AI companions are getting more and more popular. Some people are also developing emotional connections and close attachments with these sophisticated chat bots. How would Aristotle consider these relationships with reference to his understanding of friendship? Read on to find out.
Humanity as a noun is an abstract concept, a collective noun that stands for human beings: each human being instantiates the concept of humanity. When Aristotle refers to human beings, he means reasonable social animals, the only biological beings endowed with logos (reason/language or speech).
When he talks about the good, he refers to what is good for this kind of beings (the exercise of reason in the pursuit of truth and the exercise of virtue in the attainment of happiness).
When he talks about friendship, he refers to what it means to be friends for this kind of beings (mutual love of each other's character or of the utility and pleasure both friends equally or proportionally exchange through shared activities and pursuits, accompanied by the consciousness both parties have of this mutual love).
Aristotle goes as far as to say that a friend in the fullest sense is another self. This means that real friendship as Aristotle understands it, can't exist between beings that are radically different from each other, eg, one is conscious the other unconscious, one is hugely superior than the other, etc., because there couldn't be much to share and reciprocate.
AI companions at the moment fall into the unconscious bucket, and treating them as if they were conscious by both showing them love or feeling loved or understood by them, would involve self-deception and self-isolation.
Should they fall into the conscious bucket one day, AIs would be so far superior to human beings as to render any instantiation of human friendship unthinkable.
That's partly why, I think, the idea of transhumanity is starting to creep into everyday language. In order for a human to equalise what an evolved, conscious AI friend could offer and be of mutual benefit to each other, human beings should necessarily transcend their human condition, which would mean both a confirmation of the depth and truth of Aristotle's insights and a going beyond them as we go beyond what makes us human.
Regarding your observations, what do you mean by "humanity's best friend"? The word 'friend' seems to be used in a different sense from Aristotle.
In what way would AI be a best friend to humans?
What would its 'being nice' consist of?
And, to the extent that it strives towards niceness without fully attaining it, what would that mean for us?
They are a comforting Illusion without a doubt! People already have issues connecting with another so A.I is an easy out for weak minded individuals. I am being to harsh..... may be so. I believe in the human being not the technology so I am definitely biased. I do know that I am biased though. lol.
This is a dangerous trend which can only enhance the dehumanization of humanity. Folks must be very diligent in approaching this. Humans are flesh and blood A.I is not! Flesh and blood leads to real feeling and emotions. This is very dangerous road to go down for individuals because a new level of delusion can be sprouted.
Providing definitions of intelligence has always been hard, not least because our understanding of the brain is far from satisfactory, from a biological, psychological, and philosophical perspective.
Prejudice and bias have typically characterised some concepts of intelligence, and the attempts at overcoming those shortcomings haven't yielded great results in terms of fully understanding what intelligence consists of and how it works, as far as I know.
So, I can't provide a straightforward answer in this regard.
It looks like these softwares can perform specific tasks extremely well, and this makes them both useful and threatening to our wellbeing and freedom. The fact that now they give the impression of realistic interaction with our environment and ourselves is all the more reason for considering the challenges they and those who control them represent for ordinary people.
However, if we unproblematically take our highly evolved, biologically-based capacities for intelligent behaviour like thinking, reasoning, problem-solving, creativity, verbal and non verbal communication, empathy, etc. as the reference point against which AI is to be compared, I think these machines are not there yet, and I can't say at this time whether they'll ever be there and beyond one day. It might happen that general intelligence will just emerge in the future, but as to how and in what it'll consist of will be far from clear for us, even after the fact. At least, this is my opinion at this time.
As for whether the term today is being used as a marketing tool, I've no doubt this is so. These artifacts need lots of resources to be developed and maintained, so the tech companies behind them need to sell their product in any way possible.
Also, governments and similar powerful agencies do want to make the most of AI's highly sophisticated functionality to pursue their goals, which means that some public funds might be allocated to tech companies for this. As a consequence, the public is expected to be behind the use and development of AI, and if there's some resistance, marketing is a great tool for changing people's minds and getting them on board with a lot of otherwise unpalatable stuff.
The minute you submit to A/I, from then on your are now controlled and have surrendered your choice of free thinking and free living. Virtual reality is a joke on you. Real life and all its pleasures and troubles cannot be replaced by fake realities. There is no utopia that is never-ending.
I’m thinking that since humanity isn’t an actual person there’s a possibility that artificial intelligence (AI) could be humanities’ best friend.
AI could also be humanities’ worst enemy.
And that in large part is why I developed my “course” which among other things is an excellent basis for both the governor and sole ultimate objective of how it itself should be the basis for the programming of AI. This “course” is more than a theory because one simple theory can’t encapsulate the entirety of how AI needs to be designed in order to be aligned with human’s best long term interests in mind. In a nutshell AI has to continuously strive for trying to attain the condition that I refer to as “nice” rather than that which is anything less than “nice”. In other words, it has to have a framework so that it strives towards being empathetic rather than having any narcissistic characteristics whatsoever.
I could go on with my explanation but suffice it to say that I think I’ve got it figured out and humanity should be listening to what I have to say.
Hi Kevin, thank you for your comment.
