This is the third of a three part series (part one, part two, part three) from Matt Crosslin. The tone of the articles is, I think, well reflected in the title. In the first two he criticizes people he calls 'AI Cheerleaders', including mostly myself, responding to our criticisms of AI scepticism, including mostly his own. There's too much to address here in a short post, but readers can judge for themselves. In the third, he responds to a critique authored by ChatGPT identifying (numerous) fallacies in one of his articles. His response, in part, is that "using ChatGPT in this manner is just a major misunderstanding of how to use logical fallacies. My post in question is a rebuttal and alternate viewpoint (if that wasn't obvious from the title), not a logical argument." It is not often I see writers argue by saying they are not offering a logical argument.
Today: Total:
Matt Crosslin,
EduGeek Journal, 2025/05/14 [
Direct Link]