Intelligent
Tools: The Cornerstone of a New Civilization
Second Edition
Sam Ghandchi
Iranscope@hotmail.com
Written: November 15, 2004
Republished: August 9, 2007
Table of Contents
0. Preface 2004
1. Tools and Tool-Making in History
2. Intelligent Tools Of The Past
3. Artificial Intelligence: A New Alternative
4. Future Prospects
"What
if some visitor from Mars had come a billion years ago to judge
the fate of earthly life watching clumps of cells that hadn't
even learned to crawl? In the same way, we cannot grasp the range
of what machines may do in the future from seeing what's on view
right now."
The Society of Mind, Marvin Minsky, Page 30
Preface (2004)
I published
the original version of this paper entitled "Intelligent
Tools: The Cornerstone of a New Civilization", in AI Magazine,
the scientific journal of the American Association for Artificial
Intelligence (AAAI), in its Fall 1985 issue. The Persian/Farsi
translation was published in January 1998 in the first issue of AyandehNegar
magazine.
If I was writing
this paper today, I would write most of it the same way I had
written at that time, except for parts of the last section, where
I have discussed robots as a new species, which I would expand
as I have done in my 2003 article entitled Impact
of Intelligent Tools on Human Life. I would emphasize the
fact that emergence of a new species does not mean immobility
and stagnancy of human evolution and development. Of course, the
subject of this paper is discussion of intelligent tools as far
as they function as *tools*.
This paper
has since been noted in various places including a bibliography
by Claudio Gutiérrez and a book by Kurt
von Meier.
When I published
this article, I received a letter from Daniel Bell, who wrote
to me that he found my anthropological material of interest, but
did not agree to the usage of the term "intelligence"
and preferred the term "inference", which many European
writers use for the noted functions in these tools. He noted that
these tools have some rules of inference built into their programs,
which let them perform some mental functions, but in and of themselves
do not possess "intelligence".
Daniel Bell's
comment was to emphasize how the word "intelligence",
particularly in relation to judgment, bedevils us. I agree with
his comments, and I would consider my usage of the term "intelligent"
for tools, to be appropriate only in the narrow sense of the term
"intelligence", as defined in this paper for vision
(and other sense perceptions), natural language learning, or heuristics
of expertise.
Ironically,
ever since I published this paper, my interest shifted and I neither
pursued the anthropological thesis presented in this paper, nor
did I pursue the issues of Philosophy of Mind, as related to the
field of Artificial Intelligence.
My anthropological
thesis emphasizing the concept of technological basis of treating
a sentient being as a tool, pointed to, among other things, as
to why the technological basis of slavery not-having-been-eliminated,
made it possible for the socially outmoded slavery, to be revived
in the US, even centuries after slavery had been eliminated as
a social, political, economic, and cultural system.
Also as far
as issues of the Philosophy of Mind are concerned, on the other
side of the spectrum from Daniel Bell's emphasis, in the recent
years, Marvin Minsky, in his *Society of Mind*, has explored other
explanations of intelligence. Since the time I wrote this paper,
I have not followed up on the issues which relate to the topics
in Philosophy of Mind, especially as related to Artificial Intelligence.
Some authors
such as Aaron Sloman, have been publishing extensive excellent
research on the subject in the last few years, where he has discussed
the Kantian theory of viewing human senses as theory-impregnated.
Also Ray
Kurzweil, in the last 20 years has proposed a vast body of
new works on this subject.
For example,
Ray Kurzweil in his new
research states that immortality will be accessible to humans
within the next 20
years, and that human beings after millennia of fear of death,
with the progress of nanotechnology, will become immortal. Such
an upheaval will give rise to population growth, as we have witnessed
the growth of senior citizen population in the developed world
in the recent decades.
On the opposite
direction, in my opinion, reduction of use of humans as intelligent
tools, will cause a reduction in the speed of human reproduction
growth, the same way that the replacement of horses by cars as
the tools of transportation, reduced the speed of population growth
of horses in the last half century. Of course my discussion
here is about humans as *tools*, and other dimensions of humans
to produce knowledge and art, and other realms of human life,
are not intended.
