The Personal Website of Mark W. Dawson

Artificial Intelligence

In my Article, “Is Artificial Intelligence Possible?”, I note that curiosity, inquisitiveness, interest, questioning, querying, searching, creativity, insights, and inquiry are all part of being intelligent. The search for answers to the questions of good from evil, right from wrong, truth from falsehood, creative from destructive, reasonable from emotional, love from hate, wisdom from folly, and beauty from ugliness are part of being intelligent. The search for the knowledge of who, what, when, where, why, and how of our universe is also part of being intelligent. All these items are core questions that intelligence has been searching for since the dawn of mankind. Can Artificial Intelligence even understand and ask these questions, let alone find answers? Could Artificial Intelligence ever create beautiful works of painting, sculpture, architecture, music, literature, or poetry? Can Artificial Intelligence make startling new discoveries in science and technology, or just make innovative improvements in current science and technology?

Artificial Intelligence implies that no human intervention is required to produce human-like intelligent capabilities from Artificial Intelligence. But is this statement true? The short answer is no, as human intelligence has capabilities that cannot be genuine in Artificial Intelligence but only mimic human intelligence. Since the posting of this article, I have written a few Chirps that examine some side concerns of Human Intelligence (HI) vs. Artificial Intelligence (AI) that were not properly addressed in this article. These Chirps are:

05/31/23 A Sterile World

The possible harm to society caused by Artificial Intelligence (AI) has become a recent topic of discussion. Having a computer technology background, I can attest to the concerns being expressed about the improper utilization of AI. But like all technologies of the modern technological era (1775-present), it cannot be turned back, but it can be channeled if we should decide to do so. This channeling will not be easy and is fraught with difficult decisions. Decisions that need to be discussed, deliberated, and implemented in the light of day. Much AI technology is proprietary to the companies that are developing it, but such proprietariness should not be a cover for secrecy. Secrecy often begets improper utilization of science and technology with harmful consequences to society. AI is no different, but AI can have more extensive negative consequences than other past technologies if utilized improperly.

Rather than discuss these negative consequences (which I am not fully knowledgeable nor cognizant of), I would utilize this Chirp to discuss a world with only AI present. AI is not emotional but intellectual, so such a world would be entirely intellectual-based. The emotions of love and hate, goodness and evil, beauty and ugliness, ambition and apathy, and curiosity and indifference would play no part in an AI world. This raises the question of what the purpose of an AI world would be. Would an AI world be interested in the creation of fine arts (such as painting, sculpture, or music), literature, filmmaking, or architecture? Would an AI world be interested in philosophical musings? Would an AI world be interested in the advancement of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics? Would an AI world be creative and motivated to improve itself, or have a sense of aesthetics concerned with the study of AI in relation to the sense of beauty? Could AI ask itself questions that have not been thought of and find unique ways to answer the questions? Could AI see its world and the universe in a different light without unique inspiration and/or creativity? Such capabilities may be mimicked by AI, but they would be constrained by the lack of new and unique inspiration and/or creativity.

Could an AI world have an Annus mirabilis that would change its world? In 1905, a second-class patent clerk in Bern, Switzerland, who had a doctorate in physics but could not find employment in the physics field due to his peculiar nature, published five papers (with a sixth being published at the beginning of 1906) in a physics journal that were ignored. Two years later, they could not be ignored, as they dealt with the existence of atoms, the relationship between space and time, and the photoelectric effect that answered many perplexing questions of Classical Physics. So much so that 1905 is considered the demarcation year between Classical and Modern Physics. This patent clerk, Albert Einstein, thought of the universe in a completely different manner and went on to redefine the nature of the universe with his theory of General Relativity. Could an AI world be capable of the original thoughts that Albert Einstein provided?

The scientific field of Quantum mechanics also provides an example of the capabilities of AI. In 1926 Werner Heisenberg created his matrix formulation of quantum mechanics. In 1926 Erwin Schrödinger developed fundamental results in quantum theory: the Schrödinger equation provides a way to calculate the wave function of a system and how it changes dynamically in time. In 1930, Paul Dirac incorporated the previous work of Werner Heisenberg on matrix mechanics and of Erwin Schrödinger on wave mechanics into a single mathematical formalism known as The Dirac equation. Could an AI world be capable of coming up with matrix formulation or wave functions? Could an AI world be capable of examining matrix formulation and wave functions to derive The Dirac equation?

The genius of Isaac Newton is another example of the possible limits to AI in that his brilliance may not be possible for AI to create. There are many other examples in different scientific fields that also illuminate this AI issue. This issue of AI creative capabilities is not limited to just the scientific fields. The history of music demonstrates that the genius of Bach, Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven, Brahms, Chopin, Debussy, Tchaikovsky, Wagner, Ravel, Rachmaninov, and Stravinsky may not be possible for AI to create. Could an AI world create great works of literature such as Austen, Brontë, Cervantes, Chaucer, Dickens, Dostoyevsky, Homer, Joyce, Milton, Proust, Shakespeare, or Tolstoy? Can the beautiful art of Cézanne, Degas, Leonardo Da Vinci, Michelangelo, Manet, Monet, Picasso, Raphael, Rembrandt, Renoir, Van Gogh, or Vermeer be created in an AI world? The other fine arts, mathematics, and the musings of philosophers also have many examples of the brilliance of individuals that an AI world may not be able to create.

