Ask A Genius 1008: Traditionalism Versus Egalitarianism Outcome
Author(s): Rick Rosner and Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Ask A Genius
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2024/07/08
Rick Rosner, American Comedy Writer, www.rickrosner.org
Scott Douglas Jacobsen, Independent Journalist, www.in-sightpublishing.com
Scott Douglas Jacobsen: This is a different angle from what we’ve discussed. What will be the eventual outcome of the clash between traditionalism and egalitarianism?
Rick Rosner: When you mention traditionalism, are you referring to laissez-faire systems and global market forces? Is that what you mean?
Jacobsen: I mean everything associated with that term, including traditionalism in the sense of a nuclear family or a family structure guided by religion.
Rick Rosner: You are referring to doing things as they have always been. We always mean from the Neolithic age until now, when people formed family units and communities. We transitioned from hunter-gatherers to agrarian societies and developed specializations that necessitated people living in communities. We live in towns and cities, and we all perform different jobs. People have specialized roles such as bootmakers and scribes. These roles change over time, but they remain specialized. Statistically, we are born, we grow up, we meet a partner, we have children, we age, and we die. Additionally, we engage in economic activities, earn money, and spend money.
One traditional aspect that will change drastically is that humans have been the most technically proficient and intelligent, conscious entities on Earth, and consciousness has only arisen in living beings. This was true for a long time, well before the Neolithic age. However, this is about to change. When discussing egalitarianism, we consider the arc of history.
Jacobsen: “The arc of history bends towards justice.”
Rosner: Yes, the arc of history bends towards justice, albeit slowly. Even in an era where the threat of fascism has increased considerably, we are still better off. When we compare current beliefs to those held 100 or 200 years ago, we find that we are more willing to acknowledge the essential humanity of different people. We are also more willing to recognize that animals have feelings and consciousness, a relatively recent argument. It is easier to justify our treatment of animals if we do not acknowledge their feelings. However, the trend has been towards egalitarianism. The forces of artificial intelligence and created consciousness are wildly disruptive and will present numerous opportunities for inequality. Traditionalism will erode, though the first AIs or human-AI hybrids will likely incorporate traditional human values because they provide an easy foundation. Many human values, such as safety and order, are universal.
Market forces and venality will likely result in poorly treated, cheaply manufactured consciousnesses. Carole wrote a science fiction story about a nanny who is a robot with artificial intelligence and is left in a landfill with her consciousness intact. This science fiction scenario will likely become a reality because it will be challenging to protect all the new, cheaply generated AIs, many of which will be conscious. The cheapening of artificial intelligence will lead to the devaluing of human consciousness and intelligence. We may eventually achieve egalitarianism, matching current levels in 100 or 200 years, but there will be dark times before that. During these times, powerful AIs will lead to various injustices, whether designed to be conscious, becoming conscious on their own, or merging with human consciousness. It will take time to resolve these issues. Any comments? We have had a similar discussion before.
Jacobsen: Not from that orientation, which was the point I made at the beginning. Not from the orientation of traditionalism versus egalitarianism in that way. We have touched on it in different ways. I wanted to approach it from a fresher angle to see if new insights emerged.
Rosner: One thing that comes up is the role of sexual bonding. Our sex drives heavily influence the traditional family structure. Most people form their most lasting relationships, apart from those with family, based on sexual attraction. Horniness stabilizes conventional family forms. This is eroding and will erode more significantly as we gain the power to control our drives. What we are attracted to is foolish. If an attractive woman is nearby, I will be distracted by her presence. I may not act on it, but I want to look at her. This distraction is ingrained in our evolution. For example, I noticed a young woman picking up a to-go order in a restaurant. Although I had the discipline to look away, I remained aware of her presence for her entire time in the restaurant. This is ridiculous, but it is a result of our evolutionary horniness. Conquering and redirecting this would be interesting, and it is reasonable to expect people to do this when possible. When we start designing artificial consciousnesses, we will program their drives, and it will not merely involve superficial attractions.
License & Copyright
In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. ©Scott Douglas Jacobsen and In-Sight Publishing 2012-Present. Unauthorized use or duplication of material without express permission from Scott Douglas Jacobsen strictly prohibited, excerpts and links must use full credit to Scott Douglas Jacobsen and In-Sight Publishing with direction to the original content.
In-Sight Publishing 