In today’s interview, CloudTweaks connects with Ron Folman, a renowned expert in quantum mechanics and professor of physics at Ben-Gurion University of the Negev. With a distinguished career that includes founding key research centers and receiving prestigious awards such as the Lamb Medal for Quantum Optics, Ron brings a unique perspective to the complex relationship between artificial intelligence, free will, and consciousness. His upcoming book delves into these themes, challenging conventional ideas and exploring how they intersect with our understanding of human nature.
Ron, your book explores the intersection of AI, free will, and consciousness. To start, how do you define consciousness, and why is it such a pivotal concept in understanding human nature?
Humans have always felt that our species is unique relative to the other animals inhabiting our planet. More specifically, people felt that we have a unique form of life. However, no matter how hard they tried, they could never find a good definition for this uniqueness. They tried to define it using all kinds of other phrases such as self-awareness, sentient, and consciousness, but these terms did little to help in resolving the enigma of the uniqueness of human life. The Human Test begins by noting that these terms have failed us so far, and if we want some clearcut answers within our lifetime, we must make the bold move of abandoning them while searching for new pathways in the pursuit of a straightforward definition of human life, a definition that could be measured in a real experiment.
Let us note already now that while The Human Test makes quite a few conjectures, it is firmly grounded in what is already known. Specifically, it is based on hundreds of academic studies, compiled into one resounding message. These studies, referenced in the book, are carefully chosen from a wide range of disciplines, such as physics, computer science, biology and neuroscience, and all the way to history, art and philosophy. The conjectures made in the book may thus be thought of as learned extrapolations of present-day science and technology into the near future.
You challenge the idea that we are truly conscious beings in a world where AI can predict so much of our behavior. How does AI’s predictive ability force us to rethink the very nature of free will?
Just like consciousness has never been accurately defined, free will has evaded, ever since the dawn of time, all attempts to accurately define it. Without a clearcut definition we cannot, of course, empirically test whether we have free will or not. The Human Test puts forward a novel clearcut definition that may be empirically tested in the very near future by AI. This test has already been put into motion and is poised to become the most profound experiment even conducted on humans.
If our choices, from breakfast preferences to romantic decisions, can be predicted with high accuracy, what implications does this have on our understanding of free will as a human characteristic?
The Human Test defines free will as the opposite of predictability. There is a consensus that machines have no free will, and as the hallmark of a good machine is its predictability, predictability must be the opposite of free will. In other words, the two are incompatible, for what real meaning can we assign to free will if a third party can predict what you choose before you make the choice?
In a context in which AI is becoming extremely powerful and Big Data becomes enormous beyond what we can now fathom, and as the harvesting of data on individual humans will exponentially grow, The Human Test explains in detail how the new technology will be able to test the level of predictability of each individual. Half the data harvested on an individual’s past choices will be used to train the AI, namely, to get to know that specific individual, and the other half will be used to test the AI’s ability to predict what that person chooses in specific situations and then compare this prediction to his or her actual choice. The outcome of this test will be a predictability score for each person. If AI finds that a specific person is predictable, then he or she clearly have no free will.
In the book, you delve into the role of quantum physics in consciousness. How does quantum theory offer a new perspective on human cognition and our sense of self?
The Human Test goes further than the topic of free will and proposes a new definition for human life. Again, most would agree that a machine is not alive, and so human life must be the opposite of machine. As the hallmark of machines is predictability, human life is the opposite of predictability. The above predictability score provided to each individual by AI will thus also tell each and every one of us how close to a machine we are, and consequently how alive we are.
At the other extreme lies randomness. Randomness is the opposite of predictability. However, randomness cannot be life, as randomness is a throw of the dice, and this cannot be what we humans aspire to be. The Human Test thus conjectures that the definition of human life is to be unpredictable yet not random. Namely, human life is maximized in the middle between predictability and randomness.
In fact, all behavioral studies put our behavior much closer to the predictable rather than the random edges of the above spectrum, so that the real archenemy of human life is predictability. More so, physics teaches us that at the scale of the brain nature is deterministic, namely, predictable. Are we therefore doomed to be predictable? The question may then be asked whether it is possible that evolution has devised ways through which our mind may fight predictability.
