I\u2019m a newbie to robotics and artificial intelligence (AI). Like Neo in The Matrix, this feels like I\u2019m going down a rabbit hole that I never wanted to explore. My son-in-law designs robotic farm equipment. He has designed computers that, when integrated into a combine, can harvest crops without a human in the cab. When we talk about his job, I ask lots of questions and then smile while he talks. Mostly, it just goes over my head.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
This past summer, I experienced it for myself when I drove with a friend in his Tesla. At one point he put the car into self-driving mode. I was uncomfortable seeing his hands off the wheel and the vehicle driving independently. Highway driving was bad enough, but when we pulled up to an intersection on a busy stretch of road, I thought my friend would take over the controls. Instead, he let the car navigate from a complete stop. The Tesla inched out carefully. It was scanning the traffic, looking for a space, and judging how fast the oncoming traffic was approaching. It made several adjustments and then accelerated onto the busy road in the same way a human driver would. Impressive, but I breathed a sigh of relief when I knew we had made it. I\u2019m uncomfortable putting my life into the hands of a robotic car.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
I did a comparative search on Chat GPT comparing the concepts found in Thinking, Fast and Slow<\/em> by Daniel Kahneman and the \u201cthinking\u201d required to drive a Tesla into oncoming traffic or harvest a thousand-acre wheatfield without human aid. It turns out, there are interesting implications. Kahneman identifies two systems for thinking in the human brain. System 1 (fast thinking) operates automatically and swiftly, relying on intuition and heuristics. System 2 (slow thinking) is deliberate, slow, and analytical. It requires effort and conscious thought.[1]<\/a> According to my AI-aided research, I found that AI is much like System 1 thinking in the human brain. Like System 1, AI algorithms process vast amounts of data rapidly, making quick decisions. Like System 1 thinking, AI is also prone to biases and therefore prone to errors. In an Interview about AI and thinking systems, Kahneman noted that, despite my fears of driving in a Tesla, AI systems are much safer than human System 1 thinking. However, Kahneman stated, \u201c\u2026when artificial intelligence makes a mistake, that mistake looks completely foolish to humans, or almost evil.\u201d[2]<\/a> I\u2019m still not ready to take my hands off the wheel. As it turns out I may not have a choice. In that same interview, Kahneman said, \u201cSo clearly, something is coming\u2026 And clearly AI is going to win [against human intelligence]. It\u2019s not even close. How people are going to adjust to this is a fascinating problem \u2013 but one for my children and grandchildren, not me.\u201d[3]<\/a> My stomach churned when I read this. What does his mean for the future of humanity?<\/p>\n <\/p>\n However, as marvellous as System 1 is, we are still better served when we combine System 1 thinking with the ability to engage System 2 thinking. Because of the quick way System 1 operates, it is prone to biases, wrong judgements and, therefore, errors. Kahneman writes, \u201cBecause System 1 operates automatically and cannot be turned off at will, errors of intuitive thought are often difficult to prevent. Biases cannot always be avoided, because System 1 may have no clue to the error\u2026errors can be prevented only by the enhanced monitoring and effortful activity of System 2.\u201d[4]<\/a> The interaction of the intuitive system and analytical system are optimal.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n An awareness of the interplay between System 1 and System 2 will be critical as a researcher. As I consider my NPO, I realize that I had certain biases, hunches, and intuitions about a collaborative form of leadership and its impact on the mission of God, that was then refined and reshaped through a collaborative design process with stakeholders. This process required System 2 thinking.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n The resources we\u2019ve read thus far, have demonstrated how to actively engage in System 2 thinking. Let me provide a few examples from our reading. Adler and Van Doren taught us how to engage in more critical reading.[6]<\/a> While elementary reading is largely a System 1 exercise, inspectional reading, analytical reading and syntopical reading requires one to engage System 2. Ahrens\u2019 method of note taking requires the writer to put ideas into their own words rather than simply parroting the ideas of other sources.[7]<\/a> That\u2019s System 2 at work. Paul and Elder\u2019s book, is a manual on how to engage in slow thinking by asking crucial questions.[8]<\/a> The discipline of coaching found in Camacho\u2019s book requires both the coach and coachee to engage System 2 thinking.[9]<\/a> Meyer and Land encourage System 2 thinking by bringing an awareness to threshold concepts and the need to push through frustration and fuzzy thinking when concepts are hard to grasp.[10]<\/a> Tim Harford provides the reader a System 2 approach with ten different rules to help one determine the truth behind statistics.[11]<\/a> Finally, to become the kind of self-differentiated leader who maintains a non-anxious, non-reactionary, yet challenging presence requires one to engage System 2.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n The encouragement for me in all of this is that human beings are required to think critically rather than simply allowing System 1 to be in the driver\u2019s seat all the time. While a Tesla may be able to navigate through traffic, we need researchers and leaders to navigate the more complex and critical challenges of life. The warning in his book for me is to effortfully engage System 2 thinking. It\u2019s a warning because as a leader and a researcher, I know that my propensity can be toward a lazy brain. I can very easily allow System 1 to lead and System 2 to follow blissfully. Bringing my best as a reacher means seeking to optimize my brain through the interplay of both Systems 1 and 2.<\/p>\n [1]<\/a> Daniel Kahneman, Thinking, Fast and Slow<\/em> (Toronto: Anchor Canada, 2013).<\/p>\n [2]<\/a> Tim Adams and @TimAdamsWrites, \u201cDaniel Kahneman: \u2018Clearly AI Is Going to Win. How People Are Going to Adjust Is a Fascinating Problem,\u2019\u201d The Observer<\/em>, May 16, 2021, sec. Books, https:\/\/www.theguardian.com\/books\/2021\/may\/16\/daniel-kahneman-clearly-ai-is-going-to-win-how-people-are-going-to-adjust-is-a-fascinating-problem-thinking-fast-and-slow.<\/p>\n [3]<\/a> Adams and @TimAdamsWrites.<\/p>\n [4]<\/a> Kahneman, Thinking, Fast and Slow<\/em>, 28.<\/p>\n [5]<\/a> Eve Poole, Leadersmithing: An Apprenticeship Approach to Making Great Leaders<\/em> (London\u202f; New York, NY: Bloomsbury Business, 2017).<\/p>\n [6]<\/a> Mortimer J. Adler and Charles Van Doren, How to Read a Book: The Classic Guide to Intellgent Reading.<\/em>, Revised and Updated ed edition May 10 2011 (New York: Simon and Schuster, Touchstone, n.d.).<\/p>\n [7]<\/a> S\u00f6nke Ahrens, How to Take Smart Notes: One Simple Technique to Boost Writing, Learning and Thinking<\/em>, 2nd edition, revised and expanded edition (Hamburg, Germany: S\u00f6nke Ahrens, 2022).<\/p>\n [8]<\/a> Richard Paul and Linda Elder, The Miniature Guide to Critical Thinking: Concepts and Tools<\/em>, Eighth edition, Thinker\u2019s Guide Library (Lanham Boulder New York London: Rowman & Littlefield, 2020).<\/p>\n [9]<\/a> Tom Camacho, Mining for Gold: Developing Kingdom Leaders through Coaching<\/em>, First published (Nottingham: IVP, 2019).<\/p>\n