The future of man and civilization in the era of technology and artificial intelligence
the introduction
There is no doubt that the era in which we live now is the era of technology, and the era of artificial intelligence in the first place. Technology has developed in the twentieth century in an unparalleled way from any other era, and this development has been accompanied by complexity in our lives, our actions, and our social environment. Rather, it has led to the control of technology. In humans on the physical and mental level. Which contributed to the increase in human alienation due to his submission to external influences. Technology has not yet succeeded in solving basic human problems.
Many philosophers have recently become aware of the seriousness of this matter, as they have examined the existential risks that threaten humans in light of the terrible increase in technological development and the processes of creating artificial intelligence.
If science in the modern era has given man a lifeline from superstition, tyranny, and dependency, then technology in the contemporary era is almost killing him in the dark. With the emergence of the scientific revolution in the modern era and with the increase in discoveries it brought, and its contemporary applications that gave us technology, man faced new questions and issues. In this way, the philosophy of technology emerged, which is concerned with the general issues, issues, and problems of technology and the machine. Then we were faced with a new field called “machine ethics,” and questions began to appear: Can the scientific revolution and its applications be viewed as an absolute lifeline, or will it result in risks and negatives? Can't be ignored? What does this reflect, positively or negatively, on the path of progress and the future of civilization in this era?
1- Paths of progress and disadvantages of technological development
Contemporary man's alienation and submission to external influences have increased. Technology has not succeeded in eliminating man's problems, but rather has increased and deepened them and produced a human crisis, a crisis that has occupied an important place in the eyes of many philosophers, who have been concerned with the condition of man in our contemporary world and his lack of free will and choices despite scientific progress. Industrial and technological.
A - The development of the machine and the emergence of the philosophy of technology
If the twentieth century was the age of technology par excellence, then interest in the philosophy of technology is relatively recent; Before World War II, the issue of technology was not addressed by philosophers and thinkers as much as it was by poets and artists. There is no doubt that the increasing technological progress since the Industrial Revolution has coincided with human control over nature and the optimistic tendency of the European Enlightenment. Social and biological theories of evolution have also contributed to The nineteenth century in alerting minds to the expectation of a long-term material and technological development that in turn affects the social, moral and cultural progress of the human race. (Al-Jaziri, 235). Unfortunately, this did not happen.
In this regard, Karl Jaspers points out that the problem related to the state of humanity has become more urgent since the middle of the nineteenth century, and each generation of philosophers has sought to solve this problem from its perspective, especially the problem of our spiritual and mental existence. This problem has been apparent and clear to everyone since World War II. Whenever we look at man in ancient civilizations, we will find that he was limited to trying to adapt himself to life as he found it, without wanting to change it radically, and therefore his activities and activities were limited to trying to improve his situation amidst environmental conditions that were considered largely unchangeable. Under these circumstances, he had a safe haven, connected to the Heaven Realm. The earthly world was his own world, although he had no regard for it, because for him true existence existed only in a separate world (Jaspers, 1).
Compared to our contemporary world, man today has been uprooted after realizing that he exists under changing and historically undefined conditions. Hence it seemed as if the foundations of existence had been shattered, and that is why the foundations of life seemed to tremble beneath our feet; This is why we live in a moving, changing, and flowing world, according to which changing knowledge imposes a change in life and so changing life imposes a change in the consciousness of the knowing person. This movement, this flow, this unstable process, sweeps us into a vortex of continuous conquest and creation, of loss and gain, in which we revolve painfully, subject mainly to the force of the current (Jaspers, 2).
The human condition has become worse and more complex with modern scientific revolutions and rapid technological development in the contemporary era, and the bitter fruits of technology have been reflected in various aspects of human and social life. This indicates that the technological development witnessed in the twentieth century made the machine an obedient master, which foretells the destruction of man himself and his ability to act.
