The role of Artificial Intelligence in our lives will surprise you
What comes to your mind when you think of the term AI, or Artificial Intelligence? Cyborgs? Robots? Chess games? Cylons? Terminators?
It’s amazing to me to see people still thinking in those terms when it comes to AI and how we will develop it someday. It’s amazing because of how obvious it is, at least to me, that AI lives and breathes and has ruled numerous aspects of our lives for quite some time.
In fact, for as long as there have been humans, there has been Artificial Intelligence.
Have you ever sat in a movie theater with a crowd of others, watching a movie, and felt the emotions surge through the theater in perfect timing with the movie, for example? One particularly poignant example was when I attended a viewing of the movie The Passion of the Christ, that powerful film from Mel Gibson. Sitting there in the movie theater, packed to capacity, as the story unfolded, was indeed an experience. But there were moments during the viewing when I found myself holding my breath, or weeping, or with a clenched stomach, and suddenly became aware of the fact that there wasn’t a single other individual in the theater who did not experience the same. It was a collective experience that far exceeded anything I could have felt, had I simply sat in the room alone as the story was told. At moments, there was absolute silence in the theater; at other times, a collective sound of sniffles and such.
Everyone has heard of the converse of this, when a collective consciousness overwhelms that of the individualized consciousness, and suddenly you have the “mob mentality” scenario, with a crowd of people suddenly caught up in violence that would never have occurred if the individuals of that mob had retained their individual conscience and consciousness.
It isn’t that they stopped being who they were: it is simply that a groupthink suddenly overwhelmed that individuality.
And that is what I’m referring to when I speak of Artificial Intelligence. Psychologists would call it something else, certainly.
But to me, personally, Artificial Intelligence is something that exists when two or more humans come together for a singular purpose. In that setting, we set aside certain facets of our own individuality for the sake of a Purpose that can only be attained through a cohesive, collective effort. Once we’ve accomplished whatever it is that we set out to do, we revert to our individuality and go about our normal activities. The Artificial Intelligence no longer is extant.
The Biblical story of the building of the tower of Babel is an ideal illustration of the building of the modern-day Corporation!
One of the earliest recorded instances where Man came under a collective consciousness is found in Bible, in the story of the tower of Babel, when Man decided that he would build a tower that would extend into the heavens, presumably so that never again would Humanity face destruction through the Noahaic Flood. Now, whether you accept that the story actually occurred or not is beside the point I am making. The real point here is that the work effort became a focused collective work, and a singular purpose. It became an overriding force in the thinking of those who designed and built it.
The same could be said of the building of the pyramids. While experts still rely on their theories to explain just how the pyramids of Egypt were built, it’s obvious that these pyramids could never have been built without a collective effort. And when you have a collective effort, individuality is set aside in some manner, to varying extents so as to make the Purpose something that can be accomplished collectively, while otherwise implausible on an individual level.
While the collective effort is in effect, individualism is placed in limbo.
Now, the question one might ask at this point is how can I call this occurrence “Artificial Intelligence”? Really, doesn’t it fly in the face of our normal understanding of what AI is, in light of Hollywood movies, science fiction novels, etc.?
Because, typically, when we talk about AI, we immediately think of robots, or computer programs, that can think for themselves.
But my argument is that developing AI in robots and computer programs is simply our attempt to capture the essence of that Collectivism and place it into Individualism.
And yes, I’m very much aware that wanting a computer that can beat a human at a game of Chess does fall within the parameters of Artificial Intelligence. My point is that it isn’t truly Artificial Intelligence as I understand AI constitutes.
Artificial Intelligence is just that: artificial. That means that it comes about through the efforts of either an individual or group of individuals, with the caveat that it cannot exist without the pre-existence of said individual or group of individuals. In other words, AI cannot come into existence of its own volition.
Let’s take a computer that is programmed to play Chess. Right from the start, we have a crippled form of AI, in that it only knows and understands what it has been programmed to know and understand—thus it has a Maker (or Programmer or Creator or what-have-you). That it is the product of programming seems to automatically preclude the notion that it is artificial in the same way that artificial flavoring in a food is still flavoring, nonetheless. It’s simply not the natural flavoring that it is designed or programmed to act as a substitute for.
Artificial Intelligence, then, is simply a substitute for human intelligence, right? At least in the context which we conceptualize AI.
People may argue that true AI can think for itself, and I would concur. But, again, this just makes my argument more valid in that AI has been a part of our Human experience for as long as Man could set aside his personal grievances, biases, prejudices, and other petty squablings that help him to define his individuality amongst the collective, and work with others toward a common interest, goal, or purpose. Because that, too, is an artificial form of intelligence—if we are to say that individualism is the natural form of existence.
Which, itself, opens up its own can of worms, because Individualism is only effective within Collectivism.
Can Individualism exist apart from Collectivism, is the question. Each of us certainly are individuals, but we are individuals shaped by our thoughts and the outside forces that exist apart from ourselves. The child learns to conform to the classroom setting, learns to play nicely with others, to work with others in a group setting. We develop relationships right from the womb, starting with our parents. While that newborn is indeed to be considered unique from all others, an individual, the fact of the matter is that without its mother, it has no chance of survival, and the newborn understands at a core level of intelligence and reason. It becomes immediately necessary to communicate its needs as an individual to its mother, and we have the foundation of Collectivism. No matter how individualistic that infant may think it is, its needs admit that it is NOT an individual after all. In true Individualism, there is no dependence upon Collectivism.
