Beyond Jobs: Rethinking Life and Work in the Age of AI
Why does the debate about the future of humanity in the era of advanced AI still seem to focus “only” on work culture and how we will structure work in the future? Why is it not more focused on how we design our lives?
In almost every political debate around AI, topics and approaches such as “26-hour work week”, “4-day work week” and similar paradigms dominate. Simultaneously, especially in the EU, there are discussions, often without adequate reflection, about extending the retirement age. But this approach merely battles a temporary symptom, not the underlying cause, and does not create a sustainable perspective for the future.
We now know which jobs and activities will initially be less affected by the anticipated and already unfolding efficiency increase due to AI (craftsmanship, nursing), and which ones might be automated and potentially become obsolete more quickly (broadly speaking, everything else, though in detail the initial impact may be less dramatic).
However, I believe we should be discussing the broader picture and not just the symptom. Answers like “introducing the 26-hour work week” solve nothing — they temporarily combat a symptom, much like taking tablets for headaches. They do not question the causes of these headaches (stress, diet, incorrect posture, hangover, weather, disc herniation, and much more).
Expanding on this, one can argue that there’s a fundamental transformation in the nature of work that is currently underway. It is being driven not only by AI, but also by other factors such as globalization, demographic changes, and societal expectations about work-life balance. As we navigate this transformation, we need to rethink our traditional models of work and employment.
The future of work in the AI era is not just about jobs; it’s about how we want to live our lives and what kind of society we want to build.
AI’s potential for automation raises questions about the value and meaning we place on work. Historically, much of our identity, status, and sense of purpose has been derived from our work. If AI systems can perform a wide range of jobs more efficiently and effectively than humans, what does that mean for us as individuals and as a society?
This shift necessitates a focus on human-centric skills that machines cannot replicate, such as creativity, emotional intelligence, and the ability to inspire and lead others. Moreover, it might compel us to reconsider how we structure our lives, looking beyond a work-centric paradigm to a more holistic view of human wellbeing and fulfillment.
Artificial Intelligence has the potential to liberate us from mundane and repetitive tasks, giving us more time to engage in activities that we find meaningful and enriching. Yet, it is not merely about having more leisure time; it’s about redefining the relationship between work, leisure, and personal growth in the context of an increasingly automated world.
This is the big-picture discussion we should be having. Not just how to reconfigure work, but how to rethink our lives and societies in the face of rapid technological change. By doing so, we will not only be treating the symptoms but also addressing the underlying causes and charting a course for a more sustainable and fulfilling future.
We will experience a very significant paradigm shift in the coming months and years. Instead of saying “many people will lose their jobs”, we could instead say:
“many people will have much more time in the future”
We should actually be worrying about what our task should be in the future to fill the day wisely and improve our societal life. There are plenty of open issues when you look at the entire planet.
Isn’t the statement “people will lose their jobs” simply synonymous with “people will lose their income”? This is precisely where we need to start from my point of view. We need new compensation structures. Either the cost of living must go to zero, or basic incomes must be sufficiently designed so that they can cover the cost of living regardless of the activity. Or something sensible in between.
However, this does not necessarily require “work” in the classic sense. I would rather talk about “activities” or “tasks”. In the care and nursing of people, there is a lot of demand in the era of an aging population, for example. Or in research. Climate change requires a lot of research, even if no profits are initially expected.
We just need to create incentives holistically (both from a social and financial point of view) to make all these activities attractive again, which were previously rather swept under the rug. And we need to tackle the cost of living. By the way, that’s why I was never opposed to the basic income. I think it will be impossible without something like it.
When entire value chains are disrupted, this naturally also has effects on income structures. And there, we need to think completely new and be open to outcomes.
Expanding this, as we step into the future, the focus may need to shift from merely providing work to creating meaningful and fulfilling engagements. While traditional employment may decline, there could be a rise in activities contributing to societal good and personal fulfillment.
This is where universal basic income (UBI) comes into play. UBI can act as a safety net, ensuring that people have the resources they need to survive, even if traditional jobs become scarce. This could free up people to engage in activities that they find personally fulfilling and beneficial to society, such as care work, creative pursuits, or community service.
We should also consider how we might incentivize currently undervalued activities that are essential for our wellbeing and survival. This could include care work, environmental conservation, and scientific research — areas that are critical for our future but often overlooked in our current economic model.
Ultimately, the future of work in the AI era is not just about jobs; it’s about how we want to live our lives and what kind of society we want to build. By tackling these big questions head-on, we can help shape a future where technology supports our wellbeing, prosperity, and fulfillment rather than undermining them.
Conclusion
In conclusion, as we stand on the precipice of a new era shaped by AI and automation, it’s crucial that we broaden our perspective beyond the confines of traditional work structures. We must challenge the notion that our value and identity are solely derived from our jobs. Instead, we should embrace the potential for AI to liberate us from mundane tasks, allowing us to engage more deeply in activities that foster personal growth and societal contribution.
The future will likely necessitate new compensation structures, such as a universal basic income, to ensure that everyone can maintain a decent standard of living. This could also provide the freedom for individuals to pursue activities that are currently undervalued but essential for our collective wellbeing, such as care work, environmental conservation, and scientific research.
As we navigate this transformation, our focus should shift from merely providing work to creating meaningful and fulfilling engagements. This is not just about reconfiguring work; it’s about rethinking our lives and societies in the face of rapid technological change. By doing so, we can ensure that we’re not just treating the symptoms of this shift, but also addressing the underlying causes and charting a course for a more sustainable and fulfilling future.
In essence, the future of work in the AI era is not just about jobs; it’s about how we want to live our lives and what kind of society we want to build. It’s about creating a world where technology serves us, enhancing our wellbeing, prosperity, and fulfillment, rather than undermining them. This is the big-picture discussion we should be having, and it’s a conversation that requires our immediate attention and action.
