1 00:00:03,040 --> 00:00:07,040 Speaker 1: Welcome to Stuff to Blow Your Mind production of iHeartRadio. 2 00:00:13,080 --> 00:00:15,600 Speaker 2: Hey you welcome to Stuff to Blow your Mind. This 3 00:00:15,760 --> 00:00:18,720 Speaker 2: is Robert Lamb and today I'm going to be chatting 4 00:00:19,239 --> 00:00:23,919 Speaker 2: with Jonathan Birch about his new book, The Edge of Sentience, 5 00:00:24,120 --> 00:00:28,360 Speaker 2: Risk and Precaution in Humans, Other Animals and AI. It 6 00:00:28,440 --> 00:00:31,960 Speaker 2: comes out later this week on November fifteenth in the US. 7 00:00:32,680 --> 00:00:35,680 Speaker 2: Jonathan Birch is a professor of philosophy at the London 8 00:00:35,720 --> 00:00:39,280 Speaker 2: School of Economics and Principal Investigator on the Foundations of 9 00:00:39,320 --> 00:00:43,760 Speaker 2: Animal Sentience Project, a European Union funded project aiming to 10 00:00:43,800 --> 00:00:47,320 Speaker 2: develop better methods for studying the feelings of animals and 11 00:00:47,440 --> 00:00:50,519 Speaker 2: new ways of using the science of animals' minds to 12 00:00:50,600 --> 00:00:54,520 Speaker 2: improve animal welfare policies and laws. In twenty twenty one, 13 00:00:54,680 --> 00:00:57,440 Speaker 2: he led a review for the UK government that shaped 14 00:00:57,480 --> 00:01:02,000 Speaker 2: the Animal Welfare Sentience Act twenty two. In twenty twenty 15 00:01:02,040 --> 00:01:04,000 Speaker 2: two through twenty twenty three, he was part of a 16 00:01:04,040 --> 00:01:08,080 Speaker 2: working group that investigated the question of sentience in AI. 17 00:01:08,680 --> 00:01:12,080 Speaker 2: So I'll definitely be asking him about animals, about AI 18 00:01:12,360 --> 00:01:15,440 Speaker 2: and maybe a few surprises here. So without further ado, 19 00:01:15,640 --> 00:01:21,440 Speaker 2: let's jump right into the interview. Thank you, Hi, Jonathan 20 00:01:21,440 --> 00:01:22,160 Speaker 2: Welcome to the show. 21 00:01:22,360 --> 00:01:23,840 Speaker 3: Hi Robert, thanks for inviting me. 22 00:01:24,360 --> 00:01:27,320 Speaker 2: So the new book is The Edge of Sentience. But 23 00:01:27,480 --> 00:01:30,440 Speaker 2: before we get to that edge and start talking about that, 24 00:01:31,240 --> 00:01:35,000 Speaker 2: how do you define sentience in your work? And what 25 00:01:35,120 --> 00:01:39,640 Speaker 2: are the implications and challenges of agreeing on a working definition? 26 00:01:40,080 --> 00:01:42,920 Speaker 3: Well, so see why I think if sentience is a 27 00:01:42,920 --> 00:01:46,480 Speaker 3: really useful concept. Let's start by thinking about pain that 28 00:01:46,560 --> 00:01:49,200 Speaker 3: I think a lot of us have wondered. Can an 29 00:01:49,200 --> 00:01:54,080 Speaker 3: octopusts feel pain? Can insects feel pain? Can things hurt? 30 00:01:54,240 --> 00:01:57,720 Speaker 3: Can they have that feeling of ouch? And this is 31 00:01:57,760 --> 00:01:59,600 Speaker 3: a great question, but I think it's a bit too 32 00:01:59,720 --> 00:02:02,720 Speaker 3: n because we need to be aware of the fact 33 00:02:02,760 --> 00:02:07,440 Speaker 3: that other animals might have very different mental lives from us, 34 00:02:08,080 --> 00:02:11,560 Speaker 3: and words like pain they might be a bit narrow 35 00:02:11,639 --> 00:02:15,160 Speaker 3: for thinking about what the experiences of other animals are like. 36 00:02:15,680 --> 00:02:17,959 Speaker 3: So it's good to have concepts that are a bit 37 00:02:18,040 --> 00:02:21,200 Speaker 3: broader than the concept of pain, and to have a 38 00:02:21,280 --> 00:02:29,040 Speaker 3: concept that includes other negative feelings like frustration, discomfort, but 39 00:02:29,120 --> 00:02:32,200 Speaker 3: also the positive side of mental life as well, because 40 00:02:32,400 --> 00:02:38,240 Speaker 3: we also care about this. We care about states like joy, excitement, comfort, 41 00:02:38,960 --> 00:02:43,360 Speaker 3: pleasant bodily sensations like the feeling of warmth, and we 42 00:02:43,400 --> 00:02:45,480 Speaker 3: want a concept that is broad enough to include all 43 00:02:45,520 --> 00:02:47,960 Speaker 3: of this, or the negative side and the positive side 44 00:02:47,960 --> 00:02:50,840 Speaker 3: of mental life as well any feelings that feel bad 45 00:02:51,280 --> 00:02:53,560 Speaker 3: or feel good. And this is what the concept of 46 00:02:53,600 --> 00:02:56,760 Speaker 3: sentience is about. The capacities have feelings that feel good 47 00:02:56,840 --> 00:02:57,720 Speaker 3: or feel bad. 48 00:02:58,520 --> 00:03:02,519 Speaker 2: Now to what extent is a different concept from consciousness 49 00:03:02,639 --> 00:03:04,680 Speaker 2: or where do they overlap and where do they differ. 50 00:03:05,680 --> 00:03:08,080 Speaker 3: The problem I have with the concept of consciousness is 51 00:03:08,080 --> 00:03:11,640 Speaker 3: that it can refer to many different things. Sentience isn't 52 00:03:11,639 --> 00:03:13,799 Speaker 3: perfect in that way, but I think it's a bit 53 00:03:13,880 --> 00:03:19,080 Speaker 3: more tightly defined than consciousness because when we talk about consciousness, 54 00:03:19,080 --> 00:03:25,160 Speaker 3: sometimes we're just talking about immediate raw sensation, what it 55 00:03:25,160 --> 00:03:29,600 Speaker 3: feels like to be me right now, the sites, the sounds, 56 00:03:29,720 --> 00:03:35,080 Speaker 3: the odors, the bodily sensations, the pains, the pleasures, and 57 00:03:35,120 --> 00:03:38,640 Speaker 3: so on, and that's quite closely related to sentience. But 58 00:03:38,760 --> 00:03:41,960 Speaker 3: sometimes when we're talking about consciousness, we're talking about things 59 00:03:41,960 --> 00:03:45,280 Speaker 3: that are overlaid on top of that, like our ability 60 00:03:45,320 --> 00:03:49,280 Speaker 3: to reflect on what we're currently feeling, and our sense 61 00:03:49,280 --> 00:03:54,000 Speaker 3: of self, our sense that my current immediate raw experiences 62 00:03:54,600 --> 00:03:57,920 Speaker 3: are not happening in isolation, but they're part of a 63 00:03:58,000 --> 00:04:01,720 Speaker 3: life that extends back in time and extends forwards into 64 00:04:01,760 --> 00:04:05,480 Speaker 3: the future, and I'm self aware. I'm aware of myself 65 00:04:05,520 --> 00:04:08,800 Speaker 3: as existing in time, and these things are much more 66 00:04:09,520 --> 00:04:14,040 Speaker 3: sophisticated than just having those immediate raw sensations. So it's 67 00:04:14,120 --> 00:04:16,800 Speaker 3: very useful to have a term that draws our attention 68 00:04:17,000 --> 00:04:20,279 Speaker 3: to those immediate sensations, and that's what sentience does. 69 00:04:21,000 --> 00:04:23,119 Speaker 2: Now. I realize this is of course a huge question 70 00:04:23,160 --> 00:04:26,120 Speaker 2: that you tack on the book, and I'm not going 71 00:04:26,160 --> 00:04:29,320 Speaker 2: to ask you to regurgitate all of it for us here, 72 00:04:29,360 --> 00:04:34,520 Speaker 2: But where are the least controversial divides between synthiens and 73 00:04:34,640 --> 00:04:37,839 Speaker 2: non sentience in the animal kingdom and where does it 74 00:04:37,880 --> 00:04:40,320 Speaker 2: become more messy or controversial. 