Many Minds cover art

Many Minds

Many Minds

By: Diverse Intelligences Summer Institute — Kensy Cooperrider
Listen for free

About this listen

 A podcast that explores our world's diverse forms of mind—human, animal, machine—from diverse perspectivesDiverse Intelligences Summer Institute 2020-2025 Science
Episodes
  • Science, AI, and illusions of understanding

    Science, AI, and illusions of understanding
    Jun 26 2025
    AI will fundamentally transform science. It will supercharge the research process, making it faster and more efficient and broader in scope. It will make scientists themselves vastly more productive, more objective, maybe more creative. It will make many human participants—and probably some human scientists—obsolete… Or at least these are some of the claims we are hearing these days. There is no question that various AI tools could radically reshape how science is done, and how much science is done. What we stand to gain in all this is pretty clear. What we stand to lose is less obvious, but no less important. My guest today is Dr. Molly Crockett. Molly is a Professor in the Department of Psychology and the University Center for Human Values at Princeton University. In a recent widely-discussed article, Molly and the anthropologist Dr. Lisa Messeri presented a framework for thinking about the different roles that are being imagined for AI in science. And they argue that, when we adopt AI in these ways, we become vulnerable to certain illusions. Here, Molly and I talk about four visions of AI in science that are currently circulating: AI as an Oracle, as a Surrogate, as a Quant, and as an Arbiter. We talk about the very real problems in the scientific process that AI promises to help us solve. We consider the ethics and challenges of using Large Language Models as experimental subjects. We talk about three illusions of understanding the crop up when we uncritically adopt AI into the research pipeline—an illusion that we understand more than we actually do; an illusion that we're covering a larger swath of a research space than we actually are; and the illusion that AI makes our work more objective. We also talk about how ideas from Science and Technology Studies (or STS) can help us make sense of this AI-driven transformation that, like it or no, is already upon us. Along the way Molly and I touch on: AI therapists and AI tutors, anthropomorphism, the culture and ideology of Silicon Valley, Amazon's Mechanical Turk, fMRI, objectivity, quantification, Molly's mid-career crisis, monocultures, and the squishy parts of human experience. Without further ado, on to my conversation with Dr. Molly Crockett. Enjoy! A transcript of this episode will be posted soon. Notes and links 5:00 – For more on LLMs—and the question of whether we understand how they work—see our earlier episode with Murray Shanahan. 9:00 – For the paper by Dr. Crockett and colleagues about the social/behavioral sciences and the COVID-19 pandemic, see here. 11:30 – For Dr. Crockett and colleagues’ work on outrage on social media, see this recent paper. 18:00 – For a recent exchange on the prospects of using LLMs in scientific peer review, see here. 20:30 – Donna Haraway’s essay, 'Situated Knowledges: The Science Question in Feminism and the Privilege of Partial Perspective’, is here. See also Dr. Haraway's book, Primate Visions. 22:00 – For the recent essay by Henry Farrell and others on AI as a cultural technology, see here. 23:00 – For a recent report on chatbots driving people to mental health crises, see here. 25:30 – For the already-classic “stochastic parrots” article, see here. 33:00 – For the study by Ryan Carlson and Dr. Crockett on using crowd-workers to study altruism, see here. 34:00 – For more on the “illusion of explanatory depth,” see our episode with Tania Lombrozo. 53:00 – For the more about Ohio State’s plans to incorporate AI in the classroom, see here. For a recent essay by Dr. Crockett on the idea of “techno-optimism,” see here. Recommendations More Everything Forever, by Adam Becker Transformative Experience, by L. A. Paul Epistemic Injustice, by Miranda Fricker Many Minds is a project of the Diverse Intelligences Summer Institute, which is made possible by a generous grant from the John Templeton Foundation to Indiana University. The show is hosted and produced by Kensy Cooperrider, with help from Assistant Producer Urte Laukaityte and with creative support from DISI Directors Erica Cartmill and Jacob Foster. Our artwork is by Ben Oldroyd. Our transcripts are created by Sarah Dopierala. Subscribe to Many Minds on Apple, Stitcher, Spotify, Pocket Casts, Google Play, or wherever you listen to podcasts. You can also now subscribe to the Many Minds newsletter here! We welcome your comments, questions, and suggestions. Feel free to email us at: manymindspodcast@gmail.com. For updates about the show, visit our website or follow us on Twitter (@ManyMindsPod) or Bluesky (@manymindspod.bsky.social).
    Show More Show Less
    1 hr
  • The primeval soil of play

