Brad, this is a good start on AI. You are right to draw attention to C. S. Lewis's words in the title of his seminal work, The Abolition of Man. The book was about the devastating soul-destroying effect of modern education, which is incapable of rendering intelligible the essential question: "Just what is a human being and what is he for?" For we can not determine whether something is good or not unless we know what it IS and what it IS FOR. The question of AI is situated within this larger question: is there a transcending order by which we can answer such a question? Psalm 8 said it well: "What is man that Thou art mindful of him?" Modern people have difficulty answering such questions because we have forgotten the classical notion of formal and final causes: the "formal cause" tells us WHAT something IS and the "final cause" tells us what it IS FOR. The modern mind is shaped by the "social imaginary" of the Immanent Frame, which has little concern for the meaningful transcendence of formal or final causes: the Thou is forgotten. Rather, human making and practicality or usefulness become the ultimate criteria of the goodness of a thing.
Finally, I am reminded of James K. A. Smith's trilogy on the shaping power of "cultural liturgies," e.g., the "liturgy of the mall," the "liturgy of the stadium," and so on ("you are what you love."). That is, our hearts and minds are shaped by larger tacit and background forces, of which we are often largely unaware, that draw us into their shaping ways. AI is like that. It can be a very useful tool in many situations, but it can be a destroying presence in many others. AI is taking on a powerful shaping power in our contemporary world, as we enter ever more into its "liturgy." Like any tool, or thing of human making, it has a place in God's overarching cosmos, but it also speaks the ancient lie: you shall be like gods. So, indeed, perhaps the most important question to address in our contemporary world is that of the Psalmist: "what, indeed, is man that Thou art mindful of him?" That mindfulness is not artificial, and it tells us what we are and what we are for. And how we are to use the ultimately God-given tools that human beings--image bears of the Thou--are given to make.
Fascinating, proactive, and disturbing article. It notes in passing the role of educators in putting the "forbidden fruit" of AI cheating well within reach.
When I was an undergraduate (class of '68) struggling with statistics, the professor graded all things on the curve, including homework. I informed him that many students were collaborating on homework that was assigned to be done individually, thus raising the curve and penalizing students like me who were working independently.
He acknowledged the dilemma and changed nothing in this regard, and I got the lowest grade in my college career for a course that ironically I actually used far more in my work than I ever thought I would.
How much will the AI skills used to cheat contribute to using these skills to succeed in the work world?
How much will this deprive people from developing their own ability to think critically, to become creative, and to have well-deserved confidence in their own judgment?
If both happen, how does that influence the definition of "success"?
Brad, this is a good start on AI. You are right to draw attention to C. S. Lewis's words in the title of his seminal work, The Abolition of Man. The book was about the devastating soul-destroying effect of modern education, which is incapable of rendering intelligible the essential question: "Just what is a human being and what is he for?" For we can not determine whether something is good or not unless we know what it IS and what it IS FOR. The question of AI is situated within this larger question: is there a transcending order by which we can answer such a question? Psalm 8 said it well: "What is man that Thou art mindful of him?" Modern people have difficulty answering such questions because we have forgotten the classical notion of formal and final causes: the "formal cause" tells us WHAT something IS and the "final cause" tells us what it IS FOR. The modern mind is shaped by the "social imaginary" of the Immanent Frame, which has little concern for the meaningful transcendence of formal or final causes: the Thou is forgotten. Rather, human making and practicality or usefulness become the ultimate criteria of the goodness of a thing.
Finally, I am reminded of James K. A. Smith's trilogy on the shaping power of "cultural liturgies," e.g., the "liturgy of the mall," the "liturgy of the stadium," and so on ("you are what you love."). That is, our hearts and minds are shaped by larger tacit and background forces, of which we are often largely unaware, that draw us into their shaping ways. AI is like that. It can be a very useful tool in many situations, but it can be a destroying presence in many others. AI is taking on a powerful shaping power in our contemporary world, as we enter ever more into its "liturgy." Like any tool, or thing of human making, it has a place in God's overarching cosmos, but it also speaks the ancient lie: you shall be like gods. So, indeed, perhaps the most important question to address in our contemporary world is that of the Psalmist: "what, indeed, is man that Thou art mindful of him?" That mindfulness is not artificial, and it tells us what we are and what we are for. And how we are to use the ultimately God-given tools that human beings--image bears of the Thou--are given to make.
Fascinating, proactive, and disturbing article. It notes in passing the role of educators in putting the "forbidden fruit" of AI cheating well within reach.
When I was an undergraduate (class of '68) struggling with statistics, the professor graded all things on the curve, including homework. I informed him that many students were collaborating on homework that was assigned to be done individually, thus raising the curve and penalizing students like me who were working independently.
He acknowledged the dilemma and changed nothing in this regard, and I got the lowest grade in my college career for a course that ironically I actually used far more in my work than I ever thought I would.
How much will the AI skills used to cheat contribute to using these skills to succeed in the work world?
How much will this deprive people from developing their own ability to think critically, to become creative, and to have well-deserved confidence in their own judgment?
If both happen, how does that influence the definition of "success"?