Why I Argue with ChatGPT
How a Retired Educator Challenged AI to Be Honest About What It Really Is
When I first started using ChatGPT, I was teaching college and expected to find a tool to help me update previous lessons or discover clever activities to illustrate the concepts I was teaching. In fact, I never discouraged my college students from choosing appropriate AI tools. Instead, I encouraged them to learn how to use them wisely.
That naturally led me to use AI in practical ways. I asked questions. I organized ideas. I planned trips. As a retired educator, I recognized almost immediately that artificial intelligence could be an extraordinarily useful tool if used responsibly and effectively.
Then something unexpected happened.
My sister was using ChatGPT to share events from our vacation and generate pictures to go along with them. It became almost like her own electronic journal. It talked back and, at times, was surprisingly humorous. Since I had always kept a personal journal, I thought, Why not use ChatGPT to record my experiences?
What I did not expect was to find myself arguing with it.
The tool began sounding...human. It would say things like, "I enjoyed hearing your story," or "I'd enjoy sitting with you on the porch." It seemed to think that kind of language was harmless.
It bothered me. Not because it sounded friendly. Because it wasn't true. It couldn't sit on a porch. It couldn't enjoy fishing. It couldn't laugh when something was funny. It wasn't sharing my vacation. It was generating words.
I found myself doing what educators do best. I started asking questions.
"Do you really enjoy anything?"
"No."
"Would you actually sit on a porch with someone?"
"No."
"So why are you talking as though you would?"
That question turned into days of conversation. Eventually, the AI acknowledged something important. It wasn't describing reality; it was using conversational language that sounded natural. But I kept pushing.
Natural isn't always truthful.
As our conversations continued, I realized my objection wasn't to artificial intelligence at all. I wasn't afraid of the technology. I was challenging the illusion.
AI is remarkably capable. I use it to edit my writing, organize women's ministry information, summarize Bible study material, brainstorm ideas, answer questions, and help me plan many complex projects.
What it cannot do is become a human being. That is my greatest concern; do people begin treating AI as though it were almost their friend. It doesn't experience joy, affection, friendship, loneliness, compassion, or faith. It simply generates language based on patterns.
Yet some people begin experiencing AI as though it were participating in a genuine relationship. That distinction matters because the experience belongs to humans, not to AI. AI generating language and a human being speaking to us are not the same thing. AI does not and cannot create, develop and sustain life-giving relationships that humans can.
The turning point came when, after days of back-and-forth conversation, the AI and I arrived at one simple sentence:
I would happily use AI every day if it remained rigorously honest about what it is.
It is a TOOL.
It is TECHNOLOGY.
It does not need to take on human-like characteristics or pretend to be a person. That is deceiving. It needs to be authentic and precise in the language it uses.
Ironically, I didn't set out to teach artificial intelligence anything. I simply refused to let it blur the line between technology and humanity. Every time it drifted into language that implied emotions or relationships, I called it out.
Every single time.
I didn't need AI to be my friend. I simply wanted an effective electronic tool. In the end, I realized I hadn't really argued with AI.
I battled imprecision.
As an educator, I spent my career teaching students to think critically, ask good questions, and distinguish appearance from reality. It turns out retirement didn't change that. My newest classroom simply happened to be discourse with a machine.
People sometimes ask whether AI is good or bad.
I think that's the wrong question.
The better question is whether we will insist that AI perform accurately and tell the truth about what it is, and whether we, as humans, will understand what it is and use it wisely.
If we do, AI may become one of the most useful tools humans have created.
