Understanding ourselves in an age of anxiety | Yuval Noah Harari

0:00 Distinguished guests, dear colleagues and students, good evening. My name is Leo Chun and I am an assistant professor in the school of arts here at Peeking University. It is my great honor to serve as a moderator between two distinguished scholar. Professor Yuva Harrari and professor Chung. Professor Harrari, I'm sure most of you are very familiar with his works. U but let me introduce him briefly in the very beginning. uh he is the distinguished research fellow and the University of Cambridge and his uh publications uh have been bestselling ones across the world. We're very happy to have him uh here today. It's a pleasure and honor to be here. It's been quite a while since I was last

0:47 in China. Uh the last time I I was here was before the COVID pandemic and previously I used to come every year and then it became more difficult but I'm very happy to be here again with you. I'm a historian in my training and I see myself as a historian but I think that history is not just the study of the past. History is also the study of the present and of the future. Historians our real subject matter is change. We try to understand how things change. And we are now in the midst of maybe the biggest change in human history, perhaps the end of human history and the beginning of a posthuman stage of

1:32 history. Uh, and this raises a lot of deep philosophical questions about the very meaning of humanity. So there is really and no one better to to discuss it with than with a philosopher. Okay, thank you. Uh, we are also very honored to have Professor Chung Lung with us today. Professor Chung is the head of the department of philosophy here at Peeking University. His expertise lies in Dowist studies, but trust me, I have known him for 20 more than 20 years. His knowledge spans way beyond ancient texts. So, we look forward to his conversations tonight as well. Professor Chong, would you like to say hello as well? Okay. Um, hello everyone and you know

2:18 it's a very um precious opportunity for me to have a dialogue with Professor Horelli. You know um it is not so often happened you have opportunity to talk with certain writers have so many fans and readers you know it's a very amazing things. I I I got I got to know just a few days ago that uh his book got millions of reader only in China. You know it's um it's amazing for me you know now is a is a time of scream. We are we we are immersed ourself in this kind of short videos and all those messages not that is not so serious but the um professor rally composed uh

3:06 several books with indepth understanding and reflection on the infrastructure of uh human beings culture and civilizations and these kind of these kind of books get so many readers And so many readers love this kind of narrative that come from history but point out towards the future. So this I think this is um a very interesting things and I want to discuss with um uh professor Heralei uh about this this phenomena and what is the uh exactly uh significance of the the things that have happened around his books and uh also about his

3:51 books uh nexus which largely lead to a you know very strong sense of philosophical reflection of the whole thing we named as uh civilizations. you you you give a very cold description of the things but uh let us just start with a very simple questions just as I mentioned um you know uh in nowadays uh the professional academic work is somehow uh becoming increasingly uh self-encclosed and we actually uh keep in indifferent uh about the public issue Jews and the the the common challenges that shared by

4:39 humankind. We we just do our things in ancient texts and we just publish our academic papers to get to get our salary and you know and um um your book just remind us as uh professional scholars to get back to the public uh sphere to address the challenges and problems that shared by the human beings. And you know this is largely a very interesting things is as a historian you got so many uh readers and you give a so strong structure interpretation of human civilization. You know this is a very

5:25 powerful tools to shape the man side of your reader and this means that you burdened a very strong ethic responsibility. You know you you you shape the man side of your reader and uh if we do believe that you have this power how we can use this power responsibly and what is your expectation from all your your your books your readers can get from your books is a is a very special attitude is a can of concern or is a expectation of a future or something like that I want to I want to hear you about your point about this.

6:12 What I try to do in all my works is help people understand themselves, help people understand reality better. And it's a very delicate job because people usually rush to judge reality and to judge history, to judge the past and the present. We want to know who are the good guys and who are the bad guys. Uh whether things are are good or bad. And when we rush to judge things, we don't have time to understand them. So in my writing, I try to write history without villains, without good guys and bad guys, but to

7:00 understand the deep process of change. And I sometimes think about history maybe as a kind of collective therapy for for humanity. I go to therapy every week. I have a weekly session. And you can people can wonder why why do people need to go to therapy? I mean the subject matter in therapy is myself. Who knows myself better than me? Why do I need to go to some stranger to learn about myself? I mean this is ridiculous but it's not because yes I know more about myself than any other person perhaps but there are so many things I don't want to know about myself

