
Stephen C. Meyer discusses his views on AI and its implications for intelligent design.
Stephen C. Meyer has a PhD from Cambridge in the philosophy of science, and he thinks AI just handed him his strongest argument yet. I spent years pushing back on him. Today I laid three traps. Watch what he does with the third one. Subscribe if you want science with evidence, not speculation. Meyer is a philosopher of science and director of the Center for Science and Culture at the Discovery Institute. His argument: every large language model is trained on text produced by conscious agents, and when you query its own outputs iteratively, it collapses into incoherence. That dependency, he says, is a tell. AI can recombine information. It cannot originate it. And that distinction points, in his view, to something minds do that matter alone cannot explain. I push back on all of it. We go after the Oklo reactor, a natural nuclear fission reactor that ran for millions of years in Africa two billion years ago with no human input whatsoever. I ask whether that breaks his information-from-mind argument. He sees the trap before I spring it, concedes the point where concession is honest, and explains exactly where the threshold lies. We also get into the Wheeler-DeWitt equation and…
Host: Brian Keating
Guest: Stephen C. Meyer
Organizations: Discovery Institute, Center for Science and Culture
Books & works: Wheeler-DeWitt equation, ENCODE project
Places: Africa
Explore listener stats, chart rankings, contacts and more on the Into the Impossible With Brian Keating podcast page.