jpost.com
Using AI and Positive Visioning to Resolve Intractable Conflicts
Rabbi and educational visionary suggests using AI and positive visioning to solve seemingly intractable conflicts by focusing on shared future goals, such as improved mental health and political systems that accommodate competing claims in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, rather than current divisions.
- What are the potential challenges and limitations of using a future-oriented, technology-driven approach to resolve deeply rooted societal and political conflicts, and how might these be addressed?
- The article suggests a paradigm shift in conflict resolution, moving from reactive problem-solving to proactive future-building. This involves identifying shared aspirations for a future world (e.g., reduced violence, improved health) and leveraging technological advancements to achieve those goals. The author emphasizes that this process, even before concrete technological solutions are found, fosters collaboration and shifts the narrative from adversarial to collaborative.
- How can AI and other technological advancements be leveraged to transform seemingly intractable conflicts, such as the abortion debate and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, into collaborative problem-solving opportunities?
- The article proposes using "positive visioning" and technological advancements, particularly AI, to resolve seemingly intractable conflicts by focusing on shared future goals rather than present divisions. This involves bringing diverse stakeholders together to envision an ideal future, then working backward to identify necessary technological solutions. Specific examples include using AI to address mental health issues and reimagining political systems to accommodate both Palestinian and Israeli desires for self-determination.
- What are some specific examples of how the "positive visioning" approach, as described in the article, could be applied to different societal challenges, highlighting both obvious and less obvious applications of technology?
- The core argument is that technological limitations currently frame conflicts as zero-sum games. By shifting focus to a shared future vision free from current constraints, previously irreconcilable differences (e.g., abortion debate, Israeli-Palestinian conflict) can be reframed as challenges solvable through technological innovation. This approach necessitates collaborative envisioning and directing R&D towards solutions that benefit all parties.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The article frames technological advancement as an inevitable and positive force that will solve intractable conflicts. This framing prioritizes a technologically deterministic viewpoint, downplaying the role of political will, social structures, and human agency in resolving conflict. The optimistic tone and emphasis on future technological solutions overshadow the immediate need to address present injustices and inequalities. The headline (if any) would likely reinforce this optimistic, technologically-focused perspective.
Language Bias
The language used is generally optimistic and persuasive, employing words like "blessings," "transcend," and "collaborate." While not overtly biased, the consistently positive framing and lack of acknowledgement of potential negative consequences could be interpreted as subtly biased. The article's tone avoids negative or critical language, focusing instead on the positive potential of technology. This lack of nuance could be seen as implicitly biased.
Bias by Omission
The article focuses on technological solutions to political conflicts and doesn't address the potential downsides or unintended consequences of rapid technological advancement. It also omits discussion of the significant ethical considerations involved in using AI to address deeply rooted social and political issues. While acknowledging limitations of scope is mentioned, more explicit discussion of these limitations and potential biases inherent in the proposed solutions would improve the analysis.
False Dichotomy
The article presents a false dichotomy between current "eitheor" conflicts and future "both/and" solutions facilitated by technology. It oversimplifies the complexity of political issues, implying that technological advancements will easily resolve deeply ingrained social and political divisions. The framing neglects the possibility that technological solutions might exacerbate existing inequalities or create new ones.
Sustainable Development Goals
The article proposes a novel approach to conflict resolution using technology to envision a future where seemingly intractable conflicts dissolve. This directly addresses SDG 16, which aims to promote peaceful and inclusive societies for sustainable development, provide access to justice for all, and build effective, accountable, and inclusive institutions at all levels. The focus on collaborative visioning, technological solutions, and transcending current limitations contributes significantly to achieving this goal.