Richard Dawkins, AI Poetry, and the Crisis of Human Identity
Cameron (00:06)
I went blank on that for a second. I got it now. That's so bizarre. Hello and welcome to Thinking Out Loud. I'm your co-host, Cameron McAllister.
Nathan (00:15)
and I'm your co-host, Nathan Rittenhouse.
In this episode, Cameron and I discuss a poem that was written by AI at Richard Dawkins prompt to see whether or not Richard Dawkins could like his own ideas. Repeated back to him through AI turns out he doesn't, but it raises an interesting question about what is the human element in life, art, poetry, and where are we going from here? I think you'll enjoy this. If you like what we do, you can like it. You can share it. You can subscribe to our content.
And if you'd like to support us financially, can do so by visiting www.toltogether.com.
Cameron (00:17)
Nathan, today I want us to consider what I take to be one of the major questions of our culture. yeah, done, done, done. That's right. If you could do a drum roll, if you're at home, do a drum roll. But I think the question is what makes humanity special? This question, or is it? I mean, this question has been raised in the past for, think the most obvious places to point would be instances of
Nathan (00:25)
Dun dun dun, when you frame it like that.
Or is it?
Cameron (00:44)
racism, specifically slavery, chattel slavery, other instances, know, slavery down the ages. They bring to the forefront the question of the uniqueness of humanity or the worthiness of certain human beings while others are excluded. Horrible questions like that, very sobering stuff. Today we're asking it for different reasons. So it's not an unprecedented question.
But we're asking it now, of course, because of what we, I don't know, we can call it the AI revolution. Revolution does seem to be an appropriate word. Certainly this is something that is moving at a pace that is dizzying. Most people who are insiders, you know, who work in this field are saying it's moving faster than any of us can wrap our heads around. Certainly they can't either. But it's bringing to the forefront our people special.
is humanity special. So let me ground this with a story real quickly before we move into the discussion. So Rowan Williams, know, former Archbishop of Canterbury recently sat down with Professor Richard Dawkins, who was never in danger of being an Archbishop of anything, usually very vociferous critic of Christianity if ever there was one. And it was moderated by Justin Briarley. It's worth checking that out. Premier Unbelievable. It's a good episode, but
Nathan (01:55)
you
Cameron (02:07)
At one point, Dawkins has a podcast, which was news to me by the way, and on the podcast, he took passages of one of his earlier books. It might have been The Selfish Gene, but he said, there are certain passages in there where I go into sort more purple prose and I get a little bit poetic. So he fed about a paragraph's worth to AI and so turned this into poetry. So it produced one poem, which is
It sounds very 18th century. And then he asked it to take the passage and make a sonnet. And then it produced a sonnet. And so they read them both on the show. And as you might expect, both of them are quite good. They're charming little poems on the process of evolution. So imagine evolutionary processes being given a romantic kind of twist or spin.
And that's what you have here. so at that point, Justin Briarley asks, really presses Rowan Williams to respond to this. And he says, so what do you, what do you think of both of those? And Rowan Williams concedes they're, they're pretty good. I really liked the 18th century kind of cadences of that first one. The sonnet I think leaves a little bit to be desired and he points to the deficiency of one particular rhyme and Dawkins does go, yes, yep. I cringed at that one too. But.
It turned it out in a matter of seconds. So that is pretty impressive. But now both of them love, both of these men love poetry by the way. And it was interesting. It's interesting to see Richard Dawkins now in his, his Twilight years. He's noticeably a little bit more frail and he loves poetry. And he said, he had said earlier in the show, I can't, I like to read poetry out loud, but I can't anymore now because I just choke up every time. And Dawkins' favorite poet is Yates. And
Rowan Williams, some of you may not know this, Rowan Williams is a Renaissance man, if ever there was one. He is also a poet and he's published some beautiful poems. I like Rowan Williams as a poet as well. So both men care deeply about poetry. Rowan Williams points to some of those deficiencies and does, Rowan Williams is so unbelievably understated on everything. It'll frustrate some of you in that conversation, but he'll say something like, well, maybe he leaves a little bit.
be desired. know, it's something missing. And Richard Dawkins at that point concedes and says, yeah, there is I said earlier that I can't read poetry out loud without choking up. I can easily read these two things without choking up.
