The app for independent voices
Will write something more thorough later, but for some reason it seems many of the commentators on this post seem to think that the paper claims people who think AI is immoral are wrong.
But this is not a philosophy paper, its a moral psychology paper. The only point is that (some) people hold strong moral convictions masquerading as non-moral convictions. One can debate the validity of this finding, or its merit, but there is no need for the philosophical debate whether AI use is moral or not.
Ironically, this pattern of irrelevant argumentation followed by what seems as a threat to one's moral views provides anecdotal evidence to the validity of the argument in the paper.
Ask a colleague why they refuse to use AI. They say it uses up all the water. You then send them to Andy Masley’s blog. Then it's the hallucinations. You mention accuracy has improved dramatically. Then, finally: the process is the point. The struggle. The craft. The deeply human act of sitting with uncertainty.
They're not reasoning. They're ration…
