Reflections on the Future of Teaching in the Age of AI
So, you might be thinking about leaving your job soon. I teach philosophy at Arizona State University, where the institution is keen on becoming a frontrunner in the AI landscape. Personally, I’m not entirely convinced that AI can fill the shoes of humanities educators. This doubt prompted me to participate in what ASU dubs the AI Challenge.
For my project, I developed something I call “AI Dialogue.” Using ASU’s version of ChatGPT, we engaged it in Socratic-style discussions by having it impersonate various philosophers. I, uh, facilitated dialogues with Chat as Aristotle, Hume, Marx, and even Lucifer. My students critiqued these conversations to evaluate their effectiveness.
AI can tap into public information and present these thinkers reasonably well. However, it seems to often veer towards what I expected from the discussion, which is a bit concerning.
So, how does this help me avoid work? ASU is now introducing AI customized for professors, allowing them to upload syllabi and course materials. Students can pose straightforward questions and receive answers, dodging the usual emails that start with “Have you read the syllabus?” They can even ask for clarifications on concepts discussed in class.
When I explained this to my students, I jokingly asked what I needed to know right then. It was, you know, a bit of fun.
My course is built around Socratic dialogue. One idea is for ASU to create a lifelike AI version of me to interact with students. Maybe the only advantage left for real professors is that human touch. But then again, if tuition keeps rising, that, too, could fade away. Students could opt for the “AI Anderson Socrates” because it’s cheaper. And with Elon Musk planning to roll out the Optimus robot modeled after me, well, you can see where I might be in trouble.
The Evolution of Educational Myths
Musk has been vocal about the impending AI revolution for quite some time. He’s been, uh, challenging myths around higher education that have persisted for decades. This myth suggests that getting a degree guarantees a way out of grunt work—students were assured that a diploma would land them cushy jobs in air-conditioned offices filled with spreadsheets.
But those very spreadsheets? They’re exactly what AI excels at managing. The new John Henry isn’t hammering spikes; he’s now racing to crunch numbers. Humans can’t keep pace with microprocessors.
According to Musk, traditional “hard” jobs might become safer, while numerous degree-requiring roles could vanish, supplanted by engineers who manage AI while computing taxes, diagnosing health issues, and drafting legal documents. Honestly, the educational path I took at university feels increasingly shaky. Institutions now compete not only with a declining student population but also with outdated programs that students aren’t keen to choose anymore.
Job Insecurity in a Tech-Driven Future
The situation may even be grimmer than Musk acknowledges. While he suggests that “numerical jobs” are the first to go, he has also expressed intentions to manufacture 100 million Optimus robots over the next decade. If that holds true, even many physical labor positions might be jeopardized by automation.
There’s a scenario where we glide into a utopia with abundant food, diminishing work, and basic income as the norm. Yet, AI might take care of that for us too. We could find ourselves living in, well, something resembling a dystopian reality.
You know, alternatively, we could face a scenario like those depicted in science fiction, where an AI overlord controls humans as if they were mere possessions. Or, even worse, an AI like Ultron decides that to protect Earth, humanity must be eliminated. It’s almost tragic; we end up becoming our own worst enemies.
No matter which future unfolds, Musk may have touched on something fundamentally human: we tend to seek to avoid suffering—especially hard labor. We design machines to escape toil. Still, there’s a certain amount of effort we can’t skimp on.
After the biblical Adam sinned, toil was introduced into the Garden of Eden. Because of that, we cannot exist in paradise without some level of labor. We need to struggle and strive for our daily needs. History seems split between those who aim to evade suffering entirely and those who regard suffering as an opportunity for reflection and repentance. AI is simply the latest iteration of the elusive Philosopher’s Stone.
The Debate on AI in Academia
Can we genuinely consider an AI philosophy teacher as a replacement? Honestly, there’s no need to panic.
What AI can’t replicate in its misguided attempt to replace humans is the understanding that true wisdom often comes from grappling with life’s challenges. There’s a Hebrew concept of wisdom that emphasizes “skillful living.” Claiming “AI will replicate how you live your life well” pales in comparison to learning from individuals who truly embody those qualities.
Students will continue to require guidance on how to better themselves. The real professors who have navigated this journey will always hold the gold standard that AI can merely mimic. We might bypass the discomfort of learning, but, inevitably, we can’t escape the necessity of it.
