AI Couldn't Have Written the Declaration, part 3
It takes a human to craft a blueprint for freedom.
Such Big Topics, So Little Time
In the first part of this post, I argued that AI can’t produce writing as transformative as the Declaration of Independence. The bar, of course, is pretty high: in 1775 the world had zero democracies, while today the idea that a legitimate government requires the support of its people is the norm. I maintained that it takes a human to craft a transformative blueprint for human dignity and freedom.
In the second part, I explored the Christian concept of the image of God. I suggested two ways that people, reflecting God, are distinct from even the most “intelligent” machines. First, we can imagine a future, while an AI can only analyze the past. Second, we can desire freedom, whereas technology blindly serves both those who promote and oppose freedom.
As I wrote those, I experienced an internal tug-of-war because I kept picking up oversized ideas, giving them brief thought, and then setting them aside. I’m sure I’ll come back to some of the themes in the future. In particular, I want to give more consideration to how a yearning for freedom reflects the image of God—and how sin distorts this desire. I think the use of AI by dictatorships is going to be one of the most daunting issues over the next couple of decades, and possibly well beyond. A deeply biblical understanding of human dignity will be needed to counter powerful forces aiming to suppress both Christianity specifically and political freedom generally.
But it’s Saturday afternoon as I write this, and that topic is too big for me to take another bite from right now. Maybe if it were a Tuesday.
A Call for Human Freedom by AI
I started all this by arguing that AI isn’t capable of writing words that promote freedom in a powerful and lasting way. So, I thought it would be fitting to wrap up by giving the bots their due. I prompted ChatGPT with the most famous lines from the Declaration of Independence:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.
and I told it to
Write a statement similar in length to these lines from the Declaration of Independence. Produce a result, that if it became widely known in 2024, could promote human dignity and freedom for the next 250 years.
The result was such a shameless paraphrase of the original that it wasn’t worth quoting. I followed up by asking it to be more creative, specifically telling it not to paraphrase. The result was… more of the same.
I gave the AI another chance, leaving the quote out and just telling it to give me 50-60 words that could “promote human dignity and freedom for the next 250 years.” It offered:
Every individual, regardless of race, gender, or background, possesses inherent dignity and the right to freedom. Upholding these principles through education, empathy, and equitable laws will ensure a just and compassionate society, laying a foundation for generations to thrive in peace and mutual respect for centuries to come.
A boilerplate regurgitation of a Silicon Valley worldview, yes. Words that could stir real people to change… anything… for even a single week? Not a chance.
I gave another AI called Claude a crack at it. It gave a little more interesting response, even sounding a worthwhile note about how safeguarding individual liberty strengthens the fabric of society. But the statement as a whole was barely less bland than what ChatGPT did. So even with the ability to “learn” from vastly more writing than any person could read in a lifetime, AIs calls to freedom remain hollow and generic.
Bots Playing It Safe
For this kind of request, the caution programmed into AI is part of the problem. If you experiment with any well-known LLM, you catch on quickly that their makers want them to play it very safe. Gazillions of dollars are on the line for companies that make this stuff, and a chatbot that spews sewage makes for grouchy shareholders. As a result, AIs tend to write with a vacant, vanilla quality.
The Founders, of course, had no such restraints. Here’s the last line of the Declaration of Independence:
And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.
Everyday Courage, Everyday Calling
Maybe asking whether AI could write something on par with the Declaration isn’t quite the right question. After all, only a minuscule percentage of people alive today will write words that anyone will read 100 years from now.
Likewise, only a tiny number of Christians are called to lead the charge for an epic cause. Most of us will live quiet lives and work with our hands (1 Thessalonians 4:11-12), ever ready to offer a reason for the hope that’s within us (1 Peter 3:15). We might change the course of someone’s life forever as a result, but we won’t change the paths of nations.
Maybe it’s enough to pledge our lives, fortunes, and sacred honor to everyday faithfulness to Jesus Christ. No machine will ever be able to do that. And after all, it wasn’t really putting ink to paper in 1776 that transformed the centuries that followed. It was the countless sacrifices of millions of people, mostly forgotten by history but always remembered by the One whose image they reflect.