🔗 Share this article

This past summer, I was caught in gridlocked traffic on the scorching streets of Marseille. At an intersection, my companion in the passenger seat advised a right turn toward a renowned spot for fish soup. However, the digital guide on my phone commanded us to continue straight. Fatigued and in a stifling car, I followed the app's advice. Minutes later, we were stuck at a roadwork site.

A minor incident, perhaps. But one that encapsulates a defining question of our time, where technology permeates almost every aspect of our lives: whom do we trust more – other people and our personal instincts, or the machine?

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-inflicted immaturity." This state, he wrote, "is the inability to use one's personal reason without guidance from an external source." For ages, that guiding "other" for society was frequently the clergyman, the king, or the landowner – entities purporting to channel God's voice. To comprehend phenomena like volcanic eruptions, people looked for explanations in religion. 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 argued that humans always possessed the ability to think rationally. They just didn't have the confidence to use it. With upheavals in the 18th century, a new dawn emerged: logic would replace superstition, and the intellect, liberated from authority, would become the driver of progress and a more ethical world.

Now, two and a half centuries later, one might wonder if we are slipping back into a state of dependency. An app suggesting a driving route is just one example. AI threatens to become our contemporary authority – a silent overseer that influences our decisions and behaviors. We are in danger of relinquishing the historically earned autonomy to reason for ourselves – and now, not to deities or rulers, but to lines of code.

The Rapid Rise and Hidden Risks of AI Dependence

ChatGPT was launched only in 2022, and yet a recent study found that an overwhelming majority of people had engaged with artificial intelligence in the previous six months. Whether deciding on ending a relationship or choosing a candidate, individuals are increasingly turning to algorithms for guidance. Data suggests a significant portion of user queries relate to personal life matters. Even more striking than our reliance on AI for advice is what occurs when we let it speak for us. Composition is now one of the top uses for generative AI, second only to practical requests. The celebrated American author Joan Didion famously said, “I write entirely to discover what I am thinking.” What transpires when we stop composing? Do we cease discovering?

Alarmingly, emerging research hints the answer may be affirmative. A study from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology used electroencephalography to track the mental engagement of participants who had could use AI, Google, or nothing. Those who could rely on AI displayed the least cognitive engagement and had difficulty accurately recalling their own work. Perhaps most troubling was that after a few months, individuals in the AI group grew progressively lazier, pasting entire blocks of text.

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

Of course, AI's appeal lies in its efficiency. It is fast, minimizes work and – critically – offers a novel way to offload responsibility. In his 1941 book, Escape from Freedom, the German psychoanalyst Erich Fromm argued that the appeal of authoritarianism could be partly explained by a human tendency to give up personal freedom in for the sake of the comforting security of subordination. AI presents a digital avenue for surrendering the burden of having to think and choose.

The Black Box Problem: Trust Without Understanding

AI's greatest allure is its capacity to accomplish things beyond human capability – analyzing vast datasets at unprecedented speed. Stuck in the car in Marseille, this was, after all, why I opted to trust the machine over my companion (a choice she interpreted as an insult). With knowledge of real-time information, surely the algorithm had superior insight – or so I believed.

The fundamental problem is that AI is a opaque system. It produces knowledge, but not always fostering human understanding. We do not truly know how AI reaches its decisions – including its programmers acknowledge the opacity. Nor can we verify its reasoning against clear, objective criteria. So when we follow AI's advice, we are not being guided by reason. We are back in the domain 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 powerful tool for humanity in scientific pursuit. It can help medical research, liberate us from tedious tasks, or handle administrative chores – duties that demand little thought and are unfulfilling. All to the good. But Kant and his contemporaries did not champion enlightenment just so humans could optimize chores or have extra free time. Critical thinking was not just about productivity – it was a practice of freedom and human self-determination.

Human thought is often chaotic and fallible, but it compels us to argue, to question, to test ideas – and to recognize the boundaries of our own understanding. It fosters self-reliance, both individually and collectively. For Kant, the use of reason was never solely about information; it was about enabling people to become agents of their own destinies, and to oppose control. It was about creating a ethical society grounded in the shared principle of reason and debate, rather than unquestioning acceptance.

With all the advantages AI brings, the paramount challenge remains: how can we harness its promise of advanced capability without eroding human reasoning, the bedrock of the Enlightenment and of liberal democracy themselves? That is likely one of the central dilemmas of our time. It is a question we must strive not to delegate to the machine.