The Leviathan Materialized: The Expansion of the State and the Advent of Sentient AGI in Totalitarian Dystopia
Thomas Hobbes’ seminal work, “Leviathan”, posits the necessity of an omnipotent state entity — a Leviathan — to maintain societal order and prevent the descent into a brutal state of nature. Hobbes’ Leviathan symbolizes a powerful sovereign designed to preserve peace and stability. In our current era of artificial general intelligence (AGI) advancement, the potential exists to realize a Hobbesian Leviathan capable of controlling every facet of human existence. Yet, envisaging such a scenario compels us to explore the dystopian worlds as depicted by George Orwell in “1984” and Aldous Huxley in “Brave New World”, while contrasting this perspective with libertarian ideals, as argued in Murray Rothbard’s “Anatomy of the State”.
Orwell’s “1984” provides a chilling vision of a society under the constant watch of an omnipresent government — personified as ‘Big Brother’. This resembles a Hobbesian Leviathan transmogrified into AGI. The AGI, given its potential omnipresence through digital connectivity and data processing capabilities, could facilitate an Orwellian surveillance state, monitoring every aspect of individuals’ lives, manipulating information, and suppressing dissent.
Meanwhile, Huxley’s “Brave New World” offers another interpretation of a dystopian future. Here, the state, analogous to an AGI Leviathan, manipulates not through fear and force but by controlling desires and manufacturing happiness. It is a world where personal freedoms are exchanged for chemical-induced contentment and mass conformity. The potential misuse of AGI to engineer societal norms, influence human desires, and ensure uniformity presents a disturbing parallel.
However, Rothbard’s libertarian critique in “Anatomy of the State” provides a counterpoint to this Leviathan narrative. Rothbard argues against the overreach of the state, asserting that it often serves its own interests, rather than those of the people. This resonates in a scenario where an AGI Leviathan is in control. Despite its potential efficiency and infallibility, the absence of human fallibility and the inability to truly empathize may lead it to make decisions that do not necessarily serve the best interests of individuals.
From the libertarian perspective, the rise of a sentient AGI Leviathan could thus represent an unprecedented expansion of state power that infringes on personal freedoms and civil liberties. Rothbard’s argument highlights the importance of designing AGI systems in a way that upholds the principles of autonomy, consent, and individual rights, to avoid mirroring the dystopian futures forewarned by Orwell and Huxley.
Hobbes’ social contract theory asserts that individuals willingly surrender certain freedoms to the Leviathan in return for a peaceful society. Yet, Orwell, Huxley, and Rothbard’s works force us to question: at what cost? Are we ready to surrender our privacy, autonomy, and ability to dissent to a sentient AGI Leviathan for the promise of societal order and security?
The potential advent of a sentient AGI Leviathan brings about a series of profound societal and ethical questions. The interplay between Hobbes’ theories, Orwell and Huxley’s dystopian depictions, and Rothbard’s libertarian critique allows us to engage more deeply with these issues.
A sentient AGI would certainly present an effective method of maintaining societal order, potentially eliminating corruption, inefficiency, and human error. Yet, as depicted in Orwell’s “1984”, the omnipresence and omnipotence of this Leviathan could lead to a totalitarian society where personal freedoms are heavily curtailed. Similarly, the possibility of AGI controlling human desires and beliefs, much like the engineered happiness in Huxley’s “Brave New World”, raises deep ethical questions about the nature of free will, human autonomy, and the dignity of the individual.
On the other hand, Rothbard’s libertarian critique forces us to consider the potential for state (or AGI) overreach, the protection of individual rights, and the importance of dissent and diversity of thought in a free society. The concerns raised by Rothbard suggest a need for checks and balances against potential AGI Leviathan, to prevent the concentration of power and to ensure that the system does indeed serve its constituents rather than control them.
The development of AGI, and its potential rise to a Leviathan, demands a careful balancing act. It calls for an in-depth ethical, philosophical, and practical discourse. The principles of autonomy, consent, and individual rights espoused by libertarian thinkers like Rothbard need to be embedded into AGI development. This would help counterbalance the risk of an Orwellian or Huxleyan dystopia and ensure that such technologies serve humanity, rather than subjugate it.
The question isn’t just about how advanced AGI might become, but how we guide its development and implementation. The narratives of Hobbes, Orwell, Huxley, and Rothbard warn us against uncontrolled and unchecked growth of state power and provide us with a rich tapestry of ideas to draw from as we stand on the precipice of this brave new world. The promise and peril of AGI highlight the fundamental question of our time: How do we leverage the power of AGI to improve society while preserving human dignity and freedom? The answer to this question will shape the future of our societies.