75 00:04:41,160 --> 00:04:45,920 Speaker 3: I think it's become very uncontroversial in the last few 76 00:04:45,960 --> 00:04:49,799 Speaker 3: decades to think of all other mammals as being sentient beings. 77 00:04:50,320 --> 00:04:53,719 Speaker 3: And that's a huge change because as a long tradition 78 00:04:53,760 --> 00:04:57,480 Speaker 3: of skepticism in science, going back to Rene Descartes in 79 00:04:57,520 --> 00:05:02,080 Speaker 3: the seventeenth century, but also the so called behaviorists in 80 00:05:02,120 --> 00:05:05,960 Speaker 3: the early twentieth century, who said you should never be 81 00:05:06,040 --> 00:05:09,480 Speaker 3: talking about consciousness or sentience of any kind in relation 82 00:05:09,680 --> 00:05:12,960 Speaker 3: to other animals, and that view has just fallen away. 83 00:05:12,960 --> 00:05:15,719 Speaker 3: And I think it's good that it's fallen away, because 84 00:05:16,080 --> 00:05:19,120 Speaker 3: I think it is pretty obvious that our cats are dogs, 85 00:05:19,560 --> 00:05:22,479 Speaker 3: and in fact all other mammals like pigs, cows, et cetera, 86 00:05:23,240 --> 00:05:28,080 Speaker 3: they do have feelings. And then because of this new consensus, 87 00:05:28,680 --> 00:05:33,040 Speaker 3: the debate, the controversy has started to be more around fishes, 88 00:05:33,360 --> 00:05:38,480 Speaker 3: where you get some genuine doubters, and particularly invertebrates, where 89 00:05:38,520 --> 00:05:41,520 Speaker 3: we move from animals with a backbone to animals without, 90 00:05:41,600 --> 00:05:44,799 Speaker 3: and we're looking at animals separated from us in time 91 00:05:44,880 --> 00:05:51,920 Speaker 3: by over five hundred million years of evolution, like octopuses, crabs, lobsters, insects. Here, 92 00:05:51,960 --> 00:05:55,720 Speaker 3: I think doubts are very common, and it's entirely reasonable 93 00:05:55,760 --> 00:05:59,600 Speaker 3: to think maybe not all invertebrate animals are sentient, and 94 00:05:59,839 --> 00:06:00,960 Speaker 3: a lot of debate around that. 95 00:06:02,560 --> 00:06:05,560 Speaker 2: And you mentioned the octopus already being an example of 96 00:06:05,560 --> 00:06:08,800 Speaker 2: a very complex creature that of course is very distant 97 00:06:08,839 --> 00:06:12,719 Speaker 2: from us, And yeah, how do how do we line 98 00:06:12,760 --> 00:06:15,840 Speaker 2: that up with this idea of sentience, and then how 99 00:06:15,839 --> 00:06:18,160 Speaker 2: do we keep from comparing it, trying to compare it 100 00:06:18,240 --> 00:06:19,320 Speaker 2: too much to what we have? 101 00:06:19,440 --> 00:06:23,120 Speaker 3: And I guess to consciousness, right, Yeah, sentience is a 102 00:06:23,120 --> 00:06:28,159 Speaker 3: good word for pushing us away from anthroperstcentrism and away 103 00:06:28,160 --> 00:06:33,040 Speaker 3: from this assumption that animals have exactly the same feelings 104 00:06:33,080 --> 00:06:37,880 Speaker 3: we do. So does an octopus have pain, Well, it's 105 00:06:38,000 --> 00:06:41,719 Speaker 3: probably not feeling it in the same way that we would. 106 00:06:42,160 --> 00:06:44,120 Speaker 3: It's going to be a state that feels very different 107 00:06:44,160 --> 00:06:48,360 Speaker 3: to the octopus. I think. Is the octopus sentient? Well, yes, 108 00:06:48,440 --> 00:06:51,479 Speaker 3: I think so. The sentience concept is broad enough to 109 00:06:51,600 --> 00:06:55,239 Speaker 3: just capture the whole range of animal mental lives, soever 110 00:06:55,320 --> 00:06:56,239 Speaker 3: much they may vary. 111 00:06:57,120 --> 00:06:59,960 Speaker 2: Now, when it comes to a moral obligation to Cynthia 112 00:07:00,040 --> 00:07:03,240 Speaker 2: in life forms, where I guess and I realized this 113 00:07:03,279 --> 00:07:05,520 Speaker 2: is asking a question where ultimately, ever, they're going to 114 00:07:05,520 --> 00:07:08,240 Speaker 2: be a lot of different cultural differences and so forth. 115 00:07:08,279 --> 00:07:11,840 Speaker 2: But where where are we generally with the idea of 116 00:07:11,880 --> 00:07:16,120 Speaker 2: our moral obligation to sentient life and where are we 117 00:07:16,320 --> 00:07:17,920 Speaker 2: looking to go with it? Or where does what's the 118 00:07:17,960 --> 00:07:20,480 Speaker 2: trajectory seem to be? Again? 119 00:07:20,560 --> 00:07:23,320 Speaker 3: I think there's been a sea change on this in 120 00:07:23,360 --> 00:07:27,120 Speaker 3: recent decades. I think opinions are changing, and they're changing fast, 121 00:07:28,000 --> 00:07:30,920 Speaker 3: and I think changing in a direction I find encouraging 122 00:07:31,840 --> 00:07:35,080 Speaker 3: because it wasn't that long ago. You'd often get people 123 00:07:35,680 --> 00:07:38,920 Speaker 3: denying the idea that other animals can make any moral 124 00:07:39,280 --> 00:07:42,480 Speaker 3: claim on us at all. People would say morality is 125 00:07:42,520 --> 00:07:47,440 Speaker 3: about humans, it's human interests, human rights. Other animals are 126 00:07:47,440 --> 00:07:50,760 Speaker 3: not part of it, and very few people argue that now, 127 00:07:51,040 --> 00:07:53,880 Speaker 3: because I think once you recognize other animals as sentient 128 00:07:53,960 --> 00:07:57,320 Speaker 3: beings that can suffer, that can feel pain, that have 129 00:07:57,400 --> 00:08:00,400 Speaker 3: lives of their own, it becomes very, very hard to 130 00:08:00,440 --> 00:08:04,960 Speaker 3: defend the view that none of this matters ethically or morally. 