David A. Bell, a Historian at Princeton University
David A. Bell, a historian at Princeton University, points out that while AI’s instant answers save humans time in retrieving data and offer convenience, they may erode the most precious legacy of the Enlightenment, namely the spirit of independent thinking and rational questioning.
(Previous context: Letter to the Editor “The Anthropic Lawsuit Unveils the AI Veil: Plundering Under the Guise of Social Welfare, We All Bear Responsibility for the Knowledge Desert of Future Generations”)
(Background Supplement: Lawyer Lin Shanglun’s article “AI Defeats Three Lawyers? Don’t Get It Wrong, This Is the Prologue to ‘Lawyer 2.0′”)
The Rapid Development of AI
Currently, with the rapid development and popularization of artificial intelligence (AI), more and more people are incorporating AI into their work and lives, whether it be coding, designing posters, or academic writing. Although many current tasks still require both AI and human effort to complete, discussions about “AI eventually completely replacing humans” are incessant.
However, David A. Bell, who focuses on the study of the Enlightenment, recently wrote in The New York Times acknowledging the transformations AI brings to the world while critiquing the possible impacts of AI on modern spirit. Bell stated:
AI’s Knowledge and Its Impact
The knowledge provided by AI may seem comprehensive, but it could undermine the most precious legacy of the Enlightenment: the spirit of independent thinking and rational questioning.
Bell points out that 18th-century Enlightenment thinkers, such as D’Alembert and Diderot, encouraged readers to scrutinize texts themselves through the Encyclopedia. However, today’s AI tools like ChatGPT can quickly retrieve and organize knowledge, yet they serve up answers “pre-chewed,” allowing users to arrive at conclusions in a short time while stripping away the exploratory and reflective processes. Bell mentions that in interactions with AI, it is evident that AI always caters to various demands under human prompts but lacks challenges to viewpoints and positions, stating bluntly:
“It has never said: ‘This is a wrong question.’ It has never challenged my moral beliefs or required me to defend myself.”
In Bell’s view, when the unique rational thinking ability that humans possess as intellectual beings is deprived by AI, the modern spirit nurtured by the Enlightenment has undoubtedly been weakened.
Truth, Reason, and ‘Hallucinated Content’
Bell is particularly concerned about the speed and scale at which AI generates “hallucinated content.” He notes that AI lacks genuine understanding and moral judgment, easily packaging fabricated data into credible statements to satisfy user demands. If society becomes overly reliant on such outputs, the evidence culture painstakingly established by the scientific community may be eroded. Bell points out that the scientific spirit of the Enlightenment emphasizes verifiability and public debate; if people lose confidence in the authenticity of information, the pillar of “rational discussion” will also collapse.
Enlightenment thinkers like Montesquieu and Voltaire excelled at guiding readers to hone their reasoning skills amidst contradictions. In contrast, most commercially-driven AI products reinforce users’ existing preferences. Simply put, if a user holds a bias towards a certain viewpoint, AI not only fails to stimulate self-reflection and critical abilities but may exacerbate this bias, trapping humanity deeply within the prison of prejudice. Bell emphasizes that when humans sacrifice sharp questioning in pursuit of quick results, from the perspective of civil society, people will lose the necessary inquiry into authority and tradition.
Education and the Path of ‘Collective Mixed Wisdom’
However, Bell does not dismiss technology but rather calls for maintaining human agency in policy and educational settings. He proposes the concept of “collective mixed wisdom”: integrating AI’s computational power with human ethical judgment and experiential insights. This means that school classrooms should strengthen deep reading, debate, and logical training, enabling students to view AI as an assistant rather than the endpoint of answers. In the long run, only through active questioning and brave dialogue can humanity continue to write the spirit of the Enlightenment amidst rapidly changing technological tides.
Bell’s historical perspective reminds us that in seeking convenience, we may lose our instinct for truth. When AI can replace human effort in capturing information at a cosmic explosion level, what truly requires investment may be the patience to wrestle with questions. Whether AI can become a driving force for the continuation of Enlightenment spirit rather than standing in opposition to it depends on whether each user is willing to retain the courage for self-inquiry.
Related Reports
AI Privacy Collapse “ChatGPT Dialogue” Bare before the Law; Altman: I Fear Inputting Personal Data, Hard to Know Who Will Access the Information
When AI Threatens Human Survival, We Need Satoshi Nakamoto’s Design Philosophy Even More
Yale Professor: AI Will “Permanently Eliminate” Human Loneliness; Do We Still Need Each Other’s Company?