An exploration of how AI impacts human expression, challenges legacy education norms, and redefines creativity and adaptability in a changing world.
Amid the tsunami of changes we are witnessing in technology and its lifecycle and other associated aspects of creators’ economies (video making, content creation, writing, etc.), the role of AI is most entrenched and perhaps the most debated. The most common narrative or argument that seems to take the spotlight is “AI or LLMs or Vibe Coding shrinks Human Ingenuity“.
The above adage although, might seem to be a fair concern – the foundation it’s built on is flimsy. The concern does not necessarily reflect the inherent intent of the debater – “The Loss of Control“. As commonly believed by the pseudo-intelligentsia, AI does not stifle expression – it nourishes or in the barest sense democratizes it. The persona-driven purists often relegate or dismiss the issue, hauntingly coining it as something that berates originality. The notion of gradual human cognitive erosion is naive, to say the least, and conforms well to someone who lacks a basic understanding of the “Technological Lifecycle’s” intertwinedness with human evolution. Inevitably, AI will fundamentally transform civilization like no other cosmic factor in the next century. For someone to argue that they cannot evolve with AI eventually stands compromised at the crossroads of humanity’s journey to the next echelon. Not the intellectually dominant but the one who unlearns and learns as a perpetual act will evolve and fit into the web of evolution continuum.
AI and its usage across multiple sectors will replace redundant unproductive tasks, tasks that often allow a set of underemployed individuals to lay claim to their indispensability. The nature of work that is information-heavy and does not necessarily require human touch can belong to AI’s forte. The human touch in some unanticipated measure usually creates bias. However, the sole act of creating an AI model itself must also conform to certain ground rules, and by design, the AI artifact should not be biased. Not all information needs human flourish and storytelling, but some need deep discernment. There exists work that demands purity and transparency over human interpretation. Those tasks must be entrusted to AI, with responsibility and transparent rigor while training them.
Such a belief system often depicts the fallacy of the inherently flawed schooling (read education) system that portrays a conventional narrative of what a ‘genius’ ought to be. The ‘Tuition Teacher Pets‘, and the ‘School Toppers’ were mistakenly crowned as future thought leaders. However, the passage of time did not necessarily ingrain in them a sense of rationality fused with technical depth, and the peddling of ideological fallacy seems to be the ideal course of action for them.
The ingenuity of human expression can never be stifled – but can evolve and adapt to the most recent aspect of evolutionary strata. It is evident – The future technical leaders and architects are ignoring the narrative of surface scratchers and minions whose sole intent is to raise a voice for the sake of it to vindicate themselves.
P.S: The thoughts expressed above stem from personal and lived work experiences. None of the content or opinion expressed in this website borrow creative ingenuity from any AI tool, except where required for informational purity. In the strictest sense, the Puritan aspect of human expressional ingenuity stands vindicative and intentional.
The image of course is borrowed from a popular LLM.