Ian LeslieHis work focuses on human behavior. He has appeared on two previous episodes of EconTalk (Ian Leslie’s Curiosity and Ian Leslie’s ConflictIn this episode, the host Russ Roberts and Leslie continue their discussion of human behaviorwe discussed Leslie’s assertion that AI is already changing the way we think. It’s not just matches that are imitating us, but rather we are beginning to fundamentally imitate machines, which is changing what and how we make things.
Roberts and Leslie discuss how students actually teach writing using a very simple algorithm: a five-paragraph essay. As a former teacher, I am glad I left teaching before Chat-GPT and similar tools came along. However, some of the cultural and technological forces Leslie points out were already visible in my students’ writing and thinking long before generative AI technologies were available to the public. Indeed, we have been living in a world shaped by algorithms for many years. Social media and search algorithms have shaped our information flows and social circles for years. The ubiquity of autocorrect and the digital organization of information are impacting how adults and children learn. The simple isolation that personal devices enable also changes how we interact with, process, and share information.
If Ian Leslie’s argument is correct, then algorithmic knowledge transfer is even older than these technologies. As a teacher and product of late 20th and early 21st century schools, I am inclined to agree. As Leslie points out:
…Essentially we Taught We’ve taught a lot of students that good writing is about following a set of rules, that an essay should have a five-part structure. So instead of helping them understand the importance of structure, the different ways you can approach it, and the subtleties of the question, we now tend to say, “Five points.” That’s what you want to say in your essay. Students say, “Okay, I can follow those rules.” Instead of helping them understand what it means to write really well, or at least to complete a sentence, Depth And for originality and interest, we say, “Here are five principles to follow: Your paragraph should be this length. This is how your sentences should be structured. This is where you should or shouldn’t put your prepositions.”
And we basically programming We are giving them a very simple program, a simple algorithm.
The result is often very bland and very shallow answers. So it’s no wonder that ChatGPT is able to create these essays, as it essentially follows a similar process – just much faster because ChatGPT has a ton of training data.
And we Should We should be wary of it, not because it is on the brink of superintelligent consciousness, but because of the way we have been trained. Ourselves Write an algorithm essay.
It is no wonder that modern school systems have come to rely on such “simple programs, simple algorithms.” Providing a quality education at scale is not an easy proposition, and a five-paragraph simplistic view can certainly produce mediocre but acceptable outcomes. Indeed, this goes a long way to explaining the mediocrity common in education. average General access to generative AI Pre-student essays. Now the question is more direct: Essay Actually compiled With generative AI. I don’t envy teachers these days who are trying to teach around this problem, but it was there before the latest and most powerful tools arrived, and it’s only accelerating now.
Of course, the applications of AI in education go far beyond the classroom. Most of us use Google and other search engines as a way to quickly find information and images. Now, much of that content is influenced or created by AI, and our perception of reality is filtered through machines. Here’s one bizarre example: I was browsing my Reddit feed and saw several complaints about images of wedding flowers being generated by AI and posted to sites like Pinterest, which many use for design and planning inspiration. Why were the posters complaining? Because the wildflower bouquets depicted in the highly realistic-looking images were physically impossible. The flower seeds in the photos would not have stems strong enough to be incorporated into a bridal bouquet.
- Have you noticed how AI is changing your environment? Has it changed the way you interact with others, professionally or personally? Overall, is this making your life better or worse?
- What is AI? Autocorrect and autofill are much simpler than ChatGPT, but they are more prevalent in the digital world and have the potential to change the words we use to communicate with one another. Will they make our communication better, or will they simply become algorithmic?
- Regardless of the level of technology, some parts of learning are algorithmic and repetitive and not particularly creative: beginning piano players learn scales, math students memorize formulas, writers and artists learn by imitation. Where does imitation end and creativity begin? And when should it happen?
- What makes creativity human? What is missing or inauthentic in machine output, even highly complex output?
Additional links:
Why Ian Leslie says curiosity is like a muscle Quercus Books
Ian Leslie on why we should keep learning and staying curious Royal Society of Arts
Nancy Vander Veel holds a BA in Classics from Samford University. She has taught high school Latin in the United States and has held program and fundraising roles at the Paideia Institute. She is based in Rome, Italy, and is currently completing an MA in European Social and Economic History at Philipps-University of Marburg.
