The manliness of artificial intelligence
Liz Jackson · Educational Philosophy and Theory · 2024
The manliness of artificial intelligenceWhen it comes to artificial intelligence (ai), lively debates about its potential virtues and values and lack thereof are emerging in philosophy of education and other fields (Peters et al., 2024;Sidorkin, 2024).despite these debates, one can still plausibly call the topic undertheorized given the incredible level of public and academic interest and investment in ai as a learning, research, and communication tool (Gourlay, 2024). in this context, while the jury is still out about many matters pertaining to the use, benefits, and implications (risks) of ai, many academics feel pressured to join the bandwagon and get on board, by rapidly using and mastering ai tools and developing informed stances about them.already people like me who were already busy with various other projects feel overwhelmed (or is it underwhelmed?)by pleas from all directionsfrom peers, students, and higher education higher-ups-to not be luddites with their heads in the sand.to get with the programme.at the risk of sounding like a luddite, i admit my perspective on ai has thus far been along the lines of one of my favourite phrases from the dude in the Big lebowski: 'Yeah?Well, you know, that's just like uh, your opinion, man.' am i being assaulted by an onslaught of ai issues?Not that i'm aware of.the suggestion of an ai onslaught appears socially constructed (and financially fuelled) to me. the dramatic pleas and demands to get with the programme raise my suspicions.Why are people telling me i'm being assaulted by ai, when that is not my experience?Why are people suggesting my head is in the sand, when i seem to be no less informed about the issues than most others around me? are the robots coming, or is that just something that certain people want me to believe?