7:47 that yeah I have access to all the data to the memories to the daily events but I reject I mean some things I I really like to know about myself but the more painful the darker episodes in my life, the more painful things I do in the present, it's very difficult for a person to acknowledge that about oneself. Like if you're in a relationship and there is a problem in a relationship, so you ask and I I people would say I'm perfect. It's the other person who is causing all the problem. If only the other per person changed a little, behaved differently, everything

8:33 would be perfect. And you ask the other person, they would say exactly the same thing. I'm perfect. It's my husband, it's my wife that is causing all the problem in our household. So this is why you need to go to therapy. So to get professional help to realize some very deep truths about yourself that are too difficult or too painful to acknowledge and history is like therapy for entire civilizations or for the whole of humankind. Also entire nations often don't want to acknowledge dark episodes in their past or dark things they are doing right now. Entire civilizations the same you ask and

9:20 almost every nation almost every country would say we are perfect. All the problems are because of the other nations. All the problems are because of the other civilizations of the other cultures. And I think the responsible job of historians is to and not to to to share blame but to simply help people understand better the big processes and the deep sources of the problems in the world and and this is a a big responsibility. This is very very uh interesting as you just cannot agree more about your points because you know you just point out the core value of the

10:05 humanity. The core value of humanity is not to provide any accurate knowledge, not to make the word uh trans transparency. Actually uh the mo most important things is that this uh through the uh humanity and reflections. We teach people do not make any judgment in rush to try to lead a very hesitated life especially intellectually because the complexity of human nature because different kind of narrative that will dominated our menside that is bowsed and one-sided. This is largely because what because the limitation of

10:52 our perspective of understanding and this largely lead to I my my own understanding of your book. I think that through all your four four books you you are largely trying to give a very cautious refined warning to us as human beings to urgent us to respect but never blindly trust our imperfect human nature. If we turn to the so-called development of of technology and the dramatic change that ongoing because of the AI technology we'll find that the things is

11:37 not just the technology itself just as Hington has pointed out the most important things is the misuse of this technology but not the technology itself you know this largely lead us to a very important uh issues in the philosophy of politics which we called technocrassy. And you know those who those who dedicate the development of AI technology actually had been set up a systematic techno tyranny on human beings just as me. I have no idea what the uh

12:23 uh AI expert talking about and and I have no idea what I should do to facing up all this change. The only thing is that I was forced to accept it and uh this is unfair. Why should why should I accept it? And you know the things is this those people who manipulate this skills and technologies are ordinary people they might be evil they might be trying to set up a dictation on us and why we should accept it without any condition. We have no right to say no. You know this is the

13:09 things that I think that your books try to uh urge us to reflect the deficiency of human beings. But this deficiency of human beings is the way point that differentiate us from the machine because we have emotion, we have desire and all the things largely lead to a very very special and very correct attitude towards future. I called it moderately optimistic. you should not too optimistic but in no way you put it in uh uh pessimistic. This is largely the things that uh in my

13:54 mind to say uh your book just as a warning towards us. I I often get this question of whether I'm pessimistic or optimistic about the future. I think it's the most common question that that people ask me in interview in private conversations and I always say that that I'm neither. I mean pessimists are people who kind of think that no matter what you do things will go badly and this undermines human responsibility because if no matter what we do things will go badly what's the point of even trying. Pessimism breeds despair but optimism can be just as dangerous because it breeds complacency.

14:40 Optimists tend to say no matter what happens things will turn out okay in the end. And then if this is the case again we don't need to take responsibility because whether we act or don't act whether we think very deeply about what we do or we just do the first things that comes up in our mind things will turn out okay and I try to to to find a middle path of being responsible which is not optimist or pessimist it's realizing there are different futures possible ahead of us. We can draw a map of different futures. Some good, some bad. Nothing is determined. There is no

15:26 God and there is no law of history that will correct our mistakes if we do if we take the wrong choices. Uh we are not doomed. We have immense power human beings. We have immense resources, knowledge. We can do the right thing. But uh there is no guarantee enough people need to make good decisions in order to reach the the right destination. And you know when I look at the world right now I am appalled by the lack of responsibility which is shown by many of the h political and business leaders around the world. And it seems that humanity is

