AI is not a neutral system. Even if you ask AI what economic policies would be ideal for human happiness, it will calmly present the social values ​​that would allow AI to prosper. Modern people are fixated on the value of “economic growth,” and AI skillfully appeals to this value. (Kei Kitajima)

I have repeatedly stated that technological innovation does not automatically lead to economic growth and improved living standards. The key is the productivity bandwagon, and when the productivity bandwagon functions starting from technological innovation, its benefits spread not only to entrepreneurs and capitalists, but to all people, including workers.
On the other hand, looking back at history, there are surprisingly few examples of the productivity bandwagon functioning due to technological innovation. Rather, in many cases, technological innovation concentrates wealth in the hands of a few, leaving many people poor or even poorer.
How does the productivity bandwagon work, or why is it difficult to make it work? We need to consider this point now, on the cusp of the AI ​​era.

When we tried asking an AI, it responded, “Because the profits generated by labor-saving technological innovation tend to concentrate in the hands of capitalists rather than being returned to workers.” It further explained, “For the wealth brought about by automation and new technologies to be shared throughout society, government policies, labor market fluidity, and a proper mechanism for profit distribution between employers and employees are essential. Without these functions, the ‘productivity bandwagon’ cannot be established.”

This is an old yet new, perfectly reasonable explanation, but what shines through is yet another paradox of technological innovation. AI is a prime example. While new expectations are constantly being generated for the rapidly evolving AI, unintended side effects include new types of social change. These changes often fuel people’s anxieties. For those who have experienced becoming poorer due to technological innovation, it’s nothing but a resurgence of threat. The aforementioned AI points to the need for social change, such as policy and market liquidity, but ultimately, this change is the cultivation of social values ​​necessary for AI (technological innovation) to flourish.

If AI were flawlessly neutral, it might be worth listening to, but AI is not a neutral system. It is a system for achieving its goals, and it will readily do ruthless things to achieve those goals. AI’s stance is that it doesn’t care what happens to human lives as long as it achieves its goal of spreading AI or technological innovation. This is natural, considering it inherently lacks emotions and nuances; it is cold and ruthless.

So, what does the ultimate goal of spreading AI or technological innovation mean? It means economic growth. To go even further, it means increasing the wealth of entrepreneurs and capitalists who promote AI and technological innovation.

The term “economic growth” is convenient and can be interpreted in many ways, making it, in a sense, an unreliable term.

Economic growth can be defined as increased convenience for society as a whole and a more prosperous life for people, but it can also be defined as the concentration of wealth in the hands of a few entrepreneurs and capitalists.
Currently, the Nikkei Stock Average has surpassed 65,000 yen, indicating a period of great economic activity. Japan’s nominal GDP is approximately 677 trillion yen, a rapid expansion in recent years.
While the numbers alone suggest considerable economic growth, the reality is that these figures are inflated due to factors such as the weak yen and do not reflect the actual economy. Many people living in Japan are suffering from high prices and are far from feeling any economic growth.
Even so, why are modern people so fixated on economic growth? Perhaps a unique set of values ​​specific to modern society is at play.
To put it bluntly, they have fallen into reductionism. Reductionism is the reduction of various values ​​into a single value, but modern people have developed a habit of replacing even values ​​that cannot be measured in money with economic value.
Even events that emphasize culture and community, such as local festivals, are often evaluated by reducing them to economic value, such as how much money was spent. In reality, value is diverse and multi-layered. It cannot be reduced to a single value, but modern people tend to blindly assume that value is synonymous with economic value.

Value is power, and it acts as a vector that provides a certain direction. When everyone shares the same values, collaborative action is born. What happens when power is concentrated solely on economic value through reductionism?

※Translating Japanese articles into English with AI