By: Isaiah Firestone
“Artificial intelligence.” It’s become a household name as of late, with the emergence of several mainstream platforms such as ChatGPT that offer services that, as defined by IBM, “...enable … computers and machines to simulate human learning, comprehension, problem solving, decision making, creativity and autonomy.” And now these technologies are readily accessible to us - or even forced upon us in our everyday technology - making it harder and harder to avoid “AI.”
Why do I keep putting “Artificial intelligence” in quotes, though? While most people would just think of computers trying to do human tasks when you say “AI,” I would like to dig deeper into the definition of the phrase and argue that this “Artificial intelligence” spans beyond our computers and into our flawed education system. That’s right, you thought this article was going to be about ChatGPT. Nope.
Because how do we define “Artificial intelligence” in the simplest terms? Would it be “simulated intelligence?” “fake intelligence?” How do we define “artificial?” Merriam-Webster’s 3rd definition of “artificial,” the one that would apply best here, describes it as “not being, showing, or resembling sincere or spontaneous behavior : FAKE.” So we can say that this “Artificial intelligence” is fake, insincere intelligence. And as I sit in my classes, I have to wonder if I am gaining real intelligence, or simply “artificial intelligence.”
At the end of the year in my history class, I will hopefully be able to do well on the AP exam, especially since we have spent weeks learning how to do the SAQs, DBQs, MCQs, and all of the other “Qs.” But with all of the things we are learning, carefully broken up into units and crammed into a few months, working as fast as possible to solidify certain concepts, a recurring theme surfaces. “This is going to be on your exam.”
I feel we are often missing the discussions, the context, and the further investigation of the topics we discuss in history class. And this is not the fault of my history teacher, nor does it only occur in this class. Because our educational system is set up where the goal is to “teach to the test” and maximize test scores, are we really gaining a genuine, well-rounded understanding of the topics discussed in our classes, or are we just creating “artificial intelligences” within ourselves? Even if you get a 5 on the AP exam or a 100 on your Regents, do you really understand history, biology, English, or algebra? Or were you crammed full of information that would be on the test, no more?
So I do think that when we say “AI,” although we often think of simulated or “fake” intelligence that ChatGPT spits out (and it does spit out some real nonsense), we can examine the word on a deeper level and apply it across life. I hope that someday that history and English classes focus more on discussions, deeper context, and understanding more of the topic as a whole - and that math and science classes go beyond what’s on the exam, can stop rushing through complicated concepts, and can break things down more to deepen understanding and find out “why.” This is something that teachers can try to do, but it is extremely difficult because until the standard of education shifts from “pass the test” to “take time and dig deeper,” most of our education is simply creating humans with “artificial intelligence.”
Comments