Over the last year, the number of articles and books emerging about artificial intelligence (AI) has exploded. Some issues have been raised particularly dealing with the matter of AI’s involvement in writing, creatively or otherwise. For me, this raised the matter of whether AI produced outcomes can offer a real opinion on a subject. After all, an opinion is a view or judgement not necessarily based solely on fact or current knowledge. In fact, in some of my blogs I may be expressing an opinion based on my background experiences and my past acquired knowledge base. Humans cannot avoid having some preconceived opinions which are often attributed to such factors as their history, education, socioeconomic status and culture. This is what makes opinions so much more interesting than merely providing an overview of information and data simply gathered from varying sources. Varying opinions among people are what makes debates so valuable and interesting since they provide opportunities to view issues from different perspectives.
In some fields, such as medicine, engineering and most sciences, AI can be very effective in providing an initial interpretation of potential causes and effects based solely on factual evidence. However, in the social sciences and literary fields from a creative point of view, I don’t see AI as being all that much useful. When it comes to problem solving and critical thinking, a lot of the needed information resides through engagement within our communities. Daron Acemoglu and Simon Johnson in their recent book, “Power and Progress”, note that our reasoning is primarily based on “social communication”. Decisions need to be made with the use of this social dimension of intelligence. With respect to many of today’s major issues, we often develop additional skills and capabilities based on our empathy for others and the consequential sharing of goals, values and objectives. You and I can appreciate this human need, but AI cannot.
In my opinion, there is little substitute for years of experience involving different situations and circumstances over one’s lifetime. Life-long skills are nurtured and opinions are developed which take into consideration a wide variety of influences. Sometimes, others come forward with different views and will influence one’s opinion on issues, greatly or in small ways. Indeed, in the face of good arguments, one will often be forced to soften or alter one’s views. This is not something that AI can really respond to.
Most importantly, the advent of hundreds of thousands of sources of information in the digitalization age, frequently including misinformation, will influence the use of AI and its accuracy. Humans on the other hand need to employ critical thinking skills to discern what information is based on reliable facts and is not information based solely on preconceived bias. This is not easy, and requires extensive research beyond what is contained in digitalized sites. For example, authors, so-called experts and researchers involved in socioeconomic fields can take years to consolidate their positions on most issues. From a community point of view, these positions are then often peer-reviewed as a means of validating the methodical approaches taken. AI cannot consistently and effectively do this. Whether the results of AI can satisfy such processes has yet to be determined — no easy matter.
In the meantime, I would suggest that bloggers like myself will continue to study and write according to our opinions formulated over decades of experiences and research. I prefer to provide a human perspective to many of the important issues and challenges we all face in our communities on a daily basis. After all, mine is but one of many existing opinions on these issues, largely intended to stimulate discussion and debate.
FROLITICKS 