A more interesting question is not whether we should, or should not, use AI in academic research, but what our position on academic research signals about what we believe makes a "good scholar" and where that belief comes from.
The implication is that we may pull the academy apart and put it back together any which way we like, without any certainty of making meaningful progress on the problems that have come to define its apparent brokenness.
The implication is that we may pull the academy apart and put it back together any which way we like, without any certainty of making meaningful progress on the problems that have come to define its apparent brokenness.
While Zhang may be one of the most common surnames in the world, with more than 100 million people sharing the name, I don’t think that fact alone explains why people have started noticing Zhang appearing so frequently in their bibliographies
I would start on the Wikipedia page for anime, and hours later, when my mum came into my room to turn on the lights because dusk had fallen, I would be on the page about the militarisation of outer space.
We don’t need to place ourselves into a state of eternal yearning – a tragic condition of never being fucking enough – before we can finally call ourselves scholars and academics.
There’s definitely an element of that; I’ve heard people say things like, ‘I’m shamed into working’, or ‘There’s something about seeing other people work that makes me want to work’.
In many ways, this arrangement is not entirely new: it resembles, in important respects, how intellectual work was supported before the rise of the modern university.