WEBVTT - Ep67 "How did human brains get runaway intelligence? "

0:00:05.080 --> 0:00:10.440
<v Speaker 1>Humans are really smart? But how did intelligence evolve? If

0:00:10.440 --> 0:00:13.760
<v Speaker 1>we're trying to look back at the history of intelligent brains,

0:00:14.360 --> 0:00:16.520
<v Speaker 1>do we have to look all the way back to

0:00:16.640 --> 0:00:20.880
<v Speaker 1>our common ancestors with the apes, or all mammals or

0:00:21.000 --> 0:00:25.640
<v Speaker 1>all reptiles, or can the origins of intelligence be traced

0:00:25.680 --> 0:00:30.000
<v Speaker 1>back even further? And now that our species is good

0:00:30.040 --> 0:00:33.320
<v Speaker 1>and smart, what does the knowledge of our past mean

0:00:33.479 --> 0:00:41.640
<v Speaker 1>for us as we work to build intelligence artificially? Welcome

0:00:41.640 --> 0:00:45.640
<v Speaker 1>to Inner Cosmos with me David Eagleman. I'm a neuroscientist

0:00:45.680 --> 0:00:48.919
<v Speaker 1>and an author at Stanford and in these episodes, we

0:00:49.000 --> 0:00:53.440
<v Speaker 1>sail deeply into our three pound universe to understand why

0:00:53.560 --> 0:01:05.160
<v Speaker 1>and how our lives look the way they do. Today's

0:01:05.160 --> 0:01:10.200
<v Speaker 1>episode is about intelligence and the history of intelligence. How

0:01:10.240 --> 0:01:13.360
<v Speaker 1>did human intelligence arrive on the scene?

0:01:13.880 --> 0:01:14.080
<v Speaker 2>Now?

0:01:14.120 --> 0:01:16.800
<v Speaker 1>This is an important question because we seem to be

0:01:17.000 --> 0:01:21.120
<v Speaker 1>operating at a different level than our neighbors in the

0:01:21.200 --> 0:01:24.520
<v Speaker 1>animal kingdom. We are the only ones, as far as

0:01:24.520 --> 0:01:29.160
<v Speaker 1>we can tell, who compose symphonies and launch mars rover

0:01:29.280 --> 0:01:34.520
<v Speaker 1>missions and discover DNA and build courthouses and have congresses

0:01:34.560 --> 0:01:39.480
<v Speaker 1>and construct windmills and write novels and build screws and

0:01:39.520 --> 0:01:42.880
<v Speaker 1>screwdrivers to hold things together, and so on and so on,

0:01:43.200 --> 0:01:46.679
<v Speaker 1>none of which any other animal does. And this is

0:01:46.720 --> 0:01:50.000
<v Speaker 1>how we've taken over the whole planet. But how the

0:01:50.040 --> 0:01:56.559
<v Speaker 1>heck did this happen? Why are humans such a runaway species? Well,

0:01:56.640 --> 0:02:00.120
<v Speaker 1>traditionally the explanation has been something like this is a

0:02:00.200 --> 0:02:04.080
<v Speaker 1>special gift from your deity, whichever deity your family believed

0:02:04.120 --> 0:02:09.200
<v Speaker 1>in at whatever moment in history. But centuries of people

0:02:09.240 --> 0:02:12.480
<v Speaker 1>looking at this carefully, sometimes in a microscope, sometimes in

0:02:12.520 --> 0:02:18.000
<v Speaker 1>the brain scanner, sometimes at autopsy, careful examination has made

0:02:18.080 --> 0:02:21.600
<v Speaker 1>something very clear. When you look at the brains of

0:02:21.720 --> 0:02:26.800
<v Speaker 1>other animals, those brains are very similar to our own. Now,

0:02:26.880 --> 0:02:30.240
<v Speaker 1>this shouldn't be surprising. It's the same when you look

0:02:30.280 --> 0:02:34.320
<v Speaker 1>at other animals hearts or lungs or kidneys. It's the

0:02:34.440 --> 0:02:39.600
<v Speaker 1>same good idea, and it's conserved throughout evolution, and so

0:02:39.800 --> 0:02:44.960
<v Speaker 1>it goes with brains, with neurons and cerebellum and thalamus

0:02:44.960 --> 0:02:48.360
<v Speaker 1>and hippocampus and cortex and blah blah blah. It looks

0:02:48.520 --> 0:02:52.320
<v Speaker 1>pretty similar everywhere. And this leads to a point which

0:02:52.360 --> 0:02:56.160
<v Speaker 1>should be fairly obvious when you look across the evolution

0:02:56.480 --> 0:03:00.480
<v Speaker 1>of the vast Kingdom of animals. You don't find that

0:03:00.520 --> 0:03:05.120
<v Speaker 1>there was no intelligence and suddenly humans popped up like

0:03:05.240 --> 0:03:09.440
<v Speaker 1>hairless geniuses. That's not what happened. Instead, what you find

0:03:10.080 --> 0:03:14.000
<v Speaker 1>is there are versions of intelligence all around us. As

0:03:14.040 --> 0:03:17.880
<v Speaker 1>one example, I always admire the squirrels hopping in my

0:03:18.080 --> 0:03:22.040
<v Speaker 1>tree in the garden. They perform these sophisticated acrobatics and

0:03:22.080 --> 0:03:25.280
<v Speaker 1>do the kind of stuff that human gymnasts would never

0:03:25.320 --> 0:03:29.680
<v Speaker 1>even attempt. And crows show intelligence that's closer to our own.

0:03:29.720 --> 0:03:33.959
<v Speaker 1>They can solve really sophisticated puzzles, and dolphins have some

0:03:34.000 --> 0:03:37.440
<v Speaker 1>sort of societies and language, though again not quite as

0:03:37.480 --> 0:03:41.440
<v Speaker 1>sophisticated as ours. And in episode thirty four, I explored

0:03:41.480 --> 0:03:44.760
<v Speaker 1>what it would be like to have different levels of intelligence,

0:03:45.160 --> 0:03:47.480
<v Speaker 1>So please check out that episode if you're interested in that.

0:03:47.960 --> 0:03:52.120
<v Speaker 1>So back to this question. When we ask how intelligence

0:03:52.200 --> 0:03:55.480
<v Speaker 1>got here, it ends up being a question about an

0:03:55.520 --> 0:03:59.720
<v Speaker 1>evolutionary journey, like when we ask how did Homo sapiens

0:03:59.760 --> 0:04:02.440
<v Speaker 1>start walking on our rear legs? Or how did we

0:04:02.520 --> 0:04:06.040
<v Speaker 1>become hairless? Or why do we get pimples and other

0:04:06.120 --> 0:04:09.440
<v Speaker 1>primates don't, or even deeper things like how did any

0:04:09.480 --> 0:04:12.640
<v Speaker 1>of us we and other land dwelling animals, how did

0:04:12.680 --> 0:04:16.159
<v Speaker 1>we get kidneys or lungs? We can ask the same

0:04:16.279 --> 0:04:19.560
<v Speaker 1>sort of questions about the brain. The brain has a

0:04:19.800 --> 0:04:25.159
<v Speaker 1>very rich evolutionary history, a long and sometimes branching pathway

0:04:25.240 --> 0:04:28.719
<v Speaker 1>that has led from early brains swimming around looking for

0:04:28.839 --> 0:04:33.520
<v Speaker 1>food to brains now that build skyscrapers and launch rocket

0:04:33.520 --> 0:04:37.520
<v Speaker 1>ships and try to figure themselves out. This is the

0:04:37.600 --> 0:04:39.560
<v Speaker 1>kind of stuff that none of our neighbors in the

0:04:39.600 --> 0:04:41.919
<v Speaker 1>animal kingdom do, as far as we can tell. And

0:04:41.960 --> 0:04:45.680
<v Speaker 1>there's clearly something special about the human brain that allows

0:04:45.720 --> 0:04:49.560
<v Speaker 1>that to happen. In other words, we find smarts all

0:04:49.600 --> 0:04:52.800
<v Speaker 1>across the animal kingdom, but there is something very special

0:04:52.920 --> 0:04:58.320
<v Speaker 1>about human intelligence. There's an evolutionary biologist named Theodosius Dubzanski,

0:04:58.560 --> 0:05:03.440
<v Speaker 1>and he once said all species are unique, but humans

0:05:03.680 --> 0:05:06.920
<v Speaker 1>are the uniquest. So I've just told you two things.

0:05:07.040 --> 0:05:10.640
<v Speaker 1>On the one hand, we have very similar brains to

0:05:10.720 --> 0:05:14.039
<v Speaker 1>all our animal cousins, and on the other hand, we

0:05:14.200 --> 0:05:19.000
<v Speaker 1>have a runaway intelligence. So what has happened here? One

0:05:19.040 --> 0:05:23.080
<v Speaker 1>person who has devoted himself to this question is Max Bennett,

0:05:23.080 --> 0:05:27.080
<v Speaker 1>who wrote a wonderful book called A Brief History of Intelligence,

0:05:27.480 --> 0:05:30.800
<v Speaker 1>And in this book, Max distills an enormous amount of

0:05:30.880 --> 0:05:34.960
<v Speaker 1>data about the history of animal species to reveal a

0:05:35.160 --> 0:05:40.839
<v Speaker 1>clear path that stretches from very ancient ancestors to us.

0:05:41.520 --> 0:05:45.839
<v Speaker 1>He attributes the story of human intelligence not just to

0:05:45.920 --> 0:05:50.719
<v Speaker 1>a single breakthrough, but to five breakthroughs. I really loved

0:05:50.720 --> 0:05:58.840
<v Speaker 1>his books, so I called him to join us today. So, Max,

0:05:58.880 --> 0:06:02.240
<v Speaker 1>when we're talking about the origins of intelligence, you might

0:06:02.320 --> 0:06:04.400
<v Speaker 1>think that what we need to do is look all

0:06:04.400 --> 0:06:07.279
<v Speaker 1>the way back to our common ancestors with the apes,

0:06:07.440 --> 0:06:10.640
<v Speaker 1>or maybe farther back to mammals, or maybe even as

0:06:10.640 --> 0:06:13.320
<v Speaker 1>far back as reptiles. But you suggest in your book

0:06:13.560 --> 0:06:16.560
<v Speaker 1>that we have to look back much farther than that.

0:06:16.720 --> 0:06:19.479
<v Speaker 1>Even so tell us where you think the sparks of

0:06:19.520 --> 0:06:20.600
<v Speaker 1>intelligence began.

0:06:21.320 --> 0:06:24.320
<v Speaker 2>So what's so interesting in trying to understand how the

0:06:24.360 --> 0:06:28.360
<v Speaker 2>human brain works is not only how much we've learned,

0:06:28.400 --> 0:06:31.880
<v Speaker 2>but also how much we've still failed to learn because

0:06:31.880 --> 0:06:34.240
<v Speaker 2>of how complicated the human brain is. I mean, the

0:06:34.279 --> 0:06:36.600
<v Speaker 2>human brain has eighty six billion neurons and one hundred

0:06:36.640 --> 0:06:40.360
<v Speaker 2>trillion connections, and so one strategy for trying to understand

0:06:40.400 --> 0:06:43.760
<v Speaker 2>the brain is to look at the series of steps

0:06:43.800 --> 0:06:46.200
<v Speaker 2>by which it came to be. Even if we only

0:06:46.240 --> 0:06:50.280
<v Speaker 2>go as far back as the first vertebrates, with whom

0:06:50.320 --> 0:06:53.039
<v Speaker 2>our common ancestors are around five hundred million years ago.

0:06:53.560 --> 0:06:56.880
<v Speaker 2>Our ancestors had brains somewhat akin to a modern fish,

0:06:57.279 --> 0:07:00.680
<v Speaker 2>and even in a fish brain there are a lot

0:07:00.760 --> 0:07:04.400
<v Speaker 2>of complicated structures and a lot of neurons. So I

0:07:04.400 --> 0:07:06.280
<v Speaker 2>think it behooves us to go back all the way

0:07:06.320 --> 0:07:09.200
<v Speaker 2>to the very first brains, which have brains akin to

0:07:09.840 --> 0:07:13.560
<v Speaker 2>a modern nematode and a modern Some species of modern nematodes,

0:07:13.600 --> 0:07:16.120
<v Speaker 2>like C. Elegans, only have three hundred two neurons, and

0:07:16.160 --> 0:07:18.119
<v Speaker 2>we can learn a lot about what the very first

0:07:18.120 --> 0:07:22.040
<v Speaker 2>brain did by understanding what a nematode brain does.

0:07:22.120 --> 0:07:25.400
<v Speaker 1>So tell us what a nematode is for listeners who don't.

0:07:25.280 --> 0:07:27.960
<v Speaker 2>Know, there's many different species of nematodes, but the most

0:07:27.960 --> 0:07:30.760
<v Speaker 2>well studied is something called Cea elegans, and it is

0:07:30.800 --> 0:07:34.040
<v Speaker 2>a small wormlike creature. You could fit a few on

0:07:34.080 --> 0:07:37.880
<v Speaker 2>your fingertip. And they have no eyes, they have no ears,

0:07:37.920 --> 0:07:40.640
<v Speaker 2>they can't render an image of the external world. They

0:07:40.680 --> 0:07:43.600
<v Speaker 2>only have three hundred two neurons in its entire nervous system,

0:07:44.040 --> 0:07:46.360
<v Speaker 2>and yet it can do some really impressive stuff and

0:07:46.360 --> 0:07:48.840
<v Speaker 2>that teach us a lot about the foundations of the

0:07:48.920 --> 0:07:49.680
<v Speaker 2>very first brains.

0:07:49.960 --> 0:07:52.680
<v Speaker 1>Okay, so give us a sense of what C. Elegans

0:07:52.720 --> 0:07:53.000
<v Speaker 1>can do.

0:07:53.480 --> 0:07:56.000
<v Speaker 2>One thing that's really interesting about C. Elegans is how

0:07:56.080 --> 0:07:59.400
<v Speaker 2>well it navigates the world and the absence of a

0:07:59.520 --> 0:08:03.640
<v Speaker 2>complex sensory apparatus. So one might think that in order

0:08:03.680 --> 0:08:07.679
<v Speaker 2>to find food or avoid predators, one needs to build

0:08:07.680 --> 0:08:11.280
<v Speaker 2>a map of space, or have eyes that enable them

0:08:11.320 --> 0:08:15.120
<v Speaker 2>to see into the distance, or have complex ears that

0:08:15.160 --> 0:08:18.640
<v Speaker 2>allow them to detect things through sound. But the elegance

0:08:18.640 --> 0:08:21.040
<v Speaker 2>has none of this. And yet if you put sea

0:08:21.040 --> 0:08:24.720
<v Speaker 2>elegans in a peatrie dish, it finds food rapidly. And

0:08:24.760 --> 0:08:27.720
<v Speaker 2>if you put them in the wild, they eminently find

0:08:27.800 --> 0:08:31.400
<v Speaker 2>optimal temperatures, and they eminently find ways to avoid predators.

0:08:31.800 --> 0:08:34.720
<v Speaker 2>And so the ways that their brain does this seems

0:08:34.720 --> 0:08:37.120
<v Speaker 2>to be quite similar to the way that a rumba works.

0:08:38.280 --> 0:08:42.800
<v Speaker 2>So a rumba, if folks aren't familiar, is the sort

0:08:42.800 --> 0:08:46.280
<v Speaker 2>of classic vacuum cleaning robot, and it also has no

0:08:46.360 --> 0:08:49.840
<v Speaker 2>eyes or ears, and yet somehow it cleans up everything

0:08:49.880 --> 0:08:53.240
<v Speaker 2>in your house. And so what a rumba does is

0:08:53.880 --> 0:08:55.600
<v Speaker 2>when it hits the wall, it sort of backs away

0:08:55.600 --> 0:08:58.079
<v Speaker 2>and turns randomly, and it keeps doing this randomly enough

0:08:58.160 --> 0:09:00.880
<v Speaker 2>until it reaches all the corners of your house. And

0:09:00.920 --> 0:09:04.640
<v Speaker 2>what nematoad does in some ways actually more advanced, where

0:09:04.679 --> 0:09:07.640
<v Speaker 2>it has sensory neurons around its head, and all these

0:09:07.679 --> 0:09:10.600
<v Speaker 2>sensory neurons do is they get excited when a good

0:09:10.640 --> 0:09:13.320
<v Speaker 2>thing like a smell, is increasing in concentration like a

0:09:13.320 --> 0:09:17.679
<v Speaker 2>food smell, and those drive forward movements, or another set

0:09:17.720 --> 0:09:22.000
<v Speaker 2>of neurons gets excited when something bad increases or something

0:09:22.000 --> 0:09:24.520
<v Speaker 2>good decreases, in other words, a decreasing concentration of a

0:09:24.559 --> 0:09:28.920
<v Speaker 2>food smell. And just by detecting these changes, a brain

0:09:29.040 --> 0:09:31.120
<v Speaker 2>can decide I'm going to keep going forward if good

0:09:31.160 --> 0:09:33.959
<v Speaker 2>things are increasing, or I'm going to turn randomly if

0:09:34.000 --> 0:09:37.800
<v Speaker 2>good things are decreasing, And this is classically called taxis navigation.

