TAL2025 - Teaching with AI.
This year, we focus on how artificial intelligence (AI) can be used critically and constructively in teaching.
-Simon
Simon Laub (Let me Google that for you).
www.simonlaub.net
How to Cite:
Laub, S. (2025). Preparing Students for the Rapidly Changing, Generative AI–assisted Workplace through Survey-informed Dialogue. Proceedings of The 8th World Conference on Education and Teaching, 4(2), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.33422/etconf.v4i2.1506
-Simon
Simon Laub (Let me Google that for you).
www.simonlaub.net
-Simon
Simon Laub (Let me Google that for you).
www.simonlaub.net
Imagine if everyone on earth wore green-tinted sunglasses, all the time. To them, everything would look green. In fact, if they didn't know they were wearing sunglasses, and if they had absolutely no way of taking them off, then as far as they were concerned, the world would be, objectively, green [1].I.e.
Is it not so that our brains impose certain things on the way we perceive the world... [1].Certainly, we need philosophers to ask (the right) questions:
Philosophers view the world to a certain extent in the same way as do alien beings or children. Everything is always completely new. They mistrust strongly ingrained judgments, and, yes, they even mistrust the scientific claims of experts.So, why is it that we can't really see the world?
We cannot create a picture of the world because we cannot look at the world from the outside.
...
According to philosopher Thomas Nagel, we cannot attain the world from ''nowhere''.
We cannot grasp the world conceptually because there is no field of sense to which it belongs. The world does not appear on the stage of the world; it does not step up and introduce itself to us.In other words: ''We only ever know sections of the infinite. An overview of the whole is impossible'' [2].
...The quite devastating problem for materialism consists in the idea that materialism itself is not material.According to Markus Gabriel:
Materialism is a ''theory'', an idea, according to which everything consists of material objects, without exception.
For an idea to be true, it is not sufficient that it is a brain state.On ''Philosophy Now'' Markus Gabriel elaborates:
...
Otherwise, every thought that someone had as a brain state would be true as a result of someone having had it.
Coming out of your philosophical position is a sense that all perspectives are in a way equally legitimate. Is that right? There's a sort of relativism there?Indeed, finding truth is not always easy...
- I don't think so at all. I think that all perspectives equally exist, if you like, but I'm not saying that they're all equally legitimate. Recognising that something exists is not tantamount to saying that it's good [3].
To study the brain, well, that’s real science; to speak of all this other stuff (''selves'', ''souls'', ''values'', ''volition'', ''autonomy'', ''consciousness'', and ''perception''’) well, that’s some kind of necromancy, or at best, mere metaphysics [4].
Unfortunately for this reaction, we don't live long at all without running into these spooky entities. All the time we rationalize, we use concepts, we refer to values, we consult our own volitions, and we routinely speak of ourselves as real selves. Even those who continue to deny the ultimate reality of all such conceptions do so. It seems the non-physicalist philosophers of mind are onto something, then: the fact that we just can't get a complete picture of human existence by confining our thinking merely to material entities. We need something more [4].
It may be theoretically satisfying for some people to believe that, say, their own intellect is nothing but a neurochemical crapshoot; but which one of us would feel satisfied to hear (or to offer) a profession of love that ran something like ''Honey, I really hormone you''? Hormones may indeed be involved in what we call ''love''; but to take them as the sum total of human affection is surely obviously too reductionist. It is the same with the mind and the brain [4].
It (the book) really argues that it's a basic category error even to imagine that everything could be expressed in materialist terms [4].Ryan Boissonneault writes in ''Goodreads'':
(That) Mind is identical to the brain works under the assumption of materialism, which holds that nothing exists except matter and its movements and modifications.Indeed, there is subjectivity in there that one needs to deal with...
I.e.
all of reality can be described with one coherent set of laws.
...
But, it is not even accurate within physics itself, as no one to date has successfully integrated the quantum world with that of relativity. Not to mention the fact that consciousness, if it (consciousness) can't impact the physical world, would serve no purpose, thus invalidating the underlying rationale for all evolutionary theory [5].