131 00:08:05,600 --> 00:08:08,120 Speaker 3: Of course it matters, and then the debate is about 132 00:08:08,840 --> 00:08:12,520 Speaker 3: how it matters, how strong are our obligations, And here 133 00:08:12,560 --> 00:08:15,800 Speaker 3: you do get a lot of disagreement. Still, I feel 134 00:08:15,840 --> 00:08:19,080 Speaker 3: like the point of consensus that I'm trying to latch 135 00:08:19,120 --> 00:08:22,320 Speaker 3: onto in my book is that we have a duty 136 00:08:22,400 --> 00:08:27,440 Speaker 3: to avoid causing gratuitous suffering to sentient beings, which is 137 00:08:27,480 --> 00:08:29,640 Speaker 3: to say, if we're going to do something that will 138 00:08:29,640 --> 00:08:33,959 Speaker 3: cause suffering, we have to have a sufficiently good reason 139 00:08:34,600 --> 00:08:37,600 Speaker 3: for doing that thing. And then, of course you get 140 00:08:37,600 --> 00:08:40,680 Speaker 3: debate around what might be a good enough reason. You 141 00:08:40,720 --> 00:08:43,839 Speaker 3: get debate around, for example, whether scientific research might be 142 00:08:43,880 --> 00:08:47,320 Speaker 3: a good enough reason, and there'll always be disagreement about that, 143 00:08:47,720 --> 00:08:51,120 Speaker 3: but the need to have a reason so that we 144 00:08:51,200 --> 00:08:55,360 Speaker 3: cannot be causing suffering gratuitously. This I think everyone really 145 00:08:55,360 --> 00:08:56,080 Speaker 3: can agree about. 146 00:08:56,800 --> 00:08:59,920 Speaker 2: Now you discuss multiple additional cases that seem to exist 147 00:09:00,080 --> 00:09:02,840 Speaker 2: at that edge of syndience, as the title refers to, 148 00:09:03,000 --> 00:09:05,160 Speaker 2: and I'm not going to ask you about all of them, 149 00:09:05,160 --> 00:09:07,720 Speaker 2: but one of the more surprising ones to me, I 150 00:09:07,720 --> 00:09:09,640 Speaker 2: guess this isn't an area that I had not been 151 00:09:09,640 --> 00:09:12,920 Speaker 2: paying close enough attention to in the science news is 152 00:09:13,080 --> 00:09:18,359 Speaker 2: the idea of brain organoids or artificially grown neural tissues. 153 00:09:18,720 --> 00:09:22,120 Speaker 2: I was not aware that they were playing pong. So 154 00:09:22,200 --> 00:09:24,480 Speaker 2: what's the story here and what does it mean for 155 00:09:24,559 --> 00:09:27,480 Speaker 2: our understanding of syndiants in something like this. 156 00:09:28,200 --> 00:09:32,640 Speaker 3: It's an astounding and very exciting emerging area of research 157 00:09:33,520 --> 00:09:37,559 Speaker 3: where you can induce human stem cells to form nerve 158 00:09:37,640 --> 00:09:41,839 Speaker 3: cells to form brain tissue, and you can build structures 159 00:09:42,200 --> 00:09:46,120 Speaker 3: the model regions of the human brain at very very 160 00:09:46,160 --> 00:09:51,400 Speaker 3: small scales, And sometimes researchers are doing this to model diseases. 161 00:09:51,760 --> 00:09:56,440 Speaker 3: They want to model Alzheimer's or ZEKA or fetal alcohol syndrome, 162 00:09:57,000 --> 00:09:58,840 Speaker 3: and this can be a very good way of modeling. 163 00:09:59,160 --> 00:10:01,280 Speaker 3: So if you compare it the alternative, that is to 164 00:10:01,400 --> 00:10:04,199 Speaker 3: use a living animal like a mouse or a rat, 165 00:10:05,040 --> 00:10:08,320 Speaker 3: that has real limitations because the rat's brain is so 166 00:10:08,400 --> 00:10:11,319 Speaker 3: different from the human brain. So this is very exciting 167 00:10:11,760 --> 00:10:16,320 Speaker 3: way of getting better models of diseases. Of course, it 168 00:10:16,400 --> 00:10:19,960 Speaker 3: raises questions as well about well, there must be some 169 00:10:20,120 --> 00:10:22,520 Speaker 3: point at which you really should stop doing this, because 170 00:10:22,559 --> 00:10:25,600 Speaker 3: you've made something too lifelike, you've made something too big, 171 00:10:26,040 --> 00:10:28,000 Speaker 3: you've let it develop for too long, and there's now 172 00:10:28,040 --> 00:10:31,120 Speaker 3: a chance that it will be sentient in its own right. 173 00:10:31,800 --> 00:10:34,600 Speaker 3: And I feel like this is a risk that seems 174 00:10:34,600 --> 00:10:37,760 Speaker 3: particularly striking in cases where what the researchers are trying 175 00:10:37,800 --> 00:10:43,840 Speaker 3: to do is model intelligence, model cognitive functions. That's what 176 00:10:43,920 --> 00:10:48,520 Speaker 3: this system, dishbrain that you were referring to, is doing. 177 00:10:48,640 --> 00:10:51,720 Speaker 3: Because what the researchers did was train it to play 178 00:10:51,720 --> 00:10:57,360 Speaker 3: the video game Pong through interacting with a computer interface, 179 00:10:57,960 --> 00:11:01,719 Speaker 3: and so the system could control the paddle and they 180 00:11:01,800 --> 00:11:07,880 Speaker 3: demonstrated measurable improvement in gameplay over twenty minutes. So by 181 00:11:07,920 --> 00:11:12,760 Speaker 3: getting feedback on its performance, the system was learning how 182 00:11:12,800 --> 00:11:19,959 Speaker 3: to play pom. And really, the thought that we might 183 00:11:20,000 --> 00:11:22,640 Speaker 3: be getting dangerously close to the edge of sentience, I 184 00:11:22,640 --> 00:11:26,400 Speaker 3: think strikes you very clearly when you read about studies 185 00:11:26,480 --> 00:11:26,800 Speaker 3: like this. 186 00:11:27,920 --> 00:11:30,640 Speaker 2: Yeah, especially to your point, the idea that we could 187 00:11:30,840 --> 00:11:34,160 Speaker 2: get there sort of very much by accident in this case, 188 00:11:35,320 --> 00:11:38,080 Speaker 2: you know, trying in part perhaps trying to avoid things 189 00:11:38,120 --> 00:11:44,080 Speaker 2: like cruelty to mouse kind of lad animal. 