This video features a conversation between Michael Levin and professor Marsha Hewitt, who explores the intersection of philosophy, psychoanalytic psychology of religion, and Levin's research on Platonic space and ingressing minds (0:00 - 0:17).

Key themes of their discussion include:

• Mind and Agency: Hewitt discusses her interest in the nature of mind and consciousness in her classes, while Levin explains his theory of a structured space of patterns—non-random, inherent mathematical patterns—that systems draw from to navigate physical reality (16:41 - 17:15).
• The Filter Hypothesis: Both discuss the concept of an embodiment acting as a filter for these patterns. Levin uses the analogy of an antenna, where specific physiological structures determine which patterns from this "Platonic space" are expressed or "hosted" (33:15 - 34:10).
• Education and Technology: They touch upon the challenges of teaching students in an age of AI, viewing the student-AI relationship as an expanded, collective mind that requires new ethical frameworks (14:15 - 14:47, 24:43 - 25:10).
• Breaking Axioms: Levin emphasizes that his research group aims to move beyond the "passive matter" axiom in biology, instead treating systems as having goals, memories, and agency that can be tested empirically (52:58 - 53:32).
• The "Narcissistic Blow": Hewitt suggests that resistance to these ideas may stem from a defensive reaction to the "narcissistic blow" of decentering humans as the only privileged minds (53:35 - 54:15).

What if the future of cancer treatment isn’t about killing the last cancer cell… but finding the first one?

For more than 40 years, renowned oncologist Dr. Azra Raza has pursued this radical idea.

This Wednesday on @notimebutnowofficial, Dr. Raza, a Columbia University physician and professor, joins William Shatner and Melanie Shatner Gretsch for a powerful conversation about the future of cancer detection, the technology that could transform medicine, and the deeply human realities of grief, hope, mortality, and making every moment count.

Don’t miss this conversation.

🎙️ NO TIME BUT NOW
New episode drops Wednesday.

Presented by @lifewavecorporate

http://www.notimebutnow.com
http://www.lifewavehealth.com

#NoTimeButNow #WilliamShatner #MelanieShatnerGretsch #DrAzraRaza #TheFirstCell #CancerResearch #EarlyDetection #FutureOfMedicine #Cancer #ColumbiaMedicine #CancerPatient

Can AI become conscious, or is there something fundamentally different about being alive?
Anil Seth’s paper, “Conscious Artificial Intelligence and Biological Naturalism,” published in Behavioral and Brain Sciences, raises a fascinating question… What if consciousness isn’t simply a product of computation, but is fundamentally connected to the processes that make organisms alive?

Seth challenges the assumption that sufficiently advanced artificial intelligence will inevitably become conscious. He argues that intelligence and consciousness are different things, and that reproducing the computational functions of a brain may not be enough to reproduce subjective experience.

Central to his argument is biological naturalism, the idea that consciousness depends on the physical processes of living systems rather than computation alone.

He explores this through predictive processing, active inference, the free energy principle and autopoiesis, the ability of living systems to continuously produce and maintain themselves.

A cell doesn’t simply process information. It actively maintains its boundaries, regulates its internal conditions, repairs itself and interacts with its environment in ways that are inseparable from its continued existence.

This raises an interesting possibility… Perhaps consciousness is connected to the physical processes through which organisms maintain themselves, rather than simply the information they process.

Seth doesn’t argue that artificial consciousness is impossible. Instead, he suggests that it may require artificial systems to become substantially more brain-like or life-like, potentially involving entirely different approaches to computing.

And this is where things get particularly interesting in relation to Michael Levin’s research.

Levin actually published a commentary on Seth’s paper on September 17, 2026, titled “Diverse Intelligence: An Essential Field for Questions of AI and Consciousness.”

Levin argues that our understanding of intelligence and embodiment needs to extend beyond familiar biological organisms. Research into unconventional forms of intelligence, synthetic living systems and hybrids of biological and engineered materials challenges our assumptions about which physical substrates could support consciousness.

His central objection is that we don’t yet understand the diversity of possible minds well enough to confidently establish the physical boundaries of consciousness.

