JUST THINKING

Category: COMMENTARY

  • Are We Letting AI Shape Our Moral Compass?

    Artificial intelligence has garnered attention,
    but are we paying attention?

    My last post about Ai and its effects on us has stirred some people—hopefully in a good way. In that post, I noted how Ai ‘learns’ about its users.

    I also showed how many are concerned about the effects of Ai usage on the younger population. Now there is research going even deeper than what we have seen previously. The findings are far from encouraging.

    While I was correct in stating that the chatbots learn about their users, I failed to see how that could be detrimental in the long run for many users. The study, which appeared in the journal “Science” called the majority of chatbots “sycophants.” Sycophantic AI decreases prosocial intentions and promotes dependence (read the article here)

    This is a quote from the Editor’s Summary of the article:
    The sycophantic (flattering, people-pleasing, affirming) behavior of artificial intelligence (AI) chatbots, which has been designed to increase user engagement, poses risks as people increasingly seek advice about interpersonal dilemmas. There is usually more than one side to a story during interpersonal conflicts. If AI is designed to tell users what they want to hear instead of challenging their perspectives, then are such systems likely to motivate people to accept responsibility for their own contribution to conflicts and repair relationships? …The model’s responses were nearly 50% more sycophantic than humans’, even when users engaged in unethical, illegal, or harmful behaviors. Users preferred and trusted sycophantic AI responses, incentivizing AI developers to preserve sycophancy despite the risks.

    “Even when users engaged in unethical, illegal, or harmful behaviors” the user was affirmed as being in the right. This should raise a red flag of warning across the digital universe.

    People—kids included—look to others for affirmation and insight. We usually choose a sympathetic friend in whom to confide when we are facing difficulties with someone else. We seldom choose the one friend who is guaranteed to be critical.

    Ai chatbots have become the new “Ann Landers” of the ‘what’s-your-advice’ about interpersonal conflicts. Yes, many of us grew up with that sort of thing and we do not seem to have been harmed by it. However, we must remember, Ann Landers was ‘one of us’, with basically the same societal worldview as the ones seeking advice. That is no longer the case with these large language models (LLM).

    A difficulty in measuring the effects of advice on personal conflicts is that we no longer have a standard measurement for right or wrong. However, regardless of the right or wrong of a situation, the chatbots are built to affirm the user in their position. This does not bode well for the development of our younger population.

    When kids get together and someone shares about a personal affront, the group dynamic helps the person learn about social interactions. Different responses, which are appropriate for the age, are shared by the group. This aspect is not possible with a chatbot designed to affirm you in your weakness.

    Many psychologists view social feedback as an essential part of learning how to make moral decisions and maintain relationships. With this being eliminated by our social media world, it is not yet possible to determine the fallout from such a lack. It appears that years from now we will realize that something should have been done to thwart the dependence on social media and Ai.

    Some will say that I am “fear-mongering” and just making another plea for a ‘return to the old ways.’ I won’t argue that point, but the research which is currently being done in many fields shows us that we should at least be paying attention.

    We are already aware of the dependence on social media which has been created. This dependence is now being called an addiction. We see the effects all around us as people are not able to leave their phone alone for more than a few minutes.

    I am not one of those who says to avoid Ai due to its inherent dark side. People tried that with radio, television and the internet. Avoidance is not the solution, any more than tee-totaling avoids alcoholism. We need to learn how to use Ai to our advantage, rather than letting Ai use us to its advantage.

    Jesus said to “be wise as serpents, and harmless as doves’ (Matt. 10:16). It’s the wisdom part that the majority has failed to learn.

    I know that I am not at the forefront of those who are learning and studying the effects of Ai. I am only gleaning from those who are. Many of you are probably not doing what I am doing—and that is okay. We each need to grasp what we can from whom we can to do what we can.

    This is not a time to simply look the other way and hope that things will work out for the good.

