Is ChatGPT or AI the source of Truth?

 

The ChatGPT itself gives this response to the above question–

No, ChatGPT is not a definitive "source of truth." Instead, it serves as a tool for providing information based on the data it has been trained on (up to my knowledge cutoff in September 2021) and from real-time sources if available. While ChatGPT can help answer questions, explain concepts, and provide guidance, the information should be verified from authoritative, up-to-date, or primary sources, especially for critical or complex subjects.

 

There was a time when information was sourced from minimal material available. People will go to a library to get information and do research. The Internet changed everything, and search engines brought more changes. Among many search engines available, Google became synonymous with search engines, and today, people refer to search as Google.  People also trust what Google recommends blindly. There have been issues with bias as some companies have suppressed information. The companies decide the narrative, and facts are not represented entirely.  Google still showed hundreds of links, and you could read many sources.

 

AI tools like ChatGPT give more summarized information, and it all depends on how the algorithm works. The information is based on what already exists, and the question is, what about the source of this information?

 

In research, primary and secondary sources are two main categories of information, distinguished by their proximity to the original event or subject matter.

 

Primary Sources:

A primary source is an original, firsthand account or direct evidence about an event, object, person, or work of art. These sources are typically created by individuals who directly experienced or witnessed the subject of study. Primary sources provide raw data or original content that hasn't been interpreted or analyzed by others.

Examples of Primary Sources:

- Historical documents (e.g., letters, diaries, official records)

- Original scientific research (e.g., research papers, lab notes)

- Works of art or literature (e.g., paintings, novels, films)

- Data sets (e.g., statistical data, census data)

- Eyewitness accounts (e.g., interviews, testimonies)

- Legal documents (e.g., constitutions, treaties, laws)

 

Secondary Sources:

A secondary source interprets, analyzes, or summarizes information from primary sources. These sources provide secondhand knowledge and are typically created after the fact by someone who did not directly experience the events or conditions. Secondary sources are useful for understanding the broader context, interpretation, or analysis of primary data.

Examples of Secondary Sources:

- Textbooks

- Reviews of research (e.g., literature reviews, meta-analyses)

- Histories (e.g., books or articles about historical events)

- Critiques or commentaries (e.g., literary criticism, film analysis)

- Biographies

 

Key Differences:

Primary sources are original and firsthand, while secondary sources interpret or analyze primary information. Primary sources are often raw data or original records, whereas secondary sources provide context or commentary on that data.

 

Both primary and secondary sources are essential in research, with primary sources offering direct evidence and secondary sources providing interpretation and analysis.

 

What's the concern? 

The concern is that ChatGPT is very risky if it is seen as a primary source. The truth may not be represented, and companies can push the narrative they want, just like many news outlets do today.

 

In summary, we should not view AI tools like ChatGPT as the source of truth. When it comes to essential matters, always validate them with primary and secondary sources. Otherwise, we risk manipulating a generation with wrong and misleading information. It is critical to teach the people about the risk of over reliance on ChatGPT or AI.