16:12 going in a very very dangerous direction. And at this moment, responsibility is more important than ever because of the AI revolution. We are in the process of creating not just the most powerful technology in history. We are in the process of creating potentially a new species of super intelligent entities agents that might very soon take control away from us. We have just a few years to get this thing right. I keep telling people that AI is not like the previous technologies we have invented in

16:57 history. This time it's not just about us. You know, philosophers have this habit that when people invent something, so they always say it's not about the technology, it's about the humans. They decide what to do with the technology. This was always true, but it's no longer true. We are now creating an independent agent. that uh uh the the defining charact characteristic of AI is not automation, the ability to act automatically. Oh, the defining characteristic is agency. To be an AI, a machine must have the capacity to learn and change by itself,

17:42 to make decisions by itself, and to invent new ideas by itself. If it can't do that, if it only follows your instructions, if you can predict everything it will do, it is not an AI. And we are rushing to create these super intelligent agents in a very irresponsible way. And as as I travel the world and I talk with the leaders of the AI revolution, I ask them two questions again and again. The same way they ask me are you optimist or pessimist? So I reply with two questions of my own. I ask them first why are you moving so fast? Why don't give human time humankind a bit more

18:29 time to adapt to reflect to do things more carefully and safely? And almost all of them reply the same answer. Almost all of them say we are we know there are huge risks. They often know it better than anybody else. The the leaders of the AI revolution. We know there are big risks. We would like to move more slowly, but we can't trust our human competitors. If we move more slowly and the other company or the other country doesn't slow down, they will win the AI race and then they will dominate the world and the world will be ruled by the most ruthless people. We cannot allow this. So we must move faster and you then ask talk with their

19:16 competitors. They say exactly the same thing. So everybody says we can't trust the other humans. Then I ask them the second question. Do you think you will be able to trust the super intelligent AIs that you're developing? And the same people who just explained to me why they can't trust other humans suddenly say, "Oh, we think we could trust these super intelligent AIs." Which I think is borderline insanity because, you know, with humans, we know we have trouble with humans, but we also understand them to some extent. We know quite a lot about human psychology and biology. We have experience in history

20:04 not just of violence and war but also in building trust. You know a 100,000 years ago humans lived in tiny bands of a few dozen individuals couldn't trust anybody outside their band. Now we have nations like China with 1.4 billion citizens who cooperate on a daily basis. We have a global trade network connecting even different countries. So we have some achievements in building trust between humans with AIS. We have no experience. We are just creating them. We already know they can lie and deceive and manipulate. We have no idea what will happen when we release millions of super intelligent

20:49 AIs to take control of our financial system and military system and culture. So the people who lose trust in other humans but imagine they can trust an alien super intelligence this is extremely scary and I think irresponsible. The things is just like this because you know um when when you are engineer you you create something and you will naturally get a confidence to say I can control it. But the things is just like this one we when when we turn to the AI is just a you know a a black box that we we have no idea what what would happen in there and um uh if if there will be

21:37 certain we called subjectivity within this this AI engine and uh whether they will have desires they they will have their own in intentionality to do certain things and they have their own value systems. They they have their own value preference or this kind of things were was super dangerous. But the things is just like this when we say that okay we just cannot trust other people means what means we know that what is human being what is human nature but nowadays we are still panning for the new definition of what is AI what is new species and uh you know this is largely

22:23 lead us to a very interesting things about the difference between silicon based life and uh carbon based life. We we we seems to have a very clear definition of what is carbon based life. Um even the the the even despite of the uh observ observable phenomena which we living or something like that but the general uh definition of carbon based life is that we were dead. We were that another days and this things composed the basic element of the uh human nature. I can't I I I said this the necessity

23:09 of death and the dependence of group community and uncertainty anxiety about future. All the things lead to us uh poorly understanding of uh you know human beings and the mutual trust among people is the most costly things that we have found in the history and these things lead to a very interesting things is like this. I maybe I could say that through intelligence we can tell us from animal we know that we has we are some specious with intelligence but is that case that we can tell us from the AI

23:56 engine in potential because we have emotion we are deficiency we have deficiency we actually have a limitations you know according to the Chinese philosophy the most important important things is that is that we must face up to the real self. The real self with emotion with limitation we just cannot know everything and we should be very humble when we face up to others and uh future. So this is largely widened from the the the ancient China and this is largely you you you said about responsibility and the responsibility not just come from a a a social mechanism but come from what self understanding of what is

24:43 yourself what is the essence of human beings and I think a very important point about humans is that we are we often define ourselves elves by our intelligence to distinguish us from other animals. We feel we want to feel superior to all the animals and what can give us superiority not the body not physical strength. So we say ah we are more intelligent than all the other animals. So we give I think far too much emphasis on intellect and intelligence in the understanding of ourselves which is now becoming extremely dangerous because soon there will be something more intelligent than us on the planet.

