True value is intrinsic to context. AI can’t do context because context is an embodied awareness. A daffodil in the abstract is a flower. In an embodied context, it’s a garden. This is something I’ve been thinking a lot about recently.
I think we've got so used to transactional environments that what is happening now makes us realise just how impoverished that view of the world is.....
I would agree that there is something missing from "value" as in "value chain". And I agree that what is missing is, or has to do, with context. I am not so sure about your definition of 'context' or of 'true'.
AI cannot have *human* context, and therefore it cannot reliably assess, or create, things that are of value in a human context. But is what is valuable to humans the only 'true' value'? Is there any 'true' value? And is the human yardstick the only valid way to measure value?
This gets a bit slippery because as a human, I may not be able to fully perceive other kinds of value. But if I use system analogies, there is the 'true' value a starling perceives being part of a murmuration. There is another level of 'true' value if you see the murmuration as an entity 'making sense' of the approaching hawk, and 'defending' against it.
In a human body, it is clear and accepted that no neuron has access to the sensemaking, and valuing, that the human does. But if we are part of organizations, working with each other, and now with different kinds of 'cells' (AI), how much access do we have to the 'collective sensemaking' of the organization? And is an organization, creating its context, so much difefrent from a garden (a very human concept), or an ecosystem (which is certainly also a human concept, but feels a bit more neutral and abstract)?
True value is intrinsic to context. AI can’t do context because context is an embodied awareness. A daffodil in the abstract is a flower. In an embodied context, it’s a garden. This is something I’ve been thinking a lot about recently.
I think we've got so used to transactional environments that what is happening now makes us realise just how impoverished that view of the world is.....
I would agree that there is something missing from "value" as in "value chain". And I agree that what is missing is, or has to do, with context. I am not so sure about your definition of 'context' or of 'true'.
AI cannot have *human* context, and therefore it cannot reliably assess, or create, things that are of value in a human context. But is what is valuable to humans the only 'true' value'? Is there any 'true' value? And is the human yardstick the only valid way to measure value?
This gets a bit slippery because as a human, I may not be able to fully perceive other kinds of value. But if I use system analogies, there is the 'true' value a starling perceives being part of a murmuration. There is another level of 'true' value if you see the murmuration as an entity 'making sense' of the approaching hawk, and 'defending' against it.
In a human body, it is clear and accepted that no neuron has access to the sensemaking, and valuing, that the human does. But if we are part of organizations, working with each other, and now with different kinds of 'cells' (AI), how much access do we have to the 'collective sensemaking' of the organization? And is an organization, creating its context, so much difefrent from a garden (a very human concept), or an ecosystem (which is certainly also a human concept, but feels a bit more neutral and abstract)?