In my early 20s I learned of the 100+ cognitive biases that distort my reality to help me navigate a complicated world. Simple things like falling prey to the gravitational force of any ideas that confirm what I already believe or becoming certain that once I know how it turned out, I'm certain I saw it coming. It shattered my world view that I was a purely rational being. That shattering was further compounded when I learned that becoming aware of the cognitive bias wouldn't cure me of the affliction. I can't. It's beyond my abilities. It's a forever sentence to being an irrational being. It happened again when I was chronically depressed. My brain told me that things were hopeless and I was better off ending it all. Thankfully I learned, those thoughts are not mine. My brain was autogenerating them and subjecting me to torture. I could choose to observe them and not be them. That was my first step out of that dark place. These two discoveries of myself have led me to be suspicious of everything my mind tells me. By default, I don't trust my own mind. By default, I don't trust other people's minds either. This has been on my mind for the past ten years as I've tried to figure out how to think about AI. Is it friend or foe? Do I feel excitement or dread? Is utopia or dystopia imminent? This book I'm currently reading chronicles how humanity has been thinking about AI for thousands of years and how current societal AI discourse repeats ancient cultural myths. The myths serve the role of determining what questions a society asks itself. This does not mean that the ideas or questions are wrong. Old worries can be the correct worries. The rebellion script is a 20th century modernization of much older archetypes. Other traditions imagined coexistence. Much of what a specific society thinks about AI is a reflection of their local cultural heritage and not derived from first principles. Who in the world can actually think clearly about AI? Who is sufficiently meticulous to examine the origin of their thoughts, stand independent of their culture, overcome their own biases, and reign supreme in offering coherent, rational analysis? I don’t think anyone clears that bar wholesale. Clarity is a property of individual positions and not an individual. I'm personally trying to untangle my own thoughts: the inherited cultural myths, my biases, and my local, cultural traditions. Then, try and eek out the tiniest bit of sober thought. Who in your estimation is best at this?