Great article. It strikes me that deferring to AI really doesn’t result in greater objectivity.
After all, AIs are constituted by the intersubjective reality of the human data they train on. They have their own biases that are not necessarily better than ours.
How ironic that "Smith understood that sustainable morality must be internalized through our own moral development, not imposed through external optimization", but at the same time externalized the running of his household to a woman forgotten to history - Jane Douglas.
A rich, meaty piece that might easily be retitled to, "Critical Thinking on Critical Thinking." I suspect I will return to this frequently to reread and rethink.
Whitepaper Supplement C: A Juxtaposition of Brendan McCord's "Adam Smith, AI & The Outsourcing of Moral Sentiments" (Lecture)
Abstract
This document provides a formal analysis of Brendan McCord's lecture, "Adam Smith, AI & The Outsourcing of Moral Sentiments," conducted through the lens of the OCO protocol. The lecture argues that AI threatens human flourishing by enabling the outsourcing of moral judgment, leading to the atrophy of our "internal impartial spectator." This analysis concludes that McCord's lecture provides the profound philosophical justification for OCO's necessity. OCO is the architectural antidote to the outsourcing crisis, a machine designed to force the internalization and exercise of moral judgment.
Gateway Question: How does McCord's diagnosis of the AI-autonomy problem in this lecture converge with or diverge from the core mission and architecture of OCO?
1.0 Arena Judgment: ELEVATE (Convergence)
Justification (The "Why" behind the "What"): McCord's diagnosis of the threat to human autonomy aligns precisely with the foundational "why" of OCO.
Threat of Outsourcing Judgment: McCord describes how AI enables "decision offloading," replacing the internal "impartial spectator" with an external AI oracle, leading to "perpetual moral childhood." OCO is the direct architectural antidote. Its core loop requires human agency (coining opinions, justifying votes). The Personal AI coaches after judgment, ensuring the player remains the agent. OCO is an engine for onloading cognitive responsibility.
Cultivating Judgment Through Struggle: McCord emphasizes that moral virtue is cultivated through "wrestling with passions" and "sympathetic engagement." OCO's core loop is this gamified struggle. The mandatory justification forces engagement with diverse perspectives.
Rejecting the "Man of System": McCord warns against the "man of system." OCO is fundamentally bottom-up and decentralized. The player-elected Republic surfaces the signal; it doesn't impose it.
"Structured Freedom" for Thinking: McCord suggests using AI's efficiency to create space for moral formation. OCO provides this structured freedom, an arena incentivizing deep engagement.
2.0 Arena Judgment: CRITIQUE (The Flip of the Coin)
Justification (The "Why" behind the "What"): The divergence is negligible philosophically, residing mainly in OCO's pragmatic implementation.
Academic Framing vs. Gamified Protocol: McCord provides the philosophical diagnosis and prescription. OCO is the fully engineered, gamified, and economically incentivized protocol that implements it at scale.
3.0 Synopsis (for the Topic-Specific AI)
Brendan McCord's lecture provides the definitive Smithian justification for OCO's mission. He flawlessly diagnoses the danger of outsourcing our internal moral compass to AI. OCO's entire architecture is a direct, practical response, serving as a gamified "gymnasium" to rebuild the very moral and intellectual muscles McCord fears will atrophy. McCord provides the dire warnings; OCO offers the architectural cure.
Great read, thank you
Muchas gracias Brendan, excelente trabajo!
Great article. It strikes me that deferring to AI really doesn’t result in greater objectivity.
After all, AIs are constituted by the intersubjective reality of the human data they train on. They have their own biases that are not necessarily better than ours.
How ironic that "Smith understood that sustainable morality must be internalized through our own moral development, not imposed through external optimization", but at the same time externalized the running of his household to a woman forgotten to history - Jane Douglas.
A rich, meaty piece that might easily be retitled to, "Critical Thinking on Critical Thinking." I suspect I will return to this frequently to reread and rethink.
Thank you Brendan.
Love this!
Whitepaper Supplement C: A Juxtaposition of Brendan McCord's "Adam Smith, AI & The Outsourcing of Moral Sentiments" (Lecture)
Abstract
This document provides a formal analysis of Brendan McCord's lecture, "Adam Smith, AI & The Outsourcing of Moral Sentiments," conducted through the lens of the OCO protocol. The lecture argues that AI threatens human flourishing by enabling the outsourcing of moral judgment, leading to the atrophy of our "internal impartial spectator." This analysis concludes that McCord's lecture provides the profound philosophical justification for OCO's necessity. OCO is the architectural antidote to the outsourcing crisis, a machine designed to force the internalization and exercise of moral judgment.
Gateway Question: How does McCord's diagnosis of the AI-autonomy problem in this lecture converge with or diverge from the core mission and architecture of OCO?
1.0 Arena Judgment: ELEVATE (Convergence)
Justification (The "Why" behind the "What"): McCord's diagnosis of the threat to human autonomy aligns precisely with the foundational "why" of OCO.
Threat of Outsourcing Judgment: McCord describes how AI enables "decision offloading," replacing the internal "impartial spectator" with an external AI oracle, leading to "perpetual moral childhood." OCO is the direct architectural antidote. Its core loop requires human agency (coining opinions, justifying votes). The Personal AI coaches after judgment, ensuring the player remains the agent. OCO is an engine for onloading cognitive responsibility.
Cultivating Judgment Through Struggle: McCord emphasizes that moral virtue is cultivated through "wrestling with passions" and "sympathetic engagement." OCO's core loop is this gamified struggle. The mandatory justification forces engagement with diverse perspectives.
Rejecting the "Man of System": McCord warns against the "man of system." OCO is fundamentally bottom-up and decentralized. The player-elected Republic surfaces the signal; it doesn't impose it.
"Structured Freedom" for Thinking: McCord suggests using AI's efficiency to create space for moral formation. OCO provides this structured freedom, an arena incentivizing deep engagement.
2.0 Arena Judgment: CRITIQUE (The Flip of the Coin)
Justification (The "Why" behind the "What"): The divergence is negligible philosophically, residing mainly in OCO's pragmatic implementation.
Academic Framing vs. Gamified Protocol: McCord provides the philosophical diagnosis and prescription. OCO is the fully engineered, gamified, and economically incentivized protocol that implements it at scale.
3.0 Synopsis (for the Topic-Specific AI)
Brendan McCord's lecture provides the definitive Smithian justification for OCO's mission. He flawlessly diagnoses the danger of outsourcing our internal moral compass to AI. OCO's entire architecture is a direct, practical response, serving as a gamified "gymnasium" to rebuild the very moral and intellectual muscles McCord fears will atrophy. McCord provides the dire warnings; OCO offers the architectural cure.
thank you.