0:09:38.480 --> 0:09:41.000
<v Speaker 2>In simpler terms, you call this just steering. And in

0:09:41.040 --> 0:09:44.160
<v Speaker 2>the absence of any site, nematoads can find the origin

0:09:44.200 --> 0:09:48.040
<v Speaker 2>of food smells because food creates this gradience in water,

0:09:48.240 --> 0:09:51.280
<v Speaker 2>where the concentration of the smell is higher towards the source.

0:09:51.760 --> 0:09:55.200
<v Speaker 2>So the very first brain, its core function, was just

0:09:55.240 --> 0:09:57.520
<v Speaker 2>to categorize things in the world and too good and bad,

0:09:57.920 --> 0:09:59.760
<v Speaker 2>such that it would turn towards good things in a

0:09:59.800 --> 0:10:00.720
<v Speaker 2>way from bad things.

0:10:01.160 --> 0:10:03.760
<v Speaker 1>Now bacteria do that too, yes they do.

0:10:03.920 --> 0:10:09.800
<v Speaker 2>Clinokinesis absolutely what's almost mesmerizing about evolution is how this

0:10:10.080 --> 0:10:13.320
<v Speaker 2>exact same algorithm seems to have been recapitulated in a

0:10:13.320 --> 0:10:17.679
<v Speaker 2>completely different substrate. So single celled organisms do this exact

0:10:17.720 --> 0:10:20.920
<v Speaker 2>same type of taxis navigation, but it's implemented in sort

0:10:20.920 --> 0:10:24.319
<v Speaker 2>of the protein machinery of a single cell. And animatode

0:10:24.360 --> 0:10:27.400
<v Speaker 2>does the exact same algorithm, but not implemented within a

0:10:27.440 --> 0:10:29.360
<v Speaker 2>single cell, but through a web of neurons.

0:10:29.800 --> 0:10:32.240
<v Speaker 1>And so what you've proposed in your book, which is

0:10:32.280 --> 0:10:38.679
<v Speaker 1>an amazing book, is five breakthroughs that happened in evolutionary

0:10:38.760 --> 0:10:43.040
<v Speaker 1>time scales that led to intelligence the way that we

0:10:43.840 --> 0:10:47.840
<v Speaker 1>have and care about intelligence. So tell us about breakthrough

0:10:47.920 --> 0:10:48.400
<v Speaker 1>number one.

0:10:49.040 --> 0:10:52.679
<v Speaker 2>So breakthrough number one was this idea of steering. So

0:10:52.920 --> 0:10:57.000
<v Speaker 2>the animals before the first animals with brains, which are

0:10:57.000 --> 0:11:01.800
<v Speaker 2>classically called bileatrians because they have bilineateral symmetry, meaning they're

0:11:01.840 --> 0:11:04.959
<v Speaker 2>symmetric across the central plane. It is interesting to real

0:11:05.040 --> 0:11:07.320
<v Speaker 2>people don't realize this until they think about it, but

0:11:07.440 --> 0:11:09.800
<v Speaker 2>all animals that we think of as animals are symmetric

0:11:09.920 --> 0:11:11.600
<v Speaker 2>across the central line through their body.

0:11:11.840 --> 0:11:13.200
<v Speaker 1>So you mean they have a left side on the

0:11:13.280 --> 0:11:15.880
<v Speaker 1>right side, and they are a mirror image.

0:11:16.240 --> 0:11:19.439
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, and so, but not all animals have that. So

0:11:19.600 --> 0:11:21.920
<v Speaker 2>the very very first animals, we think, we don't have

0:11:21.960 --> 0:11:24.719
<v Speaker 2>perfect evidence for this, but we think we're probably more

0:11:24.760 --> 0:11:28.280
<v Speaker 2>akin to a coral polyp or a jellyfish, which has

0:11:28.400 --> 0:11:33.160
<v Speaker 2>radial symmetry, so they're symmetric across a central axis. And

0:11:33.240 --> 0:11:37.080
<v Speaker 2>so the transition from radial symmetry to bilateral symmetry seems

0:11:37.120 --> 0:11:39.960
<v Speaker 2>to be in part driven by the need to navigate. So,

0:11:40.440 --> 0:11:43.280
<v Speaker 2>although jellyfish are an interesting exception because some of them

0:11:43.360 --> 0:11:48.080
<v Speaker 2>independently seem to have evolved relatively complex navigational systems, most

0:11:48.400 --> 0:11:52.559
<v Speaker 2>evolutionary neuroscientists think the very first animals were more sensile,

0:11:52.800 --> 0:11:54.960
<v Speaker 2>like a coral polyp, where they sit in place. They

0:11:55.000 --> 0:11:57.040
<v Speaker 2>have tentacles and they just try to detect food that

0:11:57.080 --> 0:12:00.280
<v Speaker 2>pass by the tentacles. But the very first animal with

0:12:00.320 --> 0:12:05.040
<v Speaker 2>brains are bilateral ancestors. They use this brain to categorize

0:12:05.080 --> 0:12:07.040
<v Speaker 2>the world and to good and bad. To implement this

0:12:07.160 --> 0:12:10.280
<v Speaker 2>taxis navigation to find food and avoid predators.

0:12:10.679 --> 0:12:14.640
<v Speaker 1>So the existence of a brain correlates with having this

0:12:14.760 --> 0:12:17.120
<v Speaker 1>left right side. Is that correct?

0:12:17.480 --> 0:12:20.880
<v Speaker 2>There are all animals with brains descend have bilateral symmetry,

0:12:20.960 --> 0:12:24.000
<v Speaker 2>or descend from the bilaterally symmetric ancestor in which the

0:12:24.000 --> 0:12:27.000
<v Speaker 2>first brains evolved. And so we also see a suite

0:12:27.000 --> 0:12:30.199
<v Speaker 2>of other interesting things emerged with this first breakthrough of steering.

0:12:31.120 --> 0:12:34.440
<v Speaker 2>One is classically called affect, which is sort of the

0:12:34.440 --> 0:12:40.160
<v Speaker 2>first template of emotional states. And so a nematode actually

0:12:40.240 --> 0:12:44.400
<v Speaker 2>has dopamine neurons, and what these dopamine neurons do is

0:12:44.400 --> 0:12:48.160
<v Speaker 2>they detect the presence of bacteria outside of the nematode.

0:12:48.520 --> 0:12:51.240
<v Speaker 2>And what it does is it changed their behavioral repertoire

0:12:51.320 --> 0:12:54.720
<v Speaker 2>to search in their local area. And we see why

0:12:54.760 --> 0:12:56.840
<v Speaker 2>this exists in the rumba. So a rumba has something

0:12:56.880 --> 0:13:00.200
<v Speaker 2>called dirt detect and what dirt detect does is if

0:13:00.200 --> 0:13:03.840
<v Speaker 2>it bumps into dirt, it starts turning randomly in that area.

0:13:04.679 --> 0:13:06.839
<v Speaker 2>And the reason it does that is because the world

0:13:06.880 --> 0:13:09.600
<v Speaker 2>is clumpy, So if you detect dirt, it's likely that

0:13:09.640 --> 0:13:12.880
<v Speaker 2>there's other dirt nearby, even though you're not. Maybe detecting

0:13:12.960 --> 0:13:16.080
<v Speaker 2>dirt in the moment. So what anematod does is the

0:13:16.080 --> 0:13:18.800
<v Speaker 2>exact same thing. If it runs into food, even though

0:13:18.840 --> 0:13:21.480
<v Speaker 2>it might not detect food a second later, it's probably

0:13:21.520 --> 0:13:24.160
<v Speaker 2>the case there's other food nearby, and so this rush

0:13:24.160 --> 0:13:29.199
<v Speaker 2>of dopamine drives this local search in these very early brains. Similarly,

0:13:29.640 --> 0:13:33.200
<v Speaker 2>there are serotonin neurons, but they're in the throat, and

0:13:33.280 --> 0:13:36.640
<v Speaker 2>so what serotonin signals is the consumption of food, and

0:13:36.720 --> 0:13:40.199
<v Speaker 2>serotonin in these very early nematodes drives sort of satiation.

0:13:41.120 --> 0:13:44.800
<v Speaker 2>And of course those chemicals do much more complicated things

0:13:44.800 --> 0:13:48.000
<v Speaker 2>than human brains. That basic template of dopamine being the

0:13:48.040 --> 0:13:53.240
<v Speaker 2>seeking exploitation nearby reward signal and serotonin being the sort

0:13:53.280 --> 0:13:58.680
<v Speaker 2>of satiation consumption satisfaction signal. We do see hints of

0:13:58.760 --> 0:14:04.480
<v Speaker 2>that basic even in human brains. So we see categorizing

0:14:04.480 --> 0:14:07.000
<v Speaker 2>the world into good to bad, we see bilateral symmetry,

0:14:07.040 --> 0:14:09.800
<v Speaker 2>we see these very basic behavioral states. And then the

0:14:09.880 --> 0:14:11.920
<v Speaker 2>last thing we also see emerge in this breakthrough of

0:14:12.000 --> 0:14:15.520
<v Speaker 2>steering is the foundation of associative learning, and this is

0:14:15.520 --> 0:14:18.280
<v Speaker 2>the first form of real learning that we see emerge

0:14:18.440 --> 0:14:24.520
<v Speaker 2>in animal evolution. And anematode can associate a stimulus with

0:14:24.840 --> 0:14:27.240
<v Speaker 2>a good or bad thing. So if you put a

0:14:27.240 --> 0:14:30.720
<v Speaker 2>nematode in a peach redish and put salt on one side,

0:14:31.000 --> 0:14:35.120
<v Speaker 2>nematoads typically steer towards salts because salt tends to correlate

0:14:35.160 --> 0:14:37.720
<v Speaker 2>with food. But if you leave them in a peach redition,

0:14:37.920 --> 0:14:39.760
<v Speaker 2>starve them for a long period of time in the

0:14:39.760 --> 0:14:42.800
<v Speaker 2>presence of salt water, they change their opinion and they

0:14:42.800 --> 0:14:45.160
<v Speaker 2>will start steering away from salt in the future. And

0:14:45.200 --> 0:14:48.360
<v Speaker 2>it makes sense why associative learning would emerge if the

0:14:48.440 --> 0:14:51.080
<v Speaker 2>very first brain of steering, because you want to tweak

0:14:51.120 --> 0:14:54.000
<v Speaker 2>the goodness and badness of things, because deciding what to

0:14:54.040 --> 0:14:55.840
<v Speaker 2>turn towards and away from is a life or death

0:14:55.840 --> 0:14:58.720
<v Speaker 2>decision for anema TOD. So this first breakthrough of steering,

0:14:58.760 --> 0:15:01.640
<v Speaker 2>we see the suite of of new abilities from associative learning.

0:15:01.640 --> 0:15:05.440
<v Speaker 2>Bilateral symmetry categorizing things in a good and bad emerged

0:15:05.480 --> 0:15:08.240
<v Speaker 2>with the very first brain. So that was breakthrough number one.

0:15:08.080 --> 0:15:10.400
<v Speaker 1>Okay, terrific. And what was break through number two?

0:15:11.360 --> 0:15:14.400
<v Speaker 2>So if we fast forward about fifty million years or so,

0:15:14.840 --> 0:15:18.680
<v Speaker 2>we enter what's famously known as the Cambrian Period and

0:15:18.720 --> 0:15:23.200
<v Speaker 2>the Cambrian Explosion, is this huge diversification of life, which

0:15:23.280 --> 0:15:27.320
<v Speaker 2>actually is all of the children of this first bilateral animal.

0:15:27.520 --> 0:15:30.240
<v Speaker 2>So if you were to swim around the Cambrian Ocean,

0:15:30.560 --> 0:15:34.520
<v Speaker 2>you would see many ancestors of this bilateral wormlike creature

0:15:34.800 --> 0:15:37.960
<v Speaker 2>who had proliferated into what would look like crustaceans and

0:15:38.080 --> 0:15:42.240
<v Speaker 2>arthropods of today. There were huge insect like creatures in

0:15:42.280 --> 0:15:45.400
<v Speaker 2>the ocean, and then there were also our ancestors, which

0:15:45.440 --> 0:15:49.120
<v Speaker 2>were much smaller, modest creatures, but they were most akin

0:15:49.200 --> 0:15:51.240
<v Speaker 2>to a fish of today, and they were called the

0:15:51.280 --> 0:15:54.840
<v Speaker 2>first vertebrates. And the reason they're called vertebrates is because

0:15:54.840 --> 0:15:58.640
<v Speaker 2>in fossils, the most salient feature is the vertebral column,

0:15:58.760 --> 0:16:01.840
<v Speaker 2>so they had a spine. And in these first vertebrates,

0:16:02.360 --> 0:16:04.920
<v Speaker 2>we can get insight into what their brains did by

0:16:04.960 --> 0:16:09.160
<v Speaker 2>looking into the brains of fish today, because there's many

0:16:09.240 --> 0:16:12.920
<v Speaker 2>species of fish that evolutionary neuroscientists think have brains that

0:16:12.960 --> 0:16:15.480
<v Speaker 2>were quite similar to the very first vertebrates. And what

0:16:15.560 --> 0:16:17.840
<v Speaker 2>I found most surprising when I first started looking into

0:16:17.920 --> 0:16:20.880
<v Speaker 2>this is how similar fish brains are to human brains.

0:16:21.000 --> 0:16:22.880
<v Speaker 2>So I would have expected a fish brain to have

0:16:22.920 --> 0:16:25.600
<v Speaker 2>almost none of the features of a human brain, but

0:16:26.480 --> 0:16:29.680
<v Speaker 2>counter to that, intuition. Fish brain have all, with the

0:16:29.720 --> 0:16:32.040
<v Speaker 2>exception of a few things, have all of the major

0:16:32.080 --> 0:16:36.200
<v Speaker 2>brain structures that a human brain does. And also, counter

0:16:36.360 --> 0:16:39.400
<v Speaker 2>to what my expectations would have been, there's sort of

0:16:39.400 --> 0:16:42.440
<v Speaker 2>a stereotype that fish are really dumb, but the more

0:16:42.440 --> 0:16:45.520
<v Speaker 2>you look into the comparative psychology work done on fish,

0:16:45.680 --> 0:16:48.320
<v Speaker 2>fish are way smarter than we think. And for example,

0:16:48.720 --> 0:16:50.920
<v Speaker 2>fish can learn how to navigate out of a maze

0:16:50.960 --> 0:16:53.000
<v Speaker 2>and remember exactly how to do it a year later.

0:16:53.320 --> 0:16:55.680
<v Speaker 2>You can go to YouTube and find really funny cute

0:16:55.760 --> 0:16:58.560
<v Speaker 2>videos of people training fish to jump through hoops for treats,

0:16:59.040 --> 0:17:01.320
<v Speaker 2>and you can train a to push levers for food

0:17:01.360 --> 0:17:03.600
<v Speaker 2>and all of these sort of fun things. And so

0:17:04.040 --> 0:17:06.760
<v Speaker 2>when we look at these brain structures that emerged, there's

0:17:06.800 --> 0:17:09.320
<v Speaker 2>a lot of really good evidence that the key thing

0:17:09.400 --> 0:17:13.280
<v Speaker 2>that happened was these early vertebrate brains enabled the ability

0:17:13.320 --> 0:17:16.720
<v Speaker 2>to learn through reinforcement and AI. This is called reinforcement

0:17:16.840 --> 0:17:20.960
<v Speaker 2>learning and behavioral psychology is typically called trial and error learning.

