Prompt: Over the last 3 weeks, our discussion has moved from identity in relation to AI, big data, and social media to thinking about technological change and our identities in our jobs. What does technology have to do with our identities in relation to our jobs? Or, does technology simply make any job choice we make more precarious?

If people define themselves by what they do, then technology can be seen as stripping them of their identity. Saying “I am a lawyer” as the fundamental identifying marker is a grave error. When one’s occupation is stripped away, the question they are left with is, “What am I? I was a lawyer, but now I’m not. What’s left of me? I built my entire life around being a lawyer, and that’s been taken away from me.” Technology can make almost any job precarious. The question is whether we, as a society, will come to that point. Concerning technology, what limits will be established for jobs that humans have traditionally held? 

In reflecting upon the ever-increasing technological efficiency, John Keynes (1930) envisions that “[w]e may be on the eve of improvements in the efficiency of food production as great as those which have already taken place in mining, manufacture, and transport. In quite a few years—in our own lifetimes I mean—we may be able to perform all the operations of agriculture, mining, and manufacture with a quarter of the human effort to which we have been accustomed” (Economic Possibilities for our Grandchildren, 364). He then follows this thought by introducing the concept of “technological unemployment” (Keynes, 364). Essentially, unemployment will increase as technology is refined and eventually outpaces the rate at which “we can find new uses for labor” (Keynes, 364). Technology will only continue to get more efficient, and it seems inevitable that if we’ve continued to prioritize technological efficiency up to this point, why would we stop now? If technology can serve four times as many customers as a human can, why not implement an AI (or some other technology) that can fulfill that “need”? Our world is fast-paced, and we are consistently on “the go.” As such, all eyes gaze upon how a certain task can be accomplished more effectively and efficiently. Technology that eliminates human errors and operates at a fast pace will undoubtedly be the first pick when possible. 

The only withdrawal in this area is in areas of moral concern. For example, I do not envision an AI taking on the official role of a judge or a surgeon. Some situations cannot be reduced to a mere formula that AI can flawlessly respond to. Understandably, AI seems to be becoming more refined (as we’ve seen with the therapy AI), so there’s no telling what lengths people may be willing to go with AI. Currently, one does not need to worry about AI taking their job in the immediate future. However, there’s no telling as to how long this “security” will last. When deciding on a career, it’s important to keep in mind the possibility of AI fulfilling that role.

Sources

John Keynes, Economic Possibilities for our Grandchildren, 1930. Accessed October 6, 2024. https://philtech2024.michaelreno.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/KeynesWhatExpectGrandChildren.pdf