl Popper. This is neither exhaustive nor authoritative (excuse the pun) and is meant to pick up on some key themes in Popper's work and perhaps encourage a deeper exploration of his ideas and philosophy.
...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IQdykOFqsB0
Although I do not explicitly mention it, this entire episode was motivated by a Sam Harris “meme post” found here: https://www.instagram.com/p/B-sWqk5n1Zh/?utm_medium=copy_link
The claim that appears there (which reads “The free market is not producing effective responses to our most important problems” is emblematic of an intellectual culture that now holds sway not only in the academy but broadly in public discourse and, of course, it is readily consumed by people hungry for simple solutions and perversely promoted by business people afraid of their left-leaning customers.
In this episode I spend time on a very brief historic analysis of the motivation for such rejections of freedom and capitalism (which we must admit are relatively new creations when put beside ancient tribalism) and I look at some of the failures of central planning or rejection of the free market. I agree with those who say “there is no actual capitalism” there are merely degrees of socialism in existence. Where there is freedom in a socialist framework, to the degree there is freedom: wealth grows. And to the degree there are top down controls: poverty increases.
I regard this as an opportunity cost to some extent. It should not be necessary to defend the fundamentals of economic systems that allow for wealth creation and problem solving. But we live in a time where, for various reasons, a neo-Marxist move is on the ascendency. On that: I also voice concerns I have about allies on the side of liberty turning on one another rather too often out of concern this or that “capitalist” is not sufficiently “capitalist”. I see this as a wonderful way for socialists to continue to gain ground in institutions at all levels of government.
A partial script for this episode can be found here: https://www.bretthall.org/our-most-important-problems.html
This video and ones like it take many days (sometimes weeks) of production from research and reading for the script through to filming and audio recording, searching libraries of stock videos and music, organising copyright issues and finally editing - because I work alone. If you would like to support this effort, you may donate at www.bretthall.org where there is a "Donate" button for one off or monthly donations. On the same page are links to my Patreon accounts where you can also support me.
Thankyou :)
...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TfuQI_LgDBE
This is a plain language summary of the most up to date epistemology (as of early 2022) in the tradition of Karl Popper due to the work of David Deutsch about what explanations are. Some of David's earliest work published on this is found in his TED talk here: https://youtu.be/folTvNDL08A . For further details consult "The Beginning of Infinity" - all of it, but especially chapter 1.
The search for good explanations does not merely solve our problems and provides us with objective knowledge about all aspects of reality but in a sense might be thought of as among the most profound reasons for human existence.
...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=63UNFIlrOIo
In this episode I respond to an article in the Science Journal “Nature”. Here is the link: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-022-04412-x
Nature is among the highest tier of journals in the world - highly respected and the place every scientist would love to have their work published at some point in their career. Nature has editorials as well as journal articles and they have effectively a letters to the editor section and commentary. Nonetheless, although this article is labelled as “comment” it has 8 authors all claiming expertise in disciplines from environmental science through to ecological economics and sociology. I refute the article paragraph by paragraph and point by point providing analysis, opinion and reflections. This is a clash of worldviews: that of decline and degrowth and pro-environment and that of progress, growth and pro-people. This was something of a “straw that breaks the camel’s back” moment. Just as around the world many people are struggling to pay energy bills and governments persist in implementing policies that will only see the cost of living due to energy policy increase further while the overall wealth of households decreases, Nature sees fit to publish a defence of strong-socialism. This piece refers to “science” and yet it is not science. It is not even economics. It is an ideology screed. And a screed of this kind needs to be answered because, as I conclude - this is dangerous. This is literally life, livelihood and liberty threatening. The brakes are presently on the economies of the world because of the misconception that rapid progress and growth are a bad thing. That population increase is a bad thing. That cheap reliable energy is a bad thing and the prescription for this is to coerce people into using forms of energy that are not yet shown to have worked reliably anywhere (in other words entirely untested in even one place before being mandated on all places) and in many places simply not available yet, while coal and fossil fuel supplies are decommissioned too early. This is a threat to nation states and to the globe. This is my defence of humanity against anti-rational memes, prosaic “bad ideas” and stasis.
Enjoy! :)
...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d8wCWHeab2k
This is a question for David about Popper's notion of "verisimilitude". Can we utter the truth? What does David think about probability?
Two excellent talks by David referred to in this video are the one he did on "Statements, Propositions and Truth" with the Oxford Karl Popper Society https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DZ-opI-jghs
and the one on Probability (which is somewhat misleadingly titled "David Deutsch on Physics Without Probability" - it's actually far broader than this and should be required viewing for anyone who thinks they already understand lots about probability. After this, they might need to rethink their life ;) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wfzSE4Hoxbc
...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_2w8TupOH7M
For a version of this video without the musical soundtrack go here: https://youtu.be/YfVl70treS8
An explanation of a tradition of criticism as an error correction mechanism helping ensure the stability of a society.
Also a defence of free speech and liberty for the 21st century.
And for those who need it: a pocket sized response to modern day anti-enlightenment figures who say “the west” lacks culture/tradition. Inspired by "The Beginning of Infinity" by David Deutsch.
Music by Ketsa:
1. "Tradition"
2. "Our Little Blessings"
(Used under a paid license).
...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fEeuLzm5Qfc
This is some reading from and reflections upon Chapter 12 of "The Beginning of Infinity". In this, the third part of the series on "Bad Philosophy" we concentrate in a more focussed way on "bad science" - described as being "explanationless science". Many 'studies' or 'research projects' purport to be science - because data is collected, graphs are drawn and trends extracted. But is this enough for science? What is the purpose of data and observations and does the data speak for itself? This leads into some analysis of psychological studies, which in turn brings into relief the nature of the mind and personhood...and this then has consequences for human vs non-human animals and the concept of free will and the capacity to have an experience and "be conscious" of states by virtue of possessing a mind. Much in this episode will be new, and challenging, for many people. I hope you enjoy it.
...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aAWiUStz6wA