[EN] 社会人类学家项飙：要活得更像人 才不怕AI取代 Xiang Biao on AI and meritocracy ｜未来365

People are afraid that AI will replace your job.

One premise is that we're too much like AI.

That's why AI will replace you.

Now you're being forced to be more human.

I think this might sound a bit cruel.

The person above tells you it's because you're not good enough.

And that's how Trump came to be.

In that case you'll always be in suspension.

You will feel extremely helpless.

You lose yourself.

That will be a tragedy.

Xiang Biao is internationally renowned, a highly regarded anthropologist.

He researches on migration, social psychology and the lived experiences of contemporary individuals.

I’m here in Beijing to interview him.

On the one hand, I want to know how does he understand the division and anxiety in contemporary society?

On the other hand, how should people imagine a fairer and more humane future?

Prof. Xiang, previously you had conversations with Michael Sandel from Harvard University.

There is a dialogue about meritocracy.

There is a dialogue about meritocracy.

There is a dialogue about meritocracy.

In Singapore, we like to talk about meritocracy.

But for you, meritocracy in your opinion, you take a critical view.

Both of you do not think this will bring about a just society?

The merit-based competition we have today, for example, the college entrance examination in mainland China.

If you don't pass the exam or if you don’t get into the universities that you feel good about, you feel like these past ten years have been a waste.

It’s a huge feeling of failure.

Many people feel that they can't hold their heads up.

This model might no longer be sustainable.

You can say that meritocracy allows a few people to go up, however, more and more people realised that they can no longer improve their life.

Because of the economic downturn, the overall international and global economy is not good.

It completely legitimizes the benefits gained by those who are able to rise to the top.

The rest of you, do not be jealous.

Because these people are intelligent.

Because we are a meritocracy.

We are a meritocracy.

These people have their merits.

And you can't complain.

That's because you're not good enough.

you are not smart enough.

So for Michael Sandel, he is emphasizing that meritocracy ultimately led United States to have such a big problem.

It is this kind of humiliation, this feeling of being unable to lift your head up.

Then you ask why do I work so hard and life has not improved?

The people above would tell you it's because you're not good enough.

And that's how Trump came to be.

That’s why there’s depression.

That’s why life feels hopeless.

If you imagine society to be a vertical, top-bottom relationship.

I did this job because I'm better than you, and you actually want to be like me, it's just that you're not good enough.

Then I'm sorry, you should stay there.

Why can't we imagine society in this way, where you and I are different.

You could consider this as a horizontal division of labor.

That means what I'm doing is a relatively high-intensity mental activity, what he is doing is a relatively high-intensity physical activity.

In the end, society will need them all.

Then there is respect for everyone.

There is value to each person.

We shouldn’t measure it with a vertical ruler.

Instead, we should appreciate it in a more equal and diverse way.

Yes, this is my vision.

For example, Germany, it started earlier than Singapore, in my understanding, to begin streaming at around the age of 10 or 11.

To decide if one goes into an academic stream or a technical stream.

Vocational.

However, Germany did not experience such social anxiety, where parents pray for their child to get into the academic track, reluctant to get into the typical technical track.

The welfare situation there, the terms of the job, they have labor protection.

Income is relatively equal.

Therefore, in everyone’s mind, you choose this because you're a bookworm, I just love sports, so I choose to study something that's more suitable for the extroverted.

I might prefer outdoor and physical work, I simply enjoy it.

I don't want to spend all day in the office, it's so boring right?

But many Singaporeans, especially the lifestyle of young people today, his living conditions have improved.

He is not like his ancestors.

He wants that kind of quality life.

So now, on the contrary, many scholars have made an observation that our young adults today are living too comfortably.

First of all, don't be too worried.

Because the younger generation's urge to relax is universal.

Don't be too concerned that look, how hardworking other countries are, and we are not giving it our all.

I think this is a world phenomenon, and it is an interesting phenomenon.

The situation varies greatly from country to country.

However, the lifestyles of young people in different countries, their feelings and experiences are becoming more and more alike.

This might be related to the rise of social media globally.

The second point is this.

We should reconsider this, Singapore's competitiveness, must we build it up based on how hard individuals work?

It has its own set of drawbacks.

One very important drawback is the impact on birth rate.

Why are people not getting married?

Unwilling to have children?

It's because you have been asking them to compete endlessly.

They tried to compete relentlessly, leaving little time and energy for love.

Another very important point is that they wouldn’t want their children to go through this again.

Therefore, this demonstrated that it is unsustainable.

So now, this younger generation decides to be lying flat sometimes.

They are actually making it more sustainable for themselves.

Subsequently, they might create a new kind of economy.

Opening up more cafes, more leisure services available, then they start to fall in love, and the birth rate of the next generation might increase slightly, I mean, compared to how it would be if they keep competing.