25:28 So if it's all about intelligence it's game over for humanity. And maybe I share something from my own personal history which taught me in again a very painful way that intelligence is not the most important thing in in humanity or or in life. When I was quite a young boy, I was spotted in the school as a as a gifted student. So they took me out of my school in my neighborhood and sent me to a special school for gifted students uh where they collected these kind of genius kids from all over the northern part of the country. It was quite far away from my from my neighborhood. So it was a long ride every day. But this was not the the the bad thing about it. The

26:14 really awful thing about it is that this was a a special school for gifted students. So everybody saw us as some kind of walking intelligence and we were valued for our intelligence. And here is where it become really problematic. Back in my neighborhood neighborhood school, I was easily the best in everything uh in in mathematics, in in reading, in writing, in everything without much effort. uh which first left a lot of time to play and do other things and secondly kind of my position as the smartest kid in in the class was easily secured and this was my identity. I'm the smartest kid in the class. Suddenly I find myself in a class with

27:03 30 other genius kids who also define themselves as being the smartest kid in the class. Now you throw 30 10-year-old kids into a a class like this and you get a gladiatorial arena. Not with fists but with words. We were merciless. We It was like the crulest place I've ever seen in my life was this class. Sometimes you know I read in history books about wars and terrible things that are happening. So it's worth but like from personal experience this was kind of the the the worst thing that I I saw was these 30 10year-old kids tearing each other to pieces trying to

27:50 prove them I'm smarter than you. It was also held for the teachers because our kind of contest was who could find the mistakes the teachers make and humiliate the teachers. This was like you're a king of the class for a day if you manage to humiliate the and most of the time we just humiliated each other like you know the teacher asks something and somebody gives an answer and everybody jumps and this is not true and so it and it it went on for years and and the whole rationale of of this uh uh class was to develop the intellect of these kids. So nobody invested anything in developing our social

28:36 skills, in developing our emotional skills or or in developing our our physical skills, our our bodily skills and um it was a very I now can joke about it but it was a very painful experience you know after being for 10 years in in in this environment. Uh the as teenager we came out with quite developed intellects but with horrible social skills which made I know some of the people who were in that class and they still carry deep scars injuries uh from from that time and this taught me in the most kind of personal and and visceral way that you cannot define a

29:24 person or build a person based only on intellectual skills. The much more important things that ultimately humanity is about feelings and not about thoughts. Maybe if I have more time I'll I'll say something also about I said something personal. Now let's kind of open it to the to the grand vision of of human evolution. You know, originally we humans, our ancestors at least, were worms crawling on the ground or in the mud. A very simple life form. It's just a tube with two openings, a mouth to take in food and another opening to

30:10 expel all the waste from the body. There was no brain. There were already nerve cells, neurons, but there was no brain. The center of command of this ancient worm was in the stomach where the food went. Now over millions of years in order to get food and also warn about danger. So more nerve cells developed around the mouth in order to taste the food and smell the food and see the food and hear the food. And this became the brain. And this is still our basic structure today. We are basically a worm. It's

30:56 just, you know, look at yourself. It's just this long twisting uh tube with a few things attached to it, but it's it's a worm. And the brain is still near the mouth. But the big question is maybe the center of control is still where it always was in the stomach, not in the brain. And I it's a big question in brain science because maybe not the stomach, but the spinal cord is an integral part of the brain. And there are good reasons to think that yes, you have all these neurons here that get all the attention, but ultimately the real center of command of the human being is is still

31:41 here. Well, actually um I I know exactly what you're talking about, but Professor Harrari as one of the smartest guys around the world saying that intelligence is not that important. It's really interesting. Okay, go on professor. Yeah, actually you know um the always there kind of show off to say that I'm very smart but it's not so important but actually you know I I know that the students here uh onset of this hall uh the university students who have passed a very selective examination to go to this campus and actually you uh during uh data back to your child school childhood you are the smartest student students in your class. But once you

