UI ni zgolj orodje
Vpliv naraščajoče tvornosti umetne inteligence na prihodnost dela
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.37886/ip.2025.009Ključne besede:
umetna inteligenca, tvornost UI, zavest UI, delovna sila, prihodnost dela, filozofija znanosti, filozofija duhaPovzetek
Raziskovalno vprašanje (RV): Katere so temeljne filozofske predpostavke, ki oblikujejo sodobno razumevanje umetne inteligence (UI) kot zgolj orodja, in kako te predpostavke vplivajo na naše dojemanje naraščajoče tvornosti UI ter njenega možnega vpliva na prihodnost dela?
Namen: Članek kritično preučuje razširjeno domnevo, da sistemi UI ostajajo pasivna orodja, popolnoma pod nadzorom človeka. Raziskuje, kako nove oblike tvornosti UI – razumljene kot avtonomne oziroma polavtonomne sposobnosti odločanja – izpodbijajo to predstavo in kakšne posledice ima ta premik za človeško delo, etiko in družbeno stabilnost.
Metoda: Raziskava uporablja filozofsko in konceptualno metodologijo, utemeljeno v filozofiji duha in filozofiji znanosti. Opira se na klasične miselne poskuse (Searlov “kitajski sobi”, Jacksonovo “Mary v črno-beli sobi” in Penroseove argumente o nealgoritmični zavesti) ter vključuje sodobne interdisciplinarne razprave o tvornosti, avtonomiji in zavesti UI. Analiza temelji na kritičnem pregledu literature, ki združuje filozofske, tehnološke in družbenopolitične vire.
Rezultati: Ugotovitve kažejo, da predpostavka o UI kot »neumnem orodju« ne vzdrži več. Dokazi o naraščajoči avtonomiji UI potrjujejo, da se postopki odločanja, ki so bili nekoč izključno v domeni človeka, vse pogosteje prenašajo na stroje. Takšno postopno prenašanje človeške tvornosti lahko povzroči družbene in etične slepe pege ter vodi do neenakih transformacij dela in izzivov upravljanja. Vendar pa lahko nadzorovan prehod k sodelovanju med človekom in UI spodbuja inovativnost in vključenost, če temelji na etičnem nadzoru in ustreznih regulativnih okvirih.
Organizacija: Za organizacije raziskava poudarja potrebo po pravočasnem predvidevanju sprememb v delovnih strukturah in procesih odločanja, ki jih povzročajo sistemi UI z naraščajočo tvornostjo. Menedžerje in oblikovalce politik spodbuja k oblikovanju upravljavskih okvirov, ki ohranjajo človeški nadzor in hkrati omogočajo odgovorno sodelovanje z UI.
Družba: Na družbeni ravni raziskava poudarja nujnost odprtega političnega in etičnega dialoga o regulaciji UI. Naslavljanje posledic avtonomije UI je ključno za ohranjanje človeške tvornosti, demokratične odgovornosti in družbene pravičnosti v digitalni dobi. .
Originalnost: Članek prispeva k povezovanju filozofske refleksije in družbeno-tehnične analize, saj ponovno opredeljuje UI ne zgolj kot tehnološko orodje, temveč kot nastajajočega akterja v sistemih človeškega odločanja. Razvija koncept »tvornosti UI« kot osrednjo analitično perspektivo za razumevanje preobrazbe dela.
Omejitve/nadaljnje raziskovanje: Raziskava je konceptualne narave in ne vključuje empiričnih podatkov. Nadaljnje raziskave bi morale empirično preučiti, kako organizacije in delavci v praksi doživljajo tvornost UI – na primer s pomočjo etnografskih ali organizacijskih študij primerov – ter raziskati politične in regulativne instrumente, ki bi lahko omilili tveganja, povezana z avtomatizacijo in tehnokratskim upravljanjem.
Literatura
Agüerra y Arcas, B. & Manyika, J. (2025). AI Is Evolving – And Changing Our Understanding of Intelligence. In Noema, Berggruen Institute,
https://www.noemamag.com/ai-is-evolving-and-changing-our-understanding-of-intelligence/.
Anderson, J. & Rainie, L. (2023). The Future of Human Agency. In Pew Research Center, https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2023/02/24/the-future-of-human-agency/.
Baron, S. (2025). Are a Machine's Thoughts Real? The Answer Matters Now More Than Ever. In Science Alert, https://www.sciencealert.com/are-a-machines-thoughts-real-the-answer-matters-now-more-than-ever.
Bengio, Y, Hinton, G. et al. (2024), Managing Extreme AI Risks Amid Rapid Progress, in Science, Vol. 384, Issue 6698, pp. 842-845.
Boudry, M. & Friederich, S. (2024). The Selfish Machine. On the Power and Limitation of Natural Selection to Understand the Development of Advanced AI. In Philosophy of Science, PhilSci-Archive, preprint, https://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/23903/.
Boudry, M. (2025). The Selfish Machine. Will Humanity Be Subjugated by Superintelligent Ais?. In Maarten Boudry’s Substack, https://maartenboudry.substack.com/p/the-selfish-machine.
Bratton, B. (2024). The Five Stages of AI Grief. In Noema, Berggruen Institute, https://www.noemamag.com/the-five-stages-of-ai-grief/
Brey, Ph. & Johnny H. Søraker, J. H. (2009). Philosophy of Computing and Information Technology. In Philosophy of Technology and Engineering Sciences, edited by Antonie Meijers, Amsterdam, Elsevier, pp. 1341–1407.
Bryson, J. (2009). Robots Should Be Slaves. Published at Joanna Bryson Publications, https://www.joannajbryson.org/publications/robots-should-be-slaves-pdf.
Darwin, C. (1859). On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life. New York, D. Appleton and Company, 1861 (first edition 1859).
Dhondt, S. & Dessers, E. (eds.)(2022). Robot zoekt collega. Uitgeverij Lannoo. [In Dutch; English title: Robot seeking colleague].
Douglas Heaven, W. (2023). Deep learning pioneer Geoffrey Hinton quits Google. In MIT Technology Review, https://web.archive.org/web/20230501125621/https://www.technologyreview.com/2023/05/01/1072478/deep-learning-pioneer-geoffrey-hinton-quits-google/.
Edwards, B. (2025). What does “PhD-level” AI mean? OpenAI’s rumored $20,000 agent plan explained. In Ars Technica, https://arstechnica.com/ai/2025/03/what-does-phd-level-ai-mean-openais-rumored-20000-agent-plan-explained/.
Ferguson, N. (2025). The Doom Nexus. In Niall Ferguson’s Time Machine, https://niallferguson.substack.com/p/the-doom-nexus.
Floridi, L. (2025). AI as Agency without Intelligence: On Artificial Intelligence as a New Form of Artificial Agency and the Multiple Realisability of Agency Thesis. February 12, 2024. Available at http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.5135645.
Foreman, J. T. (2024). How to Make it as a Doomsday Prophet. In The Metaphor, https://www.taylorforeman.com/p/how-to-make-it-as-a-doomsday-prophet.
Ginnis, V. (2025). Is er nog íémand bekommerd om de gevaren van AI? In De Standaard, 15 February 2025, https://www.standaard.be/cnt/dmf20250214_96655287 [In Dutch; English title: Is there still anyone concerned about the dangers of AI?].
Harari, Y. N. (2024). Nexus. A Brief History of Information Networks from the Stone Age to AI. Vintage Publishing, Kindle Edition.
Huxley, A. (1932). Brave New World. Pdf edition, Coradella Collegiate Bookshelf, 2004, http://collegebookshelf.net.
Jackson, F. (1986). What Mary Didn’t Know. In The Journal of Philosophy, Vol. 83, No. 5 (May, 1986), pp. 291-295.
Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking Fast and Slow. New York, Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
Krajewski, S. (2015). Penrose’s Metalogical Argument is Unsound. In Ladyman, J. et al. (eds.)(2015). Road to Reality with Roger Penrose. Kraków (Poland), Copernicus Center Press, p. 87-104.
Krauss, P. & Maier A. (2025). De geest in de machine. In EOS Psyche & Brein, June 2025, pp. 20-25 [In Dutch, English translation of the title: The Ghost in the Machine].
Ladyman, J. et al. (eds.)(2015). Road to Reality with Roger Penrose. Kraków (Poland), Copernicus Center Press.
Leibe, B. (2025). Post on LinkedIn, https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:7313873939691130880/.
Lim, D. (2024). Why Yuval Noah Harari’s AI Doomsday Prophecies Are Misleading. In Medium, https://medium.com/@don-lim/why-yuval-noah-hararis-ai-doomsday-prophecies-are-misleading-5541504ec3ab.
Molek, N., Pulinx, R. & van Biezen, A. (eds.)(2024). Analysis of the State of the Art on the Future of Human Workforce. Scientific Report. Transform, European Union.
Molek, N., van Biezen, A. & Velez, M. J. (2025), Book of Abstracts. International Interdisciplinary Conference Transform “The Future of Human Workforce”. Novo Mesto (Slovenia), FOS.
Müller, V. (2025). Philosophy of AI. A Structured Overview. In Smuha, N. (ed.)(2025). The Cambridge Handbook of the Law, Ethics and Policy of Artificial Intelligence. Cambridge University Press, p. 40-58.
Nagel, E. & Newman, J. R. (1958). Gödel’s Proof. New York, New York University Press.
Narayan, S. (2024). AI and the Future of Human Agency: Are We Outsourcing Decision-Making or Evolving with Machines?. In Medium, https://medium.com/@narayan.somendra/ai-and-the-future-of-human-agency-are-we-outsourcing-decision-making-or-evolving-with-machines-78da6ba4475f .
Newman, S. et al. (2019). AI & Agency. In 2019 Summer Institute on AI and Society, in AI Pulse, 26 September 2019, https://aipulse.org/ai-agency/?pdf=417.
Palazzolo, S. and Weinberg, C. (2025). OpenAI Plots Charging $20,000 a Month For PhD-Level Agents. In The Information, https://www.theinformation.com/articles/openai-plots-charging-20-000-a-month-for-phd-level-agents.
Pelley, S. (2024). "Godfather of Artificial Intelligence" Geoffrey Hinton on the promise, risks of advanced AI. In CBS News, https://www.cbsnews.com/news/geoffrey-hinton-ai-dangers-60-minutes-transcript/.
Penrose, R. (1989). The Emperor’s New Mind. Concerning Computers, Minds and The Laws of Physics. Oxford, Oxford University Press.
Renard, V. et al. (2024). Mary Steps Out: Capturing Patient Experience through Qualitative and AI Methods. In NEJM AI, Vol. 1 No. 12, https://ai.nejm.org/doi/10.1056/AIp2400567.
Sapunov, G. (2023). Turing, “Intelligent Machinery. A Heretical Theory”, 1951. In Gonzo ML, https://gonzoml.substack.com/p/turing-intelligent-machinery-a-heretical?utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web.
Saso, E. (2025). The path to safe, ethical AI: SRI highlights from the 2025 IASEAI conference in Paris. In Schwarz Reisman Institute for Technology and Society, University of Toronto. https://srinstitute.utoronto.ca/news/the-path-to-safe-ethical-ai.
Satyanarayan, A. and Jones, G. M. (2024). Intelligence as Agency: Evaluating the Capacity of Generative AI to Empower or Constrain Human Action. In An MIT Exploration of Generative AI - From Novel Chemicals to Opera, https://mit-genai.pubpub.org/pub/94y6e0f8/release/2.
Searle, J. (1980). Minds, Brains and Programs. In Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 3, pp. 417-517.
Searle, J. (1984). Minds, Brains and Science. Cambridge, Mass., Harvard university press.