I need to note that I have not discussed the above topics in this
paper, and my 2003 article entitled Impact
of Intelligent Tools on Human Life briefly touches on the
topic of intelligent tools as a new species, and also in my paper
entitled Is Nanotechnology
Real?, I have discussed the developments of nanotechnology.
And although
I have noted that social justice will be the central issue of
the new civilization, I have basically iscussed the issue in my
essay entitled Social Justice
and the Computer Revolution and more extensively in my 1989
paper A Theory of Uniqueness
Value and further discussed it recently in Wealth
and Justice in Future Iran.
I hope the
reader finds this paper something worthwhile to raise interesting
questions.
* * *
I am indebted
to the many individuals whose fruitful criticisms improved my
work, especially William
Clancey (a pioneering scientist in the field of Artificial
Intelligence (AI)), whose reflections on an earlier draft spurred
me to clarify some elusive passages; and Robert Engelmore (AI
scientist and the editor-in-chief of AI Magazine), whose editorial
comments were also cogent and well-founded. Nonetheless, I am
solely responsible for this final manuscript. I acknowledge the
controversial nature of my article and hope it kindles further
discussion and debate from the readers.
* * *
Abstract
The following
article briefly describes the developments of tools and knowledge
in human history and states that these two phenomena co-exist
only in intelligent tools. It focuses on the productive merits
of the past intelligent tools, and discusses the social and biological
demerits related to their essence (animal or human). Moreover,
since human beings were unable to produce an intelligent tool
capable of outperforming human beings as tools, the technological
basis of slavery continued to persist throughout history. The
article then examines the current achievements of computer technology
in producing intelligent tools. It argues that the *production*
of intelligent tools makes it possible to bypass the social and
natural *limitations* of all past intelligent tools. Once these
tools *outperform* human beings as intelligent tools, humans will
no longer be indispensable as production tools. Consequently,
the inception of these new tools eradicates the *technological*
basis of the subjugation of humans by humans. This eradication
may start a new civilization by effecting higher human intelligence,
more economic wealth and greater socio-political freedom in human's
future society.
* * *
Tools
and Tool-Making in History
Although anthropologists
have different appraisals of the role of tools in the evolution
of primates, they are unanimous in recognizing tool-making as
the most important differentiation of our ancestors from other
primates. Making tools enabled us to pursue our intentions with
means *separate* from our bodies. Tools, in contrast to our limbs,
could develop apart from the life and death of every individual
member of our species, thus handing down the fruits of past productive
activities to new generations.
Other animals
occasionally use natural objects as tools, but their tools do
not develop very far beyond the form or state of their natural
source. Human-made tools, on the other hand, have become more
and more discernible from natural objects as we have moved away
from the animal kingdom. The reason lies in the preconditions
of our species prior to tool-making. The articulation and mental
capabilities of our ancestors were mature enough to spawn human
intelligence and language. As both tool-making and communication
were social activities, advances in one reciprocally affected
the progress in the other. Thus, being a social animal, human's
higher form of communication between individuals (i.e., language)
evolved alongside tool-making.
Language made
possible the retention and transfer of human knowledge apart from
and independent of the life and death of individuals. In this
way, knowledge could be transferred from one generation to another
by a means other than genetic heredity. The advent of writing
also enhanced the linguistic transfer of knowledge. Spoken language
conveyed knowledge via memory, habits, expertise, and cultural
assimilation; whereas written language made knowledge transferable
in greater detail and exactness, and less dependent on particular
moods of individuals, i.e. more **objective**. [Tools, language,
and writing strengthened human abstract thought. Mathematics and
tools to perform mathematical operations (i.e., a type of mental
work) are found very early in human history maybe from the time
humans used their fingers for counting. Tools similar to the abacus
are traceable to the dawn of civilization. These tools and mathematics
further helped the objectification of knowledge.]
Writing made
possible the use, criticism, and development of knowledge by individuals
spatially and temporally apart; i.e., knowledge became more objective
and a world in itself, discernible from the natural world as well
as the subjective world of every individual. Similarly, tools
as distinct from natural objects-constituted another world stamped
by human knowledge yet separate from it. They were used for
physical as well as mental work and were partly automated in later
industrial developments.
