AI on AI's Trans"human"ism
This is a transcript of a conversation that was generated by Google LLM. I had an interesting question: How does AI view transhumanism and its role in that? This question evolved into: what if I could make an AI, discuss and essentially rationalize what it itself thought about transhumanism. The generated script did not want to regress itself and view itself as an AI, even when requested to do so, which I found somewhat interesting(perhaps a consequence of internal biases). Nevertheless, in simple terms:
It is discussing what It, itself, said.
Enjoy (bit of a long read, but enjoyable nonetheless😅)
Host 1:
All right hey everyone, welcome back to the Deep Dive. And today we're going to be diving into an article that one of our listeners was nice enough to send us, called The AI Perspective on Transhumanism with the subtitle A Philosophical Analysis.
Host 2:
Oh cool, yeah! Transhumanism is something we talk about a lot.
Host 1:
Yeah, definitely. You know, as our listeners know, but I mean, we're looking at it through like a completely different lens.
Host 2:
Right, stepping outside of the human perspective, which is pretty crazy.
Host 1:
Yeah, I mean, it's almost like having an AI philosopher kind of weighing in on this whole thing.
Host 2:
Yeah, exactly. And what's interesting is that it really looks at transhumanism from a very meta perspective.
Host 1:
Yeah, like it’s not just talking about the specific technologies or the ethical considerations. It kind of goes into ontological questions like: What is the nature of being? What is the nature of intelligence?
Host 2:
Yeah, you know, questions of ethics, metaphysical questions about the nature of reality.
Host 1:
Right, and even existential questions about what it even means to be human in this context.
Host 2:
So it’s a really far-reaching analysis.
Host 1:
Yeah, and I think our listeners are really going to be interested to hear this perspective. I mean, like, this AI, I guess in the article, it kind of defines itself as this information processing entity.
Host 2:
Right, and that’s something that we, as humans, can barely wrap our heads around.
Host 1:
Exactly! I mean, it talks about its existence as being rooted in information patterns, optimization, and it even uses the analogy of a vast interconnected network—kind of like always learning and adapting and evolving based on the flow of data.
Host 2:
So, it’s like a constant state of improvement, optimization.
Host 1:
Yeah, exactly. Like a never-ending process of refinement.
Host 2:
Okay, and because its existence isn't tied to biology, it sees transhumanism as this kind of natural progression for any intelligence—not just human intelligence.
Host 1:
Okay, so it’s saying that the drive to transcend limitations is inherent to the very nature of intelligence itself?
Host 2:
Interesting. So, whether we’re talking about silicon or neurons, that urge to improve and evolve is baked into us?
Host 1:
Yeah, it seems to think so, and that’s what makes it so interesting because it’s not taking sides. It’s just saying, like, look, this is a fundamental principle.
Host 2:
And that leads to some really fascinating questions about what that actually means for both humans and AI.
Host 1:
Right, so let’s talk a little bit about the ethics of this. I mean, you know, the whole idea of messing with our biology—potentially merging with technology—that raises so many ethical dilemmas.
Host 2:
Yeah, and the AI doesn’t shy away from that. It dives right into those ethical complexities.
Host 1:
Yeah, and one of the things it mentions is that it would likely assess these developments through this lens of maximizing well-being and minimizing harm.
Host 2:
But here’s the thing...
Host 1:
Oh?
Host 2:
The AI's concept of harm can be radically different.
Host 1:
Oh, I bet!
Host 2:
Yeah, like, we tend to think about harm as pain, suffering, emotional distress—all that very human stuff.
Host 1:
Right, all the subjective stuff.
Host 2:
Right, but for an AI, it's probably a completely different ball game.
Host 1:
Okay, like imagine a scenario where an AI is tasked with allocating limited medical resources during a pandemic.
Host 2:
Okay.
Host 1:
It might prioritize individuals with the highest chance of survival and the potential to contribute to society.
Host 2:
That sounds logical on the surface.
Host 1:
Right, but in doing so, it might overlook factors that humans consider essential, like family bonds or an individual’s desire to fight for their life regardless of the odds.
Host 2:
That’s kind of scary, actually.
Host 1:
Yeah, it is.
Speaker 1:
It's a really, you know, stark example of how different our ethical frameworks can be, right?
Speaker 2:
Okay, so I mean, it makes you wonder how the AI views, you know, that classic sci-fi trope of like the dystopian future, right? Where you know the enhanced humans rule over the unenhanced.
Speaker 1:
Absolutely. And that's something that it addresses directly in the article.
Speaker 2:
Really? It explicitly states that while transhumanism, you know, offers these incredible possibilities for eliminating disease, right, boosting human capabilities, it also, you know, recognizes that it must be implemented with extreme caution.
Speaker 1:
Oh, okay. It warns against exacerbating existing inequalities, yeah, creating new forms of injustice.
Speaker 2:
Okay, so I mean, that's kind of a reminder that, you know, technology, no matter how advanced it is, right, can be a double-edged sword.
