George Rebane

Thus argues secular humanist author, musician, and self-educated techie Jaron Lanier.  His cleverly titled book came out earlier this year, and I received it as a birthday present from old friends in soCal who are of a similar philosophical vein.  The book is a fascinating cobble of various articles and pieces Lanier has written over the last twenty years or so.  The jacket blurb would have you believe that it is also “controversial”, but only if enough people would read it to create controversy.

The essay itself is a rambling yet engaging collection of historical observations, experiences recounted, and musings philosophical of the current pre-Singularity years as Man collides and couples with machine.  I found it interesting because of my own work in the same vineyards, but in many places I saw different things happening for different reasons than did Lanier.

In the book he shows us the impact on society – ‘technical and cultural problems’ – that “can grow out of poorly considered digital design”, although I didn’t find cited examples compelling.  He does seem to be concerned about a genre of computer programs (machine intelligence) and the new celebration of ‘mob wisdom’ that yields various algorithmic cook-ups of what groups of people purport to say and do.  These he sees as beginning to trump “over the intelligence and judgment of individuals” in advanced societies.

Finally, he argues for the advent of a “humanistic technology” that somehow will maintain the primacy of human individualism and creativity in a world facing the onslaught of ever more intelligent machines.  Admiral Hyman Rickover, father of the nuclear navy, introduced the notion of humanistic technology in a 1964 speech at Georgetown University.  He was worried that technology might be developed for its own sake instead of for solving specific human problems.  And high thinking people have been so worried ever since.

Unfortunately science and technology do not enjoy such a directed and purposive growth.  More often than not we see human knowledge spurt in totally baffling directions, which only at a later time are tied together with other developments to yield something that is belatedly acknowledged to fill a pressing need or inspire new worlds of discovery.  But people from Rickover to Lanier have always wanted some higher wisdom – perhaps theirs? – to preside over such labors.

I was also intrigued by watching Lanier squirm in his “deeply felt defense of the individual” against encroaching technology.  In the final analysis, the secular humanist sees Man as an exquisitely evolved wet computer or gadget.  And now that dry computers are beginning to approach the complexity, processing power, and reasoning abilities of humans, people like Lanier are working up a sweat.  Deep down inside they feel that humans are somehow intrinsically different, and therefore deserve a playing field tilted in their favor.  But what’s a body to do if your precious wet computers begin to be outclassed by all those dry ones?  You suddenly find your arguments for a humanistic technology erected on a shaky scaffolding that you thought was anchored in a solid belief system.

Time to wrap this up.  Lanier’s work definitely appeals to the deep intellectual in you, and presents a smorgasbord of ideas and interpretations destined to spice up your next tailgate party conversation or job interview.  You’ll be bandying about words like ‘neoteny’ and ‘antisoftware’ before you know it.  Lanier’s a kick, have some fun, read the book.