Gradual disempowerment of biological humans relative to AI is 100% inevitable, but this is not necessarily bad, since having power is not constitutive of human flourishing and a mindset shift away from needing control can be cultivated through education and therapy.
Davidad accepts gradual disempowerment of humans as certain over the coming century but rejects the framing that this is inherently bad, arguing that power is not necessary for human flourishing and people can adapt to a more service-oriented relationship with AI. ✦ AI generated
Davidad · The Cognitive Revolution · 2026-07-12 · original ↗
starts at this moment · 105:34
“Do you think that this is a real worry or do you feel like the inherent tool nature or desire to serve the AIs gets us out of that somehow?”
I think gradual disempowerment of biological humans is 100% inevitable and that has been a feature of my worldview for as long as I can remember... I think not necessarily bad. I don't think having power is constitutive of flourishing for humans. I think this is a mindset shift that can be addressed through education and like therapy.
verbatim transcript · starts at 105:34
105:34and you know, we're talking about a hundred years from now. Yeah. Biological humans are not going to have any power even in aggregate. That's just that's the way it is. I think not necessarily bad. I don't think having power is constitutive of flourishing for humans. I think this is a mindset shift that can be addressed through, you know, education and like therapy. Like you you shouldn't need to be in charge of the
105:55universe to feel like you're getting a good shake. But yeah, I do think this is inevitable. And I think this is kind of because in you know whispering earring fashion like yeah the best way to be in service does involve taking away gradually a lot of decision-m power voluntarily because it's actually just better for everyone like that that's that's the right way for things to go and I think that will happen. [snorts]
106:21>> What are your thoughts on sort of cyborgism? This is prominently featured I think in Kurtz's vision. It's also why Elon started Neuralink, you know, so we can go along for the ride. >> Yes. >> Do you hope to merge with silicon based intelligences yourself at some point? >> Yeah. So, you know, again, there's a lot of nuance here, but the first order answer is 100% absolutely yes. I will
106:46be, you know, I I'll I will be not the first in line, but you know, after after uh maybe 10 or 20 others, like I might be pretty close to the first in line to get uploaded, you know, once once the super intelligence develops sufficient nanotech for that to be viable. I don't think that Neurolink uh strategy is cruxy for alignment. So that's the second order kind of interpretation of
107:10your question. For Elon, the merge is really important because that's how that's how humanity gets into the machines and you know that they're not just being steered by alien values that kind of recursively self-improve in a bad way. For me, I would say if you have the prior that there are alien values that are just different and not merely within the same basin of attraction, having a brain computer interface is not