Humanities AI Padlet by

Main Argument

arp354 — 2025-09-30 03:33:39 UTC

Humanities educators should actively shape how society understands and uses AI rather than retreating from AI or fearing it replaces them.

Subtopic

arp354 — 2025-09-30 03:34:11 UTC

Humanists can decode AI hype and teach critical literacy

“Instead of resigning themselves to obsolescence, faculty are making the most of their status as the world’s most knowledgeable authorities on the teaching of writing… avoiding panic, combating hype, and educating oneself and one’s colleagues about the topic.”

arp354 — 2025-09-30 03:35:59 UTC

AI can be more functional when it is not seen as something to be feared or removed from people's toolboxes. There are many ways AI can help, and educating others about this topic can help heighten AI's usefullness. When AI is used in moderation it can be highly beneficial.

“The point is not for educators to kill ChatGPT on the mistaken assumption that it obviates the need for humanistic labor, knowledge, and experience. Rather… the time has come to cut through the hype, and claim a seat at the table where tech entrepreneurs are already making their pitch for the future.”

arp354 — 2025-09-30 03:39:35 UTC

Educators shouldn't try and eliminate AI entirely but rather mold and shape it into something beneificial. Influences should influence it and develoup it's cultural meaning, integrating it into our lives in a proper functional way.

Subtopic

arp354 — 2025-09-30 03:41:22 UTC

Early adoption risks replacing judgment with an “autopilot” and flatten original natural thinking.

“Just as drivers who turn the wheel over to flawed autopilot systems surrender their judgment to an over-hyped technology, so a future generation raised on language models could end up, in effect, never learning to drive.”

arp354 — 2025-09-30 03:44:31 UTC

Using an auto-pilot and surrendering your better judgement to a robot to drive for you can overtime worsen your skills at driving because you're so used to handing over the wheel. Similarly this can be said for AI and in turn overtime never allowing students to learn the correct and valuable way to think critically.

Subtopic

arp354 — 2025-09-30 03:48:04 UTC

Using Large Language Model's for first drafts takes away from real intellectual work

“Tech enthusiasts must consider that a first draft of an essay generated by a model fine-tuned for the commonplace has already short-circuited a student’s ideas.”

arp354 — 2025-09-30 03:49:59 UTC

Student's aren't challenged to think for themselves when the overall outline is already given to the student. That natural critical thinking is already taken away so students are just building on AI work which can ultimately make the work and final product less efficient and substandard compared to natural humanistic work.

Subtopic

arp354 — 2025-09-30 03:54:10 UTC

Natural writing cultivates reasoning and critical thinking machines can't replace.

“The purpose of a college research essay … is to enable (students) to develop and substantiate their own robust propositions and truth claims, not to ‘gussy up pre-digested pablum.’”

arp354 — 2025-09-30 03:56:35 UTC

This enables students to generate their own opinions without the help of AI and other resources. This is important for students to generate their own claims and perspectives giving them more autonomy over their thinking and decisions they make when writing.

“The capacity for revision requires hard-won habits of critical reflection and rhetorical skill. Since text generators … suffer from simplistic, derivative, or inaccurate content, requiring students to work from this shallow foundation is hardly the best way to empower their thinking.”

arp354 — 2025-09-30 03:59:34 UTC

Technology cannot derive the same human-made opinions in the same natural way. Technology lacks the complexity and emotional depth that humans bring. AI can't feel emotion or add the same depth which is why it is important to allow humans to derive their own opinions from real resources rather than turning to AI.

"Intelligence"

arp354 — 2025-10-02 18:34:15 UTC

LLM's can't replicate human judgement, and there's only so high of a bar AI can replicate human behaviors. Human behavior and creative thinking is unique to each individual.

"Knowledge"

arp354 — 2025-10-07 19:38:43 UTC

Teaching students what real knowledge is crucial. Even though LLM's offer synthetic summaries of knowledge this is not knowledge grounded by human understanding and experiences. A good blend between the two would be beneficial, shaping how society understands AI.

"Never learn to drive" - ("Autopilot")

arp354 — 2025-10-07 19:42:15 UTC

It is possible for students to overuse AI and cause students to lose their own thinking habits when they integrate AI into all of the work they do. Using it as an outline for certain things is fine but when students find themselves relying on AI too much, it can flatten their critical thinking skills and ability to perform.