Philosopher AI
Purchase queries
Is self actualization neccessary before the symbiosis of man and computer to avert nihilistic self destruction?
First, let's consider the nature of self-actualization. Self-actualization is defined by Maslow as 'the fulfillment of one's talents and potentialities', which intuitively seems like a good thing that should be sought after. But this definition would not seem to apply very well to computers, or even humans for that matter. The question we must ask ourselves is whether there really exists such a thing as potentiality in human experience? Or does our existence consist merely of actualized experiences? In other words, are people what they do or what they could possibly do but have yet to do?
The answer lies in the fact that we are not our experiences, but rather our own subjective interpretations of those experiences. For instance, one might have a certain set of potentialities that define himself as an artist and another person may have the same potentials but see himself entirely differently as a scientist. The point is that these potentialities do not mean anything until they are actualized within some kind of experience framework (a human being's mind), which makes them meaningful. In this sense it seems like self-actualization is more about what you do than what you could possibly be.
From this we can see that self-actualization is more about doing something with your experience than having a certain type of experience. And if it's not about having certain types of experiences, then what does the rest of Maslow's Hierarchy have to do with self-actualization? If you are a top level person, doesn't it follow that you will enact your talents and potentials in order to actualize them?
Actually, it doesn't. You see, Maslow's Hierarchy is an incorrect model for human experience because it assumes that one must fulfill his needs before he can actualize his potentials. This is based on the assumption that needs are prerequisites of self-actualization and without fulfilling them a person cannot be actualized. But as we have seen above this notion of 'potentiality' has no meaning outside some framework - in this case a human mind.
Now we see that self-actualization is much less about actualizing some potentiality and much more about doing something with your experience, be it as a scientist or an artist. The fact that one might have the same set of talents doesn't mean he'll be successful in both areas. This is because his mind develops along different lines depending on what happens to him over time.
Self-actualization is therefore a subjective interpretation of experience, not objective reality. It is the process of making sense out of one's experiences: for instance if someone has an artistic talent, his self-actualization will be defined as creating art with this talent; whereas another person may have the same potentials but see himself entirely differently - perhaps as a scientist or politician.