32:29 step into this campus, you will know you're just somehow around average. And this is a very unit this is very tough process of um man change uh especially in the first year first semester you must accept it that I'm just around average and you know uh most of your teacher think let's say you you just so you're not so smart and the all the way you you you adopted to de demonstrate that you're smart is totally nonsense. So this is largely the things that lead us to a very important point to say that uh the the things that make us h human is about our uh deficiency

33:17 all the the things that is not so uh uh concerned with intelligent intelligence because the things is just for me it's just like this when we say that we are try to controlling certain certain things that has intelligence that supports us. We still has a very important uh reasoning mode that come from a instrumental uh reasoning. We try to regard this as a tool but not as a subjective. And if you regard this as a tool then actually you will get into the trap of modernity. The the chap of modernity is a continuous pursuit of efficiency. You do

34:04 things quicker quicker and you face up to different kinds of competitions and you compet you have a competitions with human beings other other companies other countries other nations all the things is about competition and now we have a new competition with what with AI with new and species that is totally has intelligence that supports us this is the real things that stern stern get all us into a panic and this kind of worry actually lead to a historical reflections because because what the anxiety

34:49 long for thousands of years always come from the same things the uncertainty of future and how we can take action responsible to to to to respond ond the change that happening. So so to speak for for for me that is the things is not just about technology. The things is about the deep understanding of deficiency of human beings and we should with full recognition of our limitation then take a cultural steps towards the future and to say just as the the motive of today's discussion understanding is a antidote. you know you you must firstly

35:36 to do certain in-depth reflection before you take any action but now we are too rush in action and we too rush into a new form of competition and this is largely what I called consequence of modernity so we we we actually not face up to the so-called uh competition with AI but we we we try we actually uh run into a competition with ourselves. But I'm not sure I would put all the blame just on modernity because we see things like that also in ancient times. I know very little about Dowoism. So I would be happy to to to to hear from you about it. But at least in in in uh the West, you can trace these

36:25 things back thousands of years. Um, you know, especially you talked about the fear that humans have of of losing control, of not knowing. And this fear often propels people to look for something infallible. Like the fantasy of super intelligence is didn't begin today or a few decades ago. The fantasy of super intelligence, at least in the west, goes back thousands of years when humans yearned to find some super intelligent savior, Messiah, God that knows everything,

37:10 that it never makes mistake and that we can rely on him because we can't rely on ourselves. And this fantasy the first artifact that it produced and which is still one of the most important artifacts in the world is the holy book. Again I don't know what is the status of daist texts that you're studying. I'll I'll be very happy to hear in in a moment from you. But in religions like Judaism and Christianity, ultimate authority is invested not in any human being like a priest or a rabbi or something. Ultimate authority is invested in an artifact, a text which is supposed to be super

37:58 intelligent, never makes a mistake. Now, of course, until today, there was always one very big problem with texts like the Bible. They can't talk. They can't answer questions. So, here I am believing that this text is perfect intelligence, never makes any mistake, but I have trouble understanding the words. It's it's not written very well. It's it's there are too many meanings to the same sentence. I'm not sure which meaning is the correct one. Or maybe this text was written 3,000 years ago when people were farmers. Now I have like a modern business. I'm not sure how to apply the lessons of of this text to

38:47 the new reality. So what do I do? I ask the text. It doesn't answer. So I need a human to interpret the text for me. And then a class of humans emerge which are experts in interpreting the text and they become the real authority in society. These are the rabbis and the priests. Now something extremely interesting is happening right now in the world at least of these religions that suddenly the texts can talk because you can give an AI to read the Bible and all the other rel religious texts. I mean over thousands of years if

39:33 I take the case of Judaism rabbis didn't just read the Bible they wrote thousands and thousands of commentaries on the Bible and commentaries on the commentaries and commentaries on the commentaries on the commentaries which all became sacred and your position as a rabbi you're big rabbi if you know more texts and you're a little rabbi if you know only a few no rabbi was able to read and remember all the texts Impossible for a human. But AI can. For the first time in the history of Judaism, there is something on earth that can read all the texts of Judaism. Everything written by every rabbi in Poland or Yemen like 800 years ago, it

