Toward a new work paradigm in an age of AI
Rethinking the Fear of Job Loss: How AI and Automation Can Unlock a New Work-Leisure Paradigm
By Will Green May 5, 2023
In recent weeks Goldman Sachs has been making headlines with the prospect of 300mn jobs on the line due to the rapid acceleration of AI technology and the replacement of many white collar jobs by its hands.
But it’s not the first time headlines have been made due to the advent of new technologies. This is a repeating historical narrative. From electrification to the horse to cart transition, computers back in the 60s or the internet more recently. Time and again we have feared the loss of jobs only for the opposite to happen. “There has been a steady march of new jobs that technology has been creating since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution” economist David Autor argues in his TED talk.
The concern is that this time the speed of transition is far higher than anything previously seen. 300m seems to be a low ball on potential estimates. McKinsey already put the figure at 375 million who’s jobs could be lost by 2030, others say up to 1 billion could be affected.
Isn’t the whole idea of technological progress to eventually free us from work? To create a Utopia?
But whilst there may be 100 reasons to be fearful of the impending technological arms race - notably with the prospect that our AI assistants might accidentally wipe out humanity if their programming is not aligned with the undefinable parameters of ensuring human flourishing - haven’t we got the fear of job loss backwards? Isn’t the whole idea of technological progress to eventually free us from work? To create a Utopia?
We’re so caught up in the paradigm of work-survival thinking that we fail to recognise the opportunity that lies ahead.
What does work-survival mean? In the current paradigm we are born and must work for our right to live. We have no birthright to access the goods we need to survive and thrive. In the predominant social Darwinian view of the world more recently expounded by selfish gene deterministic theory our fight for existence is ordained by nature. However evidence from the social sciences, neuroscience, biology, epigenetics and other fields increasingly suggest that this view is lopsided at best if not downright wrong. The emerging view is that humans are innately pro social, caring, empathic, compassionate and our capacity for love stretches into an intrinsic desire for creativity and mutualism - ideas interestingly that Darwin himself supported (see Descent of man; love and mutualism are mentioned over 90 times vs selfishness about 10 and in a negative context). Systems scientist Riane Eisler documents extensive evidence in her book Nurturing Our Humanity noting “rather than being hardwired for ruthless selfishness and violence, humans have also evolved powerful capacities, and indeed proclivities, for empathy, equity, helping, caring, and various other prosocial acts."
Why does this matter?
It matters because in the current paradigm, survival is assumed as the sole motivator to get us to work and participate in society. If we lose that motivation we will become lazy “free riders”, as social theorist Mancur Olson warned 60 years ago in the logic of collective action. Jobs are not just a means to an end they are the substrate that keeps society functioning, lose that and anarchy will ensue.
Studies have shown that we’re less creative when we are in survival mode. The current paradigm has us in a kind of collective fight or flight mode writ-large.
But the emerging perspective of human nature suggests that if freed from the obligation to work to survive - an extrinsic motivator - we will not only not become lazy but we will activate our intrinsic motivator functions. Intrinsic motivation is activated when individuals have the feeling they are doing an activity out of their “free choice”, which is to say if we must take that job purely to put food on the table it is unlikely we have the freedom of choice. Studies have shown that we’re less creative when we are in survival mode. The current paradigm has us in a kind of collective fight or flight mode writ-large.
By freeing people from the bondage of work, which may be possible in an age of AI, we have the potential to activate an even greater creativity and participation in society. What is more we have the policy ideas for how to facilitate this. Universal basic income and its eventual derivatives have the power to change dynamics of the jobs market as we know it, eventually allowing people to choose the work purely based on what they want to do most.
It is not just theory either. The emerging perspective that comes from empirical research in psychology is showing how a basic income would not lead to reduced motivation to work it will actually increase it. Automation therefore has the potential to revolutionise people's capacity to find true meaning, fulfilment and purpose.
At this critical juncture in civilisation where our survival as a species depends on us finding new ways to reduce our impact on the planet and live better with nature, the impending job’s crisis is yet another existential initiatory challenge pushing us to shift our perspectives. If we can heed the evidence and tell a new story of human nature, one that’s grounded in creativity and cooperation then we have the potential to unlock a new work-leisure paradigm and a world where progress happens not just because of the commercial gains to be made but also for the fun of it all.