In the most recent Republican primary debate, televised on Fox News channel, one

In the most recent Republican primary debate, televised on Fox News channel, one of the candidates, Chris Christie, pointedly remarked that another candidate, Vivek Ramaswamy, is “a guy who sounds like ChatGPT.” On one level, Christie’s remark was intended to insult Ramaswamy for espousing political beliefs based upon internet conspiracy lies, what the ancient Greeks would have described as a failure of logos. But, on another level, Christie’s jab suggested that Ramaswami has no mind of his own, no original thoughts about policies. In other words, Christie was saying that voters can’t trust Ramaswami because he lacks character and substance, what the ancient Greeks called ethos. Perhaps unwittingly, Christie was pointing to a larger ethical problem that has emerged from ChatGPT and other generative AI softwares that are being used in many professional settings today, and one that also connects to the work you will do in your AWR class this semester. That is, how do we assess the truth value, the validity, of any statement that is generated by a computer and not a single author? If we remove the concern for where an idea or statement originated and can no longer “consider the source,” will that undermine all truths, even those that are “[held] to be self-evident,” as Thomas Jefferson stated in the “Declaration of Independence”? More directly, how can your teachers assess the value of work that you produce, if there is no longer a way to determine whether the ideas or statements in that work are yours or a computer’s?
Write a brief essay (350-500 words) that takes a position on whether generative AI should be permitted in the college classroom. Regardless of which side you choose, make sure that you offer reasons that explain and support your position and feel free to use examples to help illustrate those reasons.