A provocative question. Given the state of the world, perhaps a genuine one.
I guess, because things could always be worse?
I’m not sure how much I can add to this discussion, but I wanted to make a couple of points.
First, I think we vastly overestimate our capacity for rational thought, i.e. “critical thinking.” Where, by “critical thinking,” I mean the capacity to assess the truth value of a given assertion, or the relative merits of differing propositions that purport to make some claim about the way things are.
Much of what takes place in the internal narrative going on in our heads, assuming you are one of the people who has an internal narrative (apparently, some people don’t, just as some people are incapable of internal visualization), is prompted or driven by our interior emotional state. A feeling.
That is to say, to the extent we “reason” at all, it is to justify an emotion, how we “feel” about something.
“I like AI.”
“I’m afraid of AI.”
“Do I have to think about AI?”
We reason backward from our feelings. Emotion is the prompt in the LLM of the mind.
This is to say nothing about the difficulty of learning complicated or difficult subjects. People have varying capacities in their ability to learn. To the extent that our conventional approaches to teaching underserve some fraction of the population, indeed, “Why continue to learn?” It’s often an exercise in frustration or futility.
In this regard, perhaps AI has some value. It is an infinitely patient interlocutor, with the capacity to re-state difficult concepts in other words, or perhaps illustrate them with drawings or animations. (How well we can evaluate the accuracy of those drawings is another question.)
I enjoyed a lengthy conversation with ChatGPT in trying to understand what makes a “greenhouse gas.” (Vibrational modes.) It never gets frustrated with the student, tired, or bored. And the answers gave me clues to search other resources to ascertain with some degree of confidence whether or not it was hallucinating.
How much of genuine insight is inaccessible to “rational thought.” That is, the Eureka! moment. Perhaps people without an internal narrative exist in this state at all times, albeit without the joy.
My point is that much of our “thinking” takes place below conscious awareness, and is somehow brought to conscious awareness in the shower, after a walk or a good night’s sleep. (Not in the “graph.”)
I am burdened with a non-stop inner narrative, and a vivid imagination that dreams in color. I can’t draw a picture to save my life, but I can watch a movie in my head. I should probably develop a disciplined meditative practice. I also should watch what I eat. Many “shoulds” in my life.
So, learning is hard. AI might be able help.
Thinking is often driven by our interior emotional state. Desire is another prompt. Wishing to please your geometry teacher, or wanting to know.
But most of what goes on in our heads, well, my head are habituated loops because thinking is hard. The brain uses a lot of energy. Willpower is resource constrained by energy. Attention is a finite resource and it is preyed upon by our culture and economic system.
We don’t have to worry about AI destroying our ability to think critically, we’ve done a wonderful job all by ourselves.
Anyway, not sure I added much to the conversation, but it prompted an emotion and here I am.
I’ll leave you with Thales…
Know thyself.
Le Monde.fr
The Atlantic
Lifewire
