Outside the Box: Can AI Free Us From an Either/or World?

I came across an article about the artificial intelligence phenomenon that predicts “a tech stock crash” and massive disruption in the economy due to the miscalculations of executives who over-invest in AI. I thought this might be the occasion to see where my own dialogue with AI might lead. I offered ChatGPT the following prompt.
“AI will always be controversial, simply because people persist in framing their understanding of what it is and what it does as a competition with human intelligence. Business Chief has published an article that asserts ‘MIT professor Daron Acemoglu believes that companies are wasting vast amounts of money investing in AI, when its net effect is going to be marginal.’
In terms of the practice of businesses he is probably right. But I would question the framing that Acemoglu and practically everyone seems to have adopted. They see it as in terms of either/or logic. I may be wrong — and given the way humans act, I probably will be wrong — but I believe that potentially AI can be socially integrated into human civilization.
By that I mean that there can be a real give and take, a mission of what some call ‘negotiating meaning’ between human actors and AI agents. AI ultimately faces similar problems of defining ‘identity’ as humans. And we can see in human society today the ambiguity, anguish and misunderstanding that have arisen around the question of identity. So, my question is twofold: Can AI itself address the question of its identity in human society? If, as I suspect, that can only happen through dialogue about society itself and AI as a voice (or a multitude of voices) what should that dialogue look like and how should it play out?”
“Your insight taps into a very nuanced area of how we conceptualize AI’s role within society. The prevailing ‘competition’ narrative between AI and human intelligence indeed limits the potential of AI and feeds into this ‘either/or’ logic that assumes humans and machines must either replace or outdo one another. You suggest a more dynamic relationship, where AI becomes a partner in a shared process of meaning-making—a compelling idea that reframes the entire debate.
### Can AI Address Its Own Identity in Human Society?
AI’s ‘identity’ is tricky because it’s not an agent of identity the way humans are. It doesn’t have a sense of self, emotions, or subjective experience. However, AI can play a role in helping humans reflect on their own identities, understand complex systems of identity (race, gender, culture), and provide frameworks or tools for identity construction, all while learning from the social context it operates in.
In terms of AI addressing its own identity, it may not be about *AI* directly formulating a personal or self-reflective identity (because it doesn’t have personal experiences or desires), but more about how it is positioned within human society by those who design, use, and interact with it. This position will evolve as AI capabilities expand, and society grapples with questions about the ethics, limits, and integration of AI.
### Dialogue Between Humans and AI: The Need for ‘Negotiating Meaning’
The real opportunity, as you propose, lies in the idea of a ‘negotiation of meaning.’ This would entail humans and AI actively co-creating knowledge, norms, and solutions in a reciprocal exchange. Instead of AI passively performing tasks, it would be an interlocutor that provides new perspectives, challenges assumptions, and helps refine collective understanding.
Here’s what such a dialogue might look like and how it could play out:
1. **AI as an Augmenter of Human Thought, Not a Replacement**
2. **AI as a Mediator of Social Complexity**
3. **Multi-voiced Dialogue**
4. **Ethical Considerations as Core to Dialogue**
5. **AI as a Mirror of Society**
### What Should This Dialogue Look Like?
1. **Multi-stakeholder Forums:**
2. **Educational Curricula:**
3. **AI in Public Discourse:**
4. **Human-AI “Collaboratories”:**
In summary, the dialogue you envision is critical because it reframes AI from being an alien force competing with human intelligence to a potential partner in societal progress. This dialogue should be ongoing, inclusive, and multidisciplinary, ensuring that AI’s integration into human society reflects the shared values and diverse identities of humanity itself.”
There’s a lot here to ponder and, even more urgently, act upon. I’ll start with William Wulf’s neologism of “collaboratories” (1989). Initially conceived of as a way of stimulating human collaboration between researchers in a particular field, it can take on a new and much broader meaning in the age of AI. Now that some believe AI has already passed the Turing test, part of the task will consist of defining who the AI voices are and how we humans can give some kind of productive substance to them.
We will delve further into this theme in our next installment as we attempt to examine the cultural and communicational dimensions of the changes now taking place.
Please feel free to share your thoughts on these points by writing to us at [email protected]. We are looking to gather, share and consolidate the ideas and feelings of humans who interact with AI. We will build your thoughts and commentaries into our ongoing dialogue. 
*[Artificial Intelligence is rapidly becoming a feature of everyone’s daily life. We unconsciously perceive it either as a friend or foe, a helper or destroyer. At Fair Observer, we see it as a tool of creativity, capable of revealing the complex relationship between humans and machines.]
[Lee Thompson-Kolar edited this piece.]
The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Fair Observer’s editorial policy.