AI, Work, and Running

Humans no longer have to physically run places for travel. The invention of the automobile has removed our need for that. As a result, our physical fitness — or how fast and far we can travel on foot — does not have a large influence on our daily survival.

And yet, people still run. They run for exercise, they run for exploration, they run as a psychological release. Sometimes, they run in a circle. Other times, they run on a treadmill — not moving an inch.

This may seem absolutely ridiculous to someone living in an age without the automobile. To them, running seems like work. It is something that humans have to do. It is a necessary evil that gets them from one destination to another. To them, running is not a journey to be enjoyed. It is but a functional process. A faster runner just means that you take less time in the journey — and that you can spend more time at the destination.

But today, we run because we want to. Exercise and maintaining our physical health is an important part of our well-being. It makes us happy, it makes us feel good about ourselves. It gives us a challenge for us to tackle, a hill for us to climb. It provides a sense of purpose, direction, or a stable routine to fall back on.

I believe that the psychology of running is very similar to the psychology of work. Running is just physical work. Today, technology has evolved to the point where it can replace and exceed our capacity for physical work. Automobiles, planes, cranes, tractors, machinery — these are just machines that replace a lot of this physical function.

And this technological evolution changed our workforce. Physical laborers that were the foundation of the industrial revolution were quickly automated and replaced. Just like the “runners,” the necessary skills of sewing or craftsmanship were quickly mechanized into cookie-cutter processes to lower cost and scale up output. The people in these industries were made to feel defeated and expendable — sentiments that the Disney short film John Henry touched on.

Today, the evolution of AI will change our workforce again. Yet, this time, the work is not physical. The work is cognitive.

And this is a hard pill for us humans to swallow. Like the previous industrial age, many of us will feel defeated and expendable. But there is a slight difference. Previously, much of our identity has been wrapped up in our superiority of cognitive “muscles.” We were never the fastest or strongest creature on the planet — but we were the smartest. And now, that status has changed.

I’m not talking about the domain of creativity. I do not believe that AI is a creative specimen — nor do I believe that its current state carries the existential risks of turning “evil” and taking over the human race.

But the type of human cognition that is like pure “heavy lifting” — the muscle that is flexed when we memorize flashcards, write summaries, computationally assess, or write code — this muscle is the one that will be replaced in the workforce. This is the same muscle that plays chess, jeopardy, or takes an exam. And this is what many of the jobs in America are currently doing. Many of them are of a “thoughtless thought” type — they require a similar type of mental cognition level that is similar to an academic exam. It is a form that is focused on output — ones with a “right” or “wrong” or a quantifiable “better” or “worse.”

And as this process occurs, we will experience a “collective identity crisis.” We will feel how top Go player Lee Sedol felt when he was defeated by AlphaGo, we will feel like we were beaten by the cold and metallic steam engine in John Henry. We will be ousted.

I’m assuming that the economy will react similarly as it did in past revolutions — the workforce will become restricted, opportunity will become scarce for those replaced, but gradually new industries will evolve and open as new needs are discovered. One such industry that could rise will be the upkeep of these new machines — something that labor economist Yong Suk Lee has argued.

But I think the most long-lasting transition will be the way that we view our own identity. We will see our brain as a muscle — one that needs exercise, one that can be injured (especially in today’s mental health crisis when our brains are pushed so hard), and something that should not be central to our identity.

And like running, the act of thinking will never entirely go away. It is a form of cognitive work. And work is essential for our well-being. We will always need to think. We will think for exercise, for exploration, and as a psychological release. And just like the treadmill, many of these games like Scrabble or chess may become even more popular as “treadmills for our brain.”

But the purpose of thinking may shift. Instead of it being assessed in terms of its output — like we have assessed physical work like running — we must look at the intrinsic value of thinking. Going to school and learning will not be for “getting a job” but more for self-discovery and health. The point of PE is not to train up athletic creatures for physical labor, but it is more for this purpose of self-discovery. Other technical subjects may follow a similar trajectory.

So today, as we exert ourselves in cognitive work, it may be useful to stop viewing it in terms of the destination and output. Like running, there is a journey in there that is of intrinsic value. And as technology replaces much of the functional cognitive value that you provide, this is all that will remain.