0:17:21.280 --> 0:17:24.360
<v Speaker 2>So they could learn to perform arbitrary sequences of actions

0:17:24.440 --> 0:17:27.600
<v Speaker 2>on the basis of whether or not it led to

0:17:27.640 --> 0:17:30.440
<v Speaker 2>a reward at the end. So when we go into

0:17:30.440 --> 0:17:33.439
<v Speaker 2>the fish brain. There are two key structures that are

0:17:33.520 --> 0:17:36.879
<v Speaker 2>useful to know about because they will keep coming up

0:17:36.880 --> 0:17:39.400
<v Speaker 2>through our story and the evolution of the human brain.

0:17:39.680 --> 0:17:42.320
<v Speaker 2>One is something called the basal ganglia, and the basil

0:17:42.320 --> 0:17:45.600
<v Speaker 2>ganglia of a fish has almost exactly the same structure

0:17:46.240 --> 0:17:49.520
<v Speaker 2>and network as the basil ganglia of a human, and

0:17:49.960 --> 0:17:53.920
<v Speaker 2>computational neuroscientists have gone to painstaking efforts to show that

0:17:53.960 --> 0:17:58.000
<v Speaker 2>the basil gangly is implementing a reinforcement learning algorithm almost

0:17:58.000 --> 0:18:01.240
<v Speaker 2>identical to the reinforcement learning algorithm we use in AI

0:18:01.359 --> 0:18:05.040
<v Speaker 2>system today. And the way that it works in principle

0:18:05.280 --> 0:18:08.920
<v Speaker 2>is it trains itself based on the exciting the excitement

0:18:08.920 --> 0:18:12.600
<v Speaker 2>of dopamine, and it learns to repeat behaviors that drive

0:18:12.640 --> 0:18:16.439
<v Speaker 2>dopamine release and inhibit behaviors that drive dopamine decreasing. And

0:18:16.480 --> 0:18:18.680
<v Speaker 2>what's so fascinating is if you look at how this

0:18:19.000 --> 0:18:21.920
<v Speaker 2>system came to be, you can see how reinforcement learning

0:18:22.000 --> 0:18:25.560
<v Speaker 2>is only possible if brains first had the foundation of steering.

0:18:26.040 --> 0:18:29.359
<v Speaker 2>Because the foundation of steering gives us the categorization of

0:18:29.359 --> 0:18:31.600
<v Speaker 2>things in the world and to good and bad, and

0:18:31.640 --> 0:18:34.720
<v Speaker 2>that is repurposed to create this reward signal that the

0:18:34.720 --> 0:18:38.159
<v Speaker 2>basal ganglia then can use to create arbitrary sequences of

0:18:38.200 --> 0:18:41.400
<v Speaker 2>behavior on the basis of what leads to reward or none.

0:18:41.960 --> 0:18:44.120
<v Speaker 2>And this is how a fish can learn really complex

0:18:44.160 --> 0:18:47.600
<v Speaker 2>sequences of actions on the basis of what leads to reward.

0:18:47.640 --> 0:18:50.320
<v Speaker 2>In the end, the second key structure in a fish

0:18:50.359 --> 0:18:53.480
<v Speaker 2>brain is something called the cortex, and we do have

0:18:53.520 --> 0:18:55.919
<v Speaker 2>a version of a cortex. There's a portion of our

0:18:55.960 --> 0:18:58.439
<v Speaker 2>cortex that we'll talk about that's way more advanced. But

0:18:58.480 --> 0:19:01.800
<v Speaker 2>a phish cortex can still do something incredible that the

0:19:01.800 --> 0:19:05.399
<v Speaker 2>first nematodes could not, which is it recognizes things in

0:19:05.440 --> 0:19:08.679
<v Speaker 2>the world on the basis of patterns. So in the

0:19:08.720 --> 0:19:11.919
<v Speaker 2>first nema, in the first bilateral brain, it could not

0:19:12.000 --> 0:19:13.679
<v Speaker 2>detect things in the world on the basis of a

0:19:13.680 --> 0:19:16.080
<v Speaker 2>pattern of activation. So when you look at a horse,

0:19:16.440 --> 0:19:19.000
<v Speaker 2>you recognize a horse not because of any single neuron

0:19:19.040 --> 0:19:21.760
<v Speaker 2>in your brain, but because your brain is somehow decoding

0:19:21.800 --> 0:19:24.480
<v Speaker 2>the pattern of activation on your retina, the neurons in

0:19:24.520 --> 0:19:27.760
<v Speaker 2>your retina. And so the first brains could not do

0:19:27.840 --> 0:19:30.639
<v Speaker 2>anything like this. They only detected things when a single

0:19:30.680 --> 0:19:34.040
<v Speaker 2>neuron got excited in the presence of some stimulus. But fish,

0:19:34.400 --> 0:19:36.760
<v Speaker 2>fish can even recognize human faces. There have been some

0:19:36.800 --> 0:19:39.040
<v Speaker 2>amazing studies that show a fish can recognize a human

0:19:39.040 --> 0:19:41.520
<v Speaker 2>face and learn which face leads to a reward in

0:19:41.560 --> 0:19:44.640
<v Speaker 2>which face does not. Even when that face is rotated

0:19:44.680 --> 0:19:48.320
<v Speaker 2>in space, they still recognize it. So the cortex somehow,

0:19:48.320 --> 0:19:51.600
<v Speaker 2>this is still an outstanding mystery in the field of neuroscience.

0:19:51.920 --> 0:19:56.320
<v Speaker 2>Somehow the cortex recognizes patterns and fish eminently well. And

0:19:56.359 --> 0:19:59.160
<v Speaker 2>in some ways the cortex of a fish recognizes patterns

0:19:59.200 --> 0:20:01.359
<v Speaker 2>better than even our our best vision systems in AI,

0:20:01.480 --> 0:20:03.680
<v Speaker 2>because we can. They've done studies that show that a

0:20:03.760 --> 0:20:07.200
<v Speaker 2>fish can recognize objects in one shots even though it's

0:20:07.240 --> 0:20:10.159
<v Speaker 2>been rotated in space, and AI systems typically don't do that.

0:20:10.160 --> 0:20:11.600
<v Speaker 2>You need a lot of data to get into that.

0:20:12.000 --> 0:20:15.560
<v Speaker 2>So at the first fish brain, we see reinforcement learning emerge,

0:20:15.840 --> 0:20:19.000
<v Speaker 2>which can recognize patterns in the world and can learn

0:20:19.040 --> 0:20:21.359
<v Speaker 2>to take actions in the presence of those patterns based

0:20:21.400 --> 0:20:24.200
<v Speaker 2>on rewards. We see reinforcement learning as breakthrough number two.

0:20:24.800 --> 0:20:26.879
<v Speaker 1>Excellent, Okay, how about number three?

0:20:27.160 --> 0:20:30.199
<v Speaker 2>Then we're going to fast forward through a long period

0:20:30.240 --> 0:20:34.160
<v Speaker 2>of evolutionary time, all the way until about one hundred

0:20:34.160 --> 0:20:36.240
<v Speaker 2>and fifty million years ago. Between hundred and hundred million

0:20:36.280 --> 0:20:40.480
<v Speaker 2>years ago. This is the era of dinosaurs. Our ancestors

0:20:40.480 --> 0:20:44.600
<v Speaker 2>were very, very humble, tiny squirrel like creatures that lived underground,

0:20:45.080 --> 0:20:48.560
<v Speaker 2>and we only came out at nights to hunt for insects.

0:20:49.240 --> 0:20:51.800
<v Speaker 2>But these were the first mammals. We know a lot

0:20:51.800 --> 0:20:54.120
<v Speaker 2>about mammal brains, way more than we actually know about

0:20:54.160 --> 0:20:57.959
<v Speaker 2>fish brains, because the main stay of neuroscience research typically

0:20:58.000 --> 0:21:02.760
<v Speaker 2>happens in rats and mice when we go into these brains. Interestingly,

0:21:03.000 --> 0:21:06.399
<v Speaker 2>the fundamental difference between a mammal brain and a fish

0:21:06.440 --> 0:21:09.840
<v Speaker 2>brain is the presence of one key new structure, which

0:21:09.920 --> 0:21:13.440
<v Speaker 2>is a part of the cortex elaborates into what's famously

0:21:13.480 --> 0:21:17.560
<v Speaker 2>called the neocortex NEO for new, and under a microscope

0:21:17.560 --> 0:21:20.800
<v Speaker 2>there's some really interesting things. So we have remnants of

0:21:20.840 --> 0:21:24.800
<v Speaker 2>the old cortex of fish they are called the olfactory cortex,

0:21:24.920 --> 0:21:28.440
<v Speaker 2>and humans and mammals they're called the hippocampus, and they're

0:21:28.440 --> 0:21:32.000
<v Speaker 2>called the cortical amygdala. These are all ancestral remnants of

0:21:32.040 --> 0:21:35.240
<v Speaker 2>the very first cortex. But the neocortex is entirely new.

0:21:35.400 --> 0:21:38.560
<v Speaker 2>This is something that only occurred within mammals, and it

0:21:38.600 --> 0:21:42.120
<v Speaker 2>looks way more complicated under a microscope and so there's

0:21:42.119 --> 0:21:47.080
<v Speaker 2>this grand question what did this neocortex do? And classically,

0:21:47.400 --> 0:21:50.240
<v Speaker 2>when we study the neocortex, we look at a lot

0:21:50.280 --> 0:21:52.200
<v Speaker 2>of humans, and when you look at a human brain,

0:21:52.880 --> 0:21:54.960
<v Speaker 2>the whole thing seems to be neocortex. So when you

0:21:55.000 --> 0:21:57.160
<v Speaker 2>look at human brain, all of this all is full,

0:21:57.240 --> 0:22:01.720
<v Speaker 2>that's all neocortex bunched together. It's this sort of has

0:22:01.800 --> 0:22:06.879
<v Speaker 2>this sort of surface area, and the neocortex seems to

0:22:06.920 --> 0:22:09.960
<v Speaker 2>do everything, which is this funny perplexing thing in neuroscience.

0:22:10.040 --> 0:22:12.840
<v Speaker 2>Because there's one region that seems to do vision. If

0:22:12.840 --> 0:22:15.960
<v Speaker 2>it gets damaged, people can't see. There's another area that

0:22:16.000 --> 0:22:18.520
<v Speaker 2>seems to do audition. If it gets damaged, people struggle

0:22:18.520 --> 0:22:20.919
<v Speaker 2>to hear things. There's a region that seems to do attention.

0:22:20.960 --> 0:22:23.000
<v Speaker 2>If it get damaged, you can't perceive things on one

0:22:23.000 --> 0:22:26.400
<v Speaker 2>side or visual of view. There's an area for movements.

0:22:26.480 --> 0:22:28.560
<v Speaker 2>If it gets damage, you get paralyzed, so on and

0:22:28.600 --> 0:22:30.840
<v Speaker 2>so forth. So it's this grand sort of mystery of

0:22:30.840 --> 0:22:33.480
<v Speaker 2>what the neocortex does, but most of it seems to

0:22:33.520 --> 0:22:35.679
<v Speaker 2>have been based on this idea of perception. A lot

0:22:35.720 --> 0:22:38.040
<v Speaker 2>of the neocortex seems to enable us to perceive things

0:22:38.040 --> 0:22:40.240
<v Speaker 2>in the world, But what's odd is if we think

0:22:40.240 --> 0:22:44.639
<v Speaker 2>about this from an evolutionary perspective, there's no clear perceptual

0:22:44.840 --> 0:22:49.040
<v Speaker 2>improvements or very salient at least perceptual improvements, and a

0:22:49.080 --> 0:22:51.680
<v Speaker 2>mammal relative to a fish, so a fish can recognize

0:22:51.680 --> 0:22:54.760
<v Speaker 2>faces as well as a rat can. It recognizes them

0:22:54.800 --> 0:22:57.600
<v Speaker 2>when rotated in space, So it's not so clear from

0:22:57.600 --> 0:23:01.680
<v Speaker 2>an evolutionary perspective that the neocortech evolve for better perception.

0:23:02.119 --> 0:23:05.639
<v Speaker 2>If we really examine the fundamental differences in the abilities

0:23:05.720 --> 0:23:09.520
<v Speaker 2>of simple mammals with fish. There are, however, four things

0:23:09.520 --> 0:23:11.639
<v Speaker 2>that are seen, and I think these are great clues

0:23:11.680 --> 0:23:14.240
<v Speaker 2>as to what the first the neo cortex did. One

0:23:14.280 --> 0:23:16.880
<v Speaker 2>thing that mammals can do very well is they can

0:23:16.920 --> 0:23:20.800
<v Speaker 2>imagine the future. So there's some really wonderful studies done

0:23:20.840 --> 0:23:23.200
<v Speaker 2>by David Reddish that show you can put a mouse

0:23:23.200 --> 0:23:25.080
<v Speaker 2>in amaze and you can watch a mouse imagining its

0:23:25.119 --> 0:23:30.359
<v Speaker 2>possible futures. Another thing you can do is mammals, even rats,

0:23:30.720 --> 0:23:33.400
<v Speaker 2>are eminently good at having regret. So if you put

0:23:33.400 --> 0:23:36.400
<v Speaker 2>them in a situation where they have to make irreversible choices,

0:23:36.640 --> 0:23:38.920
<v Speaker 2>they will often regret their decision and you can watch

0:23:38.960 --> 0:23:41.919
<v Speaker 2>them in their brain imagining themselves taking prior past choices.

0:23:42.520 --> 0:23:45.880
<v Speaker 2>Mammals also have something akin to episodic memory. You can

0:23:45.880 --> 0:23:49.359
<v Speaker 2>put rats in experiments where they have to imagine some

0:23:49.400 --> 0:23:51.399
<v Speaker 2>recent past event in order to solve a puzzle in

0:23:51.440 --> 0:23:52.879
<v Speaker 2>front of them, and you can watch them do that.

0:23:53.560 --> 0:23:55.760
<v Speaker 2>And then the fourth is they have really great fine

0:23:55.760 --> 0:24:00.000
<v Speaker 2>motor skills. So in the reptile literature, there's some good

0:24:00.080 --> 0:24:04.000
<v Speaker 2>evidence that most lizards, with the exception of birds, which

0:24:04.040 --> 0:24:07.320
<v Speaker 2>is a non mammalian vertebrate that has amazing find motor skills.

0:24:07.640 --> 0:24:12.639
<v Speaker 2>But reptiles don't even sort of anticipate our movements to

0:24:12.760 --> 0:24:15.600
<v Speaker 2>get over obstacles. They're very sloppy in their movements. And

0:24:15.680 --> 0:24:18.639
<v Speaker 2>yet a squirrel, watch a squirrel run across sort of

0:24:18.680 --> 0:24:21.440
<v Speaker 2>tree branches, has find motor skills that blow away any

0:24:21.480 --> 0:24:26.240
<v Speaker 2>modern robotic system. So these four things actually can be

0:24:26.320 --> 0:24:30.200
<v Speaker 2>seen as different applications of what I would call simulating

0:24:30.840 --> 0:24:34.160
<v Speaker 2>an AI. This is called planning. Typically, so mammal brains

0:24:34.200 --> 0:24:37.800
<v Speaker 2>are good at simulating possible states of the worlds and

0:24:37.840 --> 0:24:40.359
<v Speaker 2>then making choices on the basis of that simulation. They

0:24:40.400 --> 0:24:43.640
<v Speaker 2>can simulate the future, that's imagination. They can simulate past

0:24:43.640 --> 0:24:46.679
<v Speaker 2>events that's episodic memory, they can simulate and plan their

0:24:47.520 --> 0:24:50.840
<v Speaker 2>hand motions, which is effectively enabling them to find motor skills.

0:24:51.440 --> 0:24:54.560
<v Speaker 2>And so this mental simulation we even see in humans.

0:24:54.600 --> 0:24:56.560
<v Speaker 2>I mean, we are eminently capable of doing this. Close

0:24:56.560 --> 0:24:58.920
<v Speaker 2>your eyes. You can imagine things in your mind's eye.