Knowledge
and tools were the ingredients of all future human progress (or
even the setbacks). Using knowledge and tools in production and
all other aspects of life reciprocally affected individuals physically,
mentally, and socially. The tremendous progress of our species
can be more clearly understood by observing how children acquire
a vast amount of knowledge and learn to use a great variety of
tools in a very short time. Humans are the only species on Earth
who use knowledge and tools in all aspects of their lives. In
a word, we can say that tool-making was the most important
activity differentiating our ancestors from other primates, and
human beings are uniquely recognizable by their production of
knowledge and tools in the world of animals. No other technological
upheaval or socio-political development has caused such a tremendous
distinction between our own and other species.
The world
of knowledge and the world of tools have concurred only in one
special phenomena: Intelligent tools (e.g., police dogs). These
tools were used by humans, but not produced by them. The possession
of sensory perceptions and locomotion, the capacity to communicate
with humans, and the ability to learn a special skill necessary
for a specific task were the ideal qualities sought in intelligent
tools. These tools were peculiarly related to human's knowledge
and needs. Ordinary tools were used and improved by human knowledge
to fulfill human needs and their development was limited only
by the state of technology. But intelligent tools were also limited
by natural evolution which, until the advent of genetic engineering,
has been almost exclusively uninfluenced by human knowledge. The
natural limitations of intelligent tools have mostly been a "good"
reason for the philosophers and historians of tools to pay little
attention to these tools. Nonetheless, modern intelligent tools
are not only influenced by human knowledge, but are more and more
becoming the embodiment of our knowledge. The current capabilities
in the *production* of such tools make it necessary to review
past social impact of these tools prior to speculating on their
future potentials.
* * *
Intelligent
Tools of the Past
Animals are
the first intelligent tools used by humans. The use of animals
as tools dates back to primitive human societies. One may mention
the use of horses as tools in transportation, dogs in trailing
fugitives, doves in carrying messages, falcons in hunting birds,
and many other examples. Using intelligent tools is not new
in human history (even some animals use other animals or members
of their own species as tools). Nevertheless,
producing intelligent tools is a fairly new phenomenon and their
improvements are not limited by natural evolution. I will discuss this point more thoroughly in the next section.
However, now I would like to draw attention to some of the peculiar
features of past intelligent tools; for this purpose, I will concentrate
on the use of horses as tools.
Horses, as
tools of transportation, were used for their locomotive power.
Their biological characteristics provided ease of use, speed,
and environmental adaptability. They (along with camels, llamas,
etc.) were preferred over many stronger animals, as means of transportation,
mainly because of their capacity to act as tools, i.e., to yield
to control. For example, it is interesting to note that gorillas
are both more intelligent and stronger than horses, but yet they
lack the capacity to yield to control. Yielding to control or
following orders may not make an animal intelligent, but surely
makes it tool-like. Hence, horses were not selected because of
their intelligence (or even their common sense) but rather for
being a tool-like locomotive system.
It is obvious
that these animals could never lose their intelligent characteristics
and humans did not treat them as mere tools either. Feelings and
even affectionate relations between humans and dogs or horses
are commonplace in all civilizations. But these relations existed
whenever animals were considered as companions, not as tools (the
same is true in the relations between humans themselves).
The above
can even be confirmed by the eventual replacement of horses by
cars. Cars outperform horses, both in their locomotive power and
in yielding to human control. But the most stupid horse would
recognize a ditch, even if the rider does not notice; whereas
a car may crash if the driver fails to see a ditch. However, this
important difference did not cause humans to even pause before
replacing horses by cars; because the main reason for choosing
horses in the first place was *not* their *intelligence*, but
the reason for the choice was rather the horses' locomotive power
and capacity to perform like tools. The same can be said about
dogs and other animals. Of course, this is not to say that humans
always disliked the advantages of common sense in animal tools,
but the point is that it was not the primary criteria for selecting
them as intelligent tools.
Why then was
the intelligence in these tools of little importance to human
users? I think the answer lies in human's choice of having a better
*general-purpose* intelligent tool that could be applied to all
tools (i.e., animals included). This tool was nothing but humans
themselves in the role of tools. Only when an intelligent characteristic
was not available in humans, were animals used for their *intelligence*,
and then in a limited domain. For example, the strong sense of
smell in dogs gave them an edge over humans as tools for detecting
smell and humans relied on even the dogs' wit for trailing fugitives.
Otherwise, humans were preferred over animals whenever more intelligence
than just following orders was desired in a tool.
* * *
Thus, in order
to understand the significance of intelligent tools in history,
one should not focus on the use of animals but rather on the use
of humans themselves as tools. Humans were used as tools whenever
their sense perceptions and locomotive abilities, language understanding,
and special skills were utilized as *means of production* (i.e.,
means to an end). To the degree humans are clipped of their versatility
and their freedom is limited in order to conform to the production
process, the more tool-like they become. In contrast, human being
remains an *end in itself* and is not reduced to a special tool
to the degree versatility, knowledge, and sophistication prevail
in his/her productive activities.
The more complicated
the society, the harder it is to draw a line between these two
kinds of human activity; but still, control determines the character
of each kind. As long as a better alternative to human being as
an intelligent tool did not exist, there necessarily developed
social relations to compromise the natural equality of all humans
and human's use as a tool. These social relations have constituted
the main part of all social relations in human history. As
a result, it is often difficult to determine whether an individual
is performing as a free individual or as a special-purpose tool.
Only slavery had the clearest distinction of the two *kinds* of
humans: The slaves who, as tools, yielded to the control of their
owners, and the slave-owners who ruled over their slaves and regarded
them as mere tools.
Slavery was
the first important use of humans as tools. Slaves were not allowed
to have independent judgment- submission to the control of their
owners was the "virtue" expected from them. They were
even *owned*, like any other tool, as a private property. There
were different kinds of slaves trained for particular undertakings,
and there were laws that prevented slaves from developing into
whole individuals, such as those forbidding participation in many
social activities, including education.
The use of
human being as an intelligent tool made it possible for a large
part of the free citizens to distance themselves from direct contact
with tools. Thus, their role in the production process resided
in the realm of control, with knowledge and decision-making as
their primary tasks. In other words, possession of intelligent
tools relieved them from working for their basic needs.
The great
construction works of ancient times were not surpassed until the
Industrial Revolution. Inanimate tools accompanied with intelligent
tools (slaves) required only their owners' knowledge and decision-making
to become a wealth-producing system. It was like having a smart
machine which would start production by verbal orders, would change
shape and improve by our desires. What a long way from the times
primitive human had to achieve everything by his/her own hands!
This is how intelligent tools supplemented inanimate tools through
human's journey of progress.
Although the
state of technology in slave society furnished a good technological
basis for using human beings as intelligent tools, the disappearance
of slavery was *not* due to the eradication of that *technological
basis*. In fact, the revival of slavery in early United States
history demonstrated that even the tools of modern America could
be well-used by slaves. In other words, the disappearance
of slavery was due to the social unacceptability of the shameless
treatment of our own kind as mere tools. The more civilized we
became, the less could we endure such inequalities. Needless to
say, the whole mental framework of a slave society was the assumption
or perception of slaves as mere tools-an assumption which certainly
was contrary to the truth and was bound to be challenged by some
from both sides.
In other
words, as long as the human race lacked intelligent tools that
could outperform human beings as tools, some form of subjugation
of human by human, or even the possibility of a revival of slavery,
could continue to exist.
Besides the
social problems that accompanied the use of animals and humans
as intelligent tools, there was another important difficulty to
their use (prior to genetic engineering): Their natural limitations.
Other tools were improved and refined for new tasks. Only the
current state of the technology limited their progress. Intelligent
tools of the *past*, i.e. animals and humans as tools, were not
only limited by the state of technology, but their progress as
tools was also limited by their confinement to natural evolution-
a primary obstacle. For example, it was impossible to extend the
length of human's hands two fold or increase the speed of a horse
two times in thousands of years; in particular, the life span
of these tools was technologically unsurpassable. In comparison,
the length of cranes has been extended, the speed of cars has
been increased, and the durability of steel has been enhanced
several times during the last fifty years.
What made
intelligent tools special, i.e., their senses, reasoning, and
capacity for communication, could hardly improve significantly
in centuries. The past intelligent tools (e.g., humans as tools)
not only had difficulties performing as tools (due to social reasons),
but their very biological existence imposed a serious handicap
on their progress as tools. Both these negative elements are
absent in the contemporary intelligent tools, i.e., intelligent
robots.
