AI, Prometheus, 42 – and the Responsibility of Teachers

The rapid transformations of our world because of new technologies demands that we adapt to changes in every sphere of our lives. These “megatrends”, as described by the Zukunftsinstitut, bring about deep and inevitable revolutions in society, upsetting our habits and certainties. Artificial Intelligence (AI) plays an important part in these transformations. As is our responsibility in moments of crisis or when a shift of paradigm occurs, it is only natural to question both the opportunities and risks associated with this evolution.

At the core of the debate

In higher education, we can no longer talk about an emergence. AI is already part of our daily lives and is the subject of much debate. Distance learning has also given rise to intense discussions, within the academic community that continue to this day. This complex subject requires some nuance – another challenge of our time. Provided that it is supported by appropriate pedagogical engineering systems, it represents, for some programs and curricula, an essential component of the course offering, particularly with regard to continuing education participants who have to combine their studies with their professional activities. On the other hand, in my experience and in the surveys I have conducted among students, the demand for face-to-face courses remains strong and massive.

Resonance

Our primary mission as educators is to transmit knowledge and understanding through dialogue with our students. This is only possible through direct contact, which permits Resonance, a concept developed by the German sociologist Hartmut Rosa. According to Rosa, “Resonance” is an animated mode of relationship in which reciprocal vibrations are generated. This interpersonal resonance, requiring vibrations, energy, interactions, dynamism, and most importantly direct contact to establish a “responsive relationship to the world” (Hartmut Rosa) is crucial for effective teaching and hardly possible outside face-to-face classes.

How does AI come into this? Our responsibility towards our students is also to integrate artificial intelligence into our work and to make sure that we use it properly in the transmission of skills and knowledge so that they learn how to use AI appropriately. The question then becomes: how should teachers position themselves regarding AI? Should we teach it as a technique or as a tool? Or should we rather focus on methods, values, and an ethical framework for using AI correctly? Perhaps we should concentrate less on teaching a technology that is in constant flux – caught up in what Hartmut Rosa calls an “escalation logic” – and more on asking ourselves: on what methods, cultural foundation, and values can we rely to use such a technology rightly and efficiently?

The seemingly effortless prompt

Today, two trends stand out regarding technology: an admiration for its promising possibilities, focusing on the positive aspects of its development, or a pessimistic view that sees it as a danger. With regard to this development, Marine Protais, a technology journalist, warns of a possible “atrophy of free will”. While we might be unable to measure or control the risks and opportunities of this technology, we can nonetheless sharpen our critical thinking. Digital resources like AI offer an immediate and easy response to our demands for information. This means that there is an almost unlimited availability (Hartmut Rosa) of all kinds of information, whether it is correct or not. In this context, it is no coincidence that giving an instruction to an AI system is called a “prompt”. The term itself reflects the very hasty nature of the command. This certainly speeds up processes and enhances task efficiency, but it also leaves little room for reflecting on the outcome and the path taken to achieve it. So that in most cases, it is absolutely necessary to submit the results provided by AI to a critical assessment. Errors, misinformation and other “hallucinations” generated by AI are still piling up.

AI, “master of all arts”?

Given that both critical thinking on the processes and a critical view of the results are needed, how can we sharpen and adapt these skills to this new challenge? To help us answer these questions we need to take some historical perspective and turn to a period far removed from our technophile era. In what context the benefits and risks of technological progress was first discussed, we can find a surprising answer in a text nearly 2,500 years old. In one of his tragedies, Prometheus Bound, Aeschylus shows how Prometheus was chained by Hephaestus on the top of the Caucasus mountains for having given fire to mortals. One could compare the emergence of today’s new technologies with this ancient story and pick out multiple interpretations of the parable. Is Prometheus, the giver of fire, a genius who bestows happiness on mortals? Or a rebel whose gift endangers them? And could the fire be interpreted as AI? Our interpretation of this play allows for either an optimistic or a pessimistic interpretation. Did Prometheus bring mortals an invaluable gift, or an uncontrollable curse? Later in the story we encounter another parable: Pandora opens her box, a gift from Hephaestus, and the vices and misdeeds contained within escape and contaminate the whole of humanity. Here again, an interpretative parallel can be drawn with current developments. For Prometheus, “fire has proved a teacher to mortals in every art and a means to mighty ends”. Could we see AI as a “teacher in every art”? Returning to the original question – how well we are preparing our students for this evolution – it is essential to emphasize critical reflection. What Prometheus tells us and what Aeschylus teaches us in this play is strikingly clear: “The fire must be nurtured so that it does not extinguish, tamed so that it does not destroy”.

The ultimate question of life, the Universe, and everything

To further this reflection and highlight the importance of this critical approach, another work can be used to shed light on the matter. In his book The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy, Douglas Adams asks “the ultimate question of life, the Universe, and everything“. An ultra-powerful computer would need to calculate and ponder the question for 7.5 million years in order to solve it. The answer turns out to be very short: 42. If one were to ask AI for an explanation, the result might be: the French Loire department number. How can one be satisfied with this answer given the philosophical significance of the question? For our purposes, however, in the novel the computer’s response is much more revealing. The computer explains: “I think the problem, to be quite honest with you, is that you’ve never actually known what the question is”. The point here is not simply to master data or information, but to master questioning, reflection, and one’s own intellectual tools. To avoid this “loss of free will among young people, whose critical sense remains plastic until the age of 25“,  as researcher Laurence Devillers points out, human-centred education should, alongside technical training, focus on fostering this form of critical thinking, reflection, and dissent. Clearly, this represents a major challenge for us as educators. Yet, the AI revolution and its already foreseeable consequences should encourage us to master the fire so that we can control it.