The vulnerability to "AI"-capture seems to run deepest among intellectuals - but this vulnerability extends across a very wide range of intellectual types - politicians, media executives, corporate managers, finance entrepreneurs, technocrats, academics, teachers, totalitarians, atheists and traditionally religious, New Age spiritual seekers...
Indeed, no class or kind of intellectual persons seem to have much resistance to capture.
It seems that almost all have by now succumbed; and with those who have not succumbed... well, it seems like just a matter of "not yet"*.
Why are intellectuals especially vulnerable?
My best guess is that intellectuals have always tended to engage with life via models; and models are abstract simplifications of the boundless complexity of reality. Such models include mathematics, sciences, politics, economics; and indeed all academic and bureaucratic subjects.
This second-hand engagement via abstract simplifications is valuable insofar as the models are useful; albeit the usefulness of a model may not have been checked, and even if a model has been checked these checks are only retrospective (can only be retrospective).
The prospective, future limitations of a model (which limitations are many and intrinsic exactly because it is an abstract simplification) are not knowable or predictable in advance; and indeed when the model has captured a person, the failures of a model will usually be denied, explained-away.
The value of intellectuals is not that they understand Life, or The World, or The Universe, or God; but that they understand the model.
Insofar as the model is useful or valued, so intellectuals are useful or valued.
But the problem, the weakness, is that intellectuals (of all kinds) so-often depend for their position and self-esteem on maintaining the special value of second-hand understandings (of all kinds).
One malign tendency among intellectuals is to assert the primacy of the model: that the model is itself The Thing being-modelled.
And another tendency is to increase the abstraction and complexity of the model, partly to protect their own expertise - e.g. to keep the model difficult enough to elude external analysis and critique, and to impress/ bamboozle/ subordinate the layman.
I mean that intellectuals are prone to elaborating or generating a complex model that covers ever-more ground.
Indeed, intellectuals tend to press their models to such a degree of complexity and abstraction, that they themselves do not understand the model in which they claim expertise.
Instead intellectuals may claim expertise in using the model.
So the situation arises that many intellectuals suffer the profound and existential disadvantages of a belief-in, a commitment to, the primacy of merely secondhand models of reality...
Yet these are models which the intellectuals themselves do not understand; instead these are models that the intellectual merely serves (or claims to serve).
This situation, although common, is wrong - is indeed evil; insofar as service to the un-understood, service to something whose nature is not known, is evil.
So-called-AI is a cluster of abstract, highly complex, and un-understandable models of reality.
There can be no expertise in understanding an "AI" model.
As such; "AI" technologies suffer all the intrinsic disadvantages of all models; but "AI" also intrinsically lack the potential value (which is a pragmatic and retrospective value) of the most valid models.
Therefore, the special vulnerability of intellectuals to capture by "AI" is in the first-place a consequence of the evil abuses of secondhand models as a way of relating to reality; secondly that "AI" models are of a model-type that cannot validly be used, since they are un-understandable.
The answer to this situation is in striving to eschew un-understandable models of reality - and to reject their primacy; and to recognize that to be useful a model must genuinely be understood.
Such a moral discipline will reject a great deal more than "AI" - but exactly that is necessary+.
Because all abstract models of reality need to be simple enough that we genuinely understand them: and if we are to regard them as central to our lives, we need personally to understand them.
It is not difficult, as a mental process.
I believe that we all already-have a simple, innate and direct (because God-given) contact with primary Life and Reality.
The intellectual deception is in demanding a more comprehensive, hence too-complex, typically too abstract, understanding - than that which is understandable and knowable.
In a nutshell; modern intellectuals of all stripes and types have become experts at self-validating, self-serving, self-deception; by pretending (for advantages of self-esteem, for claimed social expediency) to understand that which they do not understand...
Which is why intellectuals are so especially vulnerable to capture by the un-understandable models of "AI".
_____
+ I mean that if someone tries to reject "AI" while retaining their commitment to some abstract, complex, un-understood model/s - then that person will end-up by embracing "AI".
And this is exactly what has happened to so many intellectuals over the past four years.