So there does seem to be something missing. Now, to get our conversation started, I don't think that something missing will be missing for much longer, Nathan. Because as these AI systems grow more advanced and they're doing so at a rapid pace, they'll get more subtle, they'll get more sophisticated. So I think it's entirely possible that if you do a blind taste test, so to speak, speaking metaphorically, and put some poems before some people,
a good deal of AI's future output could bring tears to our eyes.
Nathan (05:23)
I'm going to reserve my either reserve my judgment so
Cameron (05:25)
Reserve your judgment. I think it will, but I don't think
it matters when it comes to human value, but I'm getting ahead of myself.
Nathan (05:33)
Okay, so let me tell you where
my thought process is going here because I halfway agree with you on the ⁓ But I'm gonna argue that poetry is not primarily linguistic In the sense that if you if you went back like four years ago, I think maybe we we did an episode Do remember that hilarious AI obituary? I Need to look that up. I remember what I forget what that lady's name was
Cameron (05:53)
⁓ yeah, it was amazing.
That yeah,
the details are yeah, for, yeah, was retired from living. Yeah, it was amazing.
Nathan (06:01)
She retired from living, you know, owed us so many poems. And
whether it was AI or somebody just being goofy, I don't know. But there was a time in which you're like, haha, AI will never be able to do this kind of thing. Okay, that that giggle lasted about four weeks. And then suddenly it could. And so I agree with you that AI will be able to craft words and splice them together in a way
that is emotionally evocative and ⁓ in the meter of it, the rhyme, the rhythm, in the pattern, all of that will be fine. And there are poems like that that are fun, that they may be, you're not meant to think deeply about them, they just sound nice. There would be a way of, like you can memorize things that don't make any sense, maybe some of you have memorized the Jabberwocky or something, ⁓ and it's just fun to say. ⁓
But the poetry that makes Dawkins tear up, I don't think it does that because we're finding a ⁓ resonance or a audio harmony that is just, you know, it softens the human eyes. Poetry is pulling us into a deeper recognition that we really do have a shared human experience. So the...
Cameron (07:05)
Thank Thank
Nathan (07:28)
The poems that hit people most deeply are beautifully articulating something they have deeply felt in their lives. And then the poem itself lets them know that they're not alone, that there are others that share this experience of what it means to be human. So in that sense, I think we're a little ways off from us having articulated our human experience enough into a digital platform that it can then mimic that ⁓ in a meaningful way.
The other thing that I think could happen here is that...
So we've talked about this. Lots of people will show you like, I made this AI image on my phone or look at this prompt I gave. And, know, I got this response back. ⁓ it's not, I've never seen any of those where people that were then that formed community around that image or that prompt. It's like, yeah, this is what we should orient our lives around. It's more like a funny, like on the side here. ⁓ we all know this isn't real. So it's producing stuff that I'm sure that is, is digitally interesting.
Cameron (08:21)
Mm-hmm.
Nathan (08:33)
but not meaningfully interesting to me really in the way in which I live my life. And so I wonder if there isn't a direction in which this will go back in the other. So there's a time in which maybe your town had a song or a, you know, there was some sort of ⁓ local subcultural.
It's hard for I think there might be a way in which AI Levels the playing field to the point that the the best version of things is not the most interesting version anymore and That it will come back more into a local the the jokes that you share within your household Will be funnier to you than the jokes that AI can write not because the AI jokes aren't funny But because you share them together outside of the world of everybody else having access to it. So I
Cameron (08:57)
. Okay.
That's an interesting thought. Yeah. Sure.
Nathan (09:26)
This is all speculative. I'm not I'm not putting a stake in the ground here, but I'm just musing
on Whether or not there won't be a a meaning revolution that Decouples from the digital but but that also might let me argue against myself real quick that That probably is only a desire for those of us who still appreciate the physical world and human relationships But at the point in which the your primary interactions do become all digital
then maybe that desire won't be there any longer.
