Ge Jianxiong: AI Has Not Yet Broken Through the Barriers Between Science and the Humanities; Don't Rush to Hand "Humans" Over to It

Recently, Musk posted on social media that many people will be "taken down in one blow" by highly persuasive and extremely intelligent superintelligence. This statement has drawn attention. Today, artificial intelligence has already shown its prowess in scientific fields such as mathematics and physics. Is it also stirring, ready to extend its reach into the human spiritual world? This week, the NYU Shanghai Library hosted a lecture themed "Science, Humanities, Life—How to Face the AI Era." The event specially invited the renowned historian, Distinguished Senior Professor of Humanities at Fudan University, member of the Central Research Institute of Culture and History, and Director of the Library of The Chinese University of Hong Kong (Shenzhen), Professor Ge Jianxiong, as the keynote speaker. In his opening remarks, NYU Shanghai Provost Wu Bei raised a value question about the AI era: "When technology can tell us how to complete a task more efficiently, who judges whether the task is worth doing? When obtaining answers becomes easier and easier, do we instead need more to learn to ask good questions?" Can the humanities rely on AI? In his keynote speech, Ge Jianxiong gave an example: some hold the view that in the future, with the help of AI, it may be possible to reconstruct historical facts about Qin Shi Huang: on which day he was born, on which day he died, what illnesses he suffered, and what deeds he did. Ge Jianxiong hypothesized that if that day comes, the results given by AI might be more comprehensive than those of any historian. But he immediately asked: how Qin Shi Huang should be evaluated—must that also rely on AI? "We need to understand: AI has not yet broken through the barrier between science and the humanities; it is still at the physical stage. We can use AI as a powerful tool and fully leverage its role at the material level, but we should not and cannot hand the humanities over to it." Ge Jianxiong proposed that the knowledge system can be divided into two major domains: science and the humanities. Science is based on matter, usually has standard answers, and requires empirical evidence and reproducibility; the humanities are based on the spirit, have no objective standard answers, and do not require empirical evidence. What guides social progress is always human nature and thought; therefore, what should lead the future is the humanities, not any specific science and technology. He particularly reminded young students that they should not rely too early on AI to replace their own thinking training. What must be guarded against is that people's thinking, logic, and language abilities need continuous training and improvement; if they rely on AI too early, our own intelligence may stop developing or even regress. "As humans ate more and more cooked food and food became more and more refined, the cecum gradually degenerated. If in the future the brain function of humans itself also stops developing or even regresses, the impact will go far beyond a single generation. If that really happens, people will become increasingly inseparable from artificial intelligence and from technologies that may be more advanced in the future." He could not help imagining: if one day the artificial intelligence system pauses or is even destroyed due to natural or man-made disasters, how would people accustomed to relying on it survive? When technology develops to a certain level, a person's life may encounter no difficulties and feel no pain. But how is such a life different from other lives? Where is its value? Ge Jianxiong concluded that we should place AI in an appropriate position, and sometimes even actively choose not to use AI and not be constrained by it; we should think more about life and the meaning and value of our own existence, and actively pursue our own happiness and future. What cannot AI replace? In the subsequent dialogue session, NYU Shanghai Chancellor Tong Shijun engaged in dialogue with Ge Jianxiong. Tong Shijun agreed with the proposition of strictly limiting AI to a "tool," while also offering a different perspective. He cited a philosophical concept and pointed out that a distinction must be made between "having knowledge" and "knowing." "In terms of having knowledge, AI can indeed play a huge role; but in helping people personally experience cognition and understanding, AI's role is probably destined to be very limited." Regarding the current education mechanism, Tong Shijun acknowledged frankly that if education evaluation, constrained by the social environment, emphasizes only selection and neglects cultivation, people will easily rely blindly on AI, because AI can indeed provide answers and complete tasks more and more effectively; therefore, in order to prevent some abilities unique to humans from gradually degenerating because they are "outsourced" to AI, not only education evaluation but also social institutional arrangements need necessary improvement. In response, Ge Jianxiong said that the direction of AI's technological application and its governance need to be guided by humanistic values. He gave an example: if AI is popularized on a large scale regardless of actual conditions, it may lead to many grassroots and lower-level jobs being replaced too much and too early. "Just as society imposes ethical prohibitions on gene editing, AI development also needs to achieve balance through comprehensive social consideration, rather than letting technology itself dominate." In the on-site interaction session, audience members asked questions about "whether AI can replace human scholars and artistic creation," "individual anxiety," and other issues. A student asked, "If in the future we are accurately predicted by AI, what is the meaning of life?" Ge Jianxiong said that the more developed technology becomes, the more humans must maintain subjectivity and conscience. "Even if AI is even more powerful in material and data prediction, in spiritual and value choices, we can still choose to believe in ourselves. Pursuing spiritual value and challenging oneself is itself the meaning of life." In his concluding remarks, Tong Shijun quoted the classic passage from Mencius, "King Hui of Liang I": "To hold Mount Tai under one's arm and leap over the North Sea, and to say to others, 'I cannot.' This is truly being unable. To break a branch for an elder, and to say to others, 'I cannot.' This is not doing it, not being unable." Mencius thereby distinguished the question of "can" from the question of "will do." From this he observed that even if AI's capabilities continue to grow in the future and it becomes capable of everything, humanity still needs to think: which things are, in principle, not to be "done," and should not be outsourced or ceded to any subject other than humans.