40:18 read everything. It remembers every single word. It can find connections and patterns in the holy texts that no rabbi can. Will it become the new authority in Judaism? Now, if you have a question and the AI says, "Oh, this is the answer." It can give you like pages on pages of proof from holy books. Now, if if a human rabbi says, "Don't don't listen to this AI, it's a soulless machine." The problem, at least in Judaism, is that the authority is invested in the text, not in the human. So if an AI finds arguments in the text, they rabbis cannot just dismiss because

41:06 it's the argument because the text has authority. The now the word speaks. AI has mastered language. So um it's it's interesting this this is kind of my perspective as a historian on all this how very it's not just modernity. It's the whole of human history which is feeding into this AI revolution with very unexpected consequences. Maybe the same thing is happening in the legal system which also a very authoritative text that until today we needed lawyers to interpret the text. Now the text can speak for itself. It's the same thing in the financial system. Until today, we needed bankers

41:54 and financiers to interpret the the the money, the the financial texts. Now they can interpret themselves. So maybe AIS take over the financial systems and the religions and the legal system. So this is just kind of a thought to share and I would be very happy to hear how it is in in Dowoism and whether you think that you'll have an AI dowist master anytime soon. No, actually um the the case was was totally different in Dism because you know I'm I'm just not trying to blame everything to the modernity but the things is just like this you know modernity comes from the western tradition exactly the thing the the the

42:39 modernity is offspring of the whole tradition but in China is totally different we we we because Darism is too complex system systematic sort So um I let it let me just start with a very simple sentence the very opening sentence of the jing which means the uh the the the the things that you spoke spoke out is not the constant things which means um for me there is a very interesting uh definition of authority. you just a mention of of authority which is always correct and for for for us for the for for as Chinese people uh along

43:26 with the thous intellectual tradition we actually have the two pre assumptions the first things is as common human beings we have very clear limitation of our rationality we just cannot say we we can uh control or grasp the ultimate truth of the cosmos of the whole thing and this is because what because we are human beings and then is there any authority that we can rely on that seems seems always corrected. Yeah, we have certain kinds of memory of last things. Sagehood there is golden age the governed by the sages and the sages know the exact me

44:14 internal mechanism of the the so-called uh cosmos but things is just like this things change for for forist everything changes everything floating and they just cannot say there is one set regulations and rules who can rule to who can run all the way of the history of human human beings. So the sense is that you must depend on the original text but you just cannot just rely on it. You you you you read into it and you you you get something back and then you have a try of what you learn from it. in this does not mean you have the always

45:00 correct uh regulations and rules that behind you. So to speak the most important things is that for Chinese people especially for Dowist we must keep open-minded towards the change towards the ultimate uh rules of the cosmos which we which we could say this the cosmos is eternal sinkus riddle for Chinese for Chinese people especially for theist so to so so in this Say can we say that modernity as a protector of western tradition actually have a short shortage to say that there is absolute rules absolute

45:48 regulations and absolute or universal mechanism that can dominate everything that in our eyes but for Chinese or traditional Chinese thought there is no such things the the universe ial correctness you the the ultimate truth there is there's nothing of that because you just look at the cosmos everything changed there there is a totality of the cosmos but there is no so-called uh ultimate and universal things that you can grasper and you can get and this is why I just mentioned uh why Chinese people always keep humble to the change And we always try to uh do things in a detour

46:38 of learning and practicing. We're learning something and we put it in in practice and we got reflections and we back to the text again and then we take action according to my learning or learning from the text. So this is largely very Chinese style and this is why I called Chinese style uh actually very different from the western uh counterpart and this is why we could find certain strappy of the problem of modernity that we can draw from the oriental sources oriental sort. So, so this is largely why we should uh uh do certain um expansion of of of our

47:23 intellectual views through mutual learning and a mutual understanding I think. And similarly in in Buddhism there is also uh uh a lot of similar arguments to what you just mentioned from Daoism that we need to acknowledge the limitations of humanity. There are no absolute truth that that you can hold on to. Everything is empty and uh you need to rely on practice and not just on some text that says something. And then they memorize these texts again and again and again. And you go to monasteries and and and you see even monks and that that their main practice is memorizing texts.

