Live data from Hacker News

The Impact of Generative AI on Critical Thinking [pdf]

microsoft.com

21–30 of 109 posts

Re: The Impact of Generative AI on Critical Thinking [pdf]

#21
I think this study does not say what most people are taking it to say.

> our research questions - when and how knowledge workers perceive the enaction of critical thinking when using GenAI (RQ1), and when and why do knowledge workers perceive increased/decreased effort for critical thinking due to GenAI (RQ2)

This is about the application of critical thinking to AI outputs and in AI workflows. Are people cognitively lazy when some other entity hands them plausible sounding answers?

The answer of course is yes. If some entity gives you a good enough result, probably you aren’t going to spend much time improving it unless there is a good reason to do so. Likewise you probably aren’t going to spend a lot of time researching something that AI tells you if it sounds plausible. This is certainly a weakness, but it’s a general weakness in human cognition, and has little to do with AI in and of itself.

In my reading, what this study does not say, and does not set out to answer, is whether or not the use of AI makes people generally less able or likely to engage in critical thinking as a result of use of AI.

Re: The Impact of Generative AI on Critical Thinking [pdf]

#23

People are worried AI is making us dumber. You hear it all the time. GPS wrecked our sense of direction. Spellcheck killed spelling. Now it’s AI’s turn to supposedly rot our brains. It’s the same old story. New tool comes along, people freak out about what we’re “losing.” But they’re missing the point. It’s never about losing skills, it’s about shifting them. And usually, the shift is upwards. Take GPS. Yeah, okay, m…

This assumes you always have reliable GPS:

- areas that lack map details and obstructions that preclude straight line paths, e.g. deep forest

- wartime GPS blocking

- device failure incl battery

- errors in mapping data

- maps that contain other information not found in your GPS-enabled map

Re: The Impact of Generative AI on Critical Thinking [pdf]

#24

As I expected. When I got a cell phone I forgot everyone's phone numbers, and I'm afraid if I use AI I'll forget how to think.

It probably also depends on whether you trust the AI. I don't, at all. So, I'm often critically thinking about whatever nonsense it spews out.

I wonder a lot why people use generative AI in the first place.

I’ve found in my work that I don’t really have anything to ask an AI to help me with that the generative AIs available to me are particularly good at. I distrust them, but I also haven’t really found a use for them. Which isn’t to say that such generative AIs don’t exist; I just don’t have access to those particular ones due to the nature of my work, and so haven’t tried them.

I don’t really have a use for them personally either. I think the closest I come is voice assistants, which I use so sparingly I wouldn’t miss if they were gone.

Re: The Impact of Generative AI on Critical Thinking [pdf]

#25
> Thus, knowledge workers with higher levels of trust in GenAI — generally or for specific tasks — perceive engaging in critical thinking activities to be less effortful. A possible explanation, supplemented with our qualitative analysis in RQ1 (see Section 4.3.2), is that trust and reliance on GenAI inhibit the enaction of critical thinking, i.e., users underinvest in critical thinking when using GenAI.

There is a reduction in certain kinds of effort when using any kind of tool.

Another possible explanation is that using LLMs, much like using a pry bar for leverage with physical energy, provides leverage for cognitive energies. Does the person using a pry bar become less physically fit than if they were removing floorboards by hand or do they just get more work done during the day?

I don't think there is a problem in exploring the trade-offs for using any kind of tool or technology but the discussion needs to be balanced.

Personally, I use LLMs but I'd say I have a critical understanding of their limitations and when it is better to start using another tool, like a book, to learn the skills required to use the tools to achieve the tasks at hand. I will say that using a tool that provides leverage for cognitive energies allows for the cognition to be applied to other parts of the process, typically higher order.

For example, I spend much more time thinking about the overall architecture of the memory model in C applications.

Re: The Impact of Generative AI on Critical Thinking [pdf]

#26

People are worried AI is making us dumber. You hear it all the time. GPS wrecked our sense of direction. Spellcheck killed spelling. Now it’s AI’s turn to supposedly rot our brains. It’s the same old story. New tool comes along, people freak out about what we’re “losing.” But they’re missing the point. It’s never about losing skills, it’s about shifting them. And usually, the shift is upwards. Take GPS. Yeah, okay, m…

AI can program, but not engineer. Even then, you eventually reach a point in the project where it is too complex for AI to even do snippets; especially if you are pioneering something new that has never been done before. A sprinter is unlikely to win a marathon, and that is what using AI to program is like. By the time you have to take over, you have a huge learning curve ahead of you as you can lean on the AI less a…

> AI can program, but not engineer.

I feel like that's what the OP said. People can focus on the engineering part and not memorizing syntax or function names.

