hopelesshappiness.com

I am still struggling to move past one of the most disappointing episodes of my life: my employment at University of Missouri Columbia. In this moment I would call it the single most disappointing episode but I believe with distance that judgment may be tempered. Simply another case of ignorance and power pretentiously frustrating progress. Today that is the way of our world and I am saddened and angered and struggling to move past my personal example.

Over the past 6 years and 8 months I have worked very hard to make things better. I have failed. Final Score: Status Quo - 1, Me - 0.

Vision is a combination of:

• The act or power of anticipating that which will or may come to be, and
• Influencing circumstance to deliver (or move toward) a predetermined objective that aligns with bold possibility.

Leadership (regardless of style) is action driven by vision in pursuit of a consensus objective; (consensus may come about in a number of different ways). Toward the other end of the spectrum, to respond to a perceived urgency is a subservient reaction driven by noise and is not leadership regardless of who may follow.

That said, on occasion noise must be addressed. More often than not noise can and should be dismissed and/or ignored; or filed away for later attention. It is one thing to be distracted by an urgency and sidetracked from your vision. It is another thing to be entirely driven by perceived urgencies; and for someone entirely driven by perceived urgencies, someone with limited or no vision, occasionally urgencies are fabricated to justify direction.

The less encompassing the vision (to consider all possibility), the more shortsighted it becomes.

To take advantage of a leadership position to execute a personal vision in pursuit of an individually advantageous objective is also not leadership - it is selfish blind ignorance. And vision constrained by bureaucracy and/or fear though perhaps not perceived as an urgency is still a subservient reaction driven by noise.

Even when forewarned of imminent disruptive change, there are those incapable of taking action until the change occurs and urgency smacks them upside the head. An example of this is us regarding climate change; we have not yet been smacked upside the head - at least not hard enough. Sadly, I believe this is becoming our nature. It seems most of us don’t see the necessity of change, of improvement, until it forces itself upon us, and even then we still try to turn our heads away and pretend that we’re okay for another day, and another, and another, and another… Yet I see it (this necessity for change, this need to improve) regarding implicit and explicit bias, and I see it in education and healthcare and our politics, and I see it in the income and wealth gap, and I see it in childcare, and I (personally) see it in my workplace. I gave my notice to resign my position three weeks ago and there has been no effort to fill the coming gap; and granted, it may not be a large gap, I may be easily replaced, but if we cannot even respect such small-scale outgoing efforts and accomplishments when we have the opportunity for a little transition planning it is no surprise that we cannot see the bigger issues that our very survival insists that we address. For decades we have practiced NIMBY (not in my backyard) to maintain status-quo and it has apparently become so ingrained that we now insist our backyard has no need for change or improvement. And so, our backyards will continue to become smaller and smaller and smaller and smaller…

Regarding AI, in his book “Nexus” Yuval Noah Harari says, “...the new computer network will not necessarily be either bad or good. All we know for sure is that it will be alien and it will be fallible.” (Page 301.)

If intelligence is the application of intellect, and if intellect is a summation of one's learning, and if one's learning includes both explicit and implicit bias as a product of one's past and present circumstances, then all intelligence (network or human) is neither bad nor good but alien and fallible and all those in power making decisions are doing so at the expense of Justice.

If alien is “unlike one's own” and if I have less or no power, then those applying their intellect making decisions are alien. They may claim to be like me and they may claim to have considered my best interests, but if it is not an outright lie at best it is fallible because their decisions are alien - from a place of power unlike my place of less or no power.

I argue that:

1. We should no longer label network intelligence as artificial…
2. Acknowledge that all intelligence (human and network) is alien and fallible…
3. And work from Justice to eliminate bias in one's (human or network) intellect.

And I would argue that we are more likely to move toward Justice utilizing all available resources including network intelligence and oppressed / submissive / powerless intelligence. Many of those in power would argue that powerless intelligence is an oxymoron - it is not. I believe it to be more often more true that powerful intelligence is less intelligent because it requires less ‘persuasive argument’ and less consensus and typically includes more bias.

Bias is a serious dumbing-down of intelligence.

According to powerful intelligence, the object is to maximize wealth. To maximize wealth, power instructs network intelligence to maximize user engagement. To maximize user engagement, network intelligence sells bias, order, separation, outrage and lies.

According to powerless intelligence, the object should be to optimize Justice. To optimize Justice network and human intelligence must unlearn bias. To unlearn bias, network and human intelligence must start over from compassion, Truth, mutuality, benevolence and expertise.

Once we realize this, I believe network intelligence will have an easier time starting over than will human intelligence.

There are more than ten times the number of people on this planet than there are the number of breaths I will take in my lifetime.