In Defence of a Liberal Education (In the Age of Machine Intelligence)

I have long considered whether or not to put the pen to paper on my conflicting thoughts about the emerging influence of artificial intelligence on humans. Partly because for the longest of time - I was not sure what I actually think. Partly because I have always been a champion of the idea that technology can be and is a force for good (I absolutely despise the idea of being a luddite). Lastly - it’s because of a fear of coming across as a hypocrite - critiquing the very tools I depend on so heavily in my professional career.

However, while processing those thoughts — I’ve come to realise that there is an underlying logic for the uneasy feeling in my stomach. One not founded in fear of technology, but borne from an observation of the underlying mechanisms behind artificial intelligence and their interplay with human psychology.

To start - it’s been very interesting to observe that the the biggest critiques of AI came from artists, journalists, philosophers, spiritual leaders, etc… while the biggest praises came from engineers and techies. How come? Is it just that one group stands to profit from it while another stands to lose money? The partial answer is — definitely yes (when in doubt, always follow the money).

But the full answer hints at something much deeper.

This debate around AI always reminds me of an excellent book called “In Defence of a Liberal Education” from Fareed Zakaria. In it, he outlines the dangers of undermining the value of classic literature, poetry, art or debate skills for a purely technical educational curriculum. Because it is precisely the education in those liberal skills which makes humans become the best and most productive version of themselves.

The crucial challenge is to learn how to read critically, analyze data, and formulate ideas—and most of all to enjoy the intellectual adventure enough to be able to do them easily and often

— Fareed Zakaria

My personal experience largely mirrors the conclusions of the book. A very large number of engineers I’ve worked with never took liberal education and classical education too seriously. A lot of them, for the most part, consider literature, art and social sciences to be below them — an area of interest for the less intelligent or less motivated.

I argue for the opposite - knowledge gained by studying liberal arts (such as literature, poetry, art, social sciences, history, …) and the application of that knowledge has been the instrumental driver of human productivity ever since the dawn of time.

Because it takes a lot of skill to know how to build, but it takes much more to know what to build!

The ability to think critically about a problem, the ability to explain your ideas and influence the people around you, the ability to appreciate and create beautiful things or the ability to bring people closer together and resolve conflicts - all of these will have more effect over your life than any technical skill you might attain. And until now, there was no way - machine or otherwise - to outsource or fake those skills.

If you wanted to get good at conflict resolution - you had to endure countless conflicts and defeats. To get good at expressing yourself and conveying your ideas - you will have to have expressed yourself poorly thousands of times. To get good at critical thinking, you needed to make wrong conclusions over and over again.

The trouble then, with AI - is that it outsources those very tasks to an unobjective, overly confident machine. Every time you ask the GPT to write an essay or respond to an email, to tell you “who’s right” during an emotionally charged conflict or to prepare a step by step plan for executing a project - you loose the ability to train the very mental muscles which are critical for you to do those things yourself. There is no real way to learn something other than doing it yourself.

AI isn’t special in this regard — every technology is a double edged sword. The splitting of the atom can power the world or destroy it. Social media brings people together, but creates anxiety and addiction. Short form content can educate people, but it obliterates their focus. And AI can bring unprecedented growth in medicine, technology and science, but it too - has a cost.

For what it’s worth — I don’t think technology can be stopped or regulated away. The human condition is a constant march forward and if you stop moving you’re dead. This is not a call to action to ban or regulate AI or to critique the companies building these systems. Each and every one of us has a personal responsibility to adapt to times exactly as they are — not to force them to be as they wish they were. And AI is here to stay!

Rather, this is a call to you - to keep writing, keep talking in your own voice and keep thinking for yourself - without asking ChatGPT to do it for you. Your future self will be thankful.

If you need an answer to a political question — read an essay (then read the opposing essay), don’t ask AI. If you’re struggling with grief or sadness, talk to a human — not a robot. Whatever your outsource, you’ll never get good at.

Becoming the best version of yourself is hard, confusing, full of mistakes and self-doubt. But it’s the only way to grow.

Just like physically inactive people quickly become out of shape - so will people who defer their thinking to machines quickly become mentally out of shape - unable to express themselves, entertain opposing ideas, create new things, resolve conflicts or think critically.

So before you ask a chatbot to tell you whether your partner was right or wrong during a fight, or to help you write that essay - think of the price you’ll pay later.