    The primeval soil of play
    Jun 12 2025
    Puppies wrestling and mock-biting each other. Toddlers playing hide and seek. Kittens pouncing—repeatedly—on a toy mouse. You've no doubt looked on at scenes like this with amusement. And you've no doubt seen some of those viral videos—of ravens sledding down hills, of bumble bees playing with balls. All these moments make us smile, maybe even giggle. But the scientific questions they raise merit serious attention. Where do we see play in the animal kingdom? Where do we not? What functions does play serve? Do we—and many other creatures—have an elemental need for play? My guest today is Dr. Gordon Burghardt. Gordon is a longtime Professor in the Department of Psychology and the Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology at the University of Tennessee. For decades now, Gordon has been a pioneer in the study of animal play, with a particular focus on play in reptiles and other animals not usually considered playful. His 2005 book, The Genesis of Animal Play, remains a landmark in the field. Here, Gordon and I talk about the major types of play: locomotor play, object play, and social play. We discuss the five criteria he has proposed for recognizing play across animal taxa. We survey several of the functions of play that have been proposed over the decades, and discuss how—in the end—play doesn't seem to have just one function. We also talk about human play—about what sets it apart, and about the possibility that play lies at the root of many of the capacities and institutions we think of as distinctively, impressively human. Along the way, Gordon and I touch on play in bears, pythons, turtles, fruit flies, and octopuses. We consider play between members of taxonomically distant species. We talk about “self-handicapping”; the surplus resource theory of play; the importance of "risky play" and "free play"; the immersive quality of play; bodily and vocal play signals in mammals; and whether human play is increasingly endangered. Without further ado, here's my conversation with Dr. Gordon Burghardt. Enjoy! A transcript of this episode is available here. Notes and links 3:00 – A news article on the finding of “play-like” behavior in fruit flies. The original study. 4:30 – For recents reviews of play by Dr. Burghardt and colleagues, covering the three major types of play, the five criteria for recognizing play, and many other topics, see here, here, and here. 12:00 – For more on Dr. Burghardt’s early research and hand-rearing of black bears, see here. 23:30 – For the recent study on ball play in bumble bees, see here. 26:00 – For an example of studies examining self-handicapping, see this study on belugas. 27:00 – For a video of a bull and goat butting heads, see here. For more on cross-species play, see this recent paper by Dr. Burghardt and a colleague. 31:00 – For more on the “relaxed open mouth expression” and “play face,” see our previous episode on the origins of the smile. For a recent study about such expressions possibly attested in dolphins, see here. 44:00 – For the book by Johan Huizinga, see here. For some of Dr. Burghardt’s ideas about the connections between play and certain aspects of human culture, see here. 54:00 – For research on the value of “risky play,” see work by Dr. Ellen Sandseter. For an article connecting “free play” and children’s mental health, see here. Recommendations Kingdom of Play, by David Toomey Many Minds is a project of the Diverse Intelligences Summer Institute, which is made possible by a generous grant from the John Templeton Foundation to Indiana University. The show is hosted and produced by Kensy Cooperrider, with help from Assistant Producer Urte Laukaityte and with creative support from DISI Directors Erica Cartmill and Jacob Foster. Our artwork is by Ben Oldroyd. Our transcripts are created by Sarah Dopierala. Subscribe to Many Minds on Apple, Stitcher, Spotify, Pocket Casts, Google Play, or wherever you listen to podcasts. You can also now subscribe to the Many Minds newsletter here! We welcome your comments, questions, and suggestions. Feel free to email us at: manymindspodcast@gmail.com. For updates about the show, visit our website or follow us on Twitter (@ManyMindsPod) or Bluesky (@manymindspod.bsky.social).
    Show More Show Less
    57 mins
  • The big five and beyond

