🔗 Share this article

This past summer, I found myself navigating in congested traffic on the sweltering streets of Marseille. At a crossing, my companion in the front seat advised a right turn toward a famous spot for bouillabaisse. Yet, the navigation app on my phone instructed us to go forward. Weary and overheated, I followed the algorithm's advice. Moments later, we were stranded at a roadwork site.

A minor event, maybe. But one that encapsulates a defining dilemma of our time, where technology touches nearly every facet of existence: who gets our trust to a greater degree – other people and our personal instincts, or the machine?

A Call for Intellectual Maturity and A Contemporary Backslide

The renowned German philosopher Immanuel Kant once defined the Enlightenment as "man's release from its self-inflicted nonage." This state, he argued, "represents the inability to use one's own understanding without guidance from another." For centuries, that guiding "other" for society was frequently the priest, the monarch, or the landowner – figures claiming to channel God's voice. To explain natural events like volcanic eruptions, people sought answers in theology. In organizing the fabric of society, from commerce to love, faith served as the main compass.

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

Kant maintained that humans always possessed the ability to think rationally. They just didn't have the boldness to use it. With revolutions in the 18th century, a fresh era emerged: reason would replace blind faith, and the human mind, freed from authority, would become the engine of progress and a better world.

Today, two and a half centuries later, one might wonder if we are slipping back into a state of dependency. An app dictating a driving route is just one example. AI threatens to become our contemporary authority – a silent guide that influences our choices and behaviors. We risk relinquishing the historically earned autonomy to think independently – and this time, not to deities or rulers, but to computer programs.

The Rapid Rise and Subtle Dangers of AI Dependence

ChatGPT debuted a mere three years ago, and yet a global survey indicated that an overwhelming majority of people had used AI in the previous six months. Whether contemplating a breakup or choosing a candidate, individuals are increasingly turning to algorithms for guidance. Research suggests a significant portion of user prompts concern personal life matters. Even more striking than our reliance on AI for advice is what occurs when we let it express for us. Writing is now among the most common uses for generative AI, just behind everyday tasks. The celebrated American author Joan Didion once remarked, “I write purely to find out what I am thinking.” What transpires when we stop composing? Do we cease discovering?

Alarmingly, emerging research suggests the outcome may be yes. 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 rely on AI displayed the lowest brain activity and had trouble quoting their own work. Maybe most troubling was that over time, participants in the AI group became progressively lazier, copying large sections of text.

“Laziness and cowardice,” Kant wrote, “are the reasons why so great a proportion of men … stay in perpetual nonage.”

Certainly, AI's attraction lies in its efficiency. It saves time, minimizes work and – importantly – offers a new method to abdicate accountability. In his 1941 book, Escape from Freedom, the German psychoanalyst Erich Fromm proposed that the rise of fascism could be partly explained by a preference to give up autonomy in for the sake of the comforting security of subordination. AI offers a modern avenue for relinquishing the weight of having to think and choose.

The Black Box Problem: Trust Without Understanding

AI's greatest allure is its ability to perform tasks beyond human capability – sifting through oceans of data at lightning pace. Stuck in the car in Marseille, this was, after all, why I opted to trust the app over my friend (a choice she took as an insult). With access to real-time information, certainly the app had superior insight – or so I believed.

The fundamental problem is that AI is a black box. It generates knowledge, but not always deepening human comprehension. We do not truly know the process behind its decisions – including its creators acknowledge the opacity. Nor can we verify its reasoning against clear, objective criteria. So when we heed AI's advice, we are not being led by logic. We are returning to the realm of belief. In dubio pro machina: when in doubt, trust the machine – that may become our 21st-century credo.

Harnessing Without Eroding: The Critical Balance

AI can be a formidable ally for mankind in scientific pursuit. It can aid in medical research, liberate us from "bullshit jobs", or manage taxes – work that are repetitive and are unfulfilling. All to the good. But Kant and his contemporaries did not advocate for reason over faith just so humans could assemble better furniture or have more leisure. Independent thought was not just about efficiency – it was a discipline of freedom and human self-determination.

Human thought is often chaotic and error-prone, but it forces us to debate, to question, to test ideas – and to recognize the limits of our own knowledge. It fosters confidence, both individually and collectively. For Kant, the use of reason was never solely about information; it was about empowering people to become authors of their own lives, and to oppose domination. It was about building a moral community grounded in the shared principle of rational discourse, rather than unquestioning acceptance.

With all the undeniable benefits AI brings, the paramount challenge remains: how can we leverage its promise of advanced capability without undermining human reasoning, the cornerstone of the Enlightenment and of free societies themselves? That is likely one of the central dilemmas of our time. It is a question we would do well not to outsource to the algorithm.