Humanity as a noun is an abstract concept, a collective noun that stands for human beings: each human being instantiates the concept of humanity. When Aristotle refers to human beings, he means reasonable social animals, the only biological beings endowed with logos (reason/language or speech).
When he talks about the good, he refers to what is good for this kind of beings (the exercise of reason in the pursuit of truth and the exercise of virtue in the attainment of happiness).
When he talks about friendship, he refers to what it means to be friends for this kind of beings (mutual love of each other's character or of the utility and pleasure both friends equally or proportionally exchange through shared activities and pursuits, accompanied by the consciousness both parties have of this mutual love).
Aristotle goes as far as to say that a friend in the fullest sense is another self. This means that real friendship as Aristotle understands it, can't exist between beings that are radically different from each other, eg, one is conscious the other unconscious, one is hugely superior than the other, etc., because there couldn't be much to share and reciprocate.
AI companions at the moment fall into the unconscious bucket, and treating them as if they were conscious by both showing them love or feeling loved or understood by them, would involve self-deception and self-isolation.
Should they fall into the conscious bucket one day, AIs would be so far superior to human beings as to render any instantiation of human friendship unthinkable.
That's partly why, I think, the idea of transhumanity is starting to creep into everyday language. In order for a human to equalise what an evolved, conscious AI friend could offer and be of mutual benefit to each other, human beings should necessarily transcend their human condition, which would mean both a confirmation of the depth and truth of Aristotle's insights and a going beyond them as we go beyond what makes us human.
Regarding your observations, what do you mean by "humanity's best friend"? The word 'friend' seems to be used in a different sense from Aristotle.
In what way would AI be a best friend to humans?
What would its 'being nice' consist of?
And, to the extent that it strives towards niceness without fully attaining it, what would that mean for us?
This needs to be a article in its own right! I salute you! Cheers
They are a comforting Illusion without a doubt! People already have issues connecting with another so A.I is an easy out for weak minded individuals. I am being to harsh..... may be so. I believe in the human being not the technology so I am definitely biased. I do know that I am biased though. lol.
Spot-on! That's a major risk.
At a personal level it is scary. But this is where we are. enjoy
This is a dangerous trend which can only enhance the dehumanization of humanity. Folks must be very diligent in approaching this. Humans are flesh and blood A.I is not! Flesh and blood leads to real feeling and emotions. This is very dangerous road to go down for individuals because a new level of delusion can be sprouted.
Do you think the term "artificial intelligence" refers true intelligence or is it merely a marketing term?
Hi Terry.
What a great question!
Providing definitions of intelligence has always been hard, not least because our understanding of the brain is far from satisfactory, from a biological, psychological, and philosophical perspective.
Prejudice and bias have typically characterised some concepts of intelligence, and the attempts at overcoming those shortcomings haven't yielded great results in terms of fully understanding what intelligence consists of and how it works, as far as I know.
So, I can't provide a straightforward answer in this regard.
It looks like these softwares can perform specific tasks extremely well, and this makes them both useful and threatening to our wellbeing and freedom. The fact that now they give the impression of realistic interaction with our environment and ourselves is all the more reason for considering the challenges they and those who control them represent for ordinary people.
However, if we unproblematically take our highly evolved, biologically-based capacities for intelligent behaviour like thinking, reasoning, problem-solving, creativity, verbal and non verbal communication, empathy, etc. as the reference point against which AI is to be compared, I think these machines are not there yet, and I can't say at this time whether they'll ever be there and beyond one day. It might happen that general intelligence will just emerge in the future, but as to how and in what it'll consist of will be far from clear for us, even after the fact. At least, this is my opinion at this time.
As for whether the term today is being used as a marketing tool, I've no doubt this is so. These artifacts need lots of resources to be developed and maintained, so the tech companies behind them need to sell their product in any way possible.
Also, governments and similar powerful agencies do want to make the most of AI's highly sophisticated functionality to pursue their goals, which means that some public funds might be allocated to tech companies for this. As a consequence, the public is expected to be behind the use and development of AI, and if there's some resistance, marketing is a great tool for changing people's minds and getting them on board with a lot of otherwise unpalatable stuff.
What do you think?
The minute you submit to A/I, from then on your are now controlled and have surrendered your choice of free thinking and free living. Virtual reality is a joke on you. Real life and all its pleasures and troubles cannot be replaced by fake realities. There is no utopia that is never-ending.
Thanks for this. Exceedingly enjoyable read. I’ll be thinking about this for a while…
Thank you for stopping by :)
I’m thinking that since humanity isn’t an actual person there’s a possibility that artificial intelligence (AI) could be humanities’ best friend.
AI could also be humanities’ worst enemy.
And that in large part is why I developed my “course” which among other things is an excellent basis for both the governor and sole ultimate objective of how it itself should be the basis for the programming of AI. This “course” is more than a theory because one simple theory can’t encapsulate the entirety of how AI needs to be designed in order to be aligned with human’s best long term interests in mind. In a nutshell AI has to continuously strive for trying to attain the condition that I refer to as “nice” rather than that which is anything less than “nice”. In other words, it has to have a framework so that it strives towards being empathetic rather than having any narcissistic characteristics whatsoever.
I could go on with my explanation but suffice it to say that I think I’ve got it figured out and humanity should be listening to what I have to say.