-Simon
Simon Laub (Let me Google that for you).
www.simonlaub.net
Scientific theories, couched in the language of objects in SpaceTime are theories still bound to the interface. They can't properly describe reality any more than a theory couched in the language of pixels and icons can describe a computer.
Each perception is an interface, like an icon, a desktop of a computer [p. 75].
Marr [6] wrote in his book ''Vision'' that visual systems like the fly's, are not very complicated.Clearly, ''Food for thought''...
...
Very little objective information about the world is obtained. The information is all very subjective...
No true conception of a surface for example.
...
But the fly can still survive, because it can still chase its mate with sufficient frequent success.
SpaceTime is doomed, and has to replaced by some more primitive building blocks [p. 114].I.e.
Quantum theory predict outcomes that contradict local realism.What we see are ''constructions''.
That is that physical objects have definite values of physical properties.
Position, momentum, spin, charge
- even when un-observed.
(But) Particles can be a in superposition of states A and B
(E.g. see experiments by Sandra Eibenberger [8]).
But I don't believe that the Sun existed
before there were creatures to perceive it,
or that my neurons exists, if unperceived... [p. 176].
All we have are conscious agents.Hoffman continues:
Networking with other conscious agents. But agents that lack the resources to experience
all the experiences of all the (sub)agents of its instantiation,
according to Hoffman [p. 193].
Objects, shapes, space, and time resides in consciousness.According to Hoffman:
If the living creatures were removed, all of these qualities would be annihilated.
What is SpaceTime, This book has offered you the red pill.Of course ... :)
SpaceTime is your virtual reality.
A headset of your own making.
The objects you see are you own invention.
You create them with a glance, and destroy them with a blink [p. 202].
-Simon
Simon Laub (Let me Google that for you).
www.simonlaub.net
Emotions are ultimately error signals. Which register deviations from your biologically preferred states, which tell you whether the steps you are taking are making things better or worse for you [p. 102].So, where are emotions and consciousness ''made'' in the brain?
Giuseppe Moruzzi and Horace Magoun established over seventy years ago that consciousness in cats is lost following tiny incisions that disconnect the cortex from the reticulate core of the brainstem. A core that is some 525 million years old, because it is shared by all vertebrates - from fishes to humans [p. 122].Solm continues:
...
In all manner of species relatively small lesions in this core causes coma [p. 122].
The neurological sources of affect and of consciousness are, at a minimum, deeply entangled with one another, and they may in fact be the very same machinery [p. 125].In standard textbooks the link between Gamma rhythms and conscious experience is described like this:
...
The cortex becomes conscious only to the extend it is aroused by the brainstem. The relationship between the two is hierarchical, cortical consciousness depends upon brainstem arousal [p. 125].
...
That is why the gamma rhythm - strongly associated with consciousness - can be driven by the reticular activating system alone [p. 128].
Gamma rhythms, brainwaves oscillating between 30-100 Hz, are linked to consciousness and are associated with high-level cognitive functions like attention, memory, and perception. These rhythms are thought to play a crucial role in integrating information across different brain regions, potentially contributing to the unity of conscious experience [9].So, how do we feel? What does it mean to feel?
The periaqueductual grey, PAG, is where all brains affective circuitry converges [p. 134].In standard textbooks the periaqueductal gray is described like this:
Whereas the reticular system exerts it's influence upwards into the correct, then the PAG, next to the reticular system, receives signals from the cortex.
The PAG must choose what to do next based on the residual errors that are relayed back to it from affect systems. I.e. it must set priorities for next action sequence [p. 137].
The periaqueductal gray (PAG) is a key brain region involved in integrating and modulating a variety of behavioral and physiological responses, particularly those related to pain, stress, and defensive behaviors. It acts as an interface between the forebrain and the lower brainstem, receiving inputs from various brain areas and projecting to different brainstem nuclei to coordinate responses like cardiovascular, respiratory, motor, and pain modulation [10].Mark Solms continues, and even tries to tell us where our ''point of view'' comes from:
Our here and now perceptions are constantly guided by predictions.Given these predictions, a biological (self-organising) system must then continually test their models of the world.
