C. S. Lewis's Warnings About the Pursuit of Power
A prominent theme in the work of British writer and scholar C.S. Lewis is a warning about science, magic, and the attempt to gain power over nature. While Lewis certainly wasn't anti-science, he understood that the good uses of science could be easily corrupted when scientific discovery and technological development are stimulated purely by the pursuit of power. According to Lewis, seeking power over nature—from trying to control the weather to trying to control human nature itself—contradicts a spirit of wonder, gratitude, and admiration. It also tends to make other human beings and nature itself accessories, making us lose sight of their inherent value.
Lewis most clearly articulated this warning in his nonfiction book 'The Abolition of Man,' adapted from a series of lectures he delivered at King's College, Newcastle in 1943. The book begins with a critique of the then-newly published textbooks that promoted relativism and undercut a belief in objective truth. It goes on to challenge modern attempts to dispense with natural law and manipulate nature to humanity's own ends—which often means, in practice, that some people use applied science as a way to gain control over other people.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
20 hours ago
- Yahoo
Watch: 'World's smallest violin' can't be seen without a microscope
June 6 (UPI) -- A team of physicists from a British university used nanotechnology to create what they dubbed "the world's smallest violin," an instrument that can't be seen without a microscope. The Loughborough University team said the platinum violin measures 35 microns -- a measurement unit equal to one millionth of a meter -- long, and 13 microns wide. The violin is smaller than the diameter of a human hair, which ranges from 17 to 180 microns. Tardigrades, eight-legged micro animals, measure between 50 to 1,200 microns long. The researchers created the minute musical instrument to demonstrate the abilities of their new nanolithography system, technology that allows scientists to build and study nanoscale objects and structures. The instrument was chosen as a play on the phrase, "Can you hear the world's smallest violin playing just for you?" The phrase is an expression of mock pity in response to exaggerated complaints or overly dramatic reactions. "Though creating the world's smallest violin may seem like fun and games, a lot of what we've learned in the process has actually laid the groundwork for the research we're now undertaking," Professor Kelly Morrison, head of Loughborough University's Physics Department, said in a news release.
UPI
20 hours ago
- UPI
Watch: 'World's smallest violin' can't be seen without a microscope
June 6 (UPI) -- A team of physicists from a British university used nanotechnology to create what they dubbed "the world's smallest violin," an instrument that can't be seen without a microscope. The Loughborough University team said the platinum violin measures 35 microns -- a measurement unit equal to one millionth of a meter -- long, and 13 microns wide. The violin is smaller than the diameter of a human hair, which ranges from 17 to 180 microns. Tardigrades, eight-legged micro animals, measure between 50 to 1,200 microns long. The researchers created the minute musical instrument to demonstrate the abilities of their new nanolithography system, technology that allows scientists to build and study nanoscale objects and structures. The instrument was chosen as a play on the phrase, "Can you hear the world's smallest violin playing just for you?" The phrase is an expression of mock pity in response to exaggerated complaints or overly dramatic reactions. "Though creating the world's smallest violin may seem like fun and games, a lot of what we've learned in the process has actually laid the groundwork for the research we're now undertaking," Professor Kelly Morrison, head of Loughborough University's Physics Department, said in a news release.
Engadget
2 days ago
- Engadget
It turns out you can train AI models without copyrighted material
AI companies claim their tools couldn't exist without training on copyrighted material. It turns out, they could — it's just really hard. To prove it, AI researchers trained a new model that's less powerful but much more ethical. That's because the LLM's dataset uses only public domain and openly licensed material. The paper (via The Washington Post ) was a collaboration between 14 different institutions. The authors represent universities like MIT, Carnegie Mellon and the University of Toronto. Nonprofits like Vector Institute and the Allen Institute for AI also contributed. The group built an 8 TB ethically-sourced dataset. Among the data was a set of 130,000 books in the Library of Congress. After inputting the material, they trained a seven-billion-parameter large language model (LLM) on that data. The result? It performed about as well as Meta's similarly sized Llama 2-7B from 2023. The team didn't publish benchmarks comparing its results to today's top models. Performance comparable to a two-year-old model wasn't the only downside. The process of putting it all together was also a grind. Much of the data couldn't be read by machines, so humans had to sift through it. "We use automated tools, but all of our stuff was manually annotated at the end of the day and checked by people," co-author Stella Biderman told WaPo . "And that's just really hard." Figuring out the legal details also made the process hard. The team had to determine which license applied to each website they scanned. So, what do you do with a less powerful LLM that's much harder to train? If nothing else, it can serve as a counterpoint. In 2024, OpenAI told a British parliamentary committee that such a model essentially couldn't exist. The company claimed it would be "impossible to train today's leading AI models without using copyrighted materials." Last year, an Anthropic expert witness added, "LLMs would likely not exist if AI firms were required to license the works in their training datasets." Of course, this study won't change the trajectory of AI companies. After all, more work to create less powerful tools doesn't jive with their interests. But at least it punctures one of the industry's common arguments. Don't be surprised if you hear about this study again in legal cases and regulation arguments.
