People are attached to the idea of objectivity, whether that is religion, a political ideology, or science. I do believe that there is an objective physical world. People expect objectivity in places where it cannot exist. , and pretending that something is objective when it is not has dangerous consequences. We saw this when people thought religion was the objective truth. Religion was used to control people, it promoted slavery and sexism. People think AI will solve human bias, but a racist AI has already been invented.
Everyone has a bias. A scientist who has worked on a theory for their whole life has a bias towards that theory being correct. If the theory is proven wrong, then all their hard work was for nothing, and that would be a devastating loss. Psychiatrists cannot let themselves be too aware of the fact that the chemical imbalance theory is wrong because their medical debt is too large to abandon their practice and find something else to do. Politicians support policies that benefit them and get them the best vote, not always what is best for society as a whole. CEOs have a profit motive, helping their employees and society is secondary.
My concern for the future, with AI becoming more and more integrated with society is that people will assume these AI are 100% objective when they are not. People still choose the pools of data, and the parameters chosen to make the decision. The parameters will be my biggest concern. If the current average employee isn’t black because of past racial biases, then some AI will pick up that the ideal employee is white, which clearly does not get to the heart of what a good employee is. Similar things will happen with different types of decisions. Turning everything into a math problem is not the answer as math cannot solve human problems.
There is no objectively best society. What benefits one person will often inherently harm another person. Less taxation will benefit a rich person who does not need welfare and most government programs, but it will harm poorer people who need benefits to stay afloat. There is no way to reconcile this. True equality cannot exist. Not everyone can own a house by the beach because there is not enough space, if everyone wanted a house by the beach the government would have to find a way to decide who gets to live there, and most governments use money to decide this. People with more money are the only ones who can afford a beach house, which leaves less competition. Imagine having it be an equal first come first serve basis, then the waitlist would literally last a century, and rich people would probably buy their place in line anyway. Resources are not infinite, so there has to be criteria to determine who gets what. There is no objective basis of who deserves what, it essentially becomes a fight oh who wins. People’s world views will create a scenario that makes their side have the upper hand, even if they lie about wanting everything equal and fair. If something says they want what is best for society they mean they want what is best for their interest group.
Most people assume that their own opinions are the objective truth, and get offended when people don’t share their same opinions. People raise their blood pressure to because other people are wrong. Everyone is incorrect about some things, even you, get over it. People need to be okay with being wrong, you have to be wrong before you become right. It’s important to admit when sources are biased. Everyone has their own agenda. A scientist and the government can say incorrect statements sometimes. I wonder if different people are more likely to believe in different things. It’s just annoying when people attack you for having a different view before listening to your reasoning. Of course you shouldn’t be so open that your brain falls out, but people shut down anything that isn’t mainstream. If you question something like psychiatry, then some people will think you are a delusional freak despite you having solid evidence against it.