With the amount of data we give out about ourselves, it is very likely that Big Tech is capable of measuring our individual intelligence. What does the near future present us in terms of Intelligence
Thanks again Sam! A very timely & important article. Yet, I see a few deeply embedded problems, down in the paradigm layer. For example, I think it's not very effective to stick with such a limited basic definition of intelligence.
Consider this, if intelligence is only a capacity for understanding our local habitat (or the cosmos) and adaptability, we're doomed. For, without talent, imagination, creativity and the skills required to survive or thrive, understanding and adaptation are worse than useless. That is so because, without great understanding of ourselves, our own nature, our minds, abilities, ways, habits, tendencies, relationships and our community, we can never progress beyond being an exploitable socioeconomic consumer droid.
Of course, I'm not the first person to realize that, nor were Dr. Timothy Leary, Mohammad, Lao-Tzi, Confucius, Jesus and Buddha. Hence, in the late '80s I realized that stupidity is not the opposite of intelligence, its the opposite of wisdom. Only the most intelligent person can be the stupidest, making the biggest mistakes when they should have known better.
Tao-te Ching is ripe with many wise admonitions against being a very clever or well-educated fool.
We've all known or heard stories about absent-minded geniuses or folks with high IQ scores but little or no common sense & practical skill. Then there's also the mostly forgotten findings on the 9 different types of basic human intelligence & natural talents. Sam, neither the standard IQ tests nor the other ways of analyzing intelligence you mentioned account for those 9 basic kinds of innate personal intelligence.
For me, the most troubling issues are 1) the belief that average or even very clever programmers/system developers could or would develop a for-profit commercially sponsored AI-IQ-Analyst surveillance system may do some kind of good and 2) that "we" means all human beings and 3) that most of us are NOT getting less intelligent. Exemplary proofs of those 3 problems can be found everywhere now, online & elsewhere.
For example, I see the the lack of a bioethical AI-Advisor system (with a database of all human wisdom & ethics) as existential proof that Issue 1 exists because very clever people and big corporations lack a) good human values, b) ethics, c) morals, d) wisdom and e) enough intelligence to foresee & fear the consequences of their very high level of stupidity. We should be praying that a bioethical AI-Advisor system is developed & deployed globally ASAP, before many more Fukushima/Chernoble type disasters start occurring.
The trouble with Issue 2 is that too many of us think we are all highly intelligent animals, while that's obviously not the case. Most current uses of AI enhance only corporate profitability, not survivability of the biosphere now turning ever-more deadly and dangerous, thanks to most of us. Cognitive science studies and empirical observation of many different people reveals that humans display a broad spectrum of differing levels of intelligence & wisdom.
For example, folks born with Downs' syndrome & other cerebral disabilities are human, yet without special care their ability to understand their world, to adapt, survive and thrive on their own is usually nonexistent or minimal. Then we have the Hitlers and Trumps and even smarter ecocidal maniacs near the other end of the IQ spectrum.
According to Sam Clemens AKA Mark Twain, we seem to have a 4-level spectrum, with negative & positive alpha percentiles (5%ers) at both ends of our IQ+EQ+SQ* spectrum. Sadly, the best positive alpha folk are usually ignored or given lip service, until the exploitation & abuses of the negative 5%ers is so awful & the consequences so catastrophic even the 10%er supporters & protectors (goon squads) and the average folk filling 85% of the spectrum have had enough. Then the 95% will respect and follow the positive alpha 5%ers, for awhile. Then, historically, the new civilization game starts declining again, almost immediately, enabling the negative 5%ers to rule the roost again.
However, this time the decline & fall of 'modern' kleptocratic civilization may bring about 98% of all species down with it, with us, ecocidal humanity. That brings us to my Issue 3:
Between the extremes, in advanced Western nations, the average IQ level has dropped by about 14 points so far. That could be because of the ever more pervasive use of 'smart' phones & gadgets, commercial propaganda, deliberate dyseducation, unrewarding jobs, welfare state politics, severe dysequity & inequality, demoralization and the decline of ethical training in most 'Western' homes.
So, if my analysis of those 3 big issues is valid, our future problems will not be caused by any use of AI. Our worst possible future could be caused by those of us who choose an ecocidal dystopia--for-profit or by default--because they don't care about ethics or about creating an ecotopian future for all generations.
Finally, caring about intelligence levels, concerns about AI surveillance & profiling for profit seem far less important than caring about generating more compassionate wisdom, globally. Like Gary Kasparov, I know that AI can help us with that project, but only if enough of us prefer healthy wisdom & compassion more than oblivious greed, ruinous consumption and anti-bioethical cleverness.
I look forward to your response! Thanks ~ M
For more on AR (actual reality) intelligence, use following links:
* IQ+EQ+SQ = IQ tests for Euro-American style cleverness. EQ is a fuzzy measure of emotional maturity & relational resilience. SQ = Would be a measure of social skills, status, likability, etc. Yet, there could be a measure of talent & personal cultural skills. It also seems high time we have a measure of ecological intelligence (EiQ). So, without factoring a person's EiQ & their unique mix of our 9 kinds of natural intelligence, I see no way to get a truly holistic measure of the whole of a human being's intelligence.
I have no words. This is quite simply a brilliant response!
My initial focus on the standard measurement of IQ happened to be that I felt it had far more research done on it, and as such, would be far more easily developed into more sophisticated means of measurement like those you mentioned. But as you said. There is no way we could find a truly holistic measure of intelligence, or at least ever be cognizant of such a measure. Simply a phenomenal response!