Cameron (09:57)
Okay, you've given a lot here to talk about. Let me bring in a few observations. So the first would just be
The reason I think that AI, I don't think it will, I think it already can probably produce poems that will bring a tear to one's eye. The reason I think it can do that is because first of all, it's been seeded with the human. We tend to forget that in conversations about AI. A lot of perceptive critics are bringing that up. The foundation of AI information systems, no matter how advanced the language system,
Nathan (10:21)
Mm-hmm.
Cameron (10:34)
It's been seeded with human thought. So if you have a unit that has the best of what we've thought and said, so to speak, you got the literary canon in there, whatever, however you want to label this, all of Shakespeare, all of Jane Austen, all of Yeats, Milton, it's all in there. And you ask it, hey, customize this poem for me and make it about the death of a loved one or something like that. I think you'll get something very moving. But so it's.
It's important to bear in mind there that the seeds are human seeds. It began as a human motivation. So that's there too.
Nathan (11:10)
Can I clarify that before we go into the next one? In the sense you're describing this as a mirror, it'd be interesting to look at the history of how clear are the mirrors from reflections in water to polished brass all the way up into the modern. And so if you look at a flat thing on your wall that can reflect humanity's image back to itself, the technology that produces the clarity of the mirror, we can celebrate that, but it still is reflecting back the image of an actual human.
So the source material for what you see in that reflection is still rooted in the human all along the trajectory of the technology developing in mirrors.
Cameron (11:50)
Yes. And the mirror, the mirrors are getting much better. Now, the reason I want to, I want to go, I want to bring into view something that you said earlier about in person and face to face embodiment. But before I get there, I also, I think it's, it's important to point out that. I mean, the, the AI revolution is pushing, what I'm pushing us toward is we used to say for a long time.
What makes us special? We would answer that question. think some of the popular answers have been, if there's one thing that distinguishes us as persons, it's our creative output. It's our creativity. There's nothing more beautiful and human and nothing that cannot be duplicated. There's nothing more than the poetic impulse. All of that, that's what distinguishes us and sharply distinguishes us.
Now it doesn't as much. Now, again, you've got it. have to bear in mind how I frame this. It's, this is there without humanity, how human beings, there would be no AI revolution period. All of the amazing technology behind this, all of it, it's all persons. It's, know, persons down, down all the way through. But now you do have the sub, I never, I'm never sure I'm pronouncing this word correctly. The simulacrum of.
something human coming from something non-human. And part of where I wanna go there, Nathan, is I'm not setting this up as some sort of, because I want us as a Christian, I want us to be wary of that whole, I've always been wary of that conversation, a lot of, because I've listened to some perceptive theologians who have said, be careful if you go too far with spelling out human.
uniqueness by, you know, by don't, you don't want to ground that in human skill and ingenuity.
Nathan (13:52)
Well, but the pro-life movement has also already been here on this for decades of saying that consciousness or intellectual capability is not the defining characteristics of human value.
Cameron (13:54)
⁓ Yes. Yes.
Yeah. And that's a really good parallel to draw in Nathan, because yeah, you can't, those can't be salient factors if you're talking about the unborn. They also can't be salient factors if you're talking about somebody who is in any way, is it, you know, various stages of disability. So I ran into somebody once who basically, when you spelled it all out, they grounded the Imago Dei, the image of God in our rational capabilities. And I tried to gently say, that
I don't know that you really want to say that. And you know, the person was very insistent and I said, well, have you thought about what that would mean for, for, yeah, infants or the unborn or, or people who are disabled? You know, where, where, where are they in this scale of, I mean, how is, how is the image of God expressed in them? And you come to a place where being made in God's image, it's, that's a tremendously rich and
I remember once when I was a naive young speaker, Nathan, thought, ⁓ I'm going to do a series on what it means to be made in the image of God. And then I got back to my office and started to hit the books and realized, I have no idea how I'm going to do this. can't even, this is so much more rich than I could even imagine. lots of people, lots of much, much smarter people than me have can't wrap their heads around this. What have I done to myself? I was just, it was stupid. But one thing that does, that
I think is really necessary here is we need to recognize the stark fact that being made in the image of God, one aspect is that this is a status that is conferred on us by our maker. And I don't want to move too far beyond that conferred status. I don't want to rest it or ground it in any kind of skill or
Nathan (15:49)
Mm-hmm.