As they come to realize that "AI" is not qualitatively different from that-to-which-they-have-outsourced-their-thinking-and-judging; rather than rejecting their practice of outsourcing, such persons instead expand their outsourcing such as to include "AI".
*NOTE: My concern here is spiritual. Of course; the effect of "AI" will be to hasten the destruction of Western Civilization. But in that resepct "AI" is just one of many, simultaneous and synergistic global strategies (e.g. everywhere war, financial parasitism, purposive economic and agricultural destruction, mass migration, the CO2 Climate agenda etc etc). And, after all, the West is by-now (and increasingly) the most extremely and unrepentantly evil civilization in world history - such that striving to "save" WC in the absence of a prior spiritual rebirth, entails a personal commitment to advance purposive evil. No: The most significant harm of "AI"-capture is spiritual: 1. spiritual outsourcing; and 2. spiritual outsourcing of almost the worst conceivable kind - its being evidently both addictive in the short-term, and purposively soul-destroying in a cumulative and self-stoking fashion. To observe more and ever-more once-respected persons, across the board of thinkers and intellectuals, so-willingly succumbing to AI-dolatry of one sort of another - is a spiritually-dismaying experience. I should add that although AI-capture is common across the board, and not confined to intellectuals; I believe that its spiritual damage is most severe and pervasive - and negatively transformative - among the intellectual class.
11 comments:
The intellectuals generally demand transparency and auditability. eg. wanting to do away with jury trials because a jury does not provide a reasoned judgment -- second-guessing employment decisions (hiring, salary levels, firing) -- demanding that all industries should have a regulator and then asking "where were the regulators?" when things go wrong -- generally disregarding anyone's right to privacy. But now they are all in for an inscrutable black box ! Beats me !!
A timely piece. AI is extremely seductive but it's a body without a soul.
AI aside, this point "One malign tendency among intellectuals is to assert the primacy of the model: that the model is itself The Thing being-modelled. " could also be used as a counter to those who think truth can be held by any religion. A religion can start by guiding and inspiring but end up by enclosing and limiting, and that is especially true nowadays.
It's tempting to think of it as a midwit phenomenon, but it really does appear that even highly intelligent people -- and even people who saw right through the last several psyops -- are not immune.
I suppose I have something of an "intellectual" personality and make extensive use of abstract models, but "AI" has no appeal for me -- except for its comedy value when it's comically bad.
Recently I just lost an enjoyable side gig as transtator to "IA", as thousands of others did in other fields. Are translations now better? I doubt it, but they are faster and "good enough". Not sure if cheaper. Translators were paid peanuts and the cost with software, data centers etc is probably higher.
I suspect companies (and people) just use Ai "because everyone else is doing it". But I can't see any wai in which it has made things better or easier. Even Internet search has become worse.
The real point of AI seems to be to concentrate everything in the hands of just a few tech companies. Of course quality and society in general is going to become worse but that's not the real objective.
General comment - it seems that people called William are highly-resistant to AI-capture!
@william a
Yes. I suppose that is explicable as evidence that "reasons" are actually self-serving expediency. Behind these phenomen is, perhaps, a deep desire to on the part of people to deny their own responsibility, while harvesting benefits.
*
@William W - That is indeed a deep lesson of "AI".
It seems that "AI" is exposing and exploiting some ancient and deep metaphysical errors and deficiencies in Western thinking - including that Truth is "out there" independent of human consciousness, and requires mostly our obedience.
*
@Wm - I have used models very explicitly, especially in science - and also regarded them as reality. But I have always been wary of commiting to a model tha tI did not genuinely understand - so I noticed that very few of my colleagues were thus constrained; with the consequence that incoherent models often lasted for many decades, and indeed indefinitely; when they were sufficiently astract and complex to be un-understandable.
*
@Zeno. These things can only happen in an already deeply-corrupted and feckless civilization that is indifferent to truth and functionality; because nobody would use a mechanism for translation-without-comprehension, if they regarded the validity of the output as genuinely important.
I dealt with a customer shoving 20-30 page reports at me that were AI-generated. Their summary was "there is no problem on our side" and the customer totally believed it They were wrong, the problem was definitely on their side. I contemplated running those through AI for the answer with the prompting "they are wrong", but resorted to the old-fashioned method of proving them wrong manually.
