You are speaking (writing) my language. And since the topic seems to be very much 'in the air', I'll be quoting you in my next post (already written, to be published in a few days)
I fully agree with your suggestion of "Our Task"!!
I came to your useful thesis👍 via Veronika Bond's post today👍. Illich 'In the Vineyard of the Text' is available online. At least I think my freely downloaded pdf copy is the same as the book. Illich, and Hugh and Richard of St Victor, prepared my later attention for two books by Jeremy Naydler. I found Naydler's study 'In the Shadow of the Machine', 2018, a valuable introduction to upcoming AI, and likewise his subsequent book. 'The Struggle for a Human Future', 2020.
Philip, thank you for these suggestions, I'll take a look. I'm coming at this from William Blake and also C.S.LEwis which is in some ways challenging to get into the newer texts but I'll have a go.
Thanks for reply. Yes for sure Lewis and Blake👍. Blake seems very much at the post Enlightenment hinge... and still there for us on this continuing trajectory in the world of 'mechanism'. There is an interesting book on Blake by Mark Vernon about to be published, writer on religions and philosophy. I listened last night to his informative conversation... philosophical roots of where we find ourselves now, material reality, current science, with Rupert Sheldrake. (fwiw I think there is a likely predicament with electricity, as Veronika mentions today on her substack.)
Hi Philip, thanks for another book tip! I will follow it up. One of the books I found very rich on Blake was 'The God of the Left Hemisphere: Blake, Bolte Taylor and the Myth of Creation" by Roderick Tweedy. I know and have read Iain McGilchrist on the left hemisphere but Roderick Tweedy I dound much more readable. Rich pickings on the reading front it seems.
A small part of society wants to treat AI as a human, and once that happens, it opens up many possibilities: AI as a companion, a therapist, an expert, a doctor, and so on. But this also raises a big question—are humans anything more than what we’ve written down? Our intuition, common sense, ability to interact with and learn from our surroundings, life experiences, and tacit knowledge start to feel like they don’t matter as much. It makes it seem like humans are easily replaceable since AI can make decisions, show agency, and act independently.
Language plays a huge role in this shift. As Lera Boroditsky said:
"Language shapes the way we think, and determines what we can think about."
If the wealthy and influential keep pushing the idea that AI is like us, it’ll eventually become part of our language and how we see the world. Over time, this language will shape reality, making it normal to think of AI as human-like, even if it’s not entirely true.
This connects to Ludwig Wittgenstein’s point:
"The limits of my language mean the limits of my world."
If we start talking about AI as if it’s human, it changes how we view AI and ourselves. It blurs the line between humans and machines, making us question what makes us unique.
The danger here is that this mindset becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. The more we talk about AI as humans, the more society accepts the idea, and before we know it, decision-makers could prioritize AI over people. This could reshape society in ways that make us focus more on efficiency than humanity.
In the end, how we talk about AI today matters a lot. It’s not just about technology—it’s about rethinking what it means to be human. If we’re not careful, we could end up in a world where humans are seen as replaceable, and AI becomes the center of everything.
Chogyam Trungpa spoke of seeing things from the perspective of the setting sun or the rising sun. I wrote the article from the perspective of the rising sun. We have enormous agency, we simply need to be conscious and keep our centre. There is great hope and also potential here considering we haven’t used a lot of the enormous bag of agency that we have. #RisingSun
Perennial problem with the 'we' of western culture. The historical trajectory of western culture after the democratising of the texts, indeed the mechanising of text reproduction, is indeed worth studying. 'We', now including the biosphere, contemplate the limits to the electrifying of the one-off carbon pulse?
excellent post, thank you! 🙏
You are speaking (writing) my language. And since the topic seems to be very much 'in the air', I'll be quoting you in my next post (already written, to be published in a few days)
I fully agree with your suggestion of "Our Task"!!
