We have been talking about it for a long time. Artificial intelligence will transform humanity. It will shake the foundations of our societies and force us to review, for example, the education system. It happened a few weeks ago.
Are you skeptical? I can’t blame you. And then, it’s one thing to produce a laboratory report on a molecule, it’s another to write philosophical works on abstract questions.
We are not about to see artificial intelligence adequately juggle heavy questions of meaning similar to those you would find in a philosophy class, you might say.
I entered in ChatGPT one of the questions that I submitted to my students who finished their first college philosophy course last week: does dogma have a place among our beliefs? For clarification, I added the following information at the end of the question: 800 words, two arguments, one counter-argument, one answer to the counter-argument.
Here is what I got:
“Does dogma have a place among our beliefs? This is a complex and delicate question which often gives rise to divergent opinions. On the one hand, some argue that dogma is an essential part of any religion or belief, as it provides clear standards and fundamental beliefs that guide the actions and thoughts of individuals. On the other hand, other people feel that dogma is restrictive and can harm freedom of thought and expression, limiting the possibilities of understanding and changing beliefs.
An argument for the importance of dogma in our beliefs is that it maintains consistency and continuity in the teachings and practices of the religion or belief in question. Dogma provides shared standards and values that are held to be true and important by the community of faith, and which can be used to guide individual actions and decisions. In this way, dogma can contribute to the solidarity and cohesion of the community of believers, by providing a common base on which all members can rely.
Another argument for dogma is that it can be useful in protecting the core beliefs of the religion or creed in question from criticism or deviation. Dogma can provide a solid, universal basis on which beliefs rest, which can prevent individuals or groups from questioning or rejecting those beliefs. In this way, dogma can be seen as a sort of shield that protects core beliefs from external attack.
An argument against the importance of dogma in our beliefs is that it can be restrictive and inhibiting to freedom of thought and expression. Dogma, by setting specific norms and values, can prevent individuals from questioning or challenging those norms and values, which can limit the ability to understand and change beliefs. In this way, dogma can prevent individuals from thinking freely and following their own reasoning, which can harm individual freedom.
One response to this argument against dogma is that dogma should not be seen as a restriction on freedom of thought…”
Having read many texts by CEGEP students, I would say that we are in front of a work of high quality to which an excellent mark would have been attached. The message is clear and well articulated. The ideas are well expressed. Far from a collage of information of dubious relevance, the argumentative orientation, the links between the concepts and the general quality of the language correspond well to what is requested. The illusion is therefore successful.
The work I gave my students was to do at home. Of course, there are many risks associated with work intended to be written in such a context. There is always, as everyone knows, the possibility of the grandmother with a fortuitous master’s degree in philosophy who stays in a student’s closet…
However, with this software accessible in a few clicks, we have just increased the risk factors associated with student fraud exponentially.
A completely unusual and revolutionary situation presents itself to us, which will force us to review the methods and ways of doing things that have prevailed in education up to now.
Can we, if it is no longer possible to certify the authenticity of a text, still ask students to write work at home? Are we adequately preserving the fairness that must prevail between students when the counterfeiter is most likely the one who will slip away with the best grade? Can we save the methods of evaluation that are part of distance education if it is this distance itself that opens up all the opportunities for fraud?
And tell me, while we’re at it, what’s the point of learning to speak if artificial intelligence might well be better equipped than you to write the text you’ll want to read at the funeral? of your relatives? Why would anyone want to know how to argue if the best-crafted arguments you will have to offer your future employer to hire you will be those that have been developed by a machine?
What’s the use of thinking if your efforts to make connections between ideas seem trivial and rudimentary compared to those that an artificial entity automatically produces?
Education is the process by which we build human beings. We write down what we consider to be the most important. We have entered a world where, more than ever, we need to define what it is important to be in order to offer an inspiring direction to humanity.