Scholarlink

<p>In a recent paper, Sparrow and Flenady (AI Soc 40:5285–5296, 2025) argue that the use of GenAI in tertiary education should be resisted. Sparrow and Flenady give many reasons for such resistance, but they say that ‘[t]he most important reason to resist the use of AI in universities is that its outputs are fundamentally bullshit…’. In this paper, we take issue with this claim. We argue that (a) GenAI cannot bullshit, and (b) bullshit is often compatible with the goals of tertiary education. The upshot is that we need to look at other considerations besides whether the outputs of GenAI are bullshit to determine whether and how to integrate GenAI into university education.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

In defence of bullshit in universities

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2025年11月25日

查看全文
  • William Tuckwell,
  • Daniel Cohen,
  • Morgan Luck

摘要

In a recent paper, Sparrow and Flenady (AI Soc 40:5285–5296, 2025) argue that the use of GenAI in tertiary education should be resisted. Sparrow and Flenady give many reasons for such resistance, but they say that ‘[t]he most important reason to resist the use of AI in universities is that its outputs are fundamentally bullshit…’. In this paper, we take issue with this claim. We argue that (a) GenAI cannot bullshit, and (b) bullshit is often compatible with the goals of tertiary education. The upshot is that we need to look at other considerations besides whether the outputs of GenAI are bullshit to determine whether and how to integrate GenAI into university education.