Ironically, unlike many of the modes of technology the Amish reject, A.I. really does carry the threat of damaging society and ruining lives. (If the Amish went to movies or watched TV, they would know that.) New York Times leftist op-ed writer Michelle Goldberg this week wrote (Gift link!) about how the remarks by guest speakers at college commencements regarding artificial intelligence caused graduates to boo and jeer:
When Eric Schmidt, the former chief executive of Google, started talking about artificial intelligence during a commencement speech at the University of Arizona on Friday, the graduates erupted in boos. “A.I. is going to touch everything,” said Schmidt, as his stadium-sized audience roared its disapproval. “Whatever path you choose, A.I. will become part of how work is done.” Maybe he meant this as a promise of opportunity, but the students seemed to hear it as a threat — or a curse…One recent report found that only 18 percent of Gen Z-ers feel hopeful about A.I., and almost half say the risks outweigh the benefits. Politicians with followings among young people — including Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez on the left and James Fishback on the right — are calling for moratoriums on data centers. A.I. is increasingly a pop culture villain.
Of course Goldberg, being Goldberg, wants the government to crack down on A.I. (which, I submit, is impossible, but that is a topic for another day) and extols the European nanny states doing just that as well as totalitarian nations like China who are “managing it.” The point here is that of all developments to embrace as exceptions to the Amish wariness about technology, A.I has to be one of the worst ones imaginable.
Once, I regarded the Amish as misguided but admirable in their adherence to their core values even at the price of being estranged from American culture and society.
Now I realize they are just kooks.
Ethics Alarms 
Perhaps we do not understand what the role of moral restrictions is in tight communities.
Is there a good reasonable basis for why observant Jews keep kosher? Why they do not eat pork, shellfish, why meat and dairy have to separated strictly. What is the reason for the dress code of Orthodox Jews? You may suggest that is because it is in the Torah, but then the question becomes why it is in the Torah. OK another try, Orthodox Jews do not eat pork because eating pork in ancient times could infect people with parasites (trichinosis). Well, why did the neighbors of the Jews eat pork?
Similar questions can be asked about other tight communities. Why do the Jehovah Witnesses refuse blood transfusions? Why do the members of the Church of God Scientist refuse conventional medicine by rely on spiritual healing?
One explanation is that some of these moral restrictions that do not make sense on a rational basis, but exist as a costly signal of commitment to their community. These very rules help to tighten to community by advertising that they are different than the rest of the world. Orthodox Jews tell to everyone by their dress code that they belong to a community as Orthodox Jews, including their own community. For Amish it works the same way.
A key text in the Holiness Code of Leviticus is Leviticus 19:2 “Be holy because I, the Lord your God, am holy”. Holy here means set apart, and that implies that the people of Israel had to be different than the people around them. That includes denouncement of (aspects of) the secular culture. This text is also quoted in the New Testament in 1 Peter 1:16. Romans 12: 1-2 also urges Christians to live differently than the secular world:
1Therefore, I urge you, brothers and sisters, in view of God’s mercy, to offer your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and pleasing to God—this is your true and proper worship. 2 Do not conform to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind. Then you will be able to test and approve what God’s will is—his good, pleasing and perfect will.
The trouble is that many communities inherit a legacy of moral rules that they poorly understand due to a lack of reflection. Practices are being followed simply out of tradition, as this is the way everybody in their community does things. And if you do things differently, and reject authority of the parents or the elders, that basically results in you leaving that community.
Here we may invoke Nietzsche’s ideas about master morality and slave morality: are you following certain morals because you inherited them and follow scripts handed to you without reflection or out of laziness (slave morality), or do you make your own decisions and chart your own path through life (master morality)? OK I will not further open the can of worms presented by Nietzsche’s philosophy in this comment.
Are the Amish unethical? I think they are simply faced with challenges that they are not thinking through as they are stuck in traditionalism which may preclude rational ethical thinking.
Is there a good reasonable basis for why observant Jews keep kosher? Why they do not eat pork, shellfish, why meat and dairy have to separated strictly.
Cees, how is this relevant? It would be useful if Jews decided, “We won’t eat pork, except for bacon, because it’s really yummy.”
My argument is that their are a lot of moral rules that cannot be justified on a basis of reason, but are followed to signal a costly commitment that proofs that they are part of the community. For the Orthodox Jews that means food restrictions and dress codes, for the Amish that means dress code and abstaining from electricity and mechanized vehicles. The traditions hold the community together, think about “Tradition” in Fiddler on the Roof; that community does not survive as such as they all move to the United States.
The challenge is always to keep these traditional societies running while the world around them changes; these changes may make the moral codes out of date and irrelevant. The church that I am a member of ninety years ago condemned dancing, card playing, movies, theater and jazz music. Even stricter Puritan communities eschew television (I have been around those in the Netherlands) because that brings in the godless world with all its temptations, have to come to grips with computers (as they need to handle spreadsheets at work) and cellphones. People have been excommunicated from their churches for possession of a television; at the same time members of the same community can access porn on their laptops and cellphones. That illustrates the limitations of these moral codes, as they often do not withstand the test of time.
I am a bit hesitant to use the term “hypocrites” for those with old-fashioned moral views; my preference is to reserve that word for people who preach one thing and do the exact opposite, or people who act virtuously for the sake of moral status (also known as virtue signaling).
What would you call a “tradition” that rejects 100 year old technology but embraces more advanced technology with far less safety and certainty? What is a rational explanation for that? It’s like the politicians who say they believe that life begins at conception as the Catholic Church preaches but then promote abortion. Here we’re talking about an extreme and pervasive tradition that has far more impact than wearing beards and black hats.
The Amish tradition may work well in an agrarian society with closed communities. If you have no electricity at home and work with horses, you typically do not need a computer. Communication with old-fashioned flip phones does not require AI. In their own communities, in their own homes they may keep modern technology out of the door.
However when members of the Amish community find work outside their village, in manufacturing or at an office, they will have to use all that modern technology that they eschew in their communities. ChatGPT and other AI tools are used at the office and become well integrated with Microsoft Office and with the Internet; we are not even aware anymore that we use AI.
The sociology does not work in favor of the Old Amish, and new technology renders the Amish’s old morals out of date.
???? Technology always rendered the Amish’s old morals out of date! Why would AI be any different from any of the technology tyhey have been rejecting for all this time?
jack, one random reporter talking to one random family, which doesn’t sound Amish, is a bit light t generalize cult status. There are Quakers, Mmenonites, Friends, and a bunch of other variations. Amish vary from church to church even. Amish would likely have a factor dealing with any level of PC.
Jack, you sound a bit stressed take the dog fr a walk and just breathe
Question: Did you read the article? It’s not an unusual format: he uncovered a widespread practice, and used one chatty participant to help explain it. He did not just use a single source to jump to a conclusion. So from my angle, I read the article, use a quote or two to summarize and explicate its story, and if you question my overview, I include the link so you van make your own judgment.
Considering that, I don’t think your comment is warranted.
I have heard, from a Lutheran pastor, that the essential question the Amish face when considering new technology is “is this good for the community? That is, does in reinforce the community bonds?” Motor vehicles and farm equipment, electrical grid, radio, TV; these connect them to the outside, rather than to other members of their community. Cooperative care for livestock, building, community social events, all reinforce the community. They’ll run a woodworking shop on a diesel generator rather than the electrical grid, because the resupply of fuel is intermittent and under their discrete control, whereas the grid is just there all the time. As for AI, I suppose the argument is that they can take it or leave it at any time, but if so, I disagree too.