Turn down the lights
Turn up the lights
Change Player Size
Watch this video in a new window

Conversations with History: Hubert Dreyfus

Host Harry Kreisler welcomes philosopher Hubert Dreyfus for a discussion of why machines cannot become human. In their discussion, they talk about the role of philosophy in clarifying what it means...  
 
Customize

More From: UCtelevision

Pharmacologic Treatments of Autism Spectrum Disorders55:29
765 views
H1N1 Update58:01
1,136 views
San Diego OperaTalk: Romeo and Juliet29:08
902 views
Orchestra Nova: A Conversation with Gay Hugo-Martinez5:40
413 views
The California Budget Crisis1:26:19
738 views
Treatments for Children with Autism1:00:00
472 views
Architecture of Greece and Trends in American Architecture1:29:41
291 views
FGF Signaling and Neocortical Patterning52:37
131 views
PTSD and Substance Abuse: Part II Treatment Options54:11
203 views
What We Learn About Autism from Studying Fragile X Syndrome54:32
150 views
Herbert York Memorial: The Founding Chancellor of UCSD58:06
80 views
Greek Architecture and Urban Design: 3000 Years of Creating59:41
197 views
Use of Traditional Chinese Medicine in Breast Cancer Care51:16
196 views
The Difficult Leap: Greek Architecture 1950-20071:23:11
74 views
Educating Individuals with Autism59:44
127 views
A New Age of Treatment for Fragile X Syndrome (2009)58:17
95 views
Doxiadis and Architect Konstantinidis57:56
44 views
Conversations With History: Leon M. Lederman57:06
210 views
Intellectual Disabilities and College53:33
248 views
What Causes Autism? Two Short Stories55:25
433 views

QuickList(0)

Featured Videos

52 ratings
Sign in to rate
10,949 views
Want to add to Favorites? Sign In or Sign Up now!
Want to add to Playlists? Sign In or Sign Up now!
Want to flag a video? Sign In or Sign Up now!

Statistics & Data

Loading...

Video Responses (0)

This video has no Responses. Be the first to Post a Video Response.
Sign in to post a Comment

Text Comments (33)   Options

Loading...
0leander410 (2 months ago) Show Hide
 -1
Marked as spam
He undercuts his argument by reducing the action of "intercorporeality" to the function of mirror-neurons. If this is true, this "intercorporeality" is the result of a type of neural circuitry that could easily be mapped in a computer's circuitry.
He also explains, somewhat unwittingly, how we will accomplish strong-AI, by giving robots bodies and senses similar to our own. His prediction that this could never happen is groundless, and, accordingly, he never supports it here or in his book
soursourapples (1 month ago) Show Hide
 0
Marked as spam
i thought he was using the function of mirror-neurons as one example of intercorporeality but i will have to watch again and check.
You are right that his prediction is groundless, but i believe Dreyfus' argument is really that machines can never be Dasein. I would agree with him for the time being.
pilkingtonphil (2 weeks ago) Show Hide
 0
Marked as spam
Its not groundless - and if you read the philosophy his work was based on you'd realise this (Merleau-Ponty's "Phenomenology of Perception). Merleau-Ponty shows how symbolice logis - that which is used in computers/machines - is actually built UPON sensory perception and not vice versa.
If this is the case trying to mimic our senses and bodies with symbolic logic is impossible - it's putting the cart before the horse.
Merleau-Ponty's masterpiece is your "ground" - all 650 odd pages of it...
pilkingtonphil (2 weeks ago) Show Hide
 0
Marked as spam
And regarding the notion of mirror-notions - of course this couldn't be mapped into computer circuitery. Computer works in a causal space which is pretty much linear. If a neuron creates something from nothing you're no longer in a linear causal space.
People may dream that they'll be able to create a computer outside linear causality - they won't be able because the symbolic logic the computers are based on is itself based on linear causality.
I'm sorry but I don't think you understand Dreyfus
soursourapples (3 months ago) Show Hide
+6
Marked as spam
i can't believe they cut him off at his most important point! That modern thinking is STILL pre-heidegerian!
soursourapples (3 months ago) Show Hide
 0
Marked as spam
This is true, but it was definitely not an influence on his early work. The book of Chuang Tzu is one of my favorite books.
Comment(s) marked as spam Show
fomastephanovitch (8 months ago) Show Hide
 -6
Marked as spam
TVAAK (6 months ago) Show Hide
 0
Marked as spam
No.
sayeed0011 (1 year ago) Show Hide
 0
Marked as spam
whatever my opinions and grudges, the tone of my responses has been unacceptable. i owe professor dreyfus and others an apology

Would you like to comment?

Join YouTube for a free account, or sign in if you are already a member.