The Role Of Leaders When AI Can Know Everything

Forbes

a day ago

As much as AI can do and will do, there is something it cannot do that remains a crucial role for ... More leaders—and it's not what we think.
When personal computers went mainstream in the 1980's, a euphoria around what they could do was met by contrarians pointing out their limitations. Sure, they could do analytical tasks better than humans, but not intuitive, strategic tasks, such as playing chess. And then computers were built to become chess champions. Yes, they could reason faster than humans but not coordinate movement tasks. And then computers were built into deft manufacturing robots and human prosthetics. Sure, they could do what humans programmed them to do, but they couldn't outlearn their programming. And then AI shredded that assumption.
As ChatGPT burst onto the scene, a similar euphoria erupted around what it could do, again followed by contrarians pointing out limitations. Sure, it could learn and regurgitate case law faster than a human, but it also made up cases. Then AI was improved to show sources. Yes, AI can write content better than many people and faster than all, but it's wreaking havoc with publishing and educational practices. Then AI was developed to detect AI-developed content. And so on. We have decades of experience telling us that the edges we suppose to machine intelligence are but the starting point for the next X-prize. And so it is now as we witness the explosive use of AI in good hands and bad—arguably even its own hands—with command of knowledge and networked effects we cannot even imagine.
It is with full recognition of this history of underestimating what machines can do that I suggest there is yet something AI cannot do, no matter how much it knows nor how powerful it becomes. And that is to be a living antenna and transformer for sensing and manifesting futures in which life flourishes. This is the crucial and uniquely human role for leaders when AI can know everything. It is an energetic or spiritual role: to sense the zeitgeist, the field, the emerging future, the collective unconscious, God-Source, the Way, or universal Mind—however we name it—and from this place of resonant connection, through collaboration and using all tools available, including AI, conduct that future into the present.
I'm certainly not alone in suggesting there's a quality of human intelligence that supersedes AI, nor that AI could be mighty dangerous in the wrong hands or in charge of itself. The earliest pioneers in machine intelligence, such as Marvin Minskey saw risk, not in whether such intelligence could be achieved, but in having no way to ensure it would act in our best interests. The Australian Risk Policy Institute, part of a global risk advisory network, argues for the importance of AI augmenting human intelligence, not replacing it. Numerous tech companies have been party to AI pledges promising responsible and ethical AI development and use. And dominant players, such as Google, have also walked away from those pledges or subjugated them to a winner-take-all race to dominate the AI industry.
Mo Gawdat, a former AI leader at Google, in a mind-bending interview on Diary of a CEO, sees the biggest threat facing humanity today is humanity in the age of the machines, with all of our ignorance, greed and competition. 'This is an arms race,' Gawdat says, with 'no interest in what the average human gets out of it…every line of code being written in AI today is to beat the other guy.'
AI is an exponential amplifier of the mindset with which it's being created, trained and deployed. As covered in Closing The Great Divides, when that mindset is based in dualism, that is, separation within oneself, self from others or self from the environment, it propagates that separation and resultant suffering in what it creates. For example, it will create businesses that exploit the environment, social systems that create big winners and many losers, or economic policies whereby the rich get vastly richer. Add to this the amplification of AI and the effects are so extreme that it gives even the tech titans pause to ponder the ethics of it all.
While dualism is the norm in our culture (in which AI has been created) and embedded in our subject-object language (on which AI has been trained), it is not the greatest truth for the human being. Human leaders are capable of a kind of merge or flow state that goes by many descriptions: unity consciousness, interbeing, samadhi, mystical union, being one-with, or simply being the whole picture. This one-withness is the essence of Zen Leadership. When leaders operate from this state of connection, they propagate a sense of care for the whole, for example, in businesses that take care of the environment, social systems that help people thrive, or economic policies that respect limits. Such leaders create flourishing futures.
So, while there are many areas in which AI will far exceed human capacity, it is poorly equipped to sense connection at the depth available to a human being. Moreover, this isn't just another limit that will be superseded by the next generation of AI. Machine intelligence itself grew out of living in our heads—disconnected from the wisdom of the body—and equating intelligence with our thoughts, as in Descartes' dictum: 'I think therefore I am.' We failed to realize that the very thoughts 'I' thinks and the language it uses to express them is how 'I' keeps its ego-centric game going. Modeling computers and AI on how we think and talk propagated this mindset of separation, first replicating the mind's left-brain logic, then advancing to more holistic pattern recognition associated with the right brain.
By contrast, the human being has a very different origin. We come from one living cell, through which the entire evolutionary journey played out in our development from gilled sea-creatures to lunged air-breathers. We embody antenna for a whole spectrum of consciousness whereby the universe has revealed itself to itself from the beginning of life, from five basic senses to thought consciousness, to ego consciousness, to collective consciousness. In the collective field, we are able to sense the energy of relationships, of opportunities in crises, of ideas not yet taken form, which is the playground from which skillful leaders bring an emerging future into the present.
While AI can reproduce the veneer of human experience—even vastly accelerate and improve upon some aspects of it—it has not lived those experiences. Just as reading the Adventures of Tom Sawyer is not the same as being Tom Sawyer, AI's training in the language of human experience is not the same as living those experiences. Even though AI can talk a good game about being one-with by regurgitating things it has read, it has no physical basis for experiencing one-withness. It lacks the antenna. AI may have sensors or network connections to feed its semiconductors, silicon wafers, transistors, software and so forth. But it does not vibrate or resonate with the field the way a human body does. It does not have the complexity or fractal quality of life and hence cannot support the same expansive consciousness. Opinions vary in the field as to whether AI has consciousness (or 'interiority') at all. But even if we grant that everything has consciousness commensurate with its complexity, AI is far less complex than a human being.
That said, AI is already superior to humans at knowing what there is to know. It has thoroughly commoditized knowledge; being the 'smartest person in the room' is no longer a necessary or useful role for human leaders. Far more useful and necessary are practices for connection, which are part of contemplative, embodied wisdom traditions, as in Zen Leadership, for literally resonating one-with others, one-with the environment, one-with the emerging future. Through our connected selves, we bridge AI knowledge and universal wisdom.
For sure, such bridging will not be the main AI narrative anytime soon. AI development and use is likely to be dominated by the billionaire footrace we see now, with even shadier characters at the margins and AI itself in the not-too-distant future. But wise, connected AI development and use can serve as a vein of gold through the detritus of disruption and destruction of coming years, manifesting the priceless role of humanity in the evolution of consciousness. AI can only serve a flourishing future for life if it is helped along by living beings connected with same purpose. It is the essential, human leadership opportunity in an era when AI can know and do most everything else.
As Mo Gawdat concludes, there are several inevitables with AI. (1) AI will happen, (2) AI will be smarter than us, and (3) AI will replace many of our jobs. But what he also concludes is that it's smarter to create from a place of abundance rather than scarcity, which is another way of saying create from a place of infinitely resourced connection rather than the scarcity of a separate self. That is the most important role a leader can play, and we are living at a most pivotal time in which to play it.