‘Philosophy Is Thinking Outside the Box’

@ Kandinsky

In October 2024, Louis Vervoort, Associate Professor at the School of Philosophy and Cultural Studies of the Faculty of Humanities presented his report ‘Gettier's Problem and Quine's Epistemic Holism: A Unified Account’ at the Formal Philosophy seminar, which covered one of the basic problems of contemporary epistemology. What are the limitations of physics as a science? What are the dangers of AI? How to survive the Russian cold? Louis Vervoort discussed these and many other questions in his interview with the HSE News Service.

Before obtaining a PhD in the philosophy of science, Louis Vervoort completed a PhD in physics (Université de Marseille) and a postdoctoral fellowship in physics at École Normale Supérieure in Paris. This combination of experience in both philosophy and physics naturally led him to focus his interests on the philosophy of physics and artificial intelligence, and more classical topics such as epistemology and the philosophy of mind, free will and consciousness. 

Louis Vervoort

—Let's start with your arrival to Russia in Tyumen. What interested you in coming there? What did you teach? How did you survive Siberian cold weather?

—In Tyumen, I started my first job as a professor, thanks to a new English-speaking interdisciplinary teaching and research centre that was created there in 2017. With my atypical CV in physics and philosophy, I was happy to find a position so soon after my post-doc in Montreal. I taught a variety of courses, mostly in philosophy (of science, of physics, of AI).

Siberia attracted me from the start, I suppose because I have a certain taste for adventure.

It is a great place for discovering all kinds of things unseen in the West, such as its nature, local people and communities, cities, food, and habits.

Getting used to the climate is quite easy with regular physical outdoor activities

Tyumen actually gets much more sun than Western Europe, where I originally come from, and don’t forget: I came from Canada, where snow is even more abundant.

—You have a unique background with a PhD in philosophy of science and a PhD in physics. What are the top philosophical problems of modern physics? 

—In my opinion, the top philosophical problem of modern physics is the understanding of quantum mechanics. Quantum theory is very efficient for calculating and predicting the outcomes of experiments on atomic systems. But, at the same time, it is often said that nobody really understands the theory—what it means beyond the mathematics.

Physicists often are happy to ‘just calculate and do experiments,’ but I believe this approach has clearly shown its limitations

Physics has been at an impasse for decades: quantum theory is in contradiction with the other pillar of physics, general relativity theory, and these theories remain unsuccessful, even after half a century of research.

I believe that new ideas are necessary, and that philosophy can help: philosophy is thinking outside the box.

Also, philosophers can elucidate some of the flabbergasting features of quantum theory, such as non-locality (do particles feel each other instantaneously over infinite distances?), the Schroedinger cat paradox, quantum teleportation, etc. Interestingly enough, some of these problems—which all are at the interface of physics and philosophy—have links with well-known philosophical theories.

—What are the most critical philosophical issues in AI? What are the potential risks of widespread AI distribution?

—Personally, I believe that the most interesting question in the foundations of AI is whether there is a difference between artificial and natural thinking. Does a key rational skill exist in humans, which—perhaps—cannot be emulated by AI? Or can this skill be taught to AI?

In general, I am not pessimistic in regards to the future use of AI, as long as benevolent humans, having a sense of the ethical issues raised by AI, keep control over it

To me, the largest risk is that AI can, in principle, give a sudden and critical cognitive advantage to a small group of people, who may or may not have intentions beneficial for everyone. So, once again, the risk is about creating unacceptable inequalities among people—which can, and should, be mitigated by governments by imposing rules on the use and creation of AI.

All in all, I am moderately optimistic: AI has enormous potential, which could be used to improve society on many levels

Ah, and I almost forgot: another risk is that we, teachers, will be replaced by AI at some point, but I hope that decision makers will understand that there is a decisive psychological factor to take into account: I suspect that students always will find benefits in interacting with real teachers!

—How is AI being researched by you and other HSE experts? What are your conclusions so far?

—One of my conclusions is that, for the time being, we still have one critical advantage over AI, but it is difficult to predict how long we can hold onto it. A year? Ten years? A bit longer? I call this key skill ‘hypothetical-deductive’ thinking, the core ingredient of scientific thinking.

It would be particularly interesting to study if AI and artificial neural nets can improve at this kind of reasoning together with computer science colleagues (of course, sometimes AI already comes close, but not yet in complex situations). I hope to achieve this at HSE, but it hasn’t happened yet. In the meanwhile, there are many experts in AI at HSE in the computer science department and several other departments. Unfortunately, it is difficult to get in touch with them, for example, because the different departments are located on different campuses.

—You've presented a research paper at the HSE Formal Philosophy seminar. What's next in your research pipeline?

—I am working on the questions of quantum physics and AI that I previously mentioned. Another topic is free will and consciousness, which I would like to study with neuroscientists.

—You speak many languages, including English, French, German, Italian, Dutch, Spanish. I can't help but ask about your Russian after so many years here.

—Touché. Well, my Russian is good enough for superficial conversations, but unfortunately not for academic discussions. All my students, colleagues and friends are excellent in English or French. The best way for me to learn Russian better would be to teach a course in Russian. I am working on it!

—You've been at HSE University for two years already. How are things going for you while working and living in Moscow? What are your goals and challenges?

—Living in such a megalopolis as Moscow comes with its challenges, such as transport and expensive housing, but I have to say that Moscow has the best public transport of all the big cities I know. It’s amazing how fast one can travel within the city, and at an affordable price.

Moscow has an enormous intellectual capital

But one thing I have not yet managed is to become a part of a vibrant community of people who would like to do common interdisciplinary research. Maybe this is an idea for the future: creating a platform at HSE University for facilitating interdisciplinary research.