For some time now, we have been listening to the changes implied by the advent of the Technological Singularity, as a point of no return.
The discussions are as versatile as they are disturbing.
In that moment of increasing autonomy and perhaps independence from Artificial Intelligence, it seems to be evident that technological changes will exceed the human capacity to assimilate them.
Authors such as: (Theys, 2012), (Kurzweil, 2012); (Ruiz, 2013) (Cordeiro, 2016), among others
They have offered a very abundant discussion to the rspect
How do you imagine philosophy in that new horizon?
I think that philosophy is always at the level of the respective state of science and technology, especially since a whole series of philosophers have also embarked on a full study of physics, biology or chemistry, also in the context of mathematics and technology, just as scientists and engineers have embarked on philosophy.
The more the possibility of human self-destruction begins to become reality and how today the quality of life of later generations is in danger of being diminished by the exploitation of limited resources, by war or by omission of measures, the more the question of the limits of technology, growth and political oppression becomes an issue in philosophy. Man is not only a learning being, he is also a being that produces conflicts and dilemmas. It is precisely where progress seems to be at its greatest that we become aware of this.
Philosophy is a way of life: love of wisdom and preparation for death. Philosophy leads to autonomy---and the rulers don't like that, and they always do whatever it takes to remain in control, and technological progress makes the controlling of people easier and easier . . .
But philosophy will never become a mass movement. Philosophy is an individual endeavor. Philosophy cannot be monetized. Philosophy will never be a real threat to the rulers (and vice versa). So i think that technological progress will do nothing to philosophy.
Although I am not nearly as knowledgeable as you I will admit, Moore's law does dictate technological advancement. I believe you are asking this: are we as humans capable of adapting positively toward a more technologically autonomous society? I perceive that your question reflects the simple nature between good and evil, although it is simply the majorities perception. A technological dystopia is merely perception, it is misanthropic to believe that humanity will dissolve when technology has become superior to our understanding. Reality is merely perceptual, to say that our minds will become uniform with a technological society in my belief is nihilistic. The kindle of hope will never be snuffed so long as there are people who think and adapt positively toward their environment. Knowing this function, the only way a human society could become completely dystopiatic would happen simply over one condition: the regression of the very neurological components of our brain. I believe that the word human is solely dependent upon our "humanity." So long as ideas are worth fighting for, the true answer is no.
Dear Reinaldo,
As I see it, philosophy is a way of wondering about, for example, knowledge (i.e., gnosiology), existence (i.e., ontology) and existential questions (i.e., metaphysics). Its role is to reflect on assumptions of these three main domains, not to test them in empirical terms. This test is science, which is never, say, armchair speculation. Philosophy, as I see it, aims to give rise to autonomous and critical individuals who often question the status quo. This is one of the reasons why many rulers (e.g., dictators) very often do not like philosophers and why philosophy will never become, say, a mass moviment. Masses are more inclined to have fun than to think seriously, which is a demanding task. I don't think that technological changes will exceed the human capacity to assimilate them. This is so because technological advances come from scientific progress, which is a human ability. So, at least those whose work leads to scientific discoveries that allow the most sophisticated technologies are in a good position to understand such technologies. Scientific and technological progress often raises moral dilemmas adrressed, for example, in bioethics. I believe that philosophers are called to play a crucial role, for example, in bioethical decisions. As I see it, not only philosophy is ready to deal with the drastic changes that the advent of technological singularity presupposes, but it also has a crucial role in the discussion of moral dilemmas that often arise when technology is applied to human affairs. Euthanasia, abortion, and so forth, are only two examples.
Best regards,
Orlando
i don't think the purpose of philosophy is to solve (any or all) problems. i think that the purpose of philosophy is for the philosopher to realize that there are no problems whatsoever.
I think that philosophy is always at the level of the respective state of science and technology, especially since a whole series of philosophers have also embarked on a full study of physics, biology or chemistry, also in the context of mathematics and technology, just as scientists and engineers have embarked on philosophy.
