AI as Philosophical Ideology: A Critical look back at John McCarthy’s Program

Philosophy and Technology 37 (2):1-24 (2024)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

AI has become the poster child for a certain kind of thinking which holds that some technologies can become objective, independent and emergent entities which can evolve beyond the control of their creators. This thinking is not new however. It is a product of certain philosophical ideas such as materialism, a common-sense world of objective and independent objects, a correspondence theory of truth, and so forth, which are centered around the pre-eminence of science, epistemology, and logical reasoning, among others, as the supremely valid modes of engaging experience. This paper aims to critically examine the synthesis of the development program for AI to be found in the writings of computer scientist John McCarthy (1927–2011). McCarthy has been called one of the founding fathers of AI. First, some of the main themes which recur in his writings from as early as the mid nineteen fifties in the Dartmouth proposal, up to his late writings, are considered. A discussion of the goals that such a program implies, follows, in terms of society’s relation with AI based technology and the nature and purpose of AI itself. These implications are arguably related to social control and are also moral. Ultimately, McCarthy’s idea that AI is and can be built upon a paradigm of reasoning and logic so as to simulate a perfectly rational abstraction of human thinking is shown to be motivated by his view that AI systems should be controlled, as servants. This understanding of human thinking is questionable, however, given current research on human irrationality, as well as on the argumentative role of reasoning. And yet, the process of development toward the unachievable goal of controllable, rational, logical AI systems, has handily come to serve as a blind for increasing techno-corporate control of society, with techno-corporate interests displacing blame for devaluations and harms caused by their push to develop the technology to AI systems which they can conveniently ‘lose control of.’

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 92,261

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Reconstructing reason in the aftermath of deconstruction.Calvin O. Schrag - 1991 - Critical Review: A Journal of Politics and Society 5 (2):247-260.
The phoenix of ideology.Gayil Talshir - 2005 - Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy 8 (2):107-124.
Ideology and Post-structuralism after Bernard Stiegler.Ben Turner - 2016 - Journal of Political Ideologies 22 (1):92-110.
Ideology and Post-Structuralism after Bernard Stiegler.Ben Turner - 2016 - Journal of Political Ideologies 22 (1):92-110.
Ideology and Symbolic Action.Fredric R. Jameson - 1978 - Critical Inquiry 5 (2):417-422.
Ideology Critique: A Deleuzian Case.Keunchang Oh - 2022 - Southern Journal of Philosophy 60 (3):388-412.

Analytics

Added to PP
2024-03-21

Downloads
17 (#872,959)

6 months
17 (#151,744)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Marc Anderson
Macalester College

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Consciousness Explained.Daniel C. Dennett - 1993 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 53 (4):905-910.
Intentional systems.Daniel C. Dennett - 1971 - Journal of Philosophy 68 (February):87-106.
Why do humans reason? Arguments for an argumentative theory.Dan Sperber - 2011 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 34 (2):57.

View all 12 references / Add more references