🔗 Share this article

This past summer, I found myself navigating in gridlocked traffic on the scorching streets of Marseille. At an intersection, my companion in the passenger seat advised a right turn toward a renowned spot for fish soup. Yet, the digital guide on my phone commanded us to continue straight. Weary and overheated, I heeded the app's advice. Minutes later, we were stranded at a roadwork site.

A minor event, perhaps. But one that encapsulates a central dilemma of our time, where digital tools permeates almost every aspect of our lives: whom do we trust more – other people and our personal instincts, or the algorithm?

The Enlightenment's Promise and Our Modern Relapse

The influential German philosopher Immanuel Kant once defined the Enlightenment as "man's release from its self-imposed nonage." This state, he wrote, "is the incapacity to use one's own understanding without direction from another." For ages, that guiding "other" for society was frequently the priest, the monarch, or the landowner – entities purporting to channel God's voice. To comprehend phenomena like changing seasons, people looked for explanations in religion. In shaping the fabric of society, from economics to matters of the heart, religious doctrine acted as the primary guide.

“Sapere aude!” or “Dare to use your reason!”

Kant argued that humans always possessed the capacity for reason. They simply lacked the boldness to use it. With revolutions in the 18th century, a fresh era arrived: reason would supplant superstition, and the human mind, liberated from authority, would become the driver of progress and a more ethical world.

Now, 250 years later, one might wonder if we are quietly regressing into a form of dependency. An app dictating a direction is just one example. Artificial intelligence threatens to become our new "other" – a silent guide that influences our choices and behaviors. We risk relinquishing the historically earned autonomy to reason for ourselves – and now, not to deities or rulers, but to computer programs.

The Swift Adoption and Subtle Dangers of Algorithmic Reliance

ChatGPT was launched only in 2022, and yet a recent study found that an vast number of respondents had used AI in the previous six months. Whether deciding on ending a relationship or choosing a candidate, individuals are looking to machines for guidance. Data suggests a significant portion of user queries relate to non-work topics. Even more striking than our reliance on AI for advice is what occurs when we allow it speak for us. Writing is now among the top uses for tools like ChatGPT, just behind practical requests. The celebrated American author Joan Didion famously said, “I write purely to find out what I am thinking.” What transpires when we cease writing? Do we lose that path?

Worryingly, emerging research hints the outcome may be affirmative. A study conducted by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology used electroencephalography to observe the cognitive activity of participants who had access to AI, Google, or no aids. Those who could use AI displayed the lowest cognitive engagement and had trouble quoting their own work. Maybe most troubling was that after a few months, participants in the AI group grew progressively lazier, copying entire blocks of text.

“Inertia and fear,” Kant wrote, “are the reasons why so many of men … remain in perpetual nonage.”

Certainly, AI's attraction lies in its convenience. It saves time, reduces effort and – critically – offers a new method to offload responsibility. In his 1941 book, Escape from Freedom, the German psychoanalyst Erich Fromm argued that the rise of fascism could be understood by a preference to surrender personal freedom in for the sake of the reassuring certainty of subordination. AI offers a digital method of relinquishing the burden of having to think and choose.

The Black Box Problem: Faith Over Reason

AI's primary draw is its capacity to accomplish things beyond human capability – analyzing vast datasets at lightning pace. Stuck in the car in Marseille, this was, after all, why I chose to believe the machine over my companion (a choice she took as an insult). With knowledge of real-time information, certainly the algorithm must know best – or so I believed.

The fundamental problem is that AI is a black box. It generates answers, but without necessarily deepening human understanding. We do not truly know the process behind its conclusions – including its creators acknowledge the opacity. Nor can we check its logic against transparent standards. So when we follow AI's advice, we are not being guided by reason. We are back in the realm of belief. In dubio pro machina: when in doubt, trust the machine – that could be our 21st-century guiding principle.

Harnessing Without Eroding: The Essential Challenge

AI can be a powerful tool for humanity in scientific pursuit. It can aid in inventing drugs, liberate us from tedious tasks, 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 extra free time. Critical thinking was not merely about efficiency – it was a practice of freedom and human emancipation.

Human thought is inherently messy and fallible, but it forces us to argue, to question, to test ideas – and to recognize the boundaries of our own understanding. It fosters confidence, both individually and collectively. For Kant, the use of reason was never only about information; it was about empowering people to become agents of their own destinies, and to oppose domination. It was about building a moral community grounded in the shared principle of rational discourse, rather than blind belief.

With all the advantages AI offers, the key question remains: how can we leverage its potential of advanced capability without undermining human reasoning, the bedrock of the Enlightenment and of liberal democracy themselves? That is likely one of the defining questions of our century. It is a question we would do well not to delegate to the machine.