Are we heading toward an autonomization of machines?

Résumé En

Do automata have autonomy, as their name seems to imply? Will they any time soon acquire it? One could react to this question by insisting that degrees of autonomy are conceivable, and that as such an autonomous progression also is. One could also require that a rigorous use of the term only exist if one is "to oneself one’s own law,” therefore staying closer to what the etymology implies. In all cases, one would have to elucidate how a concept can be used as a heuristic, but can also pose a challenge when one tries to bridge it to other neighboring fields. According to the second viewpoint, none of us would really be free, we'd have rather to say that we navigate between indetermination possibilities. If we attempt to model dynamic fluxes which are larger and larger, we will see that our world also created a posture wherein individuality disappears, to be washed away by correlations which somehow hide the universal in a certain refraction of intelligent activity, which we could characterize as frequential return. Are we going to learn from a knowledge that we cannot reason backwards, where we would acquire new information (but of which kind?) through mining accidental associations as we would have named them in traditional scholastic terminology? There is an abductive character to knowing, where we can also talk about “deduction from phenomena.” If we consider information as an object of value and desire, in the end it remains an information about something, and this means we have to distinguish it from raw matter, that is commercialisable and desirable in economic terms. What is more, this information in itself is valuable only in reference to axiological framing. In this sense, the problem we encounter is to define what are its uses and how much those really matter. Were we to accord a dignity to the most complex object we can find, such as in the suggestion of Vidal & Delahaye, this would still remain problematic if the object be only made in a conventional fashion, with relations specifiable from outside. Personal identity links together and makes not only coincide, but entangles together the levels that analysis distinguishes. In the face of this, what makes it such that the living remains under transformation? While living, we explode, or in other words we again create an entanglement, between levels which, should we follow Gregory Bateson, would lead us all the way back to an intuitive look at the theory of types. Raymond Ruyer’s suggestion that consciousness be an ideal beyond the “refracted ideals” of regulators, will perhaps enable us to steer a way for-ward in the face of seeming paradoxes of un-integrated new possibilities for “knowledge without a knower.”