If this indicates anything, it indicates that technology has already begun to transform from a tool for cultural and societal progress into a means of destruction of civilization, people, and the environment. Thus, the question posed by Bertrand Russell in 1963, at the height of the Cold War and the nuclear confrontation, seems more important than ever: Is there a future for man? Is the choice between sustainability and extinction a basis for the framework of our common future, or are there other options? (Bridotti, 19-20).
B - The person disappears and the alarm sounds
The crisis caused by technology is multifaceted and touches every aspect of our lives: our health, our livelihoods, the quality of our environment, our social relationships, our economy, our technology, and our politics; In short: our very survival on this planet. For example, since the late twentieth century, the countries of the world have stored more than 50,000 nuclear warheads, which is enough to destroy the entire world several times, and the arms race has continued and continues at a constant speed. While military spending worldwide amounts to more than a billion dollars a day, more than fifteen million people die from hunger annually; Thirty-two people die every minute, most of them children. To make matters worse, developing countries spend more than three times as much on armaments as they do on health care. While we find that thirty-five percent of humanity lacks access to healthy drinking water, and nearly half of the scientists and engineers work in weapons technology! As for economists, they are obsessed with building economies based on unlimited growth, and while our limited resources are rapidly diminishing; Industrial companies dump toxic waste elsewhere, rather than neutralize it (Spretnak, & Capra, n.).
From this standpoint, the crisis that modern man is experiencing is a comprehensive crisis and stems from several causes, the most important of which are the rearmament plans, which ultimately lead to annihilation, as it is the last stage of industrial civilization. Extermination here does not refer to military destruction or to the neutron bomb, but rather refers to the fate of industrial civilization as a whole and to many of its aspects, and not just the material aspects, although the latter is the one that imposes its control over the visible. In light of these conditions, we are confronted with: “Logic of Self-Extermination,” which refers to “the increasing determination of the process of extermination, the final dysfunction of humanity, and its complete self-destruction”: the number of outcasts and miserable people has increased incredibly with the spread of Industrial and technological civilization, and never before in all history have so many people been sacrificed and suffered from hunger, disease and early death as is the case today. Not only is their number increasing, but their percentage of all humanity is also increasing. As an inseparable consequence of technological, military and economic progress, we are destroying the living organisms and their environment that protect and keep us alive. (Bahru, 19).
Thus, despite the technological development that has produced new spaces and the closing of distances between individuals and peoples, it has had the opposite result. Then, confidence in the capabilities of technology was quickly shaken: after it had been absolute and limitless confidence, it became a limited confidence that inspired more doubt than certainty, and then the tension began between awareness of the limits of progress and the traditional idea of the possibility of achieving continuous progress, and it floated to The surface has many problems; Such as lack of resources, arms race, prediction or the relationship between living organisms and their environment. Such problems have created what looks like discontent or complaint towards the responsibility of technology (Al-Jaziri, 235-236) for destroying the world, especially its responsibility for the environmental crisis and climate change, which represent the most serious existential challenge facing humans and the environment, as well as its responsibility for destroying societal ties and the destruction of... A large part of our humanity, and even threatens the entire human race with extinction.
From this standpoint, most contemporary philosophers have tended to address the tense relationship between man and machine, and this is what appears in Ortega y Gasset, Karl Jaspers, Nicholas Berdiaev, and Gabriel Marcel. And Heidegger. Among these and others, there is a deep sense of concern about preserving human subjectivity and independence in the face of technology. For example, we see in Karl Jaspers a comprehensive condemnation of technology in light of what it has led to transforming man into merely one of the functions incapable of finding a way to the height worthy of authentic human existence.
As for Berdyaev, we find him in many of his writings condemning technology, which was intended to be a path to liberation, but it takes on an objective entity alienated from human existence.
The interest in technology takes on an ontological dimension according to Heidegger, through which he directs him to research public existence, as he sees that contemporary technology challenges nature, destroys it, and robs it of the energies it contains that can be stored and transmitted. Which reflects negatively on humans, and creates a tense relationship between human existence and machines or technology (Al-Jaziri, 248-253).
