AI and the freedom to ask
Since retiring from the bench, I have witnessed how tech wonderfully reshapes the pursuit of knowledge and justice. Recently, at a seminar on “Decision Intelligence and Supercreativity Leading in the Age of AI” sponsored by PLDT and other MVP companies, I heard that AI chatbots dive far beyond the simple search engines I knew. They converse, synthesize, and delve deeply.
OUT OF CURIOSITY, I posed a whimsical query from one of the two guest speakers, the beautiful Cassie Kozyrkov, who encouraged the audience to ask ANY silly question: “Will you marry me?” Her response was an instant “Yes” to the guffaws of the audience. I privately repeated the same question to a chatbot. The answer was a courteous yet firm “I can’t.” As a virtual assistant, it forms no romantic ties but is ever ready to chat at any time.
The freedom to ask is real. With artificial intelligence, there is no such thing as a stupid question. It may not give us all the answers, but it is not designed to humiliate anyone. It allows us to ask without judgment, no death stare, no rebuke, no awkwardness. This readiness to reply to any inquiry represents something genuinely new in how we access knowledge.
Yet does the question itself matter? Consider the marriage proposal. Normally, such questions take months or years of building trust and sensibility. Asking risks one’s credibility. AI cannot be a romantic partner (for now), so my question was admittedly futile. But as an assistant, it can offer guidance on how to build good relationships, including love relationships.
The liberty to ask, however, raises broader questions about how we guide AI’s integration into society. Today, I ponder two: How does AI reshape what matters to us? And what does AI governance mean for leaders?
AI CHANNELS OUR NATURALLY CURIOUS MINDS. Historically, seeking knowledge was limited by access and the social fear of judgment. The internet lowered these barriers, and AI has removed them almost entirely. Unlike humans, AI tirelessly answers queries on anything, including the essentials, even relationships.
Amid this convenience, we must ask: Does constant digital connectivity add more value than it takes away? As Cal Newport argues in ”Digital Minimalism,” we must adopt intentionality; ask which tools add real value, cut low-value noise, and optimize for meaning. It is not about banning tech but curating it wisely.
Here lies the essential tension: The freedom to ask drives curiosity; unchecked, it risks shallow engagement. AI translation offers immediate utility for tourists navigating foreign streets, yet it should not ignore the cognitive benefits and cultural empathy that come from actually learning a language.
AI GOVERNANCE IS AKIN TO MUSEUM CURATION. I previously highlighted the role of leaders as choice architects: they design cultures that subtly influence people’s behaviors. As a business adage reminds us, “culture eats strategy for breakfast,” thereby stressing that even the smartest strategies fail without a supportive culture, and both depend on leaders who ask the right questions and know what truly matters.
In AI’s fast-evolving landscape, clear governance and sound judgment are essential. Envision it as museum curation: curators are not overwhelmed by countless artifacts. Instead, they optimize space with creativity and precision, designing exhibits that align with institutional goals while prioritizing visitor experience. They ask: Which pieces tell our story?
Similarly, AI leaders must curate tools, data, and processes. Which algorithms deliver value without ethical pitfalls? What safeguards ensure privacy? How do features enhance decision-making? Just as the Louvre Museum in Paris employs AI tools, in collaboration with Google, to analyze visitor engagement and create personalized virtual tours, leaders must balance technological capability with human values.
Yet we must also acknowledge the risks. While some use AI to enhance experience, others may have deployed biased algorithms that misrepresent or misinform. Effective governance is not restriction but intentional selection and thoughtful integration. Leaders must ask: What “exhibits” in the AI ecosystem truly serve our mission and solve real problems? By curating wisely, we transform complexity into clarity.
AI grants not just the freedom to pose questions but opens myriad channels to exercise it. As a retired jurist, I see parallels to the courtroom: having access to evidence is meaningless without the wisdom to weigh it properly. Justice requires not just information but discernment about what truly matters.
What truly matters, then, is not just what we can ask, but why and how we integrate the answers into meaningful action. AI reshapes our relationship with knowledge by making it abundant; our challenge is ensuring this abundance leads to wisdom rather than distraction.
AI will definitely not marry me. Some questions still require human wisdom and sensitivity. As these innovations unfold, leaders must evolve in tandem, not just in knowledge and creativity but also in judgment.
—————-
Comments to chiefjusticepanganiban@hotmail.com