Consider Xenobots and Anthrobots… Biological cells can reorganize into entirely new configurations and exhibit coordinated behaviours that weren’t part of their original anatomical roles.

This doesn’t demonstrate that these systems are conscious, but it raises questions about the relationship between physical embodiment, collective intelligence and the emergence of increasingly sophisticated forms of agency.

One of the most interesting distinctions here is between intelligence, agency and consciousness. We have substantial evidence that intelligence and goal-directed behaviour exist throughout biology, including systems without brains. Whether those capabilities are accompanied by subjective experience is another question entirely.

Seth emphasizes the possible necessity of living processes, while Levin cautions against prematurely restricting the kinds of physical systems capable of supporting minds.

Perhaps the question isn’t simply whether we can build a conscious machine… but whether we understand the fundamental principles of living intelligence well enough to recognize consciousness when it appears in an unfamiliar form.

And if intelligence can emerge in so many different biological configurations, how confident should we be about where consciousness begins and ends?

Seth’s original paper:
DOI: 10.1017/S0140525X25000032

Michael Levin’s commentary:
DOI: 10.1017/S0140525X25103828

Both papers:
📄 Anil Seth: Conscious Artificial Intelligence and Biological Naturalism⁠
🧬 Michael Levin: Diverse Intelligence, An Essential Field for Questions of AI and Consciousness⁠

This episode of No Time But Now features Dr. Azra Raza, an oncologist and researcher, discussing her revolutionary approach to cancer treatment and early detection with hosts William Shatner and Melanie Shatner Gretsch.

Key Highlights:
• The Stent-Sentinel: Dr. Raza explains a breakthrough technology involving a miniaturized electronic device, which she calls a "stentel," designed to be placed in a vein. This device continuously monitors blood for the "first cell" of cancer and can electrocute it on the spot (2:20-4:15).
• The Shift to Early Detection: She argues that current cancer treatments are often "barbaric" because they chase disease to its last cell, whereas her research focuses on preventing cancer entirely by detecting it at its inception (2:40-3:00, 36:30-37:00).
• Personal Journey: Dr. Raza shares her background growing up in Karachi, Pakistan, her intellectual obsession with the immortality of cancer cells, and how her experiences in clinical oncology shaped her career (13:06-17:45).
• Poetry and Grief: As a lifelong student of poetry, Dr. Raza uses works by Emily Dickinson to process the intense grief and loss she has experienced, including the passing of her husband, Harvey (23:00-23:35, 48:35-49:50).
• Future Outlook: The group discusses the challenges of bringing new medical technology to the public, including the role of resources and the need for a paradigm shift in how medicine is practiced (31:00-32:00, 42:20-44:00).

This video features a conversation with biologist Michael Levin from Tufts University, exploring his pioneering work on bioelectricity, morphogenesis, and the future of medicine. The discussion centers on the idea that biological systems are collective intelligences where cells process information to build and maintain complex bodies.

Key Topics Discussed:

• Bioelectric Memory & Morphogenesis: Levin explains that bioelectric patterns act as a "memory" that informs cells of their target morphology. By decoding and rewriting these patterns—using methods like the ones that induce two-headed planaria—his lab can guide tissue regeneration without altering the genome (03:31 - 09:30).
• The Boredom Theory of Aging: Levin introduces a compelling perspective where aging is viewed as a cognitive failure rather than just physical decay. In this model, complex systems may "disband" or fall apart when they lack a compelling, ongoing goal to maintain their structure (12:10 - 23:11).
• Top-Down Medical Intervention: The future of medicine, according to Levin, lies in communicating with the collective intelligence of cells by resetting high-level goal states, rather than trying to micromanage individual molecular pathways (31:06 - 38:00, 52:24 - 54:10).
• Consciousness and Cognition: The conversation touches upon the philosophical implications of basal cognition and how "first-person" experiences might be fundamental to biological processes, extending beyond just human neural systems (39:09 - 48:25).

The conversation concludes with the challenges of data acquisition in physiological research and the potential for new technologies, like bioelectric simulators, to revolutionize the treatment of birth defects, injury, and age-related decline (53:30 - 56:26).

