Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
/
Musk vs. Ma on AI: Why the future of work is bright
Musk vs. Ma on AI: Why the future of work is bright
Apr 26, 2025 12:25 AM

Given the breakneck pace of improvements in automation and artificial intelligence, fears about job loss and human obsolescence are taking increasing space in the cultural imagination.

The question looms: What is the future of human work in a technological age?

At the recent World Artificial Intelligence Conference in Shanghai, China, Tesla’s Elon Musk and Alibaba’s Jack Ma weighed in on the topic—offering conflicting perspectives and predictions.

For Ma, machine learning offers an opportunity not just to improve products and services, but to “understand ourselves better” so that “we can improve the world.” Though we may work fewer hours in the years e, we will be both more productive and more focused on “creative tasks,” living longer and more fulfilling lives.

For Musk, such optimism is severely misplaced. We are already being outpaced by our own creations, and it’s paving the way for severe unemployment. From the BBC:

“AI will make jobs kind of pointless,” Musk claimed. “Probably the last job that will remain will be writing AI, and then eventually, the AI will just write its own software.”

He added that there was a risk that human civilization e to an end and ultimately be seen as a staging post for a superior type of life. “You could sort of think of humanity as a biological boot loader for digital super-intelligence,” Mr Musk explained.

Both men panies with heavy investments in artificial intelligence. Likewise, each as his own particular faith in human possibility. So why the difference in perspective?

It is here where we begin to see that the debate is about far more than mere economic predictions—particular jobs in particular industries at particular periods of time. More fundamentally, it’s about our underlying beliefs about human purpose and human destiny.

Ma digs a bit deeper, drawing our attentions to the real distinction between man and machine:

“Don’t worry about the machines,” [Ma] said. “For sure, we should understand one thing: that man can never make another man. puter is puter. puter is just a toy. Man cannot even make a mosquito. So, we should have a confidence. Computers only have chips, men have the heart. It’s the heart where the es from.”

Although Mr Ma acknowledged that we needed to find ways to e “more creative and constructive”, he concluded that “my view is that puter may be clever, but human beings are much smarter.”

(Musk was quick to respond, “Yeah, definitely not.”)

Ma’s sentiments echo those of Kevin J. Brown, a professor of business at Asbury University, who offers a similar perspective in AEI’s recent collection of essays, “A World Without Work: Technology, Automation, and the Future of Work.”

According to Brown, our view of the human person plays a significant role in shaping our response to economic disruption and the various threats of artificial intelligence. The bigger question: When human value and “usefulness” are called into question, from what position or perspective will we respond?

For those who share the scarcity-mindedness of Thomas Malthus, the answer typically takes the form of a “chaos narrative,” prompting fears about the future of human utility. “Because beings have specific needs to survive and the resources necessary for survival are limited, they are inevitably in conflict with one another,” Brown writes, describing the perspective. “Further, beings that reproduce with superior qualities will outpace and outlive their less adapted counterparts…Here, human teleology gives way to pragmatism: if it works, it endures.”

Through this vision, Brown explains, technology is a tremendous threat, leading to an inevitable “sunsetting” of human value as we know it. Yet Brown, like Ma, suggests a different narrative, one through which humans are not doomed as powerless cogs, but “deliberately designed and uniquely created,” part of a larger created order and (already) in service to a larger creator being.

Similar to the vision outlined in Acton’s Core Principles, Brown’s “design narrative” reminds us that humans have inherent dignity and worth, regardless of the machinery that surrounds us. “We are spiritual beings,” he writes, born in the image and likeness of a creator God. “We are not simply the sum of our ponents. Nor does our value merely rise to the level of our economic productivity. We have a spirit; a soul.”

If we assume the chaos narrative, Musk is probably right, and humans have little hope peting with high-speed petitors in a massive, mechanistic economic regime. Through such a view, Brown concludes, “It is not unreasonable to expect that we would e obsolete and thus replaceable once similar organisms evince qualities better suited for survivability in petitive landscape.”

But through the lens of God’s creative design, we see the opposite: humans as protagonists in a bigger, more mysterious economic story. Far from human obsolescence, we see the opportunity for an increase in human wisdom and others-oriented love and creative service. We see the opportunity to better serve our neighbors through new ideas, new relationships, and the economic abundance that’s bound to follow.

The future of robots is bright. But the same goes for our work, if only we’d choose to see it.

