Sam Altman knows me better than I know myself. The algorithm has become a best friend. They will teach you how to become original. EM Dash is a “real” suspect in a prize. It’s better to say “nature.” As if you already know what this means.
Openai (ChatGPT) CEO Altman is at the forefront of the latest digital technology. Supported by fellow peers and billionaires like Meta (formerly Facebook)’s Mark Zuckerberg, Altman runs towards the singularity at the moment when mechanical intelligence surpasses human intelligence, as if this transformation requires an extraordinary leap. If they stay in 2045, the moment is said to be much closer – 2030?
Eventually, my wrist device was able to ensure you were interested in me. Or make sure I’m actually smart. Even before nerve transplants, we are digitalised in competition with different versions of ourselves. We see the news that has been adjusted for us and know which products should be avoided and which substances are among its top performers. This all sounds exaggerated, so it’s flagged for exaggeration and encourages searching for more reliable synonyms.
I am caught up in the advice that the best answer to all this is “to know your own voice.” But AI knows that, but to make it a reality, you need endless copy editing. My colleague smirked, “The only way I can do it.” Authentic It’s been weird these days. “It’s already on the data bank, and AI is blamed for hallucinations.
It’s easier to stick to our own sounds, just as it is. But in reality, what we consider to be original is already a copy, a replica of what others would want to hear. Our desires are borrowed from birth. Infants don’t just want to be fed. They learn to expect and prefer feeding the way they experienced it. They mimic expressions within weeks, facing towards the voice, indicating that they prefer familiar tones and faces.
Rene Girard, the great philosopher of desire, explored the nature of what we want and wrote about “imposed desires”: how to take clues from others for the value we desire. We learn how to be selfish before we know that it’s not what other people are like.
In literature, another thinker spoke of “influence concerns.” This is a struggle to overcome or creatively misunderstand the work of a great predecessor in order to ensure his originality. In external literature, the same dynamics unfold in life. Looking at them with the hands of others will discover new ambitions. I want to write well, as many of my readers have urged me to do so, and I would not want to be judged otherwise.
Artificial intelligence drama makes us think our times are unprecedented. Plato spoke of the emergence of writing himself as a threat to the truth. His own dialogue was written, and Socrates ended up composing poems, but the argument was that writing weakens memory, giving only knowledge borrowed from words fixed on the page, rather than gaining through his appearance of wisdom, his own understanding. However, as Plato taught in the doctrine of the Soul’s prerequisites, our understanding is itself a “borrowed” imitation, and speaking directly is not near the truth. The criticism of writing as a derivative is pointing to something deeper. The relationship with the language itself is fundamentally imitation.
Originality is already a myth. Or, in another context, Plato calls it a “noble lie.” Every sentence has another person’s touch. Speech does not overtake imitation. It just hides it. AI reveals the remix. So the question is not purity, not responsibility. We trust voices, we hope we reject and choose to pass it on. If there is something like originality, it is a conscience that you choose.
AI has no conscience other than what we program. It’s important, but it can’t address the deep question of what should be imitated. That wrestling is an impact to accept it and a conscious choice to resist, and clearly gives birth to humanity.
The Bible describes the disciples as “imitations of Christ.” Who do you imitate? Is it Christ, or something like Christ, a great thinker like Plato, a superhuman machine?
The Old Gospel Song provides one answer: “Just like me.”– Not a rejection of influence, but always accept that we are always shaped in some way by what we receive and are responsible for what we give.
Notes and reading
cf.Tip Off #61 – Return to the future
cf. Tip #142 – How Love Should Be Begin
cf. Hint #209 – Ancient Discussions with Authors
cf. Luke Bourgis’ “thick” and “thin” desires; want (2021), Introduction to Rene Girard, Milan Cundera’s “lightness” and “weight”; The insurmountable lightness of existence (1984, 2023)
cf. Harold Bloom, Influence anxiety (1973, Rev. 1997) – Strong poets of “Swerve” from the precursors creatively misunderstand them to make room for their own voices. This is a drama of rivals that resembles Burgis’ “thick” desires and Kundera’s “weight.”
Black mirrorThe British anthology series premiered in 2011 and moved to Netflix in 2016. Each standalone episode delves into the dark satirical aspects of technology’s impact on society, revealing how media, AI, surveillance, and biotechnology exacerbates human flaws. This title evokes the black screen of our device, the symbol of both charm and foreshadowing.
(Thank you, tl)
cf. Approx. 2 + 2 = 5 – Orwell knew mathematics.
Source: 2 + 2 = 5 – williamgreen.substack.com