Fewer neurons propagate signals from the external sense organs to the internal memory systems than the other way around.
Perception begins with an expected scenario which is then adjusted to match the incoming signal [p. 143].
...
Systems can only register the not-self world via the sensory states of their own Markov blankets.
That constitutes the elementary basis of subjectivity.
A point of view [p. 166].
Friston free energy is a quantifiable measure ofI.e. increasing uncertainty is a dangerous state of affairs for any self-organising system.Therefore, we must minimize the difference.
- The way the world is modelled by a system.
- (and) The way the world really behaves.
A systems model of the world must match the real world as closely as possible [p. 172].
Precision prediction errors in perception and proprioception register as exteroceptive qualia...Which, according to Solms, puts us on track to ''explain feelings''...
The biological functions of feelings like hunger is nothing mysterious...Mark Solms goes on to say that it should eventually be possible to make an artificial machine with ''feelings''
...
We should expect to have an inner world built for deliberation and choice [p. 267].
...
Concerns about an ''explanatory gap'' would never have arisen,
if we had begun by asking how feelings arise
rather than by looking for neural correlates of consciousness in the cortex.
Unless it is possible to make a conscious machine, we will not have solved the hard problem...Summa summarum (According to Mark Solms):
...
If the special form of information processing, I have proposed here, really is the causal mechanisms of consciousness then it must be possible to produce artificially a conscious mind with it... [p. 280].
But the Turing test will not be the way to test it.
The Turing test is a behaviourist test of intelligence, it is not a test of consciousness [p. 288].
Intelligence combined with self-preservation motivation is something quite different from intelligence alone [p. 293].An awesome book, indeed!
...
Consciousness is generated in the upper brainstem.
It is fundamentally affective, working to preserve homeostasis [p. 295].
The theory proposes that consciousness is present to some degree wherever information is coordinated across the parts of a larger whole.Humphrey is clearly not happy about this:
Not only within living brains, but also in any integrated system of any scale.
There doesn't have to be a defined subject for whom the experience is about.
I don't deny that the theory has a certain elegance.
...
(But) Why should we engage with a theory of subjective phenomenal experience that unashamedly leaves out the subject and leaves out the experience?
Robots, with inquiring minds, left alone on Mars, would indeed succumb to existential despair - to dark thoughts about whether their lives have any meaning...But we are not there yet, according to Humphrey.
The startling performance of software programs like ChatGPT has convinced some observers that machine consciousness is imminent;Indeed, LLMs are not conscious yet.
...
From Humphrey’s point of view, these attitudes are misguided. Artificially intelligent machines are all perception, no sensation; they’ll never be sentient so long as they only process information.
... If we don’t understand what sentience is for, we’re likely to see it everywhere.
...
however it works, he argues, it must have evolved through natural selection, and this, in turn, means that conscious sensations must be valuable in their own right [11].
Phrased differently, we can think of the brain, with all of its different parts, as evolutions solution to the problem of uncoupling inputs from outputs.
Without this flexibility, animals are bound to perish.
...
A fairly direct sensory-motor transformation only supports limited and rigid behaviors.
Uncoupling input from output provides increased flexibility
(But added complexity makes the system more difficult to understand)
[p. 34].
Ultimately, emotion - insofar as it is meaningful to speak of ''emotion'' - like every other mental domain, is a large-scale network property of the nervous system [p. 191].
The current obsession in the field with causation is equally problematic.Indeed, with perception, cognition and emotion woven together,
Without conceptual clarity (How should we even think of causation in highly entangled systems?),
''causal'' explanations in fact might miss the point [p. 229].
-Simon
Simon Laub (Let me Google that for you).
www.simonlaub.net
That ''much of the electrical activity that is experimentally recorded in theMany neurons self-assemble to make brain circuits (on the basis of the selection of those circuits),
human brain and becomes associated to cognitive phenomenon, like EEG, derived from small,
graded currents generated at the dendritic level...
...
However, to convey the signal to other neurons, dendritic activity
must eventually sum up enough electrical power at the axons initial segment
to produce the action potential that is transmitted along the axons''.
