🔗 Share this article

This recent season, I was caught in congested traffic on the scorching streets of Marseille. At a crossing, my friend in the front seat suggested a right turn toward a famous spot for fish soup. However, the digital guide on my phone commanded us to go forward. Fatigued and overheated, I heeded the app's advice. Minutes later, we were stuck at a construction site.

A minor incident, perhaps. But one that encapsulates a defining dilemma of our time, where technology permeates nearly every facet of existence: whom do we trust to a greater degree – fellow humans and our personal instincts, or the algorithm?

The Enlightenment's Promise and A Contemporary Backslide

The influential German philosopher Immanuel Kant once defined the Enlightenment as "man's release from its self-imposed immaturity." This immaturity, he wrote, "is the incapacity to use one's own understanding without direction from another." For centuries, that directing force for human thought was frequently the clergyman, the monarch, or the landowner – figures claiming to speak for divine will. To comprehend phenomena like changing seasons, people sought answers in theology. In organizing the fabric of society, from commerce to matters of the heart, faith acted as the main compass.

“Sapere aude!” or “Dare to use your own understanding!”

Kant maintained that humans had the capacity for reason. They simply lacked the confidence to use it. With upheavals in the 18th century, a new dawn emerged: reason would supplant superstition, and the human mind, liberated from dogma, would become the engine of advancement and a better world.

Now, two and a half centuries later, one might question if we are slipping back into a form of intellectual immaturity. An app dictating a direction is merely the start. Artificial intelligence threatens to become our new "other" – a unseen guide that influences our decisions and actions. We risk ceding the hard-won courage to think independently – and now, not to gods or kings, but to computer programs.

The Swift Adoption and Subtle Dangers of Algorithmic Reliance

ChatGPT debuted only in 2022, and yet a global survey indicated that an overwhelming majority of respondents had engaged with artificial intelligence in the preceding half-year. Whether contemplating ending a relationship or choosing a candidate, individuals are increasingly turning to machines for counsel. Research suggests a significant portion of user queries concern non-work topics. Even more striking than our reliance on AI for advice is what occurs when we allow it express for us. Writing is now one of the most common uses for generative AI, just behind everyday tasks. The celebrated American author Joan Didion once remarked, “I write entirely to find out what I am thinking.” What occurs when we stop composing? Do we cease discovering?

Alarmingly, emerging research suggests the outcome may be affirmative. A study conducted by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology used electroencephalography to track the mental engagement of participants who had could use AI, traditional search engines, or no aids. Those who could rely on AI showed the lowest cognitive engagement and had trouble quoting their own work. Perhaps most troubling was that over time, individuals in the AI group became progressively lazier, pasting large sections of text.

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

Of course, AI's attraction lies in its convenience. It saves time, reduces effort and – importantly – offers a new method to offload accountability. 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 give up autonomy in exchange for the comforting security of subordination. AI presents a modern avenue for surrendering the burden of having to decide for oneself.

The Opacity Dilemma: Faith Over Reason

AI's greatest allure is its capacity to perform tasks outside our minds – analyzing oceans of data at unprecedented speed. Stuck in the car in Marseille, this was, after all, why I chose to trust the app over my companion (a decision she took as an insult). With access to all the data, certainly the app must know best – or so I believed.

The core issue is that AI is a opaque system. It produces knowledge, but not always deepening human comprehension. We cannot fully grasp the process behind its decisions – including its creators admit this. Nor can we check its logic against clear, objective criteria. So when we follow AI's advice, we are not being led by logic. We are returning to the domain of belief. In dubio pro machina: when in doubt, side with the machine – that could be our future credo.

Harnessing Without Eroding: The Essential Challenge

AI can be a formidable ally for mankind in rational inquiry. It can help inventing drugs, free us from "bullshit jobs", or handle taxes – work that demand little thought and offer little satisfaction. All to the good. But Kant and his peers did not advocate for reason over faith just so humans could optimize chores or have more leisure. Independent thought was not just about productivity – it was a practice of freedom and human self-determination.

Human thought is often chaotic and fallible, but it forces us to debate, to question, to test ideas – and to recognize the limits of our own understanding. It fosters confidence, both individually and as a society. For Kant, the exercise of reason was never only about acquiring knowledge; it was about enabling people to become agents of their own lives, and to resist control. It was about creating a moral community grounded in the shared principle of rational discourse, rather than unquestioning acceptance.

With all the advantages AI offers, the paramount challenge is this: how can we harness its promise of superhuman intelligence without undermining human reasoning, the cornerstone of the Enlightenment and of liberal democracy itself? That may be one of the central dilemmas of our time. It is a question we must strive not to delegate to the machine.