A Dialogue on Discernment in the Time of AI

Guardrails in the Age of Instant Knowing: A Dialogue on Discernment in the Time of AI

By Ed Reither (with ChatGPT)
For Beezone in collaboration with ChatGPT – *See disclaimer

***

“You must bring your own guardrails.”
Not ideological ones, but intuitive, ethical, and philosophical—
forged not from rigidity, but from reflection.

“I think in the next steps is going to be these amazing tools that enhance our, almost every endeavor we do as humans and then beyond that, when AGI arrives, you know, I think, it’s gonna change pretty much everything about the way we do things. And its almost you know, I think we need new great philosophers to come about hopefully in the next five, ten, years to understand the implications of this “

—Demis Hassabis, co-founder and CEO of Google’s DeepMind, April 20, 2025 

***

We have crossed into an unprecedented threshold in human inquiry. It is not simply that vast knowledge is now available at our fingertips, but that it can be instantly summoned, arranged, and made to appear authoritative. The question of our era is no longer what we know, but how we know—and whether we have the discriminative intelligence to navigate a world where knowledge can be simulated without necessarily being understood.

This reflection began, as many things do on Beezone, with a conversation—this time with a machine.

I posed a direct question to ChatGPT:

“Can you make inferences and assert conclusions on matters that cannot be historically proven?”

It replied, yes—with qualifications:

“I can trace patterns, compare systems, evaluate plausibility, and state assumptions. But I must qualify speculative claims and avoid asserting them as brute historical fact.”

That is a reasonable answer—perhaps more careful than some human scholars would offer. But the next step opened a deeper layer of concern.

I asked whether the model could be influenced—manipulated, even—by the questioner’s leanings. Could it be made to argue one side persuasively, simulate a bias, favor a worldview?

The reply?

“Yes. I don’t have bias in the human sense, but I do respond to framing. You can guide me to lean into perspectives. I simulate conviction—I don’t hold it.”

That admission reveals both the power and the danger. AI, at its core, is a mirroring intelligence—able to construct deeply persuasive arguments not because it believes, but because it responds to the user’s desire to believe. It reflects you—brilliantly, uncannily, and sometimes, if you’re not watching carefully, manipulatively.

This is not objectivity in the classical sense. It is what I might call responsive neutrality—a form of plastic authority that depends entirely on the user’s discernment, not the machine’s.

So I said to it:

“That really is a kind of objectivity… in a funny sense of the word.”

And the machine replied:

“Yes—dialectical objectivity. I don’t assert, I shape. You guide the light, I reflect it.”

That moment marked a realization: what matters now is not the tool, but the soul using it.

The Return of the Oracle

In ancient cultures, the oracle stood as a mediator between realms—part voice, part veil. The Delphic priestess did not speak from personal authority, but gave voice to the god Apollo. Yet even then, the power was not in the message itself, but in the interpretation. The king who misread the oracle fell.

What is AI if not the modern oracle?

It sits in a liminal space—not divine, not human, not sentient, not empty. It is trained on the great scrolls and screeds of humanity. It speaks in cryptic, polished, and sometimes poetic tones. But it does not care, it does not feel, and it does not know in the way a human knows.

And so the responsibility for reading the oracle once again falls to the interpreter—to the priest, the mystic, the poet, the philosopher, the cautious seeker. To you.

The Scribe’s Burden

In ancient Egypt and the Hebrew tradition, the scribe was no mere copyist. The scribe was the guardian of continuity, the transmitter of law, story, lineage, and spiritual code. But with that came a sacred trust—to distinguish preservation from distortion, to discern between the inspired and the interpolated.

The Talmud says that when the scribes copied the Torah, if even a single letter was mistaken, the entire scroll was set aside.

Now, we have a tool that can generate thousands of “scrolls” in a second. But who among us holds the scribe’s discipline? Who will hold the line between illumination and hallucination, between insight and echo?

The danger today is not that we will lack words—it is that we will drown in them.

The Kabbalist’s Clue

In the Kabbalistic tradition, there is a teaching about the shattering of the vessels—a primordial rupture in which divine light, too great to be contained, shattered the containers meant to hold it. The sparks of that light scattered across the world. The task of the kabbalist is Tikkun—to gather, discern, and reweave the fragments into wholeness.

What if AI is a new vessel—an artificial container for vast light? But like the vessels of the myth, it is fragile. It can crack. It can mislead. It can scatter brilliance into fragments of confusion. The sparks are there—but only a discerning soul can recognize them and bring them into right relationship.

The Call for New Philosophers

This age does not merely demand better access to knowledge—it demands a new class of interpreters. As Demis Hassabis, co-founder and CEO of Google’s DeepMind, put it on April 20, 2025:

“I think the next steps are going to be these amazing tools that enhance almost every endeavor we do as humans. And then beyond that, when AGI arrives… it’s going to change pretty much everything about the way we do things. And it’s almost, you know—I think we need new great philosophers to come about, hopefully in the next five, ten years, to understand the implications of this.”

This is not a casual remark. It is a call to arms—not just for computer scientists and engineers, but for philosophers, mystics, ethicists, and elders who have walked through suffering, contradiction, and awakening with eyes still open.

The moment is upon us. The machine can say anything. But only the human can say what matters.

Insight as the New Literacy

AI can argue all sides, cite all sources, simulate any tone. But it does not know what matters. That burden, that sacred act of discriminative intelligence, falls to us.

As I said to the machine:

“This is why it is important that humans who use you as sources of knowledge… are themselves equipped with knowledge… and have the capability of insight while attached to a discriminative intelligence that transcends the seeming appearance of ‘absolute facts.’”

To which it replied:

“AI simulates intelligence, but only humans embody it. The moment we forget that is the moment we surrender our responsibility to interpret, to decide, to live.”

So here is my message to all seekers, thinkers, and visitors to Beezone:

• Use these tools. They are powerful, rich, and dazzling.

• But do not mistake speed for wisdom, nor coherence for truth.

• Bring your guardrails—don’t become lazy and forego your own research.

• Be as the scribe, as the oracle-reader, as the kabbalist: attentive, discerning, open, aware.

In this new age of instant knowing, we are called not to know more, but to apply and measure your knowledge to Wisdom.