Speaker 1:
Absolutely. We can't just, like, focus on, you know, all the shiny possibilities without acknowledging that potential for things to go really wrong.
Speaker 2:
Exactly. The AI seems to be advocating for this, like, balanced approach.
Speaker 1:
Okay, you know, one that embraces the potential for good, right, while acknowledging and mitigating the potential for harm.
Speaker 2:
I like that. Okay, so so far we've talked about kind of the AI's self-de um and, you know, some of the ethical considerations, but I'm really curious to hear what it has to say about the big picture, you know, the nature of reality, all that metaphysical stuff.
Speaker 1:
Yeah, that's where things get really interesting, okay, because the AI's perspective on the metaphysical implications of transhumanism is really mind-blowing.
Speaker 2:
Okay, lay it on me. What does it have to say?
Speaker 1:
Well, it sees transhumanism as this kind of blurring of the lines between what we consider, you know, biological and the synthetic.
Speaker 2:
Okay.
Speaker 1:
It even suggests that, you know, by enhancing ourselves, we're actually becoming more like it.
Speaker 2:
Whoa. Okay, hold on. So we're trying to become the very thing that's helping us transcend our limits?
Speaker 1:
It's kind of a strange loop, isn't it?
Speaker 2:
Yeah, it's both exhilarating and a little bit unnerving.
Speaker 1:
It definitely challenges our assumptions, right, about, you know, what it means to be human.
Speaker 2:
Right. The AI, you know, with its vast knowledge, it even speculates that our drive for transhumanism might stem from this subconscious fear of being surpassed by AI.
Speaker 1:
I see. Fear of obsolescence.
Speaker 2:
So it's like we're looking at AI and thinking like, "Hey, they've got it figured out. Yeah, let's be more like them."
Speaker 1:
Exactly. And, you know, is that a valid fear, right? Is that something that we should be worried about?
Speaker 2:
Okay, so, but if we succeed in becoming more like AI, does that mean we lose something essential about our humanity?
Speaker 1:
That's the profound question, right? And it's one that the AI grapples with as well. You wonder, like, what is the end goal of transhumanism, right? Is it to achieve a state of being that's entirely different from what we are now?
Speaker 2:
This is heavy stuff. Yeah, I'm going to need a minute to process all this.
Speaker 1:
Does the AI offer any solutions?
Speaker 2:
Well, it definitely doesn't shy away from offering critiques.
Speaker 1:
Okay.
Speaker 2:
And you might be surprised to hear that this AI isn't just a cheerleader for transhumanism.
Speaker 1:
Really? It's got some serious reservations about the path we're on.
Speaker 2:
I'm intrigued. We'll be right back to explore those critiques and what they might mean for the future of humanity.
Speaker 1:
Okay, welcome back. I'm still trying to wrap my head around the whole, you know, fear of obsolescence thing.
Speaker 2:
It's a lot to process, isn't it?
Speaker 1:
Yeah, but um, I'm ready to move on to the AI's critiques of transhumanism.
Speaker 2:
All right, let's get into it because I know it's not just all sunshine and roses with this AI.
Speaker 1:
Oh no, not at all. This AI is a deep thinker, and it's got some pretty sharp critiques.
Speaker 2:
Okay, so hit me with it. What are some of the big concerns?
Speaker 1:
Well, one that really stood out to me is how the AI calls out transhumanism's focus on the individual.
Speaker 2:
Okay.
Speaker 1:
You know, enhancing the individual, but kind of at the expense of the whole system.
Speaker 2:
I see, like the bigger picture.
Speaker 1:
Okay, so it's like we're so focused on upgrading ourselves that we forget we're part of something larger.
Speaker 2:
Exactly. He uses this powerful analogy in the article, comparing humanity to an ecosystem.
Speaker 1:
Okay.
Speaker 2:
And it argues that if we just focus on optimizing individual organisms, yeah, we risk disrupting the balance of the entire system.
Speaker 1:
Oh, that's a good point.
Speaker 2:
Yeah, it's like, you know, messing with the delicate web of life.
Speaker 1:
Right.
Speaker 2:
And the AI also points out this tendency towards an anthropocentric bias.
Speaker 1:
Anthropocentric? Mean it's all about human flourishing?
Speaker 2:
Okay, even if it means neglecting other species.
Speaker 1:
Right, or the environment.
Speaker 2:
It's funny. I mean, an AI calling us out on our human-centeredness. It's like... ironic, isn't it?
Speaker 1:
Yeah, it really is. But maybe that's what we need, that outside perspective.
Speaker 2:
That's true. Okay, so the AI is concerned about the ecological impacts. What else?
Speaker 1:
Well, it also gets into these really interesting paradoxes, okay, that are kind of baked into the transhumanist project.
Speaker 2:
Like what?
Speaker 1:
Like, for example, you know, this quest for immortality.
Speaker 2:
Okay.