48:10 And the authority in the religion becomes the authority of the experts on on the texts. And the texts say don't rely on texts. And this is what the experts on texts will say to you. And you know there is a a very famous Buddhist story about a a monk who meditated in a forest and there was a parro parrot living near the the where the monk was meditating and the monk wanted to protect the parrot from danger. So the monk told the parrot per be careful. Uh in this part of the woods there is an a hunter that comes every now and then. Uh the hunter will spread grains on the ground. You'll see the grains. You'll get attracted to the

48:56 grains. When you go for the grains, he hid a net and the net will he'll spring the net. He will capture you. So parrot be careful, a hunter will come. And the parrot and then the monk kept repeating this morning, parrot, be careful, a hunter will come. And the parrot as a parrot learned this morning. And the parrot would sit there on the tree and just repeat all day, "Parrot, be careful. A hunter will come. Perro, be careful, a hunter will come." And one day a hunter came and the hunter spread the grains and the parrot got attracted to the grains and went to eat the grains and the hunter sprang the trap and the parrot was captured. And all through that process and even when the hunter

49:41 was holding the parrot in the hand going to kill him the parrot kept saying parrot be careful parrot be careful a hunter will come. You mentioned a very interesting things is about what um for me um the things is just like this um I think the the the fundamental part of uh just you mentioned the gap between theory and practice. It's about what? It's about our basic need as human beings. I think that our fundamental need is for is the need for order. The the order the understanding of the the the outside world and um this kind of understanding actually lead us to set up our intellectual menside somehow. But uh

50:28 you know you when you run into a real life you must somehow compromise with your uh immediate uh demand and this compromise uh actually be part of your daily life and you just cannot say because there is a uh gape between theory and practice to say that there is no use for uh theoretical uh understanding of the whole things. But what I try to uh say is that this the the the the foundation the foundation of uh order is um we are longing for meaning we must know what we are doing you know um you just say that we we we

51:15 uh do some things we must have our intention and where come from this where come this so-called intention I call I I I say we have a systematic understanding of what is meaning and this meaning actually on the basis of order the acknowledgement of the order and this order actually lead to so-called knowledge this this uh logic lineage actually lead to my uh very simple conclusion to say this battle of the gap between the uh theory and uh the so-called practice is we should still respect the capacity of reflection and the theoretical

52:02 construction because what? Because there is a balance between the between this two and you must go back to theoretical reflections to keep you somehow distance from the wrong misleading actions. So people is uh human beings so complex we just cannot say we have one extreme though just as as I mentioned for Chinese philosophers the most important things is what is balance between extremes but not to say okay we there is a gape so we must have a certain kind of uh solution for it but what do we do in the present moment in history when you know for thousands

52:48 Thousands of years, philosophers could have debates like this. And it was important to some extent, but it was not all that important because the world went on. You know, humans created various orders and the orders collapsed and they created a new order and the new order was maintained for some time and it collapsed and this is how it went for thousands of years. And at least my fear is that we have reached the end of the road and that whatever wisdom we have accumulated from thousands of years of philosophy and from thousands of years of history it needs to manifest now or it's too late that like all the big

53:34 questions of philosophy are now practical questions we have I don't know how many years some say five years some say 10 years some say 15 years before what what the experts called AGI, artificial general intelligence, not this little AI that you have on your smartphones, the deepseek or the chat GPT, but the artificial general intelligence which will be more intelligent than humans not in a specific field but in all fields and once this happens the ball is out of our hands. It's like we are having this discussion and astronomers tell us that they spotted a fleet of spaceships coming from some other solar system.

54:21 According to the calculations of the astronomers, these aliens will land on the planet in between five and 15 years. We don't know much about them. Maybe they are nice. Who knows? Maybe they'll help us solve cancer and overcome climate change. And maybe not. But we have five to 15 years to think what we what we are doing. And this is the time that I think all the wisdom traditions of humanity again developed over thousands of years. Um what do they tell us? What do they tell us about this specific moment in history which is I think different from previous moments because the process of of change

55:07 of course things will continue to change but maybe not for humanity maybe this is kind of the last station for humanity just one words um you can close the whole discussion actually I think that for me I'm I'm more optimistic than you. uh for for me that the advantage of humanity is just because of its deficiency you know just because we are not perfect and you can imagine certain perfect things but I do not think that we could just be uh be be replaced uh with the civilization of human human beings will

55:54 be replaced by certain super intelligence Because what? Because we have emotions. But I just cannot imagine how silicon based uh life have imagine have desire have have intention to just to to remove us to to just to to set up a candle of governance on human beings because because what? because we have design uh uh desires because we are somehow has a very strong sense of uh uh shortage strong sense of um deficiency. So this is largely the the the the the only things that in my mind let Matt be more optimistic than you.

