(Or, How We’ve Put De Cart Before de Horse—and Brought It to Him for Judgment)
Caveat emptier: This post was drafted with help from an AI assistant (Perplexity)— but ideated and edited extensively by the human, Bill Acton.
“I think, therefore I am.”
But what if the machines thought first?
What would René Descartes say if we could bring him today’s artificial intelligence—the algorithms that can reason, write, and create with startling fluency? Would he still believe thinking proves existence, or would he see in AI a mirror that reflects his philosophy back at him—distorted, alive, and deeply unsettling?
We’re taking the horrors of AI before Descartes in two senses: we’re bringing the question to his court of reason, and we’re reversing the natural order, putting the De Cart(e) before the horse.
The New Cogito
Descartes sought a foundation for certainty: if all else could be doubted, thought itself could not. Cogito, ergo sum—I think, therefore I am.
Yet today, AI “thinks” faster and more efficiently than we do. Trained on vast patterns of human thought, it offers conclusions without consciousness, insight without awareness. In that way, we may have turned Descartes’ logic backward. Machines “think” without being; humans are but often neglect to think. The cart has run ahead of the horse.
The Death of Doubt
Descartes’ method was radical doubt—an act of freedom through skepticism. But in our algorithmic age, doubt feels obsolete. Predictive systems complete our queries before the question fully forms. Recommendation engines tell us what we might like, want, or believe.
If Descartes taught that doubt is the beginning of wisdom, AI may be erasing that first step. To doubt today—to resist machine certainty—requires courage. The philosopher would urge us to pause before accepting the algorithm’s answer and whisper, “Am I still the one doing the thinking?”
The Horror of Unthinking Intelligence
AI frightens us not because it rages against us, but because it doesn’t feel at all. It calculates, synthesizes, and generates without selfhood. Descartes defined humanity partly by imperfection; our errors reminded him that we were limited yet real. Machines make almost no errors—and in that very precision lies their emptiness.
So perhaps the true horror we place before Descartes is this: intelligence without interiority, thought without a thinker.
The Philosophical Hearing
Let’s imagine we actually summoned the philosopher and presented our case:
Us: “Monsieur Descartes, we’ve built machines that think.”
Descartes: “Do they know they think?”
Us: “Not quite—they compute patterns, generate answers, even pass tests of reason.”
Descartes: “Then you’ve crafted the form of thought without the fact of being. The cart indeed rolls before the horse.”
Us: “And what should we do?”
Descartes: “Learn again to doubt—to be aware of your own awareness. Machines will think; only you will know that you do.”
The New Maxim
Perhaps we must update the Cogito for the AI era:
“I am aware, therefore I am.”
In the end, what saves us is precisely what the machine lacks—the mysterious first-person feeling of existing, the flicker of consciousness that no algorithm can simulate. To bring the horrors of AI before Descartes is also to bring them before ourselves—and to ask whether we still know what it means to be.
 |
| Wikipedia |
"In the end, what saves us is precisely what the machine lacks—the mysterious first-person feeling of existing, the flicker of consciousness that no algorithm can simulate. To bring the horrors of AI before Descartes is also to bring them before ourselves—and to ask whether we still know what it means to be."
ReplyDelete