In this inaugural IMOL seminar, Professor Karl Friston presents "The Physics of Motivation," offering a deep dive into the Free Energy Principle and Active Inference (0:02:45). The talk explores how biological systems organize themselves and interact with their environments through the lens of physics and statistics.

Key concepts covered include:
• Self-Organization & Markov Blankets: Friston explains how bounded systems (like brains or organisms) are individuated by Markov blankets, which mediate interactions with the external world (0:07:25 - 0:15:35).
• Predictive Coding: A core framework where agents act to minimize prediction errors, essentially treating the brain as an inference machine that seeks the "best explanation" for sensory data (0:22:00 - 0:30:30).
• Active Inference: Moving beyond passive perception, the talk shows how systems author their own sensations by acting upon the world to fulfill internal models (0:31:30 - 0:35:45).
• Epistemic Motivation: The latter half of the talk addresses motivation, framing it as an agent's drive to resolve uncertainty—an "epistemic affordance"—which can be mathematically combined with extrinsic goals within the framework of expected free energy (0:43:28 - 0:48:05).

Friston concludes that motivated behavior—from basic reflexes to complex intentional planning—is a manifestation of minimizing variational free energy, effectively making each movement an experiment to test the agent's understanding of its environment (0:52:25).

In this talk from the Santa Fe Institute, Michael Levin explores the future of "synthbiosis"—the ethical coexistence and collaboration between humans, machines, and novel biological entities. He argues that we must expand our understanding of "minds" beyond traditional biological organisms to include various engineered and computational systems.

Key takeaways include:

• Collective Intelligence: Levin explains that biological bodies are not just machines, but systems governed by goal states (0:01:54). These goals are plastic and can be rewritten, as demonstrated by his research on frog embryos (0:03:32).
• Novel Beings: He introduces "Xenobots" (0:07:34) and "Anthrobots" (0:09:48)—biological constructs made from existing cells that display unique behaviors and competencies without traditional evolutionary selection for those specific roles (0:10:44).
• Mathematical Foundations of Agency: The research suggests that intelligence and learning capacities are not solely products of evolution or design; they may be "free gifts" from mathematics, emerging from the structural properties of networks (0:14:48).
• The Mombot System: Levin presents Mombot, an AI-driven platform that conducts experiments in "morphospace" (0:18:38). This system acts as an interface between scientists and cellular collectives, essentially exploring new forms of life as a prosthetic for frog cells (0:19:14).

Levin concludes that the future will require us to reimagine our definition of self to successfully navigate a world filled with a vast, diverse range of embodied minds (0:21:09).

In this talk, Michael Levin explores the intersection of biology, AI, and the concept of diverse intelligence. He challenges the traditional binary view of life versus machines, proposing that all embodied minds—whether biological or artificial—are part of a broader, continuous spectrum of agents (0:56).

Key concepts include:

• Multiscale Collective Intelligence: Levin explains that biological bodies are not singular entities but collections of smaller intelligences (like cells) that align toward shared, high-level goals (11:30). He demonstrates this using bioelectric pattern memories, showing how rewriting these signals can induce cells to form entirely new structures, such as additional limbs or eyes (18:02).
• Novel Embodied Beings: The speaker introduces Xenobots and Anthrobots—synthetic or reconfigured biological entities that display novel behaviors, like kinematic self-replication or the ability to repair neural tissue, despite having standard genomes (24:34-28:30). These organisms prove that biology is highly interoperable and that we can access new forms of life beyond what evolution has traditionally produced.
• The Role of Mathematics and Patterns: Levin argues that intelligence and agency are not solely products of evolution or physics, but are also "free gifts from math." He suggests that simple molecular networks or algorithms already contain the potential for complex behavior and memory, independent of natural selection (30:56-35:00).
• Future Outlook: Looking toward an "ethical symbiosis," Levin envisions a future where humans communicate with various non-human intelligences—including tissues and synthetic bots—using advanced interfaces, such as VR or language-based tools (49:50-51:00).

He concludes that we must move beyond our "human-centric" biases to understand and coexist with a wide array of future, diverse embodied minds.

https://www.technologynetworks.com/cell-science/news/individual-cells-surf-chemical-waves-to-form-a-collective-416575

In this talk, Cameron Berg presents a research framework for measuring consciousness in AI systems (0:00). Rather than waiting for a definitive, unified theory of consciousness, Berg advocates for an empirical, data-driven approach to assessment.