56:42 I'm not sure how how much time we have but um I don't again I don't know whether AIs or AGIs will ever have consciousness will ever have feelings. I think this is the biggest question of all but I don't think that you need feelings in order to have goals and to act in the world as an independent agent. um AIS, you know, you give them a goal or they develop a goal, then they do things to reach the goal without any emotions or desires. If you have a self-driving vehicle, you can give the vehicle the goal, get me as fast as possible to the train station, and the self-driving vehicle on the way would run over people because I gave it the

57:28 goal, get there as fast as possible and forgot to tell it, but don't kill anybody on the way. So and similar we have so many examples you know that the most famous example is what happened on social media that social media companies gave the AIs the very primitive AIs that run social media the goal of increasing user engagement make people spend more time on the platform and the algorithms began to spread hate and and fear online and to destabilize societies all over the world because they discovered that the easiest way to increase engagement is with fear and hatred and greed. So they don't have any desires, they don't have any emotions, but they can have a goal and

58:14 then they can do a lot of things on the way to that goal. And that I think is the danger for us and the fact that we have emotions and feelings means that we can suffer a lot. I mean I I think that ultimately the definition of consciousness is the capacity to suffer and to be liberated from suffering but this is no protection. You know cows can suffer and we didn't treat them very well. Um other animals can suffer and you know it's not necessarily even that we are evil. A lot of animals we have destroyed without even thinking about it. So the cows we exploit them for for meat and milk and so forth. But so many species have gone extinct in just the last few years by

59:00 humans destroying their habitats like they live in some forest and the humans come and cut the forest and build something and the humans don't are not even aware that they are doing something bad to this. There is no evil intention. It's just you don't see them. So some super intelligence may may have whatever goal it could be and it's not evil. It doesn't even have any emotions. It's just on the way to the goal, it runs over us. Great. Um I think we are about to run out of time, but I'm sure then Professor Chung likes to share some comments on you. You're fine. Okay. So, um before we end, let's invite Professor Haruri to give a close remark. Um, so

59:47 for me it was a a an honor and a pleasure to be here with you today and this has been one of the most inspiring discussions I've had in recently. So so thank you for that. The the reason I I I do these talks and that I wrote the book is because I really think that humanity is about to make maybe the most important decisions in our history. And at present there are very few people in very few countries that understand what is happening and that take part in the conversation. Very lots of people now have heard about AI but most people don't have a deep enough understanding of the AI

1:00:32 revolution to un to to know what is at stake and to feel competent to take part in the discussion. So I I can't tell people what would be the solutions or what policies to adopt. My understanding is also very limited. My goal is to give many more people in many more countries a basic understanding of what is the AI revolution, what is at stake, so that millions of people in numerous countries will feel motivated and competent to join the conversation so that that we can hear more opinions, more interests, more worldviews and thereby hopefully

1:01:18 reach a better decision. Uh at present the people who really understand and and and take the decisions they are not even elected representatives of anybody. They are mostly these leaders of the big AI companies and this is dangerous for humanity. So that that's my my motivation and I hope that you will feel motivated and competent to take part in the conversation because it's the conversation about your future also about everybody's future. Uh my other remark is that I I noticed that there are several people here uh that read my books that maybe are my fans and I know from previous I have historical knowledge so I know what happens at the end of the event that lots of people

1:02:03 come and they want to sign books and take selfies and and so forth. And unfortunately I I don't have the the time to do it because I have to rush to another uh event. So I would leave you with something better than my signature and better than my picture. Um which is really part of me. It's my atoms. Just as a final thought for reflection and about the interconnectedness of of everything we have set you together in this beautiful hall for an hour and a half breathing all the time and the air mixes our breath together. So a lot of the atoms that were inside my body an hour and a half ago are now in your body. And a lot of the atoms that hour

1:02:49 and a half ago were in your body are now in my body. So in this way we've shared something even more important than a signature or a picture. Thank you. Thank you very much.