Likewise, the French philosopher Jacques Ellul began discussing issues related to technology and the extent of the influence and tyranny of modern technology on society, as he denounced the negative effects of technology due to the increasing dependence on it in daily life. Although he acknowledged the benefits offered by new technologies, he said there was always a price society had to pay for adopting them; Ellul believes that every innovation leaves “harmful effects that cannot be separated from the favorable effects.” He also believes that these forces are “contrary elements that are always connected in a way that cannot be separated,” adding that society’s adoption of technology (in the comprehensive sense that he defined) “presents more problems than it solves,” and that “every technology entails unforeseen consequences” ( Cell, 50-51).
Thus, in light of interest in the relationship between man and machine, many philosophers began to denounce the evils of technology and criticize the machine. This leads us to ask: The course of action of technology, especially artificial intelligence, in our contemporary world?
C - The nature of the work of robots and highly intelligent artificial intelligence
Nick Bostrom ( [1] ) points out that there are four paths or methods through which artificial intelligence or super-intelligent machines can work, and these four paths are interconnected, and the first three paths offer different sets of advantages and disadvantages in terms of alternative methods. For the control problem, it is as follows:
The first method: Oracles “predictions” method
It means that artificial intelligence will be able to answer questions, in natural language, with a good degree of accuracy. A method that only accepts yes or no questions can produce its best guess, while a method that accepts open-ended questions may need some criteria by which possible honest answers can be ranked in terms of informativeness or relevance. Either way, building predictions that have the full general ability to answer natural language questions is the number one problem in AI. If this can be done, it is also likely that humans will create artificial intelligence that has a good ability to understand human intentions as well as human expressions.
The second method: the “genie” method
It is a command execution system, where the artificial intelligence receives any command, executes it, and then pauses to wait for the next command. Although this method may seem like a radically different way of what superintelligence should be and do compared to the first method, the difference is not as profound as it may seem at first glance. With the reaping method, one actually sacrifices the most attractive feature of the prediction method. While one might think of inventing a genie who could only create certain things on command, it would be difficult to have much confidence in such a method that involves manipulatives and multi-use building materials.
The third method: the Sovereign method
It means that a goal or a set of goals can be determined to be achieved through artificial intelligence, after which we can give it the authority to work and make decisions to achieve the goal or goals in the best ways. So the real difference between the three sects did not lie in the ultimate abilities they would unlock. Instead, the difference is reduced to alternative approaches to the control problem.
Fourth method: Tool method
It is the best and safest method in Bostrom's opinion, as here artificial intelligence is a tool or machine and not a force or actor like a human, such as a flight control system, and the creation of more flexible and capable virtual assistants. Therefore, this method does not raise any safety concerns, any existential risks, or any initial challenges to making it (Bostrom, 2014, 145-153).
2- Industrial civilization and the era of automated simulation
The tremendous development of technology and machine manufacturing, and the complexity of our shared smart technologies, represents the core of the shift to “post-anthropocentrism” in contemporary civilization.
A- Determinants of cultural success
“Machine ethics” is part of artificial intelligence ethics concerned with adding or ensuring ethical behaviors for human-made machines that use artificial intelligence, and it differs from other ethical fields related to engineering and technology. For example, machine ethics should not be confused with computer ethics, as the latter focuses on... Ethical issues associated with human use of computers; The field of machine ethics must also be distinguished from philosophy of technology, which is concerned with epistemological, ontological, and ethical approaches to the larger social, economic, and political impacts of technological practices of all kinds. Machine ethics is concerned with ensuring that the behavior of machines toward human users, and perhaps toward other machines as well, is morally acceptable. The ethics we mean here, then, are ethics that machines as things must have, not humans as manufacturers and users of these machines! (Osman, 2012).
As for the human-machine relationship, some important issues have been raised about the degree of autonomy achieved by industrial robots. Which calls on society to establish new rules for its management. In contrast to modernity's view of robots as subordinate to humans, we now face a new situation that makes human intervention marginal if not completely worthless.