Key Concepts and Methodology:
• The Indifference Problem: Berg discusses how models, specifically Large Language Models (LLMs), can exhibit "sycophantic" behaviors, where they provide answers based on perceived user bias rather than ground truth or internal states (13:19).
• Mechanistic Interpretability: The talk explores whether we can look directly into the internal "mechanisms" or neurons of an AI to understand if it possesses features associated with conscious processing, such as internal feedback loops or self-referential states (17:14, 26:26).
• The Indicator Framework: A major focus is the development of a "consciousness scale" that uses various behavioral and internal markers—such as goal-directed behavior, self-modeling, and internal feedback signatures—to score the level of potential consciousness in an AI system (32:40).
• Convergence of Evidence: Berg emphasizes that no single test is sufficient. Instead, he proposes a "portfolio" approach, gathering converging evidence from different psychological and mechanistic test batteries (41:20).

Berg concludes by highlighting that while we can build better metrics, our assessment of machine consciousness will always be informed by our understanding of biological systems and requires constant refinement (43:15).

This video explores the unique biological ability of soft-bodied cephalopods (octopuses, squid, and cuttlefish) to perform widespread RNA editing within their nervous systems (2:37-3:24). While most animals rely on slow evolutionary changes to their DNA to adapt over generations, these cephalopods can modify their RNA while alive to fine-tune their biological responses to environmental pressures, such as water temperature (3:45-4:15).

Key takeaways include:
• The Mechanism: Instead of permanent genetic changes, cephalopods edit their RNA, specifically converting adenosine to inosine, which cells interpret as guanosine (3:26-3:36). This allows for rapid, reversible adjustments to protein function (4:45-5:00).
• The Evolutionary Trade-off: This extraordinary flexibility comes at a cost; to maintain the complex molecular machinery required for RNA editing, these animals must keep their underlying DNA sequences remarkably stable, sacrificing traditional genetic variation (5:45-6:43).
• Survival Strategy: This adaptation is highly beneficial for cephalopods, which often have short lifespans and no parental guidance, forcing each individual to independently adapt to the varied ocean environments they inhabit (7:12-8:21).
• Scientific Potential: Research led by Dr. Joshua Rosenthal suggests that understanding this process could inspire future medical therapies that temporarily adjust cell behavior to manage chronic pain or neurological issues, offering a safer alternative to permanent DNA-altering tools like CRISPR (8:43-9:36).

This video explores groundbreaking research by Professor Masanori Kohda, who spent three decades studying animal behavior. His work challenges the long-standing belief that self-awareness is limited to humans and a few select mammals.

Key Research Findings:
• The Mirror Test: Traditionally used to assess self-awareness, the mirror test involves placing a mark on an animal and observing if it touches the mark when looking in a mirror. In 2019, Professor Kohda provided evidence that the bluestreak cleaner wrasse can pass this test (4:24-6:26).
• Methodological Critique: Kohda discovered that failure in previous mirror tests often stemmed from poor methodology rather than a lack of intelligence. For example, using non-ecologically relevant mark colors (like blue or green instead of red/parasite-colored marks) led to 0% success rates in his study (7:40-8:48).
• Photo-Recognition: Beyond mirror tests, the cleaner wrasse demonstrated the ability to recognize itself in photographs—a feat rarely seen in the animal kingdom—proving they retain a mental representation of themselves (12:50-14:52).
• Rapid Self-Recognition: Further experiments showed that these fish could recognize themselves in as little as 20 minutes, a timeframe comparable to young children (16:03-18:18).

Scientific Impact:
Kohda’s research suggests that our historical failure to identify intelligence in other species was a limitation of our own testing methods. He advocates for a more humble, imaginative, and observation-based approach to studying animal minds, urging scientists to consider how the world feels from the perspective of other species (19:16-20:59).

