Is nonliving intelligence dead intelligence?
Biosphere as a Self-conscious Being
There are predictions that in not so distant future a highly developed artificial intelligence (AGI) will surpass humans as an independent and superior entity with unforeseeable consequences not only for humans but for the all living matter as such.
On the other hand, as for example the current pandemic has shown, all life on Earth is connected in countless ways most of them we are not even aware of. It might make sense to consider another possibility, one that the next stage in development of life on Earth would come out of all living matter as some kind of emergent event. In that case the entire Biosphere will become integrated in a single living intelligent entity that might even acquire its own consciousness (Bio General Intelligence) based on integration of all the networks of communications that are still developing between humans, also including all living beings throughout the entire planet. And within this super-being humans will most likely play the role similar to the brain nerve-cells in our body.
Except that we as individuals, unlike cells, have self-awareness (consciousness). This is why, if and when such event takes place, question is whether humans, individually or a as group, will be able to recognize the appearance of such entity, understand the roll they are playing within it, and eventually to do anything about it. In any case, it is worth considering that the emergence of a superior non-living entity (AGI) is not the only possible future, that there is a possibility of emergence of living (conscious) super-entity (BGI) that will incorporate all living forms on this planet.
The question is how the process/event of emergence might look like in case of the Biosphere if it ever takes place?
When the elements/ parts of the emerging entity (fish in the school, bird in the flock, or ant in the colony) take part in forming the new larger entity, it appears that each individual unit is not “aware” of this; they do not and cannot “see” themselves as a part of the emerging phenomenon from the “outside”. What is the tipping point in the process of moving from one stage (single bird) to another (flock), from a single entity (unit) to a much larger group formation with some very different properties? Is it something similar that was happening in the transition from non-living to a living matter? Does the emergent process in case of non-living and living matter (water and ants) have some similarities? Another question relevant in case of the Biosphere is: how the emerging phenomena in case of the living matter are different from the non-living? How transition from one-cell to multi-cell organism differs from one fish and a fish school, or one bird and a bird flock? In case of higher multi-cell organism there is a specialization of cells and division of roles/labor, but the parallel specialization appears among ants and bees. So, which of these two complex models of organizing living matter: bird-flock or ant-colony might emerge in case of the Biosphere? Perhaps it might start as a bird-flock and morph into the ant-colony model. At some point it might even become something closer to the complex living organisms with highly specialized cells and organs and with the brain as its central organ, where in case of the Biosphere the human network would be parallel to the brain structure.
The question is, if the Biosphere ever emerges as a single being, what would be its main properties? Would it be able to “see” the world only from the inside out, or it might become capable to perceive itself from the outside as well? In addition to having a certain degree of living intelligence, it is possible that, when it becomes aware of its own existence (self-awareness), it acquires a capacity to see itself, not only from within, but from without as well. This process already started a few decades ago when a few humans were able to see the Earth from the space and the Moon, thus enabling the Biosphere to see itself from the outside as whole. Another possible option would be a view from some non-organic (AI) position, or some alien, non-DNA based, life form.
Humans are living matter. All non-living matter used by humans, including (high) technology, internet, artificial intelligence (AI), is in essence just a tool or prosthesis. Only in case if and when some non- living matter (AGI) reaches a stage when it becomes independent from humans, with its own will, it should be considered as an alien, an entity outside of the Biosphere, and the relationships with it will have to be negotiated. Competition over the energy resources will most likely be one of the major issues. It seems there are only these three options: cooperation, coexistence and confrontation. There is also a possibility of symbiotic cohabitation, but it could be either very sophisticated prosthesis, or double-minded entity with one or more non-living “minds” attached to human brain.
The relationship between living and non-living doesn’t have to be binary only. It could be represented as a gradation with transitional stages. One final stage “black” would be clearly “non-living” and “white” would be “living, while the middle(“gray”) might be interpreted as analogous to the “Schrodinger’s cat”, being both living and non-living at the same time.
In any case it would it make sense today to consider, in addition to anticipated emergence of AGI and its consequences for all life on Earth, possible emergence of a living alternative to this non-living super intelligence. It would be also the way to address the distinctions and relationships between living and non-living matter, between life and death. For example, AGI is by definition non-living, but is it dead?