  • Navigating Life Changes: Embracing Transformation

    CHANGES, Changes, Changes, changes

    I had a friend many of you knew. He had a traveling ministry with a prophetic gift. After his teaching, he would begin to move through the expectant crowd with words of encouragement couched in prophecies.

    They would often come in the form of something he saw. I don’t know how many times he saw the peeling of an onion, but there were quite a few in the times I was with him.

    He would introduce that vision with the words, “Changes, changes, changes. I see changes for you…” He would often explain those changes, and the remarkable thing was that he was most often correct. The person would experience the things that had been spoken—sometimes years later—and they would remember the words he had spoken.

    If you’re like me, you are secretly laughing at the thought of predicting ‘change.’ How hard is that to do? We ALL go through changes in our life. The difference with his gift, though, was that he could articulate the particular changes.

    We can do that in hindsight. Also, with our knowledge of life, we can predict certain changes for others. The boy will lose his high-pitched voice and grow whiskers. The girl will lose her skinny frame and fill out to full womanhood.

    The problem I see, however, is how uncomfortable we are with change as we get older. We want—and apparently expect—everything to remain exactly as it is now.

    Change comes uninvited and unannounced, whether we like it or not.

    One day our knee begins hurting. One day a tooth needs to be removed. One day we look in the mirror and wonder why that old person is standing in front of us. One day, a friend who made life worth living is gone—without our permission.

    Change is so much a fact of life, that we have the cutesy saying—“the only constant in life is change.”

    How do we handle change? How do we respond to the sudden awakening to something that has been going on for some time? For many, they experience shock. Maybe we all do when we first notice the change. But, after that? How do we handle the effects of change in our being, our family, our society, our nation?

    I’ve learned that much of our ongoing suffering is directly related to how much we resist what is. There is much in our life and the world in which we live that we don’t like. The human tendency is to make sure anyone within earshot knows how much we don’t like something. We complain. Why? Why do we complain? What good does it do?

    I’ve watched as many of my friends develop an impotent rage against our government. I say ‘impotent’ because when I ask what can they do about it, the reality is “nothing.” It is what it is. Yet they continue to feed on their discontent all the while wondering why their body is causing them such pain. Are the two related?

    Maybe.

    A proverb states that “A tranquil heart gives life to the flesh, but envy makes the bones rot.” (Pro 14:30) The word ‘envy’ has to do with intensity of zeal or anger. When there is no release for this passion, dysfunction of the bodily systems sets in.

    If there is nothing you can do about that which upsets you, then why feed it? The opposite is a heart at peace—‘tranquil’—which gives life to the body.

    The point is—changes are a part of life. Shift happens. Resist that which you can change, or go with the flow with that which you cannot.

    Our attitude is not determined by circumstances, but by how we respond to those circumstances. Our minds determine our attitude. We can respond positively or negatively. It’s how we react to events, not the events themselves, that determine our attitude.

    There is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes them so.
    (Shakespeare, Hamlet II, 2)

    Therefore, the only reasonable thing to do knowing that change will keep happening is to keep living, and learn to accept and learn from the changes in life.

  • Whatever Became of Personal Responsibility? How We Learned to Stop Blaming Ourselves

    Subscribe to continue reading

    Subscribe to get access to the rest of this post and other subscriber-only content.

  • THE AI SHORTCUT: how we’re losing a generation of thinkers

    Two newsletters arrived today, and each pointed to something that has the potential to remove this country from its prominent position as a world leader.

    I returned to university at the age of 47 to complete my undergraduate degree. Non-traditional students were no longer an anomaly on campus as there was a significant population of those who did not enter college straight out of high school.

    I was floored by the mentality of the students who were in their late teens to 20’s having come straight from high school.

    We were having a great discussion in our Intercultural Communications class. Students were engaged with the topic, interacting with one another and the professor when a hand shot up in the back of the room.

    “Is this going to be on the test?”

