🔗 Share this article

This past summer, I found myself navigating in gridlocked traffic on the sweltering streets of a southern French city. At an intersection, my companion in the passenger seat suggested a right turn toward a renowned spot for bouillabaisse. Yet, the navigation app on my phone instructed us to continue straight. Weary and overheated, I followed the algorithm's advice. Minutes later, we were stranded at a construction site.

A minor event, maybe. But one that captures a defining dilemma of our era, where digital tools permeates almost every aspect of our lives: who gets our trust to a greater degree – other people and our personal instincts, or the algorithm?

A Call for Intellectual Maturity and Our Modern Relapse

The renowned German philosopher Immanuel Kant famously described the Enlightenment as "man's release from its self-inflicted nonage." This immaturity, he argued, "is the incapacity to use one's personal reason without direction from another." For centuries, that directing force for society was often the priest, the king, or the feudal lord – figures claiming to speak for God's voice. To explain phenomena like volcanic eruptions, people looked for explanations in religion. In organizing the social world, from economics to love, faith served as the primary guide.

“Sapere aude!” or “Have courage to use your own understanding!”

Kant maintained that humans had the capacity for reason. They simply lacked the boldness to use it. With upheavals in the 18th century, a new dawn emerged: logic would replace superstition, and the intellect, freed from dogma, would become the engine of advancement and a better world.

Today, two and a half centuries later, one might wonder if we are slipping back into a form of dependency. An app suggesting a direction is merely the start. Artificial intelligence threatens to become our new "other" – a unseen guide that influences our choices and actions. We are in danger of ceding the hard-won 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 debuted only in 2022, and already a global survey found that an vast number of respondents had engaged with artificial intelligence in the previous six months. Whether contemplating a breakup or selecting a vote, individuals are looking to algorithms for counsel. Research suggests a significant portion of user queries relate to personal life matters. Even more intriguing than our use of AI for judgment is what happens when we allow it express for us. Writing is now among the top uses for tools like ChatGPT, just behind practical requests. The celebrated American author Joan Didion famously said, “I write entirely to discover what I am thinking.” What occurs when we cease writing? Do we lose that path?

Alarmingly, some evidence suggests the answer may be yes. A study conducted by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology used electroencephalography to track the mental engagement of essay writers who had could use AI, Google, or nothing. Those who could rely on AI displayed the least brain activity and had trouble accurately recalling their own work. Perhaps most concerning was that over time, participants in the AI group became progressively lazier, copying large sections of text.

“Inertia and fear,” Kant wrote, “are the reasons why so many of men … remain in lifelong immaturity.”

Of course, AI's appeal lies in its convenience. It saves time, reduces effort and – critically – offers a novel way to abdicate responsibility. In his 1941 book, Escape from Freedom, the German psychoanalyst Erich Fromm argued that the rise of fascism could be understood by a human tendency to give up autonomy in exchange for the comforting security of obedience. AI presents a modern avenue for surrendering the weight of having to think and choose.

The Black Box Problem: Faith Over Reason

AI's greatest allure is its capacity to accomplish things outside our minds – analyzing oceans of data at unprecedented speed. Stuck in the car in Marseille, this was, ultimately, why I chose to trust the machine over my friend (a decision she took as an affront). With knowledge of real-time information, certainly the app had superior insight – or so I believed.

The fundamental problem is that AI is a opaque system. It generates knowledge, but not always deepening human understanding. We do not truly know the process behind its conclusions – even its creators acknowledge the opacity. Nor can we check its logic against transparent standards. So when we heed AI's advice, we are not being led by logic. We are back in the domain of belief. In dubio pro machina: when in doubt, side with the machine – that may become our 21st-century credo.

Harnessing Without Eroding: The Critical Balance

AI can be a formidable ally for humanity in rational inquiry. It can help inventing drugs, free us from "bullshit jobs", or handle administrative chores – work that are repetitive and offer little satisfaction. This is beneficial. But Kant and his peers did not champion enlightenment just so humans could optimize chores or have extra free time. Independent thought was not just about efficiency – it was a practice of liberty and human self-determination.

Human thought is often chaotic and error-prone, but it compels us to argue, to question, to challenge concepts – and to acknowledge the limits of our own understanding. It builds confidence, both individually and as a society. 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 resist domination. It was about building a moral community grounded in the shared principle of reason and debate, rather than blind belief.

With all the advantages AI offers, the paramount challenge remains: how can we leverage its potential of advanced capability without eroding human rationality, the cornerstone of the Enlightenment and of liberal democracy themselves? That may be one of the defining questions of our time. It is a question we would do well not to outsource to the algorithm.