On a broader social level, we now live in a “virus universe”. It is not a story of religion or history we are now submerged in, but the story of a virus pandemic that is reshaping our understanding of the world, our behavior, forming new customs and relationships with other people and the world around us. Now, when we have all humanity on one side, who/what is the “other”? Could this mysterious virus be a metaphor for non-living (death, AGI)? Virus itself is both dead and alive, like the “cat” mentioned above, while all humanity resembles a single organism (or an organ) attacked by this strange enemy. When the virus enters our body it becomes alive, starts to multiply and because of that we might move from living into non-living state as more than four million people unfortunately already did.
However, how this Bio General Intelligence (BGI) would manifest itself is hard to anticipate. In addition to self-awareness, it might be able to acquire some other properties unknown, even unimaginable to us.
Gregor Mobius, July 31st, 2021
*)This is a slightly changed version of the paper that was not accepted for the PT-AI 2021 – 4th Conference on “Philosophy and Theory of Artificial Intelligence”. A friendly correspondence with Professor Vincent C. Mueller, Chair of the conference, is in the Appendix I. A brief history about the origins of the idea of the Biosphere as a single living system(Gaia) and Noosphere as a self-conscious entity on the global scale is in the Appendix II. Images are a random mix of drawings on biology themes found in textbooks, and “children drawings” from Google and those generated by the Stabile Diffusion.
Appendix I
From: PT-AI 2021, Aug 31, 2021
To: Gregor Mobius, Subject: PT-AI 2021 notification for paper 59
Dear Gregor Mobius,
thank you very much for submitting your paper 59 “Bio General Intelligence” to this year’s PT-AI conference. We have now seen the reviews for the papers (double blind) and decided on paper acceptance or rejection on the basis of reviews by at least two members of the program committee. We had 60 submissions, nearly all of very sufficient quality and relevance, but given a reasonable programme in a hybrid conference we accepted only 25.
We are very impressed by the high quality submissions and we are sorry to say that your paper did not make the cut for presentation this year. Perhaps the reviews included below are useful for the future development of your work. Please allow me to stress again that, as you can see from the reviews, many papers were at a level that is suitable for presentation.
We do hope, of course, that you will participate in the conference.
More information about the conference & publication procedure is to follow shortly.
Thank you very much for your contribution!
Yours, Vincent C. Mueller, Chair, PT-AI 2021
REVIEW 1 , SUBMISSION: 59
TITLE: Bio General Intelligence, AUTHORS: Gregor Mobius
Overall evaluation , SCORE: -2 (reject)
The topic of this paper is whether an organic general intelligence other than an animal is possible, how it manifests itself and whether we would recognize it. The paper raises a lot of, sorry, quite wacky questions, provides few arguments and I am not even sure if the topic is relevant to the conference.
REVIEW 2, SUBMISSION: 59
TITLE: Bio General Intelligence, AUTHORS: Gregor Mobius
Overall evaluation, SCORE: -2 (reject)
The paper is a fascinating survey of speculative questions about how/whether the planetary biosphere might emerge as a “single being”. There exists historical discussion of this topic in the “Gaia Hypothesis” of James Lovelock and Lynn Margulis, but this paper makes no link to this or any other literature there may be. Perhaps the main issue with the paper though is that it is hard to tell what the paper is saying and or doing other than presenting such questions. Early in the paper, the author suggests that discussion of artificial general intelligence and smarter-than-human AI at the very least invites consideration of “Bio general intelligences” which are beyond human in some similar way. The paper could be read as an ironic response to the equally speculative philosophy of AGI and superintelligence. In any case, it would be helpful if the paper situated itself a bit more clearly.
Vincent C. Mueller, Professor, Philosophy & Ethics of Technology (TU Eindhoven), University Fellow (U Leeds)
Turing Fellow (Alan Turing Institute), http://www.sophia.de
On 31. Aug 2021, gregor mobius wrote:
Dear Vincent C. Mueller,
thank you very much for your kind letter. Although I am bit disappointed, but not surprised, that my paper is not accepted for the conference, especially after reading the reviews. Whether I agree or disagree with the opinions presented in the reviews is not so important. More important is the question: Would it make sense today to consider, in addition to anticipated emergence of AGI and its consequences for all life on Earth, possible emergence of a living alternative to this non-living super intelligence? For me it is also the way to address the distinction and relationship between living and non-living matter, between life and death. AGI is by definition non-living, but is it dead?
