Intelligence: artificial or mechanical, that is the question

In a previous article I began to address the terminological issue linked to the use of the expression "artificial intelligence" (AI), which leads us to attribute more to the digital tools based on it than they are capable of accomplishing.

The scenario is not easy to understand well, especially for non-experts, since the words that make up this term do not help common understanding. In fact, in the expression "artificial intelligence" the adjective "artificial" gives the noun "intelligence" only an ontological qualification, that is, it indicates the constitutive nature of the entity but does not describe its functions. What these functions are is instead communicated by the noun itself. To clarify through a more common example, when we talk about "artificial heart" it is clear to everyone that it is an object made of a substance different from that of that organ that everyone carries in their chest (it is artificial) but carries out its own functions. functions (it's a heart).

For this reason, the expression "artificial intelligence" correctly expresses the fact that it is something made up of a different material from that on which human intelligence is based, but it completely deceives common sense into thinking that real intelligence human it is. Of course, we also indicate as intelligent some behaviors exhibited by dogs or cats or horses or monkeys. However, when we say that an animal is intelligent we do so exactly because, on one or more occasions, it has behaved "as if" it had been a person, but the vividly perceptible immediacy of its non-human nature prevents us from attributing more to it. than there is in the metaphorical use of the term. Given our addiction to digital interactions, when we instead receive a result produced by an AI tool, since its physical nature made of electronic circuits is hidden, we tend to see – due to this evocative but imprecise expression – more than what there is, neglecting that essential aspect of "as if".

We should instead call AI “mechanical intelligence,” since “mechanical” is an adjective that describes how a machine works or behaves. Consider, for example, the use of the expression “mechanical behavior” as opposed to “natural behavior”. The use of the adjective "mechanical" would therefore have the advantage of drawing attention both to the fact that the construction of new representations takes place on an exclusively logical-rational level and to the way in which this processing is carried out. That is, regardless of any physical or emotional consideration and, therefore, in a way alien to our nature. Which does not mean that it is useless, far from it, but that it is something very different from what we normally call "intelligence". In fact, it lacks many dimensions that give meaning to the term intelligence used for people, from the bodily one, through which we experience and know the physical world around us and which constitutes the common substrate of our interactions with others, to the emotional one, which it allows us to have stable, authentic and profound relationships with our fellow men, to the artistic one, with which we can express our aesthetic sense in an extremely meaningful way, just to remember the most important ones.

Paraphrasing a saying about computer intelligence attributed by this site to Edsger Dijkstra, one of the great fathers of computer science, saying that a computer system is an "artificial intelligence" is like saying that a submarine is an "artificial fish". It seems clear to me that it is more precise to define the submarine as a "mechanical fish".

The problem lies in the word "intelligence": when we use it we inevitably bring with us all the dimensions which, in the human person, are inextricably associated with it and dependent on its being inextricably embodied in a specific physical body. Instead, that of cognitive machines is a totally "disembodied" intelligence , therefore devoid of all those components that give meaning to our destiny as human beings and our role in society.

Pragmatically, I know very well that it will be difficult to undermine the use of AI, which has been widespread for 70 years and which has recently exploded, becoming part of common discourse. However, it should be remembered that in the early days of this discipline, especially in the academic world, the expression machine intelligence was very widespread, which certainly serves the purpose better of making people understand that we are talking about a different type of intelligence. Among other things, it was the one used by Alan Turing, the English computer scientist who invented the theoretical model of a computer which is still today the reference for all scholars in the sector and who opened the research area dedicated to the understanding of what the intelligence of a computer can be.

Using this expression highlights well that a mechanical intelligence decides in a purely rational way, regardless of the nature of people and human relationships, and can help ordinary people to understand it better. I talked about it, together with more general reflections on the role of information systems in society in episodes 19 and 20 of the podcast "Onlife: psychology of daily life with the Internet",

Talking about mechanical intelligence would also be useful to trace it back to its role as a powerful amplifier of our logical reasoning abilities, just as industrial machines enhance our physical abilities. It could be better perceived, for example, that the idea of ​​delegating decision-making processes hitherto carried out by people to cognitive machines is not a very democratic idea. Those who believe that governing human society through mechanical intelligence leads to better results for all have not understood that the so-called "common good" can only emerge from a democratic debate. Or, he knows it very well, and is precisely interested in emptying democracy of meaning. Considering that the predominant players in the digital sector are multinationals with budgets larger than those of many states, the idea that they want to increase their sphere of influence in this way is not entirely far-fetched.

Using words appropriately is a necessary condition for having a constructive dialogue.

(Interested readers will be able to dialogue with the author, starting from the third day following publication, on this interdisciplinary blog .)

---

This is a machine translation from Italian language of a post published on Start Magazine at the URL https://www.startmag.it/innovazione/intelligenza-artificiale-o-meccanica-questo-e-il-problema/ on Sat, 24 Feb 2024 08:52:51 +0000.