Humans have a formidable trait of learning from nature as we build, design and innovate. Our ‘natural intelligence’ and ability to mimic and draw inspiration from biological and abiological nature has skilled us to design shelter, vehicles, functional and structural materials, optics, and myriad innovations.
Artificial intelligence (AI) has originated from our ability to mimic natural intelligence — those of higher-order organisms including us humans and lower-order organisms — but modern AI pursuits have forgotten these roots.
The celebrated systems theorist John von Neumann’s concept of self-replicating automata (1958), Norbert Wiener’s concept of self-regulating mechanisms in his path-breaking modern use of the term cybernetics (1948), the renowned psychologist Frank Rosenblatt’s work on perceptron algorithm for image recognition (1960), Warren McCulloh’s and Walter Pitt’s pioneering study on artificial neural networks (1943), and Joshua Lederberg’s post-Nobel prize work on dendritic algorithm ‘Dendral’ that set stage for exobiology (search for life in the universe) and search for exotic organic compounds on Mars (1965) — all tried to mathematicise, compute, and mechanise biophysical and biochemical phenomena.
But after these successful initial trans-disciplinary pursuits, AI became increasingly siloed in computer sciences, information technology and engineering domains.
Today, AI is considered as an emerging technology of great importance across laboratories, business boardrooms and parliaments. It is largely estimated to troubleshoot numerous end-of-road processes and make them appear mundane. Its conjoint usage with the term robotics often gives the impression that these two will serve humans.
Regardless of the intent of designing robots to serve humans, intelligence is a far profound construct to serve the species.
AI attempts to simulate natural intelligence as we know it. But how much do we comprehend natural intelligence?
The answer is, very little.
The fact that we do not know how to use AI for understanding the simplest of life forms, testifies that we are definitely far from able to simulate higher-order life forms and their intelligence.
In the twenty-first century, AI research will progress in a multipolar world with each country approaching it with its innate civilisational understanding and philosophy. The diversity of approaches to AI is bound to accelerate the growth of the field.
In this, India will have to develop its innate two-prong strategy for AI: one for focusing on tactical AI that is of immediate socio-economic consequence and the other, strategic; that will yield multitude of returns over longer scales of time.
India’s current focus is largely on ‘tactical AI’ which has immediate applications in industry and governance and that is easy to adapt, assimilate and accommodate with the globally common AI.
However, it is the strategic AI and its scientific and technological niches that should make India deliberate intensively. Strategic AI might not be of immediate commercial consequence, but it will give India the primacy in the field.
India must make ‘strategic AI’ a trans-disciplinary pursuit and not keep it limited to information technology, computation, and machine learning.
If science and technology policy-makers are to lay a strong AI plinth for India, they need to consolidate and co-nurture discrete disciplines such as classical Indian philosophy (astika and nastika schools of thought), neurosciences, cellular biology, molecular biology, language processing, systems sciences, control theory, evolutionary biology, origin of life, astrobiology, fluidic robotics, and operations research.
Natural sciences and indigenous philosophies are the bedrock of AI. The trans-disciplinarity is particularly important at this point in time when the world is on the verge of the fourth industrial revolution — as ‘strategic AI’ has begun to diversify into new pursuits for artificial consciousness, artificial cognition, artificial sentience and artificial sapience intensively.
The opulence of Indian philosophy and the unique outlooks of natural sciences undertaken in India will go a long way in enriching the global comprehension not only of natural and artificial intelligence but also our search for extra-terrestrial intelligence. If AI is to grow in tune with human needs and safety, humans will have to put in diverse efforts to learn more about nature and natural intelligence.
Dr. Chaitanya Giri writes on science, diplomacy, strategy, and techno-economics. Views are personal.
An appeal from Swarajya
At Swarajya, we rely on our readers' support through subscriptions to sustain our media platform. Unlike larger conglomerates, we are unable to relentlessly chase advertising money — our model is largely built on your patronage.
Your support has never been more crucial. We work tirelessly to deliver 10-15 high-quality articles daily, ensuring you receive insightful content from 7 AM to 10 PM.
If you believe India's story has to be articulated in a way it has never been done before without shrugging it off, become a patron (or) subscribe now for ₹̶2̶4̶0̶0̶ ₹1999 and get 12 print issues, unlimited digital access for 1 year, a special India that is Bharat T-shirt (Offer ends soon).
We are counting on you!