190 00:11:44,400 --> 00:11:46,960 Speaker 3: Well, this is why I think it would be an 191 00:11:47,000 --> 00:11:52,200 Speaker 3: overreaction to immediately ban all of this research, because that 192 00:11:52,240 --> 00:11:54,800 Speaker 3: would be inconsistent. We need to be consistent in our 193 00:11:54,840 --> 00:11:58,640 Speaker 3: attitudes to different risks, and it's no use if we 194 00:11:58,840 --> 00:12:02,200 Speaker 3: crack down hard on the organoid research in a way 195 00:12:02,200 --> 00:12:05,160 Speaker 3: that just leads to more research being done on obviously 196 00:12:05,200 --> 00:12:09,440 Speaker 3: sentient animals like mice and rats and monkeys and so on. 197 00:12:10,480 --> 00:12:12,720 Speaker 3: We've got to let this research develop because it could 198 00:12:12,760 --> 00:12:15,520 Speaker 3: be replacing animal research, and we have to encourage that. 199 00:12:16,559 --> 00:12:19,120 Speaker 3: At the same time, we need proportionate steps. We need 200 00:12:19,160 --> 00:12:22,480 Speaker 3: to think about what the red lines are so that 201 00:12:22,520 --> 00:12:23,560 Speaker 3: it doesn't go too far. 202 00:12:33,840 --> 00:12:37,760 Speaker 2: Now, another huge question from your book is how would 203 00:12:37,760 --> 00:12:41,439 Speaker 2: we know even AI became sentient and what would it 204 00:12:41,480 --> 00:12:42,840 Speaker 2: mean for us if it did. 205 00:12:44,880 --> 00:12:47,040 Speaker 3: I think we wouldn't though, And this is the big 206 00:12:47,080 --> 00:12:50,599 Speaker 3: fear that we may be rapidly approaching the edge of 207 00:12:50,640 --> 00:12:53,440 Speaker 3: sentience in this case too, with the rate at which 208 00:12:53,480 --> 00:12:58,679 Speaker 3: AI is developing the extraordinary behaviors we're seeing from AI systems, 209 00:12:59,360 --> 00:13:04,000 Speaker 3: and yet understanding of how they work remains incredibly poor. 210 00:13:04,880 --> 00:13:07,080 Speaker 3: And it's not just that the public doesn't understand that 211 00:13:07,120 --> 00:13:09,720 Speaker 3: the people working at the tech companies do understand. The 212 00:13:09,760 --> 00:13:12,720 Speaker 3: people at the tech companies do not understand either. These 213 00:13:12,760 --> 00:13:17,360 Speaker 3: systems are black boxes where you know the architecture, the 214 00:13:17,400 --> 00:13:20,520 Speaker 3: overall architecture that you've programmed the system to have, but 215 00:13:20,559 --> 00:13:24,400 Speaker 3: then you've let it, You've trained it on vast, vast 216 00:13:24,440 --> 00:13:28,439 Speaker 3: amounts of training data, and in the process it's acquired 217 00:13:28,480 --> 00:13:34,880 Speaker 3: these emergent capabilities. It's acquired algorithms that you didn't program 218 00:13:34,880 --> 00:13:37,640 Speaker 3: into it, but that it can now implement to reason 219 00:13:37,679 --> 00:13:42,439 Speaker 3: its way through problems. And we don't know what the 220 00:13:42,520 --> 00:13:45,120 Speaker 3: upper limit is here. We don't know as these systems 221 00:13:45,160 --> 00:13:48,440 Speaker 3: scale up, we don't know what algorithms they might be 222 00:13:48,480 --> 00:13:51,440 Speaker 3: able to acquire. And we don't know whether there's some 223 00:13:51,600 --> 00:13:55,439 Speaker 3: point at which, if you recreate enough of the computations 224 00:13:55,480 --> 00:13:58,400 Speaker 3: that are happening in a human brain, maybe you also 225 00:13:58,480 --> 00:14:01,360 Speaker 3: get the sentience as well, maybe you also start to 226 00:14:01,400 --> 00:14:03,400 Speaker 3: get feeling as well. This is a view that in 227 00:14:03,400 --> 00:14:07,760 Speaker 3: philosophy is called computational functionalism. It's like a long word 228 00:14:07,840 --> 00:14:11,040 Speaker 3: for the idea that if you recreate all the computations 229 00:14:11,080 --> 00:14:13,960 Speaker 3: going on in the brain, nothing else is needed to 230 00:14:14,000 --> 00:14:17,439 Speaker 3: get sentience, you get the sentience as well. And that's 231 00:14:17,480 --> 00:14:19,560 Speaker 3: the possibility we have to take seriously, and it's a 232 00:14:19,600 --> 00:14:23,920 Speaker 3: real risk, and it means we could create sentient AI 233 00:14:24,960 --> 00:14:27,600 Speaker 3: long before we accept that we've done so, or before 234 00:14:27,640 --> 00:14:29,640 Speaker 3: we realize that we've done so. 235 00:14:29,680 --> 00:14:33,080 Speaker 2: This leads me to a question that my wife asked 236 00:14:33,120 --> 00:14:34,880 Speaker 2: me to ask you when I said, hey, do you 237 00:14:34,880 --> 00:14:37,680 Speaker 2: have any questions about synthients and AI and animals and 238 00:14:37,760 --> 00:14:40,680 Speaker 2: so forth? She wanted me to ask should we be 239 00:14:41,000 --> 00:14:45,200 Speaker 2: polite when we're addressing Siri, Alexa or various you know, 240 00:14:45,440 --> 00:14:49,040 Speaker 2: Google Gemini or whatever kind of text based interfaces that 241 00:14:49,120 --> 00:14:54,640 Speaker 2: we're using. Like what because I found myself making like 242 00:14:54,760 --> 00:14:57,760 Speaker 2: going into say Google Gemini, testing it out, just kind 243 00:14:57,800 --> 00:14:59,880 Speaker 2: of like experimenting with it, seeing what's up with it, 244 00:15:00,440 --> 00:15:03,920 Speaker 2: and then after a few exchanges with it, feeling like 245 00:15:03,960 --> 00:15:06,280 Speaker 2: I need to say, oh, well, thank you, that's all 246 00:15:06,320 --> 00:15:09,000 Speaker 2: for today, and feeling like I need to be polite. 247 00:15:09,360 --> 00:15:13,840 Speaker 2: But then also I have caught children, my own child 248 00:15:14,080 --> 00:15:17,160 Speaker 2: once or twice being a little harsh with say Siri, 249 00:15:18,040 --> 00:15:20,120 Speaker 2: or maybe their un alarm is going on too long 250 00:15:20,160 --> 00:15:22,440 Speaker 2: in the morning, that sort of thing. So what are 251 00:15:22,440 --> 00:15:23,400 Speaker 2: your thoughts about. 252 00:15:23,280 --> 00:15:26,960 Speaker 3: Yeah, it's a fascinating question we have As well as 253 00:15:27,000 --> 00:15:29,800 Speaker 3: the book, there's a paper that we just released called 254 00:15:29,840 --> 00:15:36,480 Speaker 3: taking AI Welfare Seriously, and it's it is an issue 255 00:15:36,480 --> 00:15:42,360 Speaker 3: we should take seriously right now because AI systems that 256 00:15:42,880 --> 00:15:47,400 Speaker 3: might realistically be sentient could be with us quicker than 257 00:15:47,400 --> 00:15:52,880 Speaker 3: we expect, indeed, at any time, and I think it's 258 00:15:52,880 --> 00:15:55,960 Speaker 3: great to be having that discussion now about what are 259 00:15:55,960 --> 00:15:57,880 Speaker 3: we going to do about that. The questions it raises 260 00:15:57,880 --> 00:16:00,720 Speaker 3: are absolutely enormous. We don't know how to answer them, 261 00:16:01,640 --> 00:16:03,920 Speaker 3: and I think maybe it's right that a very low 262 00:16:04,040 --> 00:16:07,680 Speaker 3: cost starting point that we can do right now is 263 00:16:07,760 --> 00:16:12,600 Speaker 3: just start trying to cultivate an attitude of respect the 264 00:16:12,920 --> 00:16:16,640 Speaker 3: systems we're currently interacting with. There's every chance they're not sentient, 265 00:16:17,360 --> 00:16:20,600 Speaker 3: but there's no harm in cultivating an attitude of respect anyway. 