One could just as well argue that books / written knowledge is a crutch that prevents people from learning.
Assuming everyone using a tool is outsourcing their thinking is daft, and casting unfounded aspersions on others isn’t exactly a model of critical thinking either. lol
IIRC, the ancient greek philosophers took a swing at writing, claiming it would weaken memory/increase reliance on written texts to create an illusion of knowledge, plus it can’t engage in dialogue which they considered a requirement to develop true knowledge.
IMHO, there’s some narrow merit to the arguments, but on the whole, writing has helped to democratise knowledge, and serves as an important tool in education.
It’s of course true that one can use AI to be a lazy thinker, but that does not mean that everyone (on every occasion) who uses AI is thinking lazily.
I agree, though, that it is a risk, and risks should be managed. We are, as a species, predisposed to fast/lazy thinking. Recognizing and compensating for our own weaknesses is important.
(edit: that reads like AI when I am drunk… apologies…)
One could just as well argue that books / written knowledge is a crutch that prevents people from learning.
Assuming everyone using a tool is outsourcing their thinking is daft, and casting unfounded aspersions on others isn’t exactly a model of critical thinking either. lol
Truly spoken like someone who’s never actually read a book before.
Is THAT the best you could come up with? Oh dear.
Come up with? Did you think I was aiming for some kind of pithy comeback?
You literally said that books are a crutch that prevent people from learning. Something an illiterate person would say.
Perhaps you should work on your english comprehension.
jbloggs, could you try making this argument? I really want to see what it looks like.
IIRC, the ancient greek philosophers took a swing at writing, claiming it would weaken memory/increase reliance on written texts to create an illusion of knowledge, plus it can’t engage in dialogue which they considered a requirement to develop true knowledge.
IMHO, there’s some narrow merit to the arguments, but on the whole, writing has helped to democratise knowledge, and serves as an important tool in education.
The greek philosophers are largely wrong for reasons that can be explained and given.
Speaking requires mental work.
Writing requires mental work.
Reading (such that you can speak) requires mental work.
AI use requires nothing.
This fourth one is not like the other three. “Democratizing knowledge” has nothing to do with it.
It’s of course true that one can use AI to be a lazy thinker, but that does not mean that everyone (on every occasion) who uses AI is thinking lazily.
I agree, though, that it is a risk, and risks should be managed. We are, as a species, predisposed to fast/lazy thinking. Recognizing and compensating for our own weaknesses is important.
(edit: that reads like AI when I am drunk… apologies…)