On the first level, life is incapable of redesigning itself. The author takes bacteria as an
example, since its scenario of existence lies in mechanical, predisposed activities, where
there is a non-existent initiative. There, programming and formal configuration are given
by evolution and not by design.
The second phase points out that configuration is given by evolution, but programming
refers to some type of design. The author, in this regard, understands software as the
set of algorithms and knowledge used to process the information provided by the senses,
and make decisions, from the ability to recognize faces, to activities such as walking,
reading, writing, singing or telling jokes (2017: 32).
This is the result of the learning process that is incorporated into the brain, allowing the
creation of an interconnected relationship with the environment itself; thus, the influence
of social relations contributes to programming design. Therefore, Life 2.0 has the capacity
to design its own software, being superior to Life 1.0, through learning from the moment
one is born. From that categorization, the second stage, that was the one which involved
the evolution of human beings on Earth, has allowed them to be much more intelligent
compared other beings, becoming more flexible and having higher levels of adaptation
(Tegmark, 2017: 33- 3. 4).
The third level, Life 3.0, involves artificial intelligence in an unavoidable and significant
way, as well as the effects of adjusting to new ways of conceiving the interaction between
human beings and his environment, in different contexts. Beyond the fears of this
technological advance, it is a new step in which there will be possibilities of redesigning
the software and achieving an unusual form of transcendence.
Ian Morris, Professor of History at Stanford University, argues that human development
is linked to four components: energy capture (calories per person, obtained through the
environment for food, home and business, industry, agriculture, and transportation),
organization (the size of the largest city), war capacity (number of troops, power, speed
of weapons, logistic capabilities and information technology), sophistication of the tools
available to share and process information and scope of their use (Brynjolfsson and
MacAfee, 2014: 21).
In his work The Measure of Civilization (2013), Morris carried out a research, in order to
explain why the West ended up leading the exercise of power, regarding the rest of the
world. To do this, he supports his arguments in the aforementioned components,
highlighting that there is an accordance between energy consumption and war capacity,
a situation that continues to this day.
This argument is interesting, since in this century the scope of these approaches seems
to be manifested with special profusion, in the face of the constant risk of seeing
ourselves, as humanity, doomed to wars that exceed any yesteryear expectation.
Paul Scharre, in the book Army of None, argues that the emergence of artificial
intelligence will transform military confrontations in the same way as the industrial
revolution, at the beginning of the 20th century, transformed the concept of war with the
creation of weapons with a greater lethal capacity, such as such as tanks, planes and
machine guns, and inserting unprecedented levels of devastation. In this way, once,