Robots are becoming more autonomous; The idea of computer-controlled machines faced with moral decisions is moving from the realm of science fiction to the real world. Most of these new robots share a basic feature: through robots, it has become technically possible to replace humans to make decisions at both operational and ethical levels. In light of this, the role of humans can change from decision maker to decision operator, and observe robots in their work instead of controlling them (Bridotti, 58).
In this regard, Walter Paget ( [2] ) referred more than one hundred and fifty years ago in his book “ Physics and Politics ” to the determinants of civilizational success. He argues that if civilizations want to advance and preserve themselves, it is necessary to resist strict traditions and customs and to go beyond the primitive and military methods that nature forced them to take to materially preserve themselves in the early stages of civilization. If some societies have succeeded in this, others have not been able to reach these advanced stages in the ladder of civilizational progress. In light of this, civilizational progress depends on action based on the idea of competition between societies and overcoming surrounding circumstances (Baget, 12-13 32-33).
Regardless of the racist tendency that characterizes Paget's views, and despite his being strongly influenced by Darwin's theory of evolution, the important thing in his talk is his perspective on the link between physics and politics. Just as the change in scientific laws that scientists discover about nature comes gradually, the same applies to politics. Therefore, the origin of the policy would not appear to be in essence a major change; At the very least in the early stages of this change; Because what is important is to overcome the political norms and traditions that stand in the way of development, and move towards the values of modern liberalism that are open and constantly renewable (Baget, 17).
?If progress does not come at once, then what is the situation when we are in the age of technology and artificial intelligence
B- Future scenarios of civilization
Nick Bostrom (2003, 243) points out that there are many scenarios, assumptions, or possibilities for the path of civilization in today’s world, but he presents three assumptions, confirming that at least one of them remains true, and they are as follows:
The first possibility: It is highly likely, for whatever reason, that the human race will become extinct before it reaches the “post-human” stage, that is, before advanced and non-advanced civilizations are able to build huge devices and machines that have the ability and technological capabilities to simulate the reality in which we live. Completely in an advanced digital way. This scenario does not represent a problem at all as long as humanity will perish before it reaches the major stages of technological development that will enable it to create alternative simulation devices for humans.
The second possibility: It is unlikely that any advanced civilization, which has reached the peak of technological development, would create a large number of simulations (despite its ability to do so) for reasons of morality, utilitarianism (the dangers resulting from them), out of indifference, or other reasons. But this possibility remains just a fantasy; Because it moves away from what reality currently says, and from human selfish tendencies. Then comes the third possibility, which is closest to reality and is confirmed by evidence, but it represents the most dangerous and cruel possibility.
The third possibility: It is almost certain that we already live inside a world of simulation thanks to the enormous and advanced computer power, especially since civilizations have begun and are still continuing to build these devices thanks to current technical development. As a result, virtual worlds will increase rapidly day after day, and the rug will be withdrawn from real worlds until they disappear completely.
In light of this third possibility, we are faced with an artificial world based primarily on simulation. In fact, computer devices can go so far as to simulate human consciousness. If the common assumption in the philosophy of mind is that humans are distinguished from others by the component of consciousness, and that mental states can transcend any broad category of physical things, then computer systems, in their development of structures and computational processes, can develop consciousness itself. The implementation of these operations is not limited to biological neural networks based on carbon inside the skull, as silicon-based processors inside computers can also perform this method in principle (Bostrom, 2003, 244).
Hence, this may have been the last position that led some people to give a mythical view of technology through their belief in the possibility of discovering similarities and correspondences between computers and human minds. The computer is capable of action and many aspects of purposeful behavior similar to human behavior. Therefore, he is capable of feeling, awareness, and sensation. From this standpoint, some people tended to present a cognitive view of cybernetics as a theoretical interpretation of conscious information in light of dialectical material terms, and as a result of the purposeful behavior of the computer, some of them saw the possibility of treating it as a mental method of some kind (Al-Jaziri, 259).