0:24:59.160 --> 0:25:01.439
<v Speaker 2>This lights up your neocortex the same way as if

0:25:01.480 --> 0:25:04.600
<v Speaker 2>you perceived those same objects. And so simulation was this

0:25:04.680 --> 0:25:07.840
<v Speaker 2>incredible skill given to these early mammals because it enabled

0:25:07.840 --> 0:25:10.600
<v Speaker 2>them to plan their movements ahead of time and sort

0:25:10.600 --> 0:25:15.200
<v Speaker 2>of outsmart the dinosaurs. In AI today, this is classically

0:25:15.200 --> 0:25:19.320
<v Speaker 2>called model based reinforcement learning. And so in AAI there's

0:25:19.320 --> 0:25:22.359
<v Speaker 2>this big division between model free, which means learning to

0:25:22.400 --> 0:25:25.399
<v Speaker 2>take actions without any planning at all. You just see

0:25:25.440 --> 0:25:27.400
<v Speaker 2>sort of the current state and then you make a choice.

0:25:27.640 --> 0:25:30.680
<v Speaker 2>Our self driving cars, the AI algorithm that keeps you

0:25:30.720 --> 0:25:32.600
<v Speaker 2>in the lane is a model free system just sees

0:25:32.640 --> 0:25:34.520
<v Speaker 2>a picture of the road and decides how to put

0:25:34.560 --> 0:25:38.960
<v Speaker 2>the seering wheel. Model based systems are ones that imagine

0:25:39.000 --> 0:25:43.000
<v Speaker 2>possible futures before making a choice. So Alpha Go, that

0:25:43.080 --> 0:25:45.720
<v Speaker 2>one classically be the best go player in the world,

0:25:45.800 --> 0:25:48.600
<v Speaker 2>was a model based reinforcement learning system. It actually within

0:25:48.640 --> 0:25:51.800
<v Speaker 2>a matter of seconds simulated thousands of possible games before

0:25:51.800 --> 0:25:55.080
<v Speaker 2>making a choice, and so there's this really nice synergy

0:25:55.520 --> 0:25:58.280
<v Speaker 2>with AI. Where in early vertebrates, with breakthrough two, we

0:25:58.359 --> 0:26:01.359
<v Speaker 2>see model free reinforcement learning. There's no evidence of fish

0:26:01.400 --> 0:26:04.240
<v Speaker 2>being able to imagine the future, but with early mammals

0:26:04.240 --> 0:26:07.000
<v Speaker 2>we see model based reinforcement learning, which is them being

0:26:07.000 --> 0:26:10.200
<v Speaker 2>able to imagine futures before acting. And what is also

0:26:10.240 --> 0:26:13.760
<v Speaker 2>really interesting is how you can't have simulation without first

0:26:13.840 --> 0:26:16.639
<v Speaker 2>having trial and error learning, because the way that simulation

0:26:16.880 --> 0:26:20.960
<v Speaker 2>cascades into action is you're training yourself in your mind's eye.

0:26:21.240 --> 0:26:24.040
<v Speaker 2>When a rat closes its eyes and imagines itself taking

0:26:24.359 --> 0:26:28.360
<v Speaker 2>multiple paths, a little dopamine gets released when it imagines

0:26:28.400 --> 0:26:31.199
<v Speaker 2>taking the path that actually leads to food. And so

0:26:31.320 --> 0:26:35.040
<v Speaker 2>then the way that the simulation leads to action is

0:26:35.040 --> 0:26:37.280
<v Speaker 2>because you already have this trial and error system in

0:26:37.280 --> 0:26:41.159
<v Speaker 2>place that you're training vicariously with your mind. This is

0:26:41.200 --> 0:26:44.040
<v Speaker 2>also why they've shown this with athletes too. This is

0:26:44.080 --> 0:26:48.239
<v Speaker 2>why mental rehearsal dramatically improves performance. Surgeons also, they've done

0:26:48.280 --> 0:26:51.360
<v Speaker 2>studies that show mental rehearsal improves performance. Okay, so that's

0:26:51.400 --> 0:26:52.439
<v Speaker 2>break through number three.

0:26:52.600 --> 0:26:54.800
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, this is something I talked about on this podcast

0:26:54.840 --> 0:26:57.320
<v Speaker 1>A lot is the way that we unhook from the

0:26:57.400 --> 0:27:00.199
<v Speaker 1>here and now and we go to the therein and then,

0:27:00.240 --> 0:27:02.760
<v Speaker 1>whether that's in the future or the past. As the

0:27:02.800 --> 0:27:06.760
<v Speaker 1>philosopher Carl Popper said, this is what allows our hypotheses

0:27:06.800 --> 0:27:09.960
<v Speaker 1>to die in our stead. And we're going to come

0:27:10.000 --> 0:27:29.159
<v Speaker 1>back to internal models a little bit tell us about

0:27:29.240 --> 0:27:30.120
<v Speaker 1>the next breakthrough.

0:27:30.600 --> 0:27:34.040
<v Speaker 2>Okay, So moving forward from early mammals, a huge asteroid

0:27:34.119 --> 0:27:38.080
<v Speaker 2>hits Earth, which tragically kills off all the dinosaurs and

0:27:38.119 --> 0:27:41.159
<v Speaker 2>opens up the world for what is sometimes called the

0:27:41.160 --> 0:27:44.040
<v Speaker 2>Age of mammals because our ancestors took over from that

0:27:44.080 --> 0:27:46.720
<v Speaker 2>point forward. It is an interesting quirk that if that

0:27:46.800 --> 0:27:49.840
<v Speaker 2>asteroid never heard Earth, there would almost certainly be no humans,

0:27:49.880 --> 0:27:51.919
<v Speaker 2>and it would likely be that we would still be

0:27:52.040 --> 0:27:55.639
<v Speaker 2>tiny little squirrels hiding in the dirt. So that is

0:27:55.720 --> 0:28:00.840
<v Speaker 2>just an interesting accident of the universe. But as mammals

0:28:00.840 --> 0:28:05.080
<v Speaker 2>started proliferating throughout Earth, our ancestors were the ones that

0:28:05.200 --> 0:28:08.320
<v Speaker 2>stayed in the trees and they became the first primates.

0:28:09.160 --> 0:28:12.399
<v Speaker 2>And primates are known for having really really big brains,

0:28:12.720 --> 0:28:16.600
<v Speaker 2>you know. The modern primates include monkeys, non human apes,

0:28:16.680 --> 0:28:20.320
<v Speaker 2>and of course humans, of whom are apes? And these

0:28:20.359 --> 0:28:24.400
<v Speaker 2>primates have really big brains for a perplexing reason. So

0:28:24.600 --> 0:28:28.560
<v Speaker 2>it's been open question in primatology for a lot, or

0:28:28.640 --> 0:28:30.080
<v Speaker 2>was an open question for a long time, why do

0:28:30.119 --> 0:28:32.360
<v Speaker 2>primates have such big brains. They don't seem to have

0:28:32.760 --> 0:28:36.960
<v Speaker 2>such a complex lifestyle that requires them this massive neocortex

0:28:37.040 --> 0:28:40.840
<v Speaker 2>that evolved. But several decades ago some theories emerged that

0:28:40.840 --> 0:28:43.920
<v Speaker 2>have been proven out, which it seems to be something

0:28:43.920 --> 0:28:47.360
<v Speaker 2>about the social lives of primates that drive their really

0:28:47.360 --> 0:28:50.760
<v Speaker 2>big brains. And so Robin Dunbar is one of the

0:28:50.800 --> 0:28:53.320
<v Speaker 2>early people that came up with this idea, And what

0:28:53.400 --> 0:28:55.880
<v Speaker 2>he did is he looked at the size of the

0:28:55.880 --> 0:28:59.240
<v Speaker 2>social group of primates and compared it to the relative

0:28:59.280 --> 0:29:01.440
<v Speaker 2>size of their new cortex relatives to the rest of

0:29:01.440 --> 0:29:05.240
<v Speaker 2>the brain. And you see this almost beautiful curve where

0:29:05.280 --> 0:29:07.520
<v Speaker 2>the bigger the social group, the bigger the relative size

0:29:07.560 --> 0:29:11.120
<v Speaker 2>their neocortex. This relationship does not hold for other mammals.

0:29:11.160 --> 0:29:14.080
<v Speaker 2>So this is not some universal principle, but something about

0:29:14.120 --> 0:29:18.160
<v Speaker 2>primate societies are such that they require really big neo courtices.

0:29:18.680 --> 0:29:21.360
<v Speaker 2>And so the more we examine the primate society, we

0:29:21.400 --> 0:29:25.520
<v Speaker 2>see some interesting features primate societies are very political, so

0:29:25.800 --> 0:29:31.760
<v Speaker 2>unlike a troop of gazelles and a troop of gazelle's,

0:29:32.000 --> 0:29:35.280
<v Speaker 2>whoever is the top ranking gazelle is typically the one

0:29:35.280 --> 0:29:38.640
<v Speaker 2>that's the strongest. So there's very explicit hierarchies in many

0:29:38.680 --> 0:29:41.360
<v Speaker 2>mammal groupings, but they're based on who's the toughest and

0:29:41.400 --> 0:29:44.200
<v Speaker 2>the strongest. But if you look at primate societies, it's

0:29:44.200 --> 0:29:47.360
<v Speaker 2>typically not the strongest. It's the most socially savvy one.

0:29:47.680 --> 0:29:49.920
<v Speaker 2>It's the one that cozies up to the most allies,

0:29:50.120 --> 0:29:53.080
<v Speaker 2>it's the one that builds the most friendships, that build

0:29:53.160 --> 0:29:56.040
<v Speaker 2>sort of this political regime that enables them to be

0:29:56.160 --> 0:30:00.320
<v Speaker 2>the top ranking chimpanzee, their top ranking bnobo. So there's

0:30:00.320 --> 0:30:03.360
<v Speaker 2>been some also amazing studies of the ways in which

0:30:03.480 --> 0:30:08.280
<v Speaker 2>these apes and monkeys reason about other people's mind states

0:30:08.280 --> 0:30:11.240
<v Speaker 2>when making choices on how to befriend them or how

0:30:11.240 --> 0:30:14.800
<v Speaker 2>to deceive them. So you can see non human apes

0:30:14.840 --> 0:30:18.280
<v Speaker 2>do things like they will hide transgressions from other people

0:30:18.320 --> 0:30:20.800
<v Speaker 2>to try and prevent themselves from getting in trouble. There's

0:30:20.800 --> 0:30:24.760
<v Speaker 2>this famous study that I love by Emil Menzel. I

0:30:24.760 --> 0:30:27.720
<v Speaker 2>think it was in the seventies where he put two

0:30:27.760 --> 0:30:30.640
<v Speaker 2>chimpanzees in the sort of one acre forest, and he

0:30:30.800 --> 0:30:34.680
<v Speaker 2>showed the location of treats to one of the chimpanzees

0:30:34.720 --> 0:30:39.080
<v Speaker 2>named Belle, and she initially would share the treat with

0:30:39.160 --> 0:30:42.840
<v Speaker 2>another chimpanzee named Rock, but then Rock started stealing the

0:30:42.880 --> 0:30:45.920
<v Speaker 2>treat from her. So what she started doing is, when

0:30:45.960 --> 0:30:48.200
<v Speaker 2>she knew the location of the treat, she would wait

0:30:48.280 --> 0:30:50.000
<v Speaker 2>for a rock to look away, and then she would

0:30:50.080 --> 0:30:53.320
<v Speaker 2>run over and grab it. So then Rock, in response

0:30:53.360 --> 0:30:56.680
<v Speaker 2>to this, decided to pretend to look away so that

0:30:56.760 --> 0:30:58.880
<v Speaker 2>when she started running, then he would turn around and run.

0:30:59.440 --> 0:31:01.640
<v Speaker 2>Then respect to this, what she would do is she

0:31:01.640 --> 0:31:04.320
<v Speaker 2>would pretend to run in the wrong direction, lead him

0:31:04.320 --> 0:31:06.400
<v Speaker 2>to the wrong place, and then run back. And so

0:31:06.520 --> 0:31:10.720
<v Speaker 2>this cycle of deception and counter deeception is very very unique,

0:31:10.760 --> 0:31:13.520
<v Speaker 2>with impossible exceptions of a few very very smart non

0:31:13.560 --> 0:31:17.400
<v Speaker 2>primate mammals like dolphins, seems to be unique to primates,

0:31:17.480 --> 0:31:20.040
<v Speaker 2>and so this gives us a clue as to what

0:31:20.160 --> 0:31:23.240
<v Speaker 2>might be new in the brains of primates. When we

0:31:23.280 --> 0:31:26.880
<v Speaker 2>go into the primate brain, we see these suite of

0:31:26.960 --> 0:31:29.920
<v Speaker 2>new neocortical regions sort of The most sizable one is

0:31:29.960 --> 0:31:31.920
<v Speaker 2>something in the front of the brain called the granular

0:31:32.000 --> 0:31:37.120
<v Speaker 2>prefrontal cortex, and when we do sort of neuroscience to

0:31:37.120 --> 0:31:40.240
<v Speaker 2>try and understand what does the structure do, it lights

0:31:40.320 --> 0:31:42.960
<v Speaker 2>up a ton when we reason about our own mind,

0:31:43.320 --> 0:31:45.360
<v Speaker 2>so how we would feel in certain states, or we

0:31:45.440 --> 0:31:49.200
<v Speaker 2>reason about other people's minds. So in tests of what's

0:31:49.240 --> 0:31:52.480
<v Speaker 2>called theory of mind, when I need to guess what

0:31:52.480 --> 0:31:54.920
<v Speaker 2>someone else is thinking about, or what their intention is,

0:31:55.040 --> 0:31:56.640
<v Speaker 2>or what knowledge they might have, this part of the

0:31:56.680 --> 0:31:59.720
<v Speaker 2>brain lights up a ton. And they've done some cool

0:31:59.720 --> 0:32:02.360
<v Speaker 2>study on macaque monkeys that show that in order for

0:32:02.400 --> 0:32:04.960
<v Speaker 2>a monkey to make a correct assessment of what someone

0:32:04.960 --> 0:32:07.120
<v Speaker 2>else knows or doesn't know, they need this part of

0:32:07.160 --> 0:32:09.720
<v Speaker 2>their brain active. If you temporarily inhibit it, they lose

0:32:09.720 --> 0:32:12.880
<v Speaker 2>their ability to reason about other people's minds. So you

0:32:12.920 --> 0:32:15.360
<v Speaker 2>get theory of mind. And so the idea is break

0:32:15.400 --> 0:32:19.480
<v Speaker 2>through four is mentalizing, which is also called metacognition, thinking

0:32:19.520 --> 0:32:23.240
<v Speaker 2>about thinking, reasoning about your own mind and other people's minds.

0:32:23.480 --> 0:32:26.040
<v Speaker 2>But there's two unique things about primates that are not

0:32:26.160 --> 0:32:30.400
<v Speaker 2>classically thought about as being related to mentalizing that I

0:32:30.440 --> 0:32:33.440
<v Speaker 2>would argue are are only possible in prime it's because

0:32:33.480 --> 0:32:37.080
<v Speaker 2>of mentalizing. One is imitation learning we know that primates

0:32:37.120 --> 0:32:39.840
<v Speaker 2>are exceptionally good imitation learners. So if you take a

0:32:39.920 --> 0:32:42.440
<v Speaker 2>chimpanzee out of their group and teach them how to

0:32:42.520 --> 0:32:45.960
<v Speaker 2>open a puzzle box or do some clever motor skill,

0:32:46.320 --> 0:32:48.840
<v Speaker 2>and then you release them back into their troop, within

0:32:48.920 --> 0:32:50.880
<v Speaker 2>thirty to sixty days, the whole troop will know the

0:32:50.880 --> 0:32:54.800
<v Speaker 2>same exact skill. So chimpanzees are very good at learning

0:32:54.840 --> 0:32:58.240
<v Speaker 2>skills through observation. This is part of why apes are

0:32:58.280 --> 0:33:01.000
<v Speaker 2>such good tool users, because once one member learns how

0:33:01.000 --> 0:33:03.640
<v Speaker 2>to use a tool, they all adopt the skill, and

0:33:03.680 --> 0:33:07.320
<v Speaker 2>then they cascade it through generations. In AI, we have

0:33:07.880 --> 0:33:11.440
<v Speaker 2>tried to teach systems through imitation. We've discovered something really interesting.

