It is a physiological matter today, glimpsing the posthuman knocking at the doors of transhumanism, to wonder whether new artificial intelligences are progressively gaining the ability to supplant humans in the creative production and in performing tasks and duties related to education. There is a proliferation of generative AI systems intended for creative writing, and it is practically obvious that progressively such tools will compete with the very users who choose to use them, they will condition their environment and future; with foresight, it is not difficult to predict that entire categories will be profoundly revolutionized by the use of these tools. The issue of AI-related creative writing is not only altering the paradigm of content generation, but also that of content fruition, especially in relation to the world of education and the ways in which GenAI-like systems based on GPT models-position themselves with respect to learning. It is easy to see the great potential within AI when interpreting it as a study support tool, especially in the performance of assignments, schoolwork, research, etc. It is equally easy, however, to recognize it as more of a problem-solving approach than an indicative one, which warns against improper, exaggerated, substitute uses of personal effort. Generative AI shifts to being «from a source of knowledge to a learning partner» along the lines of that full meaning of partner that includes the element of trust-trust, reliance. But to commit education to AI is to take the subject away from education itself, to cease to be accountable for its own education. Federico Cabitza speaks of this in the terms of «epistemic sclerosis»: a process of progressive deresponsibilization with respect to one's tasks (and the quality of their performance) due to a blind reliance on the machine (by extension, also software) as a precise and instantaneous performer. With this work, conducted on the ethical-philosophical level but never losing sight (even technically) of GenAI's declinations and potential repercussions in the world of education, we intend to deal with the issues proposed so far and identify certain phenomena that require attention: a certain process of de-accountability that leads to deskilling and severely compromises the formation and circulation of knowledge within human cultural networks; the centralization of knowledge and culture, being relegated to the technomedial infosphere; etc. From a methodological standpoint, the study is comparative and will aim at a brief analysis of contexts and uses, and then draw predictions and identify ethical resolutions. Within this potential dystopian framework of cognitive disempowerment, knowledge depletion, and withdrawal from education, there are elements of positivity in the adoption of AI-based tools within the personal education and education environment, but they must be carefully evaluated from an ethical perspective, and they need to be sufficiently regulated so that their use is not indiscriminate.
GenAI and creative-cognitive depletion: an ethical issue. Use and abuse of generative AI in the field of culture and education.
Emanuele Fulvio Perri
2024-01-01
Abstract
It is a physiological matter today, glimpsing the posthuman knocking at the doors of transhumanism, to wonder whether new artificial intelligences are progressively gaining the ability to supplant humans in the creative production and in performing tasks and duties related to education. There is a proliferation of generative AI systems intended for creative writing, and it is practically obvious that progressively such tools will compete with the very users who choose to use them, they will condition their environment and future; with foresight, it is not difficult to predict that entire categories will be profoundly revolutionized by the use of these tools. The issue of AI-related creative writing is not only altering the paradigm of content generation, but also that of content fruition, especially in relation to the world of education and the ways in which GenAI-like systems based on GPT models-position themselves with respect to learning. It is easy to see the great potential within AI when interpreting it as a study support tool, especially in the performance of assignments, schoolwork, research, etc. It is equally easy, however, to recognize it as more of a problem-solving approach than an indicative one, which warns against improper, exaggerated, substitute uses of personal effort. Generative AI shifts to being «from a source of knowledge to a learning partner» along the lines of that full meaning of partner that includes the element of trust-trust, reliance. But to commit education to AI is to take the subject away from education itself, to cease to be accountable for its own education. Federico Cabitza speaks of this in the terms of «epistemic sclerosis»: a process of progressive deresponsibilization with respect to one's tasks (and the quality of their performance) due to a blind reliance on the machine (by extension, also software) as a precise and instantaneous performer. With this work, conducted on the ethical-philosophical level but never losing sight (even technically) of GenAI's declinations and potential repercussions in the world of education, we intend to deal with the issues proposed so far and identify certain phenomena that require attention: a certain process of de-accountability that leads to deskilling and severely compromises the formation and circulation of knowledge within human cultural networks; the centralization of knowledge and culture, being relegated to the technomedial infosphere; etc. From a methodological standpoint, the study is comparative and will aim at a brief analysis of contexts and uses, and then draw predictions and identify ethical resolutions. Within this potential dystopian framework of cognitive disempowerment, knowledge depletion, and withdrawal from education, there are elements of positivity in the adoption of AI-based tools within the personal education and education environment, but they must be carefully evaluated from an ethical perspective, and they need to be sufficiently regulated so that their use is not indiscriminate.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