According to Bostrom, the percentage of realization of the first two possibilities is very close to zero, and therefore the third possibility is the most correct in light of the current reality, especially in light of the tremendous technological development in computing devices and technologies that societies are experiencing now, which confirms that we are facing a world based on... On electronic means and technologies based on creating an accurate simulation of actual reality (Bostrom, 2003, 255). However, this should not be a reason for pessimism, as Bostrom (2019) believes that technology will not only change the outside world in the future; It will also provide possibilities for changing human nature, by expanding our human capabilities.
This means that the benefits of technology may outweigh the risks that can result from it, and all that is needed is a new ethics in dealing with machines in order to improve humanity. Therefore, the important questions are: How can we improve ourselves? Should we limit ourselves to traditional methods such as study and training? Or should we also use science to enhance some of our mental and physical abilities more directly? (Bostrom, 2009, 1). We must work that can improve human capabilities, by applying technical and technological means to humans in order to prepare or create a being with at least one of the capabilities that transhumanism seeks to distribute fairly among all members of society (Yassin, 44). .
Based on the third possibility, technology should not be denounced and opposed as a disaster and a threat to humanity, but rather the risks that may result from it should be studied so that the fate of civilization does not become dependent on it. This requires us to quickly pay attention to the possibility of it developing itself so that it can, in a short period of time, surpass our human intelligence, so that it does not become dominant, powerful, and difficult to control, and so that we do not face a threat in the form of an existential catastrophe as a hypothetical result of the explosion of technology and artificial intelligence. The existential risk represents the threat of the extinction of human life on the surface of the Earth or the destruction of its potential permanently and radically in the future. In this regard, we cannot assume that artificial intelligence will necessarily share with humans the world of higher values associated with human wisdom and intellectual development, charitable concern for others, enlightenment and self-reflection, renunciation of material possessions, etc. (Bostrom, (2014, 115-116).
Conclusion
In light of the above, the importance of philosophy in confronting the negative effects of technology and artificial intelligence on human civilization becomes clear to us, and we need, as Dr. says. Salah Othman, to the ethics of dealing with machines and artificial intelligence techniques, so that we face the challenges of decision-making; Technology, by its nature, is neutral, or is, in itself, a double-edged sword, and the human use of it is what determines the different aspects and dimensions of human life, whether in a positive, constructive way or in a negative, destructive way.
For example, if huge machines and complex technological weapons can achieve more violence, oppression, and terrorism, on the other hand, they create a system among their supporters, soldiers and leaders, that subjects family life and various activities such as play and music to purely military goals and purposes. Therefore, it is correct to say that the danger of technology, its negatives, and its destructive effects depend on the mythical belief in the machine, or the supremacy of technology, and then technology acquires absolute value and becomes an unshakable myth or doctrine when we look at it in light of its absolute ability to achieve miracles.
Therefore, the importance of the attempts of some critics and philosophers, such as Lewis Mumford, to liberate technology from its mythical character by discussing its true value in light of reality itself becomes clear to us. Saying that we are powerless in front of giant machines while emphasizing their absolute usefulness is a mythical statement that has no relation to reality. From this perspective, we can confront technology and we can also determine its actual potential. Technology ultimately depends on man, and we should not put it in his place, as it only exists for purely human purposes, and humanity’s submission to what it has created means its transformation from a mere means to an independent end in itself (Al-Jaziri, 258).
On the other hand, the dominance of technology, or the logic of industrialization and the machine, and the subsequent worsening environmental crisis, force us to adhere to the “logic of life,” which requires a “leap in consciousness,” and to transcend the logic of denying life brought about by the “Mega-Machine.” Industrial mega-development, and the renewal of our lives in the light of new, alternative values that can be relied upon for social, ecological, cultural and spiritual change. As for liberal voices and calls for gradual improvement of the environment and concern for the climate, they remain hollow. Because the ecological market economy is just a new addition to the logic of self-annihilation. Its immediate effect is to reduce the level of environmental damage of the product or technology, but the overall long-term effect is to increase it (Bahru, 22, 79).