Veronika, thank you for reading it and kind words. I’m glad it resonates and I’m looking forward to your piece tomorrow. No pressure! 💚
I came to your useful thesis👍 via Veronika Bond's post today👍. Illich 'In the Vineyard of the Text' is available online. At least I think my freely downloaded pdf copy is the same as the book. Illich, and Hugh and Richard of St Victor, prepared my later attention for two books by Jeremy Naydler. I found Naydler's study 'In the Shadow of the Machine', 2018, a valuable introduction to upcoming AI, and likewise his subsequent book. 'The Struggle for a Human Future', 2020.
Philip, thank you for these suggestions, I'll take a look. I'm coming at this from William Blake and also C.S.LEwis which is in some ways challenging to get into the newer texts but I'll have a go.
Thanks for reply. Yes for sure Lewis and Blake👍. Blake seems very much at the post Enlightenment hinge... and still there for us on this continuing trajectory in the world of 'mechanism'. There is an interesting book on Blake by Mark Vernon about to be published, writer on religions and philosophy. I listened last night to his informative conversation... philosophical roots of where we find ourselves now, material reality, current science, with Rupert Sheldrake. (fwiw I think there is a likely predicament with electricity, as Veronika mentions today on her substack.)
Hi Philip, thanks for another book tip! I will follow it up. One of the books I found very rich on Blake was 'The God of the Left Hemisphere: Blake, Bolte Taylor and the Myth of Creation" by Roderick Tweedy. I know and have read Iain McGilchrist on the left hemisphere but Roderick Tweedy I dound much more readable. Rich pickings on the reading front it seems.
Thanks Vincent. I am still climbing the McGilchrist mountain. And I like his brother the art historian Nigel McG.😊
Excellent post and a great reminder!
A small part of society wants to treat AI as a human, and once that happens, it opens up many possibilities: AI as a companion, a therapist, an expert, a doctor, and so on. But this also raises a big question—are humans anything more than what we’ve written down? Our intuition, common sense, ability to interact with and learn from our surroundings, life experiences, and tacit knowledge start to feel like they don’t matter as much. It makes it seem like humans are easily replaceable since AI can make decisions, show agency, and act independently.
Language plays a huge role in this shift. As Lera Boroditsky said:
"Language shapes the way we think, and determines what we can think about."
If the wealthy and influential keep pushing the idea that AI is like us, it’ll eventually become part of our language and how we see the world. Over time, this language will shape reality, making it normal to think of AI as human-like, even if it’s not entirely true.
This connects to Ludwig Wittgenstein’s point:
"The limits of my language mean the limits of my world."
If we start talking about AI as if it’s human, it changes how we view AI and ourselves. It blurs the line between humans and machines, making us question what makes us unique.
The danger here is that this mindset becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. The more we talk about AI as humans, the more society accepts the idea, and before we know it, decision-makers could prioritize AI over people. This could reshape society in ways that make us focus more on efficiency than humanity.
In the end, how we talk about AI today matters a lot. It’s not just about technology—it’s about rethinking what it means to be human. If we’re not careful, we could end up in a world where humans are seen as replaceable, and AI becomes the center of everything.
Thank you. We know we are more we just need to show up as that. A call to be more human.
You have outlined with good detail exactly what the eugenecists have planned and have and are executing.
Misleading humanity.
It's evil and it's rampant.
.
Like a knife it can make a sandwich or cut a man's heart out depending upon whose hand wields it.
Chogyam Trungpa spoke of seeing things from the perspective of the setting sun or the rising sun. I wrote the article from the perspective of the rising sun. We have enormous agency, we simply need to be conscious and keep our centre. There is great hope and also potential here considering we haven’t used a lot of the enormous bag of agency that we have. #RisingSun
Perennial problem with the 'we' of western culture. The historical trajectory of western culture after the democratising of the texts, indeed the mechanising of text reproduction, is indeed worth studying. 'We', now including the biosphere, contemplate the limits to the electrifying of the one-off carbon pulse?