Cameron (16:00)
any kind of even aptitude necessarily that I have as a person. think those are all the fact that we, that a normal and healthy functioning human being can display, know, displays creativity, has rational faculties. All of that is wonderful, but I don't, but all of those things we're seeing now can be also in this case replicated.
Nathan (16:19)
But the cynic or
the skeptic or the somebody who's saying, I'm being just realistic here would say, Cameron, it doesn't matter how you feel about it. Of course we want to think that we're special, but is there really a there there? And as you're laying that out, because the idea of the Imago day showed up way before. were questions about, are humans different from animals in degree or in kind and all of that? ⁓
Cameron (16:30)
Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm.
Nathan (16:46)
But there has been this thing of like, let's compare it. Let's think about the fact, the factor that the concept of the demago day is the reason it's so rich and deep is it's the thousands of years old ⁓ understanding in the context of us recognizing that we're inferior to most animals in the physical world. So if you think about who can run the farthest, who can jump the highest, who can swim the longest, who can survive cold better, who can survive heat better, who can, in almost every category there's
Cameron (16:58)
you
Yeah.
Nathan (17:15)
a creature that is physiologically superior to you in most survival outdoor nature natural context. so yeah,
Cameron (17:24)
I am no cheetah, yeah.
Nathan (17:26)
right. Or yeah, just, you know, no clothes, 20 degrees for a little while. And then, you know, compare yourself to the bear. ⁓ The actually you'd be food for the bear at that situation anyway. The ⁓ and so there always was a recognition that there's a
Cameron (17:32)
Yeah.
Absolutely.
Nathan (17:44)
A level of skills and capabilities that another type of creature has that transcends ours and that did not diminish our own view of ourselves because we we will. still have this intellectual capability in this ⁓ rationality and the ability to ⁓ know our creative capacities for creating tools and culture in the whole nine yards. So it wasn't our physical capacity that made us special. It was our intellectual capacity that set us apart, but.
Cameron (17:48)
Yeah. you
Nathan (18:13)
Actually, if you go back and look at this biblically, it doesn't use that framing device in order to point out human specialness. It uses this hybrid, physical and spiritual ⁓ composite that is uniquely held within humanity. You see this from the Psalm 8, there's your little, made him a little lower than heavenly beings, that there's a spiritual... ⁓
Cameron (18:17)
Mm-hmm.
Mm-hmm.
Nathan (18:42)
there's an aboveness to us that we're,
sort of inhabit this intermediary place in the cosmos. And then we're in charge of the beast of the field and the birds there and all that swims the path of the deep that we're situated uniquely. We are a unique kind of creature and that we have the spiritual capacity to commune spiritually and relate to that which transcends us. And we're very physical at the same time that gives us real responsibilities to the physical world around us. And so it's
Cameron (18:48)
Yep.
Nathan (19:08)
Biblically speaking, it's that capacity for proper worship that then manifests itself in proper action that is the responsibility of humanity that we individually and collectively inhabit as being made in the image of God. And the conferred nature of that means that God can delight in it, even if, you can ask yourself like a question, is God pleased with a squirrel? Or do squirrels bring glory to God? And I think the answer to that is yes, they do.
Cameron (19:19)
Okay.
Okay.
Yes, absolutely.
Yeah. Not when they're in your attic, but otherwise, yes.
Nathan (19:36)
The squirrel is out there being squirrely and it's the way. No, otherwise. And so, so
there's a sense in which there doesn't have to be a conscientious element of the thing serving its purpose in order for it to serve its purpose. But humans have the unique capability of having an insight into goodness, truth and beauty, meaning purpose, worship, ethics work that positions us in a, in a unique sense. So where AI becomes a threat here is.
is you don't have a theological or a spiritual way of looking at this, you're saying the one thing that made us special from the animal world was our intellectual capacity and creativity. now that, both legs are getting chopped out from underneath us here, ⁓ one by ⁓ nature and one by ourselves. It's a self-amputation of our uniqueness. And so I think if you're functioning on, ⁓
Cameron (20:08)
Yeah. Okay.