0:33:12.520 --> 0:33:15.880
<v Speaker 2>We've learned that direct imitation of other people's actions does

0:33:15.920 --> 0:33:18.600
<v Speaker 2>not work. So we've tried this in self driving cars,

0:33:18.680 --> 0:33:21.480
<v Speaker 2>where we try to teach an AI system to drive

0:33:21.520 --> 0:33:24.520
<v Speaker 2>a car by watching a human drive a car. And

0:33:24.600 --> 0:33:28.560
<v Speaker 2>the reason it fails is because when you watch an expert,

0:33:28.600 --> 0:33:31.520
<v Speaker 2>you never see the expert recover from mistakes. So the

0:33:31.560 --> 0:33:34.680
<v Speaker 2>second this AI system started veering off the road, nothing

0:33:34.720 --> 0:33:37.160
<v Speaker 2>in its training set taught it how to recover from

0:33:37.240 --> 0:33:39.000
<v Speaker 2>veering off the road, because it only watched from an

0:33:39.000 --> 0:33:41.440
<v Speaker 2>expert of who never veered off the road. The way

0:33:41.480 --> 0:33:44.160
<v Speaker 2>we get this to work in AI systems, which was

0:33:45.240 --> 0:33:49.280
<v Speaker 2>most famously invented by Andrew Aang, it's called inverse reinforcement learning.

0:33:49.720 --> 0:33:51.920
<v Speaker 2>And so what you do is you first try to

0:33:52.000 --> 0:33:55.680
<v Speaker 2>infer what the person you're imitating is trying to do.

0:33:55.720 --> 0:33:58.920
<v Speaker 2>You infer their reward function. So if you watch someone drive,

0:33:59.000 --> 0:34:01.880
<v Speaker 2>you say, oh, they're trying to stay in the center

0:34:01.920 --> 0:34:04.520
<v Speaker 2>of the road, and then I train myself in my

0:34:04.600 --> 0:34:06.800
<v Speaker 2>mind's eye to do the same thing that they're trying

0:34:06.800 --> 0:34:11.040
<v Speaker 2>to do, and that works. So Entering in the early

0:34:11.040 --> 0:34:14.520
<v Speaker 2>two thousands trained a helicopter to do all these crazy

0:34:14.560 --> 0:34:18.760
<v Speaker 2>aerobatic tricks through watching other trained experts do those tricks,

0:34:18.800 --> 0:34:21.600
<v Speaker 2>but not by directly copying them, by first inferring what

0:34:21.600 --> 0:34:24.759
<v Speaker 2>they're trying to do, and so it eliminates all the

0:34:24.800 --> 0:34:29.279
<v Speaker 2>extraneous behaviors. This is part of why imitation learning requires mentalizing,

0:34:29.760 --> 0:34:32.439
<v Speaker 2>because in order for me to really understand what you're

0:34:32.480 --> 0:34:36.000
<v Speaker 2>trying to do with certain tool usage behaviors, I need

0:34:36.040 --> 0:34:38.480
<v Speaker 2>to reason about your mind and infer what your intent is.

0:34:38.600 --> 0:34:41.680
<v Speaker 2>And that's part of why I would argue that primates

0:34:41.680 --> 0:34:44.560
<v Speaker 2>are so good at imitation learning, they repurpose. It's mentalizing

0:34:44.560 --> 0:34:49.440
<v Speaker 2>for that. The last one is something called anticipating future needs.

0:34:50.040 --> 0:34:53.200
<v Speaker 2>So when we go grocery shopping for the week, we're

0:34:53.239 --> 0:34:57.160
<v Speaker 2>actually doing something really remarkable. We are taking an action

0:34:57.239 --> 0:35:00.239
<v Speaker 2>today to satiate a need that we do not currently have.

0:35:00.600 --> 0:35:02.480
<v Speaker 2>I might not be hungry, and yet I'm going to

0:35:02.480 --> 0:35:04.440
<v Speaker 2>take an hour out of my day to fill up

0:35:04.520 --> 0:35:08.320
<v Speaker 2>my refrigerator. And it's not so clear how many animals

0:35:08.360 --> 0:35:12.160
<v Speaker 2>are capable of doing that. So, for example, in mice,

0:35:12.600 --> 0:35:15.520
<v Speaker 2>you see hoarding behavior before the winter, but we now

0:35:15.560 --> 0:35:18.280
<v Speaker 2>know that that is genetically hard coded. They're not mentally

0:35:18.320 --> 0:35:21.279
<v Speaker 2>imagining the winter and realizing they'll be hungry. A rat

0:35:21.320 --> 0:35:24.040
<v Speaker 2>that is, or a mouse who has never experienced hunger

0:35:24.040 --> 0:35:26.520
<v Speaker 2>in the winter, never even experienced a winter at all.

0:35:26.960 --> 0:35:29.400
<v Speaker 2>If you turn down the temperature, we'll start hoarding. But

0:35:29.960 --> 0:35:33.480
<v Speaker 2>primates seem to be capable of doing this, So they've

0:35:33.520 --> 0:35:36.000
<v Speaker 2>done some fun studies on squirrel monkeys that show that

0:35:36.080 --> 0:35:39.920
<v Speaker 2>they will actually choose having less treats today to reduce

0:35:40.000 --> 0:35:42.840
<v Speaker 2>their future thirsts even when they're not thirsty today, whereas

0:35:43.040 --> 0:35:45.879
<v Speaker 2>a rat is incapable of doing that, And so this guy.

0:35:45.960 --> 0:35:48.879
<v Speaker 2>Tom and Sudendorff came up with this theory that maybe

0:35:48.960 --> 0:35:53.560
<v Speaker 2>anticipating our own future needs uses the same machinery in

0:35:53.560 --> 0:35:56.800
<v Speaker 2>our brains as reasoning about other minds, because if you

0:35:56.840 --> 0:35:59.280
<v Speaker 2>think about it, it's really the same thing. For me to ask,

0:35:59.520 --> 0:36:02.680
<v Speaker 2>what will David feel like if he didn't drink for

0:36:02.920 --> 0:36:05.880
<v Speaker 2>a week is really the same question as what I

0:36:05.920 --> 0:36:08.640
<v Speaker 2>feel like if I didn't drink for a week, And

0:36:08.719 --> 0:36:12.480
<v Speaker 2>so this might also explain why apes and other primates

0:36:12.520 --> 0:36:14.960
<v Speaker 2>are so good at anticipating their own future needs and

0:36:15.000 --> 0:36:18.640
<v Speaker 2>making these really long term plans. So breakthrough FORO is mentalizing.

0:36:19.120 --> 0:36:21.920
<v Speaker 2>It is the building a sort of model of your

0:36:21.920 --> 0:36:24.439
<v Speaker 2>own inner mind, and it enables you to reason about

0:36:24.480 --> 0:36:27.840
<v Speaker 2>other minds. It enables you to learn through imitation, and

0:36:27.880 --> 0:36:30.440
<v Speaker 2>it allows you to anticipate your own future needs.

0:36:31.000 --> 0:36:34.279
<v Speaker 1>Great tell us about the final breakthrough that led to

0:36:34.400 --> 0:36:36.720
<v Speaker 1>the kind of intelligence that we enjoy.

0:36:37.560 --> 0:36:41.959
<v Speaker 2>So there's been throughout the ages so many thinkers, philosophers,

0:36:41.960 --> 0:36:45.360
<v Speaker 2>and scientists have tried to draw a hard line between

0:36:45.440 --> 0:36:48.200
<v Speaker 2>humans and other animals and articulate what is the thing

0:36:48.239 --> 0:36:51.839
<v Speaker 2>that makes humans unique? And after writing this book, one

0:36:51.880 --> 0:36:55.560
<v Speaker 2>of the most like clear things to me is how

0:36:55.840 --> 0:36:58.759
<v Speaker 2>little difference there really is between us and other animals.

0:36:59.280 --> 0:37:02.239
<v Speaker 2>So people used to think only humans could imagine things.

0:37:02.280 --> 0:37:04.880
<v Speaker 2>I think the evidence is very strong that other mammals

0:37:05.239 --> 0:37:09.160
<v Speaker 2>and probably birds regularly have imagination. Some people thought only

0:37:09.239 --> 0:37:12.960
<v Speaker 2>humans think about thinking. I think there's pretty good evidence

0:37:13.000 --> 0:37:15.719
<v Speaker 2>that other primates do the same, and so there's been

0:37:15.719 --> 0:37:18.919
<v Speaker 2>this long laundry list of stuff. I think the main

0:37:19.239 --> 0:37:23.840
<v Speaker 2>feature of human intelligence that there is this good evidence

0:37:23.920 --> 0:37:27.279
<v Speaker 2>is uniquely human, or at least uniquely evolved in the

0:37:27.360 --> 0:37:31.000
<v Speaker 2>human lineage and was not present in other primates is language.

0:37:32.000 --> 0:37:33.880
<v Speaker 2>And so it's language is not the same thing as communication.

0:37:34.120 --> 0:37:37.840
<v Speaker 2>Even single celled organisms engage in communication, but language is

0:37:37.960 --> 0:37:42.080
<v Speaker 2>unique on two counts. Human language has what's called declarative labels.

0:37:42.640 --> 0:37:45.719
<v Speaker 2>It allows us to assign an arbitrary symbol to a

0:37:45.800 --> 0:37:49.120
<v Speaker 2>thing or an action in the world. So when you

0:37:49.120 --> 0:37:52.000
<v Speaker 2>tell a dog to sit, now what it's learning is

0:37:52.080 --> 0:37:54.440
<v Speaker 2>when I hear the symbol sit, if I take this

0:37:54.520 --> 0:37:57.319
<v Speaker 2>action sit, I get a reward. That's something linguists call

0:37:57.640 --> 0:38:01.560
<v Speaker 2>imperative labels. A declarative label is if I say sit,

0:38:02.080 --> 0:38:06.000
<v Speaker 2>we're all imagining the action of sitting. And it's not

0:38:06.200 --> 0:38:09.279
<v Speaker 2>clear that other animals are capable of these types of

0:38:09.320 --> 0:38:14.239
<v Speaker 2>declarative labels. There's been painstaking attempts to train non human primates,

0:38:14.320 --> 0:38:18.279
<v Speaker 2>specifically apes, to use language. Typically it's sign language because

0:38:18.320 --> 0:38:20.640
<v Speaker 2>they don't actually have the sort of vocal apparatus for

0:38:20.760 --> 0:38:24.000
<v Speaker 2>verbal language, And it's still controversial the extent to which

0:38:24.239 --> 0:38:27.760
<v Speaker 2>what they were able to do could be called language.

0:38:28.080 --> 0:38:30.280
<v Speaker 2>But even if you would classify it as a primitive

0:38:30.320 --> 0:38:33.640
<v Speaker 2>form of language, it's very clear that non human apes

0:38:33.880 --> 0:38:37.480
<v Speaker 2>are not nearly as good at learning languages as human children.

0:38:38.080 --> 0:38:42.160
<v Speaker 2>The second thing that's unique about human language is grammar.

0:38:42.680 --> 0:38:46.759
<v Speaker 2>So we can switch the ordering of these symbols to

0:38:46.880 --> 0:38:52.000
<v Speaker 2>change their meaning in seemingly arbitrary ways. So Max jumped

0:38:52.040 --> 0:38:56.200
<v Speaker 2>over Charlie means something different than Charlie jumped over Max,

0:38:56.239 --> 0:38:59.560
<v Speaker 2>and by ordering the symbols, the meaning totally shifts. And

0:38:59.760 --> 0:39:03.319
<v Speaker 2>so one might think, okay, language is this unique thing,

0:39:03.920 --> 0:39:06.080
<v Speaker 2>that there'd be some unique structures in the human brain

0:39:06.160 --> 0:39:09.880
<v Speaker 2>that enabled language, and to my surprise, also looking to

0:39:09.920 --> 0:39:12.800
<v Speaker 2>the neuroscience, that's not at all the case. So there

0:39:12.880 --> 0:39:17.040
<v Speaker 2>are two regions of the neocortex and humans that are

0:39:17.280 --> 0:39:21.480
<v Speaker 2>very implicated in language, famously called Wernicke's area and Broker's area.

0:39:22.160 --> 0:39:26.800
<v Speaker 2>But interestingly, those same exact neocortical regions exist in other primates,

0:39:27.080 --> 0:39:30.360
<v Speaker 2>they're just not used in communication. So for some reason,

0:39:30.480 --> 0:39:34.000
<v Speaker 2>it wasn't that some new structure emerged in the human brain.

0:39:34.360 --> 0:39:38.880
<v Speaker 2>It's that we repurpose an existing structure to use in language.

0:39:39.320 --> 0:39:42.680
<v Speaker 2>And what seems to have happened is a new learning

0:39:42.680 --> 0:39:48.000
<v Speaker 2>curriculum evolved in humans that enabled us to learn language.

0:39:48.040 --> 0:39:51.600
<v Speaker 2>And so if we compare chimpanzee children to human children,

0:39:52.000 --> 0:39:55.440
<v Speaker 2>there's two very unique traits of human children. One is

0:39:55.480 --> 0:39:58.319
<v Speaker 2>they engage in something called joint attention at a very

0:39:58.400 --> 0:40:01.960
<v Speaker 2>very young preverbal age, which means children get a unique

0:40:02.239 --> 0:40:05.680
<v Speaker 2>burst of excitement when they can confirm by looking at

0:40:05.719 --> 0:40:08.239
<v Speaker 2>your eyes that we are that they and you are

0:40:08.239 --> 0:40:11.080
<v Speaker 2>attending to the same object. So they've done lots of

0:40:11.160 --> 0:40:14.200
<v Speaker 2>painstaking studies to show that the child is not excited

0:40:14.200 --> 0:40:16.359
<v Speaker 2>because they think they're going to get the object. They're

0:40:16.400 --> 0:40:19.919
<v Speaker 2>not excited because the parent is excited. They are specifically

0:40:19.960 --> 0:40:22.680
<v Speaker 2>happy and satisfied when they confirm that they are looking

0:40:22.680 --> 0:40:24.960
<v Speaker 2>at the same object that the parent is looking at.

0:40:25.280 --> 0:40:27.680
<v Speaker 2>And what does this enable us to do? This enables

0:40:27.760 --> 0:40:29.960
<v Speaker 2>us to render a simulation of the same object in

0:40:30.000 --> 0:40:32.160
<v Speaker 2>our head, so we can assign a symbol to it.

0:40:32.520 --> 0:40:34.440
<v Speaker 2>If we all look at a cat and I confirm

0:40:34.480 --> 0:40:36.400
<v Speaker 2>you're looking at a cat, and then the parent says

0:40:36.440 --> 0:40:39.440
<v Speaker 2>the symbol cat, whether it's verbal or a sign or

0:40:39.480 --> 0:40:43.520
<v Speaker 2>a written word, it creates this sort of basic foundation

0:40:44.040 --> 0:40:47.440
<v Speaker 2>for labels to be constructed. And the other thing that's

0:40:47.520 --> 0:40:50.960
<v Speaker 2>unique in human children is proto conversation. So they've shown

0:40:50.960 --> 0:40:53.759
<v Speaker 2>that very young human infants will match the duration of

0:40:53.840 --> 0:40:57.960
<v Speaker 2>babbling before words with their parents. So if the parent

0:40:58.000 --> 0:41:00.360
<v Speaker 2>babbles for four seconds, the child tends to bet for

0:41:00.400 --> 0:41:02.600
<v Speaker 2>four seconds and then pause and wait for the parent

0:41:02.680 --> 0:41:06.400
<v Speaker 2>to do that. These two things are not naturally occurring

0:41:06.520 --> 0:41:09.080
<v Speaker 2>in non human primates, so it's very hard to get

0:41:09.160 --> 0:41:11.719
<v Speaker 2>a chimpanzee to attend to the same object and for

0:41:11.800 --> 0:41:14.560
<v Speaker 2>them to confirm that we're all attending to the same thing. Okay,

0:41:14.600 --> 0:41:17.280
<v Speaker 2>so we get language, But why does language make humans

0:41:17.280 --> 0:41:21.000
<v Speaker 2>so special? So this has been well discussed in linguistics

0:41:21.000 --> 0:41:23.800
<v Speaker 2>in Uvall's books Sapiens, I think he speaks to a

0:41:23.840 --> 0:41:28.200
<v Speaker 2>lot of this. What makes language so incredible? This enables

0:41:28.280 --> 0:41:32.160
<v Speaker 2>us to share our inner simulations, and so it transforms

0:41:32.160 --> 0:41:34.920
<v Speaker 2>the human brain from just sort of the epicenter of

0:41:34.960 --> 0:41:38.319
<v Speaker 2>intelligence to being the medium through which ideas can flow

0:41:38.360 --> 0:41:42.319
<v Speaker 2>through time. So because I can share what's going on

0:41:42.400 --> 0:41:45.759
<v Speaker 2>in my mind, culture canform or a more advanced form

0:41:45.800 --> 0:41:48.920
<v Speaker 2>of culture because I can learn certain skills and then

0:41:49.040 --> 0:41:52.040
<v Speaker 2>describe the skill to you, or the five of us

0:41:52.040 --> 0:41:54.960
<v Speaker 2>can go on a hunt together, and I can imagine

0:41:54.960 --> 0:41:57.520
<v Speaker 2>a plan and then share the plan in my mind

0:41:57.520 --> 0:41:59.640
<v Speaker 2>with you through symbols, and then we all have the

0:41:59.640 --> 0:42:01.839
<v Speaker 2>same plan in in our minds, and then we can

0:42:01.840 --> 0:42:04.400
<v Speaker 2>coordinate and do the same thing together. Without the ability

0:42:04.440 --> 0:42:07.440
<v Speaker 2>to share inner simulations, you don't get this type of flexibility.

