The year 2020 is remembered as the year of the global pandemic. During this period, more
than 29 million people lost their lives and millions suffered from illness. It was rightly said:
“The year 2020 will always be remembered as a year that challenged humanity.”
The Hollywood film Terminator-2: Judgment Day raised a similar challenge before
humanity. It depicted a future in which technological development reaches such a level
that machines become a challenge to human existence. The film raises the question of
whether technological humanism can replace human sensitivity.
The story revolves around a receptionist working in a hotel. Her daughter studies in a
reputed school and wishes to buy expensive shoes. A report by the World Economic Forum
mentions that by 2030 around 10 million jobs may disappear because of automation. The
receptionist’s daughter asks her mother:
“If robots do all the work, who will buy my shoes?”
This question compels us to think whether technological development can truly replace
human sensitivity.
In 1997, the world chess champion Garry Kasparov was defeated by IBM’s supercomputer
Deep Blue. At that time, it was considered a major victory for technology. Since then,
technology has continuously advanced. Artificial intelligence, machine learning, and
automation have entered various fields such as medicine, agriculture, banking, industry,
and education. It is estimated that in the coming years robots may be used in areas such as
housekeeping, care services, security arrangements, and industrial production.
However, technology can reduce human labour and increase efficiency, but it cannot
replace human emotions, compassion, and sensitivity. Technology is objective, while
human beings are emotional and subjective. Human civilization has progressed not only
because of science and technology but also because of values such as ethics,
compassion, empathy, love, and cooperation.
If we think from an objective point of view, technological development has undoubtedly
made human life easier. But when human beings are treated merely as consumers or
producers, the essence of humanity starts declining. Technological humanism cannot
provide meaning to life because meaning is derived not only from efficiency but also from
relationships, emotions, and moral values.
It is often said:
“Machines can work, but they cannot become human beings.”
Science is essential for development, but scientific progress should not be considered the
sole requirement for human welfare. Thinkers such as Hand Axe emphasized that human
civilization has advanced through both knowledge and sensitivity. Therefore, technological
progress can become a means of development, but it cannot completely replace human
sensitivity.
Technology had been anti-human, human civilization would have perished in the fire of its
own inventions. If technology had been destructive, human beings would have been
eliminated by fighting with weapons made of iron and metal. Instead, fire helped humans
cook food and clear forests, while iron provided better agricultural tools and implements,
making cultivation on new lands possible. Due to surplus agricultural production, human
society developed from clans to districts, from districts to states, and from states to
empires.
In the famous book The Third Wave by Alvin Toffler, it is mentioned that from the origin of
human civilization up to the first century AD, the rate of development increased tenfold.
From the first century to the eighteenth century, the rate increased even further, and from
the eighteenth to the twentieth century, the pace of development became one hundred
times greater than before.
Undoubtedly, this rapid development of human civilization has been made possible by
science and technology. However, did industrial development displace agriculture? Did
post-industrial technologies such as computers, nanotechnology, biotechnology, and the
service sector lead to the closure of factories? Certainly not. Then why and how can
science and technology displace human beings? In reality, every human activity itself
reflects the use of technology. Human beings and technology are not opponents of one
another but complement each other. Therefore, separating human labour from technology
would be misleading.
The robot technology that is often said to take away human jobs was initially used mainly
for tasks that were extremely difficult for humans, such as mining, underwater operations,
excavation, high-voltage welding, and carrying heavy loads. These tasks displaced labour,
not human beings. For example, if robots are employed as firefighters, they may reduce
human jobs, but they also save humans from dangerous tasks in which people may lose
their lives. Today, drones are used for surveillance, espionage, and attacks, and they are
controlled by computers.
In reality, displacement of labour has a dual meaning. If technology replaces human labour
and contributes to human welfare, it can be beneficial. But if machines begin replacing
humanity itself, such a situation would be unfortunate.
The same robot technology that was first developed for dangerous tasks such as mining,
underwater operations, excavation, high-voltage welding, and heavy transportation
displaced labour rather than humans. Similarly, if robots are deployed in fire brigades, they
may reduce jobs but at the same time free humans from life-threatening work. Today,
drones controlled by computers are being used for surveillance, espionage, and military
attacks.
Thus, machines performing dangerous and labour-intensive tasks should be considered an
achievement of technology rather than a replacement for human beings. Even today,
robots equipped with artificial intelligence are increasingly being used in hotels, banks, and
other service sectors, but they mainly replace certain forms of labour and cannot
completely eliminate human beings or human work.
The first point is that the displacement of human labour by technology is not anti-human
but beneficial. When computers became popular worldwide, labour unions, political
parties, and human rights activists strongly opposed computer technology, claiming that it
would take away employees’ jobs. However, all such predictions proved wrong. Today,
computers have not eliminated jobs but have created new opportunities for employment.
There is hardly any field today that functions without computers.
Did computers make people unemployed? Certainly not. Computer technology has
increased human efficiency. Statistics indicate that the employment opportunities
available after the computer revolution are many times greater than those available during
the industrial age. Therefore, even if technology displaces human labour, it ultimately
strengthens human capabilities rather than weakening them. What is needed is
technological adaptation, not opposition to technological development.
As for the idea that technology may replace human beings, such situations have so far
existed mainly in Hollywood films. Nevertheless, we should remain cautious because a
situation may arise in which highly advanced technology becomes harmful to civilization.
Machines and humans differ in nature. The greatest qualities of human beings are
creativity, thought, and sensitivity. Human beings are considered superior among living
creatures because they possess consciousness, which lifeless machines cannot have.
Machines operate according to programmed instructions, whereas humans are self
directed. Machines cannot feel emotions, while humans experience joy, sorrow,
relationships, pain, affection, love, hatred, social prestige, and insult. For example, if a
ration shop is operated by a robot, it may distribute ration according to a queue, but it
cannot understand exceptional human situations, such as giving priority to an elderly
woman who collapses due to heat. Machines act according to orders and cannot make
decisions based on changing human circumstances.
Research in this area is continuing, and many advanced computers are being equipped
with Artificial Intelligence (AI) to make them more human-like. As a result, companion
robots such as Roxxxy have been developed, demonstrating the capabilities of artificial
intelligence. Even if such possibilities increase, restrictions can still be imposed
internationally, just as restrictions are imposed on cloning technology, in order to protect
humanity.
The thinker Victor Hugo, in his book The Hunchback of Notre-Dame, compared printed
books with handwritten manuscripts and expressed concern that people might stop writing
because of machines and that literacy might decline. However, the opposite happened.
Thus, it can be said that technology and science are merely tools in themselves. If used by
good people, they may replace certain forms of labour and contribute to the upliftment of
humanity. But if they are used by people with distorted intentions, they may displace not
only labour but humanity itself. Technology is never anti-human by nature. Rather, it is
human beings who become anti-human when they misuse technology for exploitation.
Science and technology are instruments for the development of human civilization, and
through robotics, computers, artificial intelligence, nanotechnology, communication
technology, and biotechnology, they are shaping the future of the twenty-first century.
“If the direction is not right, speed is of no use.
If the path is not straight, strength is wasted.
However fast one moves, one keeps wandering,
If the destination is not fixed, the journey of life loses its meaning.”
Published in Uncategorized