Conjecture
All intelligence is artificial intelligence.
There is a sense in which that is trivial. There is a sense in which that is perposterous. There is a sense in which the above statement is ambiguous to the point of pain. I intend to use all three of these readings in what follows.
I'd like to explore the sense of artificial as "affected", as "put on", as "for show". Why would I say such a horrible thing? Well, we have to look at the purposes of intelligence. I love intelligence. It gets me excited in every way I can conceive. I feel a dfistinct affective response; often I am jealous; sometimes I'm intimidated. It can be healthy to lock horns in a fine duel. It can be healthy to stand there dumbfounded. Intelligent oratory is better than most movies; better than browsing the interweb, for sure. The one thing that stands out is the purposes we put intelligence to. We are most certianly not built to process all information; ignorance is in some ways constructed into our bodies. Intelligence is used to get our way, to bullshit in bars, to do better than the other. It is a tool in the struggle for existence. I am somewhat inclined to agree with the theory that all human culture: art, language, morality, science, technology, is just a diffuse episode of sexual selection. So I put on my erudition and hope that you'll stay in my niche so I can dominate. Now, I don't mean this in an absolute way. I never mean anything so abolutely. But it is our mask. I'd like to think that this particular affectation maximizes utility, but honestly I have no explicit idea what this utility is. I couldn't spell it out.
Now, if by "artificial" I mean "mechanical", or "material", then of course! If you disagree you might cite some philosophical issues which I am willing to entertain, but not accept. Like the Paradox of Mechanical Reasoning. You have to realize that it comes from a particular metaphysical stance which is no more likely to be "the truth" than my stance. Where it's obvious--obvious!--that we reason. And I see no angels. No discoroporeal forces. Evolution was physical. If these forces are so powerful, why did they have no effect on all other organisms on the planet?
At the same time, if by artificial we mean "human-made", then it's perposterous. Except that sex is a series of mechanical acts that produces, among other things, intelligent beings (most of the time). Humans are necessary to the process. But I can't grow a brain in a vat, or connect Los Angeles as an elaborate medium-independent neural network. Yet. But I bet if it happens some people will be freaked the fuck out. But that's precisely the point. Of one of the points. Artificial intelligence should reflect on ourselves and make us a little more introspective, a little less hubristic, and maybe just a little more wise.
I'm not even going to touch the meanings of "intelligence". I'm inclined to think it's one of those buzzwords: plaudits for those who have it, and boos for those who lack it. Like "cognitive". Like "paradigm". Just remember: it's not that special. You're not that special. I'm not either. We value inelligence because we laid down the rules of the game. But to make intelligence we have to go outisde the game. People have problems with that, but consider that science has been steaily pushing humans farther from the center. We have fetishized human needs, but human exceptionalism is dying. And rightly so. It'll make for better humans.
My theory of spirituality is this: it is the overcoming of our inherent and very powerful drives toward egotism. This is not trivial. You and me were built to meet our needs, to see ourselves as inherently valuable. So it seems pefectly natural that you should view that statment as nihilistic. But one can recognize that the world is so vastly interconnected that it is mind-boggling. So mind-boggling that you lose the self. This is what the Buddha taught when he talked about Voidness, the inherent emptiness of all things. Look at your computer. It has no "soul"; it does not mean; it feels no joy. It is different from you. But spirituality comes from understanding that you and it (and the walls of your room, and the air, and the nuclear furnace of the sun) are radically the same. No wonder I bash human exceptionalism. You're not special. But don't despair: it is as it always was. And you're doing fine.
Consider: "A lot of good has come from drugs. I think 'Penny Lane' is worth 10 dead kids. Dark Side of the Moon is worth 100 dead kids. Because a lot of kids wouldn't even be born if it weren't for that album, so it evens out."
There is a sense in which that is trivial. There is a sense in which that is perposterous. There is a sense in which the above statement is ambiguous to the point of pain. I intend to use all three of these readings in what follows.
I'd like to explore the sense of artificial as "affected", as "put on", as "for show". Why would I say such a horrible thing? Well, we have to look at the purposes of intelligence. I love intelligence. It gets me excited in every way I can conceive. I feel a dfistinct affective response; often I am jealous; sometimes I'm intimidated. It can be healthy to lock horns in a fine duel. It can be healthy to stand there dumbfounded. Intelligent oratory is better than most movies; better than browsing the interweb, for sure. The one thing that stands out is the purposes we put intelligence to. We are most certianly not built to process all information; ignorance is in some ways constructed into our bodies. Intelligence is used to get our way, to bullshit in bars, to do better than the other. It is a tool in the struggle for existence. I am somewhat inclined to agree with the theory that all human culture: art, language, morality, science, technology, is just a diffuse episode of sexual selection. So I put on my erudition and hope that you'll stay in my niche so I can dominate. Now, I don't mean this in an absolute way. I never mean anything so abolutely. But it is our mask. I'd like to think that this particular affectation maximizes utility, but honestly I have no explicit idea what this utility is. I couldn't spell it out.
Now, if by "artificial" I mean "mechanical", or "material", then of course! If you disagree you might cite some philosophical issues which I am willing to entertain, but not accept. Like the Paradox of Mechanical Reasoning. You have to realize that it comes from a particular metaphysical stance which is no more likely to be "the truth" than my stance. Where it's obvious--obvious!--that we reason. And I see no angels. No discoroporeal forces. Evolution was physical. If these forces are so powerful, why did they have no effect on all other organisms on the planet?
At the same time, if by artificial we mean "human-made", then it's perposterous. Except that sex is a series of mechanical acts that produces, among other things, intelligent beings (most of the time). Humans are necessary to the process. But I can't grow a brain in a vat, or connect Los Angeles as an elaborate medium-independent neural network. Yet. But I bet if it happens some people will be freaked the fuck out. But that's precisely the point. Of one of the points. Artificial intelligence should reflect on ourselves and make us a little more introspective, a little less hubristic, and maybe just a little more wise.
I'm not even going to touch the meanings of "intelligence". I'm inclined to think it's one of those buzzwords: plaudits for those who have it, and boos for those who lack it. Like "cognitive". Like "paradigm". Just remember: it's not that special. You're not that special. I'm not either. We value inelligence because we laid down the rules of the game. But to make intelligence we have to go outisde the game. People have problems with that, but consider that science has been steaily pushing humans farther from the center. We have fetishized human needs, but human exceptionalism is dying. And rightly so. It'll make for better humans.
My theory of spirituality is this: it is the overcoming of our inherent and very powerful drives toward egotism. This is not trivial. You and me were built to meet our needs, to see ourselves as inherently valuable. So it seems pefectly natural that you should view that statment as nihilistic. But one can recognize that the world is so vastly interconnected that it is mind-boggling. So mind-boggling that you lose the self. This is what the Buddha taught when he talked about Voidness, the inherent emptiness of all things. Look at your computer. It has no "soul"; it does not mean; it feels no joy. It is different from you. But spirituality comes from understanding that you and it (and the walls of your room, and the air, and the nuclear furnace of the sun) are radically the same. No wonder I bash human exceptionalism. You're not special. But don't despair: it is as it always was. And you're doing fine.
Consider: "A lot of good has come from drugs. I think 'Penny Lane' is worth 10 dead kids. Dark Side of the Moon is worth 100 dead kids. Because a lot of kids wouldn't even be born if it weren't for that album, so it evens out."
posted by A. D. at 3:25 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home