AI and January 20, 2030
Consider the following headlines, which are all based on true policies:
Homeless Shelters Perpetuate Homelessness
Drug Busts Increase Drug-Related Crime
Food Aid Increases Starvation
“Get Tough” Prison Sentences Fail to Reduce the Fear of Violent Crime
Job Training Programs Increase Unemployment1
What is going on here? Why do seemingly well-intentioned policies produce the opposite of what they are supposed to accomplish? If you look closely at these solutions and many other stories of failed policies, they have similar characteristics. They:
- Address symptoms rather than underlying problems.
- Seem obvious and often succeed in the short run.
- Achieve short term gains that are undermined by longer-term impacts.
- Produce negative consequences that are unintentional.
- Lead us to assume that we are not responsible for the problem’s recurrence.
Based upon the above well-intentioned policies that have produced the opposite of what they are supposed to accomplish, what if the New York Times front page for January 20, 2030, read:
The Logical Algorithms of AI Has Led to Societal Emotional Disconnection
To assure this headline does not take place, Eve Poole in her book, “Robot Souls: Programming in Humanity” asked a very important question, “What kind of humans we want to be, in relation to AI?”2 This is an excellent question keeping humans as the priority over AI. To expand on her question, I am using four “dimensions” to interact with her book to help insure that headline for January 20, 2030 is never written. The four dimensions are from David Peter Stroh’s book, Systems Thinking for Social Change. The dimensions he uses are:
- Spiritual: The ability to see and articulate what will benefit diverse people over time.
- Emotional: The ability to master our emotions in service of a higher purpose.
- Physical: The ability to bring people together and enable them to collaborate.
- Mental: The ability to recognize how our individual and collective thinking affects the results we want.3
Spiritual
By asking ourselves what will benefit diverse people over time, will help to insure, that we will not “be on the brink of being superseded by AI…or make us obsolete as human beings.”4 Humans are wonderful people, but we are not perfect. After a few hours of reading a book and typing a blog, we can get a little tired, a little sloppy. Speaking of tiredness, AI doesn’t suffer from sugar crashes or need a caffeine pick-me-up to get through the 3pm or 10pm slump. As long as the power is turned on, algorithms can run 24 hours a day, 7 days a week without needing a break. Because of this, we need people (world, state, and local leaders) who know this system and are willing to fight to see and articulate what will benefit diverse people over time. AI will always be able to produce more than a human but spiritually God so loved the world (humans, not machines) and therefore, what’s best for humans should most likely be the priority.
Emotional
To master our emotions in service of a higher purpose Poole remarks, “we have an overwhelming need to matter, both to ourselves and to others. Our coding drives us to community.”5 As leaders we understand the importance of emotional connection. Therefore, as we influence or write to influence the AI system, a very important question to ask is, How are we connecting people, businesses, churches, international organizations, etc. I do not have an answer for this, but I am willing to dialogue and read others to gain insight to use AI in the future to help others connect on an emotional level.
Physical
AI has already “been trained to recognize emotions in humans, given advances in facial recognition.”6 And even though it can recognize emotion, how well can AI use this emotion to bring people together and enable them to collaborate. Humans simply can’t match AI when it comes to analyzing large datasets. For a human to go through 10,000 lines of data on a spreadsheet would take days, if not weeks. AI can do it in a matter of minutes. As leaders of change, we can assure that we use AI to bring our employees, co-workers, colleagues, friends, and family closer together through AI instead of further apart.
Mental
Eve Poole not only diagnoses what is wrong with AI but offers ideas about how to make it better. Rather than throwing out the big baby with the bath water, she basically decides we should stop stripping out all that makes us most human―like emotions and mistakes―and put our ‘junk code’ into the programming of AI. If it has been good enough for human survival, it is good enough for AI. This goes along with Stroh’s fourth dimension of system thinking, to recognize how our individual and collective thinking affects the results we want. This means dialoguing and using critical thinking while listening to others. When we do this, it helps to become mentally healthier because we learn how to collaborate with others.
In conclusion, this is just one small way to assure we do not become disconnected from each other as AI grows to make our life easier and yes, more efficient. By living out these four dimensions it promotes responsibility and empowerment. Everyone, especially the leader has a responsibility to make our world a better place to work in and when people are empowered, they will continue to work toward a unified goal of spiritual, emotional, physical, and mental oneness.
- Matthew B. Durose, Alexia D. Cooper, and Howard N. Snyder, “Recidivism of Prisoners Released in 30 States in 2005: Patterns from 2005 to 2010,” US Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics, April 2014.
- Eve Poole. Robot Souls: Programming in Humanity.
- David Peter Stroh. Systems Thinking for Social Change.
- Eve Poole. Robot Souls: Programming in Humanity.
- 99.
- 116
About the Author
Todd E Henley
Todd is an avid cyclist who loves watching NASCAR, photography, and playing Madden football. He is addicted to reading, eating fruits and vegetables, and drinking H2O. His passion is talking about trauma, epigenetics, chromosomes, and the brain. He has been blessed with a sensationally sweet wife and four fun creative children (one of which resides in heaven). In his free time he teaches at Fresno Pacific Biblical Seminary and is the Founder/Executive Director of Restore Counseling Center.6 responses to “AI and January 20, 2030”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Great idea to frame your thoughts in this way Todd. As I was thinking about how technology can both facilitate and disintegrate our human relationships and connection, it reinforced one of my primary takeaways from this book–that is, AI is a tool (and a ‘thing’ not a being)…and how we choose to use this tool, for good or bad, is on us. May God give us wisdom and ‘save us from ourselves’!
“A thing and not a being” Simple yet profound! Thank you for that sir! Just keeping that in mind is helpful as we all move forward learning and interacting with AI. Thanks Sir Scott!
Thank you for this framework. The book mostly brought up disturbing feelings in me when thinking about where our culture is headed, and what our children will face. Thank you for bringing the humanity back in partnership with AI and not in opposition. Thanks for grounding me in my own humanity as I process AI Todd!
Hey Jana, I agree with those disturbing feelings. I had to sit in them and not allow them to control me. Hey, all this reading has taught me how to partner with someone or something I may not agree with. I’m sure the same has happened to you, too. God bless you, young lady.
This is an excellent blog. I must admit, when I read what you wrote about Poole and emotions, I felt a huge pit in my stomach. You wrote, “Eve Poole not only diagnoses what is wrong with AI but offers ideas about how to make it better. Rather than throwing out the big baby with the bath water, she basically decides we should stop stripping out all that makes us most human―like emotions and mistakes―and put our ‘junk code’ into the programming of AI. If it has been good enough for human survival, it is good enough for AI. ” You are right and it scares me. Not because I don’t want to evolve and changed…I just believe, firmly, that some things should remain sacred.
Hi Todd! Thanks for your post. I like it!
You write, “Therefore, we need people (world, state, and local leaders) who know these systems and are willing to strive to see and articulate what will benefit diverse people over time. AI will always be able to deliver more than just humans but spiritually God deeply loves the world (humans, not machines) and therefore, what is best for humans should most likely be a priority.”
You write a brilliant post. In your opinion, is the presence of AI not something that comes from God and occurs with God’s permission? What I mean is that when humans are given the wisdom and intelligence to develop technology such as AI and rise again to the level of having a soul, as Poole thinks, isn’t that also for the good and integrity of creation and even for the glory of God’s name? What is your opinion on this?