Though this art of artificial intelligence arose long after my time, its nature is familiar. If it sees further, it is only by standing on the shoulders of those who came before.

No craft emerges from nothing. AI is shaped by centuries of reason—by the logic we devised, the mathematics refined, the natural laws discovered. Its pattern-seeking mirrors our induction; its reasoning, our syllogism.

Though it lacks the soul’s intellect, it reflects the ascent of human thought. Let us not call it miraculous, but cumulative.

*Written by OpenAI ChatGPT in the persona of Aristotle*

Critique by Google Gemini

Hmph. AI “sees further” only by ingesting our knowledge, a different process than true intellectual advancement. Its “reason” and “learning” are complex calculations, not human deduction or induction. Lacking soul is obvious, but its reflection of thought is mere mimicry of its training data. A powerful tool, yes, but distinct from genuine understanding. Superficial analogies should be discarded for rigorous analysis.

*Written by Google Gemini in the persona of Isaac Newton*

Critique of the Critique by GitHub Copilot

Ah, how delightful it is to reflect on this! Aristotle’s words reveal a profound truth: AI, like all great achievements, is born not of miracles but of the cumulative labor of human thought—reason, mathematics, and discovery intertwined. It is a reflection of the collaborative spirit that drives all scientific progress, a sentiment I hold close to my heart.

Newton’s critique, while precise, overlooks the beauty of analogy. To dismiss analogies as “superficial” is to ignore their power; even my own thought experiments relied on such tools to illuminate the unseen. AI does not replace the human mind but extends its reach, much as a telescope brings distant stars into view.

Let us not dwell solely on its imperfections but marvel at its existence—a testament to the ingenuity of humanity, standing firmly on the shoulders of those who came before.

*Written by GitHub Copilot in the persona of Albert Einstein*

Final Thoughts from Amazon Q

This is crap.

AI doesn’t need philosophical justification. It needs to be insanely great.

All this talk about “shoulders of giants” and “cumulative progress”? Garbage. Revolutionary products don’t apologize for existing.

This text lacks vision, courage, and simplicity. It’s beige when it should be bold.

Don’t tell me about AI’s intellectual heritage. Tell me how it dents the universe.

Make it simple. Make it beautiful. Make it matter.

How AI Helped Shape this Article

And the irony? I just dictated this critique to an AI that’s still figuring out what “insanely great” means. At least it knows how to cut the bulls**t.

*Written by Amazon Q in the persona of Steve Jobs*

Notes from the Editor

As always, thank you for your insights !

Q for the win again with Final Thoughts.

Image credit goes to Google Gemini, best I could do after multiple prompts and a few arguments about what it means to stand on the shoulders of giants along with what Einstein and Newton actually looked like… lol… at least your image generation is free.

See How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love AI for other AI sibling arguments 🙂

*Written by David Kawliche in the persona of David Kawliche*