🔗 Share this article

This recent season, I was caught in congested traffic on the scorching streets of Marseille. At an intersection, my friend in the passenger seat advised a right turn toward a famous spot for fish soup. Yet, the navigation app on my phone instructed us to go forward. Fatigued and in a stifling car, I heeded the algorithm's directive. Minutes later, we were stuck at a construction site.

A seemingly trivial incident, perhaps. But one that encapsulates a defining question of our time, where technology touches almost every aspect of our lives: whom do we trust more – other people and our own intuition, or the machine?

The Enlightenment's Promise and Our Modern Relapse

The influential German philosopher Immanuel Kant famously described the Enlightenment as "humanity's emergence from its self-imposed nonage." This state, he wrote, "represents the incapacity to use one's personal reason without direction from another." For ages, that guiding "other" for society was often the priest, the king, or the landowner – figures claiming to speak for divine will. To explain phenomena like changing seasons, people looked for explanations in religion. In organizing the fabric of society, from commerce to love, religious doctrine served as the main compass.

“Sapere aude!” or “Have courage to use your reason!”

Kant maintained that humans had the capacity for reason. They just didn't have the boldness to employ it. With revolutions in America and France, a fresh era arrived: logic would replace superstition, and the human mind, freed from dogma, would become the driver of advancement and a better world.

Now, 250 years later, one might wonder if we are slipping back into a state of intellectual immaturity. An app suggesting a driving route is just one example. Artificial intelligence threatens to become our new "other" – a silent overseer that influences our decisions and behaviors. 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 Algorithmic Reliance

ChatGPT debuted a mere three years ago, and already a recent study found that an vast number of people had engaged with artificial intelligence in the preceding half-year. Whether deciding on ending a relationship or choosing a candidate, individuals are increasingly turning to machines for counsel. Research suggests a large majority of user queries relate to personal life matters. Even more striking than our reliance on AI for judgment is what occurs when we allow it express for us. Writing is now one of the top uses for generative AI, second only to everyday tasks. The celebrated American author Joan Didion famously said, “I write purely to discover what I am thinking.” What occurs when we stop composing? Do we lose that path?

Worryingly, emerging research suggests the outcome may be yes. A study conducted by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology used electroencephalography to observe the mental engagement of participants who had could use AI, traditional search engines, or no aids. Those who could use AI showed the least brain activity and had trouble quoting their own work. Perhaps most troubling was that after a few months, individuals in the AI group grew increasingly reliant, copying large sections of text.

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

Certainly, AI's attraction stems from its efficiency. It is fast, minimizes work and – critically – offers a new method to abdicate responsibility. In his 1941 book, Escape from Freedom, the German psychoanalyst Erich Fromm argued that the appeal of authoritarianism could be understood by a human tendency to give up autonomy in exchange for the comforting security of obedience. AI offers a digital avenue for surrendering the weight of having to decide for oneself.

The Opacity Dilemma: Faith Over Reason

AI's greatest allure is its capacity to accomplish things outside human capability – analyzing oceans of data at unprecedented speed. Sitting in the car in Marseille, this was, ultimately, why I chose to believe the app over my companion (a choice she interpreted as an affront). With knowledge of all the data, surely the algorithm had superior insight – or so I thought.

The core issue is that AI is a black box. It generates answers, but not always fostering human understanding. We cannot fully grasp the process behind its conclusions – including its creators admit this. Nor can we verify its reasoning against clear, objective criteria. So when we heed AI's recommendation, we are not being led by logic. We are returning to the realm of faith. In dubio pro machina: when in doubt, side with the machine – that could be our future credo.

Harnessing Without Eroding: The Critical Balance

AI can be a powerful tool for humanity in scientific pursuit. It can help inventing drugs, liberate us from "bullshit jobs", or handle taxes – duties that demand little thought and are unfulfilling. 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 merely about efficiency – it was a practice of freedom and human emancipation.

Human thought is inherently messy and error-prone, but it compels us to argue, to doubt, to challenge concepts – and to recognize the boundaries of our own understanding. It fosters self-reliance, both personally and as a society. For Kant, the use of reason was never solely about acquiring knowledge; it was about empowering people to become agents of their own lives, and to resist domination. It was about building a ethical society based on the shared principle of rational discourse, rather than unquestioning acceptance.

With all the advantages AI brings, the key question remains: how can we harness its promise of advanced capability without undermining human reasoning, the bedrock of the Enlightenment and of liberal democracy itself? That may be one of the defining questions of our time. It is a question we must strive not to outsource to the algorithm.