Prof. Sam Lehman-Wilzig: Our AI Future: No Work? No Problem!
In my blog last week (https://israelseen.com/prof-sam-lehman-wilzig-in-the-ai-era-does-college-still-pay-pun-intended/), I described the background for the question: Is it still worth going to college? (If you haven’t read it yet, please do, so that you don’t react by thinking I missed something). My answer below – Yes, with a big BUT….
There are two main economic scenarios for a future full of advanced AI software platforms and hardware AI robotics: either human intellect will still be necessary but only for those with a relatively high intellectual level, or there won’t be much work for any humans at all. In both cases, going to college (or any other advanced learning program) is still going to be necessary, with a big caveat (I’ll get to that here soon enough).
Let’s start with the first scenario. AI already has a few advantages over humans that will only widen in the future – memory, knowledge base, logical thinking. However, it is doubtful that AI will supersede us regarding elements such as empathy (fully understanding human nature in all its complexity), ethics (what is [un]acceptable depending on the context), and above all: initiative. As it’s not “alive,” AI has no inner “drive” to determine by itself what needs to be fixed or improved in society; it simply waits for our prompt, and then “does its thing.”
Complicating matters, when “prompted,” it might come up with a brilliant solution, or a disastrous one – the latter in large part due to secondary damage. For instance, the immediate technical solution could be terrific but the social cost is immense. That’s not something the AI would (be able to) consider unless guided by human input.
In addition (as I noted last week), history is replete with technological advances that revolutionized the economy, but for every newly unemployed worker, a new type of job emerged out of that same novel technology (e.g., candlemakers out; electricians in). AI might follow the same path with new jobs coming onstream for humans to work with technology instead of it replacing us.
If this scenario comes to pass, then higher education (universities, colleges, etc.) will have to adjust in four ways:
1- Offer novel courses to teach the latest type of new work. Most colleges are good at this (usually even better than universities, as they must try harder to attract students).
2- Teach in a more interdisciplinarity fashion i.e., greater breadth of topics and less depth. This is harder for institutes of higher education to implement, given their traditional disciplinary “fiefdoms” (aka “departments”), each jealous of its particular research niche. Nevertheless, in Israel there’s some recent movement in this direction. For instance, in the Technion (a top-flight institute of higher learning) engineering students also study the humanities and social sciences.
3- Place less emphasis on learning facts, instead focus more on critical thinking – “critical” as in analytical, as well as adversarial (e.g., what could go wrong; is there a hidden “bug” in the solution). One would think that this is a basic function of “higher” education, but in my close to fifty-year experience lecturing to students and supervising young researchers, critical thought only begins to manifest itself at the M.A. and PhD level. Luckily, there’s something in Israel’s Jewish culture (“a stiff-necked people…”) that permeates a core of critical thinking among a large part of the citizenry (e.g., 12% of the entire workforce is in high-tech).
4- Provide high level, later career, post-B.A. education. As the economy changes at an ever-faster pace, re-education becomes necessary for mid-level workers to keep up with the latest developments (not all “technological”), or to move sideways into new professions or job requirements (e.g., ethics supervisors of AI). Some Israeli science-oriented institutions (e.g., the Weizmann Institute) already provide continuing education in data analytics, AI, and the like.
In short, college in the future (and present!) can’t be merely (or mostly) about preparing oneself for work. Rather, it’s about teaching flexibility, encouraging curiosity, sharpening critical thought, developing creativity, and inculcating the fortitude to tackle whatever surprises the future holds.
But what if that surprise is the “end of work”? Here too higher education (actually, the entire educational system from kindergarten on up) has an important role to play. Simply put (and admittedly, also somewhat simplistically), let’s assume for the moment that economic livelihood (“money”) is not an issue for individuals (a huge issue currently being seriously discussed by policymakers around the world, but beyond my purview here). What, then, would the average person do with him/herself over one’s entire adult lifetime if there’s no “economic work” to go to, or to perform?
Most people today would consider this to be a disaster personally, leading to a boring, meaningless life. But such an attitude is merely a reflexive reaction to the historical human condition; in of itself “not working” is not a problem if we prepare for it. Indeed, 150 years ago the average person worked 12-14 hours a day, 6-7 days a week, and close to 52 weeks a year. Today, we’re down to a mere 7-8 hours a day, 5 days a week, and about 46 weeks a year (six weeks for vacations and holidays). I don’t exactly see people getting upset over this huge “loss” in their work quantity!
However, it would entail readjusting our expectations regarding what our life should be all about: more self-fulfillment, more creativity, more socializing, more healthy physical activity, more… (add your own leisure preferences). Of course, in order to truly exploit all that “more” we need to undergo “re-education”: better health habits, greater creative expression, improved interpersonal communication skills – the list goes on and on. And that’s where all levels of education (especially college) will have to make their greatest adjustment: teaching more “life skills” and less “professional proficiency.”
All this “fully human self-expression” will actually be easier in a world where AI serves as our aide and implementer. The Bible (Genesis) had a good term for this (albeit male chauvinistic in the context of Eve and Adam): Ezer Ke’negdo, a helpmate. Whether AI merely changes our place in the workforce or replaces us, with the right “educational” preparation humanity can flourish – even more than in the past. Thus, our future is not about (going to) work. Rather, it’s all about learning to live meaningfully without work.
[If you’re interested in how Israeli young adults and the retiree generation view AI regarding issues beyond “work,” a recent scholarly article explores just that. Its title: AI perceptions across technological generations: Utopian and dystopian views uniting baby boomers and gen Z in Israel (https://doi.org/10.1080/13537121.2025.2542791)]
