Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
/
Robots will continue to ‘take jobs,’ and humans will continue to create more
Robots will continue to ‘take jobs,’ and humans will continue to create more
Dec 20, 2025 12:18 AM

Given the breakneck pace of improvements in automation and artificial intelligence, fears about job loss and human obsolescence continue to consume the cultural imagination. The question looms: What is the future of human work in a technological age?

Innovators such as Elon Musk and Bill Gates have done their share to affirm the predominant pessimism, painting a grim picture of a future defined by robot overlords and diminishing human contributions. “At least when there’s an evil dictator, that human is going to die,” Musk recently observed. “But for an AI, there will be no death — it would live forever.”

The most recent strides and achievements in artificial intelligence are certainly unique in the scope of human history. But as it relates to their impact on the future of human work, the questions have less to do with robotic genius than they do with our faith in human creativity.

In a short film from Freethink, we get a helpful reminder of the historical record. Despite the immediate pain and suffering caused by the various waves of automation and creative destruction, we have yet to see an overall reduction in our opportunities for work and creative service.

“If you think about it,” the narrator explains, “most of the great inventions of the past 200 years have been designed, explicitly, to take our jobs, and yet the fraction of people in the workforce is near an all-time high.”

As for whether this time is markedly different from the rest, once again, the question has to do with whether the depths of human creativity have markedly shallowed. If we only imagine the ongoing developments in robotics, humans will surely e the victim. But as those innovations unfold, we should be careful that we don’t dismiss or disregard the creative developments we’re bound to see from human minds and human hands.

“Whenever a new technology arrives, we can easily see what jobs it might replace. The problem is that we’re really, really bad at envisioning what kind of new jobs might be born in the future,” the narrator explains. “…The idea is that when we passed off some of the workload to machines it broadened the scope of what was possible. We came up with new ideas, new innovations, and new kinds of work.”

Using the example of the ATM — which, despite the popular fears, led to anincrease in bank-teller jobs, as well as higher wages and expanded responsibilities — the film reminds us of the mysteries of the unforeseen, and the continuous surprises of human capacity when machines gives us room to dream and imagine.

“All of these new technologies transformed the way we work, and adjusting to them wasn’t simple, costless, or immediate,” the narrator concludes. “But if the past is any indication, this radical leap forward in technology is just as likely to create jobs as it is to destroy them.”

Even still, much of this depends on our perspectives and cultural imaginations—particularly how we view the human person and his/her relationship to society and civilization.

As Kevin J. Brown recently wrote, much of modern society views the world through a “chaos narrative,” in which “beings that reproduce with superior qualities will outpace and outlive their less adapted counterparts.” Through such a lens, it’s no wonder we fret about an economy filled with servile humans, cooperative pliant with the blind strides of the bigger, broader “evolutionary machine,” human, robotic, or otherwise.

Yet Brown suggests a different narrative, one through which humans are not powerless cogs, but “deliberately designed and uniquely created.” “We are spiritual beings,” he writes. “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, humans have little hope peting with our petitors in a massive, mechanistic economic regime. Indeed, as Brown concludes, through such a view, “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 and varied economic story.Far from human obsolescence, we see the opportunity for the increase and expansion of human relationship, creativity, production, and the abundance es with it.

Robots will surely continue to “take jobs,” and humans will surely continue to create them.

Image: Spencer Cooper,rover 200 framing line (CC BY-ND 2.0)

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
Diversity Welcome, But Only within Very Strict Parameters
Gallaudet University is a unique institution. Founded in 1864 in Washington, DC to meet the educational needs of the deaf and hard-of-hearing, the school currently serves just under 2000 students in various capacities. As one might imagine, it is a munity, aware that they educate a group of people who have often been victims of discrimination. The school asserts: Gallaudet University as an institution embraces diversity… A university has an obligation to be a place where all views can be...
America’s Top Diplomat: Rich People Don’t Contribute to Economic Growth
“There are rich people everywhere, and yet they do not contribute to the [economic] growth of their own countries.” If such a statement were made by an activist at an Occupy Wall Street rally, most adults would chuckle and mend the budding young Marxist take a course in economics. But what do we do when the claim is made by Hillary Clinton at an event hosted by a former U.S. president and in front of an audience of global leaders?...
Acton Commentary: Representation without Taxation?
“No taxation without representation” was a slogan taken up and popularized by this nation’s Founders, and this idea became an important animating principle of the American Revolution. But this was also an era where landowners had the primary responsibilities in civic life; theirs was the land that was taxed and so theirs too should be the rights to vote and be represented. Thus went the logic. But the question that faces us now, nearly two and a half centuries later,...
The Market Outlook for the Facts of the Matter
With two presidential debates and one vice presidential debate already behind us, fact-checkers across the nation must be pulling their hair out. A brief survey of factcheck.org sheds some important light on the many claims and figures that have been tossed around in the last two weeks, revealing little concern from either ticket for the facts of the matter. Why is this the case? And must we simply resign ourselves to this dismal state of affairs? Take a look at...
Mansa Musa and the Magic of the Free Market
A new study has produced an inflation-adjusted list of the richest people of all time. To give you an idea of just how rich the rich people on the list are consider that Sam Walton and Warren Buffett are the poorest guys to make the cut. The richest person in history, according to the study, was Mansa Musa I of Mali—an obscure 14th century African king. Musa, who made his fortune on salt and gold, would have an inflation-adjusted fortune...
Are Protectionism and Patriotism Incompatible Principles?
This morning at Ethika Politika, I argue that “acting primarily for the sake of national interest in international affairs runs contrary to a nation’s highest ideals.” In particular, I draw on the thought of Vladimir Solovyov, who argued that, morally speaking, national interest alone cannot be the supreme standard of international action since the highest aspirations of each nation (e.g. “Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness”) are claimed to be universal goods. I would here like to explore his...
Acton Commentary: Politics, Social Justice and the Non-Negotiables
For many on the Catholic left, the confusion of “non-negotiables” in Church teaching with matters of prudential judgment has e all mon. In this week’s Acton Commentary (published October 17), Dr. Don Condit looks at how Vice President Joseph Biden’s “facts” about Obamacare were received by the Catholic bishops.The full text of his essay follows. Subscribe to the free, weekly Acton News & Commentary and other publicationshere. Politics, Social Justice and the Non-Negotiables byDonald P. Condit Vice President Joseph Biden’s...
What is Subsidiarity?
What is Catholic Church’s teaching on the size of government? And what is the principle of subsidiarity? Our friends at CatholicVote.org have put together a brief video to help answer these questions. ...
Samuel Gregg: Who’s Really Forgotten the Poor
On National Review Online, Acton Research Director Samuel Gregg offers an analysis of last night’s debate between President Barack Obama and Gov. Mitt Romney. Gregg begins with the assertion by Melinda Henneberger of the Washington Post that the candidates are ignoring poor and working-class Americans. Gregg responds: … what’s generally missing from the discussion of poverty in the context of this presidential election — though Romney did obliquely reference it in the second debate — is acknowledgment that: (1) the...
The Presidential Debate and Pandering to Women
I think somebody needs to admit that the level of pandering to women in this election is over the top. Whether it is Ann Romney awkwardly yelling, “I love you women” at the Republican National Convention, or the ridiculous “War on Women” meme from the left. The examples are just too many to cite and evaluate for one post. So much of it is focus driven and poll tested and here with us to stay, but the issue still needs...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2025 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved