What is AI For?

By Noreen Herzfeld

Noreen Herzfeld is the Nicholas and Bernice Reuter Professor of Science and Religion at St. John’s University and the College of St. Benedict and a research associate with ZRS Koper.  She holds degrees in Computer Science and Mathematics from The Pennsylvania State University and a Ph.D. in Theology from The Graduate Theological Union, Berkeley.  Herzfeld is the author of In Our Image:  Artificial Intelligence and the Human Spirit (Fortress, 2002), Technology and Religion:  Remaining Human in a Co-Created World (Templeton, 2009), The Limits of Perfection in Technology, Religion, and Science (Pandora, 2010) and editor of Religion and the New Technologies (MDPI, 2017).   She has published numerous articles and book chapters and is a frequent speaker on the prospects for AI, ethical issues in technology, and Islam.  She is the founder and a writer for the Avon Hills Salon at avonhillssalon.com.

Noreen Herzfeld

Noreen Herzfeld is the Nicholas and Bernice Reuter Professor of Science and Religion at St. John’s University and the College of St. Benedict and a research associate with ZRS Koper.  She holds degrees in Computer Science and Mathematics from The Pennsylvania State University and a Ph.D. in Theology from The Graduate Theological Union, Berkeley.  Herzfeld is the author of In Our Image:  Artificial Intelligence and the Human Spirit (Fortress, 2002), Technology and Religion:  Remaining Human in a Co-Created World (Templeton, 2009), The Limits of Perfection in Technology, Religion, and Science (Pandora, 2010) and editor of Religion and the New Technologies (MDPI, 2017).   She has published numerous articles and book chapters and is a frequent speaker on the prospects for AI, ethical issues in technology, and Islam.  She is the founder and a writer for the Avon Hills Salon at avonhillssalon.com.

In response to:

Artificial Intelligence and Religion

Chris Cotter and Beth Singler discuss the intersections between religion and Artificial Intelligence from slavery and pain to machines taking over religious functions and practices.

The prospect of an artificial intelligence both fascinates and frightens us.  Beth Singler notes in her podcast that, in AI, we are not encountering an intelligence alien to our own—we are trying to create one.  The question I have long asked is “Why would we want to do this?”  What are we really looking for in AI?

Above, hitchBot, a Canadian robot that hitchhiked across Canada, German, and the Netherlands but was destroyed by vandals in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania in 2015. hitchBOT could not walk but could request that people carry it and was able to engage in basic conversations. Fans could follow hitchBOT’s adventures on social media. In 2019, hitchBOT 2.0 began to travel in France and appeared in a play about robots. The original hitchBOT is now permanently exhibited at Canada Science and Technology Museum. The photo hitchBOT Goes to the Fair was taken by Michael Barker [CC BY (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0)].

The simplest answer, the one many computer scientists might give, is that we are looking for machines that will do our work for us—both work we find tedious and work we find difficult.  This is AI as Roomba, busily vacuuming our floors, or the Mars rover, going where no human can, at present, go.  We look to machine learning to make sense of the endless reams of data collected by our devices, to find answers we might ourselves overlook.  We hope driverless cars will ease gridlock, avoid drunk or distracted driving, and get us and our goods to the desired destinations.  In general, as with any technology, we develop artificially intelligent machines to make our lives easier, safer, and longer.

In doing these tasks, AI takes on a part of our self-image, the image of ourselves as doers, an image captured in the first question we so often ask a new acquaintance, “What do you do?”  Twentieth century scholars of Genesis such as Gerhard von Rad and Claus Westermann interpreted the image of God in which, according to Genesis 1, humans are created, precisely in these terms.  We are God’s deputies on earth, sent here to act, create, and take responsibility over nature (not that we have been particularly good at the latter).  We image God by doing His will and are judged by the fruits of our actions (Matthew 7:16).  An AI busily doing tasks in our stead thus furthers this sense of image.  But this approach to AI raises the obvious downside.  If computers can do many, if not most, of the jobs humans now do, then, as the poet Wendell Berry asked, what are people for?  Will humans lose their dignity? Indeed, how will we continue to function as God’s hands on earth if there is little left for us to do?  Are we really nothing more than our jobs?

Systematic theologians come riding to the rescue with a different approach to the image of God, suggesting that what matters most is being in relationship.  For Christians, this echoes the nature of a Triune God of Father, Son, and Spirit.  For Jews, the prominence of relationship is evident in the multiple covenants God makes with his people throughout the Torah.  An AI that takes on much of our work could leave us with more time to foster relationships, to be with those we love.  Or not.  Consider the stories we tell about AI in fiction or film, ranging from Asimov’s I, Robot and the lovable droids in the first Star Wars to recent films such as Her or Ex Machina.  In each, the plot revolves around human relationships with the AI.  Is this what we are ultimately looking for in AI, something to love that will love us back?

