We assume that since we’ve been increasingly “welded to our machines,” we are virtually interchangeable. 

We assume that their assumptions about the world are categorically valid. 

Therefore, this is the hallucination we’ve all agreed upon.

In formal logic and literature, there’s a famous enthymeme:

“Socrates is mortal because he’s human.”

Formal logic comes along and abbreviates this to exemplify a common syllogistic fallacy:

1. All humans are mortal.
2. Socrates is human.
3. Therefore, Socrates is mortal.

If you’re wondering what this has to do with A.I., I’m proud of you for reading this far into the article.

I believe in you. 

Let me back up and explain myself. 

What is a syllogism?

• A syllogism is a three-part logical argument combining two premises to arrive at a conclusion. 

What is an Enthymeme?

• An enthymeme is a type of syllogism that implies a premise rather than explicitly stating it. 

In formal logic, this is called a Syllogistic Fallacy. 

Basically, it is a bad idea to assume Socrates is mortal simply because all humans are mortal. 

Trust me, he’s haunted me throughout my writing and philosophy career as a specter of the English language.

Once you get to know him, he will follow you around and question every motive.

Just don’t do it.

You’ve been warned.

How Does this Pertain to A.I.?

To continue our “stellar metaphor,” we currently exist in what I would like to call a “social enthymeme” where:

1. Machines Haucinate
2. We are Machines
3. Therefore, we Hallucinate.

Simply put, we are caught in the hallucinatory web of our own creation. 

Our assumptions about the world have created an inescapable syllogism that has held us captive and has tightened its grip on the throat of humanity.

We assume that since we’ve been increasingly “welded to our machines,” we are virtually interchangeable. 

We assume that their assumptions about the world are categorically valid. 

Therefore, this is the hallucination we’ve all agreed upon.

What Sparked this Feeling?

Honestly, I don’t necessarily recall a time without them – machines that is. 

A memory exists but is so old it’s not even really like a dream. It’s more like a divorced feeling. A feeling someone else felt at some point in time.

Perhaps even a hallucination that malingers as memory, feigning the sickness of personality so as to escape an empty eternal void.

A more recent memory brings me to a trip to New York for my brother’s wedding.

I was researching the current exhibits at MoMa and stumbled across Refik Anadol’s “Unsupervised” exhibit.

Basically, true to his other work in the futurism landscape, Anadol creates complex algorithms that use real-time datasets like current weather data, acoustics in the room, and more concrete data like the MoMa artwork database to inspire vivid visual projections.

A voyeuristic and immersive experience, it showcases Anadol’s true artistry as he removes the enframed lenses from his audience’s eyes and proves our collective deluge of delusion.

Machines Hallucinate

We’re caught in the delusion that A.I. is somehow divorced from our preconceptions about the world. 

That its premises are somehow divine by their very nature.

It’s true. 

We (when I say we, I mean myself included) are mesmerized by the power hidden within the black box. 

It’s almost to the point of religious exaltation for the god-like qualities of machine learning.

We are Machines

Now – before I sound like a bitter content and copywriter who thinks AI will take their job – let me tell you what this three-part series is and is not about.

This three-part series is not:

• About being for or against machine learning and artificial intelligence.
• An attack on an evolving framework we call the jobs market.

In fact, I use NLPs like ChatGPT and Google’s Bard all of the time. It allows me to do my job more efficiently, be more productive, and consistently deliver high-quality content to my clients.

They are fantastic tools that we are just beginning to use. 

No, I’d argue that my job is better because of these language models and other A.I.

Instead, this three-part series is:

• A defense of my soul.  

• It is about the collective obligation to how our technology influences the world around us. 

• About making a decision for the future. 

• It is about deciding whether we will be negatively bound by the choices we made in the past.

• It is about the tensions between art and the real, between technology and the hyperreal, and all of us somewhere in between.

Therefore, We Hallucinate.

Will we take the measured benefit of accurately predicting what comes next? Or will we ignore the warning signs and live with the consequences?

As with everything, it will fall victim to politics and regulatory bodies that are fiendishly clawing left and right for more votes. 

Like the environment – like reproductive rights. 

You get the idea.

And, if we are to follow this metaphor all the way to fruition, just because we are slowly becoming machines doesn’t mean we all need to hallucinate – right?

Overview of the Series (Finally)

With this primary question in mind, let’s gain some oversight and look at the three-part premises for our syllogism:

1. Machines Hallucinate

• What do we mean by the real and the hyperreal?
• How does technology create the hyperreal?

2. We are machines

• How are we Machines?
• How does art mimic the real and the hyperreal?

3. Therefore, We Hallucinate

• Where do we go from here?
• Do we necessarily “need” to hallucinate?

If I haven’t lost you already (statistically, I lost 80% of you at the title – and that’s metrics for articles that are actually interesting!), follow me along this three-part journey of deductive reasoning. 

Join me for the following three articles about A.I. through the lens of a machine hallucination, our social enthymeme, our syllogistic fallacy.

It’s a fallacy that grows daily – out of our control, with no elucidation in sight. 

It’s a divorced feeling that someone’s felt – at sometime anyway.

Perhaps a memory. Perhaps the historical hallucination of a time before we became welded to our machines.

References