The more the possibility of human self-destruction begins to become reality and how today the quality of life of later generations is in danger of being diminished by the exploitation of limited resources, by war or by omission of measures, the more the question of the limits of technology, growth and political oppression becomes an issue in philosophy. Man is not only a learning being, he is also a being that produces conflicts and dilemmas. It is precisely where progress seems to be at its greatest that we become aware of this.
There has been quite a bit of philosophical research and discussion on these topics within the American Philosophical Association‘s Computers and Philosophy Committee. The Committee’s meetings at the divisional conferences have been especially lively and fruitful these past 10 years or so.
The Committee publishes a newsletter with significant articles exploring that point at which technology and philosophy meet. You can access it from the APA’s website, drilling down under “publications.” Here is a link.
https://www.apaonline.org/page/computers_newsletter
Technological improvements citing problems not only related to the environment and its pollution; but it also citing problems to the individuals in dealing with the state. The state in the world is said to be democratic, but democracy is being controlled by groups of some people which is a new form of monarchy.
If artificial intelligence exceed and adapts to know its existence and importance, and also generate will to dominate on natural intelligence; the existence of human can be questionable. At present AI is a need and alternatives of human capital also.
Prabhat, democracy is a tyranny of the majority. The majority is a collective (easily manipulable). The minority is an autonomous (wo)man (invincible).
"A man thinks and works alone." & "No work is ever done collectively." --Ayn Rand, The Fountainhead
The drastic changes of exponential knowledge automation will affect mainly medicine, finance, manufacturing and pedagogics. Philosophy can help to develop a meta-technological epistemology (understanding), something like an applied science of technical systems evolution. For our human learning curve, concerning exponential 'creative destruction', we will need much more loans from neuroscience and mental health research. However, it is not sure that singularity (like Jv Neumann opined) will follow exponentiality.
The great technological changes are unleashing new challenges for traditional philosophical paradigms.
The internal relationship of the categorial triad: science-technology-society, is very dynamic but, apparently, it is the technological changes that, when advancing at increasingly unusual speeds, force us to ask ourselves if philosophy is prepared to face them.
In most of the teaching programs, the advent of technological singularity and the challenges that this entails are not mentioned.
The factors which have been deeply impacted by the advent of technology are space, time and number. Space has shrunk, Time has been abridged, Numbers, in terms of production, have become astronomical. Reality, for most people, is virtual, which made Baudrillard claim that Gulf war never took place. The impact of instantaneous communication on human lives is not fully assessed. The advent of technology is comparable to the construction of super highway through sleepy villages. It is true that philosophy is yet to come to terms with the magnitude of technology.
this link is useful
agi-conf.org/2010/wp-content/uploads/2009/.../agi10singmodels2.pd...
regards
Essential response dear Nazir:
"It is true that philosophy is yet to come to terms with the magnitude of technology"
Technological progress is a society-wide phenomenon, whereas spiritual progress (or a lack thereof) is an endeavor of an individual human being. By observing the technological progress one may conclude that humans have become much smarter in the last five thousand years. But have they? They haven't. The touchscreen and other 'marvelous' technological achievements are not due to humans becoming smarter but because to proceed from clay tablet to touchscreen tablet takes time.
If anything, technological progress and public school system (aimed at producing 'educated idiots') makes spiritual progress more and more difficult. What proportion of the educated population today has the wisdom (which is spiritual by definition) of 'savages'? What proportion of the educated population today has an attention time-span longer than the character-limit of a single Tweet? What percentage of human brain-power has been outsourced, on average, to an external device (still usually called 'cell phone')?
For a philosopher, the purpose of technological progress is to reduce the time spent (by the philosopher) by performing mundane tasks, such as doing laundry and climbing trees in search of honey. And the time saved is used by the philosopher to study the true nature of the philosopher's self=mind=soul.
Dear Martin
Its valuable analysis refers to a real situation that has generated technological development in itself.
The introduction of these advances in life is very fast, this impacts human behavior and a new reality is built at every moment.
I believe that the philosophical analysis of these problems is essential.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Mathematics