In 2008, the Atlantic Ocean caused controversy with a provocative cover story: “Does Google make us stupid?”
In that essay of 4,000 words, later extended to a bookAuthor Nicholas Carr suggested that the answer was yes, with the argument that technology such as search engines deteriorated the ability of Americans to think deeply and retain knowledge deteriorated.
The core of Carr’s concern was the idea that people no longer had to remember or learn when they could visit them online immediately. While he is there can be a truth hereSearch engines still require users to use critical thinking Interpret and contextualize The results.
Fast forward to today, and an even deeper technological shift takes place. With the rise of generative AI tools such as Chatgpt, internet users cannot only be outsourced – they can outsource thinking themselves.
Generative AI tools do not only collect information; They can make, analyze and summarize it. This represents a fundamental shift: It is demonstrably generative AI The first technology that could replace human thinking and creativity.
That raises a critical question: does Chatgpt make us stupid?
As one Professor of Information Systems Who has been working with AI for more than two decades, I have looked at this transformation first -hand. And because many people are increasingly relinquishing cognitive tasks to AI, I think it is worth considering exactly what we are gaining and what we run the risk of losing.
AI and the Dunning-Kruger effect
Generative AI changes the way people gain access and processing information. For many, it replaces the need to compare sifts, to compare points of view and struggle with ambiguity. Instead, AI delivers clear, polished answers within a few seconds. While those results can be accurate or notThey are unmistakably efficient. This has already led Major changes In how we work and think.
But this convenience can entail costs. When people trust AI to complete tasks and think for them, they can weaken their ability to think critically, to solve complex problems and to go deep into information. Although research is limited on this point, passive consumption of intellectual curiosity content can be discouraged, reduce attention span and Create a dependence This limits cognitive development in the long term.
Consider better understanding this risk The Dunning-Kruka effect. This is the phenomenon in which people who are the least expert and competent are usually most confident in their capacities, because they do not know what they do not know. On the other hand, more competent people are usually less confident. This is often because they can recognize the complexity that they still have to control.
This framework can be applied to generative AI use. Some users can greatly rely on tools such as Chatgpt Replace their cognitive effortWhile others use it to improve their possibilities. In the first case, they can wrongly believe that they understand a subject because they can repeat content generated by AI. In this way, AI can artificially inflate someone’s observed intelligence and at the same time reduce cognitive efforts.
This creates a gap in how people use AI. Some remain stuck on the “Peak of Mount Stupid”Use AI as a replacement for creativity and thinking. Others use it to improve their existing cognitive possibilities.
In other words, what is important is not whether a person uses generative AI, but how. If used uncritically, chatgpt can lead to intellectual complacency. Users can accept the output without questioning assumptions, searching for alternative views or perform deeper analysis. But then used as helpIt can be a powerful tool to stimulate curiosity, generate ideas, to clarify complex topics and to provoke intellectual dialogue.
The difference between chatgpt makes us stupid or improving our possibilities is based on how we use it. Generative AI must be used to increase human intelligence, not to replace. That means the use of chatgpt to support research, not to cut it. It means treating AI reactions such as the beginning of thinking, not the end.
Ai, thinking and the future of work
The mass adoption of generative AI, led by the explosive rise of chatgpt (it reached 100 million users In my opinion, within two months after the release) left internet users at a crossroads. One path leads to intellectual decline: a world where we make AI think for us. The other offers a possibility: expanding our brain power by working together with AI, which uses its strength to improve ours.
That is often said AI does not accept your job, but someone who uses AI. But it seems clear to me that people who use AI to replace their own cognitive skills are stuck at the peak of Mount Stupid. These AI users will be easiest to replace.
It is those who take the increased approach to AI use that will reach the path of lighting, collaborate with AI to produce results that none of them can produce alone. The future of work will eventually go here.
This essay started with the question of whether Chatgpt will make us stupid, but I would like to end with another question: how will we use chatgpt to make us smarter? The answers to both questions do not depend on the tool but of users.
Aaron Frans is a assistant professor of information systems at Kennesaw State University.
This article has been re -published from The conversation Under a Creative Commons license. Read the Original article.
#Chatgpt #stupid #Depends