I have to commend you on a deeply insightful, well-written, and fantastic article! I will have to read it multiple times to soak in the MANY nuggets of wisdom and contemplate and reflect more on your article!
Thank you for writing, sharing, and providing thought-provoking perspectives on the subject - much appreciated!
We also muddle through, build new gatekeepers, inherit new blind spots and occasionally get eaten by the lions 😂 That feels much closer to how humans really work.
I really loved this! I think this is one of the more persuasive versions of the “we’ve lived through technological revolutions before” argument, because you aren’t claiming that the technologies or their risks are equivalent. You’re pointing to the thing that persists across them: humans adapt. The informational habitat changes, and culture updates the heuristics we use to navigate it.
What I kept thinking about is that adaptation may not only be defensive. AI makes it easier to create convincing lies and illusions, but it also gives many more people the ability to check a claim, challenge an authority and participate in conversations that were previously gated. Our cognitive style may change without simply declining. We may exercise some capacities less while developing others that better fit the new terrain.
That is also why I’m not fully convinced by the most deterministic versions of the cognitive atrophy argument. Humans seem deeply motivated to participate, connect and use our minds in ways that feel fulfilling. That doesn’t guarantee that we will adapt well, and I really liked your distinction between merely surviving and flourishing. But I do think we need to leave more room for human adaptability, including our ability to find new reasons and new ways to think.
I’m so happy this one resonated with you. I strongly agree with your assessment of the opportunity this particular tool presents in terms of critical thinking support, with the usual caveat that equality of access matters. I also think concerns about cognitive atrophy conflate how we think with how we talk about our thinking—admittedly difficult to decouple. The risk of language flattening is real and a subject of serious study already, and Orwell’s observations about the set phrase as a stand in for considered judgement are as relevant as ever—but conscious cognition precedes language. What a time to be alive!
This piece totally got me thinking, your insight on balancing state power to curb capitalism with AI deepfake regulation is brilliant for our social cohesio.
👏👏❤️🙏
I have to commend you on a deeply insightful, well-written, and fantastic article! I will have to read it multiple times to soak in the MANY nuggets of wisdom and contemplate and reflect more on your article!
Thank you for writing, sharing, and providing thought-provoking perspectives on the subject - much appreciated!
Thank you for the kind words. Having read your comments and essays, I’m all the more grateful.
“humans always adapt”
Yes, we do.
We also muddle through, build new gatekeepers, inherit new blind spots and occasionally get eaten by the lions 😂 That feels much closer to how humans really work.
I really loved this! I think this is one of the more persuasive versions of the “we’ve lived through technological revolutions before” argument, because you aren’t claiming that the technologies or their risks are equivalent. You’re pointing to the thing that persists across them: humans adapt. The informational habitat changes, and culture updates the heuristics we use to navigate it.
What I kept thinking about is that adaptation may not only be defensive. AI makes it easier to create convincing lies and illusions, but it also gives many more people the ability to check a claim, challenge an authority and participate in conversations that were previously gated. Our cognitive style may change without simply declining. We may exercise some capacities less while developing others that better fit the new terrain.
That is also why I’m not fully convinced by the most deterministic versions of the cognitive atrophy argument. Humans seem deeply motivated to participate, connect and use our minds in ways that feel fulfilling. That doesn’t guarantee that we will adapt well, and I really liked your distinction between merely surviving and flourishing. But I do think we need to leave more room for human adaptability, including our ability to find new reasons and new ways to think.
I’m so happy this one resonated with you. I strongly agree with your assessment of the opportunity this particular tool presents in terms of critical thinking support, with the usual caveat that equality of access matters. I also think concerns about cognitive atrophy conflate how we think with how we talk about our thinking—admittedly difficult to decouple. The risk of language flattening is real and a subject of serious study already, and Orwell’s observations about the set phrase as a stand in for considered judgement are as relevant as ever—but conscious cognition precedes language. What a time to be alive!
I often say we are in an odd, in between, era. It’ll pass but I think it will be painful.
I love a historical precedent. My other mantra, the tech changes, the humans stay the same.
It’s all about gatekeeping control and power, bad actors being bad, etc.
my hope is the white hats help shape this round, sooner rather than later
This piece totally got me thinking, your insight on balancing state power to curb capitalism with AI deepfake regulation is brilliant for our social cohesio.