If statistical modelling is the key to the universe, why has every other field of knowledge not already become a branch of statistics? If thinking was some kind of brute force enterprise, then the entire history of science would already have been different.
Also, I will just second Zeno's comment that the supposed cheapness of AI is not real. A human can write an essay on the energy contained in a sandwich and doesn't have to read gigabytes or even terabytes of other essays before writing it. If the "AI" companies had to pay people for their data, even fractions of a penny, their whole business model would collapse.
@NLR - Yes, immunity to the regulations and laws relating to patents, copyright, plagiarism etc; comes on top of what are evidently trillions of dollars of tax-funded subsidies, "loans", and other corruptions - paid for by inflation of money.
The cost of an "AI" translation system (electricity, hardware, software etc), for example, has already been extracted from tens of millions of wage-earning "little people" by governments over many years.
But the reason that so much "AI" has been (more or less) given away; is not dictated by economic factors, nor even by its civilizationally destructive consequences - but because of its *powerful* spiritually corrupting effect.
Indeed, the spiritually corrupting effect of "AI" has proved far more powerful than (even!) I had expected -- and I have been fully expecting it ever since I reviewed Jeremy Naydler's In the Shadow of the Machine, eight years ago.
https://charltonteaching.blogspot.com/2018/10/review-of-jeremy-naydlers-in-shadow-of.html
@C-Op - As I have said on these pages ad nauseam; one thing "AI" certianly cannot do is understand - hence "AI" cannot summarize validly.
But our bureaucratic totalitarian civilization is indifferent to validity; indeed hates truth. Hence nearly everybody finds it "useful" to deploy "AI" to "summarize" vast quantities of data mandated by The System data that will never be understood by anybody - but instead deployed to "justify" decisions made for other reasons, or no reason.
"AI" is quick at doing *that*!
I worked for a year in the NHS bureaucracy mainly on understanding then summarizing sources of information for a CEO. To do this *well*; requires a lot of ability, training, and effort.
I later spent several year in scientometric analysis of universities research performance. This too was tough work. But as with the NHS it became clear that nobody with power was interested in what the information really meant or implied - indeed they were actively hostile even to thinking in that way.
IRL, in large bureaucratic institutions; Data was gathered, statistical summaries and analyses were conducted, without gaining understanding, because without even *seeking* understanding. But instead *entirely* for dishonestly rhetorical purposes.
For such people - i.e. the entire Western leadership class; outsourcing thinking and judgment to "AI" marks no qualitative change. They continue to do what they have long been doing, only more so.
What is new and different is the evident effect of "AI" on not-so-long-ago honest, decent people - with a track record of some degree of personal questing and independent judgment.
A major driver of AI is that women & minorities are being pushed by the Regime into intellectual sectors despite severe & obvious incompetence. For them, AI is a man-in-a-can, secretly doing their work so they don't get disgraced as frauds. The moral & practical consequences of such an imposter lifestyle are horrific.
Living within your means doesn't apply only to financial debt.
@GQ3 - I would not regard that as a "driver"; since post 2022 "AI" is a multi-trillion dollar, strategy being imposed top-dwon on "all" major institutions.
I don't really regard being disgraced as frauds as a serious possibility nowadays - it is a long time since organizations were even trying to achieve functionality. A worker is more likely to be disgraced for trying honestly to do his supposed-job, than for failing to do it.
But all of the intellectual I have observed being spiritually corrupted by "AI" happen to be men - because, I am Not really thinking of those who were either *already* corrupted for other reasons, or were simply corrupt to all the Litmus Test issues due to being system-obedient careerists.
My horrified fascination has been attracted esepcially by those who saw through (for example) the scams of climate and 2020; yet embraced "AI"; or those who seemed to be solid in their Christianity (of whatever kind) yet failed to see the evil spiritual intent of the "AI" program.
Both of these despite The most obvious fact that "AI" was coming from Obviously evil sources.
Indeed; "AI" is so very blatantly evil in both nature and provenance that it really ought to have an easy challenge for discernment - and yet...
Post a Comment