Book Review: Genesis: Artificial Intelligence, Hope, and the Human Spirit

By Eric Schmidt, Henry A. Kissinger, Craig Mundie

This book is primarily a work on AI and the new technology  it has spawned written during the final years of Kissinger’s life. It really is a continuation of his earlier research and thought that metamorphosed into a new book titled Nuclear Weapons And Foreign Policy.

Contrary to what was believed then, Kissinger was not a warmonger but however even his youthful idealism did not make him a pacifist. He truly believed that the horrors of nuclear war were not likely to be avoided by reductions of nuclear arsenals or periodic inspections of

both  adversaries’  nuclear capabilities.

 Yet, he argued, America would survive if it depended on less catastrophic applications of nuclear power. If it indeed went into a thermonuclear war, that would tantamount to committing national suicide. Possibly to survive, it could  surrender which was the lesser of the two evils. Kissinger believed that one way to avoid mutual destruction was to limit one’s objectives for waging nuclear war. This would entail gaining a deeper understanding of the adversary’s psychology and military capability

While nuclear technology and its ramifications were widely understood earlier, the advent of AI thereafter added an entirely new dimension hitherto unknown and unfamiliar in modern history. Few human minds could grapple with this kind of disruptive technology and fewer scientists knew how to control this technology since it seemed to have a mind of its own. But it would be a grave error to assume that AI would be used for more productive rather than potentially far more destructive purposes

Yet faced by the prospect of a devastating nuclear exchange, this learned scholar refused to succumb to the deterministic view that nuclear war was inevitable, nor did he subscribe to those naysayers and their prophecies of doom. He was optimistic enough to believe that in every society, there would be groups of dedicated individuals who could alter the course of history by intervening to align technological developments with their own ethics and values.

Kissinger continued his line of thought by asserting that while science and the use of reason  had given mankind its greatest achievements throughout history, they could not provide any viable solutions to the contemporary dilemmas posed by the rise of AI. Suffice to say, Kissinger and his collaborators argued, AI has penetrated every nook and corner of modern society and even has managed to have a ubiquitous presence throughout the globe.   

Since AI and its powers are accelerating at an ever increasing pace, it does also provide more benefits than ever before. However, the risks of deploying AI are even greater because human beings cannot comprehend or predict the outcome of using AI because of their limited intelligence.  Yet, these authors argue, we cannot altogether abandon AI and therefore some partnerships between human beings and AI powered machines may prove imperative in the future.

If these partnerships do become available, there will have to be a proper balance between these two different entities. Can we then use traditional sources of authority such as faiths, cultures and nations to limit AI‘s authority over truth? Or can we allow AI to pick our own objectives and use AI to achieve them? If however we allow AI to pick its own objectives, should we not give it some kind of human dignity and a new philosophical orientation acceptable to all?

Kissinger contends that human beings are the most curious of living beings and this trait has made them explore most of the planets and entities in outer space. Therefore, further exploration of AI  can and will continue and may even lead to a wider AI race as more and more nations begin to devote their resources into the development of AI technology with the ultimate goal of strategic dominance.This means that even weaker nations with poor military capabilities and less powerful armaments can hold their own against powerful adversaries but with poorer AI capabilities.

Kissinger and his co-authors then pose the ultimate and final question: If human beings can gain and guarantee tactical control over decisions made by AI, would that not curb and stifle the benefits of successful deployment of AI? Possibly, we can build a basic sub-stratum of human morality into AI so as to gain a form of strategic control over it as it moves faster and faster and yet arrive at some juncture where AI moves more safely.

The authors conclude that integration of human and machine would provide the roadmap and the way forward in the future. Towards that end, since the human mind is often plagued by inconsistency and inconstancy, accordingly we must define ourselves with honesty, transparency and reliability. Only then can we program machines to behave in the same way. Together this man and machine partnership may provide us with the answers to some of the troublesome questions that dog humanity today. 

This was probably the undying wisdom that Kissinger imparted to his two partners and collaborators on their journey towards the dawn of a new era where he could see a lot of hope. Even if he were not alive to witness this evolution, his successors would  surely benefit from the work of his lifetime and his inexpressible faith in humanity. Even from his grave, his thoughts seem to emerge with his eternally optimistic message for humankind of all faiths, persuasions and creeds. If  Kissinger was dead, humanity would still continue to live, kept alive by a lifetime of his dedicated work in the service to humanity.