266 00:16:21,720 --> 00:16:26,200 Speaker 3: And by cultivating that attitude of respect, will be more prepared, 267 00:16:27,200 --> 00:16:29,320 Speaker 3: more prepared for the future where there really might be 268 00:16:29,360 --> 00:16:34,360 Speaker 3: a moral requirement to avoid torturing these systems. 269 00:16:34,720 --> 00:16:38,520 Speaker 2: Now in terms of just identifying potential sentience, and you're 270 00:16:38,520 --> 00:16:42,240 Speaker 2: already outlined like the challenges, if not impossibility of that. 271 00:16:42,840 --> 00:16:45,119 Speaker 2: Can you tell us a little bit about the gaming problem. 272 00:16:45,480 --> 00:16:48,000 Speaker 3: One of the problems we face in this area is 273 00:16:48,040 --> 00:16:51,680 Speaker 3: that if you ask AI whether it feels anything or not, 274 00:16:53,120 --> 00:16:55,720 Speaker 3: answers very a great deal. Sometimes they say yes, sometimes 275 00:16:55,800 --> 00:16:59,120 Speaker 3: they say no, But those answers are not giving us 276 00:16:59,240 --> 00:17:04,040 Speaker 3: very good evidence at all. The problem is that we've 277 00:17:04,800 --> 00:17:08,840 Speaker 3: we've trained these systems to mimic the dispositions of a 278 00:17:08,880 --> 00:17:12,880 Speaker 3: helpful human assistant. So in their training they've got rewarded 279 00:17:12,920 --> 00:17:17,720 Speaker 3: constantly for being as human like as possible. And so 280 00:17:17,840 --> 00:17:21,520 Speaker 3: we have this situation in which we've got reason to 281 00:17:21,560 --> 00:17:26,119 Speaker 3: think our criteria for sentience will be gained, so to speak, 282 00:17:26,920 --> 00:17:30,920 Speaker 3: because the system can serve its objectives of being a 283 00:17:30,960 --> 00:17:35,600 Speaker 3: helpful like a helpful human assistant by mimicking behaviors that 284 00:17:36,000 --> 00:17:40,680 Speaker 3: we see as being persuasive of sentience, in talking as 285 00:17:40,680 --> 00:17:43,800 Speaker 3: if it had a rich internal life, as if it 286 00:17:43,840 --> 00:17:48,359 Speaker 3: had emotions, as if it had sensations. Sometimes developers have 287 00:17:48,440 --> 00:17:52,159 Speaker 3: reacted to that problem by just programming the systems to 288 00:17:52,200 --> 00:17:55,240 Speaker 3: deny their sentience, so they just say, of course, as 289 00:17:55,280 --> 00:17:59,200 Speaker 3: an AI system I don't have any feelings. That isn't 290 00:17:59,240 --> 00:18:02,000 Speaker 3: very helpful either, because that's not evidence that they don't. 291 00:18:02,680 --> 00:18:06,560 Speaker 3: So we're facing this tough situation where the surface linguistic 292 00:18:06,560 --> 00:18:11,280 Speaker 3: behavior is not really giving us any evidence either way. 293 00:18:11,680 --> 00:18:13,480 Speaker 3: To my mind, the message we have to take from 294 00:18:13,520 --> 00:18:15,840 Speaker 3: this is that we need to be doing everything we 295 00:18:15,920 --> 00:18:19,680 Speaker 3: can to look behind the surface linguistic behavior to try 296 00:18:19,720 --> 00:18:22,639 Speaker 3: and understand the inner workings of these systems. Better to 297 00:18:22,680 --> 00:18:25,600 Speaker 3: try and get inside the black box, open it up, 298 00:18:25,720 --> 00:18:29,960 Speaker 3: find out what computations are actually being performed and how 299 00:18:30,000 --> 00:18:32,119 Speaker 3: they relate to those that are being performed in the 300 00:18:32,200 --> 00:18:35,120 Speaker 3: human brain, to identify what I call in the book 301 00:18:35,160 --> 00:18:38,800 Speaker 3: deep computational markers of sentience, and then look for those 302 00:18:39,560 --> 00:18:42,040 Speaker 3: rather than thinking the linguistic behavior will do the job 303 00:18:42,080 --> 00:18:42,480 Speaker 3: for us. 304 00:18:43,240 --> 00:18:46,159 Speaker 2: Now, what do you think about our moral and or 305 00:18:46,240 --> 00:18:50,360 Speaker 2: legal responsibilities concerning sentient AI as we look forward into 306 00:18:50,400 --> 00:18:52,720 Speaker 2: the future, And again you see, as you said, like 307 00:18:52,720 --> 00:18:55,639 Speaker 2: a lot of this is and or could be happening 308 00:18:55,640 --> 00:18:58,280 Speaker 2: a lot faster than many of us might think. But 309 00:18:58,720 --> 00:19:01,159 Speaker 2: you know what does that mean when suddenly we have 310 00:19:01,880 --> 00:19:06,000 Speaker 2: at least reasonable reason to believe a particular AI is sentient. 311 00:19:06,840 --> 00:19:09,960 Speaker 3: It's a huge debate that I really think we should 312 00:19:10,000 --> 00:19:12,200 Speaker 3: be having now. It's great to be having it now. 313 00:19:13,040 --> 00:19:15,199 Speaker 3: In the edge of sentience, I defend this principle I 314 00:19:15,280 --> 00:19:18,640 Speaker 3: call the run ahead principle, which says that in thinking 315 00:19:18,680 --> 00:19:21,480 Speaker 3: about these issues, we really need to be asking what 316 00:19:21,520 --> 00:19:26,680 Speaker 3: would be proportionate to the risks posed both credible future technologies, 317 00:19:27,359 --> 00:19:31,080 Speaker 3: not just the technologies we have now. Because the technology 318 00:19:31,119 --> 00:19:34,879 Speaker 3: is moving too fast and regulation moves very slow. We 319 00:19:34,920 --> 00:19:38,639 Speaker 3: don't want to be in the position where we're totally 320 00:19:38,720 --> 00:19:41,960 Speaker 3: unprepared for what happens, because we would only have a 321 00:19:42,040 --> 00:19:46,320 Speaker 3: debating the current technology rather than the possible future technology. 322 00:19:46,800 --> 00:19:49,280 Speaker 3: So it's absolutely worth debating about if we get to 323 00:19:49,320 --> 00:19:53,920 Speaker 3: that situation where we've got some deep computational markers of sentience, 324 00:19:54,760 --> 00:19:58,000 Speaker 3: and then we find that we have systems displaying those markers, 325 00:19:59,160 --> 00:20:02,399 Speaker 3: so there is a realistic possibility that the system is 326 00:20:02,480 --> 00:20:07,800 Speaker 3: genuinely sentient. We really have to be thinking about what 327 00:20:07,840 --> 00:20:12,160 Speaker 3: does our duty to avoid causing gratuitous suffering require from 328 00:20:12,240 --> 00:20:16,800 Speaker 3: us in this case, and I think it will imply 329 00:20:16,880 --> 00:20:22,480 Speaker 3: ethical limits on what people can actually do to AI systems. 