83,240
edits
Template:Modernism versus pragmatism: Difference between revisions
no edit summary
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 26: | Line 26: | ||
Now I am just such a crusty old refusenik, and while that is largely borne of self-interest — I ''am'' an irrational, costly, inconstant, error-prone [[meatsack]], after all — before mortgaging our futures to the machine, it is worth nutting through the [[Digital prophet|digital prophecies]] to see if they hold water. | Now I am just such a crusty old refusenik, and while that is largely borne of self-interest — I ''am'' an irrational, costly, inconstant, error-prone [[meatsack]], after all — before mortgaging our futures to the machine, it is worth nutting through the [[Digital prophet|digital prophecies]] to see if they hold water. | ||
We start with a fundamental, philosophical divide between, on on hand, ''[[modernism]]'': in a [[Deterministic|deterministic]] world wherein the [[Causation|causal]] principle holds it follows that, in theory, we can calculate all outcomes from first principles. In this world the main challenge is outright data processing capacity and the sophistication of our model. Encouraged by the success of [[artificial intelligence]] in solving problems not long ago considered intractable — [[chess]], [[alpha go]], self-driving cars, facial recognition, [[chatbot]]s and so on — modernists extrapolate to a world where risk is atomised and calculated out of existence | We start with a fundamental, philosophical divide between, on on hand, ''[[modernism]]'': in a [[Deterministic|deterministic]] world wherein the [[Causation|causal]] principle holds it follows that, in theory, we can calculate all outcomes from first principles. In this world the main challenge is outright data processing capacity and the sophistication of our model. Encouraged by the success of [[artificial intelligence]] in solving problems not long ago considered intractable — [[chess]], [[alpha go]], self-driving cars, facial recognition, [[chatbot]]s and so on — modernists extrapolate to a world where risk is atomised and calculated out of existence. | ||
On the other hand is ''[[pragmatism]]'': whether or not the causal principle holds, and however good [[robot]]s may get at [[chess]], they cannot manage non-linear interactions and dynamic environments which present “wicked problems” and complex systems. Not only can formal logical tools not deal with rapidly emerging risk situations, they can’t even ''[[Legibility|see]]'' them. It’s better to live with uncertainty, deploy experts, proceed with caution, keep slack in the system and use practical rules of thumb to which we have no great metaphysical attachment to address contingencies. We should live on our wits and figure things out as we go. There is no certainty, but humility is no bad defence. | On the other hand is ''[[pragmatism]]'': whether or not the causal principle holds, and however good [[robot]]s may get at [[chess]], they cannot manage non-linear interactions and dynamic environments which present “wicked problems” and complex systems. Not only can formal logical tools not deal with rapidly emerging risk situations, they can’t even ''[[Legibility|see]]'' them. It’s better to live with uncertainty, deploy experts, proceed with caution, keep slack in the system and use practical rules of thumb to which we have no great metaphysical attachment to address contingencies. We should live on our wits and figure things out as we go. There is no certainty, but humility is no bad defence. | ||