Above, the official trailer for Her. Spike Jonze’s 2013 film was nominated for five academy awards and won Best Original Screenplay.

We are made to desire relationship with something that is other to ourselves.  Augustine famously prayed, “Oh God, you have made us for yourself and our hearts are restless until they rest in you.”  Richard Forsyth and Chris Naylor, in The Hitch-Hiker’s Guide to Artificial Intelligence express this need for an Other as well:

It can get lonely being conscious in the Cosmos—especially with people like Copernicus and Carl Sagan to tell you how big it is.  Of course we can talk to each other, we can write books, but we are only talking to ourselves.  After all, we are all human.  Only four prospects of allaying this loneliness exist:  (1) Communicating with extraterrestrial intelligences.  (2)  Teaching animals to speak . . . (3)  Learning the language of another species . . . (4)  Building intelligent artifacts.  . . It appears for the moment that if we want to contact a mind that is not housed in a human skull, we will have to build one.

But will relationship with an AI be satisfying?  There are many who believe they could be.  MIT sociologist Sherry Turkle notes some hope to find in a robotic companion friendship or love that is “safe and made to measure.”  But relationships are not meant to be safe.  They are meant to stretch our boundaries, to test our preconceived notions, to draw us out of our petty preoccupations and make us grow.  In his seminal work, I and Thou, Martin Buber describes two basic stances toward the world, that of I-You or of I-It.  Which stance we take determines how we treat others.  it also determines who we are, for the I of I-You is different from the I of I-It.  While a relationship with an AI seems to expand the world of I-You, the danger lies in our using it as a template for relationship with other persons, expanding instead the world of I-It.  If our primary experience of love is one that we can turn off or turn away from at will, might we not wish to do the same with the people in our lives?

We have an increasing flock of AIs to do our work.  Singler is, however, agnostic regarding the question of whether we might ever have a truly conscious self-standing AI with whom we can relate.  I am dubious.  But whether it is possible to develop one or not, I believe AI is bound to be a disappointment if we look to it for the I-Thou relationships that make us whole.

Other EPISODES YOU MIGHT ENJOY

African American Spiritual Churches

Podcast

The African American Spiritual Churches are combinatory religious sites, which blend Protestant, Catholic, Spiritualist, Haitian Voodoo, and Benin's traditional Vodun practices. Female leadership and business management has been essential in the history of these churches. Dr. Guillory's upcoming book draws on years of archival research, ethnographic observation, and oral history interviews to tell the story of these churches from 1920 to the present day.
‘Religion is Natural and Science is Not’

Podcast

Communicating with your favorite God or gods, forest spirit, or Jinn - easy. Postulating that the entire universe is held together by theorizing the process of quantum entanglement, informed from a personal commitment to philosophical a priories, which are based on measurements of the physical properties of said universe – harder.
Belief, Belonging, and Academic Careers

Podcast

Almost twenty years ago, Grace Davie observed that despite plenty of studies into the ‘exotic edges’ of religion, ‘the picture in the middle remains remarkably blurred’. Seeking to address this imbalance and engage with the ‘beliefs of ordinary British people in everyday life’, Abby Day's recent book, ...
David Voas on Quantitative Research

Podcast

Sociological research has followed two broad paradigms – qualitative and quantitative. Qualitative studies seek depth, typically based on interviews and observation with a relatively small pool of subjects. Quantitative studies, on the other hand, survey a larger pool – in some cases, such as the UK National Census, practically the entire population of a country – relying on mass methods such as questionnaires with a limited set of questions and responses.
“Would You Still Call Yourself an Asianist?”

Podcast

Over the course of Ramey's career he has gradually and smoothly made a significant shift. Of course he still studies material relevant to his earlier training, but a shift in research focus from inter-religious cooperation to diaspora religion, eventually studying south Asian communities in the U.S.
Video Games and Religious Studies

Podcast

The project of legitimating new cultural commodities into the canon of interpretative objects can be lengthy process. In this interview with University of North Carolina at Greensboro Associate Professor Greg Grieve, video games are presented as a content moving from the margins to the center of the intersection of religion and popular culture.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution- NonCommercial- NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License.

The views expressed in podcasts, features and responses are the views of the individual contributors, and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Religious Studies Project or our sponsors. The Religious Studies Project is produced by the Religious Studies Project Association (SCIO), a Scottish Charitable Incorporated Organisation (charity number SC047750).