Thanks again Sam! A very timely & important article. Yet, I see a few deeply embedded problems, down in the paradigm layer. For example, I think it's not very effective to stick with such a limited basic definition of intelligence.
Consider this, if intelligence is only a capacity for understanding our local habitat (or the cosmos) and adaptability, we're doomed. For, without talent, imagination, creativity and the skills required to survive or thrive, understanding and adaptation are worse than useless. That is so because, without great understanding of ourselves, our own nature, our minds, abilities, ways, habits, tendencies, relationships and our community, we can never progress beyond being an exploitable socioeconomic consumer droid.
Of course, I'm not the first person to realize that, nor were Dr. Timothy Leary, Mohammad, Lao-Tzi, Confucius, Jesus and Buddha. Hence, in the late '80s I realized that stupidity is not the opposite of intelligence, its the opposite of wisdom. Only the most intelligent person can be the stupidest, making the biggest mistakes when they should have known better.
Tao-te Ching is ripe with many wise admonitions against being a very clever or well-educated fool.
We've all known or heard stories about absent-minded geniuses or folks with high IQ scores but little or no common sense & practical skill. Then there's also the mostly forgotten findings on the 9 different types of basic human intelligence & natural talents. Sam, neither the standard IQ tests nor the other ways of analyzing intelligence you mentioned account for those 9 basic kinds of innate personal intelligence.
For me, the most troubling issues are 1) the belief that average or even very clever programmers/system developers could or would develop a for-profit commercially sponsored AI-IQ-Analyst surveillance system may do some kind of good and 2) that "we" means all human beings and 3) that most of us are NOT getting less intelligent. Exemplary proofs of those 3 problems can be found everywhere now, online & elsewhere.
For example, I see the the lack of a bioethical AI-Advisor system (with a database of all human wisdom & ethics) as existential proof that Issue 1 exists because very clever people and big corporations lack a) good human values, b) ethics, c) morals, d) wisdom and e) enough intelligence to foresee & fear the consequences of their very high level of stupidity. We should be praying that a bioethical AI-Advisor system is developed & deployed globally ASAP, before many more Fukushima/Chernoble type disasters start occurring.
The trouble with Issue 2 is that too many of us think we are all highly intelligent animals, while that's obviously not the case. Most current uses of AI enhance only corporate profitability, not survivability of the biosphere now turning ever-more deadly and dangerous, thanks to most of us. Cognitive science studies and empirical observation of many different people reveals that humans display a broad spectrum of differing levels of intelligence & wisdom.
For example, folks born with Downs' syndrome & other cerebral disabilities are human, yet without special care their ability to understand their world, to adapt, survive and thrive on their own is usually nonexistent or minimal. Then we have the Hitlers and Trumps and even smarter ecocidal maniacs near the other end of the IQ spectrum.
According to Sam Clemens AKA Mark Twain, we seem to have a 4-level spectrum, with negative & positive alpha percentiles (5%ers) at both ends of our IQ+EQ+SQ* spectrum. Sadly, the best positive alpha folk are usually ignored or given lip service, until the exploitation & abuses of the negative 5%ers is so awful & the consequences so catastrophic even the 10%er supporters & protectors (goon squads) and the average folk filling 85% of the spectrum have had enough. Then the 95% will respect and follow the positive alpha 5%ers, for awhile. Then, historically, the new civilization game starts declining again, almost immediately, enabling the negative 5%ers to rule the roost again.
However, this time the decline & fall of 'modern' kleptocratic civilization may bring about 98% of all species down with it, with us, ecocidal humanity. That brings us to my Issue 3:
Between the extremes, in advanced Western nations, the average IQ level has dropped by about 14 points so far. That could be because of the ever more pervasive use of 'smart' phones & gadgets, commercial propaganda, deliberate dyseducation, unrewarding jobs, welfare state politics, severe dysequity & inequality, demoralization and the decline of ethical training in most 'Western' homes.
So, if my analysis of those 3 big issues is valid, our future problems will not be caused by any use of AI. Our worst possible future could be caused by those of us who choose an ecocidal dystopia--for-profit or by default--because they don't care about ethics or about creating an ecotopian future for all generations.
Finally, caring about intelligence levels, concerns about AI surveillance & profiling for profit seem far less important than caring about generating more compassionate wisdom, globally. Like Gary Kasparov, I know that AI can help us with that project, but only if enough of us prefer healthy wisdom & compassion more than oblivious greed, ruinous consumption and anti-bioethical cleverness.
I look forward to your response! Thanks ~ M
For more on AR (actual reality) intelligence, use following links:
> https://blog.adioma.com/9-types-of-intelligence-infographic/
> https://slate.com/technology/2018/09/iq-scores-going-down-research-flynn-effect.html
* IQ+EQ+SQ = IQ tests for Euro-American style cleverness. EQ is a fuzzy measure of emotional maturity & relational resilience. SQ = Would be a measure of social skills, status, likability, etc. Yet, there could be a measure of talent & personal cultural skills. It also seems high time we have a measure of ecological intelligence (EiQ). So, without factoring a person's EiQ & their unique mix of our 9 kinds of natural intelligence, I see no way to get a truly holistic measure of the whole of a human being's intelligence.
For more on ecotopian alternatives, go to https://www.MichaelLucasMonterey.com/
I have no words. This is quite simply a brilliant response!
My initial focus on the standard measurement of IQ happened to be that I felt it had far more research done on it, and as such, would be far more easily developed into more sophisticated means of measurement like those you mentioned. But as you said. There is no way we could find a truly holistic measure of intelligence, or at least ever be cognizant of such a measure. Simply a phenomenal response!
Hi! Glad you liked it! Thanks for the note. Cheers ~