With the emergence of Chatgpt and its increasing adoption in offices and classes, the question became further than “How do we use it?” To “What is he doing with us?” What we see is a obedient screen that is parallel to the curtain, a engine that decides on our behalf the fastest or deepest path to the solution. Recent developments such as (5-GPT) are not satisfied with improving the quality of the outputs; Rather, rearrange the mental steps themselves. The tools were an extension of the hand and the tongue, but today it is an extension of the mind, which interferes in moments of diagnosis, framing and decision -making. Here the most difficult question begins: Do these tools give us more freedom of thinking or take away the ability to practice this freedom?
In the beginnings, the user had to later a little: it would be difficult to ask the question, the entrance is selected, testing more than one angle. Those small moments were a daily mental training hall. Today, with the smoothness of new systems and their hidden guidance between fast responses and deep thinking patterns; The experience is reduced to a request and a result, and training is absent to monitor and control thinking. The outputs accelerate yes, but the mental muscles that are built with classification, assumption and verification; She loses her daily exercise and the hand loses skill if she stops writing.
The deeper danger is the hidden distance that the algorithms swallow the idea and its proof. We read a tight summary, and we do not see the mental workshop that was built inside: Where did the hypotheses disturb? How did the priorities arrange? Why was alternative methods neglected? Over time, we have a “illusion of competence”: a sense of being able to be elaborate, while “mental maps” are eroded that are not acquired except with stinginess and struggle. Even the paste expert is an experience that turns – if he is prolonged – to a more quality auditor than a meaningful maker, reviews what others formulates instead of being built from his first foundations.
The issue is not “with or against”; Rather, how can we keep ourselves a share of the road in light of this terrible simulation. This begins with conscious cognitive maintenance that restores us the initiative; To write our perception before the question: Defining the problem, assumptions, an initial plan; After taking advantage, we review any steps we jumped over it? Then we preserve us as human beings that are not controlled: the weight of values when crowded, the moral sense in gray situations, and the ability to hold the Muslim women before being reacted to them, the important thing is that we do not adopt a way out that we cannot explain and defend it.
practically; Three simple and deep effects can be adopted. The first: “A day without intermediaries”; We accomplish an authentic mission from A to Z with our own effort, not to show off asceticism; Rather, let’s remind the memory its way, train intuition on listening, and test our patience for the construction from scratch. The second: “The machine is a critic, not an author”; We offer her a draft from us, and they are tough on notes, and they present alternatives and angles, but we preserve for ourselves the right to the last drafting and the responsibility of logic. Third: “A periodic examination of cognitive fitness”; By testing the skills that we delegate a lot, if we find and here we plans for a gradual treatment that restores strength to its places. With these small steps, we raise the queen of the question before answering, and make technology a partner in raising, not a mask that we hide behind our impotence or speed us.
The new developments are amazing, Chatgpt and its sisters are a vivid example of the machine’s ability to expand the horizon and accelerate the achievement; But these tools become the best when the lens remains a zooming lens, not a lock on the mind. If we do not fill the small separation between the demand and the result with awareness, awareness and responsibility; There will be no difference between having a powerful tool and having a tool for us. The choice is still possible, but the window is narrowing; Let us keep the first decision -makers to remain, and to give these tools the honor of the service, not the throne of leadership, so we win the speed of performance today, and we preserve the dignity of experience for a further tomorrow.