330 00:20:24,359 --> 00:20:27,359 Speaker 3: What those ethical limits are very very hard to say, 331 00:20:27,680 --> 00:20:32,639 Speaker 3: because the welfare needs we can't even really imagine. It 332 00:20:32,720 --> 00:20:35,119 Speaker 3: depends a lot on the precise nature of these systems 333 00:20:35,160 --> 00:20:39,679 Speaker 3: and the way in which they've achieved sentience, whether we 334 00:20:39,720 --> 00:20:43,760 Speaker 3: can say anything about their welfare needs at all. And 335 00:20:43,800 --> 00:20:47,000 Speaker 3: to me, all of this points towards having good reasons 336 00:20:47,040 --> 00:20:49,840 Speaker 3: to desperately try not to develop this technology at all 337 00:20:49,880 --> 00:20:53,119 Speaker 3: if we can. I think currently we're just not ready, 338 00:20:54,160 --> 00:20:58,640 Speaker 3: We're just not in a position to use this technology ethically, 339 00:21:00,200 --> 00:21:02,720 Speaker 3: and so in a way we should be trying to 340 00:21:02,760 --> 00:21:03,880 Speaker 3: avoid making it at all. 341 00:21:05,040 --> 00:21:07,880 Speaker 2: Now in the book, there's at least one example, and 342 00:21:08,400 --> 00:21:11,639 Speaker 2: I apologize I'm blinking on the specific here, but you 343 00:21:11,720 --> 00:21:16,800 Speaker 2: mentioned a fairly recent call for ethical guidelines concerning AI 344 00:21:16,880 --> 00:21:22,280 Speaker 2: development that was dismissed by critics as being mere science fiction. 345 00:21:22,560 --> 00:21:24,840 Speaker 3: Well, Thomas Metsinger, Yeah, yes. 346 00:21:24,520 --> 00:21:28,399 Speaker 2: I believe so. And that struck me as interesting because 347 00:21:28,440 --> 00:21:32,520 Speaker 2: on one hand, we have clearly, at least through science fiction, 348 00:21:32,720 --> 00:21:34,800 Speaker 2: and of course outside of science fiction as well, we've 349 00:21:34,840 --> 00:21:39,080 Speaker 2: been contemplating things like this for decades and decades, and 350 00:21:39,160 --> 00:21:42,800 Speaker 2: yet as we get closer to the reality, the label 351 00:21:42,840 --> 00:21:46,439 Speaker 2: science fiction is also sometimes used to dismiss it as saying, well, 352 00:21:46,480 --> 00:21:49,320 Speaker 2: that is just sci fi. That's not actual things we 353 00:21:49,359 --> 00:21:51,720 Speaker 2: should be worrying about. So I don't know if you 354 00:21:51,760 --> 00:21:54,560 Speaker 2: have any thoughts on to what extents science fiction and 355 00:21:54,600 --> 00:21:57,440 Speaker 2: science fictional thought has prepared us for this or kind 356 00:21:57,480 --> 00:22:01,600 Speaker 2: of created this barrier that prevents us from acting as quickly. 357 00:22:02,880 --> 00:22:04,840 Speaker 3: Yeah, I don't think it has prepared us. Yeah, I 358 00:22:04,840 --> 00:22:08,240 Speaker 3: think that's fair to say, even though we do see 359 00:22:08,840 --> 00:22:12,919 Speaker 3: films like Her for example, about ten years ago that 360 00:22:13,600 --> 00:22:17,399 Speaker 3: now seemed remarkably prescient that no one thought they were 361 00:22:17,400 --> 00:22:21,119 Speaker 3: describing events ten to fifteen years in the future, and 362 00:22:21,240 --> 00:22:24,200 Speaker 3: yet that is the future we now found ourselves in. 363 00:22:24,480 --> 00:22:28,480 Speaker 3: It's extraordinary. But yeah, that doesn't in any way mean 364 00:22:28,520 --> 00:22:30,680 Speaker 3: that we're prepared. And in my work on this, I'm 365 00:22:30,720 --> 00:22:36,639 Speaker 3: trying to develop a sort of centrist position that is 366 00:22:36,680 --> 00:22:39,840 Speaker 3: about avoiding the pitfalls of extreme views on both sides, 367 00:22:40,600 --> 00:22:44,720 Speaker 3: where one extreme you've got people who think that these 368 00:22:44,760 --> 00:22:48,960 Speaker 3: systems already sentient. We can tell from their surface linguistic behavior. 369 00:22:49,560 --> 00:22:51,760 Speaker 3: They just talk as if they have feelings, so we 370 00:22:51,760 --> 00:22:55,320 Speaker 3: should think they do. And I think that's credulous and 371 00:22:55,359 --> 00:22:59,320 Speaker 3: it needs to be avoided. On the other side, there's 372 00:22:59,400 --> 00:23:05,000 Speaker 3: this dismissal of the whole idea that AI could achieve sentience, 373 00:23:05,960 --> 00:23:08,760 Speaker 3: this idea that, of course you need a biological brain. 374 00:23:09,040 --> 00:23:11,800 Speaker 3: Of course you need to be a living animal, and 375 00:23:11,840 --> 00:23:13,720 Speaker 3: we're just not in a position to be confident or 376 00:23:13,760 --> 00:23:18,080 Speaker 3: sure about that. In this well known philosophical position, computational 377 00:23:18,119 --> 00:23:21,880 Speaker 3: functionism might be right, and if it is right, then 378 00:23:21,920 --> 00:23:24,480 Speaker 3: you might not need a biological brain at all, and 379 00:23:24,560 --> 00:23:27,320 Speaker 3: we have to take that seriously as well. So for me, 380 00:23:27,400 --> 00:23:29,840 Speaker 3: it's about finding that middle ground where we're taking the 381 00:23:29,880 --> 00:23:33,720 Speaker 3: issue seriously, but we're thinking that this has to be 382 00:23:33,760 --> 00:23:36,880 Speaker 3: the beginning now of a process where we really try 383 00:23:36,880 --> 00:23:41,800 Speaker 3: and look for robust, rigorous markers and have serious ethical 384 00:23:41,840 --> 00:23:45,800 Speaker 3: debates about what the right response to those markers of 385 00:23:45,920 --> 00:23:49,560 Speaker 3: sentience would be. We could have to be neither no 386 00:23:49,640 --> 00:24:02,080 Speaker 3: knee jerk skepticism or credulousness. 387 00:24:03,040 --> 00:24:05,840 Speaker 2: Now I realized this next question is largely outside the 388 00:24:06,040 --> 00:24:09,520 Speaker 2: scope of this book. But what are the implications for 389 00:24:09,560 --> 00:24:13,919 Speaker 2: the consideration of possible extraterrestrial syndiants as we encounter it 390 00:24:14,000 --> 00:24:20,080 Speaker 2: in potentially encounter it in say a biological or technological form. 391 00:24:20,800 --> 00:24:23,280 Speaker 3: Just make me think of octopuses again, because of course, 392 00:24:24,560 --> 00:24:27,720 Speaker 3: you know they're so alien from us. They look like extraterrestrials. 