Human Intelligence and Artificial Intelligence

Some people worry that only a few elites can master artificial intelligence technology, and most people cannot participate in it. On the one hand, people’s labor will become increasingly “worthless”; on the other hand, people’s lives will increasingly rely on the inventions of a few elites. As a result, the social structure will undergo tremendous changes. Only a few people are useful, and most people will become a “useless class.”

We may think this is unfounded worry: if you don’t work, you can still play. We can divide the things in the world into what I love to do and what I don’t. With artificial intelligence, we can send them the things we don’t like to do, and then save time to do what we love to do. Things like playing ball, listening to music, falling in love. But this distinction is difficult. For example, you don’t like to take children and change diapers; you like to make children laugh. But if you don’t change your child’s diaper, you will not be so happy when you play with them. You have worked hard for your child, and your quality of getting along with him will improve.

Separating labor from enjoyment, labor is done by machines, and people just enjoy the results. We are actually going through this process. Our perception of the world is increasingly focused on the “result” side. Our experience of the world is becoming more and more barren.

Heidegger said that technology is the “destiny” of this era. Whether you like it or not, technology will eventually conquer the world. Yes, people can control other people and control heretical thoughts, but they can’t control the development of technology. If one day humans only enjoy the results, and the process of producing the results is left to artificial intelligence to implement, then we have to say that technology dominates people.

A few years ago, “AlphaGo” (AlphaGo) defeated Li Shishi. What’s interesting is not that artificial intelligence won—it’s a matter of time. I think the most interesting thing is that the designer of “Alpha Dog” didn’t know how it was won. I play chess with a Go master, no matter how high his level is, we both use the same “Go language” to think. And what “Alpha Dog” relies on is not our way of thinking at all, but a kind of thinking that we can’t understand-if it is still called thinking.

People think about artificial intelligence from all angles, how to improve the level of artificial intelligence, how artificial intelligence will change our society, change ourselves, and so on. My own interest lies in another aspect. I am more concerned about what we already have. For example, through the understanding of artificial intelligence, a more appropriate understanding of human own intelligence. According to the prevailing view, the development of artificial intelligence allows us to see that the essence of intelligence is computing. My opinion is on the contrary. Through the development of the Go program, we can see more clearly that the essence of human intelligence is not calculation, but dialogue and mutual understanding. Chess is a kind of dialogue-Go is also called “hand talk”. In fact, all human intelligence is a kind of dialogue, even if I am thinking alone. I proved Fermat’s Last Theorem alone, and at the last moment I said, I understand. What do i understand? I saw the connection between the process and the conclusion. Therefore, I understand, and I can let others understand. However, we don’t know what connection exists between the process and the conclusion in the “Alpha Dog”. In my opinion, this is the essential difference between human intelligence and artificial intelligence.