Excerpt: "Most universities are currently engaged in discussions about the possible negative and positive impacts of AI content generation on the classroom. People weigh in on both sides, some seeing it as a tool to help students self-critique, while others see it facilitating cheating or depriving students of crucial fundamental writing and thinking skills. All are concerned about the fact that generated content can convincingly represent lies as truth.
The idea of the Turing test—can a machine deceive you into believing it is human?—will ever haunt us, but we must remember that the test is not of the machine but of the human. Can we be deceived, or will we soon note the absence of a distinct human voice in the digital conversation? Have we come to know another well enough to read his or her soul—or note its absence—between the texted lines of a crowdsourced appropriation?
If we allow a machine to write for us, we bypass the chance to grow through writing, which, in its most glorious moments, can be a kind of revelation. Sometimes, especially when we are writing journal entries for our own reading, or letters or talks to move others, we may find ourselves following a train of thought that is not of our own making, one that leads to a better place where we learn new truth. This thoughtful, creative mode of writ- ing trades prompts for promptings, and rather than being relieved of an onerous task, we instead find ourselves trans- formed through writing that can, and does, change our very souls.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment