And yet, and yet…

This past weekend, I had the privilege of leading a group of men to go climb Guadalupe Peak, the highest point in the state of Texas. It was a wonderful hike and a great adventure. But if you’re familiar with the true mountains in Texas, it takes a reeeealllly long time to drive out there. On the trip, I drove our 15 passenger van for over 16 hours in two days.

One of the unique things that happens when you get a group of men into a vehicle for a long period of time are the conversational points, and even more fun, the arguments about trivial or absurd things. In particular on this trip, one of our number asked the question: “Could a person survive being thrown from the arms of one of these giant wind turbines that dominate the west Texas landscape?” The resulting conversation went for hours, and of course the consensus (not unanimous) was that a person would absolutely not survive something like that.

So why do I bring this up? Because one thing that cut the conversation short was the pulling out of ChatGPT. One of us used AI to determine unequivocally if a person could survive such a stunt. Of course AI determined that a human being should not (after expressing concern as to why a person would ask such a question).

But it made me think as I drove the van, how many great conversations and suppositions in the world have been cut short because we stopped thinking and dreaming and wondering, instead consulting the machine? Because of the role of AI, we are slowly losing the perambulatory ramblings on absurd issues.

And I see this happening in more and more environments: the removal of umpires being able to call balls and strikes in baseball games, instant replay in football games, handing over uncomplicated mathematic equations and historical searches to AI, and even allowing AI to write things that should be personal communications. Imagine a day when a girl says to a guy, “ChatGPT told me to break up with you.”

Here is the ethical question: is it always better to have a question completely answered? I wonder if the Wright Brothers had AI, if they would have been dissuaded from attempting flight, because obviously a person would hurt themselves trying to fly. I wonder if the Curies would have failed to discover radiation, because what good could that do? I wonder if Edison hadn’t failed hundreds of times if he would have continued to invent and discover.

Here’s my point: I think we need to be careful how much wonder, imagination, and critical thinking that we hand over to AI. If the ability to think critically is like a muscle, then we risk atrophy of our thoughts in service to efficiency.

Just because a route is quickest doesn’t mean that you’ll get the best view. Sometimes a little messiness in detail and a little meaningless discussion can make the long miles of this life feel shorter.

For consider your calling brothers: not many of you were wise according to worldly standards, not many were powerful, not many of noble birth. But God chose what is foolish in the world to shame the wise; God chose what is weak in the world to shame the strong; 1 Corinthians 1:26-27