Abstract

The well-established distinction between ‘knowledge about’ and ‘knowledge within’ calls into question the suitability of GenAI for scholarly activities which require grounding in commitments to a world. These commitments, relations and forms sustain a world with which scholars think, know and construct the problems their research addresses. Without a comparable world, GenAI is disclosed as un-situated, uncommitted, as well as characterized by an ‘emptiness within’ that is problematic for scholarly knowledge innovation and evaluation.

Share

COinS
 
Jun 14th, 12:00 AM

GENERATIVE AI: THE EMPTINESS WITHIN

The well-established distinction between ‘knowledge about’ and ‘knowledge within’ calls into question the suitability of GenAI for scholarly activities which require grounding in commitments to a world. These commitments, relations and forms sustain a world with which scholars think, know and construct the problems their research addresses. Without a comparable world, GenAI is disclosed as un-situated, uncommitted, as well as characterized by an ‘emptiness within’ that is problematic for scholarly knowledge innovation and evaluation.

When commenting on articles, please be friendly, welcoming, respectful and abide by the AIS eLibrary Discussion Thread Code of Conduct posted here.