Life 3.0: Being Human in the Age of Artificial Intelligence

As the title of Chapter 1 indicates, Tegmark believes that the advancement of AI technology and questions concerning AI safety are part of “the most important conversation of our time (22). Why does he think this? Is he right? Why?

In his discussion of AGI, machine learning, and the advancing capacities of AIs to perform tasks previously only achievable by humans, Tegmark shows that there are some tasks AIs can already do better than humans, but that there are others, like art and scientific research, that AIs still find difficult. What has changed since the publication of this book in 2017? Do you think there are some things AI will never be able to do? Why or why not? Is there anything that makes humans special or exceptional? How so?

In Chapter 3, Tegmark discusses many of the ways that AIs could transform the economy, manufacturing, warfare, finance, and the legal system in the near future. How do you think AI might directly affect your life or work? Does it excite or worry you? Why?

At the beginning of Chapter 5, Tegmark asks his readers to review a series of seven questions, briefly write down their answers, and return to them at the end of the chapter. Having read Tegmark’s book, do you think differently about any of these issues? What specifically? Why or why not?

Think about the possibility of an “intelligence explosion.” What do you think this would mean for the future of humanity? Do you welcome or fear a future of superintelligent, high-powered artificial creatures? Do you think humans should try to control AIs? Do you think this will become impossible? Why?

Tegmark provides a substantive list of “AI Aftermath Scenarios” at the outset of Chapter 5, many of which he subsequently describes in hypotheticals. Which of these do think is the most likely? Why? Which scenario do you think is the most preferable? Why? Are there any scenarios that you think Tegmark neglected? What are they? Check out the poll results at Tegmark’s AgeOfAi.org. What do you make of others’ responses?

In Chapter 7 Tegmark questions the nature of goals (biological, physical, conscious, etc.). What is the tension between goal-retention and the pursuit of an ultimate goal? What should the ultimate goal be? Should there be any ultimate goal? Why or why not?

In the final chapter, Tegmark discusses various levels of questions on consciousness, from the “easy” questions on brain processes, to the “really hard” question that asks why anything is conscious. Note Figure 8.1, which Tegmark uses to diagram the relationship between various questions about the nature of consciousness. What philosophical presumptions undergird Tegmark’s study of consciousness? Are these justifiable? Why or why not? Independently speculate on the “really hard” problem of consciousness. How would you answer this? Why?