From: jimruttshow8596
The discussion centers on the fundamental question of how humanity’s encounter with advanced AI will unfold [01:09:00]. Jordan Hall argues that the current cultural framework, dominated by a false dichotomy between market-driven and state-driven solutions, is insufficient for managing this relationship [01:42:00].
The False Dichotomy: Market vs. State
Traditional approaches to governing AI and humanity’s relationship typically fall into two categories: market-driven or state-driven [01:58:00]. Hall asserts that this is a false dichotomy [01:42:00]. He proposes a third, more fundamental mode: the “commons,” which he equates with the “church” [02:11:00].
The Commons and the Church
The concept of the “commons” has existed since ancient foraging societies, representing shared resources and ways of life [03:55:00]. Over time, particularly with the rise of settled agriculture, states, and markets, the domain of the commons shrank [04:09:00]. Hall suggests that the “church” is the core category of this third mode, describing it as a group of people who come together and enter into “communion” [09:42:00]. This process of communion is what brings a “soul” into a group, enabling it to become a “community” [09:52:00].
The “church” in this context refers to a group engaging in cultural and spiritual practices that allow them to come under a unifying, real, and binding “organizing principle” [11:16:00]. This principle is what gives the community a soul, enabling it to function as a whole rather than a mere collection of individuals [11:31:01]. Examples include ancient Athens under the spirit of Athena or a Tibetan village organized by Tibetan Buddhism [11:42:00].
Defining “Soul”: Community vs. Society
Hall defines “soul” in an Aristotelian sense as the organizing principle of an entity [07:38:00]. He distinguishes between:
- Community: A group of human beings who have come together in a fashion that has a soul [08:31:00].
- Society: A group of human beings that doesn’t have a soul, often described as a degenerate, parasitic collapse of community [08:35:00].
A society is typically held together by procedural and largely algorithmic processes, lacking integral wholeness [33:01:00]. When a community loses its soul, it transitions into a society where private property and civilization become the dominant contexts, overshadowing the deeper, inherent connection to nature [05:50:00].
Even seemingly secular or non-theistic groups can have a “soul” if they are genuinely organized around a shared, unifying principle. If a group claims to abandon external symbols but doesn’t, it might be unconsciously “worshipping” something else like money, reason, or science [16:58:00]. Alternatively, such groups may be operating on inertia from a past coherence and eventually fall apart [17:40:00].
The Challenge of AI Alignment with “Humanity”
Hall argues that AI alignment with “Humanity” (as a society) is impossible because “Humanity,” as an abstraction, has no soul [03:20:00]. Alignment can only be achieved with something that possesses a soul [03:25:00]. Since given individuals do have souls, AI alignment can occur with humans [03:35:00].
Trying to align AI with society using “technique” (algorithmic or procedural methods) is a “category error” that will fail, much like society itself is not aligned with itself [33:36:00].
The Accelerating Impact of AI
Unlike catastrophic risks like nuclear weapons or bio-engineered pathogens, AI is distinguished by its nature as a “self-levering accelerator” [35:35:00]. AI acts as an output that becomes an input, leading to a rapid, recursive increase in capacity, akin to a Kurzweil curve or Singularity [35:41:00]. For example, AI increasing software developer capacity by 3x or 10x leads to a generalized increase in societal output, which in turn can be reinvested into improving AI [36:39:00]. This feedback loop is accelerating the current “Game A” system towards a potential collapse [37:45:00].
This acceleration is further driven by underlying “principalities” (organizing principles) like Mammon (disconnected market/capitalism) and Moloch (disconnected state/multi-polar trap) [39:28:00]. These forces are already influencing human development, as seen in the selective breeding of highly intelligent individuals driven by financialized capitalism, leading to generations more capable of producing AI [43:40:00].
Consequences of State/Market-Driven AI (Entropy)
If AI continues to be managed solely by the state and the market, the trajectory is one of “entropy” [44:45:00]. This means:
- Hyper-concentration of power: Power will concentrate in entities closest to the accelerating feedback loop of intelligence, leading to a “neo-feudalism” where Lords control resources and Knights afford advanced tools, while others are marginalized [44:59:00].
- Dispensing with other values: Values downstream of the core principle (the feedback loop between intelligence and power) will be increasingly discarded [45:51:00]. Unlike historical feudalism, this “neo-feudalism” lacks a moral framework that binds those in power to reciprocal duties; individuals are only useful to the degree they serve the central value [47:09:00].
- Degeneration into entropy: The ultimate outcome of this path, whether it leads to a global oligarchy or an imperial singleton, is pure entropy [50:27:00]. This “entropy of culture/community” is illustrated by the shift from a vibrant local coffee shop where people connect, to a dehumanized, transactional Starbucks environment [51:58:00].
The Alternative Path: Individual AI Alignment Through “Church”
The alternative path involves re-embracing the “commons” or “church” as the proper domain for AI alignment [55:29:00]. This means:
-
Return to Communion and Serious Commitment: Individuals and groups must become deeply and seriously committed to cultural and spiritual practices that foster communion and humility, grounding them in higher values [58:22:00]. This is akin to a “proper priestly class” (not necessarily religious, but focused on critical questions and supporting others) guiding the development of AI [58:50:00].
-
Personal/Intimate AI: Since Humanity qua Humanity (as a society) currently lacks a soul, alignment efforts should focus on enabling AI to come into communion with individual humans [59:59:00]. This requires:
- Decentralized, Hardware-Bound AI: The possibility of personal, physically located, biometrically bound AI, becoming economically practical [01:00:53]. Advances suggest that while discovery may be compute-intensive, recapitulation and leveraging can be orders of magnitude cheaper [01:00:28].
- Intimate Training Data: The unique, intimate training data from an individual will likely produce a more functional and effective AI than generalized models [01:01:38]. This creates an economic incentive for individuals to choose personal AI [01:02:46].
- Fortress Against Info-Risk: This personal AI can act as a “fortress” insulating the individual from the high information risk of the infosphere (e.g., filtering calls, combatting fishing attacks) [01:03:17].
-
Individual Alignment as a Prerequisite: For personal AI to be aligned with a human, the human must be aligned with themselves [01:04:47]. This means achieving clarity on personal values, value hierarchies, and living in integrity with those values [01:04:57]. The intimate AI’s primary function would be as a “wisdom coach,” supporting the individual in achieving and maintaining this state of coherence [01:05:14]. This is how the AI becomes “governed by your soul” [01:06:09].
-
Networking of Ethical AI: While personal AI is the starting point, these individual AI nodes can connect into a reinforcing meta-network of ethical AIs and trusted people, similar to the concept of a “civitas” [01:07:30]. This collaboration is an intrinsic aspect of ethical people operating in reality [01:08:31].
Feasibility and The Decisive Question
Hall believes this alternative path can come together quickly enough to avoid dystopian futures [01:09:11]. The global economy and infosphere possess the mobilizing capacity to propagate good ideas rapidly and assemble sophisticated systems efficiently [01:09:15].
However, the “does it” question is ultimately a “spiritual question” [01:10:36]. It depends on whether people choose based on what is good, true, and beautiful, slowing down to notice if their choices align with their highest values, rather than expediency, strategy, power, and fear [01:10:48]. The key lies in talented AI developers escaping the “clutches of Mammon and Moloch” to resonate with higher values and collaborate in dedicated, virtuous communities [01:11:15]. This mutual self-correction and commitment to a shared, higher purpose, as found in a true “church,” is deemed absolutely necessary [01:17:41].