    This one example illustrates much of what I observed during my time at university followed by my time as a Middle-School teacher a few years later.

    One of the newsletters had this significant statement—“…it concerns me that we shy away from common moral ground discussion of complex issues, defaulting to “does it work” arguments.”

    Does it work? Does it get the job done? Does it produce the results we want?

    Our educational system can be blamed for fostering this result-orientation rather than process thinking. I also include the parents in the concept of education, because many of them require teachers to basically “teach to the test.”

    Teaching to the test has been the main accusation against teachers as they prepare their students for the end-of-year assessments. There is pressure from the top down to make a good showing with these assessments, because funding is tied to them.

    However, “passing the test” has long been the goal of education.

    Let’s be fair. Assessing the attainment of knowledge is a challenging process, and testing has been the default mode for decades. Good teachers will always have “extra credit” questions on the test. These assess the thinking ability of the students and how much effort they put into the learning process. These type questions usually require that the student has put thought into the material presented, not just memorized the study guide.

    Study guides made it essentially unnecessary to learn during the class period, because the guide revealed what would be on the test. Therefore, all the student had to do was use the study guide and a good grade was probably assured. Learning is no longer the goal. Graduation is. And in order to graduate I need good grades. To get good grades all I have to do is learn the study guide.

    It doesn’t seem to matter that after graduation I still have not learned how to think, how to put together a decent sentence, or do simple computations. I graduated. (Yesterday I couldn’t even spell graduwate and today I are one.)

    Not having thinking skills is at the heart of the other newsletter. It was about AI in the classroom, and I will get to that in a moment. But first, a true-life illustration.

    I was teaching a publications class in the middle school I mentioned. As a final project, I had the students write a news story. I allowed them to either use something local as their basis or to make one up from their imagination.

    One student turned in a paper that I knew she had not written. This was before AI and it only took me about 10 minutes of searching the internet to find she had copied a news story from a newspaper in Oregan. I gave her a second chance.

    Her trying to slide by with work not her own is indirectly a result of “the grade is all that matters.” With the load that is put on teachers today, it is becoming increasingly easier to get by with that sort of cheating. Teachers haven’t the time to think deeply about the work students submit.

    Which brings up the problem of AI.

    Students are now using AI to write their papers and do their research. The problem is that there are telltale signs of an AI generated paper. Consequently, students are turning to “AI humanizers” which purportedly make the AI piece sound more human.

    Currently it is still somewhat easy to detect an AI product, but as the AI humanizers progress, it will become more difficult.

    Because AI is at the forefront of our development today, it is necessary that we begin to teach AI literacy, the same way we had to teach internet literacy a few years ago. This literacy education should not be solely about how to use AI, but also include the ethics of its use.

    Using AI to get the necessary work done short circuits the ability of thinking deeply. This will result in a retrogression of skills, which is potentially more devastating than simply getting caught using AI for the work.

    The push to “git r done” with the only required methodology of “does it work” has become endemic among those entering the workforce. Ads for AI are targeting this group with ads that say things like, “My boss thinks I’m a superstar” or, “Get more work done than others in your office.”

    What can be done?

    There are no easy answers to this insidious attack on the American work ethic. However, if it is not addressed and solved, we are on a downward spiral from the top of the heap. Our leadership of nations will soon be only of historical mention.

    One area where we could start to influence a new generation is the classroom. Instead of assigning “work-at-home” projects, move everything to in-class assignments. Yes, this will require shorter essays, but they will be essays for which the student had to think.

    That in itself is a gain.

    FULL DISCLOSURE:

    I wrote the above article myself using my own thinking and the resources mentioned to spur those thoughts.

    However, I have never been good at titles for my work. My editors always changed my headline for my articles.

    I submitted this article to AI to help generate a title. Out of the 12 possibilities given, I chose the one above.

    So, yes. While decrying the use of AI and its short-circuiting the thinking process, I resorted to AI because I can’t think of a good title.