Philosopher laughs at the very first lines: what, another book on AI?! But rest assured. Her book, “Intelligence artificielle: et l’homme créa Dieu” (published by Hermann), is precise on the subject and runs to just over a hundred pages. “I didn't want it to be any bigger than that, because I think it’s overloaded with pamphlets. But artificial intelligence is both an object of anxiety and enthusiasm, and as a philosopher, I can't not think about that object”, she explains from Paris, as the book has just hit the bookshops.
His reflection in seven variations is the fruit of “research work during which I interviewed many workers: craftsmen, company directors, teachers, civil servants. I wanted to understand what was really going on.” She will be talking about it on Tuesday 27 January in a keynote at the .
“Extreme rhetoric”
“What really strikes me is the extreme rhetoric: apocalyptic fears on the one hand, almost messianic expectations on the other,” says Gabrielle Halpern. “We keep hearing: ‘AI is going to replace human beings.’ I asked myself: is it really the human being that it will replace, or something else? A lot of philosophers have looked at the question of work or have said that ‘AI will never...’. I don’t believe that. AI is making continuous progress. Yes, it still makes mistakes. Yes, it has limits. But the subject is no longer technical. It’s philosophical, moral, political and democratic. Why have human beings imagined such a tool? What anguish, what need does it meet?”
Biblical irony
From the outset, Gabrielle Halpern conceives the painting of an “AI God” hovering over humanity. She explains its origins: “My career has been marked by the study of religious texts. I studied the Bible for a long time, particularly in Jerusalem. Mythology and the Bible are part of our collective imagination. When Adam and Eve ate the forbidden fruit, God condemned them to two great curses: work (‘you shall work by the sweat of your brow’) and death (‘you are dust and to dust you shall return’). I find it quite ironic that artificial intelligence is being deployed in precisely these two areas. Work, with its promise to make us sweat less. And health, with transhumanism, by postponing death. As if bypassing divine curses. This is where the link with God comes into play.”
“A talkative god”
In the course of the text, Gabrielle Halpern wonders whether AI has become “the only legitimate figure of faith” in the West. “My starting point is a lecture by Karl Popper. But the conclusion goes beyond the West, it concerns human beings in general. Popper shows that the West, after rejecting various figures of belief, ends up placing its faith in the human being himself. With its horrors, the 20th century has profoundly shaken this faith. Human beings have perhaps discredited themselves as legitimate figures of faith. Faced with this, there has also been the silence of God, the silence of the gods. What happens to a society faced with this silence? It creates an idol, a talkative god.”
This permanent ‘word’ “says a lot about our world”, she stresses. “We distrust each other more and more: in our families, at work, in our friendships. We have thousands of friends on social networks, but fewer and fewer relationships based on deep trust. In this context, any tool to which we give a form of trust can impose itself as a central, even unique, interlocutor. Luther’s phrase, quoted by Hannah Arendt, is illuminating: human beings need God because they need someone they can trust completely. The question is simple and dizzying. Who can we trust completely today? And that’s where AI comes in.”
Doing “without the other”
In the final chapter, a “world of work” approach, Gabrielle Halpern compares AI to the entry into an era “where we no longer seek only to know, but to know ‘without the other’.” “What place will this leave for the collective? The collective is threatened, yes. But the real question is: hasn’t it discredited itself? AI doesn’t invent anything, it accelerates dynamics that are already at work. I talk to a lot of company directors, managers and HR directors. They are constantly issuing contradictory injunctions to employees. The message is ‘work together, work as a team’, while at the same time assessing each individual’s performance. It’s impossible to ask for cooperation and constant competition at the same time. Human beings are rational; they adapt if they want to succeed or be promoted. By dint of this, the collective becomes discredited.”
“If, on the other hand, recruitment and appraisal criteria really took into account the ability to collaborate, this would profoundly change relationships”, she promotes. “I’ve seen a company ask two simple questions at the annual interview: ‘Who taught you what this year?’ and ‘What did you teach who?’ Knowing that you have to report on what you’ve learned transforms the way you look at things. But sharing knowledge takes time, and the company must agree to value it and create appropriate spaces for it. Open spaces, for example, don’t lend themselves to this. There’s a lot of thinking to be done.”
“Time saved”, but what’s next?
“Artificial intelligence reveals the absurdities, contradictions and blind spots of the working world,” she considers. “Things considered secondary can suddenly become central, particularly the relationship with time”, insists Gabrielle Halpern. Time is a theme that is definitely dear to our hearts. “When I was doing research on disability, a mentally handicapped worker said to me: ‘I’m slow. I'm slow, but I like my work. I've never been taught to slack off. My work is well done. She asked for 'the right to be slow.’ The idea may make you smile. It may seem incompatible with economic imperatives. But why do we deny time to those who deserve it (doing their job well), but allow it to be wasted in sterile meetings or video conferences where some people are put in the loop purely out of diplomacy? What we give time to reveals what we value. AI is supposed to save us time. The real question, then, is what we do with the time we save.”
Collectively, “look ourselves in the face”
“Distancing and disembodiment are very real risks. Another question is how to anticipate them. Managers have a major responsibility,” warns the researcher. “In managerial terms, this means reviewing recruitment, assessment and promotion criteria. AI can generate professional risks of breakdown, but these are often the result of models that do not value collaboration. AI acts as a chemical revelation of professions, companies and managerial practices. Everyone is going to have to take a hard look at themselves.”
The risk of “other identitarisms”
Gabrielle Halpern had already devoted a note to this question of transformation for the Fondation Jean Jaurès. Published last autumn, it was entitled “Professional identities put to the test by artificial intelligence”. The text sketched out a future that looked like a jigsaw puzzle. “Our professions influence the way we speak, dress and move. We have the brains of our profession. AI, on the other hand, mobilises the same brain areas, whatever the profession. Those of verification, error detection and regulation. Doctors, lawyers, craftsmen, we're all auditors! The use of AI turns every professional into an auditor", sums up the author. "If brains become uniform, will professional identities also become uniform? What will distinguish a doctor from a lawyer or a carpenter tomorrow if they all use AI? These identities structure society. If they disappear, there is a social risk. Other forms of identitarianism or communitarianism may take over. The socio-political consequences are far from anecdotal.”