AI can generate content, but human expertise offers something irreplaceable: authentic insight rooted in experience, judgment, and accountability. Here's what that means for academics.
I like the idea of AI as "Authentic Insight." We could do with less "artificiality" in this world and more human authenticity, empathy, compassion, and conscientiousness. I'm not convinced that a computer program such as AI can display any of those human qualities, so essentially it's just another tool that's without a soul. Just look at the use of AI programs and drones in Gaza to track down and murder whole families without remorse. The humans who programmed the AI and drones probably are sociopaths, but why do we need to augment their sociopathy with more "intelligence," artificial or otherwise? We need more humanity, not less humanity in the world.
This article really captures what makes human expertise special in an age where AI can produce so much information easily. AI is great at generating content quickly, but it lacks the personal experience, judgment, and accountability that humans bring, things that matter a lot when communicating complex ideas. At ARCQ AI, we believe AI should be seen as a tool that supports and enhances human creativity and insight, not replaces it. This piece is a thoughtful reminder that authentic human voices remain invaluable, especially in fields like academia where original thinking and trust are key.
I like the three dimensions you've articulated, and I'd offer a fourth: "Purpose," or simply (and unsentimentally) "love." Artificial intelligence doesn't care about the reader, or the topic, or anything at all. Human writers do. The reason why you write, and the care you take with the details, and the words you choose that make the information accessible to your audience, are all aspects of love. (Yeah, there are other human purposes we could name, too -- greed, self-aggrandizement, retribution -- but I'm going for the fourth positive dimension of academic integrity. AI can't do the other purposes, either, though.)
I found your essay very thought provoking, especially the overlap between your list of ongoing questions and mine.
I am not an AI expert... more of an AI-curious software engineer. I've been tinkering with ChatGPT for several months now... peeking under the hood to learn how it works. There's a lot of hype about "emergent" intelligence that I am skeptical about. I find the sycophancy a bit annoying at times -- sorry, but not every question I ask it is "excellent" or "insightful", despite what it tells me. However, having a clear picture of the weaknesses and the caveats has helped me to leverage it as tool, while not deferring to its "expertise."
I see my friend, Linda, has mentioned my latest essay. If you find it helpful in any way, I have a few others on my SubStack that document what I have been exploring and learning about AI -- some of which may lend some perspective.
Thank you for the amazing work that you do. I'm so glad that Mike Madrid brought you into my sphere of awareness.
I also appreciate your Authentic Insight concept, the idea of public scholars being the middle ground between aggregate impersonal artificial intelligence and popular influencers who are not necessarily anchored in data driven knowledge.
It is an important function of our communities that we have people able to communicate data driven information in a real and tangible way to the public.
Humans develop their personality and thought patterns from their experiences, attachments, friendships, worries, trials, and tribulations from their infancy and youth, developing the perspectives and value systems that ground us.
Artificial Intelligence is still in its formative years. How we parent and provide experience for AI is of paramount importance as it trains and matures to AGI. I believe we must have a diversity of “parents” shaping it.
My online friend Jim North (another fan like me from Mike Madrid’s Great Transformation) just wrote a great substack explaining the perspectives of different researchers on the forefront of AGI development- well worth the read! It’s entitled The Third Path to Machine Intelligence.
Rupert Cocke also wrote recently on Substack (How Will People Misuse ChatGPT) asking for thoughts on misinformation and AI. He is a Bayesian philosopher who is also a financial journalist in Spain. I think you two would also enjoy exchanging thoughts on this.
I don’t see how AI could be used in creative writing. As a mystery writer or any fiction writer, it’s all about creativity, the story in your head. When I’m deep into writing, I visualize scenes with character dialogue. There’s a real connection between the writer and reader in a good story. You lose yourself in that world. Could AI do that? I image AI as the voice Hal in 2001: A Space Odyssey.😂
I like the idea of AI as "Authentic Insight." We could do with less "artificiality" in this world and more human authenticity, empathy, compassion, and conscientiousness. I'm not convinced that a computer program such as AI can display any of those human qualities, so essentially it's just another tool that's without a soul. Just look at the use of AI programs and drones in Gaza to track down and murder whole families without remorse. The humans who programmed the AI and drones probably are sociopaths, but why do we need to augment their sociopathy with more "intelligence," artificial or otherwise? We need more humanity, not less humanity in the world.