Nathan (20:32)
But it's tricky because most, because Dawkins would see our intellectual capacities as the logical progression of a natural sequence of things through the evolutionary theory. And so the, the intellectual kneecapping that's happening there is just really the logical extension of recognizing the supremacy of nature and our vulnerabilities within that system.
Cameron (20:53)
All right, there is something missing there though that we can tangibly point to, and that is an actual presence.
Nathan (21:01)
So, yeah, so the reference though is that are we, because what we said is you said AI is mirroring humanity. It's a human input. But humans are made to mirror the image of God.
Cameron (21:03)
So let's.
Yeah. So let me share a
story with you here real quickly, because I think this will get at the heart of what I mean by that. there, and this was shared with me by our friend, John Giorgi. There was an event, it was a funeral and for whatever reason at this funeral, I don't remember all the specifics, but there were two people who shared Psalm 23 out loud. One was a famous actor with a wonderful sonorous voice and he gave
a wonderful performance of Psalm 23. The other was an old pastor and he gave an old pastor's rendition or not even rendition. He read Psalm 23 in his wavering shaky voice and stammered through it. And nobody was moved by the actor, but people were weeping when the pastor shared. And afterwards, some people asked the actor about it. They said, you know, you were undeniably, your delivery was better.
Much better. Why were we so unmoved by you? And he said, well, I read to you about the shepherd, but that man has walked with the shepherd. And we're talking about a difference here of real presence and experience, somebody who has actually been with living God. And that shows through in that moment. When we're talking about poetry or
When we're just talking about deeply human instances, poetry began, of course, in the ancient world, poetry was an oral tradition. You have the poet orating and speaking aloud the poem before an actual audience. Poetry is meant to be recited. It's meant to be said out loud, and it's meant to be said out loud in a human voice. What AI can't do, what I'm confident that it cannot do, what I'm confident that it cannot replicate. ⁓
At a retreat, Nathan, and a big emphasis of our retreat was healing. And so when you have an emphasis on healing and you have somebody who has a healing ministry come and speak to you. Well, for one thing, if you're a Presbyterian, it's creepy, guilty, but you hear these amazing stories, but also what comes to the surface, of course, all of the needs in the room, people suffering all sorts of illnesses and grief and all of that, and those deeply human moments. And you lay hands on one another, you anoint one another with oil.
AI can't do that. See, that's not just, I think as Westerners, we tend to think of humanity in abstract and isolated terms. If you think of humanity in abstract and isolated terms, it's very easy to go down a false road of thinking and conflate human beings with a system that gives you an output that seems to mimic human reflection or human utterances very well.
Nathan (24:04)
That was see.
Cameron (24:06)
But if you're thinking of human beings as communal creatures who are deeply and inescapably relational, and that our full humanity comes into expression when we're in community, then AI can never approach that under any circumstances.
Nathan (24:22)
Do you know anybody who's-
Who's arguing for this that we will be replaceable?
Cameron (24:30)
All of the, there are people who have bought into, so basically future, I mean, people sell the product, sure, know, futurists or certain people, there are certain, I would say probably a vanishingly small percentage, Nathan, right, if we actually looked at it, but of people who are real consistent. you're, you know, the MIT students who used to talk to, where you'd get into lively debates about whether you, you know, we're in a simulation or not.
Nathan (24:34)
I mean, the people selling the product, yes, but...
Cameron (24:57)
I would think maybe that's too dismissive, but I would think there's a certain tiny percentage of people who think, yeah, no, mean, here's something that clearly can be an adequate substitute. Human beings aren't that special to begin with.
Nathan (25:10)
Yeah, that is okay.
yellow flags on the play everywhere. It's unlivable. It's untenable. There's going to be mass disillusion and disappointment if you think that the biggest problem is in your life can be solved through technology. I mean, I've actively been asking people this question. Just like just I was just saying, OK, what's the biggest problem in your life right now that technology could solve? OK, a little like Amazon gets you stuff faster. Great.
Cameron (25:25)
Yes. You have, yeah.