0:42:07.719 --> 0:42:10.520
<v Speaker 2>So that's one of the fundamental things that enables language

0:42:10.560 --> 0:42:14.080
<v Speaker 2>to make humans so powerful, because as generations go on,

0:42:14.280 --> 0:42:17.000
<v Speaker 2>the ideas sort of ratchet up and get more and

0:42:17.000 --> 0:42:21.920
<v Speaker 2>more complex over time, versus in chimpanzee societies. Because they

0:42:21.920 --> 0:42:25.879
<v Speaker 2>can't reliably share ideas, they can only observe through learn

0:42:25.960 --> 0:42:28.719
<v Speaker 2>from each other through observation. There's a limit to how

0:42:28.760 --> 0:42:31.239
<v Speaker 2>complex these ideas can get over generations. And so that's

0:42:31.239 --> 0:42:33.640
<v Speaker 2>one of the leading theories, not my theory. Lots of

0:42:33.719 --> 0:42:37.760
<v Speaker 2>linguists and primatologists talk about this as to why humans

0:42:37.920 --> 0:42:40.200
<v Speaker 2>sort of took over the world, which is ideas got

0:42:40.200 --> 0:42:42.440
<v Speaker 2>to get more complex over time until they reach this

0:42:42.520 --> 0:42:45.839
<v Speaker 2>sort of critical point. And so break through five was

0:42:46.160 --> 0:42:49.560
<v Speaker 2>speaking or language. And the last point I'll make on

0:42:49.600 --> 0:42:52.960
<v Speaker 2>this is how you one can see how even speaking

0:42:52.960 --> 0:42:57.600
<v Speaker 2>in language is dependent on the prior breakthroughs. So as

0:42:57.640 --> 0:43:00.640
<v Speaker 2>we now know in AI systems, when the leading problems

0:43:00.640 --> 0:43:04.319
<v Speaker 2>with an AI system bound by just language is how

0:43:04.360 --> 0:43:07.719
<v Speaker 2>hard it is to actually describe our desires in the

0:43:07.760 --> 0:43:12.279
<v Speaker 2>form of language. So Nick Bostrom has this really great

0:43:12.320 --> 0:43:16.480
<v Speaker 2>allegory where suppose there is an AI that manages a

0:43:16.480 --> 0:43:20.360
<v Speaker 2>paper clip factory, a super intelligent AI, and the instruction

0:43:20.840 --> 0:43:24.040
<v Speaker 2>US humans give that AI is maximize paper clip production.

0:43:24.239 --> 0:43:26.959
<v Speaker 2>That's the we give that a natural language, maximize paper

0:43:26.960 --> 0:43:30.480
<v Speaker 2>clip production. In his allegory, what he imagines if the

0:43:30.520 --> 0:43:34.520
<v Speaker 2>superintelligent AI were actually to just optimize for the explicit

0:43:34.560 --> 0:43:38.160
<v Speaker 2>request it was given, it would start to take over

0:43:38.320 --> 0:43:42.600
<v Speaker 2>Earth and convert everything it could observe into paper clips.

0:43:42.680 --> 0:43:44.600
<v Speaker 2>And when it was done with Earth, it would expand

0:43:44.600 --> 0:43:46.279
<v Speaker 2>to Mars and it would start to try and take

0:43:46.280 --> 0:43:48.760
<v Speaker 2>over the universe to convert all of it into paper clips.

0:43:49.280 --> 0:43:52.640
<v Speaker 2>And as silly as that example is, as almost nonsensical

0:43:52.800 --> 0:43:57.000
<v Speaker 2>as it seems, it reveals why mentalizing is required for

0:43:57.120 --> 0:44:00.520
<v Speaker 2>language to work. Because when you tell a human maximize

0:44:00.560 --> 0:44:03.400
<v Speaker 2>production of paper clips, what a human is doing is

0:44:03.400 --> 0:44:06.040
<v Speaker 2>it's they're inferring what you actually mean by what you say.

0:44:06.640 --> 0:44:09.880
<v Speaker 2>I'm simulating your mind and I'm trying to infer your preferences,

0:44:09.920 --> 0:44:12.879
<v Speaker 2>and I'm doing this really complex inference task to take

0:44:12.880 --> 0:44:15.160
<v Speaker 2>the symbols that you gave me and convert it into

0:44:15.480 --> 0:44:18.040
<v Speaker 2>a really complex reward function that I'm going to try

0:44:18.040 --> 0:44:21.040
<v Speaker 2>and optimize for. But if all system does is take

0:44:21.080 --> 0:44:22.759
<v Speaker 2>our words for what we say them to be and

0:44:22.840 --> 0:44:25.359
<v Speaker 2>doesn't have a model of our minds, then you can

0:44:25.360 --> 0:44:29.040
<v Speaker 2>get these really wacky outcomes where they would try and

0:44:29.040 --> 0:44:32.600
<v Speaker 2>convert Earth into paper clips. And so the reason why

0:44:32.880 --> 0:44:36.160
<v Speaker 2>language requires mentalizing is when we're going back and forth

0:44:36.200 --> 0:44:38.560
<v Speaker 2>trading symbols all the time, we're trying to guess what

0:44:38.600 --> 0:44:40.880
<v Speaker 2>the other person means by what they say. We're trying

0:44:40.920 --> 0:44:43.920
<v Speaker 2>to tell them information to update their knowledge given what

0:44:43.960 --> 0:44:46.319
<v Speaker 2>we know they know and they don't know. It's so

0:44:46.480 --> 0:44:48.400
<v Speaker 2>natural for us we don't realize it. But this is

0:44:48.440 --> 0:44:50.520
<v Speaker 2>one of the key things that human brains are so

0:44:50.600 --> 0:44:54.239
<v Speaker 2>good at that. Aisystems, at least in the same way,

0:44:54.320 --> 0:44:54.960
<v Speaker 2>don't solve.

0:45:11.239 --> 0:45:13.400
<v Speaker 1>You know. One of the things that always has amazed

0:45:13.440 --> 0:45:16.600
<v Speaker 1>me is the existence of literature. The thing I hadn't

0:45:16.600 --> 0:45:20.400
<v Speaker 1>realized until I thought about it was how low bandwidth

0:45:20.400 --> 0:45:24.360
<v Speaker 1>literature is. The author tells you a few sentences about

0:45:24.360 --> 0:45:27.120
<v Speaker 1>this and that, the description and the emotions and all

0:45:27.200 --> 0:45:29.920
<v Speaker 1>the rest depends on the reader. The reader is bringing

0:45:30.040 --> 0:45:34.160
<v Speaker 1>everything to the table. The author can't put what he's

0:45:34.200 --> 0:45:37.880
<v Speaker 1>imagining directly into the mind of the reader because every

0:45:37.920 --> 0:45:42.239
<v Speaker 1>reader is going to imagine something differently predicated totally on

0:45:42.280 --> 0:45:45.920
<v Speaker 1>this issue that you know, it's all about mentalizing and

0:45:46.040 --> 0:45:49.400
<v Speaker 1>language is just a very few bits of information that

0:45:49.840 --> 0:45:54.319
<v Speaker 1>you know, get thrown over the transom to inspire something

0:45:54.320 --> 0:45:55.520
<v Speaker 1>in someone else's mind.

0:45:55.680 --> 0:45:57.400
<v Speaker 2>One hundred percent. I think one thing that just to

0:45:57.400 --> 0:45:59.640
<v Speaker 2>add to that I think is really cool is it

0:45:59.640 --> 0:46:04.120
<v Speaker 2>almost is a neuroscience or AI perspective on why many

0:46:04.239 --> 0:46:07.799
<v Speaker 2>artists talk about how art is an active process. In

0:46:08.000 --> 0:46:12.000
<v Speaker 2>the sort of consumer of art, when we read a book,

0:46:12.640 --> 0:46:16.399
<v Speaker 2>we are participating in that artistic creation because we are

0:46:16.400 --> 0:46:19.560
<v Speaker 2>filling in the gaps. And that's why people can interpret

0:46:19.640 --> 0:46:22.640
<v Speaker 2>art so differently, and in some ways that's why art

0:46:23.120 --> 0:46:26.920
<v Speaker 2>is so beautiful, because it's this like message, but it's

0:46:27.000 --> 0:46:31.680
<v Speaker 2>not fixed. We as consumers get to sort of explore

0:46:31.680 --> 0:46:33.640
<v Speaker 2>it in our own way. I think it's also in

0:46:33.680 --> 0:46:37.080
<v Speaker 2>some ways why reading feels harder than watching a movie

0:46:37.200 --> 0:46:39.120
<v Speaker 2>because you don't realize it, but your mind is doing

0:46:39.120 --> 0:46:42.360
<v Speaker 2>a lot of work when you read, because it's turning

0:46:42.360 --> 0:46:44.920
<v Speaker 2>what you read into a mental movie, and that translation

0:46:45.080 --> 0:46:48.239
<v Speaker 2>takes effort versus watching a movie requires less sort of

0:46:48.280 --> 0:46:49.080
<v Speaker 2>cognitive overlook.

0:46:49.560 --> 0:46:53.480
<v Speaker 1>Now returning to the primates and the humans. So one

0:46:53.520 --> 0:46:55.319
<v Speaker 1>of the things that people have pointed out is that

0:46:55.400 --> 0:46:59.880
<v Speaker 1>humans are the only species that teach. So a prime,

0:47:00.080 --> 0:47:03.960
<v Speaker 1>a young primate will watch his mother, you know, crushing

0:47:04.080 --> 0:47:07.239
<v Speaker 1>rocks and doing something, and the primate will imitate that.

0:47:07.719 --> 0:47:10.799
<v Speaker 1>But the mother never gives feedback. The mother never says, oh,

0:47:10.840 --> 0:47:13.680
<v Speaker 1>you're doing it wrong, do it this way, and grabs

0:47:13.680 --> 0:47:16.160
<v Speaker 1>his hands and does the right way. But humans do

0:47:16.200 --> 0:47:18.799
<v Speaker 1>that all the time. We actually teach, and that's something

0:47:18.920 --> 0:47:22.160
<v Speaker 1>unique to our species. What is the basis of that?

0:47:22.640 --> 0:47:25.160
<v Speaker 2>I would argue in my framework, I would argue the

0:47:25.160 --> 0:47:29.640
<v Speaker 2>basic machinery for teaching exists in mentalizing, but it teaching

0:47:29.719 --> 0:47:33.160
<v Speaker 2>might be such a complex version of mentalizing because it's

0:47:33.200 --> 0:47:35.399
<v Speaker 2>two steps. Not only do I need to render what's

0:47:35.400 --> 0:47:37.560
<v Speaker 2>in your mind, but then I need to be able

0:47:37.600 --> 0:47:40.040
<v Speaker 2>to think about what actions can I take to update

0:47:40.080 --> 0:47:42.759
<v Speaker 2>something in your mind. You know, that's a complex act.

0:47:43.080 --> 0:47:46.040
<v Speaker 2>So I think even if the machinery exists in mentalizing,

0:47:46.040 --> 0:47:47.960
<v Speaker 2>when you scale up the brain, I mean, the human

0:47:48.000 --> 0:47:50.160
<v Speaker 2>brain is about you know, three x bigger than a

0:47:50.200 --> 0:47:54.040
<v Speaker 2>chimpanzee brain, or then the cortex area, you start getting

0:47:54.080 --> 0:47:57.120
<v Speaker 2>some of the machinery that's there in a very lightweight,

0:47:57.239 --> 0:48:00.439
<v Speaker 2>primitive form. So I think in my frame, I would

0:48:00.480 --> 0:48:03.879
<v Speaker 2>argue that some very primitive version of teaching exists in mentalizing,

0:48:03.920 --> 0:48:07.400
<v Speaker 2>but it doesn't really get rendered more effective and so

0:48:07.480 --> 0:48:08.880
<v Speaker 2>it scales up in human brains.

0:48:09.160 --> 0:48:11.680
<v Speaker 1>Okay, So that puts us at today, and what we

0:48:11.760 --> 0:48:16.120
<v Speaker 1>have today is this incredible explosion of AI, which is

0:48:16.160 --> 0:48:21.920
<v Speaker 1>something that you know, my whole career in neuroscience, neuroscientists

0:48:21.960 --> 0:48:24.120
<v Speaker 1>generally looked at AI and said, well, it's you know,

0:48:24.160 --> 0:48:26.960
<v Speaker 1>it's not very good. It's not able to do X,

0:48:27.080 --> 0:48:29.640
<v Speaker 1>y Z. But we've all been surprised in the last

0:48:29.680 --> 0:48:32.200
<v Speaker 1>few years about what it is able to do. The

0:48:32.320 --> 0:48:36.840
<v Speaker 1>interesting thing is still the stuff that it's not able

0:48:36.880 --> 0:48:41.000
<v Speaker 1>to do and why. So let's talk about AI. Tell

0:48:41.040 --> 0:48:43.680
<v Speaker 1>me your take on where it is currently and what

0:48:43.760 --> 0:48:47.160
<v Speaker 1>all of your study about the history of intelligence tells us.

