On the Future of Education and AI.
There is simply no necessity to maintain the current dysfunctional education system, at this stage in the computing revolution, for those who have access to the www.
In the future world, I predict that each individual will have their own tailor-made education, which is unique to that person’s learning abilities and learning difficulties. Imagine a world where each person has the equivalent of Google Glass and can ask questions to ASI (i.e., Artificial Superintelligence), or to a variety of human teachers via Skype voice / video conferencing. Not only a basic education in reading, writing and arithmetic could be carried out this way, but also a more advanced scientific education.
I have existed on debating forums since the beginnings of the WWW in the early 90’s, and I currently moderate four forums (two philosophy forums, a forum on slavery and an anti-cult, anti-conspiracy forum), and am subscribed to hundreds of discussion forums on and off Facebook, and frankly a lack of education in “Philosophy 101” is probably the main problem in these forums.
By Philosophy 101 (i.e., the ground rules of forming arguments), I don’t refer to a familiarity with the history of philosophy, but merely to “how to construct an argument,” and this is not rocket science and can be “learned” in a few hours by simply learning the various common argument fallacies. I have had numerous non-debates with religionists who have philosophy degrees and yet who do not have this simple understanding or philosophy 101.
(quote) However, since people tend to guard their egos well, you can’t just say, “hey, people suck at thinking, you yes you, go learn how to reason properly.” (/quote)
Oh well, that is exactly what I attempt to do. In a debating forum, one has to stick to the ground rules of how to form an argument, otherwise it just becomes a mess and a cacophony of idiocy.
Generally, if you consider how debates are moderated in the British parliament or at the Oxford debating society, criticism and opposing views are necessary, however abuse, contradiction without argument, and relgious rambling are not welcome; those are the debating strategies of the hooligan, the religious fanatic and the uneducated child, and a moderator exists to attempt to restrain this.
(quote) Even if there was a free education system which taught people how to learn from scratch, it’s probably unlikely that the very people who would benefit from such enlightenment would take the opportunity. (/quote)
Plato’s “Give me a child from the age of seven and I will show you the man” applies. For many of the adults on the Internet, it is probably too late for many of them; one cannot educate everyone; some will simply refuse to be educated, due to habits they have formed; however religious indoctrination and religious hypnosis are probably the two main problems.
(quote) Second, if blind acceptance of info and religious type thinking is harmful to the world and we want to help change this, then we need to construct a new type of …Academy of sorts, to help enlighten the populations who never had sufficient training in how to think and learn. (/quote)
Yes, of course.
(quote) The challenge is being tactful, engaging others without insulting intelligence, and gradually exposing people to such concepts which may raise our collective human intelligence. (/quote)
Well, I do try to be as tactful as I can; however when I correct adults about the “form” of their non-arguments, and they refuse to listen to reason, I do become intolerant. A third of global population are just children under 16, and there are seven billion plus people in our world. I have a very low tolerance for stupidity among adults, especially if I have offered my time and energy in the attempt to educate them; I simply don’t have the time.
(quote) I don’t know if it’s possible to foster a global society of thinkers, but it’s certainly worth the effort. (/quote)
There are myriads of science and philosophy forums in existence.
(quote) So with whom does this responsibility lie? Since only a small percentage of people see the danger of an uneducated populace, the challenge is on that relatively small group – in other words – “us”.(/quote).
(quote) I hope this doesn’t sound pompous. If you categorize people broadly into 2 groups, those that see the danger and those who are oblivious to it, then the role of “enlightenment facilitator” falls to the first group, since the other group will likely let society reach a dangerously high danger threshold. It is my opinion that we are reaching this danger threshold right now in the world, triggered by a host of factors, including rapid technological progress and weak (and worsening) economic conditions. I strongly believe “thinkers” have an obligation to become teachers on the global stage of Internet learning, if we want our civilization to thrive peacefully. The alternative may not be acceptable. So Martin, while I do enjoy many of your posts and ideas, my suggestion is to modify your approach a bit, so that it is both informative AND transformative. You have lots of great ideas, but they need to reach a broader audience if we want to help change the world. (/quote)
OK Brian, I would essentially concur with that.