If one considers “human potential” to be defined outside of practical functions, then I suppose practical functions–often referred to as “work”–would be considered a waste.
However, a robot can (and does) build furniture. A robot can (and does) paint. With the emerging reality and insurgency of advanced artificial intelligence technology, one could conjecture that any function performed by humans could be reasonably performed by a “robot”.
But consider for a moment the man who gets a deep enjoyment and satisfaction out of handcrafting furniture; indeed, not only handcrafting it, but selling it to others as well, so that he can continue to purchase the elements needed to build his wares. Consider the fact that the rhythm in the work and visceral, methodical nature of the brain, wood, and tools connecting could be therapeutic to this man. That the blend of functionality, practicality, and art inherent in this “work” that could be so easily performed by robots bring a sense of purpose to his life.
With all due respect, not everyone was meant to Roam and Write. Engaging in a function–even one that could be performed by a robot–is not a waste of potential.
I have considered all of those points. I’m in full agreement with you. There will *always* be a place for human art and love, whether that means handcrafting furniture or selling said furniture to customers. But how many of those people who are currently performing robot-capable jobs are currently doing their work for the love of it? Very, very, very few. The vast majority do their work not because they love what they’re doing but because they desire a good life, food, a home, and security for their family.
The vast majority of human beings don’t do their work because it brings them joy but because someone (industrialists) have decided that they will pay a human being $X in exchange for their time, regardless of whether or not such an exchange is a waste of that human beings potential. In other words, industrialists are exploiting cheap human labor in exchange for work that will make them more money than they have to pay the employee. I believe that’s immoral.
I was never implying that everyone was meant to “Roam and Write”, but I do believe that every human being has a right to do work that brings them joy, work that utilizes their unique potential, even if that unique potential means building and selling beautiful furniture.
If one considers “human potential” to be defined outside of practical functions, then I suppose practical functions–often referred to as “work”–would be considered a waste.
However, a robot can (and does) build furniture. A robot can (and does) paint. With the emerging reality and insurgency of advanced artificial intelligence technology, one could conjecture that any function performed by humans could be reasonably performed by a “robot”.
But consider for a moment the man who gets a deep enjoyment and satisfaction out of handcrafting furniture; indeed, not only handcrafting it, but selling it to others as well, so that he can continue to purchase the elements needed to build his wares. Consider the fact that the rhythm in the work and visceral, methodical nature of the brain, wood, and tools connecting could be therapeutic to this man. That the blend of functionality, practicality, and art inherent in this “work” that could be so easily performed by robots bring a sense of purpose to his life.
With all due respect, not everyone was meant to Roam and Write. Engaging in a function–even one that could be performed by a robot–is not a waste of potential.
Ramona, thank you for sharing your thoughts.
I have considered all of those points. I’m in full agreement with you. There will *always* be a place for human art and love, whether that means handcrafting furniture or selling said furniture to customers. But how many of those people who are currently performing robot-capable jobs are currently doing their work for the love of it? Very, very, very few. The vast majority do their work not because they love what they’re doing but because they desire a good life, food, a home, and security for their family.
The vast majority of human beings don’t do their work because it brings them joy but because someone (industrialists) have decided that they will pay a human being $X in exchange for their time, regardless of whether or not such an exchange is a waste of that human beings potential. In other words, industrialists are exploiting cheap human labor in exchange for work that will make them more money than they have to pay the employee. I believe that’s immoral.
I was never implying that everyone was meant to “Roam and Write”, but I do believe that every human being has a right to do work that brings them joy, work that utilizes their unique potential, even if that unique potential means building and selling beautiful furniture.