Science, AI, and illusions of understanding
Many Minds
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,...
info_outline
The primeval soil of play
Many Minds
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...
info_outline
The big five and beyond
Many Minds
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?...
info_outline
Philosophers on psychedelics
Many Minds
Some call it the "psychedelic renaissance." In the last decade or so, interest in psychedelic drugs has surged—and not just among Silicon Valley types and psychiatrists and neuroscientists. It's also surged among a stereotypically soberer crowd: academic philosophers. The reasons are clear. With their varied and sometimes transformative effects, psychedelics raise ethical questions, epistemological questions, metaphysical questions, questions about the nature of experience and the nature of the mind. My guest today is . Chris is a philosopher of cognitive science at the University of Western...
info_outline
The cuttlefish and its coat of many colors
Many Minds
We humans have a hard time becoming invisible. For better or worse, we're basically stuck with the skin and body we have; we’re pretty fixed in our color, our shape, our overall appearance. And so we're fascinated by creatures that aren't—creatures that morph to meet the moment, that can functionally disappear, that can shape-shift on a dime. And no creatures are more skilled, more astonishing, more bedazzling in their abilities to do this kind of thing than the cephalopods. But how do they do this exactly? What's going on in their skin? What's going on under their skin? And what's going...
info_outline
Life, free energy, and the pursuit of goals
Many Minds
You've probably come across the "free energy principle." It's become one of the most influential ideas in the broader cognitive sciences. Since the neuroscientist Karl Friston first introduced it in 2005, the theory has been fleshed out, extended, generalized, criticized, and cited thousands and thousands of times. But what is this idea, exactly? What does it say about the nature of brains and minds? What does it say about the phenomenon of life itself? And is anything that it says really that new? My guest today is . Kate is a philosopher at the University of Edinburgh and the author of the...
info_outline
Universal emotions in fact and fiction
Many Minds
Are human emotions universal? Or do they vary from one place to the next and from one time period to the next? It's a big question, an old question. And every discipline that's grappled with it brings its own take, its own framings and forms of evidence. Some researchers appeal to cross-cultural experiments; others turn to neuroimaging studies or conceptual analysis. Some even look to fiction. My guest today is , an Associate Professor of English Literature at Arizona State University. Brad is the author of a new book, ; in it he maps the landscape of debate around this long-contested topic....
info_outline
From the archive: Fermentation, fire, and our big brains
Many Minds
Hi friends, We're taking care of some spring cleaning this week. We'll be back in two weeks with a new episode. In the meantime, enjoy this favorite from our archives! - The Many Minds team ––––––––– [originally aired February 22, 2024] Brains are not cheap. It takes a lot of calories to run a brain, and the bigger your brain, the more calories it takes. So how is it that, over the last couple million years, the human brain tripled in size. How could we possibly have afforded that? Where did the extra calories come from? There's no shortage of suggestions out there. Some say...
info_outline
Howl, grunt, sing
Many Minds
The tree of life is a noisy place. From one branch come hoots and howls, from another come clicks and buzzes and whines. And coming from all over you hear the swell of song. But what is all this ruckus about? Why do so many animals communicate with sound? What kinds of meaning do these sounds convey? And—beyond the case of human speech—do any of these sounds merit the label of “language”? My guest today is , a zoologist at Cambridge University. Arik is an expert on vocal communication across the animal kingdom and the author of the recent book . Here, Arik and I talk about why the...
info_outline
The development of evolution
Many Minds
Evolution is not what it used to be. A lot has changed since Darwin's day. In the first half of the 20th century, evolutionary theory was integrated with an emerging understanding of genetics. Late in the 20th century, biologists started taking seriously the idea that organisms don't just adapt to their environments, they change them. Recently, researchers have started to acknowledge the role of culture in evolutionary processes. And so slowly our understanding of evolution has been reconsidered, updated, expanded. And more updates are underway. But it's not just our understanding of evolution...
info_outlineHow do we learn? Usually from experience, of course. Maybe we visit some new place, or encounter a new tool or trick. Or perhaps we learn from someone else—from a teacher or friend or YouTube star who relays some shiny new fact or explanation. These are the kinds of experiences you probably first think of when you think of learning. But we can also learn in another way: simply by thinking. Sometimes we can just set our minds to work—just let the ideas already in our heads tumble around and spark off each other—and, as if by magic, come away with a new understanding of the world. But how does this happen exactly? And does it only happen in humans?
My guest today is Dr. Tania Lombrozo. Tania is a Professor of Psychology at Princeton University; she and her research group study learning, reasoning, explanation, belief, and more. In a recent paper, Tania outlines this puzzling alternative form of learning—learning by thinking, as it’s known—and presents evidence that it happens in both humans and AIs.
In this conversation, Tania and I talk about her longstanding work on explanation, and how it led her to study this less-obvious form of learning. We zoom in on four flavors of learning by thinking—learning through explanation, through simulation, through analogy, and through reasoning. We talk about the evidence that machines also learn in this way, and we consider whether animals could, too. We discuss how to resolve the paradox at the heart of "learning by thinking": how it could be that reshuffling old bits of knowledge can actually lead to new understanding. Along the way, Tania and I touch on: chain-of-thought prompting in LLMs, the Reddit community 'Explain Like I'm Five,’ the illusion of explanatory depth, the power of thought experiments, Darwin and Galileo, imagination and rationalization, how psychology and philosophy complement each other, and whether we can also learn—not just by thinking in our proverbial armchairs—but also by writing and talking.
So, happy 2025, friends! We've got some great stuff lined up for the coming year. If you like what we're doing with the show, we would—as ever—appreciate your support. And the main way you can support us is just by helping us get the word out—by telling a friend about us, or a colleague, or a student, or your thousands of social media followers.
Alright, without further ado, on to my conversation with Dr. Tania Lombrozo. Enjoy!
A transcript of this episode is available here.
Notes and links
3:30 – An influential early paper on “chain-of-thought prompting” in Large Language Models. A recent preprint by a team, including Dr. Lombrozo, exploring the cases where “chain-of-thought prompting” actually impairs performance in LLMs.
8:00 – For some of Dr. Lombrozo’s important earlier work on explanation, see here and here.
11:15 – The Reddit community ‘Explain Like I’m Five.’
13:00 – An early paper on the “curse of knowledge”—the difficulty of ignoring what you know.
19:00 – Dr. Lombrozo’s recent review article on “learning by thinking” is here. Another article of hers on the same topic is here.
20:00 – The original report of the “self-explanation” effect. The original report of the “illusion of explanatory depth.”
30:00 – For a basic description of Galileo’s falling bodies thought experiment, see here. A discussion of this thought experiment by philosopher Tamar Gendler.
38:00 – For analysis of Darwin’s analogy between artificial and natural selection, see here and here.
42:00 – A paper on rationalization by Fiery Cushman.
48:00 – A paper from Dr. Lombrozo’s lab on “need for explanation.” The original paper describing the construct of “need for cognition.”
52:00 – The original report of “framing effects” by Tversky and Kahneman.
54:00 – A paper by Annette Karmiloff-Smith discussing “representational redescription.”
1:02:00 – A recent overview of issues surrounding “explainable” AI.
Recommendations
Alison Gopnik, Andrew Meltzoff, & Patricia Kuhl, The Scientist in the Crib
Frank Keil, Wonder: Childhood and the Lifelong Love of Science
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: [email protected].
For updates about the show, visit our website or follow us on Twitter (@ManyMindsPod) or Bluesky (@manymindspod.bsky.social).