Dr. Salam Al Rabadi
It goes without saying that artificial
intelligence and the biotechnological revolution will have very serious radical
political and ethical impacts in all economic, security, legal, cultural and
environmental sectors. However, what is striking now is the academic neglect
(to some extent) and the complete absence of political will (local or global),
capable of adopting theoretical and practical approaches on how to deal with
these fateful developments. In practice, algorithms have already begun to
be relied on in many fields to the point of questioning whether there is still
any importance to human existence, not to mention concerns about the ability of
biotechnology to manipulate human nature.
These issues inevitably raise many
strategic problematic at the political level, in addition to the ethical
question marks they raise, which are related to the future of human nature
itself. Especially with the complex challenges resulting from the overlap
between: artificial intelligence, emotional computing, and the biotech
revolution.
These problematic and question marks can be expressed by
asking the following questions:
1-
What are the ethical and political strategies that AI
algorithms and the biotech revolution are supposed to stick to? How concerned
is the possibility that the weapons of mathematics could be used to achieve
dirty political ends?
2- To what extent can
proactive laws be put in place that are capable of limiting and confronting
these repercussions? Why this global slowdown in setting strict standards for
controlling these developments? Does that future reality require the creation
of a global moral constitution along the lines of the Universal Declaration of
Human Rights?
3- Is there a moral,
political and philosophical vision at the level of international relations
capable of approaching these strategic challenges?
We must acknowledge the fact that the challenges of
artificial intelligence and the biotechnological revolution, with their
political, cultural, and security implications, are rarely studied
strategically. Unfortunately, the efforts made in this context are still very
modest and regrettable, especially at the level of philosophical and political
thought. Where, we cannot comprehend this approach that addresses these
challenges as if it were a technical issue unrelated to political standards.
Thus, a stereotypical and technocratic view alone cannot address the challenges
of artificial intelligence and the biotech revolution.
Accordingly, there is an urgent need to reconsider this
reality according to a critical approach based on an ethical, cultural,
political and security vision, which can be framed based on the following
problematics:
1-
Problematic of cyber security and space wars.
2-
Problematic of
algorithmic bias and societal security.
3-
Problematic of criteria for the concept of
algorithmic justice and cultural dilemmas.
4-
Problematic of emotional computing and the automation
of human nature.
5-
Problematic of technical solutions (modelling) for
climate change.
6-
Problematic of geological wars and future climate
engineering (climate weapons).
7-
Problematic of the ethical and political of
biotechnology (Biotechnical Revolution).
8-
Problematic of governance, accountability and control
related to technology.
9-
Problematic of the aura of objectivity that today's
culture confers on algorithms and science.
For example, it has been widely believed
that trusting Mathematically Models will remove human bias, but
in practice algorithms replace humans and practice their own biases and are
opaque about how they work, which is called "Algorithmic Bias",
to the point of increasing focus on the use of the concept of algorithmic
justice, on the basis of it being considered one of the most
fundamental issues of our time that must be given top priority, to the point of
calling for the destruction of the so-called weapons of mathematics.
It therefore appears
that technologies associated with artificial intelligence, affective computing,
and biobiology will relentlessly and fundamentally change the way politics is
thought of. International relations will face the most important
controversies regarding how technologies change the reality of politics,
society, and even human nature. So, if the contemporary political debate
related to the problematic of governance and influence revolves around the
nature of the relationship between the state, markets and civil society, but in
the future all political debates will focus on the problematic relationship
between politics and science. It is the relationship that can be
expressed through the following question:
To what extent should societies be directed and
controlled by artificial intelligence and the biotech revolution? And on what
terms?
In
this context, if the answer to every scientific question inevitably leads to
new questions, there is usually something that needs to be explained outside
the usual rules. Despite the complexities that will face the problematic of the relationship between science and politics, but the dialectic of the
impact of science on human nature will remain the most problematic issue.
Accordingly, the question may be asked:
What if normal biological human evolution was no
longer absolutely necessary?
Inevitably,
there are many question marks regarding the fears and doubts surrounding
developments of artificial intelligence and biotechnologies. The
development of robots and future nanotechnologies will result in systems that
are more accurate and complex than those in nature, which will change human
nature, in which it seems that there is no longer anything biological in it.
Among those developments are, for example:
1-
Nanobots
for medical diagnostics.
2-
Biometric
robots for emotions and behaviors.
3-
Robots
that track the movements and behavior of individuals.
4-
Biosensing
robots and intrusive computing.
5-
Molecular
robots containing deadly chemical and biological compounds.
6-
Robots
to modify DNA genes in humans and other living organisms...etc.
Accordingly,
one of the future issues that will arise in the field of humanities is the
problematic of the nature of the human relationship with artificial
intelligence and the possibility of its superiority over it. Not to
mention the many controversies between humanities, biologists and
neuroscientists about whether there is a similar method for achieving cultural
evolution through what can be called cultural inheritance between generations,
as is the case for biological evolution. This reality will lead to
several questions in international relations about technological determinism:
1-
Should
technologies be allowed to develop regardless of the potential consequences for
societies and human nature?
