Post-show updates - This was an incredibly spirited discussion with two of the deepest thinkers I know when it comes to understanding what, and how, we know (and don’t know). I discussed all things existential with the sociologist and philosopher Steve Fuller and longtime science writer John Horgan.
Watch and SHARE on Facebook, LinkedIn, my X account or YouTube:
Horgan, a half-a-lifetime friend and science writing peer, is best known as the author, 30 years ago, of The End of Science. But he has written hundreds of essays and several other books exploring a wide span of disciplines and ideas. Poke at his website johnhorgan.org and you’ll see.
Fuller, a professor of sociology at Warwick University in Britain, is way more than that job title conveys. Given that we’ll be talking about AI, I asked Google’s AI to summarize and here’s the result:
Steve Fuller is a provocative sociologist and philosopher of science at the University of Warwick who investigates how technology, particularly transhumanism and artificial intelligence, is reshaping what it means to be human. He critiques mainstream science, supports risk-taking technological advancement, and explores the future of education and knowledge production.
His enthusiasm for technological risk taking is particuarly interesting to me given my frequent mood swings on this issue. I still feel there’s a compelling case for the idea that intelligence is ultimately maladaptive and - pondering energy trends, AI and more - often recall what Cardinal Óscar Andrés Rodríguez Maradiaga said in 2014 at a weeklong Vatican conference on Sustainability Humanity, Sustainable Nature, Our Responsibility: “Nowadays man finds himself to be a technical giant and an ethical child.”
In his latest essay for the website of the Institute of Art and Ideas, Fuller argues that generative artificial intelligence could help humans get a full grip on the vast amount of scientific output that is unscrutinized. Here’s the summary of the piece, titled The next scientific revolution won’t come from scientists:
In a scientific world dominated by computer simulations and unread research, generative AI offers a radical solution. By mining the entirety of scientific knowledge and placing it in the hands of non-experts, AI could trigger a metascientific revolution—one that finally delivers on science’s promise of collective empowerment.
Fuller’s newest book is Media and the Power of Knowledge.
Thought provoking interview. I think what Fuller said about his student's POVs and what Horgan said about his disillusionment, and mix of optimism and pessimism, are so much more profound than the hype and self-promotions of the news media, politicians, and scientists that we hear almost every day. There are interesting explanations for what Revkin calls the hubristic aspects of science and what Hogan decries as the death of science, that search for knowledge and truth that ideally motivates scientists, but has become "window dressing for the pursuit of power".