    The big five and beyond
    May 29 2025
    If you've heard anything about the study of human personality, you've probably heard about the “big five.” This is a framework that attempts to characterize human personality in terms of five broad factors or dimensions—neuroticism, extraversion, openness, conscientiousness, and agreeableness. The big five framework has been enormously influential, generating heaps and heaps of data, and study after study on the stability of personality, on the factors that shape our personalities, on how our personalities predict success and satisfaction. But is the big five really the best we can do? What does it miss? What does it mask? Where should the science of human personality go next? My guest today is Dr. René Mõttus. René is Professor of Psychology at the University of Edinburgh, and a leading researcher in the scientific study of human personality. He’s also one of the hosts of the Personality Psychology Podcast. Here, René and I talk about the history and colossal success of the “big five.” We consider whether personality is ultimately rooted in our biology—and, if so, how. We dwell on each of the five factors and dig into the facets and nuances within them. These are, actually, technical terms in the field for the more granular aspects of personality that sit within each of these broad dimensions. We talk about personality change across the lifespan, and what factors seem to be driving it. We talk about personality and occupation, personality and birth order, personality and gender. Along the way, René and I touch on the Myers-Briggs; an alternative to the Big 5 known as the HEXACO model; the power of explicit questionnaires over experiments; the concept of "personality age"; the social investment theory; honesty, humility, humor, jealousy; life satisfaction; gene-environment correlations; and why evolutionary stories about personality seem to fail. Alright friends, I think you'll like this one. On to my conversation with Dr. René Mõttus. Enjoy! A transcript of this episode is available here. Notes and links 5:30 – For a popular discussion of the Myers-Briggs and other personality tests, see here. For a book-length treatment of the history of the Myers-Briggs test, see here. 11:30 – For Dr. Mõttus’s preprint on “personality age,” see here. 17:00 – For our episode on animal personality with Dr. Kate Laskowski, see here. 18:00 – For Dr. Daniel Nettle’s book on personality, see here. 22:00 – See Dr. Mõttus’s blog post on the genetic basis of personality. 25:00 – For our episode with Dr. Eric Turkheimer about IQ, see here. For Dr. Turkheimer’s “phenotypic null hypothesis” about personality, see here. 28:00 – For a theoretical paper by Dr. Mõttus and colleagues about “carving personality at its joints” and “big few models”—among many other issues—see here. 31:00 – See here for a classic overview of the “big five.” 38:00 – For an overview of the predictive power of the “big five,” see here. 40:00 – On the topic of “nuances,” see Dr. Mõttus’s recent co-authored paper here. 43:00 – For the study by Dr. Mõttus and colleagues of the personality profiles of different occupations, see here. For an online tool that allows you to explore the data, see here. For an online tool that matches your personality with the personality profiles of different occupations, see here. 47:00 – A classic paper on the HEXACO model of personality. 51:00 – An example of a recent effort to map out the “facets” of personality. 1:11:00 – For a study on the possibility of gene-environment correlations in the area of music, see here. For the study by Dr. Mõttus and colleagues on children “becoming less alike” through adolescence, see here. 1:18:00 – For a classic statement of the “five factor theory,” see here. 1:20:00 – The Wikipedia page for the idea of the “gloomy prospect” is here. This is also the name of Dr. Turkheimer’s newsletter. 1:22:00 – The latest installment in the longstanding debate about birth order and personality. 1:27:00 – A paper comparing the “five factor” and “social investment” accounts of personality development. 1:33:00 – For a recent paper by Dr. Mõttus and colleagues on personality and gender, see here. 1:38:00 – A research article on the Estonian Biobank. Recommendations ‘Life Events and Personality Change: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis,’ by Bühler et al. ‘Personality stability and change: A meta-analysis of longitudinal studies,’ by Bleidorn et al. ‘Choosing prediction over explanation in psychology: Lessons from machine learning,’ by Yarkoni & Westfall Many Minds is a project of the Diverse Intelligences Summer Institute, which is made possible by a generous grant from the John Templeton Foundation to Indiana University. The show is hosted and produced by Kensy Cooperrider, with help from Assistant Producer Urte ...
    Show More Show Less
    1 hr and 47 mins
No reviews yet