Really, then, the Human life consists of a constant shifting between Individualism and Collectivism. Sometimes, that line is precariously narrow, and more often than not, said line gets blurred where the two forms of existence harmonize together. A perfect example of this is found in a teenage child, who is arriving at that stage of development where they demand their Individualism, yet it’s clear that they remain dependent on Collectivism. Even adults often bristle at having to forsake their Individualism because they realize that only Collectivism can provide for their needs.
We depend on our employers, for example, to provide us with the money that we need to maintain our individuality.
We depend on our employers, for example, to provide us with the money that we need to maintain our individuality. And towards the end of our life, we find ourselves depending on our children, or institutions, or government programs so that we might live out our final days as… individuals.
One might ask, then, whether Individualism is an artificial form of existence. There’s an old saying that “no man is an island” and it’s just as true today as when it was first spoken.
However, the same could be said of Collectivism, which cannot exist without the individuals who give it a form of existence. And this brings me back to my argument, because Collectivism also has its own form of intelligence, does it not? Each of the individual units within it serve a particular function in much the same way as the cells of our body carry out their individual functions yet work harmoniously together for the well-being of the whole, the collective entity.
But here, too, we encounter a problem. Clearly, our body doesn’t seem to notice if we lose a certain number of cells each and every day of our existence; our body’s always producing new replacement cells to ensure that the needs of the body are continuously met, right?
So, if we take that biological example and apply it socially, then what? We have teachers, doctors, firemen, police officers, truck drivers, farmers, and countless other roles that individual “cells” (humans) fill to ensure that the body of Humanity is provided with what it needs to survive. Each of us serves an important role in maintaining the health of the Human body (of individuals). Somehow, the Human body understands this, regardless of what the method (form of government) is that is utilized to ensure that it’s done. Whether rule is by democracy or by dictatorship doesn’t matter, because they both depend on said roles to provide for the health of the body. The rest is, as they say, details.
Now, having said that, it’s vital that I once again return to the point I’m wanting to make in this article.
There has been a significant shift taking place for years now. Whether it’s a form of evolution I can’t personally say. But the corporation has steadily grown in power and influence in those parts of the world where Individualism has itself strained to be recognized. It’s most easily recognized in alleged “democratic” nations, if you can believe that.
I happen to live in the United States of America, a nation that prides itself on freedom. As if in stark contradiction, the ideals that have long held Humanity together—family and community—have suffered grievously. In this country, it is no longer unusual to have children move sometimes great distances from their parents. Families are now spread across states, rather than remaining together. It’s considered normal by the majority of people. In fact, I’ve often heard it said that the only time we often see our relatives is when someone gets married or dies. The rest of the time, we continue to grow apart from one another. And this in spite of the fact that up until around World War II, families primarily lived in the same town, or at least within the same district.
In other countries, not only immediate families live near one another (and in many cases live WITH one another), but extended families often are a part of that arrangement as well. Here in the United States of America, on the other hand, parents may live out their final days in nursing homes or elderly communities, placed there by their own children. It’s a remarkable development, really, because it really illuminates the artificiality of the lifestyle that we’ve taken to in this nation.
Be that as it may, there is another truly alarming phenomenon taking place in this nation, and that is the gradual ascension to power and authority of the Corporation.
A Corporation is a form of Collectivism. It’s composed of individuals who work together for a common goal or Purpose.
Now, while there is nothing at all wrong about wanting to do this, what is happening is that these forms of Collectivism are striving for Individualism, and clearly succeeding on every level.
More and more, artificial entities' rights are given prominence over Human rights.
Where one might ask how an artificial form of existence can seek and obtain greater rights and freedoms than the individuals which give it life, we see precisely that taking place as more and more Human laws not only recognize the Corporation as a valid entity, but one entitled to power and authority enforceable through Human Law.
Yet each Corporation is a form of Artificial Intelligence, unable to exist apart from its maker or creator, if you will.
This becomes dangerous especially when the Corporation evolves to the point of existence, or Life, where—like our own human bodies—it no longer faces its own demise through the loss of individual workers (or cells, if you want to draw upon the biological term), and simply replaces those cells with new ones, so as to ensure its own continued existence. Based on what I’ve seen during my lifetime, the Corporation has indeed achieved that very level of existence, and that would explain why we see so much effort to validate its existence legally, to establish its own Bill of Rights.
Corporations spend billions every year to establish their rights as superior to those of humans.
And it’s succeeding!
The frightening part about this is that I see no efforts to stop this from happening. I see no evidence of anyone stopping and asking how it is that an artificial form of life can have more right and entitlements than we humans have. That’s really the dilemma we face, if in fact we can still face it and stop it before it goes any further—and even that has become suspect. The cynic in me has become convinced that we will continue to see the further establishment of artificial life as superior to ourselves, legally as well as socially.
So, while Hollywood continues to churn out movies about robots that we design suddenly turning on us, while science fiction authors address questions about artificial life and sentience and their rights compared with human rights, we as Humans will continue to fall by the wayside, or at least become more and more subservient to Artificial Intelligence in the form of the Corporation.
It’s no wonder that in that Biblical tale of the tower of Babel that God Himself came down and broke it up personally. Maybe it was because He recognized the danger of Corporation as a fatal form of Collectivism.
Time will tell.