Watch the full debate here:

Image: Elon Musk at SpaceX (Public Domain) / Jack Ma at World Economic Forum (CC BY-SA 3.0)

Comments
Welcome to mreligion comments! Please keep conversations courteous and on-topic. To fosterproductive and respectful conversations, you may see comments from our Community Managers.
Sign up to post
Sort by
Show More Comments
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
Is Work a Curse?
Is work a curse, a result of mankind’s fall from grace? Not according to the Book of Genesis. As Hugh Whelchel, Executive Director of the Institute for Faith, Work & Economics, explains, what Adam was called to do in the garden is what we are still called to do in our work today: Humanity was created by God to cultivate and keep God’s creation, which included developing it and protecting it. You see, we were created to be stewards of...
Lord Acton and the Power of the Historian
Looking through my back stacks of periodicals the other day I ran across a review in Books & Culture by David Bebbington, “Macaulay in the Dock,” of a recent biography of Thomas Babington Macaulay. The essay takes its point of departure in Lord Acton’s characterization of Macaulay as “one of the greatest of all writers and masters, although I think him utterly base, contemptible and odious.” As Bebbington writes, “Acton, a towering intellectual of the later 19th century, was at...
Reagan, Whittaker Chambers, and the Threat to Freedom
Over at the Liberty Law Blog, there is an excellent post titled “Ronald Reagan, Whittaker Chambers, and the Dialogue of Liberty” by Alan Snyder. Snyder delves into the influence Chambers had on Reagan and how their worldviews differed as well. Many conservatives and scholars felt Chambers’ prediction that the West was on the losing side of history in the battle against Marxism collapsed after the fall of the Iron Curtain and the Soviet Union. For many, the ideas of Chambers...
How to Steal a Bike in New York City
Edmund Burke didn’t really say it, but it still rings true: All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. In a test of this maxim, filmmaker Casey Neistat tries to steal his own bike in several locations around New York City and finds that most people do nothing about it—even when it’s done right in front of a police station. I recently spent a couple of days conducting a bike theft experiment, which...
Let’s Change Hearts and Minds (and Laws, Too)
Few clichés are so widespread within the evangelical subculture, says Matthew Lee Anderson, as the notion that our witness must be one of “changing hearts and minds.” In careful hands, the idea is at best ambiguous. At worst it reinforces the sort of interior-oriented individualism that allows for and perpetuates a blissful naivete about how institutions and structures shape our dispositions and thoughts. In less than careful hands, the phrase drives a wedge between law and culture by attempting to...
Obamacare’s Religious Rubes
The White House has a plan to mobilize prayer vigils in front of the Supreme Court in defense of Obamacare. It was reported that the administration met with leaders at non-profit organizations and religious officials who support the new health care law. The court takes up the constitutional test of the health care mandate in a couple of weeks. The mandate has now been challenged in 26 states. Cue the same stale big government religious prophets who confuse statism and...
Italy’s Tax Man Takes Aim at the Vatican
Kishore Jayabalan, the Acton Institute’s Rome office director, was interviewed by the Zenit news agency in an article titled, “Is Taxing the Church a Real Solution for Italy?” In the article, Jayabalan discusses the history of the Italian state and its imposition of property taxes on the Roman Catholic Church’s land holdings, residences and non-profit businesses. Sometimes in the past, particularly under Napoleonic rule and before the Lateran Pacts, the institution of property tax was often a subject of state...
Integral Human Development
The Journal of Markets & Morality is planning a theme issue for the Spring of 2013: “Integral Human Development,” i.e. the synthesis of human freedom and responsibility necessary for the material and spiritual enrichment of human life. According to Pope Benedict XVI, Integral human development presupposes the responsible freedom of the individual and of peoples: no structure can guarantee this development over and above human responsibility. (Caritas in Veritate 17) There is a delicate balance between the material and the...
How to Love Liberty More Than a Libertarian Economist
I have a deep and abiding love for liberty—which is why I find myself so often in disagreement with libertarians. Libertarians love liberty too, of course, but they tend to love liberty a bit differently. I love liberty in an earthy, elemental way. I love liberty because I need it—like I need air and food—for human flourishing. In contrast, the libertarians I’ve encountered tend to love liberty primarily as an abstraction. Indeed, the most ideologically consistent libertarians I know seem...
Constitutional Cases and the Four Cardinal Virtues
Should virtue be a consideration in judicial decisionmaking? Indiana Law Professor R. George Wright makes an intriguing argument for why the four cardinal virtues could be useful in interpreting constitutional cases: Judges typically decide constitutional cases by referring to one or more legal precedents, rules, tests, principles, doctrines, or policies. This Article mends supplementing this standard approach with fully legitimate and appropriate attention to what many cultures have long recognized as the four basic cardinal virtues of practical wisdom or...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2025 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved