Hallucinations

Many of us are always racing against multiple deadlines and are constantly pressed for time. Some rely on how-to guides, tutorials, and digests, believing that these clearly and concisely explain the issue. This belief may be misguided, because there is a real danger that these quick fixes are not long-term solutions.

This reliance on the work of others may not be unexpected. Last week a friend forwarded to me an article with the self-explanatory title: “Modern Life May Be Overloading the Human Brain, New Research Suggests.” This may explain why some people have short attention spans and comprehension problems and prefer memes and soundbites for information as well as entertainment.

This is not a critique of people who use non-traditional tools to consume information. These tools are, in certain situations, beneficial. Some tasks can be delegated to experts, both human and artificial — i.e., artificial intelligence. But we cannot always assume that experts will always utilize credible processes and examine credible data. Thus those who cite experts, whether natural or artificial, should never anchor their arguments in appeals to authority.

In addition, those who quote experts in effect vouch for the information obtained from them. If the information is incorrect — a “hallucination,” in AI-speak — then they are personally responsible for the consequences of their lack of due diligence.

In fact, anybody who uncritically but confidently relies on experts is merely parroting them and not generating new information. Overconfidence without competence – the Dunning-Kruger effect – should not be the case.

AI, digests, how-to guides, and tutorials are tools, nothing more. They have their uses, but we should not be overly dependent on them. There is no substitute for personal knowledge, discernment, and discovery.

After all, the task of learning and understanding, and the attainment of wisdom, is our lifelong and individual responsibility — one that can never be fully outsourced.