As artificial intelligence (AI) continues to advance, society continues to shun the idea of letting machines take over the workforce. After all, they will be at the risk of losing their job. Compared to a human, an AI is not only more efficient but also has linear work progress (being able to consecutively meet deadlines) and is a one-time payment for businesses compared to the constant salary of human workers. As stated in the article “Should Artificial Intelligence Be Regulated” it states “AI is believed by some to be on its way to producing intelligent machines that will be far more capable than humans. After reaching this point of “technological singularity” … [which] could occur as soon as 2030” (Etzioni, Amitai). However, what if this is in fact a good thing for humanity? Or even not as bad as some claim to be? Yes, AI will bring problems, but it will also directly or indirectly benefit the lives of many!

            Compared to when AI was still relatively new back in the twentieth century, we understand the field much better now. The book, “Culture Clash: Law and Science in America” says, “Darwin’s theory of evolution remains much more controversial in some sectors of society, and that may be precisely because it continues to harm human self-esteem…” (Goldberg, Steven). Since this is a publication in the form of a book, the author wants to inform society on why AI could be harmful since it threatens us from evolving due to reliance on machines and not making our own judgments. This seems rather hypocritical because humans have increased reliance on machines since the industrial revolution. New improvements to these machines are bound to happen because that’s how society advances. One could argue that the introduction of AI will be beneficial to Earth because although this may seem cruel, right now the Earth is overpopulated. Fewer jobs would mean people struggling to stay alive which could solve the problem of overpopulation which goes back to Darwin’s theory of evolution. That’s why I think this statement is flawed.     

            The article “Artificial Intelligence: The Time is Now” has a more laid-back approach to the advancement of AI. The article brings up that “The need to develop our competitive edge as a nation dictates that we make every effort to enhance productivity” (Dilworth, Robert). Although the audiences for Goldbergs and Dilworth’s article are the same, their stances differ. Goldberg believes that it is too risky giving AI the power to hold the lives of the human race in the hands of machines that could be fatal while Dilworth thinks that it’s essential in the productivity and efficiency of a nation. If one nation’s technology is vastly improved compared to another’s then the lower technologically advanced nation would be at a disadvantage which means they would need to improve their technology as well.

            However, compared to both pieces, the article by Etzioni Amitai and his “Should Artificial Intelligence Be Regulated” has a more mixed stance towards AI rather than a night and day difference. His stance is that although AI will be mostly negative to society leading to job loss, it is something inevitable and if it requires, society needs to adapt to the situation which is to rely on AI.

            The final piece which is Artificial Intelligence and Human Nature by Charles Rubin although against AI took an interesting approach. Rubin based his decision on extensionists. He believes that if we somehow manage to reach a point where AI does bring in more money and efficiency would it really be worth it. For example, he states “We must also refine and enlarge our understanding of what constitutes human progress” (Rubin, Charles). He is trying to say if machines somehow became so intelligent to the point where we are not needed anymore, how will we evolve if we come to rely on them. He concluded along the lines of AI may seem good from the present, but it could lead to a dangerous future.

            Although all these pieces share the same audience, and that is us to the society that is questioning it, the stances vary from author to author. Two of the pieces are from the twentieth century while one is early twenty-first and the last one is more modern. In order, the article “Artificial Intelligence: The time is now” by Robert Dilworth was published in 1988, “Culture Clash: Law and Sciences” in America by Steven Goldberg Charles Rubin was published in 1994, “Artificial Intelligence and Human Nature” in 2003, and lastly “Should Artificial Intelligence Be Regulated” by Amitai Etzioni in 2017. A possible reason that that the first three sources have a night and day difference, and no in-between could be possible since AI and the field are very new at the time. Compared to when the earliest source was written in 1988, to the article written by Etzioni opinions have changed compared to the earlier times and that could be a reason why opinions are so mixed now. Also, let’s not forget that the youth are more exposed to modern technology while the older generations are ready to retire could also explain this.

            The tone of both “Culture Clash: Law and Science in America” and “Artificial Intelligence and Human Nature” share the same worried yet philosophical tone. They both share that wary feeling of the rapid advancement of AI and the negative impacts it will provide and that the negatives out due to the positives. They want to prove through logic that in the long run, AI would be detrimental to society. For instance, towards the end of the piece of “Artificial Intelligence and Human Nature,” the author says “In the end, the extensionists vision of the future is a dangerous delusion … but even then there is no reason to assume that post-human world will be morally superior to our own” (Rubin, Charles). Similarly, near the conclusion of the piece in “Culture Clash: Law and Science in America” the author says “The definition of death and the sanctity of human life should not turn on whether a digital computer or any other device appears to be conscious. But farfetched as it may seem, that is a risk we currently run” (Goldberg, Steven). Both author’s purpose is similar thus the reason their tones are similar. They are trying to raise awareness of the future implications that can be caused by AI such as job loss and even killing machines,

            When compared to “Artificial Intelligence: The Time Is Now” and “Should Artificial Intelligence Be Regulated?” the tone is optimistic and hopeful. This is most likely due to the fact they believe efficiency is key in the future despite the negatives which would be beneficial to nations and society as a whole. Although they share similar tones, their purposes are slightly different compared to the other two. The piece “Should Artificial Intelligence Be Regulated” is more information about both arguments of AI and says if AI does become the future, we should prioritize adapting. While “Artificial Intelligence: The Time Is Now” made it clear that since this is unavoidable, we should embrace it. They made it clear that testing will be done heavily before being available to the public.

            The language used in all these sources was all professional and persuasive that heavily prioritized convincing the reader that their sides were correct using evidence and logic. Some of it worked while others didn’t. Lastly, although their audiences were similar, their purpose and stance varied in many ways that made it interesting to dissect them down.

            Although AI is advancing rapidly, it is something that is unavoidable because there is always someone that is curious about how things work. That’s how we came this far and instead of being afraid of it we should accept that is coming and learn to adapt to it. Yes, some jobs will be lost but as overpopulation continues to rise, we would’ve faced the problem anyway. Perhaps with this, we can actually try to save the planet with the introduction of AI.

Work Cited:   

          ETZIONI, Amitai. (2017). Should Artificial Intelligence Be Regulated? Shibboleth authentication request. Retrieved September 24, 2021, from https://www-jstor-org.ccny-proxy1.libr.ccny.cuny.edu/stable/44577330

          Dilworth, R. L. (1988). Artificial Intelligence: The Time Is Now. Shibboleth authentication request. Retrieved September 24, 2021, from https://www-jstor-org.ccny-proxy1.libr.ccny.cuny.edu/stable/3380126.

          Rubin, C. (2003). Artificial Intelligence and Human Nature. Shibboleth authentication request. Retrieved September 26, 2021, from https://www-jstor-org.ccny-proxy1.libr.ccny.cuny.edu/stable/43152855.

          Goldberg, S. (1994). Culture Clash: Law and Science in America. Shibboleth authentication request. Retrieved September 25, 2021, from https://www-jstor-org.ccny-proxy1.libr.ccny.cuny.edu/stable/j.ctt9qfqbm.12.