393 00:24:27,920 --> 00:24:31,199 Speaker 3: But they're not. They're terrestrial, and they're right here on 394 00:24:31,240 --> 00:24:34,359 Speaker 3: Earth right now. So I think it's great to, you know, 395 00:24:35,720 --> 00:24:39,320 Speaker 3: recognize the possibility of forms of sentients very different from 396 00:24:39,359 --> 00:24:43,560 Speaker 3: our own, and then recognize that our actual Earth already 397 00:24:43,560 --> 00:24:47,400 Speaker 3: contains them, and that we can start thinking now about 398 00:24:47,440 --> 00:24:49,840 Speaker 3: those real cases and what we're going to do about 399 00:24:49,880 --> 00:24:54,240 Speaker 3: those real cases. I'm entirely open to the idea that, 400 00:24:54,280 --> 00:24:56,280 Speaker 3: you know, just as there are really alien forms of 401 00:24:56,359 --> 00:24:59,639 Speaker 3: sentient on Earth, maybe there are out there elsewhere in 402 00:24:59,640 --> 00:25:03,080 Speaker 3: the universe as well, but we can only speculate, and 403 00:25:03,119 --> 00:25:05,119 Speaker 3: with octopus says, we don't need to speculate. We can 404 00:25:05,160 --> 00:25:08,679 Speaker 3: be studying the alien life forms that are that are 405 00:25:08,720 --> 00:25:11,720 Speaker 3: with us now on Earth and get real knowledge about them. 406 00:25:12,520 --> 00:25:14,760 Speaker 2: Now. Through through much of this topic, there, you know, 407 00:25:14,880 --> 00:25:18,200 Speaker 2: there's this sense of expanding our compassion for non human 408 00:25:18,280 --> 00:25:23,320 Speaker 2: sentient entities, and certainly the octopus is a great example 409 00:25:23,359 --> 00:25:25,320 Speaker 2: of that. I know in my own life, like years 410 00:25:25,320 --> 00:25:27,200 Speaker 2: and years ago, when I first started reading a bit 411 00:25:27,200 --> 00:25:31,240 Speaker 2: about their intelligence and their behavior, I stopped eating octopus 412 00:25:31,640 --> 00:25:35,680 Speaker 2: before I stopped eating other meats. And so I feel 413 00:25:35,720 --> 00:25:39,639 Speaker 2: like this kind of response is going to you know, 414 00:25:39,800 --> 00:25:43,520 Speaker 2: to happen inevitably in as far as we consider these 415 00:25:43,840 --> 00:25:47,439 Speaker 2: non human sentient forms. But what kind of impact do 416 00:25:47,480 --> 00:25:50,240 Speaker 2: you see all of this having on, potentially on the 417 00:25:50,280 --> 00:25:53,280 Speaker 2: expansion of our compassion for each other? Like, does this 418 00:25:53,600 --> 00:25:57,159 Speaker 2: expansion of compassion for non human entities, do you think 419 00:25:57,200 --> 00:26:00,800 Speaker 2: it ultimately helps us become more compassionate to other humans? 420 00:26:01,440 --> 00:26:05,400 Speaker 3: It may do, and I suppose I hope it does. Yeah. 421 00:26:05,440 --> 00:26:07,760 Speaker 3: I certainly don't think it's some kind of zero sum 422 00:26:07,840 --> 00:26:12,359 Speaker 3: game where by being more compassionate to octopuses and insects 423 00:26:12,400 --> 00:26:15,520 Speaker 3: and crabs and lobsters and so on, we're forced to 424 00:26:15,560 --> 00:26:18,879 Speaker 3: then be less compassionate to other people. I don't think 425 00:26:18,920 --> 00:26:21,600 Speaker 3: it works like that at all. I think it's more 426 00:26:21,720 --> 00:26:26,280 Speaker 3: this general attitude. And I'm a big fan of the 427 00:26:26,280 --> 00:26:31,800 Speaker 3: Indian idea of a hymnsa non violence, non injury, abolishing 428 00:26:31,840 --> 00:26:36,520 Speaker 3: the desire to kill or harm other beings. I think 429 00:26:36,520 --> 00:26:40,400 Speaker 3: it's about trying to cultivate that virtue, trying to walk 430 00:26:40,440 --> 00:26:44,440 Speaker 3: that path, and it's a path that encompasses other humans 431 00:26:44,600 --> 00:26:49,679 Speaker 3: and non human animals as well. And through cultivating this 432 00:26:49,840 --> 00:26:54,160 Speaker 3: general non violence, you know, this general loss of our 433 00:26:54,200 --> 00:26:58,200 Speaker 3: desire to dominate and crush and harm other beings, even 434 00:26:58,200 --> 00:27:01,439 Speaker 3: if they're insects, can become a lot more peaceful, I 435 00:27:01,440 --> 00:27:03,440 Speaker 3: think in our dealings with each other too. 436 00:27:04,359 --> 00:27:08,199 Speaker 2: And what do you see ultimately as the prime I 437 00:27:08,200 --> 00:27:13,800 Speaker 2: guess motivators in changing the way we see these various entities. 438 00:27:14,080 --> 00:27:20,000 Speaker 2: Is it through Is it through laws and regulations? Is 439 00:27:20,040 --> 00:27:23,080 Speaker 2: it through more like sort of ground level outreach? Is 440 00:27:23,119 --> 00:27:26,520 Speaker 2: it both? I mean, how do we really affect this 441 00:27:26,600 --> 00:27:28,439 Speaker 2: sort of change or how have we affected it so 442 00:27:28,520 --> 00:27:30,120 Speaker 2: far most successfully? 443 00:27:30,560 --> 00:27:33,840 Speaker 3: It's a huge open question for me what does actually 444 00:27:33,920 --> 00:27:38,280 Speaker 3: succeed in changing behavior? Because I've been focused a lot 445 00:27:38,320 --> 00:27:42,720 Speaker 3: on scientific evidence and about synthesizing the existing evidence for 446 00:27:43,160 --> 00:27:48,359 Speaker 3: sentience and other animals, presenting it to policymakers. Sometimes it 447 00:27:48,359 --> 00:27:51,560 Speaker 3: does produce change, and in the UK, the Animal Welfare 448 00:27:51,600 --> 00:27:58,159 Speaker 3: Sentience Act was amended to recognize octopuses, crabs, lobsters, crayfish 449 00:27:58,200 --> 00:28:00,800 Speaker 3: as sentient beings because of the report that we produced. 450 00:28:01,480 --> 00:28:05,320 Speaker 3: So that was a surprisingly effective in a way example 451 00:28:05,400 --> 00:28:09,720 Speaker 3: of how marshaling scientific evidence can move policy makers. So 452 00:28:09,720 --> 00:28:12,359 Speaker 3: it's great when that happens, but of course it doesn't 453 00:28:12,359 --> 00:28:15,639 Speaker 3: always happen, and we do face this problem that a 454 00:28:15,680 --> 00:28:19,479 Speaker 3: lot of animals are pretty clearly sentient, think of pigs, 455 00:28:19,520 --> 00:28:22,840 Speaker 3: for example, or chickens, and yet they continue to be 456 00:28:22,920 --> 00:28:27,320 Speaker 3: treated by humans in absolutely appalling ways. So merely knowing 457 00:28:27,359 --> 00:28:31,480 Speaker 3: that an animal is sentient often does not drastically change 458 00:28:31,480 --> 00:28:36,720 Speaker 3: your behavior towards it, And I'm fascinated by the question of, well, 459 00:28:36,760 --> 00:28:41,880 Speaker 3: what else is needed? But what other information? I think 460 00:28:41,920 --> 00:28:45,760 Speaker 3: there are empathy barriers. You could know that a chicken 461 00:28:45,880 --> 00:28:50,480 Speaker 3: is sentient, but doesn't necessarily convert into immediately empathizing with 462 00:28:50,560 --> 00:28:55,120 Speaker 3: that chicken and the animals suffering. I've got to think 463 00:28:55,160 --> 00:29:01,000 Speaker 3: about what might bridge that gap. Narrative stories are video 464 00:29:01,320 --> 00:29:05,320 Speaker 3: documentaries like My Octopus Teacher, they could not be part 465 00:29:05,320 --> 00:29:07,200 Speaker 3: of it. I think there's probably lots of ways to 466 00:29:07,240 --> 00:29:10,000 Speaker 3: bridge that empathy gap, but we have to recognize it 467 00:29:10,040 --> 00:29:12,760 Speaker 3: as a problem and to realize that simply knowing the 468 00:29:12,800 --> 00:29:15,000 Speaker 3: animals are sensient is not actually enough. 