Greek philosophers may not have been familiar with 21st century technology, but their ideas about intellect and thought can help us understand what is at stake with the Artificial Intelligence of today.
Examining ancient texts offers useful information. In the Republic, for example, Plato uses the analogy of a “divided line” that separates higher and lower forms of understanding.
Plato, who taught in the fourth century BC, argued that every person has an intuitive ability to recognize truth. He called this higher form of understanding: “understanding.” Understanding allows for understanding beyond reason, belief, or sensory perception. It is a form of “knowledge” – but in Plato’s view, it is also a property of the soul.
Lower down, but above its "dividing line", lies the "intellect" or reason, which is based on argumentation.
Below the line (dividing line), his lower forms of understanding are “faith” or belief, and “guessing,” imagination.
Faith is belief influenced by experience and sensory perception: inputs that one can critically examine and reflect upon.
Plato defines conjecture, meanwhile, as unfounded opinion that has its roots in false perception.
In Plato's hierarchy of mental faculties, direct, intuitive understanding is at the top. The top of the hierarchy leads to true and absolute knowledge, while the bottom lends itself to false impressions and beliefs.
But intuition, according to Plato, is part of the soul and is embodied in human form. The perception of reality transcends the body – but still requires it. So while Plato does not differentiate between “intelligence” and “thought,” we can say that his distinctions can help us think about Artificial Intelligence.
Without being embodied, AI may not “think” or “understand” in the way humans do. Speculation – the lowest form of understanding, based on false perceptions – may be similar to AI’s frequent “delusions”, when it concocts information that appears true but is in fact inaccurate.
Aristotle, a student of Plato, sheds more light on intelligence and thought.
In “On the Soul,” Aristotle distinguishes between the “active” and “passive” intellects. The active intellect, which he called “nou,” is immaterial. It gains meaning from experience, but it transcends bodily perception.
The passive intellect is bodily, receiving sensory impressions without reasoning. We could say that these active and passive processes, together, constitute “thought.”
Today, the word “intelligence” possesses a logical quality that AI calculations can potentially replicate. Aristotle, however, like Plato, argues that “thinking” requires an embodiment and goes beyond logic alone. Aristotle’s views on rhetoric also show that thought and judgment require body, emotion, and experience.
We might think of rhetoric as persuasion, but it's actually more about observation: observing and assessing how facts, emotion, and character shape people's thinking and decisions. Facts matter, but emotions are what move us, something that AI can't do.
Finally, Aristotle's concept of "phronesis" sheds further light on Artificial Intelligence's ability to think.
In the “Nicomachean Ethics,” he defines prudence as “practical wisdom” or “wisdom.” “Prudence” also includes the experiential knowledge that determines not only correct thinking, but also how to apply these thoughts to “good ends” or virtuous actions.
Artificial Intelligence can analyze large data sets to reach its conclusions, but “intelligence” is not enough to achieve wisdom and moral insight.
Ryan Leak Assistant Professor of Writing, College of Letters, Arts, and Sciences at USC Dornsife
Although the press releases will range from very select to rare, I said I'd pass...because sometimes the editors hide.
