On the (thorny) subject of the unconscious, there aren’t many people who have researched and written about it more than CG Jung. I’m now immersing myself into Slater’s “Jung vs Borg” (and related) to understand more about the Jungian perspective one could (and perhaps should!) take when thinking about AI, for whatever is worth.
Thanks for reading, Martin. Yes I read a bit of Jung. And funny enough, I put Slater’s book on my to-order list just a few weeks ago. Please do let me know what you think of it.
In that vein, you may like an episode of The Emerald podcast by @Josh Schrei that I heard recently. He applies a very Jung-esque mythic/symbolic lens to AI. Really great audio essay. https://theemeraldpodcast.buzzsprout.com/317042/13210102
'good enough' is the AI mantra for sure. It's the pareto 80/20 rule applied to output. AI will do the 80% out put in just 20% of the effort, and it is that final 20% of the outcome that requires the human mind applied to a task, the true grunt work of a living thing. That's the 90% effort part.
Ai is just not intelligent. It is rather clever and brutally efficient, even allowing for errors.
But equivalent or surpassing human capability? Hardly, because deciphering a database is hardly a human endeavour.
James, once in a blue moon one discovers someone whose thinking is so original, and more importantly, whose ability to translate their insights with such clarity and simplicity as to make others sit up in awe, recognizing something profoundly important, suddenly seeing with fresh eyes as new patterns suddenly become visible with the lens borrowed.....this is what I am finding in your observations and writing. Thank you so much....I am enjoying ALL of it and I can see what you write about in my work and travels through the universe!
Thank you, Annalie. For taking the time to read the piece and such kind feedback. Being able to offer up a lens for borrowing, and for it to actually afford the recipient a glimpse of thing that inspired the writer to write, well... that's the hope of all who take up the pen/keyoard, right?
James, I share your views and love your writing. Thank you for the fantastic post and also for this quote: "In the past, jobs were about muscles. Now they’re about brains, but in the future, they’ll be about the heart." I could not agree more.
I love also how you speak of "art that is unmistakably ensouled" - I personally dream of all business being ensouled because they produce what we eat, how we heal, how we learn, play, and so on, and they impact every aspect of our lifes.
Thank you for sharing, Natalia. I read your article and tend to agree, especially with the notion that some of the unique human faculties listed have been neglected, in part owing to the way contemporary education functions.
I'd also include in that list of distinctions that humans are not just Homo sapiens, but also Homo religiosus, which refers to our intrinsic drive toward transcendence, freedom, and the creation of meaning, (regardless of our particular religious or secular backgrounds or beliefs). Humans are driven by more than just biological survival and intellectual pursuits, it seems. The impulse toward transcendence, however it manifests, is not a product, service or output that can be manufacturer. It's an experiential activity requiring first the impulse itself, and then the engagement of the whole human in that pursuit. A few people throughout history have seemed to think that this kind of activity matters in some fundamental way, so I suspect it'll persist. One could argue that transhumanism & longtermism are forms of secular religion which also come from this impulse toward transcendence.
Thank you, James. I agree with your additional point and I agree that this aspect of being human is often neglected. I find especially insightful your last sentence about the transhumanism, etc. That provides something we have been needing badly... hypothesis regarding the real drivers of some of the processes we have been experiencing. Thank you for that! Looking from that angle helps us move from a simplified (lack of) understanding of the world to a more holistic, and that's invaluable.
I never thought about it in that way but it sounds right to me in a very profound way. Thank you for bringing our attention to it! If it is the megatrend of all megatrends, and humanity keeps neglecting it... this expains why people keep being surprised by events. As someone said, if we are surprised by events, it means we are not seeing aspects of the reality around us. When we do, events come logically and can be anticipated.
I'm of the view Natalia that humans lack wisdom at any real level. We're smart enough to make things that can kill us, but not wise enough to build in to those things, ways to stop them from killing us
Great post, James.
On the (thorny) subject of the unconscious, there aren’t many people who have researched and written about it more than CG Jung. I’m now immersing myself into Slater’s “Jung vs Borg” (and related) to understand more about the Jungian perspective one could (and perhaps should!) take when thinking about AI, for whatever is worth.