AMEN to that
This article really captures what makes human expertise special in an age where AI can produce so much information easily. AI is great at generating content quickly, but it lacks the personal experience, judgment, and accountability that humans bring, things that matter a lot when communicating complex ideas. At ARCQ AI, we believe AI should be seen as a tool that supports and enhances human creativity and insight, not replaces it. This piece is a thoughtful reminder that authentic human voices remain invaluable, especially in fields like academia where original thinking and trust are key.
https://arcq.ai/
I like the three dimensions you've articulated, and I'd offer a fourth: "Purpose," or simply (and unsentimentally) "love." Artificial intelligence doesn't care about the reader, or the topic, or anything at all. Human writers do. The reason why you write, and the care you take with the details, and the words you choose that make the information accessible to your audience, are all aspects of love. (Yeah, there are other human purposes we could name, too -- greed, self-aggrandizement, retribution -- but I'm going for the fourth positive dimension of academic integrity. AI can't do the other purposes, either, though.)
Ohh I like that, I’ll borrow with attribution :)
Happy to share. And it puts me in mind of these two books:
Virtues of the Mind by Linda Zagzebski & The Body in Pain by Elaine Scarry. Do you know them too?
I found your essay very thought provoking, especially the overlap between your list of ongoing questions and mine.
I am not an AI expert... more of an AI-curious software engineer. I've been tinkering with ChatGPT for several months now... peeking under the hood to learn how it works. There's a lot of hype about "emergent" intelligence that I am skeptical about. I find the sycophancy a bit annoying at times -- sorry, but not every question I ask it is "excellent" or "insightful", despite what it tells me. However, having a clear picture of the weaknesses and the caveats has helped me to leverage it as tool, while not deferring to its "expertise."
I see my friend, Linda, has mentioned my latest essay. If you find it helpful in any way, I have a few others on my SubStack that document what I have been exploring and learning about AI -- some of which may lend some perspective.
Thank you for the amazing work that you do. I'm so glad that Mike Madrid brought you into my sphere of awareness.
Thanks so much, Jim, I appreciate the conversation enormously. I totally agree with using it as a tool without devolving into tech worship.
I also appreciate your Authentic Insight concept, the idea of public scholars being the middle ground between aggregate impersonal artificial intelligence and popular influencers who are not necessarily anchored in data driven knowledge.
It is an important function of our communities that we have people able to communicate data driven information in a real and tangible way to the public.
Humans develop their personality and thought patterns from their experiences, attachments, friendships, worries, trials, and tribulations from their infancy and youth, developing the perspectives and value systems that ground us.
Artificial Intelligence is still in its formative years. How we parent and provide experience for AI is of paramount importance as it trains and matures to AGI. I believe we must have a diversity of “parents” shaping it.
My online friend Jim North (another fan like me from Mike Madrid’s Great Transformation) just wrote a great substack explaining the perspectives of different researchers on the forefront of AGI development- well worth the read! It’s entitled The Third Path to Machine Intelligence.
Rupert Cocke also wrote recently on Substack (How Will People Misuse ChatGPT) asking for thoughts on misinformation and AI. He is a Bayesian philosopher who is also a financial journalist in Spain. I think you two would also enjoy exchanging thoughts on this.
Thank you for the thought provoking article!
I don’t see how AI could be used in creative writing. As a mystery writer or any fiction writer, it’s all about creativity, the story in your head. When I’m deep into writing, I visualize scenes with character dialogue. There’s a real connection between the writer and reader in a good story. You lose yourself in that world. Could AI do that? I image AI as the voice Hal in 2001: A Space Odyssey.😂