I Think, and Yet I Am Not

The Problem of Artificial Intelligence and Education

In Mary Shelley’s classic novel, Frankenstein, we meet young Dr. Frankenstein who has just made an incredible scientific breakthrough, he has figured out how to put the spark of life into an inanimate corpse. The Dr., in the truest scientific fashion, had interested himself primarily in what can be done but had not once thought about what ought or ought not to be done.

It was on a dreary night of November, that I beheld the accomplishment of my toils. With an anxiety that almost amounted to agony, I collected the instruments of life around me, that I might infuse a spark of being into the lifeless thing that lay at my feet. It was already one in the morning; the rain pattered dismally against the panes, and my candle was nearly burnt out, when, by the glimmer of the half-extinguished light, I saw the dull yellow eye of the creature open; it breathed hard, and a convulsive motion agitated its limbs.

How can I describe my emotions at this catastrophe, or how delineate the wretch whom with such infinite pains and care I had endeavoured to form? His limbs were in proportion, and I had selected his features as beautiful. Beautiful!—Great God! His yellow skin scarcely covered the work of muscles and arteries beneath; his hair was of a lustrous black, and flowing; his teeth of a pearly whiteness; but these luxuriances only formed a more horrid contrast with his watery eyes, that seemed almost of the same colour as the dun white sockets in which they were set, his shrivelled complexion, and straight black lips.

The different accidents of life are not so changeable as the feelings of human nature. I had worked hard for nearly two years, for the sole purpose of infusing life into an inanimate body. For this I had deprived myself of rest and health. I had desired it with an ardour that far exceeded moderation; but now that I had finished, the beauty of the dream vanished, and breathless horror and disgust filled my heart.¹

I have a hard time not comparing A.I. to Frankenstein’s monster. It seems to me that most of the impetus behind the development of this kind of technology belongs to either one of two camps. The first camp is that of the “true scientist” and the second camp is that of the opportunists.

Those in the “true scientist” camp, which I place in quotes quite intentionally, are exactly like Dr. Frankenstein. The unbridled passion for seeing what is possible leads to the development of monsters. Yes, of course, technology itself is generally neutral and can be used for good and evil. Yes, of course, nuclear fusion powers countless homes and not just bombs and submarines. Nonetheless, there is moral responsibility attached to the development of technology, as well as the way in which it is developed, and the intent behind why it is developed. Last time I checked they don’t sell enriched uranium on aisle E7 at the local Walmart. Why? Because it would be irresponsible to let everyone have access to materials that can both power and destroy entire cities.

The “true scientist” isn’t thinking about applications! He only is wondering if it can be done! This is why natural philosophers are to be preferred over the “true scientist” type. Ethics and religion have no business being separated from “science”. If only Dr. Frankenstein had considered the implication of actually putting the spark of life into a jigsaw puzzle creature before he did it! Who indeed is the greater monster in the story?

The other camp is that of the opportunists. This camp is all about application… but still not about ethics. How much money can be made? How can we control our enemies with this? How can we make life easier for ourselves with this? With Frankenstein’s technology there would of course have been a lot of money to make! Reanimating grandma would be a hot item! We could also make gigantic monsters to send into battle without risking any of our soldiers! We could make our own slave creatures to do our labor for us! But hey, I know, “It’s not wrong to make money” and “We love grandma” and “We must effectively combat our enemies” and “Tools of convenience can be great”… but doesn’t it matter how we go about all these things?

Artificial intelligence is, indeed, a Frankensteinian situation. I don’t believe that most people involved with the development of this technology have asked themselves enough questions about whether they ought to be doing this in the first place. They simply are doing it. They are going to see what all they can do with this. They are going to see how many ways it can be profitable. A.I. is now a reality and it is a growing part of our society.

There is no way to predict every possible implication of this technology which is becoming more powerful and also more accessible to the average person. There are a myriad of implications and applications already in play and we cannot see far enough to know just how far this will really go. To what extent will humanity actually abolish itself, as C. S. Lewis predicted we would, if not checked? Will man cease to physically work at all and just have machines do it? Will man cease to think at all and just have machines do it? Will we make lifelike robots with such high functioning A.I. that these machines become nearly indistinguishable from real people? Will we be granting “human” rights to A.I.s? Will people marry A.I. robots? Will we try to interface A.I. with the human brain? Will Wall-E save us all or simply rule us like we deserve? On and on…how far will it all go?

