🔗 Share this article

This past summer, I was caught in gridlocked traffic on the sweltering streets of Marseille. At an intersection, my companion in the front seat suggested a right turn toward a renowned spot for fish soup. Yet, the navigation app on my phone instructed us to continue straight. Weary and overheated, I followed the app's directive. Moments later, we were stuck at a construction site.

A seemingly trivial event, maybe. But one that encapsulates a defining dilemma of our era, where digital tools permeates almost every aspect of existence: whom do we trust to a greater degree – fellow humans and our own intuition, or the machine?

The Enlightenment's Promise and A Contemporary Backslide

The renowned German philosopher Immanuel Kant famously described the Enlightenment as "man's release from its self-inflicted immaturity." This state, he wrote, "is the incapacity to use one's own understanding without direction from another." For ages, that directing force for human thought was often the priest, the king, or the feudal lord – entities purporting to channel God's voice. To comprehend phenomena like changing seasons, people looked for explanations in religion. In organizing the fabric of society, from economics to matters of the heart, religious doctrine served as the main compass.

“Sapere aude!” or “Dare to use your own understanding!”

Kant argued that humans had the capacity for reason. They just didn't have the boldness to employ it. With upheavals in the 18th century, a fresh era emerged: reason would supplant superstition, and the human mind, liberated from authority, would become the driver of advancement and a more ethical world.

Now, two and a half centuries later, one might wonder if we are slipping back into a form of dependency. An app dictating a direction is merely the start. AI threatens to become our new "other" – a unseen guide that influences our decisions and behaviors. We risk relinquishing the historically earned autonomy to think independently – and now, not to deities or rulers, but to computer programs.

The Rapid Rise and Subtle Dangers of AI Dependence

ChatGPT debuted only in 2022, and yet a global survey indicated that an vast number of respondents had used AI in the previous six months. Whether deciding on a breakup or choosing a candidate, individuals are looking to algorithms for guidance. Data suggests a large majority of user queries concern personal life matters. Even more intriguing than our reliance on AI for advice is what happens when we let it speak for us. Writing is now among the most common uses for tools like ChatGPT, second only to everyday tasks. The celebrated American author Joan Didion once remarked, “I write purely to discover what I am thinking.” What occurs when we stop composing? Do we lose that path?

Worryingly, emerging research hints the answer may be affirmative. A study from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology used electroencephalography to track the cognitive activity of essay writers who had access to AI, Google, or no aids. Those who could use AI displayed the lowest cognitive engagement and had trouble accurately recalling their own work. Maybe most troubling was that over time, individuals in the AI group grew progressively lazier, pasting large sections of text.

“Inertia and fear,” Kant wrote, “are the reasons why so great a proportion of men … remain in lifelong immaturity.”

Certainly, AI's attraction lies in its convenience. It is fast, reduces effort and – importantly – offers a novel way to abdicate responsibility. In his 1941 book, Escape from Freedom, the German psychoanalyst Erich Fromm proposed that the rise of fascism could be understood by a human tendency to surrender autonomy in exchange for the reassuring certainty of obedience. AI presents a digital avenue for surrendering the burden of having to decide for oneself.

The Opacity Dilemma: Faith Over Reason

AI's greatest allure is its capacity to accomplish things beyond human capability – analyzing vast datasets at unprecedented speed. Sitting in the car in Marseille, this was, after all, why I opted to trust the machine over my companion (a choice she took as an insult). With access to all the data, certainly the algorithm must know best – or so I thought.

The core issue is that AI is a opaque system. It generates answers, but not always fostering human comprehension. We do not truly know the process behind its conclusions – including its programmers admit this. Nor can we verify its reasoning against clear, objective criteria. So when we follow AI's advice, we are not being led by logic. We are returning to the realm of faith. In dubio pro machina: when in doubt, side with the machine – that may become our 21st-century credo.

Harnessing Without Eroding: The Essential Challenge

AI can be a formidable ally for humanity in scientific pursuit. It can help medical research, liberate us from "bullshit jobs", or manage administrative chores – work that are repetitive and are unfulfilling. This is beneficial. But Kant and his contemporaries did not champion reason over faith just so humans could optimize chores or have more leisure. Critical thinking was not just about efficiency – it was a practice of liberty and human emancipation.

Human thought is inherently messy and fallible, but it forces us to argue, to question, to challenge concepts – and to acknowledge the limits of our own understanding. It builds confidence, both personally and as a society. For Kant, the exercise of reason was never solely about information; it was about enabling people to become agents of their own destinies, and to oppose control. It was about creating a moral community grounded in the shared principle of rational discourse, rather than unquestioning acceptance.

With all the advantages AI brings, the paramount challenge is this: how can we harness its potential of superhuman intelligence without undermining human rationality, the bedrock of the Enlightenment and of liberal democracy itself? That may be one of the central dilemmas of our century. It is a question we must strive not to outsource to the machine.