Finding Nemo was a hugely popular and successful film, winning an Oscar for the Best Animated Feature in 2003, as it followed the story of “an overprotective clownfish who searches for his missing son Nemo, on the way learning to take risks and come to terms with Nemo taking care of himself”. Through powerful and realistic animation, it shows the plight of small fish, in an enormous ocean, surrounded by numerous different types and sizes of fish at all sorts of levels of the sea. It all sounds like a modern description of a young child going to a new school!
When it comes to stories about fish, we all know that they tend to be dubious and exaggerated; there is always something fishy about such! And as we talk of a school of fish, so lessons can be found for the children in our schools. A lot of it is fishy – just consider some of the words we use: of-fish-al and super-fish- al. Then let us not forget arti-fish-al (though interestingly, if we are thinking of school and divide it up into Arts and Science, why we do not find the word ‘scientificial’…?)
We hear a lot nowadays about artificial, not least in the phrase Artificial Intelligence (i.e. AI). The very mention of AI will immediately cause some people to hold their nose at the fishy image it conjures up. There is something fishy about Artificial Intelligence, even though we cannot quite place it. The fact is, Artificial Intelligence really only scratches the surface (in other words, it is ‘superficial’ – fishy again). We treat it as ‘official’ (fishy again), in that we think it must be right, it carries authority with it. However, let us be clear, it is no more (and no less) than artificial.
The point we need to understand at the outset about Artificial Intelligence is that the clue is in the name: it is artificial. Artificial means it is something that is not real – in other words, it is made up. We take it to be absolutely true – but it is entirely dependent on what is put in, and therefore artificial. Artificial means it is not human and, in that regard, therefore, it has no values; it is seen to be fine to use others unashamedly. Artificial is thin and it is impersonal; it pays no heed to an individual’s personality. Artificial is not what we want. Who wants artificial plants?
We do well, also, to consider the other word in that phrase – ‘intelligence’. Firstly, we have every reason to question Intelligence – how intelligent is AI actually? Surely simply regurgitating something cannot be classified as intelligence? Is there any intelligence in asking someone (or in this case) something) else for their ideas and response? Some may consider a youngster smart to get someone else to do the work but is it a measure of intelligence?
Secondly, when it comes to intelligence, we have long realised that intelligence is not what education is about; it is no longer a priority in education. Knowledge, the test of intelligence, is limited and is not a test of a person’s value or worth. Intelligence Quotient (IQ), which was considered highly at one stage, is no longer seen as an appropriate, reliable or relevant measure of a child’s potential or usefulness. We are far more interested in EQ, the Emotional Quotient, in our children. Knowledge is limited; what we do with it is far more important. – education is not facts. Furthermore there is no artificial emotion.
For many years, people have spoken about how a goldfish only has a memory span of three seconds (though there are plenty of AI articles claiming scientific research has shown such an assumption to be wrong). Quite why we have to study the memory span of a goldfish is perhaps beyond us (though presumably not beyond AI) but we might well be tempted to argue that AI leaves a pupil using up the same brain power or memory scope of a goldfish. Pupils ask the question of AI while teachers are saying to the pupils what comedy sketches have interrogators saying: “We ask the questions!”
AI is intelligent, of that there is no question or indeed no concern. We must however apply our own intelligence, understanding and initiative to see it in its correct place. Pupils must be able to use real intelligence to question the artificial intelligence to prevent them simply living their lives like a goldfish in a bowl. The word nemo in Latin means “No-one”; children who jump onto AI at every opportunity, to prevent any need to think, will find they are nobody. Nothing fishy about that.