I don’t know how far it will all go but I plan to resist its intrusion into education. As a classical educator my work is not primarily to be described as training, it’s not about certifying, nor project managing, and definitely not programming. Classical educators are Mentors, like Athena in Homer’s Odyssey, we walk alongside young men and women to serve them as guides as they quest for what is true, good, and beautiful. Classical Christian education is about shaping young souls to grow in virtue (Wisdom, Justice, Temperance, Courage, Faith, Hope, and Love), and be transformed more and more into the image of Christ.

No matter how far our work with A.I. progresses, robots and computers will never be ensouled beings. They will never be human. They may seem to be thinking but they have no real personal existence. But just because machines cannot become human let us never forget humans can be dragged down to the level of machines. There is a kind of “education” that destroys souls and that is exactly what modern “education” does. Modern education sees children as flesh-bots, programmable meat bags, which can be wired to react to certain stimuli and to give pre-programmed responses. The modern teacher shows an image of man, “What is this?” The Children respond, “We cannot assume their gender.” The teacher says, “Michael, who is white, makes $50,000 a year whereas Yolanda, who is black, makes $42,000. Why might this be?” The children say, “Our society lacks equity and prefers white males over minorities and women. Michael, as a white male, is a racist, misogynist, homophobe who benefits from a capitalist system which is entrenched in our society.” Very good kids…but why did you just assume Michael’s gender?

But I digress.

With the rise of Chat GPT, and other similar programs, the world of education has just gotten more interesting. My oldest son told me about a meme he saw wherein school teachers were using A.I. to create assignments and students were using A.I. to do their homework. It would be humorous were it not 100% accurate. The fact of the matter is this, homework is dead. Online/distance education is dead. A.I. programs are now capable of writing “original” works with just a few simple prompts. Since those products are “original” and are not detectable by plagiarizing software. One can simply input a prompt, or ask a question, and have something to turn in for credit almost instantly.

Of course there are some students who actually have enough integrity, and a desire to actually learn things, who will not use such programs to cheat. Even so, how much confidence do you have in your average public high school, or state university, student to not use such a tool? Even in classical Christian schools the temptation will be very real. I have taught long enough, and in enough different contexts, to know that we have cultivated a pervasive attitude in our country that education is certification. Most people believe education is not about learning, nor about growing in virtue, but about getting a certificate that will allow you to get a job and make more money. If people believe they can get certified more easily by having A.I. do their homework… many of them will.

How do I know this? I know this because I have watched countless lazy students do the bare minimum. I have caught numerous students cheating by ripping off entire papers from the internet. I have reported students, ranging from the ages of 18-50, to university administrators who would rather not ask me back as an adjunct than actually deal with cheating students. All of that before A.I.! With A.I. now on the scene no teacher assigning a writing project, of any kind, outside of the classroom, or in an online program doing discussion threads, can ever be sure the students actually did the work themselves.

It’s a disaster! Or is it?

Actually it may simply point to the antidote. It’s time to return to the old paths of education and get more classical. It’s time to insist on beautiful cursive handwritten assignments that are worked upon in class. It’s time to make sure whatever is assigned to be done outside of the classroom can be evaluated inside the classroom. Readings outside of the classroom can be evaluated by comprehension questions and short essays in the classroom. Classroom catechisms, oral recitations, and in class debate and discussion will reveal what students have actually read and what they have really come to understand. Modern education is dying a hard (and well deserved) death, but classical education is just as vibrant and viable as ever.

The truth is, of course, that modern education will drone on and produce more drones. Modern educators will continue to lean into using all the latest tech in their classrooms and they’ll try to harness A.I. and offer it to their students as something wonderful, but they will fail miserably. The desire to be “cutting edge” in the classroom and to use “state of art technology” is the very thing that will dehumanize the learning process until humans aren’t actually learning anything at all. At the end of the day, if you actually want to see kids become brilliant thinkers, you simply cannot beat the beautiful simplicity of sitting at a table, reading great books, talking about them, debating their ideas, writing arguments, and making speeches.

As time goes by you will continue to see the chasm growing ever wider between those who insist on doing school in Dr. Frankenstein’s laboratory and those who sit around tables with books, pens, and paper. The kids coming out of the former kind of education will have conformed to the image of the things we keep making, having the appearance of free thought but no real soul. The kids coming out of the latter kind of education will conform to the image of the One who made them and will resonate with life and creativity and they will build up the world around them.

1. Mary Shelley, Frankenstein: The Original 1818 text Edition (Amazon Classics), pg. 22.