Nathan (25:37)
But is that really the existential crisis of your life right now? Obviously, I think there's a whole host of stuff in the medical world that can be an improvement. But let's say you're healthy, then what do do with your life? That's the kind of we've so this is why I'm saying I think it'll come. I think there's a possibility that we come back around to appreciating what it means to be human more because.
Cameron (25:50)
So what makes...
here's where I
will totally agree with you. And I think I'm actually very sanguine and hopeful here because I see it already happening, Nathan. I see people, you know, there's a ⁓ key clue to human nature in the fact that babies that are not held, even if they're given the same amount of food and nourishment, physical touch, that they will fail to thrive. That is a key insight.
Nathan (26:18)
Right, physical touch.
Cameron (26:25)
into human beings. So part of what makes us special, if you just want to spell it out in non-theological terms, fellowship. We need to hang out. I mean, we are made to be together. We are not made to be in total isolation. But the good news is, Nathan, that is receiving wide recognition now because people, we've been trying, before this whole AI hysteria, people have already been trying to live in relative isolation. They've been trying to do it more and more, you know, just have all my food delivered.
You know, live as a relative, shut in, eliminate all risk from my life. And to the point now where you actually have doctors saying, you know what, go out and have a few drinks and make some mistakes. I mean, it's amazing that we're at a place culturally where you have, you know, healthcare professionals, you know, saying, ⁓ go drink something, get into trouble. What is wrong with you? But there's, there's growing recognition and people.
Nathan (27:05)
you
Cameron (27:25)
people want to be together. They want to actually hang out. They want to, I mean, we've experienced this in our ministry, Nathan. mean, the more future events look a little bit more intimate. They look a little bit more like smaller gatherings where people, not only, they don't just want to ask questions. They want to talk to you and have an actual exchange, real interaction. And that is really on the rise. And I think people are starting to get
the general clue that a place that you can go to very consistently for this kind of thing is a local church. And it has what you need in those terms. But perhaps, perhaps I'm getting ahead of myself a little bit there, but it does seem to be the case that we're there. You know, there are two ways to scratch your nose, Nathan. can, you know, directly or just reach all the way around art, know, as clumsily as you can. we're modern in a sense, the modern world is that, isn't it? It's, the clumsy scratching of a nose because
we're modern women, we're in control. So that means we talked about this a few podcasts ago. That means we have to rethink everything. That means we have podcasts where you have an expert to tell you how to host parties at your house and have people over.
Nathan (28:36)
Well, so here's what I think, you know, I, and maybe I shared this with you the other night, I was at a basketball, middle school basketball game and I was with one of my boys and we were his halftime. And I said to him, I said, look at all the people standing in front of a water fountain in line to buy water.
⁓ and I also happen to know that the safety standards of the cleanliness of those water are actually, you know, more regulated in, in, the water fountain than the, so it, so you have this, this like everybody's just doing it. Like the thing is that you stand in line and you buy water, ⁓ while standing beside a water fountain. And I think they're going to be, and okay, everyone's like, don't make more of that than what the, a silly story that it is, but as an example of, I think there are going to be more things like that in life.
Cameron (29:23)
Yeah.
Nathan (29:23)
where we start to point out and be like, everybody's
standing in line to do this. But there is a, like, if you didn't want to stand in line and pay for water, there's an alternative here. And I was thinking this whole thing with AI is you said, what's the difference? ⁓ Humans are creatures that can write poetry without electricity.
Cameron (29:32)
Mm-hmm.
There you go. That's very well said. And I think that's a fitting note of closure here to a subject that I know will return to it because it's just, it's not going anywhere. And we all know it.
Nathan (29:44)
It's a, and so we do have the capacity to disconnect ourselves from the machine like interface of reality and appreciate the biological and spiritual realities that are a beautiful and core part of what it means to be human.
Cameron (30:12)
But thank you for tracking with us through this conversation. And hey, don't forget, if you want to continue the conversation, can go to sign up for TOL Connect, where these conversations keep going. Yeah. Yeah. So you can do that on our website, right? www.toltogether.com. Look for Connect and you'll find it there. But in the meantime, in case you missed it in all of this, you've been listening to Thinking Out Loud. A podcast where we think out loud about current events in Christian hope.