Indeed, The Human Test explains in detail how electric noise that has been found in the human brain may do exactly that. However, electric noise is only random relative to present-day technology, but one may imagine that in the far future, supercomputers and ultra-sensitive brain probes will be able to also predict this noise. Here enters quantum physics. One of the most fundamental tenets of quantum physics lies in its inherent randomness. A photon impinging on a piece of glass coated with a thin layer of silver paint—so that it acts as a partial mirror, will either be reflected or transmitted. Quantum theory tells us that at the most fundamental level of nature, one cannot predict for a specific impinging photon which of the two occurrences will take place. This is true randomness—which can similarly take place with other particles such as electrons or atoms, and if it plays a significant part in the decision-making processes in our brain, then the road is open for an underlying brain mechanism which can fight predictability.
Finally, the book shows how one may equate between predictability and the exploiting part of our mind, and between randomness and the exploring part of our mind. The internal battle within our mind between predictability and randomness is thus a battle between exploit and explore, and a living mind is that which arrives at a balance between the two.
Given the rise of big data and AI, do you think we are increasingly being reduced to mere data points? Or is there something about human experience that defies this mechanistic view?
As explained in The Human Test, the rise of Big Data and AI will indeed turn us into data points to such an extent that we will be predictable. As described in the book in great detail, this will be based on the exponentially growing personal data harvesting in all walks of life. AI will surely know us better than we know ourselves.
However, as noted above, evolution may have found ways to fight our predictability, at least to some extent, so that, for example, people may acquire the advantageous skill of exploration. As described above, this may come through the relative randomness of neural network electrical noise or the inherent randomness of quantum physics. However, it could be that because of the admiration of machine-age logic following the great success of the industrial revolution, and the strict education of our young generations towards logical thought, a form of thought which is in fact the opposite of randomness, we have suppressed to some extent the mechanisms evolution has put in place to suppress predictability.
Consequently, The Human Test conjectures that pills may be designed to further fight predictability. If a person receives a high predictability score from the AI test, and if that person understands the grave philosophical consequences, he or she may want to take the pill.
The Human Test describes two types of pills: A pill that may already be made and taken now, and one which is more elaborate and may be manufactured and taken in the near future. The pill of the first kind is based on exposure to abstract content such as high poetry, modern dancing, abstract paintings, activities which the logical mind finds hard to interpret, and which may therefore excite it into new modes of thought unfamiliar to it, beyond its comfort zone.
The second type of pill will be manufactured once the masses demand it, and this will most probably happen only once the predictability score will be readily available to all humans, and once humans understand the grave philosophical consequences, namely, that a high predictability score means machine, and machine means death. So, while a person’s EKG and EEG may show that their rudimentary heart and brain functions are intact, the predictability score will show that mentally they are not alive.
This pill of the second kind will include medical interventions in the form of pharmaceuticals or even implanted chips that would introduce noise and randomness into the brain.
Last, let me note that the pill of the second kind may be introduced into the human sphere earlier than expected if individuals, businesses, and perhaps even governments understand the economic edge that distancing humans from predictability may provide. Without any regard to philosophical thought, once people realize that distancing oneself from the predictable extreme allows the mind to explore and acquire divergent thought, and that this allows for economic gains, then it stands to reason that the demand for the pill of the second kind will come sooner rather than later.
You mention that creativity is key to preserving our humanity in this increasingly automated world. Could you explain why creativity remains uniquely human, even in a world dominated by AI and algorithms?
As noted above, The Human Test describes in detail why human life is maximized half-way between predictability and randomness. The former represents machines while the latter represents a throw of the dice. In the middle, humans are defined by a unique combination of the best of both worlds. They can exploit but they can also explore. However, there is no exploration without divergent thought, without creativity.
It thus becomes clear that creativity is not only something we humans should aspire to have as a personality trait. It is in fact a poor-human’s test of how far he or she have managed to distance themselves from the machine extreme of predictability. Tests for creativity already exist, and consequently, until AI and Big Data give humans their accurate predictability score, creativity can serve, under our new definition of human life, as a test of that life.
Do you believe that creativity is something AI could ever replicate? Or is it a deeply ingrained, human-only quality that cannot be mimicked by machines, no matter how advanced?
As described in The Human Test, robots, with AI in their head, will most likely be able to fully emulate the human brain, including its random seeds coming from noise or quantum behavior. Consequently, it is expected that robots will also be able to emulate the creativity of people.