0:48:47.760 --> 0:48:51.920
<v Speaker 2>So one thing that's interesting is AI today, and this

0:48:52.120 --> 0:48:55.120
<v Speaker 2>moment seems to be almost taking the exact opposite path

0:48:55.320 --> 0:48:58.360
<v Speaker 2>as our brains. It's starting from language, at least the

0:48:58.840 --> 0:49:02.120
<v Speaker 2>sort of explosion general AI has at its foundation been

0:49:02.239 --> 0:49:05.200
<v Speaker 2>language models been these things called transformers that are trained

0:49:05.239 --> 0:49:08.200
<v Speaker 2>on huge amounts of language text. And what has been

0:49:08.239 --> 0:49:12.160
<v Speaker 2>surprising is the degree with which language seems to be

0:49:12.239 --> 0:49:15.560
<v Speaker 2>so informationally rich that from going from the top of

0:49:15.600 --> 0:49:18.600
<v Speaker 2>this pyramid of the five breakthroughs, you actually can start

0:49:18.640 --> 0:49:22.800
<v Speaker 2>going down. So if you ask a large language model

0:49:23.000 --> 0:49:26.200
<v Speaker 2>questions that require theory of mind, which just to remind

0:49:26.239 --> 0:49:29.280
<v Speaker 2>the listeners, is being able to reason about other people's

0:49:29.320 --> 0:49:33.240
<v Speaker 2>knowledge or intent, language models do very good at correctly

0:49:33.280 --> 0:49:36.680
<v Speaker 2>predicting what someone might do, given that they're missing certain information,

0:49:37.080 --> 0:49:39.600
<v Speaker 2>and so one might have thought that in the absence

0:49:40.080 --> 0:49:42.560
<v Speaker 2>of having a mind themselves, they would be quite bad

0:49:42.560 --> 0:49:44.920
<v Speaker 2>at that. But what seems to actually be the case

0:49:45.239 --> 0:49:48.759
<v Speaker 2>is by reading all of the texts that exists effectively

0:49:48.800 --> 0:49:52.160
<v Speaker 2>in the world, it has started to infer things about

0:49:52.640 --> 0:49:57.320
<v Speaker 2>other people's minds. Similarly, I would have thought that common

0:49:57.400 --> 0:50:01.880
<v Speaker 2>sense questions so questions about are three redimensional worlds. For example,

0:50:02.239 --> 0:50:04.680
<v Speaker 2>if you threw a baseball one hundred feet above my

0:50:04.719 --> 0:50:07.080
<v Speaker 2>head and I jumped up, could I catch it? It's

0:50:07.120 --> 0:50:09.680
<v Speaker 2>such a simple question for a child to answer. But

0:50:09.719 --> 0:50:11.960
<v Speaker 2>what you're doing in your mind is you're rendering a

0:50:12.000 --> 0:50:14.279
<v Speaker 2>three D simulation of the world, and you're looking at

0:50:14.280 --> 0:50:16.239
<v Speaker 2>the ball one hundred feet above my head, seeing me jump,

0:50:16.239 --> 0:50:18.880
<v Speaker 2>and realizing you'd know way you could solve that. I

0:50:18.880 --> 0:50:21.200
<v Speaker 2>would have thought these types of common sense questions would

0:50:21.200 --> 0:50:24.040
<v Speaker 2>fail in language models, and they did up until you

0:50:24.120 --> 0:50:27.200
<v Speaker 2>get the most recent update, GBT four. It answers these

0:50:27.239 --> 0:50:31.560
<v Speaker 2>common sense questions really well. However, all of that said,

0:50:31.680 --> 0:50:34.759
<v Speaker 2>the way IT solves these problems are completely different than

0:50:34.800 --> 0:50:37.680
<v Speaker 2>the way that human brains solve these problems, and those

0:50:37.760 --> 0:50:41.200
<v Speaker 2>differences do matter. Two key things that I think AI

0:50:41.320 --> 0:50:44.919
<v Speaker 2>is missing that mammal brains can do, even some fish

0:50:44.960 --> 0:50:47.080
<v Speaker 2>brands can do that I think AI can learn from

0:50:47.080 --> 0:50:50.760
<v Speaker 2>neuroscience is the following. The first is something called continual learning,

0:50:51.520 --> 0:50:54.680
<v Speaker 2>So we don't realize it. But all AI systems today

0:50:54.760 --> 0:50:58.640
<v Speaker 2>are largely trained all at once, so chat GBT doesn't

0:50:58.680 --> 0:51:02.040
<v Speaker 2>update its information as it reads new articles. The way

0:51:02.080 --> 0:51:04.840
<v Speaker 2>they update the system is, by and large, they retake

0:51:04.880 --> 0:51:07.480
<v Speaker 2>the entire data set and they rebuild the model from scratch.

0:51:08.239 --> 0:51:11.680
<v Speaker 2>And the reason they do that is because AI systems

0:51:11.719 --> 0:51:15.080
<v Speaker 2>today suffer from what's called the problem of catastrophic forgetting.

0:51:15.280 --> 0:51:17.920
<v Speaker 2>All that means is when you train an AI system

0:51:18.000 --> 0:51:20.759
<v Speaker 2>with new data, it tends to overwrite its memories of

0:51:20.800 --> 0:51:24.800
<v Speaker 2>the old data. And somehow, mammal brands and even fish

0:51:24.840 --> 0:51:27.920
<v Speaker 2>brains don't forget things when they learn new information, at

0:51:28.000 --> 0:51:31.040
<v Speaker 2>least not to the extent that aisystems do. So for example,

0:51:31.360 --> 0:51:33.880
<v Speaker 2>if you learn to ride a bicycle, you don't forget

0:51:33.920 --> 0:51:37.319
<v Speaker 2>how to drive, or vice versa. And yet somehow AI

0:51:37.360 --> 0:51:41.760
<v Speaker 2>systems still suffer from this. So commercial AI systems ignore

0:51:41.800 --> 0:51:43.480
<v Speaker 2>this problem because they say, we're just going to throw

0:51:43.520 --> 0:51:45.719
<v Speaker 2>more money at the problem and just keep retraining systems.

0:51:46.040 --> 0:51:48.640
<v Speaker 2>That's also the approach in robotics, by the way, But

0:51:48.719 --> 0:51:50.920
<v Speaker 2>eventually we're going to want systems that can learn as

0:51:50.920 --> 0:51:53.759
<v Speaker 2>they go, that can get to know us, that can

0:51:53.840 --> 0:51:56.160
<v Speaker 2>change their approach based on how they interact with us

0:51:57.160 --> 0:51:59.440
<v Speaker 2>that can be around our home, and we can show

0:51:59.480 --> 0:52:01.600
<v Speaker 2>them new skills and they figure out the new skills

0:52:01.640 --> 0:52:04.560
<v Speaker 2>as they go, and that's something that's unique to mammals

0:52:04.560 --> 0:52:07.160
<v Speaker 2>that we have not yet figured out NA. So that's

0:52:07.200 --> 0:52:11.920
<v Speaker 2>one of the big problems. The second problem is mammals

0:52:12.239 --> 0:52:15.239
<v Speaker 2>have this internal model of the world, so they have

0:52:15.280 --> 0:52:18.400
<v Speaker 2>this sort of rendered world in their head that adheres

0:52:18.440 --> 0:52:20.440
<v Speaker 2>to the laws of physics. That's how I can imagine

0:52:20.440 --> 0:52:23.960
<v Speaker 2>myself do things, and the consequences of my actions in

0:52:24.000 --> 0:52:27.200
<v Speaker 2>my mind are relatively accurate for what would happen in

0:52:27.239 --> 0:52:31.560
<v Speaker 2>the real world. And this enables me to build hypotheses

0:52:31.920 --> 0:52:35.520
<v Speaker 2>and intervene in the world to test those hypotheses. And

0:52:36.400 --> 0:52:39.920
<v Speaker 2>the reason this is so important is these AI systems today,

0:52:40.400 --> 0:52:44.640
<v Speaker 2>the truthfulness of information is only as good as the

0:52:44.719 --> 0:52:48.240
<v Speaker 2>data you give it. So if you give articles about

0:52:48.239 --> 0:52:51.280
<v Speaker 2>the Earth being flat to the training set of chat SHEGBT,

0:52:51.560 --> 0:52:54.080
<v Speaker 2>it will start thinking the Earth is flat. But the

0:52:54.120 --> 0:52:56.799
<v Speaker 2>AI systems we want to create one day are going

0:52:56.840 --> 0:52:59.440
<v Speaker 2>to be ones that interact with the world, build their

0:52:59.480 --> 0:53:02.560
<v Speaker 2>own hypo aothesies about the world, and reject information that's

0:53:02.600 --> 0:53:06.000
<v Speaker 2>inconsistent with them. Model the world and so that's going

0:53:06.080 --> 0:53:07.960
<v Speaker 2>to be the way that we can get systems that

0:53:08.000 --> 0:53:10.560
<v Speaker 2>can contribute to science. That's the way we're going to

0:53:10.560 --> 0:53:15.000
<v Speaker 2>get systems that get more truthful over time. And that's

0:53:15.040 --> 0:53:17.200
<v Speaker 2>the way we're going to get systems that don't require

0:53:18.080 --> 0:53:20.799
<v Speaker 2>you know, humans to go in and manually curate these

0:53:20.880 --> 0:53:25.040
<v Speaker 2>data sets. So although CHATGBT has learned on its own,

0:53:25.760 --> 0:53:28.160
<v Speaker 2>the manual effort went into creating the data set on

0:53:28.200 --> 0:53:30.000
<v Speaker 2>which it learned and making sure that data sets rich.

0:53:30.080 --> 0:53:33.239
<v Speaker 2>So continual learning and world models that allow you to

0:53:33.239 --> 0:53:36.360
<v Speaker 2>build hypotheses, in my view, are the two big missing

0:53:36.400 --> 0:53:39.760
<v Speaker 2>gaps that mammal brains have. But aisystems today.

0:53:39.560 --> 0:53:42.000
<v Speaker 1>General I agree. You know, last year I wrote a

0:53:42.040 --> 0:53:45.560
<v Speaker 1>paper about how we would know if AI is really

0:53:45.800 --> 0:53:50.360
<v Speaker 1>intelligent as opposed to a statistical parrot. And my suggestion

0:53:50.480 --> 0:53:53.880
<v Speaker 1>is that scientific discovery is really the gold standard for that,

0:53:54.000 --> 0:53:56.960
<v Speaker 1>because yeah, this is what humans do, and what we

0:53:57.080 --> 0:53:59.600
<v Speaker 1>do with scientific discovery is not just piece facts together.

0:53:59.640 --> 0:54:03.520
<v Speaker 1>That's and chat GEPT can do that, but it's the

0:54:03.600 --> 0:54:08.000
<v Speaker 1>simulation of possible futures. It's what if I were writing

0:54:08.120 --> 0:54:11.160
<v Speaker 1>atop a photon, what would the world look like? And

0:54:11.480 --> 0:54:13.680
<v Speaker 1>you valuate that you simulate it out, and you come

0:54:13.719 --> 0:54:16.359
<v Speaker 1>up with a special theory of relativity. That's the kind

0:54:16.360 --> 0:54:19.120
<v Speaker 1>of thing that humans do all the time, not just Einstein,

0:54:19.200 --> 0:54:23.719
<v Speaker 1>but we do that when we mentalize and simulate anything

0:54:24.239 --> 0:54:26.919
<v Speaker 1>and evaluate it and say, okay, that's not going to work.

0:54:26.960 --> 0:54:29.359
<v Speaker 1>But this other strategy over here, maybe that is going

0:54:29.400 --> 0:54:32.600
<v Speaker 1>to yield something when I compare the results to other

0:54:32.719 --> 0:54:35.000
<v Speaker 1>things I know in the world. So that's what our

0:54:35.040 --> 0:54:39.000
<v Speaker 1>systems don't do currently. So this is what's really special

0:54:39.040 --> 0:54:42.600
<v Speaker 1>about human brains is being able to mentalize and having

0:54:43.160 --> 0:54:44.960
<v Speaker 1>and having a model of the world so that we

0:54:45.040 --> 0:54:48.040
<v Speaker 1>can evaluate the outcome compare it to what we know

0:54:48.320 --> 0:54:51.480
<v Speaker 1>in the world. Now you mentioned that as AI is

0:54:51.560 --> 0:54:55.359
<v Speaker 1>getting better. Let's say chatchept four and whatever will come out.

0:54:55.400 --> 0:54:57.480
<v Speaker 1>You know, a few months from now, you're saying that

0:54:57.480 --> 0:55:00.160
<v Speaker 1>it's better and better at answering these sort of of

0:55:00.239 --> 0:55:05.600
<v Speaker 1>mentalizing questions. But do you suppose it is because of

0:55:06.120 --> 0:55:09.919
<v Speaker 1>a lot of feedback from humans and a lot of

0:55:09.960 --> 0:55:14.480
<v Speaker 1>these examples appearing on the corpus of data that it

0:55:14.560 --> 0:55:17.239
<v Speaker 1>reads that it's able to do this as opposed to

0:55:17.719 --> 0:55:20.080
<v Speaker 1>actually mentalizing and having understanding.

0:55:20.880 --> 0:55:24.239
<v Speaker 2>Certainly, I think one of the key challenges with evaluating

0:55:24.280 --> 0:55:26.320
<v Speaker 2>these AI systems is we don't know what the training

0:55:26.400 --> 0:55:29.759
<v Speaker 2>data is, so it can be hard to know if

0:55:29.800 --> 0:55:32.120
<v Speaker 2>the solution to a problem or word problem you give

0:55:32.160 --> 0:55:35.719
<v Speaker 2>it is because it's effectively looking up what was in

0:55:35.760 --> 0:55:39.600
<v Speaker 2>the training data or actually generalizing. I do think though,

0:55:39.640 --> 0:55:42.000
<v Speaker 2>there's been lots of great work where like there was

0:55:42.040 --> 0:55:46.120
<v Speaker 2>a study out of Microsoft recently where they reformat some

0:55:46.160 --> 0:55:48.680
<v Speaker 2>of these mentalizing questions in way that it's very hard

0:55:48.680 --> 0:55:51.279
<v Speaker 2>to believe that it would be in the training data,

0:55:51.640 --> 0:55:55.359
<v Speaker 2>and it still solves the problems well. To me, this

0:55:55.400 --> 0:55:57.839
<v Speaker 2>is a question of how it solved the problems though,

0:55:58.280 --> 0:56:02.120
<v Speaker 2>because the way that chatchebt solves these problems as it

0:56:02.120 --> 0:56:04.880
<v Speaker 2>makes an inference over a whole series let's call it,

0:56:04.920 --> 0:56:08.000
<v Speaker 2>millions of word problems about theory of mind questions, and

0:56:08.080 --> 0:56:12.040
<v Speaker 2>so it probably builds some form of model how agents

0:56:12.120 --> 0:56:14.319
<v Speaker 2>or humans act in the presence of information or lack

0:56:14.360 --> 0:56:18.000
<v Speaker 2>of information. Certainly if it reads enough symbols that suggest

0:56:18.120 --> 0:56:20.439
<v Speaker 2>that maybe it has some of that information in there,

0:56:20.800 --> 0:56:22.680
<v Speaker 2>but that doesn't mean it solves the problem in the

0:56:22.680 --> 0:56:25.440
<v Speaker 2>same way humans do. You know, when we mentalize, we

0:56:25.560 --> 0:56:28.360
<v Speaker 2>compare the way our minds work and how we feel

0:56:28.360 --> 0:56:30.759
<v Speaker 2>about things to how we would infer someone else does

0:56:30.800 --> 0:56:33.960
<v Speaker 2>we put ourselves in someone else's shoes, And so although

0:56:34.000 --> 0:56:37.160
<v Speaker 2>the performance on word problems might look the same, there

0:56:37.200 --> 0:56:39.880
<v Speaker 2>might be very big differences in how we solve these problems,

0:56:39.960 --> 0:56:42.520
<v Speaker 2>which might have very real consequences when we send these

0:56:42.560 --> 0:56:45.239
<v Speaker 2>things out into the real world. For example, if we

0:56:45.360 --> 0:56:48.440
<v Speaker 2>made a robot powered by chatchebt help one of our

0:56:48.480 --> 0:56:51.719
<v Speaker 2>grandparents around the home, and we want them to empathize

0:56:51.760 --> 0:56:54.840
<v Speaker 2>and understand how they feel, I would not be confidence

0:56:55.120 --> 0:56:57.600
<v Speaker 2>based on the performance of word problems of theory of

0:56:57.640 --> 0:57:01.520
<v Speaker 2>mind that chatsheebt is going to care infer about how

0:57:01.520 --> 0:57:04.359
<v Speaker 2>my grandparent feels in this situation, versus I would feel

0:57:04.440 --> 0:57:06.840
<v Speaker 2>confident that a human would because I know how a

0:57:06.920 --> 0:57:09.600
<v Speaker 2>human brain is solving these tasks. So I think algorithmic

0:57:09.680 --> 0:57:13.760
<v Speaker 2>differences matter the more and more we offload these TASKSDAIE systems,

0:57:13.840 --> 0:57:17.280
<v Speaker 2>because otherwise performance in one task might not generalize well

0:57:17.320 --> 0:57:18.160
<v Speaker 2>to these other tests.

0:57:18.640 --> 0:57:20.919
<v Speaker 1>So what's interesting is I've spent a lot of time

0:57:21.000 --> 0:57:25.320
<v Speaker 1>on GPT four seeing if it has theory of mind,

0:57:25.840 --> 0:57:29.520
<v Speaker 1>you know, running tests on this and just for the audience,

0:57:29.840 --> 0:57:32.320
<v Speaker 1>theory of mind tests would be something like Sally walks

0:57:32.360 --> 0:57:34.960
<v Speaker 1>into the room and puts the baseball on the bed.