Too often I see people thinking in very binary terms, and we see it here again. AI does everything or nothing. I just keep thinking it'll be in between and people who are good at leveraging every tool at their disposal will reap the largest benefits.

Re: The Impact of Generative AI on Critical Thinking [pdf]

#27

People are worried AI is making us dumber. You hear it all the time. GPS wrecked our sense of direction. Spellcheck killed spelling. Now it’s AI’s turn to supposedly rot our brains. It’s the same old story. New tool comes along, people freak out about what we’re “losing.” But they’re missing the point. It’s never about losing skills, it’s about shifting them. And usually, the shift is upwards. Take GPS. Yeah, okay, m…

> so we can focus on what humans are actually good at

You know what humans are good at? Deluding ourselves. Because that's what you're doing. Using vague, feel-good words, based on vague analogies, no proof, to keep the inconvenient truth at bay. Not being able to navigate with a paper map is a big thing: people get lost inside buildings without a map. Next time the power fails, half of the GenZ will be lost. Not being able to write with pen and paper is a big thing. Not being able to add a few number is not as big a thing, but it certainly can be a problem. And what for? So you don't have to feel bad about using AI tools?

You know what comes next? Everything based on audio and video. Are you then going to argue: reading is an obsolete skill?

Re: The Impact of Generative AI on Critical Thinking [pdf]

#29

People are worried AI is making us dumber. You hear it all the time. GPS wrecked our sense of direction. Spellcheck killed spelling. Now it’s AI’s turn to supposedly rot our brains. It’s the same old story. New tool comes along, people freak out about what we’re “losing.” But they’re missing the point. It’s never about losing skills, it’s about shifting them. And usually, the shift is upwards. Take GPS. Yeah, okay, m…

Knowing which direction you are facing is an obsolete skill? I don’t think you’ve been paying attention. You’ve been watching too many Ted talks or something

What do you do with that knowledge? I mean, it's a good skill if you're actually going to apply it to something. Knowing you're facing north is great if there's some use you get out out that. Finding your way around is way more work than just "north is that way".

I remember the first time I traveled internationally. Incredible stress. I had a bunch of printouts with all the details. Still, I depended completely on the friend I was visiting. I literally didn't dare leave his house without him because I wasn't confident I could make it back without having to have him rescue me and didn't want to give him that trouble. Sure I had a bunch of info, but one wrong decision and my static stack of papers might not be enough to get me out of it.

Technology made an absolutely amazing difference. With GPS I could wander around a city aimlessly and still find a way to my hotel. I could figure out where the center was. The early incarnation was rough but amazing for the amount of stress relief it provided.

And modern tech? Just sci-fi magic. I can see both the usual sights and find various obscure ones and any business I might need. With Uber I could get a trip in random countries wherever needed without speaking the local language. Google now tells me about bus and tram routes, tells me what to take, where the station is, and what stations am I going to go through, and when I'm going to be there. There's a magic real time translator for both text and voice.

Re: The Impact of Generative AI on Critical Thinking [pdf]

#30

People are worried AI is making us dumber. You hear it all the time. GPS wrecked our sense of direction. Spellcheck killed spelling. Now it’s AI’s turn to supposedly rot our brains. It’s the same old story. New tool comes along, people freak out about what we’re “losing.” But they’re missing the point. It’s never about losing skills, it’s about shifting them. And usually, the shift is upwards. Take GPS. Yeah, okay, m…

This is dead on. I'm not even a big AI fan, but this is a key idea about technology in general. I don't want to have to bring to mind the laws of physics every time I drive to work. The whole point is that a group of engineers encoded them into the machine for me, and now I enhance my capabilities without needing to know how. It's what the classic Alfred North Whitehead quote is talking about. I understand the impulse towards mastery and ever-expanding knowledge—who doesn't love the idea that they should be able to "plan an invasion, change a diaper, butcher a hog"—but the truth is we have finite capabilities we are capable of mastering in a lifetime. This is why even literal geniuses often fail when they step outside their field of expertise. It's a valid concern that as a society some skill will be lost, or concentrated in the hands off too few, but losing skills and knowledge (or I would simply call it "being permitted to forget") is in general fine. Now if AI literally killed people's ability to think, that would be one thing. But what I suspect is that like parent is saying, it allows you to turn off your brain for certain tasks, like every technology. Then the question is what more complex tasks can we do on top of the automatic and thoughtless ones.

EDIT: I see some good replies to parent about stability/reliability, alienation etc. There are definitely tradeoffs to the power you get from technology, and it's worth acknowledging those. But that's exactly the framework we should be thinking in. What are the tradeoffs involved? Often these kinds of stories are one-sided arguments that imply losing skills is straightforwardly bad, when in truth it's more complicated than that.

Post reply on HN