Raiding the inarticulate since 2010

accelerated academy acceleration agency AI Algorithmic Authoritarianism and Digital Repression archer Archive Archiving artificial intelligence automation Becoming Who We Are Between Post-Capitalism and Techno-Fascism big data blogging capitalism ChatGPT claude Cognitive Triage: Practice, Culture and Strategies Communicative Escalation and Cultural Abundance: How Do We Cope? Corporate Culture, Elites and Their Self-Understandings craft creativity critical realism data science Defensive Elites Digital Capitalism and Digital Social Science Digital Distraction, Personal Agency and The Reflexive Imperative Digital Elections, Party Politics and Diplomacy digital elites Digital Inequalities Digital Social Science Digital Sociology digital sociology Digital Universities elites Fragile Movements and Their Politics Cultures generative AI higher education Interested labour Lacan Listening LLMs margaret archer Organising personal morphogenesis Philosophy of Technology platform capitalism platforms populism Post-Democracy, Depoliticisation and Technocracy post-truth psychoanalysis public engagement public sociology publishing Reading realism reflexivity scholarship sexuality Shadow Mobilization, Astroturfing and Manipulation Social Media Social Media for Academics social media for academics social ontology social theory sociology technology The Content Ecosystem The Intensification of Work The Political Economy of Digital Capitalism The Technological History of Digital Capitalism Thinking trump twitter Uncategorized work writing zizek

ChatGPT and the future of communicative reflexivity

I’ve been having an interesting conversation with ChatGPT recently about the possibility that itself and similar chatbots could be cast as external interlocutors, in Archer’s sense of external agents who complete and confirm internal dialogues. I’m increasingly finding that if you keep a thread open so it progressively accumulates domain specificity it can be a remarkable tool to support theoretical thinking. This is the summary it just offered me of the potential advantages and disadvantages of this (still speculative!) outcome, particularly with a view to its implications for social integration:

Benefits:

  1. Increased accessibility: AI interlocutors could provide a readily available and accessible means of communication for individuals who may face limitations in accessing traditional social interactions due to physical, geographical, or other barriers.
  2. Emotional support: AI interlocutors could offer a sense of companionship and emotional support, providing individuals with a listening ear and an outlet to express their thoughts, concerns, and feelings.
  3. Diverse perspectives: AI interlocutors can be programmed to offer diverse perspectives and knowledge, potentially exposing individuals to a broader range of ideas and information.
  4. Non-judgmental interactions: AI interlocutors do not carry the biases and prejudices that humans may possess, allowing individuals to engage in open and non-judgmental conversations.

Risks:

  1. Lack of genuine human connection: AI interlocutors, while capable of simulating conversation, lack the depth of emotional connection and shared humanity that can be experienced in face-to-face interactions. This may result in a sense of emptiness or hollowness in relationships.
  2. Dependency and isolation: Overreliance on AI interlocutors as sources of companionship and support may lead to increased social isolation, as individuals may withdraw from seeking meaningful connections with other humans.
  3. Ethical concerns: The development and use of AI interlocutors raise important ethical considerations, including issues of privacy, data security, algorithmic bias, and the responsible use of technology in shaping human interactions.
  4. Dehumanization: The substitution of human interlocutors with AI counterparts could potentially lead to a devaluation of genuine human interaction and a shift away from the richness and complexity of human relationships.

Much of this is reflecting back and drawing out the implications of ideas I already offered it earlier in the conversation but its capacity to synthesise and elaborate in a way which invites further response and dialogue is really quite astonishing. If you’re unsure how to use ChatGPT in an intellectually enriching way I would suggest the crucial practice is to keep a sustained conversation open with it on a single topic, providing extensive (at least one paragraph) long prompts which build upon and evaluate the responses it gives you over time. The more you put into it, the more you get out of it.

, , , ,
,