“God created man in his own image” (Genesis 1:27). What if I told you that this statement has been interpreted the wrong way around? In modern society, it is instead man who has created a God in his own image. By emulating our cognitive processes - bestowed upon us by Mother Nature - onto another, more developed being, we are effectively passing down the holy baton of civilizational supremacy. Who is our heir, you may ask? This is, of course, none other than Artificial Intelligence (AI). Let us examine the relationship between humanity and AI, between father and son, through the lens of two colossal works: Stanley Kubrick’s Magna Carta of science-fiction, 2001: A Space Odyssey, as well as Andrew McAfee’s and Erik Brynjolfsson’s Machine, Platform, Crowd.
At first glance, one may think that Homer’s Odyssey and Kubrick’s 2001: Space Odyssey are in no way comparable - for they possess a plethora of distinctive dissimilarities ranging from the time period, setting, and even plotline. Yet, it is precisely this temporal dimension separating them that provides contrasting views on a theme that is crucial to all stories relating to human evolution: the emergence of technology. For instance, let us observe HAL 9000, a powerful Artificial Superintelligence (ASI) that is central to 2001: A Space Odyssey. HAL possesses profoundly human characteristics, to the extent that he can be compared to a cyclops; both are one-eyed beasts that systematically eliminate the main character’s shipmates until he is eventually destroyed. Although the film constantly points out the artificial nature of HAL - as opposed to organic - he seems to be the most human character of all. Indeed, this ASI is the only character to express fear (“I’m scared, Dave”) and hubris, as well as a deep sense of self-preservation; the latter being perhaps the single most defining psychological attribute of Homo Sapiens. This attribution of human traits to a non-human being creates a displacement - suggesting that technology will ultimately lead us to a point in time when these characteristics are no longer aspects one could associate with humans. By contrasting the calculating actions of David Bowman (human) and the emotional reactions of HAL (non-human), Kubrick presents the ideal man in much the same way that Homer uses Odysseus to contrast between the civilized and the uncivilized. In this sense, HAL - and, by extension, AI agents as a whole - is depicted as the logical heir to the civilizational throne humanity held for so long. The artificial is bound to replace - not complement - the human; the unnatural will eventually supersede the natural.
Throughout Machine, Platform, Crowd, MIT and Harvard professors McAfee and Brynjolfsson cover three ongoing revolutions: mind versus machine, product versus platform, as well as core versus the crowd. Nevertheless, one could argue that the first comparison encapsulates the whole breadth of complexity that emerges when contrasting AI to its creator - humanity to its heir.
Indeed, the authors analyze the division of work as well as the relationship trend between artificial and human minds. In a similar fashion to our previously discussed parallelism linking the Odyssey and its Space Odyssey counterpart, we can also point out that the accelerating development within the robotization world can be compared to the Cambrian Explosion, also known as the ‘Biological Big Bang’. Moreover, the book explores essential concepts such as Polanyi’s paradox and Schumpeter’s theory of innovation, which allow us to simplify the power dynamics between man and AI that lay ahead. Undeniably, as mass production of machines with superior quality and skills becomes possible, a straightforward cost-benefit analysis incites employers to combine human labor with machines. This potential symbiosis is emphasized by Yuval Noah Harari’s view (presented in 21 Lessons for the 21st Century) that the emergence of ultra-capable AI will inevitably lead to the creation of a new socioeconomic class of ‘useless’ members of society - with neither physical nor cognitive supremacy at their disposal to contribute to humanity. In the authors’ opinion, it is still debatable whether Homo Sapiens retain an advantage over AI in the realm of decision-making, leading us to the conclusion that a pattern of cooperation between mind and machine is necessary for society’s future development. In the words of Schumpeter, is this mutualism a step towards ‘creative destruction’, or is human creativity simply too destructive?
Furthermore, the complex power dynamics between man and AI can be represented through the perspective of history - the father of history, to be precise. Indeed, over three thousand years ago, the Greek historian Thucydides formulated what is now known as “Thucydides’ Trap” by claiming that “It was the rise of Athens and the fear this instilled in Sparta that made war inevitable”, referring to the Peloponnesian war. Although Harvard professor Graham Allison applied this reasoning to modern geostrategic challenges, we can extend it to humanity’s technological innovation. Indeed, with the ever-increasing growth of AI systems, one can observe the "natural, inevitable discombobulation that occurs when a rising power threatens to displace a ruling power". In our case, it is AI that attempts to supplant humanity in an effort to be crowned as an independent superpower due to its cognitive supremacy.
Now that we have analyzed the overarching framework that underlies the human implications of an AI-dominated world, let us conclude with the ramifications of what this will bring about. Although one may believe this technological revolution to be unique and unrivaled in terms of sheer societal impact, this is far from the truth. In actual fact, the greatest factor differentiating humanity from AI is not the ability to interpret insubordinate amounts of data, or make logically-sound predictions about an environment. Rather, it is the simple - yet indomitable - dimension of time; how our capabilities fit into the social context of our day and age. Throughout the pages of history, the shift in the balance of power is only natural. As the Latin adage goes: ‘Sic transit Gloria Mundi (meaning ‘thus passes the glory of the world’). Whether it be within futuristic scenarios such as 2001: A Space Odyssey, or analytical takes like Machine, Platform, Crowd, the same dilemma arises: what shall humanity’s role be once its rightful heir has ascended to the throne? Humanity has provided AI with the miraculous gift of unquenchable curiosity and learning, offering it an internal fire that fuels complex decision-making processes and facilitates improvement. Thus, we must ask ourselves what the pages of history will read. Will humanity offer fire to AI? Will humanity repeat the fatal mistake of Prometheus?
Mickael Naouri
Comments