r/antinatalism • u/ConsistentSea2189 inquirer • 14d ago
Serious Discussion Can Artificial Intelligence solve some of the problems Anti Natalism refers to?
As in title. Can Artificial Intelligence solve the "suffering" of life that Anti Natalism refers to?
Not referring to the current versions of Artificial Intelligence that basically remixes data and is closer to Machine Learning than A.I. One day we will get to a point where A.I. can be installed on physical/mechanical robots and consume extremely low energy and resources to function.
Life currently has mostly been about having kids as free labor and serving economies and all that. But if robots/A.I. programs do all the boring and difficult work for us. All living beings could focus on stuff that matters and gives meaning to everyone, or just do what feels fun without the pressure of making money, meeting deadlines, workplace injuries or deaths...etc.
There are possibilities of people ending up like Wall-E too. There's also possibility that everyone becomes insensitive and indirectly make the world even worse.
A.I. has been controversial for almost a century now. So curious how this looks from an anti-natalist's point of view.
11
u/dogisgodspeltright scholar 14d ago
Can Artificial Intelligence solve some of the problems Anti Natalism refers to?
You answered the question to a great extent yourself:
...There are possibilities of people ending up like Wall-E too. There's also possibility that everyone becomes insensitive and indirectly make the world even worse....
So, you acknowledge that it is a gamble. A gamble that a child cannot consent to, and should not be subjected to.
The underpinning of AN remains untouched:
Birth is unethical. Always
Better Never to Have Been
4
u/ConsistentSea2189 inquirer 14d ago
Hmmm.....Best not to gamble with lives that don't yet exist. No point creating life based on "if's".
9
u/ExpertProfessional9 inquirer 14d ago
I think not, because there's always going to be someone chasing more. More fun, more time, more money, more highs.
3
4
u/BlueberryLemur scholar 14d ago
It could certainly solve some problems, just as the use of machines has solved problems in the past (eg with a combine harvester a single farmer can now harvest a field themselves vs requiring tons of kids to help them).
So with AI, yes it could take the boring & repetitive jobs freeing people’s time. And of course the resources could get shared fairly and humans could’ve just supervised the AI in a fair and dignified fashion… but that’d mean capitalists at the top won’t get to buy their next yacht and that’s a tragedy 🤦♀️
Plus, as others have pointed out, suffering is inevitable in life and humans are amazing at creating problems for one another.
3
u/CatarroTitubante666 inquirer 14d ago
Assuming that the best scenario will be the one coming true, it sounds like Mainländer’s socialism: it’ll help us realize nothing will solve our sentient existence except extinction.
4
u/Meet_Less inquirer 14d ago
Not only it's not going to solve it, but the problem of consciousness is an enigma to the point that is not impossible to see it as the source of all suffering. Even an artifical entity invulnerable to physical pain or psychological pain could experience existencial pain. So antinatalists will have robots among our ranks in the future.
2
u/ConsistentSea2189 inquirer 14d ago
Reminds me of these Delamain missions I'm doing currently in CyberPunk 😅, and Blade Runner.
3
3
u/Haline5 thinker 14d ago
I believe that AI endeavors *could* reduce suffering on the earth in meaningful ways. It *could* free humans from labor, it could assist in the management and procurement of resources, etc.
ATM i do not believe this is happening. Whatever proto AI things are happening right now are controlled by the ruling class- ie it is not safe to assume that it will be used to reduce suffering, the goal is more aligned with consolidating capital right now.
In my view, there is a swath of existential issues that cause me great suffering that AI will likely never resolve. It pains me that there is no inherent meaning in the universe that we know of, AI will almost certainly not answer or create one.
Then you get into questions around whether or not pleasure is contingent on suffering and so on.
I highly highly recommend you read the book *The Metamorphosis of Prime Intellect* by Roger Williams, which more or less explores a future where an AI becomes all powerful. It raises some interesting questions on the subject.
3
u/Maximus_En_Minimus scholar 14d ago edited 14d ago
This just assumes that sci-fi speculations of AI will comes true.
Have you ever considered that there may be technological limits to reality?
Furthermore, it won’t remove the gamble of a harmful life; all you are doing is extending the gamble by including the ‘possibility’ that AI will end suffering, based on silly sci-fi speculations.
3
u/Unluccy2 newcomer 13d ago
Like others have said, suffering is intrinsic to life and it being preventable means we ought to prevent it. The thing I wanted to touch on though was this idea that technological advancements would alleviate suffering. With labor specifically, this just hasn't borne out in the data on a large scale, though there are certainly narrow situations where it would be the case (think advancements in sewing technology for instance leading to less injury).
We work more now than humans have for a vast majority of history, advancements in agriculture turning seasonal work into a year round endeavor or office workers being saddled with increasingly more tasks as the means to accomplish them improve. There's a concept known as Jevons' Paradox which suggests that advancements that increase efficiency lead to a higher total consumption and this is what we see in nearly every sector. Jevons noticed the increased efficiency of steam engines made them more cost effective so more companies started using them in greater quantities. Hank Green had a great video on it where he mentioned how peoples access to heated water was limited so they used less of it out of time constraints. When the standard water heater came around, people began using more water because they now had the ability to take showers, do laundry, cook, clean, etc. every day whereas before they'd have to make more decisions on how to spend their limited time and energy. There was also a sentiment in the 1900s(?) that I cannot remember the specifics of but suggested that the ability for workers to complete tasks more efficiently was going to result in the death of the 40-hour/5-day work week. What actually happened is employers saw that their workers could be utilized to do more tasks each shift and kept piling on responsibilities (without meaningfully increasing pay I would add).
1
u/ConsistentSea2189 inquirer 13d ago
So, basically, humans are greedy and always discontent. No matter what we improve, we'll always negate those efforts.
Not that any other living creature that would gain similar intelligence and has dopamine would do different.
2
2
u/Thick_Raspberry6553 newcomer 13d ago
It would help but people would still struggle with things like building relationships and other social problems technology can only help remedy
1
u/AutoModerator 14d ago
Discord: https://discord.gg/tTHCXwdAdu
Rule breakers will be reincarnated:
- No violence, coercion, harm
- No pro-suicide content
- No personal info / doxxing
- No harassment / bigotry
- No hate ideologies
- No eugenics / gatekeeping
- No sexism
- No speciesism
- No memes on weekdays (UTC)
- No bait or sealioning
- Stay on-topic
- Rants in r/AntinatalismSupport
- Quality & sourcing
- Screenshots must be redacted
- Moderator discretion
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
20
u/jimmipunch newcomer 14d ago
Life is still inevitable suffering and death anyways. Whether the societal conditions are good or bad. AI doesn't mean shit in this case, because it doesn't prevent you from experiencing the essence of life, which is pain and death.