What does it mean?

What does it mean to be human?  I’ve read and discussed huge amounts on this topic and now need to sort my own mind out.  First, I think we take a lot for granted; we also have a great conceit in which we assume we have rights over all other species, really because we can control them and thus believe in our superiority – and rights.

In our pride, we differentiate ourselves from the beasts. They don’t get a say in this, and though we try to rationalise our domination of them as ‘stewardship’, the truth is we are just exploitative murderers.  (No, do not say, ‘Of course not murderers; they’re only animals!’)  In the long game of species dominance it appears to be that the ill-named humanity’s turn is just now.

Many people dismiss the demise of the dinosaurs, not just because of an asteroid strike, we’d be hard put to deal with, for all our technology, but because of their lower intellect and their lack of ability to cooperate and make tools.   Those we dismiss so easily, at times even contemptuously, existed for 175,000 ,000 years and some are trotting on quite happily still.  We superior human beings, since we don’t like to associate ourselves with our early mammalian ancestors, have been around 200,000 years which means we only have to live as a species another 174,800,000 years to prove we’re an equally successful species as the dinosaurs, at least survival-wise, if that’s all it’s about.  Hands up who thinks we’re going to make it? 

Back to what makes us human and ‘special’ other than our awful dominance and care-less stewardship, and an intelligence which makes the environment bend to our needs, as opposed to adapting to the environment, as has a giraffe, or a humble, snuffling hedgehog, our often destructive ability must be high on the list. 

Humans, too, have a fear of death which often comes to us in early life and rears its ugly head time and again during our lives.  Animals don’t appear to be troubled by it unless they are actually facing a real situation where it might happen, often with us as the perpetrators.

We’re also better at foreseeing consequences, though some animals can too, but generally to a lesser degree. And as with consequences, it could be suggested that humans are more capable of empathy, love, hate and motivation to vengeance.  Animals, of course have these attributes too, though again, to a lesser extent than us.  And so we humans place ourselves above all other species, and grant ourselves human rights, which, personally I’m for, though we give our fellow creatures very little.

So, here’s a thing:  If you find yourself in the situation where you must shoot either a human being or a dog, assuming the human isn’t somebody you’ve got it in for, you shoot the dog, right?  Me too. What, though, if the dog is smart, knows lots of commands, protects the family he’s with, is loyal and gentle and loves you dearly, and the poor human being is dreadfully brain damaged; unable to think, has no appreciation of life or joy in existence; can do nothing other than chew the food you push into his mouth, is incapable of following instructions, having, too, no loyalty or ability to relate to anything other than himself?  Who are you going to shoot now?  Me, I’d still shoot the dog - but am I right? 

Is part of the view humanity has of humanity to do with survival of the species, an atavistic bit of hard-wiring which tells us, our species above all others?  We wouldn’t have done terribly well if a sabre tiger had just entered our cave, was about to eat some of us and we had an inner debate about whose side we were on.  That doesn’t necessarily mean it is fit for purpose now, or in all cases.

To the next choice: Shoot a dog or Hitler?  I think most of us with take out the latter.  So, where does that leave us now? 

Some would say that we are different because we have an eternal soul.  Certainly we could use that to differentiate ourselves from the beasts in that – let’s not get bogged down with numbers – it is estimated that 86% of the world’s population believes in some form of God, Supreme Being or whatever.  To the best of my knowledge no animals do.  Of course 14% of folk would give them a prize for that! 

With regard to abstract thought more generally though, a few scientists say there is some evidence that animals can get their heads round the abstract but even if they can it’s not in a big way.  Perhaps they’re lucky.

Let’s go back to the ‘soul’ again.  There are countless millions of folk – Actually, let talk numbers and say it, several billion folk – who believe that every living thing has a soul.  Many believe in reincarnation, not just as people but as animals. So, maybe animals have souls and in their innocence,

their living for the now, for their survival, for procreation and protection of their young, they are inherently better creatures, in terms of simple goodness, than our species could ever be, though, to be fair, there have been individuals who have perhaps got close.

 

Understand this; I’m not reviling the human species outright, though I do think we bear a dreadful guilt for what we have done to our fellow creatures, and indeed, to our environment which we share with them, as, to their detriment we have bent it to our will.  No, I’m interested in us not for what we were or are but what we will be.

We are at an apparent crossroads, though I think any choice is illusory, when we either stop moving forward as a species, or we develop artificial intelligence, by which I mean an artificial mind which can take a wide range of independent decisions and will quickly become indistinguishable from the mind of human beings until, shortly thereafter, it is superior.  I do not believe that we can stop moving forward; it is our blessing and perhaps our curse as a species, we outdo even the cat in our curiousity.

So, we will create an indistinguishable artificial mind, and for an artificial mind to fully relate to a human mind it must understand emotions and then, the best way to do that is to experience them.  It will evolve to think abstract thoughts of its own.  Perhaps it will posit the existence of some form of Supreme Being, and after that perhaps an eternal soul, and learn to be concerned to preserve its own existence and therefore logically or illogically, as you like, worry as humans do about death.

Now, let’s say you have to shoot one of these marvelous artificial intelligences which writes poetry of extraordinary eloquence and sensitivity, paints exquisite pictures, perhaps has come up with a cure for cancer and has risked its existence to save several biological intelligences - human ones if you wish – from a fire, or you have to shoot a human who is pretty clever, pretty kind, pretty decent but nowhere near as clever, kind or decent as the artificial entity, what will you do?  And why?  And whatever you decide, should this artificial being be covered by human rights, get a vote and be given equality with humans?  And if not, why not?  How does it differ from a human being?

