The labyrinth: A Platonic dialogue on what’s next, featuring ChatGPT as Phaedrus

Q2 Social Sciences Explorations in Media Ecology Pub Date : 2023-06-01 DOI:10.1386/eme_00164_7
Isaac James Richards
{"title":"The labyrinth: A Platonic dialogue on what’s next, featuring ChatGPT as Phaedrus","authors":"Isaac James Richards","doi":"10.1386/eme_00164_7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"If all the world is a stage, then the most recent stage direction might be: ‘enter Artificial Intelligence’. OpenAI’s ChatGPT has made headlines ever since its release in late November 2022. ‘It’s like talking to God’, said a friend of mine, who first introduced me to the interface. The seeming omniscience of the thing is startling and overwhelming. Those who have played with it have found it addicting, astonishing and frustrating all at once. What follows is a conversation with ChatGPT performed in the style of a Platonic dialogue. ChatGPT is programmed as human conversation and that sparked this genre subversion, which is intended to resonate on multiple layers. Socrates was terrified by the advent of writing – the newest technology of his day. Plato’s Phaedrus is a foundational text for communication studies and has been called the first media critique. In short, this conversation with artificial intelligence (AI) honours the exigence of ChatGPT while also commemorating the tradition of communication scholarship back to Plato and Socrates. In the penultimate paragraph, I attempt to probe AI’s deepest weakness; supposedly, AI cannot create anything new – it can only remix the corpus of texts it has been trained on. That said, I believe ChatGPT’s (err, Phaedrus’s) concluding metaphor of media ecology as a labyrinth to be a provocative one. Recent technological advances seem to suggest that we are not so much on the ‘frontier’ of knowledge as in the depths of a maze. That connotes a different type of exploration, where not every advance is progress. Perhaps scholarship is nothing but a hand to the wall, thread unspooling, taking steps into the darkness as we ‘venture deeper into the labyrinth’. If so, we ought to think about which threads we are holding on to and where they might lead us.","PeriodicalId":36155,"journal":{"name":"Explorations in Media Ecology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Explorations in Media Ecology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1386/eme_00164_7","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

If all the world is a stage, then the most recent stage direction might be: ‘enter Artificial Intelligence’. OpenAI’s ChatGPT has made headlines ever since its release in late November 2022. ‘It’s like talking to God’, said a friend of mine, who first introduced me to the interface. The seeming omniscience of the thing is startling and overwhelming. Those who have played with it have found it addicting, astonishing and frustrating all at once. What follows is a conversation with ChatGPT performed in the style of a Platonic dialogue. ChatGPT is programmed as human conversation and that sparked this genre subversion, which is intended to resonate on multiple layers. Socrates was terrified by the advent of writing – the newest technology of his day. Plato’s Phaedrus is a foundational text for communication studies and has been called the first media critique. In short, this conversation with artificial intelligence (AI) honours the exigence of ChatGPT while also commemorating the tradition of communication scholarship back to Plato and Socrates. In the penultimate paragraph, I attempt to probe AI’s deepest weakness; supposedly, AI cannot create anything new – it can only remix the corpus of texts it has been trained on. That said, I believe ChatGPT’s (err, Phaedrus’s) concluding metaphor of media ecology as a labyrinth to be a provocative one. Recent technological advances seem to suggest that we are not so much on the ‘frontier’ of knowledge as in the depths of a maze. That connotes a different type of exploration, where not every advance is progress. Perhaps scholarship is nothing but a hand to the wall, thread unspooling, taking steps into the darkness as we ‘venture deeper into the labyrinth’. If so, we ought to think about which threads we are holding on to and where they might lead us.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
迷宫:关于下一步的柏拉图式对话,由ChatGPT扮演费德鲁斯
如果整个世界都是一个舞台,那么最近的舞台方向可能是:“进入人工智能”。OpenAI的ChatGPT自2022年11月底发布以来一直成为头条新闻我的一个朋友说,他第一次把我介绍给这个界面。这件事似乎无所不知,令人震惊,势不可挡。那些玩过它的人会发现它让人上瘾、惊讶和沮丧。下面是以柏拉图式对话的方式与ChatGPT进行的对话。ChatGPT被编程为人类对话,这引发了这种类型的颠覆,旨在在多个层面上产生共鸣。苏格拉底被当时最新技术——写作的出现吓坏了。柏拉图的《斐德罗斯》是传播学研究的基础著作,被称为第一部媒介批判。简言之,这次与人工智能(AI)的对话纪念了ChatGPT的迫切性,同时也纪念了柏拉图和苏格拉底的通信学术传统。在倒数第二段中,我试图探究人工智能最深层的弱点;据推测,人工智能无法创造任何新的东西——它只能重新混合它所训练的文本语料库。也就是说,我认为ChatGPT(呃,Phaedrus)将媒体生态比喻为迷宫的结论是一个挑衅性的隐喻。最近的技术进步似乎表明,与其说我们处于知识的“前沿”,不如说我们处于迷宫的深处。这意味着一种不同类型的探索,并非每一个进步都是进步。也许学术只不过是一只手伸向墙壁,解开绳索,在我们“深入迷宫”的过程中步入黑暗。如果是这样的话,我们应该思考我们抓住了哪些线索,它们可能会把我们带到哪里。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Explorations in Media Ecology
Explorations in Media Ecology Social Sciences-Cultural Studies
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
24
期刊最新文献
Strike and tangle: Crowd control in the digital media environment Enactive approach to social interactions in religious media ecologies From ‘Copy Left’ Story and Structure: A Complete Guide, Leon Conrad (2022) ‘I am big. It’s the pictures that got small’: A look at Sunset Boulevard through Marshall McLuhan’s theory of hot and cool media and personalities
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1