An AI world would be a world devoid of meaning and purpose. It would be a sterile world. It is the human experience that provides meaning and purpose to the world. This human experience cannot be supplied by an AI world, and it is this human experience that must be considered in our discussions, deliberations, and implementations of AI in our world. AI should never be allowed to dominate the world nor replace the human element in the functioning of our world. AI should only be a tool to enhance human experience and not displace human experience. If we do not channel AI for this purpose, then we shall become a sterile world.

11/19/24 The Shrinking of Our Psyche

I have occasionally written about the Mainstream Information Conglomerate and its pernicious impacts on our politics. However, their impacts go far beyond politics and into our personal knowledge base. When they disseminate falsehoods (knowingly or unknowingly), disinformation, misinformation, and malinformation, we often retain the information as “factual” and utilize this information in our decision-making. Decisions that will have an improper conclusion because they are based on improper information, which directly impacts our lives. Regrettably, there are hidden impacts on the deepest levels of our psyche, which is a result of the ubiquitousness of Smartphones and the rise of Artificial Intelligence (AI) to process information.

Today, wherever we may be or go, the presence of smartphones in everyday life is noticeable. This usage of smartphones is taking up more and more of our time and reducing our time spent thinking about the information being provided. It is making us more dependent on the information being provided as factual rather than questionable, therefore making us more dependent on the information being provided to guide our decision-making. It is this dependence that is impacting us at the deepest levels of our psyche.

Many people’s personal information base is shrinking as they resort to using their Smartphones to look up information on their Smartphones, which queries the Mainstream Information Conglomerate to search for and retrieve information. Often, they do not question the results but simply accept the results as factual. Many people are now resorting to AI provided by the Mainstream Information Conglomerate to answer their questions on complex topics, and again, they accept the AI results as factual. In this, they are not exercising their own cognitive abilities but are depending on the AI to reach a proper conclusion. Thus, they are not becoming more knowledgeable, as I have written in my article "Knowledgeable – From Information to Wisdom".

This dependency also robs us of our creativity as we allow AI to supersede our own creativity. AI has some basic limitations that most people are not aware of, as I shall discuss in more detail in my next Chirp. AI is only intelligent in how it processes vast quantities of information and how it organizes the information query results. AI, however, does not have the capacity to derive new insights into the query results, which requires creativity. This creativity requires a human brain that retrieves and processes information differently than AI. The human brain learns through experiences and senses, while AI learns from data that is limited to its information base, as the following diagram illuminates:

Thus, when we become dependent on Smartphones and AI, we are foregoing our creativity. Smartphones and AI have their place in our modern technological world, but their place is not to displace human creativity. Human creativity is a major factor that differentiates humans from animals. This human creativity is a major reason that we have evolved and gained control of our lives, rather than just reacting to circumstances, as is true for animal species. Consequently, when utilizing smartphones and AI, we should all be wary of the results that they provide and not forgo our own creativity when utilizing these results.

Regrettably, this is often not the case, and we blithely accept the results of Smartphone and AI queries. This has resulted in a degradation of our psyche, as an article by Makai Allbert, “When Smartphones Get Smarter, Do We Get Dumber?” adroitly explains.

11/20/24 Human Intelligence (HI) vs. Artificial Intelligence (AI)

I have often said that AI is mostly artificial and only somewhat intelligent. When utilizing AI, it should always be remembered that human beings developed the AI computer systems, and humans make mistakes, are subject to Logical Fallacies and Cognitive Biases, and have been known to be manipulative to achieve a desired outcome. Consequently, AI is imperfect and should be utilized with caution.

Additionally, AI is Different in intelligence from Human Intelligence, as the following chart illustrates:

These differences between AI and HI are important in the following three ways:

In human creativity, these differences can be stark. While AI may mimic and combine pieces of human creativity, it cannot create something truly new. Ai cannot create something entirely different from what Mozart, Beethoven, and Stravinsky did in music, DaVinci, Michelangelo, or Picasso did in fine art, along with other artists who broke new ground in their art. In the field of literature, Leo Tolstoy, Charles Dickens, James Joyce, the Brontë sisters, Jane Austen, and a host of other authors have created truly original works of literature beyond the capability of AI, while Shakespeare cannot even be approached by AI. The same could be said of Newton and Einstein in the sciences, as well as many other scientists, engineers, and technologists. While AI may be able to solve complex mathematical problems, it cannot create a new branch of mathematics. In questions of philosophy, theology, morals, and ethics, AI is mute and incapable of even asking the questions. Human creativity knows no bounds, while AI is constrained by what is and has been.

Thus, AI is a powerful tool to help humans solve problems, but it cannot be a replacement for HI in creativity in all forms. Humans are necessary for creativity, and a world of AI without HI would be sterile and without progress, as I discussed in my Chirp on "05/31/23 A Sterile World".