2-
What are the
cultural and ethical values that artificial intelligence and the biotechnical
revolution are supposed to adhere to? Who will decide that?
On the cultural front, it is clear
that technological development has allowed humans to escape from natural
stresses, as a result of transferring (or dispensing with) behaviors through
the use of artificial intelligence, the biotechnical revolution and
neuroscience. As this has increased the chances of escaping completely from
natural selection, and this reveals to us the reality of the new pattern of
human evolution, which is no longer biological. Based on this, the
question can be asked:
1-
Are there new patterns of selection since
robots and biological behaviors control the fate of humanity more than genes?
2-
How can these patterns be approached
theoretically and practically at the moral and political level?
Based on these future questions, it is
necessary to rethink all these problematics in order to find a philosophical
and political vision capable of confronting and controlling them. The future
will be under the control of some technologies and those who control them, and
their algorithms will solve vital questions of economics, politics, security,
medicine and culture. Consequently, with scientific considerations
intertwined with commercial interests, it became necessary on a political and
moral level for states to intervene. It cannot be decided by
scientific and technocratic institutions alone, but political institutions must
have the power to assess and legalize the legality and limits of
biotechnological discoveries and artificial intelligence inventions.
Accordingly, if there is a belief that the
current and future scientific development cannot be controlled, and that no
country can do so, because inventions and discoveries can be developed away
from the control of countries or in countries that do not have legislative and
cultural obstacles. But this pessimistic belief must be reconsidered, as
there are a number of unethical technologies that have been put under political
scrutiny on a global level, and the experience of trying to prevent the spread
of weapons of mass destruction or placing strict controls on human cloning
experiments may be the best proof of this.
Despite this optimism, there is a fact
that must be taken into account, which is that intellectual, philosophical and
political speculation about everything related to the problematic of the
biotechnical revolution and the development of artificial intelligence, may
be enough to question the pace of development of science. This
requires adopting a modern vision that is concerned with establishing clear and
unambiguous laws and treaties with regard to confronting these problematic,
especially at the level of international criminal law.
For example, the Statute of the
International Criminal Court must be amended to suit these risks and challenges
as a kind of proactive global security, so that the jurisdiction
of the court is expanded to include future crimes that threaten the fate of
humanity and related to the following issues:
-
The biotech revolution.
-
Climate change.
-
Artificial intelligence and
emotional computing.
It is evident by tracing the context
of the development of international relations and international criminal law at
the theoretical and practical levels, that they do not keep pace with these new
global patterns. The stage in which countries were trying to address these
patterns by creating codes of conduct is no longer appropriate and sufficient.
Moreover, the moral and philosophical essence of these problematic is more
complex than the traditional solutions, especially in terms of contemplating
the extent of their seriousness at the level of the essence of human nature
itself.
So, with the existence of loose and
vague political concepts, the need arises to adopt the principle of bearing
criminal responsibility explicitly and deterrent, by adopting a global
political and legal pattern that harnesses the power of technology to improve
human life instead of changing or weakening and dispensing with its biological
nature. There is an urgent need for a vision that emphasizes the
importance of preserving the biological nature of humans in light of the
provocative uncertainty associated with technology.
In
sum, logically it is extremely difficult and even impossible to refute a
theory simply because it is unsuitable for testing. Also, if this reasoning may
be true at the level of theories related to science and physical laws, but it
is inevitably often highly unacceptable in the field of human sciences.
Accordingly, there are real and realistic question marks and doubts about
whether the natural biological development of humans is no longer necessary at
all, as a result of the developments of artificial intelligence and the
biotechnical revolution, as it seems that nothing purely biological will remain
in human nature.
Therefore, it is necessary we have a deep
awareness of how to adopt cultural and political approaches capable of dealing
with these problematic. As the rulings in the field of political behavior and
the associated cultural and intellectual standards are often vague and relative
rather than clear and precise standards.
Thus, regardless of the problem of
cultural radicalism associated with the dialectic of science and politics,
which sees that the relationship with science is not important at the level of
how human nature is approached, the fact that the problematic of the issue of
the contradiction between the futures of artificial intelligence and the
biotechnical revolution with human nature will inevitably impose itself on the
political and ethical arena.
This intellectual and
philosophical pattern requires, at the level of international relations, to ask
the following questions:
1-
Is there an urgent political
need to know what are the natural biological conditions for human existence?
2-
Does the reality of technology
problematic require research into the nature of politics or the politics of
nature?
3-
Do we have to know the culture
and ideas of artificial intelligence and biomedicine scientists, before
studying political leaders, in order to understand the strategic reality of
global politics, international relations and the future of humanity?
