Nice piece on teleology. Especially for someone, like me, who thinks there is a telos in nature. It might have something to do with the modern AI hype, indeed. I never thought about it from this perspective. But IMO it is much more the material monism that followed Descartes dualism that stands behind it. Nowadays, AI, computer science, neuroscience, cognitive sciences and the philosophy of mind rely mostly on a physicalist or functionalist conception of the relationship between the mind and the brain. You are your brain, your brain is your mind and emotions and all what you are. A mechanistic conception that even no longer questions whether the mind is computational or something beyond it, despite there are tons of people having put forward good arguments against. So, inside this paradigm, if one doesn’t question it and even doesn’t know that alternative hypotheses exist (most people like Musk and in the IT branch are completely clueless in this sense) you must obviously believe that the transition from human to transhumanism, and AI to AGI is only a matter of time. It is only a matter of trying harder and harder until we get there. But, IF those who contend otherwise are right, namely that the mind and consciousness are something more than just an electro-chemical epiphenomenon arising from a machinery in our skull, then all these AI fantasies are doomed to failure. It is not about trying harder, it is simply a matter of principle. I believe the latter case is what history is going to tell us. I don't nurture concerns about Terminator-styled doomsday scenarios. I think that even the risk of mass unemployment is overemphasized. There are much more urgent necessities to focus on.
Thanks for these thoughts, Marco! I agree 100% with your analysis of the physicalist / functionalist assumptions in these fields. However, I don't that those of us who reject these paradigms should overlook concerns surrounding existential risk from AI or mass unemployment and other related issues. Just because AI won't become conscious from techies "trying harder" doesn't mean that AI is somehow "safe," socially or existentially.
I'm more optimistic in regard to the unemployment problem. Unemployment is caused by financial crises, wars, pandemics, and maybe by other factors, but never was caused by technological progress. My concern is much more in the application of AI as a propaganda tool to influence (unconsciously) the masses through social media. I guess we are already in this phase.
Nice piece on teleology. Especially for someone, like me, who thinks there is a telos in nature. It might have something to do with the modern AI hype, indeed. I never thought about it from this perspective. But IMO it is much more the material monism that followed Descartes dualism that stands behind it. Nowadays, AI, computer science, neuroscience, cognitive sciences and the philosophy of mind rely mostly on a physicalist or functionalist conception of the relationship between the mind and the brain. You are your brain, your brain is your mind and emotions and all what you are. A mechanistic conception that even no longer questions whether the mind is computational or something beyond it, despite there are tons of people having put forward good arguments against. So, inside this paradigm, if one doesn’t question it and even doesn’t know that alternative hypotheses exist (most people like Musk and in the IT branch are completely clueless in this sense) you must obviously believe that the transition from human to transhumanism, and AI to AGI is only a matter of time. It is only a matter of trying harder and harder until we get there. But, IF those who contend otherwise are right, namely that the mind and consciousness are something more than just an electro-chemical epiphenomenon arising from a machinery in our skull, then all these AI fantasies are doomed to failure. It is not about trying harder, it is simply a matter of principle. I believe the latter case is what history is going to tell us. I don't nurture concerns about Terminator-styled doomsday scenarios. I think that even the risk of mass unemployment is overemphasized. There are much more urgent necessities to focus on.
Thanks for these thoughts, Marco! I agree 100% with your analysis of the physicalist / functionalist assumptions in these fields. However, I don't that those of us who reject these paradigms should overlook concerns surrounding existential risk from AI or mass unemployment and other related issues. Just because AI won't become conscious from techies "trying harder" doesn't mean that AI is somehow "safe," socially or existentially.
I'm more optimistic in regard to the unemployment problem. Unemployment is caused by financial crises, wars, pandemics, and maybe by other factors, but never was caused by technological progress. My concern is much more in the application of AI as a propaganda tool to influence (unconsciously) the masses through social media. I guess we are already in this phase.
If the advent of the power loom didn't cause unemployment of hand loom weavers, then what did?
The unemployment rate isn't measured only by unemployed hand loom weavers.
So it all balances out with new jobs created?
On the long term, yes. This is what history showed.