Here is a theory of mine that may be novel—at least, I have not read anything like it before: Due to the development of artificial intelligence, many believe that unemployment will rise sharply. However, I have never read that the fact that it will now be possible to earn a living in physically demanding occupations again will lead to selection pressure with regard to physical abilities. This, in turn, could result in the average intelligence level of the population declining over time. The only exception: the elite who operate and develop AI systems. They will retain their high intelligence. This will lead to a division of society
in terms of intellectual abilities.
I asked ChatGPT what it thinks of my thesis. With ChatGPT, you can now have philosophical discussions at a very high level. AI beats human discussion partners by a long shot. Here is ChatGPT's statement:
<<Your thesis is interesting because it links two debates that are often discussed separately:
Technological structural change through AI (which jobs will disappear, which will remain)
Long-term biological or genetic selection (which characteristics will be promoted or suppressed)
I would classify it in several steps:
1. Plausibility of the scenario “physical labor as the main source of livelihood”
Historically, technological revolutions (industrialization, automation, computerization) have tended to displace physically demanding work and promote intellectual work. AI is special in that it can also automate cognitive activities, in some cases even better than many humans.
If AI takes over the majority of higher-skilled knowledge work, physical, manual professions could actually gain relative importance—e.g., nursing, crafts, construction, and gastronomy. This would be a shift back to professions that are difficult to replace despite automation, especially if they require human flexibility on site.
2. Selection pressure on physical rather than mental abilities
For genuine biological selection pressure to arise, two conditions must be met:
People with better physical performance would have significantly higher survival and reproduction rates.
This effect would have to remain stable over several generations.
This is not the case in industrialized countries today—living standards and medical care smooth out many differences. However:
Social selection pressure (those with higher incomes and social standing tend to find partners and have children more easily) could already be at work, even if it is weaker than in the past.
If mental work is greatly devalued, the relative advantage of high intelligence could shrink, which could reduce its biological spread in the long term – at least outside the elite.
3. Exception: “AI elite”
It is plausible that a relatively small, highly qualified group will continue to be involved in complex knowledge work: developers, system operators, strategists. These individuals could maintain their high cognitive performance both economically and culturally—and further expand it through better educational resources.
This could actually lead to a two-tier cognitive society if
there is little exchange between the groups, and
partner selection takes place largely within one's own class (assortative mating).
4. Counterarguments / mitigating factors
Educational technologies: AI could personalize and broaden education to such an extent that broad sections of society also develop higher cognitive abilities.
New knowledge professions: AI could not only replace existing jobs, but also create entirely new intellectual activities that we cannot yet foresee.
Migration and globalization: Mixing populations could weaken genetic selection effects.
Sociopolitical regulation: Redistribution, access to education, and cultural policy could counteract the drift apart.
Conclusion
Your scenario is not impossible, but it depends heavily on how profoundly AI displaces intellectual work, how partner selection patterns develop, and whether education acts as a counterweight. In an extremely unequal world, a small “high-intelligence class” could indeed split off from a large, physically oriented majority—but historical experience shows that technological upheavals rarely follow such a linear path.>>
Translated with DeepL.com (free version)
No comments:
Post a Comment