Then this is even less clear, what on Earth is “my particular orthodoxy?” And further, the calculator is absolutely an apt comparison. A calculator is a system designed with logic by human hands to shortcut the process of someone, say, multiplying two numbers, that they otherwise would have had to do by hand. The calculator isn’t thinking, and neither is AI, it’s simply a system that mimics its inputs and weights them towards its prompts. Neither the calculator nor the AI thinks, but that doesn’t mean they are harmful to use, nor does it mean that neither has no use-cases.
As for being reactionary, glorifying struggle and using it to oppose the forward progression of technology on the basis of it harming a metaphysical “human spirit” is reactionary. I don’t mean it as an insult so much as to point out that it quite literally is reactionary. Labor should be centered, not struggle, and thus any tool that can be used to assist labor should be understood properly, including its limitations, like your article stated.
Either way, if you want to stop this, then be my guest.
I didn’t say that Marxism is insufficient, I said your particular orthodoxy is, and I was very careful to phrase it that way.
And the fact that you’ve just compared calculation to thought proves my point yet again.
Then you take a phrase out of the context of the conversation and article and call me a reactionary, which is absolutely wild.
I made the other post to try to get different perspectives, not to have you follow me around.
Kindly stop with all this.
Then this is even less clear, what on Earth is “my particular orthodoxy?” And further, the calculator is absolutely an apt comparison. A calculator is a system designed with logic by human hands to shortcut the process of someone, say, multiplying two numbers, that they otherwise would have had to do by hand. The calculator isn’t thinking, and neither is AI, it’s simply a system that mimics its inputs and weights them towards its prompts. Neither the calculator nor the AI thinks, but that doesn’t mean they are harmful to use, nor does it mean that neither has no use-cases.
As for being reactionary, glorifying struggle and using it to oppose the forward progression of technology on the basis of it harming a metaphysical “human spirit” is reactionary. I don’t mean it as an insult so much as to point out that it quite literally is reactionary. Labor should be centered, not struggle, and thus any tool that can be used to assist labor should be understood properly, including its limitations, like your article stated.
Either way, if you want to stop this, then be my guest.