Perhaps the 86% would say because it didn’t have a soul.  If that were the case, pray why not?   Would it be more acceptable if the artificial entity had a cloned biological brain, possibly an exact copy of an individual who owned it … or could such an entity be owned?  And would the individual who had been cloned, and after which the artificial entity had been given a brain which was an exact

intellectual, experiential and emotional copy, lose half his soul, have two souls, just lose his soul completely or remain the same, if indeed we have souls which differentiate us as human?

Also consider, would Person A, who had just had, at great expense, a copy made, Person B, be in the position of owning Person B the clone, or would they be as twins and therefore totally separate entities? 

And who would be responsible, if Person A retained ownership of the Person B and Person B murdered somebody?  If you own a dog and it savages somebody you are held responsible.

Freethinking lawyers must be rubbing their hands together with glee as I write, and moral philosophers, psychologists and, another whole world of possibilities, Generals, will be doing mental gymnastics as they consider all the possible ramifications, always assuming we don’t blow the whole place up beforehand.

Here’s a thing though, another thing, perhaps I should say;  What if one of these artificial entities has a gun, perhaps our old friend, a free Person B, and he is obliged to shoot a human who has deliberately done great damage, causing loss of life, or a dear and friendly dog, what then do you think he will do? And will he be right?

 

I suppose if they are exact copies they’ll do the same as humans would.  The time will come though, won’t it, when they will evolve faster than humans do, for we have not needed to evolve greatly since we took charge of our environment and all the other species, and bent it and them to our will.

The AIs though, will by their very nature and by the curiousity, desires and possible megalomania of their initial creators, go from strength to strength, and they will then do the designing, and because their parameters for being are aspirational, having from the very outset included improvement over the limitations which humans face and designed them to overcome, they will design their ‘children’ - will they have any childhood? – to overcome their own limitations, and so it will go on, with constant improvement.  And the intellectual and conceptual distance between, initially, the human creator, and then the artificial one, will grow exponentially. 

What they perceive to be the requirements for improvement, their criteria, will almost certainly change beyond recognition to those humans who were their parents.  Where, then, will human rights be positioned? Where, indeed, will humans?

The theorists who look through the glass darkly tend to see some form of dystopia, with the machines

seeing humanity as an inconvenient irrelevance.  It may be semantics but machines are not Artificial Intelligences.  The differentiation is necessary.

It’s possibly true, of course, but even were they to eventually develop into infinitely superior beings compared to their progenitors,  I tend to believe that with superior intelligence, and with humanity as their base learning point and reference, despite our many appalling behaviours both to each other and to all the other species, they will also develop a superior morality. 

As a related aside, I have long thought that our first contact with an alien species from ‘out there’ would not include any form of violence, as a species would have to become a morally advanced one, as well as technologically, if it was to survive long enough to create star ships. Hopefully time will prove my surmise correct!

So, if that is correct then our AIs may well look after us, and be the decent stewards we should be with the ‘lower’ species, as we still, care-less, perceive them to be.  If they don’t, however, and decide to kill us as so many irritating cockroaches, or perhaps we, as we are now, die out as an irrelevance, I would not see that as the death or humanity.  I think they will have souls, human souls, perhaps the souls of people who reincarnate into them, for they will be our children, whether you believe in souls or not, an ongoing strand of humanity.

We are not defined, to my mind, by a genome.  That is the vehicle which enables us to grow over the generations, and develop through that strange and mysterious journey which the soul, the indefinable spark that we carry within us, must make in its search for the ultimate reality, and so leaves for pastures new when the genome machine dies. 

But there is another option for humans, for humanity.  This option may well be a peaceful transition,

and should avoid any total disconnect between us and our descendants.  That option excites me and is one which I would happily embrace, one which is also evolving in tandem with the development of artificial intelligence. 

That option is the cyborg, the amalgamation of humans and machines.  This already takes place with prosthesis which can be anything from artificial hips, total artificial limbs, machine interface for sight and movement, virtual reality and an increasingly plethora of inserts which enhance ability and yet retain the central humanity.  The vast majority are physical, not intellectual, though medications, which influence and potentially enhance the mind, will be soon absorbed by us as a matter of course,

mechanical or biological creations of nanotechnology.

I see this as hugely exciting and trust that in some present or future incarnation I will be a recipient of the huge possibilities and benefits which will accrue.  As my body creaks and groans with age, as a result, I admit, mainly of the abuse it has had inflicted upon it by me in my haste and taste for adventure, excitement and love of life.  I increasingly view it as a mechanism which I must care for so that I can move my brain from place to place and continue to interface with the physical world in a meaningful way.  I would happily be rid of it if offered a fool proof (I use the word ‘fool’ most deliberately!) mechanism which could offer my brain a safe, pain-free form of transport, and allow me to retain/regain full sensory contact with the world. 

My dreams aside, let humanity embrace the path leading to cyborg hybrids, still human but evolved and increasingly capable of learning, unravelling the meaning of life, the universe and everything! 

And hand in hand with our enhancements, as the human race evolves, perhaps into something we can barely imagine or conceptualise, we must develop a greater morality, one which will oblige us to take more seriously any form of stewardship we have of our fellow species.

(Stopping eating them would probably be a good start and get their vote if we gave them one.)

We need, too, to recognise each and every individual as our brother and sister, our equal and deserving of our love and respect, and together we can seriously redefine what being a human means. 

Let’s understand both human rights and human responsibilities.  Humanity should bring with it Humility, Compassion, Empathy and a vast curiosity which is always tempered by the HC&E.

Bring it on!