Is This AI Deception or Incompetence?
Or Both — or Somedthing Else?...
A scientist wrote me that (based on his reading my frequent alerts about how the Scientific Method and Critical Thinking have been abandoned in K-12 education in almost all states) he decided to ask AI about this to see what it had to say.
His query to ChatGPT was “In which US states is the Scientific Method officially part of the high school curriculum now?”
ChatGPT’s deceptive/incompetent answer to that reasonable question was (and I injected {a few comments}):
As of my last update in April 2023, the Scientific Method is a fundamental part of high school science education in the United States and is included in the science curriculum of all states {completely false, see below}. The Scientific Method, which is the process of making observations, formulating hypotheses, conducting experiments, and drawing conclusions, is universally recognized as a critical component of scientific literacy.
State Standards: Each state in the U.S. has its own set of educational standards that dictate what is taught in public schools. These standards typically include the Scientific Method as part of science education. {False. AI evidently believes that repeating a false statement makes it true!}
Common Core and Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS): While the Common Core State Standards focus primarily on mathematics and English language arts, the NGSS, which have been adopted by many states {49}, specifically emphasize scientific practices, including the Scientific Method {totally false — the NGSS has specifically scrapped the Scientific Method}. The NGSS outlines a framework for science education that integrates scientific inquiry and application.
Integration in Science Subjects: The Scientific Method is taught not as an isolated concept but integrated into various science subjects, including biology, chemistry, physics, and earth science. Students learn to apply the Scientific Method in different contexts and experiments. {Again, the NGSS has eliminated the Scientific Method!}
Laboratory Work and Experiments: High school science classes often include laboratory work and experiments where students actively use the Scientific Method {If they do it’s by accident}. This hands-on approach helps in reinforcing the steps and principles of scientific inquiry.
Emphasis on Critical Thinking and Inquiry: Modern educational approaches emphasize Critical Thinking, problem-solving, and inquiry-based learning, with the Scientific Method being a key tool to develop these skills. {Total garbage}
Advanced Placement (AP) and International Baccalaureate (IB) Programs: In more advanced courses like AP and IB, the scientific method is a crucial part of the curriculum, with a strong focus on independent research and experimentation.
In summary, while the specifics of how the Scientific Method is taught can vary from state to state and school to school in the U.S., it is a standard and essential part of high school science education nationwide. {Yawn: simply not true.} This reflects the importance of scientific literacy and inquiry in preparing students for higher education and understanding the world around them.
Will the average person using AI be able to discern that they have been repeatedly lied to?
Will even an above-average person be able to tell that they have been given false information?
For citizens who want to know the Truth here, it can be found by reading what is in the Science Standards of 49 States: A Framework for K-12 Science Education, which is the basis for the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS).
Alternatively, citizens can read pages 3 through 7 of my Education Report (plus any of the other Appendices that cover topics relevant to them, in more detail).
For those who find five pages too high a hill to climb, the general answer is that the NGSS (and Framework) have scrapped both the Scientific Method and Critical Thinking from US K-12 Science Standards. One more time: the NGSS has been adopted in its entirety, or mostly, in 49 states (Florida is the holdout).
Another interesting question comes to mind here: is the bogus answer given by AI due to incompetence or dishonesty? Based on the computing power involved, it’s hard to attribute this to incompetence. That seems to leave dishonesty. That would be if ChatGPT knew the right answer but purposefully altered it. That there is some algorithm that adjusts answers to reflect a progressive ideology, is certainly possible — as the computer programmers are almost certainly progressives.
A third possibility is GIGO. ChatGPT provides answers based on an extensive Internet search. Since AI can NOT tell right from wrong, it is just passing on what the majority of the Internet content is indicating. We all know (or should know) that much of the Internet has been hijacked by progressives (think Wikipedia), so it should be no surprise that the majority of what is on the Internet regarding the current teaching of the Scientific Method and Critical Thinking in US K-12 schools, is misleading or outright false.
The irony is that it takes the ability to do Critical Thinking to be able to understand when AI is inaccurate — which is one of several reasons why they don't want students to be Critical Thinkers.
Please work in your home state to see that your K-12 education system DOES properly teach and emphasize Critical Thinking. Our future depends on it!
Here are other materials by this scientist that you might find interesting:
My Substack Commentaries for 2023 (arranged by topic)
Check out the chronological Archives of my entire Critical Thinking substack.
WiseEnergy.org: discusses the Science (or lack thereof) behind our energy options.
C19Science.info: covers the lack of genuine Science behind our COVID-19 policies.
Election-Integrity.info: multiple major reports on the election integrity issue.
Media Balance Newsletter: a free, twice-a-month newsletter that covers what the mainstream media does not do, on issues from COVID to climate, elections to education, renewables to religion, etc. Here are the Newsletter’s 2023 Archives. Please send me an email to get your free copy. When emailing me, please make sure to include your full name and the state where you live. (Of course, you can cancel the Media Balance Newsletter at any time - but why would you?
Thanks for reading Critically Thinking About Select Societal Issues! Please pass a link to this article on to other associates who might benefit. They can subscribe for FREE to receive new posts (typically about once a week).
Stan Young
I have ChatGPT and use it for this and that. If I want to know what the woke thinkers are thinking on a subject, I go to ChatGPT as I find it quite woke in its point of view. To use it, you need to be a knowledgeable person and a critical thinker. With careful questioning, it can be backed into a corner, and then its logic will kick in, and it will admit its lies. Tony Cox backs ChatGPT into a corner and it admits that association does not prove causation. https://truthinscience.org/a-conversation-on-epidemiology-with-chatgpt/
One of the dangerous aspects is that misleading data can be used for training.
Much human knowledge is based on simple association. The EPA has funded hundreds, maybe thousands of association studies saying air pollution is associated with increased deaths. It only takes one valid negative study to negate all the positive association studies. In my opinion, if a researcher has EPA funding and gets a negative study, almost always they do not publish.
We know AI can only put out what it has been fed. No doubt AI could be useful as a tool, if properly programmed. The problem: we have thugs in charge of way too much. No easy or painless way out of the chaos.
God will have the last word.