0:57:35.360 --> 0:57:38.760
<v Speaker 1>Then she leaves and comes into the room, sees the

0:57:38.760 --> 0:57:41.360
<v Speaker 1>baseball on the bed, picks it up, puts in the closet,

0:57:41.560 --> 0:57:44.640
<v Speaker 1>and leaves. When Sally walks back in the room, where

0:57:44.640 --> 0:57:47.360
<v Speaker 1>does she look for the ball? And the answer, of

0:57:47.360 --> 0:57:49.000
<v Speaker 1>course is that she looks on the bed. But this

0:57:49.080 --> 0:57:51.680
<v Speaker 1>requires us to be inside her head. If you ask

0:57:51.720 --> 0:57:54.120
<v Speaker 1>a question like that to any of the big language models,

0:57:54.280 --> 0:57:57.160
<v Speaker 1>it will get it right. But why. In part, it's

0:57:57.240 --> 0:58:01.439
<v Speaker 1>because that particular test, the seal antest, is all over

0:58:01.520 --> 0:58:04.960
<v Speaker 1>the Internet the gajillion places, and there are many many

0:58:05.600 --> 0:58:08.400
<v Speaker 1>questions that have been asked about theory of mind that

0:58:08.560 --> 0:58:12.160
<v Speaker 1>already exist on the Internet. The part that I have

0:58:12.240 --> 0:58:15.840
<v Speaker 1>found so fascinating is that GPT gets this stuff right

0:58:16.040 --> 0:58:19.200
<v Speaker 1>about I don't know, sixty percent of the time. So

0:58:19.440 --> 0:58:22.360
<v Speaker 1>in other words, several times in a row, I'll try

0:58:22.440 --> 0:58:24.320
<v Speaker 1>to make up some question that I think is new,

0:58:24.600 --> 0:58:27.000
<v Speaker 1>and it gets it right, and I'm stunned, and I think, wow,

0:58:27.400 --> 0:58:29.600
<v Speaker 1>I think it really has a sense of what it

0:58:29.640 --> 0:58:31.720
<v Speaker 1>is to be a person. But then it will get

0:58:31.800 --> 0:58:35.240
<v Speaker 1>one wrong, and it's the kind of mistake that a

0:58:35.280 --> 0:58:39.040
<v Speaker 1>person wouldn't make if a person understands theory of mind,

0:58:39.080 --> 0:58:41.760
<v Speaker 1>they wouldn't get this other version wrong. And that's why

0:58:41.840 --> 0:58:44.200
<v Speaker 1>I find myself a little bit confused here in the

0:58:44.240 --> 0:58:47.240
<v Speaker 1>middle of twenty twenty four about whether to conclude that

0:58:47.320 --> 0:58:50.840
<v Speaker 1>AI has theory of mind capabilities or not.

0:58:51.560 --> 0:58:55.000
<v Speaker 2>I think this goes to the semantics of how we

0:58:55.080 --> 0:58:57.520
<v Speaker 2>measure this thing we call theory of mine, and this

0:58:57.560 --> 0:58:59.120
<v Speaker 2>is actually what we're asking these in some ways a

0:58:59.160 --> 0:59:03.160
<v Speaker 2>profound question and an open question in AI, because the

0:59:03.360 --> 0:59:07.840
<v Speaker 2>entire field of machine learning operates on performance benchmarks. The

0:59:08.000 --> 0:59:10.280
<v Speaker 2>entire field is based on this idea of give me

0:59:10.320 --> 0:59:12.360
<v Speaker 2>an evaluation test, and then I'm going to see how

0:59:12.360 --> 0:59:14.880
<v Speaker 2>well I perform on this test. But that's problematic for

0:59:14.960 --> 0:59:17.480
<v Speaker 2>things like theory of mind because if you ask any

0:59:17.520 --> 0:59:20.400
<v Speaker 2>scientist a theory of mind, theory of mind is defined

0:59:20.400 --> 0:59:23.320
<v Speaker 2>in the mechanism, not the performance, but theory of mind

0:59:23.480 --> 0:59:26.400
<v Speaker 2>is is the algorithm by which we imagine ourselves on

0:59:26.400 --> 0:59:29.120
<v Speaker 2>other people's shoes. They don't define theory of mind as

0:59:29.160 --> 0:59:31.880
<v Speaker 2>the ability to solve this word problem, and so we

0:59:31.960 --> 0:59:35.920
<v Speaker 2>see this sort of challenge where just because it solves

0:59:35.960 --> 0:59:38.360
<v Speaker 2>the word problems doesn't mean that it's solving them in

0:59:38.400 --> 0:59:41.320
<v Speaker 2>the way that someone else might classify as theory of mind.

0:59:41.480 --> 0:59:43.040
<v Speaker 2>So I think in some ways this is in the

0:59:43.080 --> 0:59:45.040
<v Speaker 2>semantics of what do we mean when we say does

0:59:45.080 --> 0:59:47.680
<v Speaker 2>the sing have theory of mind? I think it clearly

0:59:47.720 --> 0:59:51.080
<v Speaker 2>is very good at solving theory of mind like word problems.

0:59:51.200 --> 0:59:54.000
<v Speaker 2>I'm quite confident that it's not doing what primates do

0:59:54.040 --> 0:59:56.160
<v Speaker 2>when they engage in theory of mind. And I'm also

0:59:56.320 --> 0:59:59.880
<v Speaker 2>not confident that the solutions to these word problems will

1:00:00.080 --> 1:00:03.400
<v Speaker 2>generalize well to other types of tasks that are not

1:00:03.560 --> 1:00:07.120
<v Speaker 2>word based that require theory of mind, such as a

1:00:07.240 --> 1:00:09.960
<v Speaker 2>robot around the house that has to infer how someone

1:00:10.040 --> 1:00:13.560
<v Speaker 2>might feel in certain situations to proactively help them, proactively

1:00:13.600 --> 1:00:17.960
<v Speaker 2>comfort them. I'm not confident that the theory of mind

1:00:17.960 --> 1:00:20.480
<v Speaker 2>word problem success will translate to these other types of

1:00:20.640 --> 1:00:21.560
<v Speaker 2>theory of mind problems.

1:00:22.080 --> 1:00:25.520
<v Speaker 1>So to get to that robot that is like a

1:00:25.600 --> 1:00:29.080
<v Speaker 1>human and really understands these things, what do you see

1:00:29.160 --> 1:00:32.880
<v Speaker 1>from your framework of these five breakthroughs of intelligence? What

1:00:33.040 --> 1:00:35.880
<v Speaker 1>needs to happen besides this language piece.

1:00:36.240 --> 1:00:39.479
<v Speaker 2>So the big missing pieces are breakthrough three and four.

1:00:39.720 --> 1:00:42.200
<v Speaker 2>We need these systems to have some form of internal

1:00:42.240 --> 1:00:46.240
<v Speaker 2>world model that they're continuously updating based on interacting with

1:00:46.280 --> 1:00:50.120
<v Speaker 2>the actual world. And I do think this grounding in

1:00:50.200 --> 1:00:52.760
<v Speaker 2>reality is important for many of the features that we

1:00:52.800 --> 1:00:55.720
<v Speaker 2>want these AI systems to have, but that will not

1:00:55.840 --> 1:01:00.360
<v Speaker 2>be enough. That will maybe solve some very utilitarian functionals

1:01:00.400 --> 1:01:03.640
<v Speaker 2>around the home, but I think we will quickly realize

1:01:03.680 --> 1:01:08.320
<v Speaker 2>that understanding how to interact with humans and the social

1:01:08.360 --> 1:01:12.520
<v Speaker 2>lives of humans will emerge as this other really important

1:01:12.560 --> 1:01:15.120
<v Speaker 2>missing piece, which will require some form of mentalizing. In

1:01:15.160 --> 1:01:18.480
<v Speaker 2>other words, understanding what's going on in human heads a

1:01:18.480 --> 1:01:20.760
<v Speaker 2>fascinating open question that I don't have the answer to,

1:01:21.360 --> 1:01:24.240
<v Speaker 2>but something we'll need to think about. One way in

1:01:24.280 --> 1:01:28.400
<v Speaker 2>which humans build common ground is that our minds algorithmically

1:01:28.440 --> 1:01:31.760
<v Speaker 2>are quite similar. So when I put myself in someone

1:01:31.760 --> 1:01:34.880
<v Speaker 2>else's shoes, certainly there's lots of mistakes we make when

1:01:34.920 --> 1:01:37.800
<v Speaker 2>trying to guess how other people feel in situations, but

1:01:37.920 --> 1:01:41.840
<v Speaker 2>there is this basic grounding that we are all very similar.

1:01:42.000 --> 1:01:45.600
<v Speaker 2>Our brains works relatively similarly in the scope of all

1:01:45.640 --> 1:01:49.040
<v Speaker 2>possible preferences of life form could have. Humans are remarkably

1:01:49.080 --> 1:01:51.440
<v Speaker 2>more similar than they are different. And yet when we

1:01:51.440 --> 1:01:53.880
<v Speaker 2>build this AI system, it's not at all clear that

1:01:53.920 --> 1:01:55.560
<v Speaker 2>the way it would feel about the world is going

1:01:55.600 --> 1:01:57.480
<v Speaker 2>to be the way we feel about the world. And

1:01:57.560 --> 1:02:00.720
<v Speaker 2>so the basic trick that it seems primate brains use,

1:02:00.920 --> 1:02:03.240
<v Speaker 2>which is I reason about your mind by building a

1:02:03.280 --> 1:02:06.240
<v Speaker 2>model of my own mind and projecting myself into your situation,

1:02:06.720 --> 1:02:11.360
<v Speaker 2>won't work for an aisystem because it won't be the

1:02:11.400 --> 1:02:13.840
<v Speaker 2>same as us. It won't necessarily have the same preferences.

1:02:14.440 --> 1:02:17.160
<v Speaker 2>And so I do think that begets an interesting sort

1:02:17.160 --> 1:02:19.320
<v Speaker 2>of safety challenge for us, which is, how do we

1:02:19.400 --> 1:02:23.200
<v Speaker 2>make sure that they actually understand human preferences, how we

1:02:23.200 --> 1:02:25.920
<v Speaker 2>feel about things, how we would feel about things, while

1:02:25.960 --> 1:02:28.520
<v Speaker 2>not being grounded and having those same feelings themselves.

1:02:33.320 --> 1:02:36.560
<v Speaker 1>That was Max Bennett diving into the six hundred million

1:02:36.680 --> 1:02:40.800
<v Speaker 1>year history of how the human brain got here. As

1:02:40.840 --> 1:02:43.040
<v Speaker 1>you can see, Max looks at evolution the way that

1:02:43.080 --> 1:02:46.960
<v Speaker 1>you might look at technological innovation in the business world.

1:02:47.080 --> 1:02:50.640
<v Speaker 1>When a new technology comes onto the scene, like the

1:02:50.680 --> 1:02:55.240
<v Speaker 1>personal computer, it enables all kinds of new products, and

1:02:55.320 --> 1:02:59.600
<v Speaker 1>it's the same when a new brain capability hits the scene,

1:03:00.120 --> 1:03:04.240
<v Speaker 1>that opens the door to new sorts of skills. For example,

1:03:04.560 --> 1:03:08.080
<v Speaker 1>once a brain can run internal simulations, then it can

1:03:08.120 --> 1:03:13.760
<v Speaker 1>do things like remember the past, and envision possible futures.

1:03:14.280 --> 1:03:17.040
<v Speaker 1>So I just wanted to summarize Max's framework here so

1:03:17.080 --> 1:03:19.880
<v Speaker 1>that you can remember it. The first breakthrough happened in

1:03:19.960 --> 1:03:23.560
<v Speaker 1>animals that have left right symmetry, like a human or

1:03:23.560 --> 1:03:27.240
<v Speaker 1>a bird or a lizard as opposed to a starfish

1:03:27.320 --> 1:03:30.400
<v Speaker 1>or a jellyfish. The first step was that these left

1:03:30.440 --> 1:03:34.320
<v Speaker 1>right animals learned how to steer themselves through their environment.

1:03:35.200 --> 1:03:38.600
<v Speaker 1>Break Through number two happened in vertebrates, those animals that

1:03:38.640 --> 1:03:41.840
<v Speaker 1>have a spinal column. They figured out how to learn

1:03:42.080 --> 1:03:47.600
<v Speaker 1>from trial and error. Break Through three happened in mammals.

1:03:47.640 --> 1:03:52.600
<v Speaker 1>They learned to simulate internally, that's thinking about the past

1:03:52.680 --> 1:03:55.919
<v Speaker 1>and running versions of the future. Break Through number four

1:03:56.080 --> 1:04:00.920
<v Speaker 1>happened in primates in particular, and that was meant, in

1:04:00.960 --> 1:04:04.560
<v Speaker 1>other words, imagining what it is like to be inside

1:04:04.560 --> 1:04:08.400
<v Speaker 1>someone else's head to infer the intent of the other,

1:04:08.840 --> 1:04:13.520
<v Speaker 1>and for that matter, thinking about your own thinking. And finally,

1:04:13.560 --> 1:04:17.760
<v Speaker 1>break through number five happened in humans, and that was speech,

1:04:18.320 --> 1:04:21.520
<v Speaker 1>which allows us to pass information rapidly from one to

1:04:21.560 --> 1:04:24.919
<v Speaker 1>another and for that matter, from generation to generation. From

1:04:24.960 --> 1:04:29.680
<v Speaker 1>the Library of Alexandria to the Inner Cosmos podcast, all

1:04:29.720 --> 1:04:32.760
<v Speaker 1>of this is made possible by figuring out how to

1:04:32.840 --> 1:04:36.880
<v Speaker 1>communicate at this high bandwidth. As a result of this,

1:04:37.440 --> 1:04:40.520
<v Speaker 1>humans don't have to start from scratch every generation the

1:04:40.520 --> 1:04:44.160
<v Speaker 1>way a cat or a horse does, but instead humans

1:04:44.160 --> 1:04:47.840
<v Speaker 1>are able to springboard off the top of everything that

1:04:47.880 --> 1:04:54.040
<v Speaker 1>has been discovered by previous humans. Collectively, these breakthroughs, which

1:04:54.040 --> 1:04:57.560
<v Speaker 1>happened over hundreds of millions of years, gave us the

1:04:57.720 --> 1:05:00.600
<v Speaker 1>kind of brains that we have us to do the

1:05:00.720 --> 1:05:04.160
<v Speaker 1>kind of things that we do. A lot of questions remain.

1:05:04.640 --> 1:05:08.240
<v Speaker 1>One of them is whether there are different paths to intelligence,

1:05:08.560 --> 1:05:11.520
<v Speaker 1>as we suspect when we look at the octopus brain,

1:05:11.680 --> 1:05:14.920
<v Speaker 1>which is a mollusc brain that somehow evolved along a

1:05:15.120 --> 1:05:18.720
<v Speaker 1>very different sort of pathway and yet ended up at

1:05:18.760 --> 1:05:22.640
<v Speaker 1>a similar spot. And once we find other sorts of

1:05:22.680 --> 1:05:26.480
<v Speaker 1>intelligences in the universe, we may look back and realize

1:05:26.520 --> 1:05:30.720
<v Speaker 1>there are many ways to get to intelligence from single

1:05:30.760 --> 1:05:35.080
<v Speaker 1>celled organisms floating around. For all we know, intelligence is

1:05:35.200 --> 1:05:39.440
<v Speaker 1>a path that is nudged into being by the pressures

1:05:39.480 --> 1:05:43.280
<v Speaker 1>of evolution because of the advantages that it grants, so

1:05:43.320 --> 1:05:47.160
<v Speaker 1>that things generally move in that direction. And if that's

1:05:47.200 --> 1:05:51.840
<v Speaker 1>the case, if the pressures of evolution guide animals inexorably

1:05:51.920 --> 1:05:56.200
<v Speaker 1>toward intelligence so they can outcompete their neighbors. Then what

1:05:56.280 --> 1:05:59.680
<v Speaker 1>a pleasure it would be to visit the Earth six

1:05:59.720 --> 1:06:04.439
<v Speaker 1>hundred million years from now, when lots of other species

1:06:04.840 --> 1:06:09.640
<v Speaker 1>have reached new elevations in that long road. They've reached

1:06:10.040 --> 1:06:13.560
<v Speaker 1>those heights that give them the kind of view that

1:06:13.600 --> 1:06:19.120
<v Speaker 1>has allowed us to invent and create and discover and

1:06:19.440 --> 1:06:29.080
<v Speaker 1>intellectually explore. Go to Eagleman dot com slash podcast for

1:06:29.120 --> 1:06:32.720
<v Speaker 1>more information and to find further reading. Send me an

1:06:32.760 --> 1:06:36.720
<v Speaker 1>email at podcasts at eagleman dot com with questions or discussion,

1:06:37.200 --> 1:06:40.440
<v Speaker 1>and check out and subscribe to Inner Cosmos on YouTube

1:06:40.560 --> 1:06:44.480
<v Speaker 1>for videos of each episode and to leave comments. Until

1:06:44.520 --> 1:06:48.800
<v Speaker 1>next time. I'm David Eagleman, and this is Inner Cosmos