How can I explain why in a future of robots, ai, and automation, people still bother to do anything themselves?
Many people think that in the future, all jobs will be taken by machines and AI. Why then, would anyone bother doing anything at all, such as invent things, fight in combat, etc - in other words, how can I create a science fiction world where people actually do things?
This post was sourced from https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/q/88099. It is licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0.
1 answer
It provides a social life, and people enjoy doing things and doing them together. The product is not the point, producing it is the point. Sure, my wife could get a robot to tend her garden perfectly; but then she probably just wouldn't have a garden: She wants to the work, pick out the plants, position them, dig in the dirt and nurture them and check on them, trim them and care for them. Only then can she take pride in the flowers she has grown and the living artwork she has created.
It is the difference between buying a piece of art, and making a piece of art yourself. Between buying a good meal, and making one yourself. Between reading a book and writing one. A person that takes just as much pride in a purchased piece of art as one they made themselves has a deeply disturbed psychology; I'd consider that condition non-human.
Doing something gives people a purpose in life, even if the purpose is short-lived. My retired neighbor (she is a retired CS professor) loves dogs and volunteers at the dog shelter. She washes dogs for about three hours a day, inspecting them for pests or injuries. She does not want robots doing this job, she feels connected to the dogs she is helping and to the like-minded volunteers at the dog shelter, and after retirement this has become a significant part of her social life.
As for the dog shelter: Robots cost money, and it is hard to beat free labor.
As a final example, let me point to the ultra-rich in the world. They already have "robots": They can hire humans (and humans much smarter than themselves) to do literally everything in their lives. Yet many of them still take on various kinds of jobs and charities, even full time. Why is Bill Gates directing a charity? It isn't for the money, or to make sure his money is well spent. He could hire trusted subordinates (robots) to do that; just like he hired people to run Microsoft. It is because it puts meaning in his life.
Why is Warren Buffett still running an investment firm at the age of 80 plus? It isn't for the money, he gave away $30 billion dollars (to the Bill and Melinda Gate's charity), the bulk of his fortune. He is still a multi-billionaire that lives in a modest house, plays bridge and still eats fast food burgers. He doesn't exactly give a crap about earning more money: He just enjoys the puzzle of finding massive investments and being proven right, and the money rolls in as a side-effect. Like my wife's garden, he can't get those feelings if somebody else does the work.
The answer to the question is, people will bother to do things for themselves, even if those things appear to be work, because doing those things feels good and are emotionally satisfying; and would not be if robots did the work for them.
0 comment threads
0 comment threads