Should Artificial Intelligence Be Discussed Using Absolute Terms?

In recent times, some people have predicted that Artificial Intelligence will replace every job. Others insist it will solve humanity's greatest problems and there are even those who believe Artificial Intelligence can never be trusted or that it will inevitably surpass human intelligence. The above statements and many more have one thing in common: they are expressed as “absolutes”.

The dictionary describes an absolute as a statement that is presented as universally true, without exceptions, conditions, or room for alternative outcomes. It suggests that something is true in every situation, at every time and for everyone. They leave little or no room for nuance, context and most times do not even consider past patterns/history.

Like most transformative technologies throughout history, Artificial Intelligence is not a single system, the term encompasses a wide variety of technologies. For example, the internet has revolutionized education, communication, commerce and scientific collaboration. The same internet has also enabled cybercrime, misinformation, identity theft and online harassment. Another example can be seen when talking about social media. It connects families and communities across continents, yet it has also contributed to polarization and the rapid spread of false information. Let’s take electricity as a third example, electricity powers hospitals, industries and homes while when improperly handled, the same electricity can cause fires and serious injury. No one would argue that electricity is inherently good or bad. Instead, we recognize that its value depends on how it is generated, managed, regulated and even used.

Taking the above examples into perspectives, artificial intelligence deserves to be talked about using the same balanced perspective. For example when considering artificial intelligence, a recommendation engine that suggests movies operates differently from a medical diagnostic system. A robot on a factory floor has different objectives from a conversational chatbot and a fraud detection algorithm is fundamentally different from a self-driving vehicle. Each AI application has unique strengths, limitations, risks and performance characteristics. This means, making a universal statement about AI is similar to making a universal statement about transportation. For example, saying "transport is dangerous" ignores the differences between bicycles, trains, aircraft, ships and walking. Likewise, saying "AI is biased" or "AI is objective" overlooks the diversity of AI systems and the contexts in which they operate.

It can be seen clearly from many examples that whether Artificial Intelligence is beneficial depends on context. An example of this can be seen when using an AI chatbot. It may improve customer support by answering routine questions around the clock. However, it may also provide inaccurate information or even hallucinate if users rely on it beyond its intended purpose. This confirms that the technology itself is not inherently ethical or unethical. Its outcomes depend on implementation, governance and human judgment.

Should we then use absolute terms when discussing artificial intelligence? Discussing Artificial Intelligence using absolute terms creates several problems. First, “absolutes” can create false confidence. For example, absolute claims like "AI is always accurate" may lead organizations to trust automated systems without adequate testing or human oversight which can increase the risk of costly or harmful errors. In addition to absolutes creating false confidence, absolutes can also encourage fear. This can be felt when people hear statements such as "AI will take everyone's job”. Statements like this can increase anxiety in people, without understanding that lots of occupations are more likely to evolve rather than disappear entirely - especially since history shows that technological advances often automate specific tasks while creating demand for new skills and professions. Lastly, the use of absolutes when discussing subjects like artificial intelligence can weaken informed public discussion, this means that debates around AI often becomes polarised between ‘AI enthusiasts’ and ‘AI skeptics’ which will inadvertently make meaningful conversations about regulation, ethics, transparency, accountability and responsible innovation more difficult.

In conclusion, let us return to the original question: “Should we use absolute statements when discussing artificial intelligence?” The answer is No. Rather than simply declaring that AI is good or bad, we should ask more practical and evidence-based questions. Doing so helps us recognize that AI systems should be evaluated individually, based on their specific purpose, context, benefits, risks, and limitations, rather than judged through broad generalizations.