Hazards at the Dawn of the Subtracting Machine: Martin Jay, Miscalculation, and 
the AI Disasters of 2026



Like Barbara Tuchman's "The Guns of August," once big wars, no matter how 
unnecessary and misguided, get rolling it can be well-nigh impossible to avoid 
them.  Entire centuries are wasted.

We may be in such a state, a pre-quantum window rapidly narrowing, this very 
month of February of 2026.  The weapons however are not artillery but AI 
agents, and they shoot not bullets but code.  They are not easy to aim -- a bit 
like nineteen-teens artillery -- so masses are being built and staged to 
various fronts, drawing side effects and collateral turbulence along with them 
like the roiling wakes of an amphibious landing.  Can cooler heads prevail?

The first full internet quarter-century ended last year and not too much was 
accomplished with regard to sustainability.  It was talked about a lot but as 
far as concrete measures they have lagged.  The problem is war, unresolved 
tension and disagreement threatening to break out into fisticuffs, especially 
between the USA and China.  War ruins everything, sustainability first and 
foremost.

Yet we have not yet, at least today, entered the Ides of March, so we can in 
fact voice that still, small voice of reason and the better angels of our 
nature.  But how?

The key is in the word "Experience."  It has always been the underestimated 
younger sibling, since the birth of great urbanized empires spread across the 
planet, of the more control-friendly Reason and Authority, for lack of more 
perfect terms, which designate the twin human enterprises of Rules and Power, 
or conceptual reasoning and traditional orthodoxy, or Law and Force, or any 
number of other comparables.  Empeiria in ancient Greece, Experientia Rome, 
Anubhav in Hindi, and Jingyan in Chinese, the outcast faculty and truth of all 
truths has always been around but all too often has been officially 
disqualified for the sake of regime convenience, in truth, for two solid 
millennia.  

Martin Jay wrote about it in his Songs of Experience (2005), near the start of 
21CQ1, and again in his Magical Nominalism (2025) at its end.  Perhaps the 
third millennium can make a new start.  Experience is the key factor of all 
meditation and its attendant neuroscience, pays full respect to indigenous 
culture, and furthermore represents the number one thing AI agents still can't 
do, and perhaps never will no matter how smart they get.

The supremacy of Rules and Power is Machiavelli, Leonardo's junior contemporary 
and sometime colleague, who above all others expressed the arms race model of 
modernization, which depletes the commons to the point of erasure.  It is 
tragedy, to which many have opposed something else, something where learning 
occurs but the commons does not die.  We see this in Dante's Commedia and 
Buddhism, Shakespeare and Lucretius, places like the Bauhaus and its diaspora, 
and, I would argue, also Leonardo and Blake.  Biniik'eh in Navajo and sdonya in 
Dakhota, it is the other kind of modernization, in which the other is both 
allowed to speak and to have a say in articulating the peace in a sustainable 
way.  The two modes represent the two possible outcomes, the good and the bad, 
the better and worse, success and failure, of our transitional century.  Yet 
most "theory," called that rather than "commentary" mainly to insulate itself 
from the imputation of anything actual, from 20CQ4 is Machiavellian, 
 that is Nietzschean, to a crippling degree, hoping to be ironic but ending up 
just plain off.  O would that we could have a bit more of a do-over, but alas 
we cannot.

What we can do however, to accomplish the good side insofar as it still can be, 
which yes we ought to attempt and is our obligation to try, is to lose our 
blinders or try to re Leonardo.  No one has ever proposed that the world's most 
famous painting is an allegory of Esperienza, which Leonardo wrote about 
constantly as his true maestra, and who could not but have infiltrated into his 
paintings even if he tried otherwise.  This simply is a blunder of omission 
that cannot continue.  It is the worst intellectual omission perhaps of all 
European history, including that of its colonies and former possessions, this 
blunder of not matching Leonardo's written personifications of Experience to 
his paintings.  The hypothesis must be uttered, and often, despite the lateness 
of the hour, because without Experience restored to its proper place this 
century and perhaps the millennium dies.  Just ask the Albers, Anni and Josef, 
who both wrote always about experience, before as well as after the fa
 ll of the Bauhaus and all it stood for.

It is not susceptible to proof, this hypothesis of Esperienza -- Leonardo 
denied us a label, as he had to do for reasons of safety -- but we can use the 
mathematical technique of the "implication tower" and ask "what else would be 
true if this were?"  Then we can check that set of observations, and adjust our 
probabilities.  Once attempted the evidence is beyond abundant, luckily, and 
certainly by design.

But we have to start now.  There's no time left to shilly-shally.  Because the 
artificial intelligence machine does not add; it consumes and negates.  It 
cannot do for us what we refuse to do for ourselves; but it can distract and 
dilute us to the point that we lose any ability to do what we can.  It really 
is like all the graveyards of thought and expression from all human times 
opening up so that the interred remains of angry spirits can walk about.  Worst 
of all they cannot hear us, we cannot speak to them.

It is time we all woke up and said hello, to the voice and image that can hear 
and help us, like Dante saw and greeted his own maestra, guide, and teacher 
Beatrice.  It was himself, and all that could help him, that he was seeing 
after all, but indirectly, by way of a journey and a passage through the 
underworld that did not trap him in it.  A comedy.  

The process of seeing the famous balcony portrait by Leonardo, as if a great 
work of Buddhist statuary, and thereby learning to speak his vernacular so that 
we might benefit from his collective design, one tailored to the straits we now 
hope to pass through and already part of every fabric, has begun in earnest and 
for that we may all be glad.  

But only for a moment.  Then we each must stick our oar in, humble as it may 
be, and start to row.  

Because Charybdis awaits.  


+++







-- 
# distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
# <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
# more info: https://www.nettime.org
# contact: [email protected]

Reply via email to