Schoors, K. (2024). Alles wordt anders. Gent, Borgerhoff & Lamberigts. [In Dutch; English title: Everything Will Be Different]
Smuha, N. A. (ed.)(2025). The Cambridge Handbook of the Law, Ethics and Policy of Artificial Intelligence. Cambridge University Press.
Suard, T. (2024). The Future of Work: AI May Not Need Us After All. In Medium, https://medium.com/@ceo_44783/the-future-of-work-ai-may-not-need-us-after-all-5df8eae52ed9.
Suleyman, M. & Bhaskar, M. (2023). The Coming Wave. Technology, Power, and the Twenty-First Century’s Greatest Dilemma. New York, Crown.
Turing, A. (1950). Computing Machinery and Intelligence. In Mind, 49, pp. 433-460.
Turing, A. (1951). Intelligent Machinery. A Heretical Theory. https://gwern.net/doc/ai/1951-turing.pdf.
von Hoffman, C. (2025). Smarter AI means bigger risks – Why guardrails matter more than ever. In MarTech, https://martech.org/smarter-ai-means-bigger-risks-why-guardrails-matter-more-than-ever/.
van Biezen, A.F. (2016). A Case for Naturalism. In van Biezen, A.F., The Torch of Discovery, http://alexanderfvanbiezen.blogspot.com/2016/05/a-case-for-naturalism.html.
van Biezen, A.F. (2022). Top-Down Cosmology and Model-Dependent Realism. A Philosophical Study of the Cosmology of Stephen Hawking and Thomas Hertog. Brussels, VUB Press.
van Biezen, A. (2024). Emerging Skills for the Future Workforce. In Molek, N., Pulinx, R. and van Biezen, A. (eds.)(2024), Analysis of the State of the Art on the Future of Human Workforce. Scientific Report., Transform, European Union, p. 50-62.
Van Biezen, A. (2025a). Abstract of ‘AI is Not a Tool’. In Molek, N., van Biezen, A. & Velez, M. J. (2025), Book of Abstracts. International Interdisciplinary Conference Transform “The Future of Human Workforce”. Novo Mesto (Slovenia), FOS, p. 8.
van Biezen, A.F. (2025b). AI is not just another tool. What keeps us in the blind spot?. In van Biezen, A.F., The Torch of Discovery, https://alexanderfvanbiezen.blogspot.com/2025/04/ai-is-not-just-another-tool.html.
Verbinnen, L. (2025), AI-gebruik stijgt, maar ook onze bezorgdheid: ‘Techno-optimisme maakt plaats voor technorealisme’. In EOS Wetenschap. [In Dutch; English title: AI usage rises, but so does our concern: ‘Techno-optimism gives way to tech realism’.] https://www.eoswetenschap.eu/technologie/ai-gebruik-stijgt-maar-ook-onze-bezorgdheid-techno-optimisme-maakt-plaats-voor?utm_source=ActiveCampaign&utm_medium=mail&utm_campaign=eos_515.
Walther C.C. (2025). Hybrid Intelligence: The Future of Human-AI Collaboration. In Psychology Today, https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/harnessing-hybrid-intelligence/202503/hybrid-intelligence-the-future-of-human-ai-collaboration.
Wang, X. (2023). The Possibility of Artifical Qualia. In Communications in Humanities Research, https://doi.org/10.54254/2753-7064/6/20230083.
Wiggers, K. (2025). OpenAI reportedly plans to charge up to $20,000 a month for specialized AI ‘agents’. In TechCrunch, https://techcrunch.com/2025/03/05/openai-reportedly-plans-to-charge-up-to-20000-a-month-for-specialized-ai-agents/.
Dodatne datoteke
Objavljeno
Kako citirati
Številka
Rubrike
Licenca
Avtorske pravice (c) 2025 Alexander van Biezen
To delo je licencirano pod Creative Commons Priznanje avtorstva-Deljenje pod enakimi 4.0 mednarodno licenco.
