Skip to main content

Our Machine Masters

I confess up front that the title for this inspirational reflection is stolen from a recent article by David Brooks who uses the same title.  I am a regular reader of Brooks, not because I agree with everything he says, but because every thing he says is so thoughtful and insightful.  He takes on big, important issues and deals with them in a way that I have to take seriously.  In this article Brooks focuses on artificial intelligence.           

I confess, too, that I know virtually nothing about artificial intelligence.  Rather than take pride in my ignorance, I am worried about it.  I know that ignorance is seldom good---especially for the one who does not know.  And that is precisely the point of Brooks’ trenchant treatment of the topic.  I figure if I am ignorant, at least I ought to know of what I am ignorant!  What are the issues?           

Early on Brooks quotes technology writer, Kevin Kelly.  Kelly “argues that the age of artificial intelligence is finally at hand.”  Then Brooks adds another line that is deep, but troubling.  Kelly says, “Everything that we formerly electrified we will now cognitize,”  Let me unpack this a bit.  We have electrified so much stuff in our lives.  If you have a garage door opener in your car, that is electrified.  Everything on your computer is electrified.  And the list goes on.  We use this electrified stuff to think about and use to our advantage.           

But Kelly points to another step.  Now you are being bypassed.  The computer not only stores (electrifies) knowledge.  It begins to cognitize that material.  To cognitize is to think.  In fact, the computer has advanced to the state that it often can out-think humans.  Humans lose chess matches to artificial intelligence.  Computers figure out which music you like, which stuff in the grocery you buy, etc.  What we once assumed was the human domain (thinking and reason) is now being co-opted by computers who cognitize!           

Now Brooks steps into the equation.  “Two big implications flow from this. The first is sociological. If knowledge is power, we’re about to see an even greater concentration of power.”  Brooks says that the power will be centralized in a few big companies—think Google or Amazon.  And then he offers a sober warning.  “If you think this power will be used for entirely benign ends, then you have not read enough history.”           

“The second implication is philosophical,” says Brooks.  “A.I. (artificial intelligence) will redefine what it means to be human.”  We may be beaten at the intelligence game, but Brooks says we can win at the game of affection, intuition, imagination, and morality.  There will be the defining hallmarks of our humanity.  Our human advantage will be “personal and moral faculties: being likable, industrious, trustworthy and affectionate.”           

I like this list because it reminds me of the kind of spiritual characteristics I think are central to being human.  To be fully human means to be spiritual.  Just look again at the four faculties Brooks enumerates.  We can be likeable.  For me likeable could be the basic step toward loving.  Likeable is foundational to peacemaking.  If people can become more likeable, there will not be enemies.           

Industrious is the trait describing people who are willing to work and to be disciplined in that process.  Industriousness eradicates laziness.  Artificial intelligence will not replace the need to work.  It should eliminate much of the drudgery of some work.           

Trustworthy is a huge human advantage---or disadvantage if it is missing.  Trust goes to the heart of human interaction and relationship.  Artificial intelligence can electronically hook up with other computers.  But that’s different from developing trust.  I know trust is simply another word for faith.  You cannot electrify faith and automatically produce trust.  And that easily leads to affection and being affectionate.           

Who wants to hold hands with a computer!  I doubt that God is computer-like, although God’s work in the world might seem a bit that way.  The Biblical tradition holds that God is love and I am still good with that basic definition.  God is love and therefore capable of being affectionate.  And God is trustworthy.  No doubt God is industrious---six days on the job and one day called Sabbath.           

And God is certainly likeable.  God is always for me and for you.  What’s not to like about that?  If I can be clear about all this, then I don’t ultimately worry about being mastered by machines.  I know artificial intelligence will become more prominent---whether I understand anything about it or not.  But I am a child of God and not the computer’s offspring.  I am created in the image of God---thank God!
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

I-Thou Relationships

Those of us who have read theology or, perhaps, those who are people of faith and are old enough might well recognize this title as a reminder of the late Jewish philosopher and theologian, Martin Buber.   I remember reading Buber’s book, I and Thou , when I was in college in the 1960s.   It was already a famous book by then.   I am not sure I fully understood it, but that would not be the last time I read it.   It has been a while since I looked at the book.             Buber came up in a conversation with a friend who asked if I had seen the recent article by David Brooks?   I had not seen it, but when I was told about it, I knew I would quickly locate and read that piece.   I very much like what Brooks decides to write about and what he contributes to societal conversation.   I wish more people read him and took him seriously.             Brooks’ article focused on the 2016 contentious election.   He provocatively suggests, “Read Buber, Not the Polls!”   I think Brooks puts
1 comment
Read more

Spiritual Commitment

I was reading along in a very nice little book and hit these lines about commitment.   The author, Mitch Albom, uses the voice of one of the main characters of his nonfiction book about faith to reflect on commitment.   The voice belongs to Albom’s old rabbi of the Jewish synagogue where he went until his college days.   The old rabbi, Albert Lewis, says “the word ‘commitment’ has lost its meaning.”    The rabbi continues in a way that surely would have many people saying, “Amen!”   About commitment he says, “I’m old enough when it used to be a positive.   A committed person was someone to be admired.   He was loyal and steady.   Now a commitment is something you avoid.   You don’t want to tie yourself down.”   I also think I am old enough to know that commitment was usually a positive word.   I can think of a range of situations in which commitment would have been seen to be positive.   For example, growing up was full of sports for me.   Commitment would have been presupposed t
6 comments
Read more

Inward Journey and Outward Pilgrimage

There are so many different ways to think about the spiritual life.   And of course, in our country there are so many different variations of religious experiences.   There are liberals and conservatives.   There are fundamentalists and Pentecostals.   Besides the dizzying variety of Christian traditions, there are many different non-Christian traditions.   There are the major traditions, such as Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, and so on.   There are the slightly more obscure traditions, such as Sikhism, Jainism, etc.   And then there are more fringe groups and, even, pseudo-religions.   There are defining doctrines and religious practices.   Some of these are specific to a particular tradition or a few traditions, such as the koan , which is used in Zen Buddhism for example.   Other defining doctrines or practices are common across the religious board.   Something like meditation would be a good example.   Christians meditate; Buddhists meditate.   And other groups practice this spiri
3 comments
Read more