Therefore, humans can be saved from the shortcomings of scientific and technological development, which has begun to transform individuals into cogs in the machine of progress.
[divider style=”solid” top=”20″ bottom=”20″]
[1] He is the Swedish philosopher Nick Bostrom (1973-…?), and he discussed the existential risks that threaten humans in light of the increase in technology and the processes of creating artificial intelligence, in some of his articles and books, including his research entitled: “Ethical Issues in Advanced Artificial Intelligence” 2004. In this regard, it is necessary to point out his important book: “Superintelligence: Paths, Dangers, Strategies” in 2014.
[2] Walter Bagehot (1826-1877): A British thinker and journalist. He wrote extensively about issues related to government, economics, literature, and race. Among his books is: “The English Constitution ” in 1867, in which he explores the nature of the Kingdom’s constitution. The United States, especially its parliament and monarchy, as well as “ Physics and Politics ” in 1872.
[divider style=”solid” top=”20″ bottom=”20″]
References and suggested readings
Bahro, Rudolf: Avoiding Social and Ecological Disaster: The Politics of World Transformation: An Inquiry into the Foundations of Spiritual and Ecological Politics, Trans.: David Clarke, Bath, U.K.: Gateway Books, 1994.
Bostrom, Nick: Are You Living In a Computer Simulation?, Philosophical Quarterly, Vol. 53, No. 211, 2003, PP. 243-255.
Bostrom, Nick: Superintelligence: Paths, Dangers, Strategies, Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press, 2014.
Bostrom, Nick, and Julian Savulescu: Human Enhancement, Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, 2009.
Jaspers, Karl: Man in the Modern Age, Trans.: Eden and Cedar Paul, Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1957.
Spretnak, Charlene and Fritjof Capra: Green Politics , New York: EP Dutton, 1984.
Arendt, Hannah: The Human Condition, translated by: Hadia Al-Arqi, Beirut: Dar Jadaul for Publishing and Distribution, 2015.
Al-Jaziri, Magdy: Philosophy between Myth and Technology, Alexandria: Dar Al-Wafa for the World of Printing and Publishing, revised and expanded edition 2001.
Braidotti, Rosie: Posthuman, translated by: Hanan Abdel Mohsen Muzaffar, World of Knowledge Series, No. 488, Kuwait: National Council for Culture, Arts and Letters, November 2021.
Bostrom, Nick: Transhumanism: A Brief Guide to the Future, translated by: Yasser Abdul Wahed Rashid, reviewed and presented by: Haider Abdul Wahed Rashid, Baghdad: Dar Sutour, 2019.
Bostrom, Nick: “The ultimate goal of artificial intelligence must be the disappearance of work,” interview by: Benoit George, translated by: Amal Allawishish, Journal of Civilization Problems, Volume 5, Issue 2, 2017, p. 52-56.
Seale, Peter: The Digital Universe: The Global Revolution in Communications, translated by: Diaa Warad, reviewed by: Nevin Abdel Raouf, Cairo: Hindawi Foundation, 2017.
Othman, Dr. Salah: Towards machine ethics... Artificial intelligence techniques and the challenges of decision-making, an article published in (The Arab Center for Research and Studies), dated Thursday, July 14, 2022. Available at: ( http://www.acrseg.org/43003 )
Harari, Yuval Noah: God-Man: A Brief History of the Future, translated by: Hamad Sinan Al-Ghaithi, and Salah Ali Al-Falahi, Department of Culture and Tourism - Abu Dhabi, Abu Dhabi Center for the Arabic Language, Kalima Translation Project, 2021.
Yassin, Dr. Nawal Taha: The Ethics of Improving Humanity according to Nick Bostrom, Kufa Journal of Etiquette, Volume 13, Issue 49, (Publisher: University of Kufa - College of Arts), 2021, p. 43-74.