This might be important for Singapore.

Isn't human the most important resource for Singapore?

If the numbers increase, that will be most important.

It needs to be viewed dialectically, when we discuss these issues.

when the younger generation is changing their lifestyle, our first reaction should be, and on such a large scale, there must be a reason.

If you are going to go against their lifestyle, that’s not going to work.

Now I want to ask about your theory of suspension, and this feeling that there isn't enough time, or perhaps falling into a state of desolation, time is out of my control.

I'd like to ask you how can we break free from this suspension?

What is the most crucial step?

What I think "suspension" means, just like you said, feeling that time is out of my control, being controlled by time.

Why does he feel like he's being controlled by time?

He feels that everything he is doing now, they are all without meaning, yet you still have to do it.

Because if you don't do it now, there will not be a future.

So he is very busy.

But this state of busyness, comes from a kind of fear.

It's the fear that if you miss this train now, you will never be able to catch the train again.

In such circumstances, he looks at what he is doing now, and he does not attach himself to it.

Because he does it only for something to come next.

As he moves on to the next, it will be for the sake of something else again.

So the thing that you're always working on, has no meaning for yourself.

Because when people feel what I am doing is meaningless afterall, the judgement is usually based on the outcome.

But there are many things which you find meaningful, actually, if you talk about it more broadly, they are also meaningless.

For example, a conversation you had with a friend.

What did that bring you in the end?

Nothing.

But it is the process where you sit down and share with friends, time seems to pass with a great rhythm.

There is now a quality to the time space.

When you are with family, or having meals together, these are repetitive things, it seems trivial, but it gives our daily lives the feeling of having an interesting and important moment.

Otherwise, you might feel suspended, and you feel that everything is unfair, that makes you feel powerless.

You don't know what to do.

So we want to tell the younger generation from mainland China, as well as those in Singapore, when you are aware of inequality, it is important be aware, But at the same time, you need to be rooted, and then you’ll know how to push back, how to cope with it.

Otherwise when you look at the inequality, look at the unfairness, you make yourself feel immensely helpless.

You lose yourself.

That will be a tragedy.

Coincidentally, I was actually reading Jean-Jacques Rousseau.

He actually emphasizes the merits of leisure.

That means not to encourage involution.

He believes that we should have more free time to think.

Moreover, he believes that creativity often lies...

How should I say, creativity comes when you have the free time.

I feel that we might come back to the point about what you describe as a "work pit".

When everyone is trapped in this work pit, a recurring cycle, everyone is thinking that we have no way out to get out of that work pit.

What a "work pit" means is that you go to a workplace environment that has high pressure.

You put in your 100% to work there, and you work very hard.

You're pushing yourself by working overtime.

Why do you do that?

It's not because you love your job, but precisely because you hate this job, and it feels like I have fallen into a pit.

I'm here to work hard and dig as hard as I can.

Just like mining coal or gold.

As long as it allows me to make enough money, for me to jump out of this pit.

Then I do not need this job anymore.

This is something I understand from migrant workers, observations from mainland migrant workers.

They often have this mentality.

He might get into tough and tiring work, and tries to save money as much as possible, work overtime as much as possible.

He even asks to work overtime.

Then he saves up a sum of money, and he says that he will never do this job again.

He jumps out of the pit, but there's nowhere else to go.

It’s not possible for you to immediately achieve upward social mobility.

Then after a while, he has to get into a second “work pit” to continue working.

So that means he falls from one pit to another, then he jumps out again.

I think this might sound a bit harsh.

However, I think it is necessary to understand in the long run.

This way of life might not be possible for you to achieve upward social mobility, or to change your destiny, or to enter a new social class.

So the most important thing is that, when you are working on this job, do not think of it as a pit.

Think of it as a nest.

Even if this nest is very different from your ideals.

But it is what it is right now.

This is part of your life.

So you don't need to think in this way, to force yourself to work more overtime.

You can adopt a more natural, a more relaxed approach to work on your job.

Previously you mentioned AI might replace large quantities of our jobs in the future.

Throughout our lives, ideas that we traditionally hold on to, we are defined by our work, defined by our diligence in building a value system for our sense of a wholesome life.

Will we find ourselves losing the rhythm of feeling alive, and experience a so-called vacuum of meaning?

I don't think so.

I'm still relatively optimistic.

So now people are saying they're afraid of AI.

AI will replace your job.

What is the premise for that?

One premise is that we're too much like AI.

That's why AI is replacing you.

Back to the caregiver I’ve been talking about, about caregivers of the elderly, caregivers of children.

They are not afraid of being replaced by AI.

Because they are not like AI.

So who is most afraid of AI right now?

That includes those who do research.

Some people are afraid that AI will be able to write articles faster and in greater quantity.

