Couldn't this very same argument have been used against any form of mental augmentation, like written language and computers? Or, in an extended interpretation, against any form of physical augmentation, like tool use?
I can't spell for shit anymore. Ever since auto correct became omnipresent in pretty much all writing fields, my brain just kinda ditched remembering how to spell words.
buuuttt
Manual labor has been obsolete for at least 100 years now for certain classes of people, and fitness is still an enormous recreational activity people partake in. So even in an AI heavy society, I still strongly suspect there will be "brain games" that people still enjoy and regularly play.
There is another side to this, which is maybe we don’t need to know a lot of things.
It was true with search engines already, but maybe truer with LLMs. That thing you’re querying probably doesn’t actually matter. It’s neurotic digging and searching for an object you will never use or benefit from. The urge to seek is strong but you won’t find the thing you’re searching for this way.
You might learn more by just going for a walk.
This is increasingly happening to me every day. Hope the alien overlords don't have spelling tests (as their version of IQ tests) to separate the serfs from the field-masters.
Fair point. But they are heavily metaphor-laden paragraphs.
Textual interpretation is a highly subjective activity. Entire careers consist of interpreting, reinterpreting, and discussing texts that others have already interpreted. Film critics, book reviewers, political pundits, TV anchors, podcasters, etc.
'In 1972, Chinese premier Zhou Enlai was asked about the impact of the French Revolution. "Too early to say," he replied'
I had my own sense of what the "coquina" metaphor stood for. I wanted to see other peoples' interpretations. Turns out my interpretation was wrong.