Albert Einstein declared “It has become appallingly obvious that our technology has exceeded our humanity.” It is important to remember that Einstein said this long before all of the technological developments we know today. If he could see how far we have progressed, his proclamation would most likely be even more urgent. Many people share the fear of technology overtaking humans. While this apprehension is certainly understandable, technology has always advanced over time and the benefits have always outweighed the costs, there is no reason to believe this trend will not continue to persist. Two authors Clive Thompson, who wrote “Smarter than You Think” and Kevin Kelly, who wrote “Better than Human: Why Robots Will- and Must-Take Our Jobs,”
…show more content…
Similarly to Kelly, Thompson opens his essay by acknowledging the fact that people fear technology outperforming humans. However, instead of the fear being about losing jobs, it is about losing a game of chess. In the late 1990’s one of the best players of chess at the time, grand master Garry Kasparov, lost to a computer. People immediately began questioning the very foundation of chess, wondering why anyone would play if a computer could always do better. Rather than dwell on his loss, Kasparov recognized that computers and humans both brought different strengths to the table. While computers are able to process countless moves at once, humans have intuition and the ability to assess opponent's strengths and weaknesses (Thompson 343). Kasparov found that “Human strategic guidance combined with the tactical acuity of a computer was overwhelming” (Kelly 346). This led Thompson to conclude that neither humans nor computers are smarter at chess. The way to play the best game of chess is to have computers and humans working together, called advanced chess (Thompson 347). He then goes on to explain that he used chess as a metaphor to illustrate that all of the new tools technology has provided us mean we are all playing “advanced chess.” Like Kelly, Thompson asserts that collaboration with technology can improve …show more content…
Namely, Thompson illustrates how similar the anxiety people face today is to the worry people held about the printing press. One mathematician, even went as far as to proclaim the printing press would cause “a return to barbarism.” Today we can appreciate how absurd this statement was. The printing press has led to the spread of ideas, the possibility of people of all socioeconomic stati to learn, and scholarly collaboration. However, skeptics can still continue to claim that this time will be different. Additionally, If we are constantly in a fear of progressing due to the possibility of losing our progress society will either stay stagnant or regress. Unfortunately, as no one has a crystal ball, we will never know for certain that their fears are unwarranted. Another criticism Thompson faces is that by becoming too reliant technology, we are susceptible to losing everything should it be taken away or not work. Though Thompson acknowledges the validity of this criticism, he responds by saying that “if we simply don’t pay much attention to how our tools affect the way we work, then yes..” (Thompson 358). In other words, if we understand how the tools impact our work, we reduce the risk of being overly reliant on them. Another criticism of Thompson’s argument is that he talks about chess extensively, a game that not all people can relate to, or care about. I
Similarly to Kelly, Thompson opens his essay by acknowledging the fact that people fear technology outperforming humans. However, instead of the fear being about losing jobs, it is about losing a game of chess. In the late 1990’s one of the best players of chess at the time, grand master Garry Kasparov, lost to a computer. People immediately began questioning the very foundation of chess, wondering why anyone would play if a computer could always do better. Rather than dwell on his loss, Kasparov recognized that computers and humans both brought different strengths to the table. While computers are able to process countless moves at once, humans have intuition and the ability to assess opponent's strengths and weaknesses (Thompson 343). Kasparov found that “Human strategic guidance combined with the tactical acuity of a computer was overwhelming” (Kelly 346). This led Thompson to conclude that neither humans nor computers are smarter at chess. The way to play the best game of chess is to have computers and humans working together, called advanced chess (Thompson 347). He then goes on to explain that he used chess as a metaphor to illustrate that all of the new tools technology has provided us mean we are all playing “advanced chess.” Like Kelly, Thompson asserts that collaboration with technology can improve …show more content…
Namely, Thompson illustrates how similar the anxiety people face today is to the worry people held about the printing press. One mathematician, even went as far as to proclaim the printing press would cause “a return to barbarism.” Today we can appreciate how absurd this statement was. The printing press has led to the spread of ideas, the possibility of people of all socioeconomic stati to learn, and scholarly collaboration. However, skeptics can still continue to claim that this time will be different. Additionally, If we are constantly in a fear of progressing due to the possibility of losing our progress society will either stay stagnant or regress. Unfortunately, as no one has a crystal ball, we will never know for certain that their fears are unwarranted. Another criticism Thompson faces is that by becoming too reliant technology, we are susceptible to losing everything should it be taken away or not work. Though Thompson acknowledges the validity of this criticism, he responds by saying that “if we simply don’t pay much attention to how our tools affect the way we work, then yes..” (Thompson 358). In other words, if we understand how the tools impact our work, we reduce the risk of being overly reliant on them. Another criticism of Thompson’s argument is that he talks about chess extensively, a game that not all people can relate to, or care about. I