I say, indeed so.

But where does the problem lie?

It actually is about the articles you wrote.

If AI can replace you, it means that the original article is not that valuable.

Therefore, I think AI doing those work is a good thing.

Why is it good?

You're being forced to be more human.

You're being forced to be more human.

If you think this way, from this perspective, how could it be that meaning is lost?

Let AI do those other work, let AI generate resources for you.

These people can become teachers.

These people Yes You currently have a teacher with 30 students.

We can reassign those jobs and manpower.

Yes.

You can now have six times more teachers.

You can increase elderly care by six times.

You can triple the number of artists.

You let more people do creative jobs.

Why must we think in this way that I have to be doing boring and arduous work, to earn what is considered “real money”.

Only then can you call it a job.

Only then can I have meaning in society.

Why can't I be an artist or doing more caregiving, or teaching children?

These are the true nature of humanity, the most creative form of value, the manifestation of human love and so on.

Conceptually, what is efficiency?

This is a question that needs to be examined.

A person's life is not about efficiency.

We all want to live a long life.

In fact, living a long life is very inefficient.

High efficiency means you can die at 45.

So clearly I am, considering my current work efficiency is lower than how it was two years ago.

While I'm alive right now, if there’s someone coming to assess me and tell me Xiang Biao, though you’re alive, you are actually a negative asset.

As an individual responsible for social efficiency, please commit suicide right now.

That would fit the logic, but it sounds absurd.

In our daily lives, we are actualizing this principle of prioritizing efficiency.

There’s the thought that chatting, having a moment to sit down and space out, to feel the wind, these are all considered a waste of time.

While people who develop various financial derivatives which has nothing to do with the real economy, bearing no benefits to human well-being.

None, and it has been proven.

These jobs have no real impact, but are considered high efficiency.

That’s where you get more money.

Another anthropologist David Graeber speaks about the salary distribution.

Kindergarten teachers and caregivers, they are the ones who receive the lowest salary, while the highest salaries are earned in banks, investing in those financial derivatives.

In fact, these are the people who caused the financial crisis.

Their salaries are the highest.

Right.

So in a way, when you take care of people and love someone, it’s seen as extremely inefficient.

Especially if you only love one person for your whole life.

Then you are being very inefficient.

Yes.

For caregivers, how do you calculate efficiency and apply that to a caregiver’s job?

Perhaps efficiency really isn't that important.

Perhaps inefficiency has its value.

Young people in mainland China, similarly I think in many places, his perception of the world comes from two extremes.

One extreme is from oneself.

My own grades in school.

Will I be able to find a job?

And then my relationship with my parents or intimate relationships.

Another extreme is from the world on the mobile phone.

Various forms of international crises from far away places.

You don't know what exactly happened, what you see are all pre-packaged.

It carries a very strong emotional tone.

Those events with extremely stimulating scenes fill up your mind.

It also makes your emotions unstable.

But on this spectrum, you are at the near end while the world is on the far end.

The middle section is missing.

Who is your neighbor?

Who is cleaning this place?

Where does your food come from?

These are specific details of your life and your social relationships.

Who operates public transportation?

Why is the public bus late?

Why is it not late?

The realities within your life how are they constructed?

That part is left empty.

The disappearance of the “Nearby” is related to urban planning and the degree of urbanization.

It is all high-rise buildings now, so there are no more neighbors.

It’s similar in Singapore.

And then people you meet in your neighborhood.

They pretend to look at their phones, even if there is no signal in the elevator.

Looking at the phone.

That’s a vivid description.

And because the elevator is the only place where you meet your neighbors.

The elevator is (a space for interaction).

But people will avoid it.

Right.

Absolutely.

Not even looking into their eyes, it's best not to make eye contact.

Never.

It's very awkward when your eyes meet.

It makes people nervous.

What is happening?

What should I do, right?

So this is the kind of situation.

I call this the disappearance of the “Nearby”.

It sounds mundane.

But it's very important to me.

What it means is that if the Nearby disappears from your experience, how then do you understand relationships?

How do you understand those very specific social relationships?

How do you understand the public realm?

When you think about humanitarianism, you think about a poor person who needs help, what is the basis you use to imagine how a poor man's life look like?

What kind of help does he actually need?

You might have an abstract feeling of sympathy, but how do you understand what exactly is your relationship with him?

You are only helping him in a moral sense.

Alternatively, your relationship with your superior, people who are more capable and richer than you.

What exactly is your relationship with them?

You might only have hatred and disgust.

But do you see a more specific and layered relationship behind it all?

If there is no such perception of the Nearby, those understanding will not be grounded.

Your life might become a vacuum, and it becomes very abstract.

So this is why we need to rediscover and rebuild the connection between our life and the world, with this method to understand relationships.