AI Prospers, Thinkers Stand Alone

When ChatGPT generates academic papers fluently, when Midjourney sketches fantastic scenes in an instant, and when intelligent assistants accurately predict our needs, AI has moved from laboratories to every corner of life, reshaping the world with its astonishing computing power and learning ability. Some marvel at this technological leap, regarding AI as an omnipotent "super brain"; others feel an inexplicable anxiety, worrying that human thinking ability will gradually deteriorate under the influence of intelligent tools. From my perspective, however, the prevalence of AI is by no means the end of thinking, but rather should be the starting point for us to deepen independent thinking — only by adhering to the subjectivity of thinking can we remain sober and independent in the wave of intelligence.

It is undeniable that AI provides unprecedented convenience for human cognitive activities. In the field of data processing, AI can screen and analyze massive amounts of information in milliseconds, saving researchers months or even years of work; in terms of knowledge acquisition, intelligent search tools have broken the constraints of time and space, allowing us to access the knowledge repository of human civilization with a light tap on the screen; in the field of creative generation, AI can integrate and innovate based on a large number of samples, providing designers, writers and other creators with rich inspirational materials. These advantages make AI an efficient "tool assistant", freeing humans from repetitive and tedious mental work and, in theory, freeing up more time and energy for in-depth thinking.

But we must clearly recognize that there is an essential difference between AI's "intelligence" and human "thinking". The core of AI lies in algorithms and data. It simulates human cognitive behaviors through learning from massive samples, but it can never possess true "consciousness" and "subjectivity". It can accurately calculate advantages and disadvantages, but cannot understand the value choice of "sacrificing life for righteousness"; it can integrate existing knowledge to form answers, but it is difficult to produce "rule-breaking" disruptive innovations; it can analyze the laws of emotional expression, but can never truly understand the life experience of "joy, anger, sorrow and happiness". Just like AlphaGo, which defeated world champion Go players relying on iterative calculations of tens of millions of game records, not on the perception and love for the art of Go; intelligent writing tools can generate logically coherent articles, but they always lack the unique life experience and ideological warmth of the author.

What is more alarming is that over-reliance on AI may trap us in the dilemma of "thinking laziness". When encountering problems, many people's first reaction is to turn to AI for help, replacing their own exploration process with ready-made answers. In the long run, we may gradually lose the ability to analyze problems independently: we no longer want to spend time sorting out logical chains, no longer want to delve into the essence of things, and no longer want to bear the confusion and perplexity in the thinking process. Just like people who use calculators for a long time may forget basic calculation rules, over-reliance on AI's "feeding" will blunt our thinking and turn us into passive "containers" for receiving information, rather than active "subjects" for constructing cognition.

In fact, the prevalence of AI precisely provides a higher dimension for human thinking. True thinkers will regard AI as an "extended brain", not a "replacement brain". They will use AI to process basic information, but always adhere to the core links of "raising questions, constructing logic, and making value judgments". For example, researchers can use AI to analyze experimental data, but the research topic selection, hypothesis proposal, and conclusion interpretation still rely on human insight into the academic frontier and academic intuition; entrepreneurs can use AI to predict market trends, but the company's strategic positioning, brand philosophy, and weighing of social responsibilities still depend on human in-depth understanding of business essence and human nature. AI can provide answers to "what is it", but the inquiry into "why" and the choice of "how to do it" always require human thinking to respond.

Looking back at the development history of human civilization, it is continuous thinking that promotes social progress. From Socrates' "maieutics" inquiry, to Newton's meditation on the falling apple; from Einstein's exploration of the nature of time and space, to Tu Youyou's repeated research on artemisinin, every breakthrough of human beings stems from the courage and persistence of independent thinking. As a crystallization of human wisdom, AI should be a ladder to help us climb the peak of cognition, not a hotbed that makes us stand still. In the intelligent era, we need to cultivate critical thinking even more: learn to identify the authenticity of information output by AI, learn to jump out of the "information cocoon" recommended by algorithms, and learn to anchor core issues in massive data, so that our thinking always maintains independence and depth.

AI prospers all over the world, but its essence is still a tool; no matter how strong the computing power is, it cannot replace the value of human thinking. True intelligence has never been passive acceptance and imitation, but active exploration and creation. When we take AI as our wings and thinking as our soul, we can not only enjoy the convenience brought by intelligence in the wave of technology, but also hold fast to the unique spiritual core of human beings. After all, it is always those "thinkers" who dare to think independently and bravely question the essence that drive the world forward.