elmundo.es
Internet, Dopamine, and the Algorithmic Future of Democracy
This essay argues that the internet's dopamine-driven reward system weakens critical thinking, making people more susceptible to populism and potentially leading to a future where algorithms hold political power.
- How does the internet's impact on cognitive function affect political systems and the rise of populism?
- The rise of populism is linked to the development of the internet, which fosters tribalism and amplifies eccentric views. Digital rewards, like dopamine from online interactions, reduce the capacity for strategic thinking, impacting decision-making and political engagement.
- What are the long-term societal implications of granting voting rights to algorithms, and how might this reshape the concept of democracy?
- The essay predicts that by 2029, AI's cognitive abilities may surpass humans', suggesting a potential future where algorithms hold political power. This is presented not as a dystopian warning but as a solution to perceived flaws in human governance, such as corruption and biased decision-making.
- What are the potential consequences of delegating increasing numbers of mental functions to technology, and how might this affect societal decision-making?
- The author argues that internet's dopamine-driven rewards system weakens critical thinking, making individuals more susceptible to populist appeals. This shift, coupled with delegating mental functions to technology, is viewed as a cognitive decline, impacting political processes and potentially leading to algorithmic suffrage.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The framing consistently portrays the rise of populism and the development of internet technologies in a negative light, associating them with a decline in human intelligence and the rise of a 'child-mass' mentality. The headline (if any) would likely reinforce this negative perspective. The concluding statement, while seemingly positive, remains framed within the context of AI as a replacement for flawed human governance.
Language Bias
The author uses loaded language such as "adelgaza a un ritmo preocupante" (thins at an alarming rate), "niño-masa" (child-mass), and "decrepitud" (decrepitude) to describe the state of humanity in relation to technology. These terms carry strong negative connotations. More neutral alternatives could include terms like "changing at a rapid pace", "general populace", and "aging population". The overall tone is alarmist and pessimistic.
Bias by Omission
The article focuses heavily on the negative impacts of internet and AI, omitting potential benefits or counterarguments. It doesn't address the positive uses of technology or efforts to mitigate negative consequences. The lack of diverse perspectives on the role of technology in society constitutes a significant omission.
False Dichotomy
The text presents a false dichotomy between human intelligence and artificial intelligence, suggesting that one must necessarily replace the other. It overlooks the potential for collaboration and synergy between humans and AI.
Gender Bias
The analysis doesn't explicitly exhibit gender bias in its language or examples. However, the lack of diverse voices and perspectives, including female voices in the discussion of technology and politics, is an omission that warrants attention.
Sustainable Development Goals
The article suggests that AI could potentially reduce inequality by making more objective decisions than humans, free from biases like corruption and nepotism. While this is speculative, the author uses it as a positive argument for AI governance.