How do you make artificial intelligence, its design, production, development, and use more humane? Is this possible? Those are the challenging questions that this chapter poses. Instead of answering them, the chapter brings novel ideas and practices to the reader in order to elicit novel paths to make the debate. As is shown that authenticity is one of the key goals to achieve this, so there is a debate about how to ingrain authentic living and thinking in humans. From there, a revision of some challenges of AI are presented like the AI-traps that any development of AI-APIs would encounter. All this is applied and operationalized in a current project that was prototyped with students at the Master's of Human Talent of the Universidad Santo Tomas. The results are shown after using the 'Left-Column' Social Technique along with how the conversations uploaded by the MTH students were later analyzed using DEMOs by BigTech Companies. The APIs used are for sentiment analysis, using NLP. The results of these analyses are shown at the end, discussed, and a future framework proposed.
TopIntroduction
Which of the nine intelligences (Gardner, 2011) Newton used when the apple fell from the tree? What would have happened if Newton had used one different from the Logical-Mathematical—although he did it—when he started to think about gravity and his famous Laws? Would be society living in a different world.? Yes and no. Yes, it would be different. No, it wouldn’t be fair to compare it, since it would be completely different. However, in the 21st Century we can find examples of how the world can be seen from a holistic use of intelligences. For example, grammar structure, or language structuring process, like the ones described by Bohm (2002, p. xiv)—using the rheomode, “a new mode of using the existing language”. Humanistic Management as the ones seen in radical, maverick-style businesses around the world, where, for example, ‘workers put their own salary’ (Hamel & Breen, 2010; von Kimakowitz, Pirson, Spitzeck, Dierksmeier and Amann, 2011; von Kimakowitz, Schirovsky, Largacha-Martínez and Dierksmeier, 2021). Education like the ‘Free Writers’ approach. Alternative approaches in neuroscience, like neuroplasticity (Doidge, 2007), epigenetics (Lipton, 2006), and quantum mechanics, and so forth.
Hence, what is the pattern here in these different domains or disciplines about how to understand being-in-the-world, knowledge, and learning? The patterns that arise from multiple intelligences, management, education, and medicine—other examples could be set here—is that trying to define what is humane and humanistic is a big challenge and has always been. This is not new. However, it is important to acknowledge that there is a symbiotic relationship between the context and the being that emerge from the interaction of that context. Hence, there is a co-creation not only between humans about the humanness they want to co-create, but there is also a co-creation between the goals that humans had when they created the social institutions—SI, the reality as how they are existing and operating today—the emerging structures within the social institutions, and the kind/type of human that it is emerging from within and from these interactions.
Humanizing technology—or a technology that push/drives beings into more humane ones—must take into account the three forces—SI’s goals, SI’s structures, emerging beings—plus the inner humans reality—their essence, in order to have a long-term analysis of any reality. Hence, business reality has to be thought or deconstructed in a new way. Peter Senge’s thoughts about why we can never really solve our problems within organizations helps deconstruct traditional management. Senge (1994, p.11) argues that,
From a very early age, we are taught to break apart problems, to fragment the world. This apparently makes complex tasks and subjects more manageable, but we pay a hidden, enormous price. We can no longer see the consequences of our actions; we lose our intrinsic sense of connection to a larger whole. When we then try to “see the big picture”, we try to reassemble the fragments in our minds, to list and organize all the pieces. But, as physicist David Bohm says, the task is futile—similar to trying to reassemble the fragments of a broken mirror to see a true reflection. Thus, after a while we give up trying to see the whole altogether.