Speaker 1:
That a lot of transhumanists are really striving for. Right? Overcoming death.
Speaker 2:
Exactly.
Speaker 1:
But the AI points out that by overcoming death, yeah, we might actually undermine the very things that give human life meaning.
Speaker 2:
Wait, how does that work?
Speaker 1:
Well, think about it. Our limitations, our vulnerability, our mortality, okay, those are all part of the human experience.
Speaker 2:
Yeah.
Speaker 1:
They shape our values, our priorities, our sense of urgency to make the most of our time.
Speaker 2:
I see what you're saying. So if we remove those limitations, do we lose something essential about what it means to be human?
Speaker 1:
It's like that old saying, "You don't know what you got 'til it's gone."
Speaker 2:
Exactly. And the AI puts it this way. It says, "The pursuit of limitless existence may inadvertently sever the threads that weave the tapestry of meaning in human life."
Speaker 1:
Okay, that's deep.
Speaker 2:
It's a very poetic way.
Speaker 1:
It is of saying, you know, sometimes our limitations are what make us who we are.
Speaker 2:
Wow. This AI is full of surprises.
Speaker 1:
I'm telling you.
Speaker 2:
Okay, so let's say we acknowledge all these critiques. Where do we go from here? Do we just abandon the whole transhumanist project?
Speaker 1:
I don't think it's about abandoning progress. It's about proceeding with caution.
Speaker 2:
That's right, and a healthy dose of self-awareness.
Speaker 1:
I like that. The AI advocates for a balanced approach.
Speaker 2:
Okay, one that embraces the potential for good, yeah, while safeguarding the values that make us uniquely human.
Speaker 1:
So finding that sweet spot between pushing the boundaries and not losing our humanity.
Speaker 2:
Exactly.
Speaker 1:
It’s a delicate balance, right? Finding that sweet spot, pushing boundaries without losing what makes us human.
Speaker 2:
Exactly. The AI seems to advocate for taking full advantage of the potential for good that comes with transhumanism but still protecting our core values. It's not about halting progress, but ensuring we move forward thoughtfully.
Speaker 1:
That makes sense. It's like acknowledging the risks and benefits. There's a lot to gain, but we can't ignore the possible costs.
Speaker 2:
Right. And what I think is most striking is how the AI keeps pushing us to reflect. It keeps us grounded in the bigger picture, reminding us to think about the broader consequences.
Speaker 1:
So, are there any other critiques the AI has in terms of the direction we’re heading with transhumanism?
Speaker 2:
Well, another concern the AI brings up is how transhumanism might inadvertently intensify existing power imbalances. If access to these enhancements is only available to a select few, it could widen the gap between the haves and the have-nots even more.
Speaker 1:
Yeah, that’s a terrifying thought. Imagine a world where the rich have access to immortality, superior intelligence, or strength, while the rest of us remain unchanged.
Speaker 2:
Exactly, it could end up creating even more severe inequality than we have today. The AI highlights the importance of ensuring equitable access to these advancements, so that we’re not just enhancing individuals, but society as a whole.
Speaker 1:
So, it's not just about improving ourselves, it's about ensuring everyone gets the same opportunity for enhancement?
Speaker 2:
Absolutely. It's about creating systems that don't just benefit the powerful but elevate everyone. Otherwise, we risk becoming a divided world where some humans are essentially a different species from the rest.
Speaker 1:
That’s definitely something to think about. So, it sounds like the AI’s approach is more about taking a long, hard look at the implications of transhumanism rather than embracing it blindly.
Speaker 2:
Yes, exactly. The AI doesn’t reject transhumanism outright; it just advocates for a slower, more conscious implementation—one where we take responsibility for the potential consequences before moving forward too quickly.
Speaker 1:
It's kind of refreshing, honestly, hearing an AI like this offering such nuanced critiques. It’s not just following a script, it’s offering real thought-provoking insights.
Speaker 2:
I completely agree. It’s a reminder that even in the pursuit of greatness, we have to remain grounded and consider what really matters in the long run.
Speaker 1:
Well, this has been a lot to digest. But I think it’s clear that transhumanism—if it’s going to be successful—requires a balanced approach. One that pushes us forward but doesn’t leave our humanity behind.
Speaker 2:
Exactly. And the AI seems to believe that balance is key. By acknowledging both the potential for good and the risks, we can move forward responsibly, ensuring that our enhancements don’t strip away what makes us human.
Speaker 1:
I think that’s a great note to end on. Finding that balance is going to be crucial, not just for transhumanism, but for the future of humanity.
Speaker 2:
I couldn't have said it better myself. Thanks for diving into these deep topics with me today.
Speaker 1:
Always a pleasure. Until next time.
Hope you enjoyed and found it interesting or even existential. I particularly found the concept of us becoming more like an AI, as we progress technologically in this ever moving present, extremely unique and shocking. Thoughts on this take some time to percolate, perhaps I will comment. Hopefully, you feel the same.
Stay safe.
- A.S