Thinking About Artificial Intelligence
We are not thinking frogs,
nor objectifying and registering mechanisms
with their innards removed:
ceaselessly we have to give birth to our thoughts
out of our pain, and maternally,
endow them with all that we have of blood,
heart, fire, joy, passion, torment, conscience,
and fate.
–Excerpt, The Gay Science, Preface §3, by Friedrich Nietzsche
A humorous thought, at water’s edge a frog patiently rests, waiting the proximity of an unsuspecting fly… Or perhaps more disturbing something machine-like recording rapid succession images to take note of external reality…
Homo sapiens are manifestly unlike amphibians searching for insect nourishment, nor are we machines processing the external world according to rules. With us, something esoteric, with the delicacy of dance between body/mind and world, — takes place. Thus far, we have not been able to specify the “mechanism” (likely that is NOT what we are searching for)… To date there is no agreement on the definition of consciousness, the nature of the reciprocal dynamic between mind and world — that results in a Sistine chapel, in the planning of a city, or even the cup of coffee which I reliably receive here at Starbucks day by day.
Intelligence as we know it, — there’s nothing artificial about it. Intelligence is profoundly human, a matter of blood, heart, fire, joy, passion, torment, conscience, and fate — something which is the instantiation of our pain.
As for the tune to get us through a cloud-covered winter day, Freeze Frame by the J. Geils Band will elevate our mood. I think the lyric lauds the triumph of the imagination. What is real? Why that depends upon yours and my imagination… What do you think?
2 thoughts on “Thinking About Artificial Intelligence”
Hmmm…. The definition of intelligence is itself profoundly human, for this is something that we have made up out of thin air. Our “consciousness” is also a matter of debate, for we can only view it from inside the black hole of our skulls and pretend to observe it in others of our species. In addition, we are constantly unfairly comparing ourselves with other creatures. Many times this manifests itself in an anthropomorphism that places expectations of human behavior onto frogs, dogs, cats and all manner of our animal brethren. We also give human attributes to objects such as trees, rocks, and even the momentos within our own homes. Certainly I am as guilty of this as anyone, but I also know, from a pragmatic point of view, that it is nonsense.
We cannot know what intelligence truly means, whether it is that ability of a frog to sense the fly or whether it is the ability to create nuclear fusion. Each of these activities carries with it the potential to be deemed as “intelligence” relative to a rock. Perhaps it is the notion that we have moved well away from nature and into a separate realm, wholly created by a combination of curiosity and egotism, that makes us actually less intelligent, depending on ones definition.
The bottom line is that I believe we can only guess at the meaning of intelligence and as we toy with the concept of “artificial intelligence” we are at risk of playing god. According to the mythology found in Genesis, God created man in his/her own image. Is this not what we are attempting to do through Artificial Intelligence as well? But until we can determine the true meaning of intelligence we are indeed playing with fire for any form of this technology we do create is subject to the inclusion of our own foibles and flaws. Putin, Assad, Xi, and Trump all believe they are highly intelligent and they have a huge combined influence on the direction of technology. From the cheap seats, many of us believe these people (and the millions of others who support them) are the anti-intellectuals and represent the worst of humanity. So where do we net out when it comes to the definition of “intelligence”? We can’t know and we won’t know for centuries if we actually do survive. My skepticism places our chances at next to zero in this regard.
A thoughtful probing of the matter… In the mind “image and illusion coexist….” do they not? The mind of homo sapiens is a borderland of sorts is it not?
So where do we net out when it comes to the definition of “intelligence”?
I suspect we are best left with such a question, and the humility to confess that we do not have an answer.