7 minute read
“DO WE MAKE TECHNOLOGY OR DOES TECHNOLOGY MAKE US? EXPLORING TECHNOLOGICAL DETERMINISM THROUGH RAY KURZWEIL”
By Kevin Jae
ONE narrative of human history is the story of technological development, of how human beings, as a species, have conquered and tamed the natural environment through increasingly sophisticated technology. In this narrative, our current moment can be seen as a unique turning point. For example, note the language employed by Klaus Schwab, the Founder of the World Economic Forum, and his framing of our current epoque, the Fourth Industrial Revolution: “We stand on the brink of a technological revolution that will fundamentally alter the way we live, work, and relate to one another… The speed of current breakthroughs has no historical precedent. When compared with previous industrial revolutions, the Fourth is evolving at an exponential [emphasis added] rather than a linear pace.”
Are we human being stuck deep in the rapid currents of technological development, doomed to be swept away uncontrollably? What is the nature of technological development? This article will examine this question through the theory of technological development in the work of futurist Ray Kurzweil in The Age of Spiritual Machines. A critical examination of Kurzweil’s model of technological development will come with insights with which to reflect on the framing of technological development in our time. Taking from these insights, I will suggest another way of viewing technological development. The way in which we conceive of technological development is of utmost importance; this will be made apparent by way of a case study on the future of work.
Ray Kurzweil’s The Age of Spiritual Machines is a work with recognition and influence in the futures studies community—it was listed as one of the Most Significant Futures Works by the Association of Professional Futurists in 2008. In the book, Kurzweil advances a deterministic theory of technological development that inevitably leads to a certain conclusion. A brief elaboration of the theory follows; the reader may skip the next paragraph to skip ahead to the implications of Kurzweil’s theory.
In The Age of Spiritual Machines, Kurzweil’s theory of technological development is centered on the Law of Time and Chaos. The Law is built on his observation of exponential trends, some of which include the exponentially slowing pace of the universe, the exponentially quickening development of computing, and the quickening pace of evolution for lifeforms on Earth. The speed of change is described by the interval between salient events, or “events that change the nature of the process, or significantly affect the future of the process” (p. 29). So, the exponentially slowing pace of the universe does not refer to the speed at which it expands. Instead, it refers to the fact that, within the first 20 minutes, the universe passed through numerous salient events (the Planck epoch, the Quark epoch, the Hadron epoch, the Lepton epoch, and the Photon epoch), whereas now, hundreds of
NOTES:
1Schwab, K. (2016 Jan 14). The Fourth Industrial Revolution: what it means, how to respond. World Economic Forum. https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/01/the-fourthindustrial-revolution-what-it-means-and-how-to-respond/ 2Kurzweil, R. (1999). The Age of Spiritual Machines: When Computers Exceed Human Intelligence. Penguin. 3Association of Professional Futurists. (n.d.). Past Winners. https://www.apf.org/page/ PastWinners 4Wikipedia (n.d.). Timeline of the early universe. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_ the_early_universe 5Wikimedia Commons. (n.d.). File:PPTCountdowntoSingularityLog.jpg. https://commons. wikimedia.org/wiki/File:PPTCountdowntoSingularityLog.jpg 6Manyika, J., & Sneader, K. (2018). AI, automation, and the future of work: Ten things to solve for. McKinsey Global Institute. https://www.mckinsey.com/featured-insights/futureof-work/ai-automation-and-the-future-of-work-ten-things-to-solve-for#
Figure 1. Countdown to Singularity (Logarithmic Plot)
millions of years pass without a salient event occurring. He connects these exponential trends together to deduce his Law of Time and Chaos, where “in a process, the time interval between salient events… expands or contracts along with the amount of chaos” (p. 29). Returning to the example of the universe, there is an increasing amount of chaos due to entropy, expanding the time interval between salient events. The inverse law is the Law of Accelerating Returns, where “as order exponentially increases, time exponentially speeds up (that is, the time interval between salient events grows shorter as time passes)” (p. 30). Evolution is a particularly important exponential trend for Kurzweil’s narrative. An evolutionary process continually pursues complexity by creating a greater order, and for Kurzweil, technology is another mode of evolution. Technology also builds on order to develop exponentially and, as per the Law of Accelerating Returns, time speeds up (i.e. salient technological developments occur at shorter time intervals).
The implications of Kurzweil’s deterministic theory of technological development can be seen in Figure 1. There is no human agency in Kurzweil’s theory. Just as evolution follows a non-human logic, technological development is driven by an internal logic that is beyond human control. Technological development, for Kurzweil, seems to be a teleological history—it leads inevitably to the Technological Singularity. It follows that each technological advancement on the road to Technological Singularity is also pre-determined; new, salient technologies are stepping stones for the next stage of evolution. As Figure 1 shows, the evolution to life was destined to lead to homo sapiens sapiens and homo sapiens sapiens was destined to be swept up by the current of technological evolution that will eventually subsume him in the Technological Singularity. In this narrative of the world, another conclusion follows as a result: technology is the Great Cause and human actions and behaviours are the effect; technology determines human actions and behaviours, leaving no room for human agency. Human beings do not create a future; the future is determined by the inevitable, accelerating progress of technology that ends in Singularity.
It would be intellectually dishonest to propose this reading of Kurzweil without a note of reflection. Kurzweil never explicitly declared allegiance to this “hard” technologically deterministic viewpoint. Instead, I have created a caricature of Kurzweil’s perspective to illuminate certain absurdities. It is still true, after all, that Kurzweil describes his theory of technological determinism using terms like the “Law” of Time and Chaos and the “Law” of Accelerating Returns—the term Law seems to suggest something immutable and pre-eternal, such as the Laws of Physics: Kurzweil’s Laws seem to suggest that they are outside of human control. However, caricatures and absurdities can be enormously productive. With the previous discussion in mind, we can apply the insights of this discussion to the discourse around the future of work.
“Automation will displace some workers. We have found that around 15 percent of the global workforce, or about 400 million workers, could be displaced by automation in the period 2016–2030. This reflects our midpoint scenario in projecting the pace and scope of adoption. Under the fastest scenario we have modeled, that
figure rises to 30 percent, or 800 million workers.”
The discourse on the future of work is often framed in the manner of the quotation above. Firstly, technological progression is unavoidable; secondly, technological progression will inevitably automate a large number of workers; ergo, it is necessary for workers to reskill and upskill and adapt to the changing technological landscape. This narrative resembles Kurzweil’s theory of technological development. There is no discussion about the role of human agency in the creation of technologies. Technological development and the type of technologies that will be developed are a given.
Once we recognize the human factor in technological development and recognize that human beings have agency to create the technological landscapes that they desire, then we can have new discussions about the future of work. For example, instead of replacing workers wholesale, what if we could develop technology that can replace certain aspects of work, especially the dirty, dangerous, and demeaning aspects of work? There could be selective automation instead of the wholesale automation of jobs. At the risk of sounding like a Luddite, human beings could also choose to strategically halt the development of certain technologies that come with great risks. Exponential technological development, an uncontrollable whirlwind that threatens to blow us away, is not determined. Instead of having our techno-scapes pre-constructed for us, we should recognize that we have agency to create technologies that suit our preferred collective futures. Automation will displace some workers. We have found that around 15 percent of the global workforce, or about 400 million workers, could be displaced by automation in the period 2016–2030. This reflects our midpoint scenario in projecting the pace and scope of adoption. Under the fastest scenario we have modeled, that figure rises to 30 percent, or 800 million workers. 6 ”
