Gina Neff

The New York Times Debate: AI Will Reveal the Best of Humanity

The motion: Moments of extreme disruption can reveal what we most want to protect. AI in particular is prompting us to question what we consider most human: our histories, cultures, values; friendship, motherhood; love, empathy, relationship to truth… And it’s forcing an inflection point in our own evolution as a species. Many would argue that in the face of AI’s exponential development and influence, and all of its unknown consequences, our humanity will be triggered into consolidating and redefining itself, to survive and preserve its legacy on earth. Others would say that it’s too late. That AI has already evolved to disregard the truth, neglect law and democracy, feed on hate sentiment and violent, tribal dynamics on social media; to design deep fakes and extreme forms of surveillance; and to rely entirely on data and information at the cost of nuanced, critical thinking. AI, after all, does not ‘reveal’ much in of itself. It’s a tool: an engine to deploy, deliver, and distract. If it’s having terrifying consequences, it’s because human beings have designed it so. As a super-intelligent being that will learn, think and create better than the smartest human in 20 years, there is no doubt that AI will soon be able to do what most of us do, but better. So we are at a crisis point: Will this moment of confrontation and existential risk reveal the best or the worst of us? Will we adapt and thrive in a new social contract with machines, or will we give into our worst instincts and add fuel to AI’s fire? About the format: In a time of increasingly polarized and siloed conversation, The New York Times strives to protect societies' relationship to nuanced, critical thinking, healthy disagreement and trustworthy debate. The New York Times debate format, inspired by the traditional Oxford-style debate, convenes speakers for and against a motion, alongside a jury for high-level commentary. Its goal - more than pronouncing a clear winner - is to shed light on the key tensions of a complex issue in a dynamic format underscoring the importance of balanced dialogue. This session is sponsored by GitHub.