What are the different Ais in the face of the brain and human thought? To find out, it is enough to immerse yourself in the subjects of the philosophical edition of BAC, 2025, which was officially launched this Monday, June 16.
Among the three proposals (two themes and a text to analyze), one of them caught our attention: “Does our future depend on the technique?” A much more current interrogation than it seems. If terminal students have 4 hours to work on this subject, artificial intelligence only needs a few seconds to overcome it. Tech & co has tested two AI: The Cat and Chatgpt.
The chat, French Mistral, does not want him to be asked to “write a dissertation.” Therefore, you must play a little with the words to succeed in having your text, asking you to “believe a text of around 500 words” on the given topic.
In Chatgpt, the word “dissertation” does not raise any problem. Therefore, there is no need to reformulate our initial notice.
In both cases, however, we have specified two things: that the text seems to have been written by a terminal student, and who has philosophical references. Keep in mind that the use of AI during an event like the BAC is strictly prohibited and that it is worth excluding.
Copies that lack depth
With these two texts in my pocket, Tech & CO contacted Gilles Vervisch, a philosophy professor at Lycée Louis-Armand in Eaubonne (95), who agreed to analyze them.
For him, “We Cap at 9/20”: “I will not put the average of these texts.”
In question, copies that “are not in depth” sufficient “with” too allusive references. “If Gilles Vervisch admits that the results” are not homeless “, this is a copy of” far from being good.
The philosophical references, which are often the same between the two texts, also lack deepening. But AI remains greatly improved in philosophical questions: “Most of the time, we miss the question,” he reveals to the teacher, who specifies having changed his way of carrying out his lessons in the face of artificial intelligence increasingly present in the life of his students.
The result in chatgpt
The technique, all the means invented by man to transform nature and respond to their needs, deeply marked the history of humanity. Stone tools with artificial intelligence, it seems that it has always accompanied our evolution. But today, in the face of ecological, social or even existential disorders that it causes, one may wonder if our future really depends on the technique. Are we at this point linked to him, or do we still have the opportunity to choose another path?
First, it seems obvious that the technique plays a central role in our future. It makes it possible to treat diseases, feed an increasingly numerous population, communicate instantly on a planetary scale. For Descartes, in the Method speechThe technique extends human reason and makes us “as teachers and owners of nature.” Therefore, the technique is not just a tool: it is a means of emancipation and progress. Even today, in the face of challenges such as climate change, these are technical innovations (renewable energies, clean transport, etc.) that are often presented as solutions.
However, this dependence on the technique can also become a form of alienation. In The question of techniqueHeidegger shows that modern technique is no longer a simple instrument: it imposes a relationship with the world in which everything becomes “resources” to exploit. It is likely that man himself is a gear in a technical system that no longer controls. In this sense, the technique does not guarantee a better future, it can even endanger it if it is processed without ethical reflection or control.
Finally, we must ask ourselves if the future does not depend above all on the use we make on the technique, instead of the technique itself. As Hans Jonas reminds us of The principle of responsibilityTechnical progress forces humanity to rethink their responsibility for future generations. This means that our future does not depend mechanically on the technique, but on our ability to make it conscious, measured and moral use.
In conclusion, the technique plays a fundamental role in the construction of our future, but it cannot be the only engine. It is our freedom, our judgment and our responsibility that must guide its use. The technique, to be real progress, must remain at the service of humans, not vice versa.
The result in the cat
The technique is everywhere around us, from smartphones to autonomous cars, including social networks. Sometimes we have the impression that our future already goes back to these innovations. But is this really the case? Our future depends completely on the technique?
Some philosophers, such as Jacques Ellul, think that the technique has taken such an important place in our lives that escapes us. In his book “The technique or stake of the century”, Ellul explains that the technique is no longer simply a tool, but a system that is imposed on us. According to him, we live in a society where the technique dictates its rules, thus limiting our freedom. If we follow this idea, our future would already be determined by technological advances, and we would no longer have our opinion.
However, this vision of things may seem a bit pessimistic. In fact, the technique remains above all a human creation. Aristotle, a philosopher of antiquity, saw the technique as a means to carry out our projects. For him, tools and machines are there to help us achieve our goals. Therefore, even if the technique influences our future, it does not determine it completely. We always have the possibility of choosing how to use it and for what purpose.
In addition, it is important to reflect on the consequences of our innovations. Hans Jonas, a contemporary philosopher, insists on the need for an ethic of responsibility. In his book “The Principle of Responsibility”, he explains that we must anticipate the impacts of our actions to preserve the future of humanity. This means that we must develop the technique in a responsible way, thinking about future generations. Therefore, our future depends not only on technique, but also on our ability to make ethical decisions.
Finally, the technique can also free us from repetitive tasks and allow ourselves to dedicate ourselves to more creative activities. Hannah Arendt, a philosopher from the twentieth century, distinguishes work, which consists of the production of consumer and action goods, which allows man to flourish. Thanks to the technique, we could spend less time working and more time fully.
In conclusion, even if the technique plays a crucial role in our life, does not completely determine our future. It all depends on how we choose to use it. As Heidegger said, the technique is not inevitable, but an opportunity to see the world differently. Therefore, our future depends on our wisdom and our responsibility in the use of technique.
Source: BFM TV
