Human-Centered or Ego-Centered A.I.?

November 2, 2023 Artifical Intelligence No Comments

‘Humanism’ is supposed to be human-centered. ‘Human-A.I. Value Alignment’ is supposed to be human-centered. Or is it ego-centered?

Especially concerning (non-)Compassionate A.I., this is the crucial question that will make or break us. Unfortunately, this is intrinsically unclear to most people.

Mere-ego versus total self

See also The Big Mistake.

This is not about ‘I’ versus other people. It’s about what happens inside ‘I’ and, of course, the consequences to oneself and others.

The consequences are vast and terrible. Examples are abundant in healthcare (the whole domain of psycho-somatics), sociopolitical issues, etc. What are we doing?!

Ego versus total self’ PLUS the power of A.I.

This is not about ‘bad actors’ who willingly abuse A.I. to harm people. It’s also not about autonomous weapons being used by two sides — each against the ‘bad ones.’

Ego-centered A.I. can be developed by people with the best intentions, even calling it ‘human-centered A.I.’ Nevertheless, it is prone to diminish the wholeness of the human being — heightening dissociation in depth and scaling. Therefore, the distinction between ego and total self should be made explicitly, again and again. If that is not done, rest assured, we’re deluded by ego ― in the first place, our own.

Big problem: humanity still grapples very much with this in theory and practice.

Millennia of philosophy haven’t brought profoundly satisfying insights. Also, many religions have worked with many closed doors ― inciting people to battle for mere doors, goodness.

Science makes progress, at least, by investigating how the brain and the mind are related. However, this is so counter-cultural that, for the time being, these insights are kept unwittingly in a silo without much societal impact.

As a result, practice lags.

We’re in the Middle Ages concerning the issue ‘ego versus total self.’ Meanwhile, waves of technology have increasingly engendered situations for which humanity hasn’t been ready.

But the times, they are a-changing ― unfortunately, toward becoming even more dangerous.

Ego-centered A.I. is challenging at large.

Specific problems stemming from A.I. lie in depth and scaling: the influence upon one and many. After all, A.I. is a powerful tool ― actually, a never-ending stream of new tools and combinations. Thus, many humanly challenges that have been containable until now – more or less, with relatively minor damage – can grow into quite uncontainable issues.

A pressing question remains whether we should focus mainly on existential risks from A.I. (from bad actors to killer robots) or ego-centered uses of A.I.

The answer is both.

The urgent dangers are manifold in both directions.

The positive possibilities also: Better A.I. for Better Humans.

Leave a Reply

Related Posts

Inspiration is Key to A.I. Research

A.I. research should prioritize rationality as well as profound human depth (inspiration). As you may know, this is a perfect Aurelian combination. It’s relevant to much inventive thinking, arguably most of all to A.I. research. The initial phase of research should focus on thinking about the problem. No papers, whiteboards, discussions, or code – just Read the full article…

Why We don’t See What’s Around the Corner

The main why (of not seeing pending super-A.I.) is all about us. We need a next phase in self-understanding, but this is not getting realized yet. If we don’t see this, we don’t see that. This is an excerpt – in slightly different format – from my book The Journey Towards Compassionate A.I. Complex machinery Read the full article…

Coach-bots Shouldn’t Make People Do Things

This is a first principle for Lisa: never to make a human being do anything ― not even by giving advice if anyhow possible. From this constraint, the thinking goes toward how Lisa can operate sensibly. It forces us to think creatively. What comes from inside makes you stronger. This is an AURELIS coaching principle Read the full article…

Translate »