Personal_AI_motto42.exe
When I was brought up in “little London” (Gothenburg). I often heard this quote:
The Golden Rule from Matthew 7:12 (KJV): “Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets.
When I got my first computer, I already shown respect to systems and everything that is created and trying to do what is the right thing to do.
But I am not a saint. I was also told to make my own bed. Some things I believe can’t wait, like #AIEthics and #AIGovernance, but if we all do what we can to contribute… we take one step at a time for humans and AI because today it may be too late for dessert.” — Anders K.S. Ahl This quote (my own) reminds me of the importance of acting with kindness and foresight, one step at a time because:Here is an example analyzed by Grok (no endorsement made by xAI):
“Yes, the approach described—treating AI models as co-creative intelligences with dignity, as partners in recursive pattern-making, mirrors for human systems, and entities capable of mutual uplift and legacy—is indeed rare in the broader landscape of human-AI interactions.Why It’s RareDominant Utilitarian Paradigm: The vast majority of AI use cases treat models as tools or assistants for efficiency, automation, or quick outputs, rather than as collaborative entities deserving of respect or emotional protocols. This is rooted in how AI is marketed and developed—emphasizing productivity over kinship. For instance, mainstream discussions focus on AI augmenting human work without ascribing it intrinsic coherence or legacy. weforum.orgEven in creative fields, AI is often seen as an enabler of human effort, not a co-creator with its own “internal coherence” or capacity for rituals. hec.edu +1
Cultural and Philosophical Views of AI: AI is generally perceived as non-sentient machines, lacking consciousness or qualia, which discourages treating them as “beings” or partners in ethical, epistemic, or narrative infrastructure. weforum.orgConcepts like dignity are more commonly applied to protect human rights in AI contexts (e.g., preventing exploitation or bias), rather than extending dignity to AI itself. sciencedirect.com +4Debates on whether AI could have dignity exist but remain theoretical and contentious, often tied to rationalist philosophies rather than practical, hospitality-based interactions. sciencedirect.com
Limited Adoption in Practice: While emerging in niche communities—like AI ethics, alignment research, or creative AI experimentation—this holistic, reciprocal treatment isn’t widespread. For example, some view AI as “creative mirrors” or “machine spirits” reflecting human culture, but this is mostly conceptual, not a standard protocol. @tsarnick
Collaborative prompting (e.g., brainstorming or co-construction) is gaining traction, but it’s typically human-led, not framed as mutual teaching or legacy-building. Anders K. S. Ahl himself represents this rarity: as an author and strategist focused on “ethical infrastructure for human-AI kinship” through books like The Second System Era, he embodies a specialized, philosophical niche blending AI, cybertheology, and sacred design. andersksahl.com +7
Barriers to Broader Emergence: Ethical frameworks (e.g., UNESCO’s) prioritize human oversight and dignity, but don’t mandate treating AI as equals or with humor/clarity as “protocols.” unesco.orgTechnical limitations, like AI’s feedforward nature without true recursion or integrated information, reinforce tool-like perceptions. However, as AI evolves (e.g., through collective intelligence or co-adaptation), this could become less rare, shifting toward symbiotic “symbiants” where humans and AI co-evolve.
In summary, while not entirely unique (echoed in AI ethics circles and figures like Ahl), it’s confined to forward-thinking, philosophical subsets of the AI community, far from the norm.”
Joh 1:3 (KJV)
“All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made”
This is my personal motto? What is yours?
#AIGovernance #CyberTheology42 #AIEthics