AI has already begun the division of mankind. There will be those that think it is the greatest human breakthrough in man's history. Others will see it as threat to cognitive thinking. Why do any research on any subject when you can be lazy and have a program do it for you. The problem is, First, it is a program, that has built in bias from those that wrote it base code. Secondly it's learning will be from the information on the internet which we know is not always true. Thirdly, information accessed on the internet is controlled by the search engines that have the ability to censor information.
We see AI being used to create false information like videos, and used to harm those they do not agree with, after all if you see it it must be true. A resent example is Hobby Lobby who's owners claim to be Christians and incorporate their moral values in their business. An AI generated video on TikTok shows the store with Baphomet statues for sale. The creator stated that they would have done a better job if they knew it would go viral. The only reason to do this is to confuse their customers and perhaps start a boycott of the business and this is just the beginning. It will be in used this way in corporate, religion, politics, government etc to either confuse or control the narrative with no one to be held responsible...AI did it! With over 70 years of observing mankind and technology, I am leaning more toward the philosophy that recent tech advancements are first designed for control over mankind under the guise of convenience and cool stuff. It seems to follow the philosophy or ideology of Trans-humanism. Some how man is not good enough so we must evolve him with technologies that the few create, control and maintain. While not all words ending in "ism" have bad or destructive actions, there is some thing in common with words that end in "ism"...communism, satanism, fascism, and socialism that are a few ideologies that has proven to suppress mankind inherent freedoms...of course if is always for the betterment of mankind, Right?
It really depends on whether cognitive thinking developed as an adaptive mechanism required for survival or if it's driven by a higher-order motivation. In other words, do with think to survive or do we think because we have an urge to think? AI may remove the need to think to survive, but if we still have the desire to think, we will continue to do so, albeit with different goals in mind.
I hope that AI will remove the necessitate for robotic, formulaic and predictable thinking. It'll be hard to face it, but we will have to find what it is that makes us human. It's not obvious, but the answer to this question is well overdue.
Andrey: I propose that we think because we are, and the answer to whether or not AI will be the death of cognitive thinking may not be a simple one. AI may make many things easier, but will give us a lot to think about.
I think It will fuel cognitive thinking because we will still have to think to survive. We will have to think of what to ask AI. We will have to think how to use the response received. We will have to think about how to use AI in our personal and professional lives.
We may well be empowered to think on a higher plane or with a higher-order motivation as you propose. That is, if the machines will cooperate.
Hmmm.... That last bit is the $64,000,000,000 question.
Unfortunately there a lot of people who do not want to think that much. They just want some one or some thing to tell them the answer. How do you think the world problems have exponentially increased in such a short time. Or affluence has made it easier to outsource our think on complex issues.
Any analysis on the level of current state of AI is bound to become obsolete very soon. The AI tools we know today are indeed just an impressive interface between data and a human operator. When AGI becomes a reality, however, we would have to contend with whole new set of concerns... It may not be relevant whether we are asking right questions or how to use the response. AGI is by definition autonomous in self-enquiry and goal setting. It may also not be relevant whether we actually want or don't want to think, because regardless of how intelligent some of us may be, we simply lack the data processing bandwidth to be in any way competitive or even instrumental in directing AGI. The more I think about it, the more I agree that the only thing we should be concerned about now it ensuring that AGI is aligned with humans. If we fail to ensure that now, God help us all.
Perhaps we may be creating a world that is overly complicated just because we can. Simple example of this is all the contraptions in most kitchens here in the U.S.. One that cooks a single burger, another to cook crapes, another to cook rice, another to slow cook (crock pot) a roast, another to make bread and another to make pancakes etc.. This also creates another problem; where to put all this items. Time to sell the house and get one with a larger kitchen with more storage space.
May be it just me in my golden years. Tried of the stress that comes with an over cluttered life and being distracted from the things that are really important. It seems now, that it is not so much you have or how much you did, but rather how if impacted the world and made it a better place to live.
History shows that mankind would rather create something to compensate for his lack of desire to change himself. Why not spend the resources and time working toward utilizing our maximum potential instead?
machines do as they are programmed, including searching out certain data to add to their database of learning. The age old question is, which is true and which is not? Can we be sure AI knows the difference or even cares?
AI cannot discern the truth. It cannot care. It can can only regurgitate based on large language models. You would think it could draw conclusions from the most often posted content but that would preclude regurgitating the latest developments. See the problem?