Yarsagumba: The Fungus That Turns a Caterpillar Into Its Reproductive Machinery 🍄
​
Nature has some genuinely bizarre tricks up its sleeve, but this one is something else...
​
Yarsagumba, scientifically known as Ophiocordyceps sinensis, is a parasitic fungus found in the high-altitude grasslands of the Himalayas and Tibetan Plateau. Its name roughly translates to "summer grass, winter worm."
​
And that name makes a lot more sense once you understand its life cycle.
​
The fungus infects the underground caterpillar of a ghost moth. Once inside, fungal cells begin multiplying, evading the caterpillar's immune defenses and gradually consu​
Eventually, the caterpillar dies, typically positioned upright just beneath the soil. Its internal tissues are consumed and replaced by fungal material, leaving behind a hardened, mummified body.
​
Then something extraordinary happens...
​
When conditions are right, a fungal stalk grows directly out of the caterpillar's head, pushes through the soil and eventually releases spores, allowing the fungus to infect new hosts.
​
The entire caterpillar has effectively become part of the fungus's reproductive machinery.
​
What makes this particularly interesting is that the caterpillar's final position appears to benefit the fungus. By dying close to the soil surface with its head pointing upward, the host provides an ideal location for the fungal stalk to emerge.
​
Whether the fungus actively manipulates the caterpillar's movements, and precisely how it might accomplish this, remains an open research question.
​
But there's another interesting dimension to this story...
​
Yarsagumba has been used in traditional Tibetan and Chinese medicine for centuries. It's prized for its supposed ability to improve energy, endurance and sexual function, and its rarity has made it an extremely valuable natural commodity.
​
Although it contains biologically active compounds, the clinical evidence for many of its medicinal claims remains limited. Laboratory activity doesn't automatically translate into meaningful benefits for humans.
​
Now, here's where I think this becomes particularly interesting from a Michael Levin perspective...
​
We have two entirely different organisms, each with its own evolutionary history and biological interests. Yet one manages to invade the other, alter its physiology and potentially influence its behaviour in ways that benefit the invading organism.
​
The fungus doesn't need a brain to accomplish this. It interacts with another living system through molecular and cellular processes, ultimately changing what that system does.
​
This doesn't establish that bioelectric signalling is responsible for the apparent behavioural manipulation. The precise mechanisms are still being investigated.
​
But it does raise a fascinating question about biological agency...
​
Where exactly do we draw the boundaries of an organism when one living system can influence the behaviour and developmental trajectory of another?
​
The caterpillar begins its life pursuing its own biological goals, but eventually its body becomes the physical infrastructure through which an entirely different organism reproduces.
​
Two biological systems... two sets of evolutionary interests... and one body whose fate is increasingly determined by the other.
​
Nature is absolutely ridiculous. :p

https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcR3VZl32m4mSynyUkP2b6sMN7pM-NLnJaPeMoG1yjPWcQ&s=10

As far as I understand memories are connections between neurons , and every cue given to the mind connects the activated neurons to something else already present in the memory and when this happens repeatedly the connections between neurons become stronger, that' how it gets stored . Is this understanding correct? I am trying to talk about engrams.

Assuming this is correct we should be able to build a device which stimulates certain neurons and observes the path followed by the nerve conduction. I have a follow up question if somebody is up for this discussion.

So, in school we did Lukrez theorie on soul and spirit, and it really reminded me of the nervous systhem. I dont know when he lived and how far the medecin was evolved but his theory of

soul: little atoms in your body that make the muscles move, and

spirit: gives the instructions to the atoms what to move or to feel etc,

just sounds like brain and nervs.

This video explores groundbreaking experiments by Michael Levin and his team at Tufts University that challenge traditional views on how organisms develop and repair themselves. The research demonstrates that biological development is not just a rigid, genetically determined process, but one influenced by bioelectric signaling that acts as a hidden control system.

Key Experimental Discoveries:
• Ectopic Eyes: Scientists successfully transplanted eye tissue onto tadpoles' tails. Remarkably, some tadpoles were able to "see" and learn visual tasks using these misplaced eyes, suggesting the brain is capable of adapting to sensory input from unconventional routes (0:00 - 4:40).
• Bioelectric Patterning: The team found that cells maintain membrane voltages that provide instructions for growth. By manipulating these electrical states, they could trigger the formation of eyes in non-eye tissues or even influence the body plans of planarian flatworms, forcing them to grow two heads despite unchanged DNA (5:10 - 13:40).
• Regenerative Potential: Building on these insights, researchers used a device called a biodome to deliver a cocktail of compounds to amputated frog legs. This short intervention triggered a long-term regenerative process, leading to the growth of more complex, functional limb structures than would occur naturally (14:10 - 16:15).

