Accused of being a practical tool for plagiarism, the now famous OpenAI chatbot provides quick and consistent answers on most topics. But what are these answers really worth?
Is ChatGPT the Ultimate Lazy Weapon? In schools around the world, the subject is on the table. Because the OpenAI chatbot has proven, since it was made available to the public last December, its ability to present accurate and complete content on all (or nearly) possible topics in a matter of seconds.
But if the instrument can perform feats in mathematics, history or languages, what does it matter when it comes to philosophical reflection? BFMTV presented ChatGPT scheme on one of the philosophy subjects for a teacher of philosophy for graduation of 2022.
To say it from the outset: It was particularly critical of the result, even though the fact of knowing that the result came from an algorithm might partially bias its final decision.
It should also be noted that the creators of ChatGPT now prevent the production of a full dissertation, precisely to no longer fuel criticism. Hence “Does freedom consist in disobeying someone?” Must be satisfied with a dissertation plan on the topic.
Here is the result generated by ChatGPT.
To approach this topic, let me begin by defining what I mean by “freedom” and “obedience.” It is also important to consider the different philosophical perspectives on liberty, such as liberty as freedom or liberty as self-determination.
Next, I continue to explore the arguments for the claim that freedom consists in not obeying anyone. For example, some may argue that obeying others leads to a loss of self and therefore a loss of liberty. On the other hand, I also examine arguments against this claim, such as the need for some form of obedience to maintain social order and security.
It is also important to consider the practical consequences of the claim that freedom consists in not obeying anyone. For example, how would it affect interpersonal relationships and social institutions?
Finally, I finish by bringing a personal reflection to give my perspective on the subject, justifying it with logical arguments, references to philosophers or examples of concrete situations.
very cold side
“A plan ultimately too artificial that does not take into account a reflection” directly states Mary Perret, associate professor of philosophy and president of APPEP (Association of Professors of Philosophy in Public Education).
“What we expect from a plan is precisely that it is a transcription of the way in which the student has thought about the topic he has chosen to tackle. And besides, when you read the text one side is very gets colder” he continues. “When a student chooses to do an essay topic, it is usually because the question involves something that interests them.”
And the professor outlines the AI approach. “That’s the very first sentence to address the subject” she comments. “Let me start by defining what I mean by freedom and obedience. But that is exactly what the students are asked not to do. How do you want to define freedom in a few lines” insists the teacher. Huh.
Clearly, the ChatGPT approach didn’t convince the teacher who certainly wouldn’t put the average in the graduate. Should we be looking at device limits? The limitations set by OpenAI partially affect the result, but we must not forget that this is the third version of AI and others, always more efficient, will come. Yet, for the time being, reflection is not yet the prerogative of the machine.