AI and Human Identity

The technological progress is said to travel on a spiral made up of small incremental innovations that then make it possible to draw a line that connects points of ingenuity that lie on different planes, and which harmonize to create something radically new and unthinkable before now.

Today, which could be called the “Dawn of AI”, it is clear to everyone that this innovation process is speeding up at an unexpected rate. The next technology, such as the constant improvements of the most popular large language models, that can create quite a buzz among researchers, innovators or simple observers is always just moments away.

But, in a technological landscape that is approaching double exponential speeds, and where the totality of information generated on the planet doubles within 13 months, it is vital to reflect on whether the core values on which our society is founded can support this acceleration. Or if these values are destined to be overtaken and left behind. We should reflect on how we are essentially biologically identical to our Roman ancestors, living within late 19th century or early 20th century social constructs, but our technology is projected far beyond these horizons.

For every article in newspapers, every piece published on the web, in every conversation between experts and non-experts around the topic of technological progress and that of the so-called “artificial” intelligences, behind the inexhaustible optimism that characterizes the human condition there always manages to appear that visceral fear of losing our status as a dominant species. This theme, very pervasive in various media, passing from Asimov to Cameron, perhaps represents the greatest fear of every man, that of losing his own uniqueness, and that due to an interminable moment of hubris, he finds himself replaceable.

Considering all this, it is therefore imperative to re-establish the precepts that serve as pillars for our community, and by extension also those of this impetuous process of innovation. The key is perhaps to be found in our past, in a historical moment in which we were able to rediscover the dignity inherent in the human condition and those values which are the most suitable for exalting it; those cornerstone values of humanism and by default of classical culture, of which western society boasts being a descendant, but which in the succession of historical courses and recurrences has been diluted and unable to readjust.

It is therefore appropriate to re-contextualize these milestones in our conception of what a man is in order to guarantee us that uniqueness and irreplaceability that must be the compass to guide us in this ocean of innovation and progress. To begin, the primacy of human intelligence, which is not and cannot be considered mere calculation or statistical computation, but which is made up of interpretation, empathy, and self-awareness. Through this lens we should reinterpret the definition of artificial intelligence, which is nothing more than a statistical computer of extraordinary sophistication, composed of millions of algorithms carefully stacked according to a rigorous hierarchical order, trying to imitate the unit of the least order that make up our brain, the neurons. AI is therefore without a shadow of a doubt an artificial entity, but unable to be intelligent by construction, because an intelligence cannot be built, but must be able to be born and no test, including Turing's test, can change this axiom. Under these principles it is therefore appropriate to reinterpret this acronym of AI in “augmented” intelligence, i.e., a tool of inestimable value that allows the only intelligence, the human one, to be exponentially more efficient and effective in fulfilling its tasks, and not a surrogate that can replace it.

Taking ourselves to a higher step, it is perhaps necessary to re-evaluate the relationship between man and technology in its most intimate conception. For a few decades now, each of us has been increasingly immersed in technology in all its forms. This forest of gargantuan dimensions, where at every single step we take we leave traces of ourselves in the form of data created with meticulous precision regarding every aspect of ourselves. However, in this metaphorical forest we are not at the apex of a hypothetical food chain, but rather we are often prey according to the formula "You are the product”, precisely because of the data, which is the lifeblood of this ecosystem. In this digital Eden, man is not a favored creature, but a resource at the mercy of something that should be his natural extension, but which, in a sad game of power and profit, seems to resemble chains. It is therefore evident the importance that the centrality of man must hold for technological advancement, as it is an extension of the man himself and whose objective can only be to satisfy the needs of the human being in an intimate and totalizing way, and not a yoke that enslaves him to the logic of predatory profit.

It is therefore vital to think about whether these systems that see profit, specifically the money and by extension the data that are acquired through it, are correct or if they are the result of an unfortunate variation that has reversed the roles of means and ends. It is undeniable how money is a necessary means for almost any type of progress that benefits the human condition, and how the logic of the market can lead to greater efficiency of those entities that have the same purpose. But profit, money, and data cannot be the end reached through the exploitation of man. Instead, the roles should be reversed having progress as the objective of man's well-being, not only understood as an individual customer but as a community, and to capture part of this economic benefit to refinance other innovation processes that are precursors of even greater improvements, without ever losing sight of the goal, man himself.

In this new hyper-connected world, we believed that this system of values would lead us, through the use of technology, to happiness. But it wasn't like that, and in fact the opposite happened, in a world where every other human on earth is just a few clicks away we feel more and more alone and dissatisfied. It is almost as if, instead of using these technologies, man is used by them. It is enough to think back to the data that we have said are the lifeblood of this system, which from the moment of their creation, although representing ourselves, do not belong to us, because these technologies instead of decreasing the complexity of the system they constantly increase it until we can no longer keep up with it. This is essentially the reason why we need a new form of humanism, which through its principles reminds us of who we are and for whom we create these technologies. Additionally, through a multidisciplinary approach, which also includes exponents of the human sciences, such as sociologists and philosophers, decrease the complexity of this system, solving needs instead of giving a solution to circumstances that leave the latent need unsatisfied, bringing man back to the center of technology, and focusing on the now, without losing sight of our past. We hope to be able to reach this new humanism one day.