Shantanu Thakur (thakur.santanu@gmail.com)
In the mid-sixties, we had this debate in school: Is Science a Menace? That was probably the first time we youngsters faced the question. We had, till then, taken the benefits of science for granted. It could also have a flipside to it; it dawned on us during the preparatory sessions where our teachers guided us to the pros and cons of development.
The debate still rages. As concern for ecology, environment, climate change, etc. grows more prominent, the question has also acquired added dimensions. In that school debate, a participant had quipped that it was the man behind the machine and not the machine that was responsible for what it did. This does perhaps sound like a hackneyed cliché now, but doesn’t it contain something fundamental? Worries over the dark, unknown abysses into which uncontrolled science could take mankind have always existed. Not just Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein; several later-day works in science fiction have imagined unforeseen scenarios of horror.
When we first got to hear of robots, it seemed like the frontiers of a brave new world were opening up. Gradually, despite the benefits robots can bring us, apprehensions about possible misuse raised their heads. Drones are probably a kind of advanced robots. They can add to benevolent services of various kinds, but fears of an unbelievable adverse fallout have also already surfaced. The notion that the intentions of the man behind the machine matter seriously refuses to disappear.
On top of everything, there’s now the looming load of artificial intelligence. Because of the proliferation of instant news over numerous modes of social media, one now gets to hear about the goings-on in the world of science without delay. So many contradictory opinions on AI have already hit the common man that he is simply bewildered by what might be happening and happening so fast for him to comprehend! The online digital world is now available to most people all over the world; many of us who have become addicted to these wavelengths do not necessarily understand how all this works or how privacy could be compromised without our will or consent. Yet, AI services now come built-in in almost all digital devices. Some of us have started using it already as if playing with a toy. There’s a tempting AI ad winking on your TV screens right now.
ChatGPT and DeepSeek have already entered the lives of many of us without our knowledge. An average commoner, habituated to using the latest technology, is hardly aware of what things like large language models (LLMs) or the many other jargon associated with AI might mean, but the fact remains that the easy availability at their fingertips renders them fully vulnerable to all the risks. While some all-powerful governments are advising caution to their staff, the risk and vulnerability scenario has not been adequately explained to the average user. This is of serious concern. It could be like letting innocent children play with fire. It may be dangerous to allow trillionaire tech houses to exploit huge commercial profits from common users of services (which are available even without AI) before fully understanding the implications of a technology that stands poised to change everything hitherto known.
True, the advances of science cannot be stopped; it may not even be at all advisable to do so. Just because there are probable risks, one doesn’t refrain from the yearning to see what is beyond. But civilisations down the ages have questioned the need to draw a line where to stop. The debate over a spiritual connection for all mankind has not ended yet. There are areas of human need and for the human mind where science may not always have a useful role to play.
They say AI can already do any creative activity done by man. Like writing an article, composing a research paper, or even turning out a poem! All this might lead to a vegetating of the human individual’s’s creative mind. Drawing from a stupendously huge databank of all creativity in all works of art, could AI churn out a Van Gaugh, a Milton, a Kalidasa, a Shakespeare, a Beethoven or a Mozart? If yes, could it also give the same original satisfaction that a work of art by man gives? Does this not amount to plagiarism, which could be caught out? Does it herald a robotic turn to the human mind? The artificial could also eclipse the original. It has been possible to scale the high and deep recesses of a universal experience of the bigger picture of life with the power of the human mind by itself. Over-dependence on artificial intelligence might stymie all that. It also brings up a rather uncomfortable question. Is intelligence, not a natural faculty in all living beings (with degrees varying)? Can it ever be seen as artificial? Can AI, for example, learn to pray on behalf of mankind? Can it pay for itself if it’s a conscious entity? Could it, over time, develop human instincts such as love, affection, a sense of justice, fairness, and right and wrong?! Could it give solace in times of distress? Could it turn human intelligence redundant? These unlikely, but scary thoughts nevertheless.
To an average human being, these questions have no easy, immediate answers right now. AI may turn out to be a benefit like humanity has never seen before; it could also, in its wake, bring in forces detrimental and beyond our control. The desire for more knowledge has been a constant human endeavour. In most cases, this has led to more positivity and less negativity. But, some say it could be a headlong rush to chaos. Dr. Faustus had willingly sold his soul to the devil Mephistopheles to acquire the powers of God. What he ended up with is well known. However, mankind must have learnt from history. If AI today is in a twilight zone, we would like to keep our fingers crossed.