Artificial Life

Abstract

In this article, we explore how the history and myths about Artificial Life (AL) inform the pursuit and reception of contemporary AL technologies. First, we show that long before the contemporary fields of robotics and genomics, ancient civilizations attempted to create AL in the magical and religious pursuits of automata and alchemy. Next, we explore four persistent cultural myths surrounding AL—namely, those of Pygmalion, Golem, Frankenstein, and Metropolis. These myths offer several insights into why humanity is both fascinated with and fearful of AL. Thereafter, we distinguish contemporary approaches to AL, including biochemical or “wet” approaches (e.g., artificial organs), electromechanical or “hard” approaches (e.g., robot companions), and software-based or “soft” approaches (e.g., digital voice assistants). We also outline an emerging approach to AL that combines all three of the preceding approaches in pursuit of “transhumanism.” We then map out how the four historical myths surrounding AL shape modern society’s reception of the four contemporary AL pursuits. Doing so reveals the enduring human fears that must be addressed through careful development of ethical guidelines for public policy that ensure human safety, dignity, and morality. We end with two sets of questions for future research: one supportive of AL and one more skeptical and cautious.

Consumers and Artificial Intelligence: An Experiential Perspective

“…Similarly, classification and social experiences share an emphasis on concerns about self-identity, as interacting with AI often influences inferences about how AI understands the self and feelings of belonging (RQE5). Confirming the relevance of these theoretical perspectives, personal control and self-identity have been recognized as key concerns in the nascent literature on consumer AI (André et al 2018;Belk, Humayun, and Gopaldas 2020;Carmon et al 2020;Schmitt 2019). A search for shared theoretical foundations may stimulate academic research and help AI designers form a more holistic understanding of consumers' interaction with AI.…”

“…Cultural differences are also likely to influence the extent to which consumers perceive social experiences with AI as alienating (RQD2). Asian consumers feel a stronger connection to both people and things than Western consumers and, as a result, have shaped their social interactions with AI in more personal ways: whereas AI social experiences in the West are mainly utilitarian and involve disembodied personal assistants, those in the East involve human and animal-appearing robots that are assumed to serve and improve society (Belk, Humayun, and Gopaldas 2020).…”

Customer Experience Journeys: Loyalty Loops Versus Involvement Spirals

“…Beyond instrumental and recreational service categories, what other service categories might benefit from distinct customer journey models? What novel types of customer journeys are possible with artificial intelligence, artificial life, virtual reality, augmented reality, and the internet of things (Belk, Humayun, and Gopaldas 2020;Javornik 2016;Novak and Hoffman 2019;Scholz and Smith 2016)? How do customer journeys unfold in the sharing economy, wherein firms have much less control over service touchpoints (Eckhardt et al 2019)?…”

Inteligencia artificial y condición humana: ¿Entidades contrapuestas o fuerzas complementarias?

“…A modo de conclusion Belk, et al (2020) señalan que, los enfoques de IA basados en sofware (suaves) o en la robotica (duros) pueden articularse en la persona humana desembocando en un proceso dificil de determinar a priori de transhumanismo. Por estas razones, urge desde ya la construccion consensuada de marcos ético, que orienten la acción y diseño de las políticas públicas para garantizar en todo momento la seguridad y resguardo de la dignidad humana ante el avance de la IA en todas las dimensiones de la realidad social.…”