Creativity is thus not a sufficient condition for human uniqueness. However, it is clearly a necessary one. Without creativity we are a rudimentary machine to begin with.
As AI becomes more integrated into our lives, what do you think will be the most significant challenge in maintaining human agency and individual expression in the face of algorithmic predictions?
There is probably no way to stop the rise of AI and Big Data. Similarly, there is most likely no turning back on the all-encompassing data harvesting which feeds Big Data. Models of personality types are also becoming more and more detailed. All this is explained clearly in The Human Test. Under these conditions, humans will become highly predictable. The predictability score will in fact become a personality trait.
As noted, the philosophical consequence of predictability is mental death, and AI, with its predictability test, will force us to accept that we are machines. To avoid this machine doom, we will have to fight. Indeed, this will most probably be the most important fight in a person’s life. With the help of the two types of pills noted above, we will hopefully be able to distance ourselves from predictability, so that we may reach the optimal human point, midway between randomness and predictability.
If technology continues to advance in the way you predict, what role do you see for traditional concepts like empathy, morality, and emotional intelligence in a world driven by artificial intelligence?
Previously I noted that distancing ourselves from the predictable extreme is a necessary condition but not a sufficient one. Once we are in the middle between randomness and predictability, we will have to search for additional traits that define us. Empathy, morality, and emotional intelligence may very well prove to be crucial. However, as they are not well defined, and as The Human Test focuses on concepts that may be clearly defined and thus empirically tested, the book does not delve far into these additional topics.
It should be noted, however, that in The Human Test the last part of the book is devoted to a translation of the conclusions born from the scientific parts of the book to the language of the humanities. With the help of ideas of numerous philosophers, The Human Test explains that humans will have to define what they ought to be, namely, what they aspire to become. Concepts such as empathy, morality, and emotional intelligence, obviously then become extremely important.
In closing, your book is a call to reconsider what it means to be truly alive and conscious. What steps can we, as a society, take to ensure that our humanity is not lost, even as we move into an era of increasing technological influence and control?
Indeed, most humans feel that the mere fact that they are breathing, or that they have a biologically functioning heart and brain—so that those lines on the hospital monitors are not flat—is not enough proof of life. For the simplest worm also has similar properties. It is therefore necessary that we humans conduct a continuous search for more unique definitions. The Human Test makes the necessary first bold step in this journey, by defining predictability as the archenemy of human life.
As explained in my previous answers, once this is understood, we may begin to introduce ways to fight back against the mental death brought about by the machine doom of being predictable.
However, in The Human Test one finds a stark warning. It may very well be that when the time comes and some agencies have the power to predict us, we will not be told about it. Such agencies may likely feel that not exposing their abilities enables them an economic, or security or political edge. The gains afforded by such technology may be enormous, and consequently, the motivation to keep it hidden so that people do not take defensive measures, are overwhelming.
In fact, we may already be living now in a pyramid of predictability, where each layer of society has more AI and Big Data capabilities than the layer beneath it. The person or entity at the very top will not need to use any force in order to rule, as the power of predictability at their disposal will enable them to manipulate the layers beneath with almost unlimited success. Not in any point in human history has such ultimate power to rule existed.
It is therefore of the utmost importance that watchdogs are put in place by society. The most sustainable and effective watchdog could most probably be universities and academic institutions. However, they will be able perform this task, of paramount importance to humanity, if and only if, the growing influence of governments and industry in the halls of academy is restrained. Without independence, the academic institutions will fall short of being able to secure the interests of humans.
Last but not least, with your permission I would like to end this brief interview with words of praise written by a distinguished engineer in Google, who read the entire book. His words are specifically important as he is an AI expert with a very impressive record. For example, he was previously a professor of computer science, and in 2021 was a recipient of the Edgar F. Codd Sigmond innovation award. Alon Halevy says the following: “In the cacophony of voices, books, and articles on the topic of AI, The Human Test clearly stands out. Intertwining alluring storytelling with a myriad of scientific and technological facts and conjectures, from philosophy through biology and quantum physics, Ron Folman hypothesizes that AI will be able to provide us with deep insight into questions of consciousness, creativity, the quantum mind, and free will. As a computer scientist who devoted his career to Big Data and AI, and their alignment with human values, I find this book to be captivating and, more importantly, of paramount importance to our future.”
By Randy Ferguson