''A key notion in this process is a reentrant signal that feeds back,Indeed, this takes place at all levels, from microcircuits [Blue Brain, microcircuits] to large-scale circuits.
thus providing a clue about the circuits fitness.
In fact, the word circuit refers to circularity''.
''The ancestral neocortex of all living mammals was probably based on a shared common plan.Brains can even work together with brains...
Likely consisting of some 20 cortical areas
(That are present in all species).
The ancestral neocortex contained at least primary and secondary visual areas,
an auditory area, two somatosensory areas, and a motor area...
Then... in the evolution of vertebrate brains, different lineages tended
to expand the neocortex independently, starting from this basic plan''.
[P. 160].
''Some authors claim that besides domesticating other species, we also domesticated ourselves.Keeping playful behaviour alive while decreasing aggression...
Decreasing aggressiveness by attenuating the stress response'' [P. 200].
''We developed what is called shared intentionality.Again: Clever!
...
Implying not only that two or more individuals attend to the same thing,
like lions hunting a zebra, but also that they know that they are attending the same thing.
Cooperating to achieve a common goal'' [P. 220].
-Simon
Simon Laub (Let me Google that for you).
www.simonlaub.net
-Simon
Simon Laub (Let me Google that for you).
www.simonlaub.net
-Simon
Simon Laub (Let me Google that for you).
www.simonlaub.net
-Simon
Simon Laub (Let me Google that for you).
www.simonlaub.net
-Simon
Simon Laub (Let me Google that for you).
www.simonlaub.net
-Simon
Simon Laub (Let me Google that for you).
www.simonlaub.net
-Simon
Simon Laub (Let me Google that for you).
www.simonlaub.net
-Simon
Simon Laub (Let me Google that for you).
www.simonlaub.net
-Simon
Simon Laub (Let me Google that for you).
www.simonlaub.net
-Simon
Simon Laub (Let me Google that for you).
www.simonlaub.net
-Simon
Simon Laub (Let me Google that for you).
www.simonlaub.net
-Simon
Simon Laub (Let me Google that for you).
www.simonlaub.net
-Simon
Simon Laub (Let me Google that for you).
www.simonlaub.net
Dall•E3 understands significantly more nuance and detail than previous systems,
allowing you to easily translate your ideas into exceptionally accurate images [16].
-Simon
Simon Laub (Let me Google that for you).
www.simonlaub.net
-Simon
Simon Laub (Let me Google that for you).
www.simonlaub.net
-Simon
Simon Laub (Let me Google that for you).
www.simonlaub.net
How to Cite:Earlier (Iscap. Nov, 2025) version: Here (Direct link: Here).
Firth, D., Laub, S., Kohl, L., Chen, F., (2027). Personality, Extrinsic Task Motivation, and the Use of Generative AI: A Framework for Understanding Human-AI Interaction. Information Systems Education Journal 25(1) pp 37-54. https://doi.org/10.62273/FRDJ9146
-Simon
Simon Laub (Let me Google that for you).
www.simonlaub.net
-Simon
Simon Laub (Let me Google that for you).
www.simonlaub.net
-Simon
Simon Laub (Let me Google that for you).
www.simonlaub.net
-Simon
Simon Laub (Let me Google that for you).
www.simonlaub.net
-Simon
Simon Laub (Let me Google that for you).
www.simonlaub.net
-Simon
Simon Laub (Let me Google that for you).
www.simonlaub.net
-Simon
Simon Laub (Let me Google that for you).
www.simonlaub.net
-Simon
Simon Laub (Let me Google that for you).
www.simonlaub.net
-Simon
Simon Laub (Let me Google that for you).
www.simonlaub.net
-Simon
Simon Laub (Let me Google that for you).
www.simonlaub.net
-Simon
Simon Laub (Let me Google that for you).
www.simonlaub.net
-Simon
Simon Laub (Let me Google that for you).
www.simonlaub.net
-Simon
Simon Laub (Let me Google that for you).
www.simonlaub.net
-Simon
Simon Laub (Let me Google that for you).
www.simonlaub.net