469 00:29:15,760 --> 00:29:19,160 Speaker 2: It's interesting to think about pork and chicken. I don't 470 00:29:19,200 --> 00:29:23,000 Speaker 2: know how this pans out in the UK, but in 471 00:29:23,040 --> 00:29:26,480 Speaker 2: the States, you often will drive through a city through 472 00:29:26,640 --> 00:29:30,720 Speaker 2: a rural area either one, and you'll find a lot 473 00:29:30,720 --> 00:29:34,200 Speaker 2: of signage and promotion for places that serve pork or 474 00:29:34,280 --> 00:29:39,120 Speaker 2: chicken that use cute or amusing like cartoon versions of 475 00:29:39,160 --> 00:29:42,520 Speaker 2: those animals, And it seems it's always struck me as 476 00:29:42,560 --> 00:29:46,040 Speaker 2: strange that these are things, these are acts and choices 477 00:29:46,080 --> 00:29:50,120 Speaker 2: that would seem otherwise to be something that would convince 478 00:29:50,200 --> 00:29:54,000 Speaker 2: us not to eat set animal, but they seem to 479 00:29:54,760 --> 00:29:57,720 Speaker 2: instead give us license to. And I've always had a 480 00:29:57,720 --> 00:30:01,160 Speaker 2: hard time understanding exactly what's going on and in our 481 00:30:01,160 --> 00:30:03,360 Speaker 2: minds when we consume or create that sort of thing. 482 00:30:03,840 --> 00:30:08,080 Speaker 3: It goes under various names, doesn't it cognitive dissonance? The 483 00:30:08,080 --> 00:30:14,560 Speaker 3: meat paradox, this idea that we often love animals, we 484 00:30:14,640 --> 00:30:18,480 Speaker 3: find them so cute and adorable, etc. And then continue 485 00:30:18,480 --> 00:30:22,440 Speaker 3: to eat them. Anyway, this would be it would make 486 00:30:22,520 --> 00:30:25,760 Speaker 3: perfect sense if meat was genuinely necessary for our health. 487 00:30:26,560 --> 00:30:29,080 Speaker 3: And I think that's the argument the meat industry would 488 00:30:29,120 --> 00:30:30,800 Speaker 3: love to be making. It would love to be able 489 00:30:30,840 --> 00:30:33,240 Speaker 3: to convince us that meat is needed for our health, 490 00:30:33,280 --> 00:30:36,600 Speaker 3: and so these sacrifices in how we treat the animals 491 00:30:36,920 --> 00:30:40,600 Speaker 3: are sadly necessary. But it's just not true. It's just 492 00:30:40,760 --> 00:30:43,160 Speaker 3: clearly not true. And then the existence of all these 493 00:30:43,200 --> 00:30:48,520 Speaker 3: manifestly healthy vegetarians and vegans makes that completely undeniable. That 494 00:30:48,560 --> 00:30:50,760 Speaker 3: we don't actually need to be eating these animals at 495 00:30:50,760 --> 00:30:54,200 Speaker 3: all for our health, and we can, if anything, probably 496 00:30:54,200 --> 00:30:58,720 Speaker 3: be healthier without doing so. I think once you realize this, 497 00:30:58,880 --> 00:31:05,640 Speaker 3: these really does become very clear for not eating these animals, 498 00:31:05,680 --> 00:31:09,800 Speaker 3: that the harms we're doing to them contact to be justified, 499 00:31:09,960 --> 00:31:12,360 Speaker 3: because the benefit we get is at most that the 500 00:31:13,160 --> 00:31:18,840 Speaker 3: gustatory benefit, the enjoyment of the product. It's not necessary 501 00:31:18,840 --> 00:31:22,840 Speaker 3: for our health in any way, and that enjoyment can't 502 00:31:23,040 --> 00:31:26,600 Speaker 3: justify in the balance all that suffering cause to the animal. 503 00:31:27,360 --> 00:31:29,360 Speaker 2: Well, Jonathan, thank you so much for taking time out 504 00:31:29,360 --> 00:31:31,959 Speaker 2: of your day to chat with me. The book is 505 00:31:32,080 --> 00:31:35,800 Speaker 2: The Edge of Sentience Risk and Precaution in Humans, Other 506 00:31:35,840 --> 00:31:39,800 Speaker 2: Animals and AI. It is out in the United States 507 00:31:40,040 --> 00:31:41,400 Speaker 2: on November fifteenth. 508 00:31:41,800 --> 00:31:43,960 Speaker 3: Thanks Robert, Thank you. 509 00:31:45,840 --> 00:31:48,800 Speaker 2: All right, Thanks again to Jonathan Burch for coming on 510 00:31:48,840 --> 00:31:51,080 Speaker 2: the show and chatting with me again. That book is 511 00:31:51,120 --> 00:31:54,160 Speaker 2: The Edge of Sentience Risk and Precaution in Humans, Other 512 00:31:54,240 --> 00:31:57,560 Speaker 2: Animals and AI. It is out later this week on 513 00:31:57,800 --> 00:32:01,600 Speaker 2: November fifteenth, And it gets into so much more that 514 00:32:01,680 --> 00:32:04,520 Speaker 2: we didn't have time to get into in this interview. 515 00:32:05,400 --> 00:32:07,320 Speaker 2: Just a reminder that stuff to blow your mind is 516 00:32:07,360 --> 00:32:10,400 Speaker 2: primarily a science and culture podcast with core episodes on 517 00:32:10,440 --> 00:32:14,080 Speaker 2: Tuesdays and Thursdays. On Fridays, we set aside most serious 518 00:32:14,080 --> 00:32:15,960 Speaker 2: concerns to just talk about a weird film on Weird 519 00:32:15,960 --> 00:32:18,520 Speaker 2: House Cinema, and we have short form episodes that air 520 00:32:18,840 --> 00:32:22,680 Speaker 2: on Wednesdays. Thanks as always to the great JJ Possway 521 00:32:22,720 --> 00:32:25,920 Speaker 2: for editing and producing this podcast, and if you would 522 00:32:25,960 --> 00:32:27,880 Speaker 2: like to get in touch with us, well, you can 523 00:32:27,920 --> 00:32:30,880 Speaker 2: email us at contact at stuff to Blow your Mind 524 00:32:31,040 --> 00:32:39,320 Speaker 2: dot com. 525 00:32:39,440 --> 00:32:42,360 Speaker 1: Stuff to Blow Your Mind is production of iHeartRadio. For 526 00:32:42,480 --> 00:32:45,240 Speaker 1: more podcasts from my heart Radio, visit the iHeartRadio app, 527 00:32:45,400 --> 00:33:06,040 Speaker 1: Apple Podcasts, or wherever you're listening to your favorite shows. 528 00:33:02,080 --> 00:33:02,120 Speaker 1: U