David Deutsch on the infinite reach of knowledge | The TED Interview

It can be easy to believe that humans are insignificant. We’re specks of dust on a random planet in a vast universe. Less powerful than elephants. Fewer than ants. But David Deutsch believes that’s all beside the point, because humans possess one unique skill: attaining knowledge. David Deutsch - Oxford professor, father of quantum computing, recluse - convinced Chris years ago to take over leadership of TED with his ideas about knowledge. In this mind-bending conversation, the two dive into his theory that the potential reach of knowledge is infinite. They explore how knowledge first developed, why it sets us apart and what all of these heady concepts really mean for our present and future.
The TED Audio Collective videos may be used for non-commercial purposes under a Creative Commons License, Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives (or the CC BY - NC - ND 4.0 International) and in accordance with our TED Talks Usage Policy (www.ted.com/about/our-organiz.... For more information on using TED for commercial purposes (e.g. employee learning, in a film or online course), please submit a Media Request at media-requests.ted.com.

[@aristotlecaballes9857]

This interview is a classic David Deutsch masterpiece.

[@eric.aaron.castro]

If you reject the infinite, you are stuck with the finite, and the finite is parochial... the best explanation of anything eventually involves universality, and therefore infinity. The reach of explanations cannot be limited by fiat. - David Deutsch, British physicist

[@diegovazqueznanini]

Thanks for this amazing interview. The world needs more people like David.

[@forrowelt]

I really don't know how many countless times I have listened to this amazing episode. Two incredibly inspiring people.

[@El_Diablo_12]

44:10, 47:20, 52:00 Love David Deutsch, I always come away with optimism and interesting knowledge.

[@edwindewit2115]

Of all the material on Deutsch and his work on KZbin, this is the densest and clearest description by the man himself. Major paradigm shift!

[@AdityaSawdekar]

This conversation is invaluable

[@workingTchr]

Deutsch builds his description of the world around human experience and thought. That's what makes his analysis different from the mainstream which sees humans as just one organism among many that evolved in the world. While it's ok to put humans at the center since we ARE human and are stuck with being that way, wouldn't you like to _escape_ that limitation of perspective as much as possible and see things objectively rather than resign yourself to living within it? I'll bet that Deutsch started down this road by not being content with the mainstream interpretation of quantum weirdness which sees it as something inherently beyond the capability of human reason to understand in the same way that we understand everyday things.

[@EmperorsNewWardrobe]

19:47 “Explanations explain the seen in terms of the unseen, whereas biological knowledge, it’s only what works” 26:13 “[Explanation] explains what might happen in terms of general ideas about what can happen” 27:14 “Memes tend to evolve to breed true. That is, memes that can get themselves faithfully copied are preferred to ones that can’t … that’s their tendency” 37:16 “I think it’s extremely significant that not one of the anglosphere countries fell to a dictatorship”

[@davegrundgeiger9063]

16:35 Chris: "We have embarked on a journey that has potentially unlimited reach. It could lead us to literally anywhere. There is no dream that, in principle, humans couldn't dream of being part of. And maybe it's not us in the end -- it's some successor species -- but we are part of a liftoff that has no limit in principle."

[@Lance_Lough]

The many ads undercut the continuity of this wonderful conversation..

[@blueskies1237]

I decided to subscribe to KZbin.

[@stegemme]

"... part of the morality of any advanced civilization would be that they would come and rescue us"

[@Dave183]

We are the universe, a distinction we share with all living things, and beyond...

[@tonysalmon4361]

I think I've spent as much time writing notes as listening to this interview. Much to ponder. Thank you for your fascinating perspective and well thought out explanations.

[@Philosophie21]

thank you so much

[@stegemme]

are there a few clues from David Deutsch about what kind of science fiction book he intends to write

[@smann11b]

Deutsch is 🔥

[@Lance_Lough]

The cutting edge of human consciousness..

[@KrwiomoczBogurodzicy]

59:51

[@stuartegrin7543]

We are all going to freeze

[@dba4a6d76]

Pure Genius

[@ALavin-en1kr]

It is hard to figure it out if man is not seen as a special creation.

[@ludviglidstrom6924]

I like David Deutsch in many ways, but I find his politics incredibly naive and narrow-minded. It’s “liberal democracy” against “totalitarianism”, which is everything else. But empirically speaking, the evil totalitarian communists have been far better at economic and technological growth as well as social progress, the alleviation of poverty etc. The main center of progress today is not the Anglosphere or the West in general, but China, the evil one-party “dictatorship”. The West on the contrary is in rapid decline as we speak and in the process of completely losing its global hegemony. And talking about the great progress of the West historically without mentioning the enormous contribution of colonial exploitation and plunder is highly tendentious.

[@cueva_mc]

But don't you think china doesn't create new knowledge? Most of new knowledge and breaking discoveries have happened in the west?

[@ALavin-en1kr]

What is not understood here is that the prototype was there from the beginning. Evolution was a matter of different stages being unsheathed until the prototype is reached. This Darwinian emphasis is so 19th century. What should be discussed here is where we are in.relation to the prototype and how much farther do we have to go to be the equivalent of the prototype. This discussion is.painful to listen to as it is so lame.

[@ixvegardxi]

How did you arrive at the conclusion that there is a prototype, and how can you be sure that it was there from the beginning?

[@ALavin-en1kr]

@@ixvegardxi Mostly because it makes sense. Also in higher ages and in the Eastern Tradition a prototype was a given. Everything coming from randomness didn’t make sense. Nothing comes from randomness. Even if it appears to be randomness it is not.

[@ixvegardxi]

@@ALavin-en1kr Sorry, I'm confused. Can you explain so that I understand, please?

[@ALavin-en1kr]

@@ixvegardxi Consciousness is referred to as the hard problem today. It is not understood what it is. Many people, not all, have been raised to believe in Darwinism, life arising out of matter, or the elemental. The worldview up to that point was that life arose out of consciousness and intelligence which posited a universal consciousness and intelligence. This was called idealism, life beginning as idea not at the monocular level; the materialistic view, which to an idealist is not the beginning of life but the expression of life at the elemental level. Because an idea posits a supreme consciousness and intelligence generally referred to as God, materialists objected and posited a monocular beginning without consciousness or intelligence behind it but emerging along the way. How this came about is not clear, so consciousness which appears to not be elemental, or owe its existence to anything elemental, is posited as the hard problem today.

[@strauss7151]

The anglosphere is the most unstable and depraved on all possible metrics of civilization.

[@ip6289]

It's not a metric, it's an attribute. And, BTW it seems currently it is suffering from the disintegration processes more than others. Could be exactly becouse it has missed the totalitarian catastrophes others have passed through.

[@workingTchr]

If Deutsch was saying the same thing with a Spanish, Arabic or any other kind of accent, you would say he was fab.