How would the world look if we were thrown off the top of the pyramid, giving way (and power) to more-than-human actors? And what if we abandoned a hierarchical system of power and dominance?
The conversation about intelligence in the last 100 years has almost unequivocally centred on AI. Now we are in a time of unprecedented interest and research about the intelligence of more-than-human actors; microorganisms, animals, plant species and much, much more.
More than human intelligence
While technology to observe and record is driving some of our interest in more-than-human actors, it is undoubtedly also a result of a shift in worldview. It reflects shifts in attitudes, ethics and philosophy. As the industrial age has driven us to an ecological brink, we are increasingly able to surpass the idea of “human first” and search for solutions in other beings present on Earth, some that have been around much longer than human beings. We are widening our gaze.
Is it not reductive to assume that creativity is inherently human when we now marvel at how imaginative nature can be? Studying subjects we previously assigned limited intelligence—instinct-driven or merely “floating around”—we are frequently surprised by the astonishing creativity of other organisms. Earlier experiments and research often looked for signs of “human-like” intelligence or mind in other beings. What has proven more beneficial is to try to understand that intelligence has not one but infinite manifestations.
What if we try to see the world like the mycorrhizal networks of ancient trees, communicating, supporting entities and preserving their “community” through collaboration for centuries? Or like other animals and organisms that show incredible capacity for creative expression and problem-solving? Could the way ants construct their anthills teach us something about how to build more sustainable architecture? Could we create and design a more balanced world that sustains itself by learning from the structures and ways of nature?
Agency of everything
Many imagine a more direct collaboration between human and nature, a 1:1 symbiosis where a sense of agency is attributed where it has not been before. What could that entail? Would it mean an unparalleled paradigm shift? For some, this means living life radically less at odds with nature, in awe and connection with it or even at its mercy, as many communities still do all over the world today. What can we learn from people living in more symbiotic relationships with nature? Could everything we need to know already be present here and now, in stewards of some of our most precious landscapes? What would we have to abandon to tap into that wealth of knowledge; our systems of power, values, organisation, suppression?
Another enticing idea is zooming even further out, attributing agency to technology, materials, things and other human-made actors. AI is perhaps both the most widely accepted manifestation of this and the most disputed. Can it ever be an autonomous being or entity when it bases its reasoning on our own actions, language and values? Will these not inevitably repeat our biases?
One scenario that seems to lurk in the common imagination of the not-so-distant future is machines in charge of the world—or at least the parts we are no longer interested in driving. In this future, they are still subordinate to humans, yet considered intelligent enough to be trusted with major decision-making; policy-making, surveillance and sustenance. When AI is optimising our whole being and reality—as algorithms are almost without exception created to do—how would our lives look? Not having to make even the most mundane decisions about life, does that facilitate a new age of human intelligence?
Creativity between human and machine
Most would agree we are realistically closing in on an era of enhanced living, a sort of symbiotic state with AI where we hand over responsibility for increasingly crucial functions to machines. What capacity does it free up, if any? Will this allow us to pursue more immersion and opportunity for creative expression and exploration? What would creating look like in this enhanced state? Would it be a collaboration?
Artists, designers and other creatives across the world are already being inspired by the capacities and creations of AI technology. As AI becomes more sophisticated—treating more complex problems, including vast data sets or evolving new states of consciousness—will it inspire artistic expression in the same way the natural world has for millennia? Will we be able to truly inspire AI creators in the same way? What happens in a more peer-to-peer relationship between AI and human, and what new modes of expression could arise from this?
What if machines started to innovate for themselves and not for us? Evolution is, after all, creative, for good and bad.
Letting go
Nonetheless, many also imagine a world where the three entities work and create together; human, nature and AI. Some imagine harnessing the knowledge and capacities of other beings, the status quo, but what makes that different from how we currently operate? Others imagine collaboration from an equal standing. That would require another kind of compassion—assigning agency to the more-than-human and, by extension, attempting to abandon notions of human dominance, exploitation and oppression to a future at odds with the current world order. It would mean letting go, abandoning control. Our ways seem to have put us in a bad state anyway. We have painted ourselves into a corner. What if we allowed other entities to decide the outcome of our endeavours? Introduced something truly random, something unknown, to the equation? In his book Ways of Being (2022) author, artist and researcher James Bridle argues that the outcomes of allowing the more-than-human into our decision-making process might not always leave us in charge and at the top of the hierarchy. Occasionally these outcomes can be ruthless. But they will always be more ideal.
Symbiosis between machine and nature
While we have explored some of the great frontiers of nature, our planet and the universe, we are in no way close to understanding its many mysteries. An underlying assumption of our somewhat uncritical trust in AI and its potential to change the world is that it will help us understand nature better. That we need a kind of mediator to make sense of it. Some imagine that being a linguistic bridge or understanding between two organisms, allowing them to communicate and collaborate. But is this not perpetrating the same human-centric lens on a completely different species?
A perhaps more compassionate approach is to explore the potential of technology to better make sense of the reality of other lifeforms. Surely, it will not be the same as ours. Their habits, responses and methods might be based on distinctly different conditions than ours, and the knowledge we yield from our study of these cannot simply be applied without keeping in mind these disparities. What if technology could help us see beyond our own world? We know that many worldly phenomena are unavailable to us, among them certain frequencies of light and sound with which other beings express themselves.
When we develop advanced technology to investigate the natural environment, we have to be careful not to allow it to perpetrate the same dominant nature that has marked our presence in the modern world. As we see AI take on agriculture, sometimes with horrifying consequences, we understand that optimisation is, in many ways, at odds with nature. The climate crisis is a physical manifestation of this. It is worth considering how a symbiotic relationship between machine and nature could look, humans out of the equation. How would they co-create and exist?
This narrative is based on a scenario collectively conceived and developed by core group participants in a Collaborative Foresight cycle. The group's voice was captured and creatively expanded by the writer.
