The stances on Generative AI from the professional-managerial class (PMC) are very predictable when you understand what the PMC is. They don’t have any fundamental problem with Gen. AI because:
§1. They don’t see the inherent value of work, the meaningfulness of doing good work for its own sake, or what you learn to attune to through the work—patience, beauty, gratefulness for things around you—because work within the system, particularly the work of the PMC, is about managing other people, like managing parts in a machine to make sure that they fit with one another and deliver a predictable result. It’s purely utilitarian, with no transcendent value.
§2. As a result, they don’t care about striving and self-overcoming. Work to them is something you need to remove at all costs, no matter the type or the degree. It is obvious that there are many forms of labor which are, at best, tedious, and at worst, horrifying in their alienating nature and their danger. I wouldn’t want anyone to be forced to go down to the mines like a coal miner in the early industrial revolution had to (then again, worth noting that coal mining is needed because of the demands of the technological system). Removing that type of labor is good (in the short-term at least, because the system that allows automation as a whole is alienating and can only grow in a direction that is self-informed, not informed by conscious human qualities, but that’s another discussion), but treating all labor as such is misunderstanding what real work is about: devotion, to a community, to a culture, and even to the Divine
§3. Because of those points, and the nature of their “work” which consists in managing others (who are often more competent than them), they do not take any pride in their work—what pride is there in telling others what to do? Thus they do not understand why people would genuinely want to keep doing what they do, and get good at it. Why not just get a machine that will do the thing for you? The result is the same right?
It is not, but it requires a discerning person to see the differences, a discernment which comes from training and experience, both of which are lacking by the PMC. To understand the greats, you yourself need to be great in some way, even if very minor. Discernment is something you develop, it is not innate in anything. 1
This is why the PMC tends to be so, so mediocre in everything they do, because they are shielded from experience by their privileges, and do not care about mastery, which does not further their career, because the system is run by machines: physical, social (institutions) and machine-people. On top of that, they do not understand the values embodied by work, which in the system has been degraded to being purely utilitarian, and their work is not even their own to begin with, which is why they have no pride in it, and are content with being dilettantes in everything. They are tourists both in the world, but also in their work.
1 This is what I call the fundamental problem of discernment: to discern any quality in others, you yourself need to be attuned to that, and embody some of that yourself. A humorless bore cannot see humor in anyone or anything. A scared, insecured person cannot see real confidence in anyone, and they end up projecting their own tendencies of manipulation onto others—he's only nice to get something from people! And people who engage in meaningless work all day think that everyone around them feels the same way about their job.
Go back to the list of blog posts
Ai Art Manager Tower Hollowwork
2026-05-30