Unregistered

I am interested in The Singularity (as discussed by Raymond Kurzweil and others), and its implications for Art.

Having recently seen a History Channel program on "Lucy" (australopithecus afarensis), it's striking that the simple act of standing up (a biomechanics solution) might have preceded the use of tools and a larger brain, and led to civilization.

My understanding is that at the point of Singularity, the world is fundamentally changed, probably beyond our current ability to comprehend. Kurzweil and others believe that this event will occur in the next thirty years.

Obviously, this has implications for Art. I'm very interested in these implications, and welcome discussion on this matter.

- Bernardo

John

Hi, Bernardo. I enjoyed Kurzweil's The Age of Spiritual Machines (also his book on immortality), and I'm currently reading The Singularity is Near.

My personal opinion is that Kurzweil's view of the near future is probably accurate and that self-directed AI is probably possible. (In fact I'm certain it's possible; I should say I believe it's possible humans will be able to create computers that have it.)

However I do think that the acceleration he foresees will take much longer to come about. For one thing, people simply don't learn that fast or change that fast. There are plenty of people on Earth who have never touched a computer, in fact MOST people on Earth probably still don't fully accept the 150-year-old concept of evolution, so the idea that humans will advance asymptotically within 30 years seems unlikely.

Also I can imagine the pure thought capability of machines advancing quickly and maybe even outstripping that of humans, but there will be vast difficulties in translating this to the physical sphere. Creating flexible "bodies" of some kind, building the kind of atom-level technology that such minds could design, etc. Humans will have to mediate everything, and humans physical action just can't be accelerated that much.

As for art: Hmmm. I'd have to do some thinking on that before I could even come up with a knee-jerk reaction.

Unregistered

I am reminded of Leonardo da Vinci's autopsies -- he seemed to have looked on Man as a machine (much of his work in this area was supposedly destroyed by the Church).

And I'm reminded of a recent PBS special on Modern Art -- they noted that DeKooning was among the first to comment on the shift from the Industrial to Information Age. I wonder who the DeKoonings of the coming years will be. My understanding is that we're still in the period of Modern Art, but the Singularity would surely change all that. Perhaps, Modern Art will take us right up to that moment.

I'm also reminded of Alan Alda's show -- they recently did a story on coclear implants, and another on restoring sight. This technology might eventually allow for other direct inputs to the brain. This desire to interface seems innate to life.

-- Bernardo

Bernardo

The books that I was introduced to recently are: Remote Viewing: Invented Worlds in Recent Painting and Drawing; and, Drop Dead Cute. Both include artists that seem to be grappling with this Singularity issue.

Remote Viewing includes such artists as Franz Ackerman, Ati Maier, Julie Mehretu, Matthew Ritchie, and Alexander Ross.

Drop Dead Cute is composed entirely of female Asian artists. Some believe that Asia will have a huge influence on Art in the next ten years or so.

Kurzweil points out that while the US graduated about 53,000 engineers in a recent year (down from 60,000 a few years ago), China is graduating c.300,000 each year. The tech bubble may have burst, but that was only a market matter -- the science has continued to move forward unabated.

-Bernardo

Bernardo

Kurzweil notes that replacing only 10% of our red blood cells with a nano version that is said to be 1000x more effecient would allow us to run an Olympic sprint for fifteen minutes, or hold our breath under water for four hours. I keep thinking of Lucy standing up over one million years ago, and the changes derived from that.

Bernardo

John,

I don't think humans will mediate everything, or certainly not humans as we know them. Imagine if a person was able to utilize the full capabilities of their brain (we use only a fraction now). Then imagine that societies utilized everyone to their full potential. Then imagine if our abilities were technologically boosted beyond even our maximum potentials -- it could be a Golden Age.

Also, the denial of Evolution by some has no effect on the theory or its laws -- they continue unabated. And the limited, or nonexistent access to technology by most of the world's population does not mean that technology doesn't effect their lives (think of colonization, monetary policy, global markets, etc.), and The Singularity would certainly have implications for the entire planet. I don't think that The Singularity would allow for inefficiencies, like the current waste of so many lives (3 to 4 million die each year in sub-Saharan Africa from treatable or preventable diseases and hunger).

My wise old friend likes to say, "Science is iconoclastic." And the Dalai Lama is said to have made a similar remark, that Buddhism does not oppose Science and its discoveries. In fact, I believe the Dalai Lama has been working on some Science related matters -- I'll look through my notes.

-Bernardo

Bernardo

The Dali Lama reference was made by Sam Harris on C-Span 2. Harris is the author of The End of Faith: Religion, Terror, and the Future of Reason. Toward the end of his c. 1 hr. talk, he suggested a melding, or cooperation, between western science and eastern religion/philosophy, and he noted that the Dali Lama is involved in this subject. Harris pointed out that the Dali Lama is open to whatever science might reveal.

Harris began his talk by saying that we are operating with Iron Age philosophy and 21st century technology. Harris didn't mention the Singularity, but he's obviously grappling with many of the same issues that Kurzweil's book touches on.

Harris questions our notion that we should respect the beliefs of others merely because those are the beliefs that they hold. We do this in no other part of our lives -- what we respect is reason, and we need to hold to this standard in all things.

Walking through galleries recently, it is relatively easy to find examples of the dark side of the evolving technology, and reactions against science -- I remain on the lookout, however, for positive images of our future.

-Bernardo

Bernardo

People might take a look at the works of Ben Matthews, Steven Hazard, and Howard Finster -- all seem to working with issues raised by the Singularity -- evolution, technology, etc. I am still looking for more positive images of the future, however (I thought this morning that the future might look like a Thomas Kinkaid painting -- kinda scary).

-Bernardo

ozric9

.

Bernardo

Yes, I think The Matrix is covering the same ground (I haven't read the literature and thinking behind the film). Kurzweil mentioned another book (by a different author), Enough, that proposes that we stop this process, if that's even possible (Kurzweil agrees with the risks pointed out in Enough, but is more optimistic about the ability to counter them).

I disagree with your suggestion that painting is less capable of addressing this topic than film. Think of the artwork of the last 100+ years -- I think it can hold its own when compared to other mediums (Picasso's "Guernica," for instance, can stand toe to toe with any film on the Spanish Civil War, or war in general).

Modernists and Postmodernists have fertile ground, here. It's this artwork that I find most exciting, whether they're reacting against it, playing with it, or celebrating the process that Kurzweil and others describe. Indeed, the Modernists have been addressing this issue since the founding of their movement in the 1800s.

-Bernardo