My 2023 has not started in the best way. After contracting the flu, the fever kept me in bed for almost ten days. Once I recovered, my mind was still foggy and, as if that weren't enough, dozens of messages on my phone were warning me of the imminent end of the world. The tone was more or less the following:

A new generation of AIs is taking over the internet, and all the professionals who make ends meet thanks to their creativity are going to lose their jobs soon.

I have to admit that as a scholar specialised in ancient mythologies with a huge passion for sci-fi literature - which, after all, is a sort of contemporary mythology - I found this scenario more intriguing than frightening.

One might think that mythology and technology are two opposite things and that the development of AIs has nothing to do with the study of the stories human beings invented through time. But, in reality, it does not work this way.

If you want a striking example, try to think how much the counterculture developed in the 70s affected the rise of tech culture. Even more specifically, let’s consider how the spiritual concept of the Age of Aquarius, typical of New Age movements, shaped our perception of the internet as a free space of connection and shared knowledge for the betterment of all mankind. In sum, myths are everywhere: they can affect the way we think about things and, at the same time, they can reveal interesting features about the reality that surrounds us.

So, let’s take a closer look at two of the most common mythological narratives concerning the latest generation of Artificial Intelligences.

Artificial Intelligences are sentient

The idea of a human being creating something that is capable of thinking and even having feelings is as old as human history itself. The ancient Egyptian believed that their sculptures could enclose a sentient - if not even divine - essence. If we move through space and time, Frankenstein by Mary Shelly is just another version of this kind of idea, but more focused on its obscure sides.

As for the current achievements of science we have to keep our feet on the ground. First of all, it is necessary to make a distinction between an AGI, which means “Artificial Generic Intelligence” and an AGSI, an “Artificial Generic Super Intelligence”. The latter is the hypothesis of a machine capable of making choices and acting on its own “will”, without having any input or order submitted by a human being. As a matter of a fact, we are still a long way from inventing this kind of thing: not only our technology is still not advanced enough, but most scholars agree that there would be some ethical issues if not even real security risks for the safety of humanity. So, we can say that, at least for now, the AGSI is more a mythological creature than a reality.

The latest generation of Ais clearly belongs to the AGI category, citing the philosopher Boris Rähme:

They are able to respond to stimuli, learn from their environments, perform tasks, produce outputs, and achieve goals in rational ways (where the paradigm of rationality is instrumental rationality: figuring out and implementing the best means to a given end in a given context).

That, of course, does not mean that an AGI is not capable of outdoing human professionals, for example, by generating good quality images (like the ones used in the present post) with an impressive non-human speed…

Artificial Intelligences are oracles

The association between oracles and AIs probably arose from the fact that you have to ask a question or deliver a command in order to get an outcome, but once you get the result you are unaware of the steps that led up to it: it is like it just came out of nowhere because of divine intervention. Sometimes, you have even to spend time interpreting these enigmatic answers as is currently happening in several branches of the hard sciences.

The analogies between an AI and an oracle are therefore evident. Let’s think, for example, of the ancient Oracle of Delphi and the cryptic prophecies delivered by the Pythia. Yet, it is important to highlight that the modern common idea of what an oracle is does not do justice to what oracles really were in ancient times. They were often used to reinforce certain power dynamics and even what today we could call social inequalities. Moreover if you look at Greek myths you might have the impression that receiving a prophecy from an oracle was essentially useless: indeed, no hero manages to change his own destiny.

A mildly optimistic wrap up

I do not think that creative jobs are going to disappear and that brand-new generations of AIs will take the place of human creativity. Of course, it is naïve to believe that the advent of these tools will not have, at least in the short term, a disruptive effect on the number of job positions currently available. In sum, the time has come to improve our skills and learn how to integrate the use of AI in our work. A huge cha(lle)nge is coming.

It is a different story when it comes to other human skills, above all the ones pertaining to the distinction between what is true and what is false, such as scientific research or journalism. As mentioned above, within hard sciences, AIs are already collaborating with human beings in order to obtain valid outcomes. And, indeed, it is reasonable to posit that something similar will happen in the future of the Humanities.

So, what will be the role of human beings in the age of artificial intelligence? The algorithms of an AI require a human direction to work properly: a well elaborate command can indeed provide a better outcome. The ability to formulate useful questions to investigate a topic is therefore an essential requisite to manage AIs within scientific research, and, at the time of writing, this is still a unique prerogative of human beings.
After all, the anthropologist Levi Strauss had already come to this conclusion several years ago:

The scientist is not a person who gives the right answers, he's one who asks the right questions

The actual problem therefore is whether human critical thinking and grounded critical discourses will be valued enough in the societies of the foreseeable future, or if they will be completely replaced by mere persuasive skills. In the last case, scientific research but also other sectors, such as investigative journalism, will become just a mere form of persuasive copywriting, where the concept of truthfulness will be exclusively endorsed by the authority of a too restricted number of oracles.