Perhaps I was not able to articulate it properly in my paper, but this issue is not going to go away and humanity will have to face it eventually one way or another.
Yours, Gregor Mobius
From: Vincent Mueller, Sep 1, 2021
To: gregor mobius, Subject: Re: PT-AI 2021 notification for paper 59
Dear Gregor,
thanks for your response. Though of course I am not responsible for the reviews, and these are mostly about the technical quality of the paper, I would say that such an investigation can be interesting, but it does not look like AI or philosophy of AI, but rather cosmobiology? One thing that some people are discussing is hybrid intelligence, so that is something to keep in mind. In my personal view, finding out what the importance of life is for cognition is central to the discussion of AI – can we have intentional states without life?
Yours, Vincent C. Mueller
From: gregor mobius, Sep 2, 2021
To: Vincent Mueller, Subject: Re: PT-AI 2021 notification for paper 59
Dear Vincent,
I would agree with your last question regarding cognition. Probably it is not only having intentional states, but also changing them. Then, having curiosity, empathy, acting, pretending, lying, making and understanding jokes, and jokes about jokes… not to mention dreams, self-awareness, self-reflection,… Also, having an overarching “existential narrative”(ideology) like in the western world Christian story, History, Philosophy…that gives us the meaning/purpose of existence. (We now definitely need a new one). Can we imagine AI having at least some of these properties? Even using the term “intelligence” in case of a non-living entity like AI might be questionable? Perhaps the term “algorithm” would be more appropriate. Algorithm is a notion that seems to be applicable for both living and non-living entities, while “intelligence” could remain specific only for living beings(craw, octopus, dolphin, human, elephant, mouse, even some plants…). By having intentionallity, living entity could decide to change algorithm(s) “while walking” or to take the “road less traveled.”
I would agree that hybrid intelligence, that could come out of some kind of “cyborg relationship(s)” seems to be the most probable way things will go, for individuals but also for groups, collectives, society(s) up to the level of the biosphere. In a way this was happening individually since the invention of tools. But, especially with the industrial and current technological revolution(s), it became social phenomenon as well. However at this point it is not easy to predict/anticipate how this “symbiosis” will unfold in the future, there are so many unknowns. It could happen on many levels, one of which most likely will be the Biosphere itself. This could be where both AI and life might appear together interwoven in a cosmo-biological entity?
My interest in these themes is relatively recent. It came from my earlier work on finding an algorithm that would convert RNA/DNA strands into 2D images. Later I begin realizing that these images are not only better way to represent RNA/DNA but that they might be the earliest “glimpses of the world” as recorded by the first living molecules(proto-RNA?). From this micro level, following current global (non)living virus, I recently jumped on the other side of the scale, to the largest known living entity on Earth(Biosphere) and posted a few related articles on my blog. https://argoseye.wordpress.com/
I have no higher education in biology, I studied electrical engineering, nuclear physics, discrete math(graph theory) and later visual studies(MIT) out of which came this algorithm for RNA/DNA visualization. By the way, my first contacts with AI were IBM 1130, punch-cards and Fortran IV.
Yours, Gregor Mobius
Appendix II
(related to REVIEW 2)
The term “biosphere” was coined by geologist Eduard Suess in 1875, which he defined as the place on Earth’s surface where life dwells. Then in 1920’ Vladimir Vernadskym together with Pierre Teilhard de Chardin and Édouard Le Roy, introduced the notion of Noosphere is the third in a succession of phases of development of the Earth, after the geosphere (inanimate matter) and the biosphere (biological life.(Wiki)
Then in the 1970’ James Lovelock and Lynn Margulis came up with “Gaia hypothesis” understanding the Biosphere as a single self-regulating complex organism that would be the largest living entity on the planet.
This most recent proposal is an attempt to consider a possibility that the entire Biosphere, as a single living organism, might emerge, at some point of singularity, as a cognitive self-conscious living being (Bio General Intelligence). That would be the largest conscious living entity on this planet having its own metabolism and perception of the world, which might be the living alternative to the anticipated emergence of the Artificial General Intelligence, a non-living entity that could be far superior to humans. Some might perceive that in this way imagined self-conscious Biosphere has certain godlike attributes, but it should be kept in mind that no living being can live forever. Thus, potentially conscious Biosphere cannot be an immortal entity and will at some point cease to exist, like any other living being. In other words, it would be natural, not supernatural entity.
Argos Eyes 