AI isn’t disruptive because it will “outsmart” us. It’s disruptive because it dissolves a distinction we thought was solid — the line between human and machine. — Tobias Rees
THE AI moment is here. And we are not quite ready for it. In academia, we are trying to grapple with the fast-paced disruptions it continues to bring forth. On one hand we see a familiar anxiety to ‘catch up’ before others do; to quickly adapt to new technology for greater efficiency and productivity; on the other, we witness a constant concern about losing control; of students, of assessments, of take-home assignments and of our ability to monitor and ‘catch the cheaters’ effectively. And so, we see an ongoing tussle where teachers seek technology to ‘detect AI’, while AI technology races to offer ‘undetectable’ and ‘humanised’ versions. We are in a new era of education. And it is time to pause, reflect and introspect.
A new era brings a new set of questions or takes us back to the old ones. For a long time, our education systems have been ignoring some fundamental questions. The AI moment offers us an opportunity to focus on these questions again: what is our idea of knowledge, what is the purpose of seeking and creating knowledge, what is our idea of intelligence, what is the purpose of assessment, why do we research and publish, and why do we need to keep education in the framework of comparison and ranking? We need honest answers to these questions again. Most importantly, we need honest answers to some other critical questions: who sets the framework of our education? Who are we accountable to? Is knowledge for the service of the economy only?
Our current higher education policy vision, documented as HEC Vision 2025, tends to be dominated by the neoliberal ethos that views higher education as a means to achieve economic growth. The aim of education is seen as development of ‘human capital’ for the economy. The graduates’ ‘employability’ remains a key indicator of success. Faculty’s success is measured in the ‘number of publications’ they produce. This view of knowledge as a product, human as capital, and education as a means to achieve economic growth remains dominant in our policy thinking, largely because we tend to uncritically adopt global trends without much reflection on our own needs.
The AI moment gives us a chance to reconsider how we view education.
There has been ample critique of neoliberal versions of education for many years, highlighting how these undermine critical and transformative functions of education and promote compliance and mediocrity. However, our policies rarely engage with this critical discourse. The AI moment gives us a chance to reconsider how we view education and what we are trying to achieve through education.
So what is the purpose of education when the lines between humans and machines have become blurred? If we continue with the dominant neoliberal view, which views humans as machines for economic growth, AI indeed poses an existential threat to this system, since AI tools will soon surpass the analytic capacity of humans. AI will be faster, more efficient and productive than humans. So humans may soon become obsolete. This is why we need to switch the reductionist view of education for a broader view as early as possible.
Blackie and Luckett identify a number of principles that must inform higher education in the age of AI. First we need to broaden our understanding of human cognition and capacities. Modern higher education has traditionally emphasised analytical forms of thinking while ignoring the brain’s capacity for holistic and relational forms of cognition. The reason for over-emphasising analytical human capacity is because it serves the need of global capital. It is time to focus on other human faculties, namely reason, intuition and imagination. Intuition and imagination are forms of relational cognition. We need to shift emphasis from ‘human as machine’ to ‘human as ecosystem’.
Second we need to recognise that knowledge cannot be separated from the knower. Our brains are embodied and deeply connected to our bodily experience. It is always an embodied human being who enacts knowledge, which means that all knowledge is situated in a time, space and culture. The notion of universal knowledge must give way to more critical and reflexive forms of knowledge in the age of AI. We need to be more aware of how our context shapes our knowledge.
Third, we must transcend disciplinary boundaries in higher education. Cross-disciplinary dialogues build a more holistic understanding of issues and foster creativity.
The AI moment is much more than a new packaging of the same old neoliberal education that EdTech companies are eager to sell. It is a moment for deeper reflection on the ‘why’ of education and research.
The writer is associate professor at University of Management and Technology Lahore.
Published in Dawn, May 27th, 2025
