“Enlightened Populism: Can AI, Radical Transparency, and Citizen Assemblies Transform Democracy?” With Mohamed Nabil

Ok, good day everyone. Welcome to the Groot and ownership podcasts where we explore both ideas, transformative thinking and the principles that shape personal and global growth. Today's guest is Mohammed, a thinker, challenging how we engage with knowledge, and truth. He is a lot of AIG OP, AID page on most publications, a system that invites AI to criticise own work in a great time. Promoting radical transparency, so it's also the mind behind a lighting populism. If we work in creating criticising overblend to us or emotional reaction, from redefining education and publishing to advocating for global governance and citizen leaders, democracy, that are both provocative and deeply reflective. Once again, welcome to the show, Mohammed. Thank you, it's a pleasure to join in here tonight. Ok, so what inspired you to create AID OP and what problem were you trying to solve in the traditional publishing of Knowledge Share. Ok, so let me define AID OP or AID based on one's publications first. It's a content creation framework, it involves a content creator from thing and AID to criticize their own content, and publishing their entire analysis and the transcript of back and forth argumentation within 24 hours of text change. It may have a revolutionary impact within publishing, education, policy making, humanities, and social sciences. But before realizing it's promising impact on those fields, I started, I created AID OP because I felt that ideas and books are typically dead if they're not discussed and debated in public. So I started debating my own books and ideas with various AI tools and publishing the entire analysis and transcript of back and forth argumentation. So people can follow the reasoning behind my conclusions instead of accepting them blindly or rejecting them. Ok, so how does it fit to publicly expose your ideas to AI criticism without editing? And what have you learned from that process? Well, you must have a certain level of radical transparency and intellectual humility in order to get yourself into using AID OP, which stands for AI Debates on Wants Publications. So I started using this methodology because of this content creation framework because I believed in my own ideas. Later on, I published a book titled Ideas that Survived AID OP. Or AID OP, which highlighted the main ideas that survived these debates, survived AI's criticism. But it's worth mentioning that one time I introduced our Clive Balance Theory and then when I got into an A-Dop session with a Church of E, that told me that my own theory doesn't apply to everyone. It doesn't apply to those who have to work because they can't afford living, achieving certain living conditions otherwise. So I accepted the criticism as valid and I admitted that my own theory isn't universal it only applies to certain group of people. Okay, so I can you spread down a lighting populism in simple terms and how is the far from blind elitism and ignorance populism? Enlightened populism is a behavioural pattern of communication that involves listening to multiple experts trying to understand how they reach certain conclusions and then investigating the information to the screens of truth. So with the two dominant behavioural patterns of communication in today's world, blind elitism, which entails blindly following an expert or an elite on a certain issue, and ignorant populism which also involves the absence of investigation while relying on feelings or trends. Would you like me to highlight it with an example? Yes, go and go and go. Okay, so let's take an example for climate change. We all know about the Paris Agreement, we've all heard about it. So if you just blindly accept some expert's opinions that the Paris Agreement is a great achievement for humanity, this is called blind elitism, we didn't investigate the issue. And if you rely on feelings and trends and just follow people saying that climate change is a hoax or it's not a train or a stop like that, where it has always been overheating and has nothing to do with industrialization, then you're practicing ignorant populism. Enlightened populism involves, in this case, involves getting back to the Paris Agreement itself, reading its facts is not too long and understanding what stands for. It's a symbolic agreement, it's a high-knight fact that there is a climate, it acknowledges that we need to take action, but it does nothing about it. Absolutely nothing. This is how we are supposed to reach conclusions and form opinions, listen to multiple experts, try to understand how they reach certain conclusions and then investigating the information ourselves to discover the truth. Why do you believe society tends to fall into either blind tourists in authority or emotional, on inform or reaction? The main problem is with cognitive energy to apply to practice enlightenment populism and apply the theme, stats I told you about, which involve listening to multiple experts trying to understand how they reach certain conclusions and investigating the information to discover the truth. You will have to spend time and effort, exert effort to reach certain conclusions or build or form an opinion. So people typically find it easier to blind the tourists some source of authority or follow an emotion or a trend or other online order of life. How can individual parts, colleagues adopt enlightened populism in daily lives? And this is your making. Well enabling enlightened populism in my own philosophical approach is distributed across three books. Two books, named the title "Sat Mine's Free and Humanities Money", tackled the economic aspect of enabling enlightened populism, and then there is truth, a sexy, which tackles the sociological aspects of enabling enlightened populism. So as for the economic aspect, we need to share the benefits of technology and technological breakthroughs that are happening nowadays. Instead of massive layoffs that are expected and are actually happening because of technological breakthroughs, we can dramatically reduce working hours, allowing people to have enough time and energy to practice enlightened populism. Then we can go into the sociological aspect and I may start with pairing. Does that sound good? Good. How do you respond to criticism? We will see your ideas like. We will see your ideas like global governance or wet cups or realities or two idealistic. While let's discuss the flexibility of these ideas, let's discuss how they can be applied in the real world. Instead of dismissing something as unrealistic because it doesn't happen in the past, we can rely on our own arguments and counter-arguments to form opinions. So I don't have a problem with criticism. I welcome criticism and this is why I created AI/DUP or AI debates from one's publications. I welcome criticism and I typically respond to criticism proactively. What do those do AI and technology play in shaping a more informed and critical thinking global population in the future? That's a two-ad story. We have to take a step back and look at social media. Social media relies on personalization, showing each person content based on their historical interactions within the platform. This ultimately creates a situation in which a person's use of social media is an endless state of vice-confirmation, even if the person doesn't suffer from confirmation bias. Even such angels are not aware of this. and LLAMs can turn into echo chambers if not used wisely as they both rely on historical data of interactions using private and collotto mode occasionally while submitting queries through multiple sessions and digging deep for multiple sources advisable, saying goes for LLAMs with the additional feature of intentionally getting into a debate with the LLAM by prompting it to take a position opposing to us. Some of your ideas like a global wet cup are controversial. So what is the core principle be I don't that belief? Okay so there are two issues. The first issue is that no person should have I'm introducing a WELCAP at $999 million dollars. This is the WELCAP I'd like to introduce through applying our government to be ruled by hyperluxism assemblies. So there are two main issues to tackle here. The first issue is that no no person should have this amount of power and influence over corporations and over governments all over the world and this is why the WELCAP is needed. The other reason is that abolishing the monarchies, abolishing military industrial complexes and setting that WELCAP will enable us to have enough funds to introduce basic human rights such as shelter access to clean water and food, education, healthcare, freedom of expression, freedom of movement and stable speed internet connections. Freedom of expression and freedom of movement are essentially at they are not related to the economic aspect of things. The rest of these human rights that should be introduced are related to the idea of taxing billionaires out of existence, abolishing monarchies and abolishing military industrial complexes. What's if God would need to be in place to ensure citizen as a symbol, as a symbol to truly represent people fairly and not influenced by power or by us? Well, we will have universal basic incomes and we will have these basic human rights. So we will expand the middle class and then we will take matters into our own hands within these citizen assemblies. Instead of representative democracies that are currently widespread all over the world, we will vote for someone to vote on your behalf on several issues. We will take matters into our own hands. We will vote directly on the issues and the policies at play. So this over time and practicing enlightenment populism while ditching the blinded in the system and ignorant populism will ensure that we as global citizens are taking care of each other and are practicing enlightenment populism in the right way and are taking the right decisions most of the time. We can't reach 100 percent efficiency under any system yet. It's essential to optimize for the best outcome. Okay, on a personal level. As a journey with AIDOP and a lighted populism change, how you make decision or view your own belief? Well, enlightenment populism helped me on a personal level. I had an experience with certain minor diseases that I had and I went to two doctors to professors and each of them told me a different diagnosis. So I had to research myself. I didn't exclude what they said. I listened to the expert. Yeah, so I did my own research to identify my own problem. Based on the scientific data available in life. So when I diagnosed myself at that day, I found the cure and it was a mix of diet and a bit physical training and the problem got solved. So this is how enlightenment populism made a difference in my own personal life. As for AIDOP, it made a difference when the difference I told you about earlier when it challenged me on a certain issue and I accepted the consistent banded. If AIDOP were widely adopted, how do you think it will change the way we learn the bits of form opinions? It will dramatically change the way we learn and form opinions. Instead of starting a debate, instead of starting the debate by presenting a certain argument or presenting a certain theory with the thesis, we'll start the debate after I present my theory and I'm showing you how it survived AID's scrutiny. I'll present a bunch of arguments and counter arguments as a starting point. You can read them or listen to them or whatever form of communication we're using. And then you can start building your counter arguments accordingly or start accepting my own premise as valid. So this is how it may change things in terms of the debate. In terms of publishing, you can see how we can see it will change the author to reader's relationship. You can see that an author will have to prove that their ideas survived scrutiny and AI scrutiny and that these ideas whenever published, they can, that level of radical transparency that allows their readers to check out the counter arguments to their own arguments presented in the book and then choose what to believe and choose how to fund their own opinions. Within education, it may revolutionize education. As you can see, there is a current panic in education because of the AI tools. Anything assigned to students can be done via AI tools. And this issue will continue to grow over time as these tools become smarter. Tutors can use, can, can solve this problem by requiring students to submit an aid up AI debates and once publications session at the end of each assignment and handle the debates of other students on their findings. What kind of watch do you hope this ideas evaporates in the next 10 to 20 years? In 20 years, I hope we will be able to achieve this form of global unity, the global government and all wars and the ridiculous spending on weapons and start spending on the mansion. There's a human rights that should be introduced. These are shelter access to clean for water and food, education, healthcare, freedom of expression, freedom of movement and the state-based speed of eternal connections. Okay, thank you very much, my mate. This has been a powerful and thoughtful working conversation. So if there's one taking away is this, I would think matters. Just as much as what we think. Challenging our assumption, questioning authority and again, you would adjust, particularly the key to both personal and global progress. So, women, in case our list is not a issue, is there any way they can issue? Yeah, thank you for having me. Okay, so is there any way our list is not a issue? They can reach me through my website, mohamed.org. It would be helpful if you can add this in the description of that. Okay, thank you very much. If you enjoyed this episode, be sure to subscribe, share it with someone who loved the conversation and keep taking ownership of your good until next time. Take care. So thank you very much, my mate, for doing this with us. Please just with wide.