Abstract Rather than creating human-like intelligence in AI, the AI field is re-defining the human in mechanistic terms, causing us to overlook a crucial inverse question: in what ways are humans and societies becoming more machine-like? In this paper we discuss three examples of how humans are becoming more machine-like: (1) the replacement of human thought with computation, (2) the subjugation of art and culture to computation, and (3) the replacement of active decision-making with statistics-driven passive decision-making. We situate these examples in two contexts. Firstly, the cultural-historical context of the machinization of humanity as described by Joseph Weizenbaum and Lewis Mumford. And secondly the existential context of (not) coping with the burdens of the human condition as described by Nietzsche, Sartre, and Lacan. Traditionally, religion helped alleviate existential uncertainty by offering fixed notions of human nature and shifting responsibility for who we are to a higher power. Today, AI seems to take on a similar role by relieving us of the burden of self-determination and not knowing what it means to be human. We end this paper by arguing why trying to overcome the burdens of the human condition with AI is undesirable.
Beerends et al. (Tue,) studied this question.