AI: The Technological Trickster
By ai-depot | October 26, 2002
Moving elegantly among social sciences, computational linguistics and classical AI disciplines, this article analyses the essence of computer thought compared to human reasoning, and emphasises its effects on society and future developments.
Written by Jim Erkiletian.
Introduction
All the ravens used to be white. Downright snooty about it too. You know ravens. Now they’re snooty because they’re black. Maybe not quite as snooty as they used to be. But they don’t like humans because of what happened. Not that they can blame us. But that only makes it worse.
Back when the world was new the people were sitting around remarking on the genius of the creator, all the wonders and how they fit together so beautifully. The world was perfect, except for one thing. Death. They decided to bring this matter to the creator’s attention. But no one volunteered to take the message personally. For obvious reasons. (Hey, creator! You made a mistake, ya big dummy. Yeah sure.) So they looked around for a messenger. And they found the dog. The only animal that seems to actually like humans. So they pet the dog and fed him with a big medium-rare caribou steak and asked him to go to the creator and ask, ‘Please correct your one mistake and make humans immortal.’
The dog set off up the trail. On the way he met the raven who, besides being white was at that time the most erudite of the animals. Raven asked the dog ‘Where you going?’ And the dog told him. The raven thought about that, then told the dog about some deer he’d seen in the next valley. He knew the dog liked chasing deer, and why, but that’s another story. Anyway, the raven agreed to take the message to the creator as a favour for his good old doggie friend. And the dog agreed he’d much rather be chasing those deer.
The raven flew directly to the creator and said ‘Creator, you have made a nearly perfect world. There is only one thing more that you could do to make it truly perfect. You can make ravens immortal.’ The creator replied something to the effect that there are indeed some improvements that should probably be made and, Zap! turned the raven black. The raven was for the first time in his life speechless, which prompted the creator to the next move. Zap! again, and the raven couldn’t talk anymore, just swalk and whistle and crow like…a raven.
And that’s the way it is today.
Why is this story important to writers of the cyber stage? It’s survived for a long time. I heard it from Tlingit elders in the Yukon. Ibo writer Ngugi wa Thiongo discovered variations on this story in over 800 different cultures in Africa alone. All had in common that humans sent a message to the creator about death, the message is intercepted by the trickster and garbled, and the trickster is changed in both verbal ability and in physical appearance. Ngugi calls it a warning from the time when spoken language was first invented, and humans were sitting around trying to figure out the possible dangers of becoming dependent on this amazing new tool.
A message sent across the ages from the dawn of word is too important to ignore, especially for those of us experimenting with what may be the most complex development in communication ever conceived. The lesson from the raven is that spoken language must harmonize with how the world is. Our ability to make stories must serve truth. If we use it to hide truth or mislead, as Ngugi says, “dire things happen.”
The first great paradigm shift in human communication was, as far as we know, the invention of spoken language. It may be fairly recent, possibly not much more than 100,000 years old. The Raven story was probably developed in the midst of that revolution. Previous communication may have used only sign language, a means of communication today among the deaf. It is learned readily by chimps and gorillas and has been used by peoples all over the world for trade and communication across language barriers. There is a possibility it created a certain type of human by ensuring the survival of those who used it to most advantage.
The first sounds were responses to stimuli. EEK! might be a response to a sabre-tooth cat, but it isn’t a word until you talk about the ‘eeker’ you saw yesterday. Language results from communication by using sounds as symbols for something else. When our ancestors discovered this ability, they realized they were on the threshold of some major change. We can assume much was gained, at least in our ability to communicate around corners, at a distance and in the dark. What was lost is more difficult to determine. Did our ancestors use ESP? We don’t know. But we know from the oral tradition that something was lost, perhaps something in the ability to remember. And we don’t know if what was gained has made us better off. Or worse.
The second major shift came with the invention of the alphabet and writing. The system of using written symbols for verbal ones is doubly removed from reality, but is useful for keeping accurate records and communicating over distances without loss of information. Again, something was lost and something gained, and the process was accelerated with invention of the printing press. The new writing allowed knowledge to spread and diversify as well as to underpin civilization with hierarchical chains of command and class societies. Besides building libraries of knowledge and recording past experience as never before, people could subjugate each other and manipulate and destroy their environment as never before.
The latest shift is the one we are experiencing today with the explosion of the internet. Digital communication is still another step removed from reality. And it carries the greatest potential for changes in our species, for good or ill. The hypertextual world we are writing/creating may result in a better human, one able to take advantage of the oral tradition from which we have descended, yet to maintain the diversity and widespread knowledge of the modern world. The tools for interaction on a grand scale, with greater tolerance, caring, love, understanding and peace, can be an outcome of a machine developed to survive a nuclear holocaust. Humans are good at reversing the intent of their own natural inclinations. But we could become enslaved, oppressed as never before by the few who control the technology, or, in the worst cyberpunk nightmare, the machines themselves.
While we have created the machinery to build a more humane and caring society, we may also lose those qualities that make caring and humanity understandable in any form outside html. Once we embark on silicon consciousness, there is no going back. Will we eliminate hate and as a result become unable to love? Nevermore?
Tags: none
Category: essay |