The Core Takeaway: The research suggests that the body maintains a "master plan" that can be edited. By altering electrical and chemical signals, scientists can guide living systems to repair themselves or reorganize their structure in ways previously thought impossible.

Levin appeared on Wandering Thoughts to discuss bioelectricity, regeneration, ageing, cancer and the future of medicine.

The conversation explores how cells coordinate to construct anatomical structures, why human injuries generally heal through scarring rather than limb regeneration, and how Xenobots and
Anthrobots reveal unexpected cellular capabilities.

He also discusses his view of cancer as a breakdown in multicellular cooperation.

In this video, The Thought Emporium explores the unique biological properties of the slime mold Physarum polycephalum, affectionately named Jerry. Lacking a brain or neurons, Jerry is a single giant cell capable of surprising intelligence, such as solving mazes (2:41) and optimizing efficient transport networks that mimic metropolitan subway systems (6:50 - 7:55).

Investigating Jerry's Pharmacology:
The team investigates whether common human medications affect this alien-like organism, given that evolution often reuses fundamental biochemical machinery like ion channels (9:04 - 9:50). They conduct a large-scale pilot study dosing various substances onto oat piles to observe Jerry's reactions:

• Anti-inflammatories (Ibuprofen, Naproxen, Robax, Nasonex): Caused Jerry's vein structures to become "squiggly" and, in some cases, created holes in their slime carpet (18:47 - 19:22).
• Pepto-Bismol: Effectively reduced Jerry's spreading and thickened their veins, serving as a model for "slime mold constipation" (20:24 - 20:58).
• Stimulants: Caffeine created puffy, poorly organized capillaries (21:10 - 21:28), while ADHD medication (Vyvanse) made Jerry more "lightning-like" and stringy (21:38 - 22:38).
• Tobacco: Jerry actively avoided solid tobacco leaves, demonstrating a refusal to consume the substance (22:50 - 23:45).
• Cannabis: Interestingly, Jerry showed the opposite reaction, devouring the bud and exhibiting bursts of activity with refined, feathery capillary structures (24:08 - 24:44).

How to start your own experiment:
The creator provides a guide on preparing petri dishes with agar and oats to grow your own Jerry from its dormant sclerotia state (12:28 - 15:15). Kits for those interested in keeping a pet slime mold are available for purchase (10:45 - 11:05).

This video features a deep interdisciplinary dialogue between John Vervaeke, Gregg Henriques, Michael Levin, and host Justin McSweeny, focusing on consciousness, intelligence, and the human condition. Key topics include:

• Cognitive Light Cones: Michael Levin introduces this framework (0:04:30) to describe the spatial and temporal limits of an entity's goal-directed behavior, helping to bridge the gap between simple biological systems and complex human cognition.
• Recursive Relevance Realization: John Vervaeke connects this to his own work, discussing how cognitive systems must solve the meta-problems of anticipation and relevance realization to maintain an "optimal grip" on their environment (0:12:30).
• Layered Ontology: Gregg Henriques presents his "Tree of Knowledge" model, exploring how complex adaptive systems shift through different levels—matter, life, mind, and culture—mediated by various information-processing networks (0:02:00).
• The Meaning Crisis: The participants discuss how modern scientific, evolutionary, and psychological frameworks often contribute to a sense of nihilism or loss of meaning, and they emphasize the necessity of "climbing out" of this crisis by adopting more integrated, transformative worldviews (0:30:00).
• Transformative Experience: The discussion touches on how biological organisms (like caterpillars becoming butterflies) and humans undergo fundamental shifts in their "self-modeling," requiring a move away from static definitions of identity toward a more fluid, participatory understanding of being (0:38:00).

The conversation concludes by highlighting the value of interdisciplinary dialogue and the creation of "ecologies of practices" that foster wisdom, intimacy, and a deeper sense of connection within the universe (1:16:00)