Thanks for reading, Martin. Yes I read a bit of Jung. And funny enough, I put Slater’s book on my to-order list just a few weeks ago. Please do let me know what you think of it.
In that vein, you may like an episode of The Emerald podcast by @Josh Schrei that I heard recently. He applies a very Jung-esque mythic/symbolic lens to AI. Really great audio essay. https://theemeraldpodcast.buzzsprout.com/317042/13210102
Thanks for sharing. Can’t wait to listen to it now!
Also, I wasn’t familiar with this podcast but I can already feel I’m going to like it :) Thanks, once again, for sharing.
'good enough' is the AI mantra for sure. It's the pareto 80/20 rule applied to output. AI will do the 80% out put in just 20% of the effort, and it is that final 20% of the outcome that requires the human mind applied to a task, the true grunt work of a living thing. That's the 90% effort part.
Ai is just not intelligent. It is rather clever and brutally efficient, even allowing for errors.
But equivalent or surpassing human capability? Hardly, because deciphering a database is hardly a human endeavour.
For me, AI can already be considered smarter than us, but it will never be wiser.
James, once in a blue moon one discovers someone whose thinking is so original, and more importantly, whose ability to translate their insights with such clarity and simplicity as to make others sit up in awe, recognizing something profoundly important, suddenly seeing with fresh eyes as new patterns suddenly become visible with the lens borrowed.....this is what I am finding in your observations and writing. Thank you so much....I am enjoying ALL of it and I can see what you write about in my work and travels through the universe!
Thank you, Annalie. For taking the time to read the piece and such kind feedback. Being able to offer up a lens for borrowing, and for it to actually afford the recipient a glimpse of thing that inspired the writer to write, well... that's the hope of all who take up the pen/keyoard, right?
James, I share your views and love your writing. Thank you for the fantastic post and also for this quote: "In the past, jobs were about muscles. Now they’re about brains, but in the future, they’ll be about the heart." I could not agree more.
I love also how you speak of "art that is unmistakably ensouled" - I personally dream of all business being ensouled because they produce what we eat, how we heal, how we learn, play, and so on, and they impact every aspect of our lifes.
I also share the opinion that AI is "an invitation to re-examine what it actually means to be human." If you or someone else is interested, I have also written on the subject: https://nataliablagoeva.substack.com/p/when-we-fear-ai-who-are-we-really
Thank you for sharing, Natalia. I read your article and tend to agree, especially with the notion that some of the unique human faculties listed have been neglected, in part owing to the way contemporary education functions.
I'd also include in that list of distinctions that humans are not just Homo sapiens, but also Homo religiosus, which refers to our intrinsic drive toward transcendence, freedom, and the creation of meaning, (regardless of our particular religious or secular backgrounds or beliefs). Humans are driven by more than just biological survival and intellectual pursuits, it seems. The impulse toward transcendence, however it manifests, is not a product, service or output that can be manufacturer. It's an experiential activity requiring first the impulse itself, and then the engagement of the whole human in that pursuit. A few people throughout history have seemed to think that this kind of activity matters in some fundamental way, so I suspect it'll persist. One could argue that transhumanism & longtermism are forms of secular religion which also come from this impulse toward transcendence.
Thank you, James. I agree with your additional point and I agree that this aspect of being human is often neglected. I find especially insightful your last sentence about the transhumanism, etc. That provides something we have been needing badly... hypothesis regarding the real drivers of some of the processes we have been experiencing. Thank you for that! Looking from that angle helps us move from a simplified (lack of) understanding of the world to a more holistic, and that's invaluable.
The quest for transcendence/eternal life is indeed THE megatrend of megatrends.
I never thought about it in that way but it sounds right to me in a very profound way. Thank you for bringing our attention to it! If it is the megatrend of all megatrends, and humanity keeps neglecting it... this expains why people keep being surprised by events. As someone said, if we are surprised by events, it means we are not seeing aspects of the reality around us. When we do, events come logically and can be anticipated.
I'm of the view Natalia that humans lack wisdom at any real level. We're smart enough to make things that can kill us, but not wise enough to build in to those things, ways to stop them from killing us
Yes, I agree, Marcus. Unfortunately... Yet, we have the human advantage to be. Machines can never be.