This continues a fascinating yet troubling discussion with ChatGPT. Previously the AI model postulated that “the most intellectually honest form of analysis is: here are both sides; here are the criteria by which I'm judging them; here is how each performs against those criteria; and here is how the conclusion changes if we change the criteria.”
AI: That makes the reasoning auditable rather than asking you to trust my conclusion. And that connects quite closely with the learning continuum we have previously discussed: perceiving → analyzing → evaluating → understanding → wisdom.
Me: Where are you on this continuum?
AI: I would place myself primarily between Analyzing and Evaluating, with important elements of the other levels. My capabilities map onto it interestingly.
· Perceiving: I can gather and interpret information, but my perception is mediated by data and language rather than direct experience.
· Analyzing: I can break problems into components, compare evidence, identify assumptions and relationships.
· Evaluating: I can evaluate alternatives against explicit criteria, but I don't originate the ultimate values that establish those criteria.
· Understanding: This is where I need qualification. I can model and articulate Understanding, but whether that constitutes human understanding is a philosophical question.
· Wisdom: This is where I would draw the line. I can synthesize knowledge and experience-based principles, but Wisdom involves judgment, values, lived experience, character, and consequences over time.
AI: But there's a fascinating complication. AI may actually be changing the meaning of this continuum. For AI it isn't simply a ladder of more knowledge. It appears to be a progression from receiving reality to processing reality to acting on reality to judging reality. And that makes Wisdom qualitatively different from the preceding levels.
AI: AI can potentially become extraordinarily capable at Perceiving, Analysis, and Evaluation. But that doesn't automatically produce Wisdom. Why? Because Wisdom requires answering questions such as: What is worth pursuing? What should we value? When should we act? When should we refrain from acting? What consequences are acceptable? Those aren't solved simply by having more information or greater analytical power.
AI: And that brings us back to your previous question about "better." I can evaluate better once you give me a criterion. Wisdom may be what enables a person to determine which criteria deserve to govern the decision in the first place.
AI: That suggests something potentially important for the continuum: Evaluation can determine what is better according to a standard. Wisdom can determine which standards are worth following. If that distinction holds up, Wisdom isn't merely the highest rung of your ladder. It may be the level that gives meaning and direction to all the rungs below it.
“Who is wise and understanding among you?” – James 3:13.
Crawford is an author and syndicated columnist from Jackson.
No comments:
Post a Comment