Artificial Intelligence Part 5: The Issue of Mediocrity

NOTE: This is the fifth in a series where I consider some of the faith and arts issues surrounding artificial intelligence. Click here to read Part 1: The Issue of Virtuosity or Part 2: The Issue of Authenticity, or Part 3: The Issue of Originality, or Part 4: The Issue of Originality Continued.

A person I know recently applied for a position working for the State of California. It’s a bureaucratic job, but it does offer stability and a chance for advancement. As a prerequisite for applying, applicants must take a standardized on-line test, and only a percentage of people who score high on the test can apply. My friend took the test, scored in the high 80s, and was later told that her score wasn’t high enough to apply. Puzzled at the result, she began Googling what score was necessary to apply. To her chagrin, she discovered that it was common practice for government applicants to use ChatGPT to answer their on-line questions for them.

Two implications stand out to me. One, my friend was penalized for her integrity. And two, the government is hiring generally average people.

But it’s complicated, isn’t it? Students are told not to use Artificial Intelligence (AI) in their schoolwork, and yet, AI is a necessary and common practice once they enter the workforce. These days, AI is commonly used in report writing, marketing, branding, design, coding, resume writing, and many other aspects of modern business. AI allows ordinary people to do extraordinary things. Which is great, right?

Right?

I admit readily—AI makes me angry at times. I’m angry that my friend wasn’t able to apply for the job she wanted. I’m angry that AI will be taking jobs from my artist friends. And I’m angry when I see people mistake artificial talent and creativity for real human artistry. And it bothers me—anger is simply not one of my normal emotions.

I’ve had a lot of time to stew in this. Why am I so irritated by this? Why is this such a big deal to me personally? After a considerable amount of reflection, I think I’m beginning to understand why. It’s because the use of AI by average people is stripping exceptional people of their competitive advantage. You have so many people who have put in their 10,000 hours to be exceptional at a thing—whether it be graphic design or music or photography or writing. And now anyone who can formulate a prompt will have the same ability—sans human creativity—to do what they do.

Now, in so many ways, AI is a positive thing. It’s undoubtedly a tremendous tool for people to work smarter, automate processes, spark the creative process, and increase the overall productivity in a thousand different occupations and industries. But consider my friend again. She is gifted in the psychology of people, gifted in creative and technical writing, gifted in discernment and wisdom, gifted in creativity and the arts. In my opinion, she lands in the top ten percent, and would be a tremendous asset in any number of government positions. But she won’t get that chance. Instead, a person of lesser ability will probably take that place.

So yeah. I feel like the competitive advantage that exceptional people used to have—which they have entirely because they worked toward becoming exceptional—is being wiped away. In other words, there’s no need to put in 10,000 hours to be great at anything anymore. In the future, mediocrity plus AI will be good enough. And that is the crux of my irritation.

Over time, I suspect my anger over this whole AI thing will simply evolve into a quiet resignation to the inevitable. Creatives won’t strive for great art; they will strive toward great prompts for art. Creatives won’t bother putting in the time and effort to be great at anything; AI will be the shortcut to artistry. The exceptional will not be able to distinguish themselves from the mediocre. And the worst part: the audience won’t know the difference, and probably won’t care.

If you’re a frequent reader of my blog or books, you know that there are huge theological implications behind my last statement. The creative drive within us is what expresses our humanity, in the way God intended. We are made in his image (Genesis 1:26), intended to join in God’s created order (Genesis 2:19-20), endowed with His inborn aesthetic (Romans 1:20), and He delights in the creative works of His children (1 John 3:1-3) especially in great and beautiful artistic expressions of worship (Exodus 36-39, 1 Chronicles 25). Will AI impinge and circumvent these great truths? And if so, how?

I know that God has met me in deep and profound ways through the 10,000 hours I’ve put in to be a good musician, a good writer, and a good leader of artist communities. Given the opportunity to use AI, a younger version of myself might bypass those hard hours, to the point that I would not be who I am today.

Am I overreacting? Probably. Are we underestimating the effect of AI on humanity? Most certainly.

[Banner Photo by Possessed Photography on Unsplash. Inset photo by Possessed Photography on Unsplash].