ASK anyone what artificial intelligence (AI) is and they are likely give you a technical definition.
They may call it machine learning, computer systems capable of simulating human cognition or the technology behind ChatGPT. Technically, they are not wrong. But to truly understand AI, we must first look backward.
Humanity’s march towards modern progress has been driven by industrial revolutions. The first brought steam engines, together with heavy atmospheric pollution.
The second brought mass production and machinery and even more environmental degradation.
The third ushered in computerisation, hailed as a “clean industry”, yet paradoxically leaving behind a pandemic of human isolation and mental loneliness.
Then came the Fourth Industrial Revolution (IR4.0), fusing physical, digital and biological spheres. Japan wisely re-framed this shift as “Society 5.0”, which is a human-centric society where technology serves humanity, not the other way around.
Today, as we stand at the threshold of IR5.0, where AI reigns supreme, we face a critical choice: Will this era make things better or worse?
In a sharing session with Universiti Sains Islam Malaysia writers pool, academician Emeritus Prof Tan Sri Dzulkifli Abdul Razak posited a powerful premise: Before we rush headlong into AI, we must first prioritise authentic intelligence.
There is a silver lining to AI – that is by automating routine tasks, it actually gives us the liberty to be “human” again. It offers a chance to return to the core of meng-insan-kan pendidikan (humanising education) – cultivating empathy, ethics, intuition and high-touch compassion that no silicon chip can replicate.
Yet, there is a catch. AI is a tool, a powerful one, but it remains just that: a tool. Consider a medical emergency where no tools are available. If a doctor loses their stethoscope, can they no longer save a life? Of course, not.
A true doctor relies on foundational knowledge, critical thinking and instinct built over years of practice. If we rely solely on AI output without having foundational knowledge first, we risk becoming useless the moment the power cuts out or the screen goes blank.
If we consume AI blindly, where do we end up? Futurists suggest that by 2050, we may see the rise of “transhumans”, a term that Dzulkifli refers to as beings that are part human, part machine.
Technology is not inherently good or evil; it reflects the hands that guide it. If we adopt AI passively, taking whatever output the generator feeds us without question, we forfeit our own agency.
Dzulkifli’s verdict is a vital reminder for all of us, especially educators, researchers and students: Go first for authentic intelligence before AI.
We need to subject AI usage to robust, transparent debate in our universities, schools and public forums before accepting it wholesale.
We must establish clear guidelines, weigh its socio-spiritual impacts and cultivate the human mind to evaluate the machine, rather than allowing the machine to dictate the human mind.
Tools should sharpen our humanity, not replace it. Let us make sure we stay authentically intelligent first.
Dr Hazlina Abdullah is an associate professor at the Faculty of Major Language Studies, Universiti Sains Islam Malaysia, Nilai. Comments: letters@thesundaily.com