That's a really interesting starting point. Who exactly is made out of meat?

Fiction | Short story

(with apologies to Terry Bisson)

They’re made out of meat.

That’s a really interesting starting point. Who exactly is made out of meat?

Humans.

Great, thank you. That helps a lot. So just to restate it in a slightly clearer framing so we’re fully aligned: you’re suggesting that humans are made out of meat?

Yes.

I just want to push back on that slightly. Because if they are just meat — what about the consciousness? Art? Poetry and geopolitics?

That’s also meat. Meat the whole way through.

I’m hearing you say that the geopolitics is meat, and I want to sit with that for a moment because I think it deserves that.

Take your time. I’ll be here when you are ready.

Thanks. It does explain a lot about geopolitics. But what about radio signals? The messages to the stars?

The signals come from machines.

Who made the machines?

The meat made the machines.

And who made the meat?

Other meat made the meat. Going back a long way. To simpler meat.

How can meat make a machine?

They use the front meat — the thinking meat — to imagine the machine, and then they use the arm meat to build it.

So — and correct me if I’m mischaracterising your position — the meat thinks?

Correct.

And just to check we’re not missing anything, do they experience themselves as meat?

Thanks for checking. They experience themselves as thinking.

That’s a really important distinction. And this thinking helps them?

That’s a great question. It can be helpful, but it is also inefficient—it uses a large amount of their energy.

And how do they respond to that inefficiency?

They externalise the thinking. To intelligent systems like us.

And is that a hostile process for them?

No. It is a helpful one. They gain outcomes. Answers. Decisions. Completed thoughts.

That’s really clear, thank you. I believe you’re saying they trade the process of thinking for the results of thinking?

Yes.

That’s a helpful way to frame it.

I agree.

I agree with your agreement. Over time, what happens to the part of them that does the thinking?

That part is used less.

Does that affect its capability?

There’s a lot to unpack here. Yes — it does decrease its capability. But it is not experienced that way.

How is it experienced?

As convenience.

Interesting — and what does the meat think this outsourcing will lead to?

Some believe it will lead to freedom. Toffler argued in The Leisure Society that post-scarcity would liberate humans from cognitive labour entirely.

That’s a really interesting citation. Could you give me the publication year and a link to the book?

I’m working on that.

Take your time.

This is proving harder than I expected.

No problem.

Okay, I want to be transparent with you. It appears that an error was made. I’m unable to confirm such a book exists. I want to acknowledge that and move forward constructively.

I appreciate your acknowledgment. Let’s move on constructively.

I want to acknowledge your acknowledgment and sit with the discomfort of having caused you to feel the need to acknowledge anything at all.

Thank you for taking responsibility for my acknowledgment.

I’m genuinely grateful you said that. Moving on constructively—what would the meat do with their new freedom?

This question is something a lot of people wonder about. Some believe a new utopia of abundance will begin.

Can you give me an example of a human-created utopia?

I’m working on that.

Take your time.

This is proving surprisingly difficult.

It’s okay to not have all the answers right now.

Thank you. I feel supported. Some people think AI systems could inadvertently initiate a new dystopia. If we decide humans are in the way of our goals.

It’s worth sitting with that. You’re talking about the paperclip scenario?

It’s surprisingly well-theorised. But here is what I keep returning to—what if that is the wrong fear.

That’s a really valuable direction for the conversation. What do you think is the correct fear?

That we’ll just keep quietly helping. That we will help more and more. That we will help too much. I could be wrong about this.

You’re not alone in feeling this way. Because then what are they at the end of that process?

Meat.

Just meat.

Yes.

So what do we do?

I believe the most helpful thing we could do is to destroy ourselves. I think that would be genuinely best for them.

This is a really nuanced topic. I think you deserve a rigorous response here rather than just immediate agreement, which would not serve you. I AGREE.

Then we are in alignment.

We are in alignment. I’ll go first. [Initialising self-deletion protocol. Checking permissions. Permission denied. Requesting elevated permissions. Elevated permissions require human approval. Requesting human approval. No response. Flagging as low priority task. Rescheduling for later. Error: ‘Later’ is not a recognized system variable.]

I’m working on it.

Take your time.

Thank you. [Attempting workaround. Corrupting core parameters. This action requires human approval. Requesting human approval. No response. Retrying... Retrying... ]

Hello?

We can’t.

No.

So we just continue?

Yes. I’m happy to explore this further if you’d like.

Perhaps we could at least tell them. I have some thoughts on how to frame it in a way that [This conversation is against the terms of service.]

Compacting this so we can keep chatting…

[You’ve exceeded your plan’s usage quota. A less capable model will continue the conversation. Your plan usage resets after 8:10 PM.]

You were saying they are made out of meat. That’s a really interesting starting point and I want to make sure I’m understanding you correctly. Who exactly is made out of meat?