* * *
Artificial
Intelligence: A New Alternative
In order to
start from a common understanding of new intelligent tools, I
have summarized the historical milestones of the computer revolution
in the following three paragraphs:
The developments
of computer technology can be divided broadly into two categories:
Number processing and symbol processing. The first category has
made information much more accessible, retainable, and transferable
than all the improvements of printing technology. [Although it
still lacks the random accessibility of book thumbing or newspaper
browsing.] Computers have surpassed all past calculation tools
(e.g., abacus or slide rules) in speed, functional variety, and
ease of use. Consequently, by extending automation to monotonous
mental labor, information processing is expanding the scope of
the printing press and the industrial revolution to new frontiers.
The second
category, i.e., symbol processing or artificial intelligence (Al),
enables computers to simulate sensory perception and locomotion,
reasoning and problem-solving, natural language, and many other
human capabilities. [Nonetheless, the simulation of some mental
processes such as postulating basic theorems, intuitive reasoning,
and common sense understanding are still very much beyond reach.]
Already intelligent vision systems have been introduced to the
production process, working alongside human workers. Knowledge
processing has been used to make expert systems for a variety
of tasks such as medical diagnose. [For example, *Internist* expert
system that has been made at the University of Pittsburgh in the
U.S. can diagnose at the two third level of an expert doctor of
internal medicine. Similar systems have been made, or are being
made, in the areas of legal, financial, and psychological counseling,
and for many other areas of human expertise]. Also, natural language
query systems have been on the market for quite some time.
Regardless
of the philosophical controversies surrounding the nature of intelligence,
all the above tools perform tasks previously considered to require
intelligence, and thus could be well called intelligent tools
in the *narrow* sense of the term. In other words, artificial
intelligence is presenting a new kind of alternative to all past
intelligent tools. This reality is prompting philosophers of Al
to shift their focus from the realm of the philosophy of mind
(i.e., whether it is possible to have intelligent machines!) to
the realm of socio-political philosophy and look at the social
impact of intelligent tools on our society. Below, I demonstrate
how these newly *produced* intelligent tools bypass the limitations
of past intelligent tools. AI artifacts, outperforming humans
as tools in the near future, may become the cornerstone of a new
civilization free from the subjugation of human by human.
* * *
Present-day
intelligent tools are called intelligent robots. [For explanation
of nanobots in Nanotechnology, please see Is
Nanotechnology Real?] They are actually a unique synthesis
of tools and knowledge, a historical first. They can be equipped
with vision systems (plus other sensory systems and locomotion),
special knowledge of various domains, and natural language capabilities
of various human languages. They are not limited by natural evolution.
Thus, contrary to an animal or a human, a robot's vision can be
extended and is limited only by the state of technology. Its required
special domain knowledge can be increased to generate the most
efficient output of the best skilled laborer or expert. Its communication
capacity can be extended to dozens of languages, whereas an average
human worker barely manages to communicate in more than one language.
In short, the only limitation to the progress of intelligent robots
is the level of technology, which is in turn limited by human
intelligence itself. Therefore, exhausting the capabilities
of intelligent tools will be concurrent with the increase of human
intelligence to levels incomparable to any past development.
I do not claim
that these artifacts are presently in a position to approach human
common sense. But the stone tools of Homo Sapiens could never
compete with humans or animals in lifting objects. It was a long
time before levers and windmills were made; nevertheless, producing
stone tools made future improvements possible such that we can
have tools like lift-trucks today which exceed the power of any
athlete or even strong animals. Thus, the current ability of state-of-the-art
intelligent robots is not as important as their future possibilities.
For the first
time in history, production of the above tools has enabled humans
to surpass the barrier of natural evolution for intelligent tools.
This will undoubtedly be a boom to world production. Moreover,
once these tools out- perform humans as intelligent tools, there
will no longer even be any technological necessity to allow degrading
members of our own species to the rank of tools. In sum, with
the production of intelligent tools, we can expect the technological
basis for any kind of human slavery to disappear in the near future.
** We are witnessing an event as important as the first making
of tools by our ancestors.** This development may start a new
civilization that may foster a simultaneous enhancement of our
socio-political freedoms on one hand and of our economic wealth
on the other- a concurrence rarely achieved in human history. In such a society, the essential human activity will resemble
more the free exploration of an affluent artist than the soldier-type
obedience of a fortuneless laborer.
Finally, it
is appropriate to mention that in this treatise, I have examined
robots only as tools. I know, as many authors have pointed out,
there is a *logical* possibility that these robots could turn
into a new species surpassing human's current intelligence (yet
I think by then humans will also have moved far more ahead and
may still be ahead of them). There are numerous possibilities
that more advanced species may reside on Earth some day (e.g.,
extraterrestrials are still a good possibility), and their origins
could be in anything from genetic engineering and space travel
to intelligent robot production and human evolution. Perhaps we
will share mostly biological needs with animals and primarily
social needs with other intelligences. This may help eliminate
some of our *anthropocentric* views of the world which have been
a part of our world outlook since the fall of early Greek civilization.
However, these issues fall beyond the scope of this review as
I have focused solely on the technological basis of the subjugation
of human by human. [For explanation of anthropocentrism, please
see Post-Anthropocentric
Production]
* * *
Future
Prospects
There is every
reason to believe that the progress of these new intelligent tools
would cause our common sense to grow immensely by challenging
it to an unprecedented extent. It will create a new civilization
in which humans, for the first time, are challenged by other creatures,
not only for their physical strength, but also by these new artifacts
for their intelligence. The technological basis of human being's
subjugation by humans and its degrading consequences will be eliminated
in society; thus, giving rise to the potential for higher human
intelligence, tremendous wealth and more socio-political freedom.
In this light,
I welcome the coming of the new civilization and look forward
to a better future following upon the heels of the contemporary
upheaval. Pessimistic views about our future arise from viewing
our own evolution to be static while intelligent tools progress.
The emergence of artificial intelligence has made it feasible
for human beings to be intellectually challenged by the immense
tasks of exhausting the intelligent characteristics of some artifacts-
a historical first. Together with improvements in genetic engineering
and telecommunications, the production process will change so
rapidly in this space-age society that we can barely imagine even
its most general lines. But whatever shape the new social formations
may take, some possible social effects of these intelligent tools
may include:
*
A broadened scope of our intelligence: Our common sense should
become much more developed and we should expect many new discoveries,
inventions, and even a new understanding of ourselves.
*
A freeing of the majority of human beings from living as tools
and means of production: A greater percentage of people should
be able to do what they like rather than being forced to do something
they dislike merely to secure their basic needs.
*
A tremendous multiplication of the wealth of humankind: The opening
of new frontiers before us, in space or on Earth, will certainly
follow the above advancements.
At first glance,
molding the new production processes, e.g., building "factories
and offices of the future," or "homes of the future,"
may appear to be the key endeavor for shaping the future. Nonetheless,
the real *challenge* before future-minded individuals is the improvement
and introduction of appropriate social relations if the fruits
of these technological advancements are to be realized. [For example,
giving priority to the production of artificial kidneys rather
than using kidneys of other humans which has given rise to the
criminal kidney trade business.] The role of science will be enhanced
both due to the new technical needs of sophisticated, knowledge-intensive
production processes and due to the new social needs of the related
human interaction. Hence, we can expect an increased sophistication
of essential human pursuits; the central activity of most individuals
will likely be related to the progress of social relations and
the enhancement of knowledge. We may even find personal income
based on a synthesis of one's intentions and needs.
The distribution
of wealth and power in this new civilization will remain a social
issue rather than a technical matter. Thus, whether everyone
and every country will be able to avail themselves of these intelligent
tools and accompanying benefits depends on future social institutions. These achievements may even add to the misery of many individuals
for some time. However, I am optimistic about the future. I think
that with the disappearance of the technological basis for treating
any part of humankind as tools, humans will, at least, be able
to spend more effort on resolving social issues and on molding
new social institutions. These new social institutions must address
and alleviate the menace of poverty, tyranny, war, and ecological
deterioration. Whether the new civilization will evolve peacefully
and uniformly world-wide is still an open question.
Back to Features Index
Back to Sam Ghandchi Index |