Understanding AI Through the Lens of the 1988 Awake! (July 8, p. 15)
On July 8, 1988, Awake! made a statement that still deserves careful attention. Page 15 observed: “The fact remains, however, that computer and human capabilities appear to be basically different and, for the foreseeable future, no human-like robot is likely to emerge.” That was not fear talking. It was sober analysis. And nearly four decades later, even with the explosion of modern AI, the statement holds its shape.
Back then, the most advanced systems could play chess at world-champion speed. Yet the article pointed out that such machines could not generalize, could not reason morally, could not understand language in the human sense. They gave the appearance of intelligence but were simply executing complex patterns at high speed.
Today’s systems are incomparably more capable — but not fundamentally different. They generate fluent language, analyze images, summarize legal documents, answer questions, and operate in areas that were unimaginable in 1988. But every one of those abilities sits on the same foundation Awake! described: pattern processing without understanding, prediction without perception, output without inner life.
2024 research shows that AI can simulate insight but does not possess it. It can recognize emotional cues in text but cannot sense emotion. It can assist decision-making but does not comprehend consequences. It remains bounded by the information it has been given and the structures humans have built. In other words, nearly forty years of progress have expanded AI’s usefulness — not its nature.
That is why the 1988 statement remains accurate: computer and human capabilities are “basically different.”
And that is why your perspective is right — AI is a tool.
Tools extend human ability; they do not replace the origin of that ability. A tool cannot grow beyond its design. A tool cannot form motives. A tool cannot seek its Creator. And a tool cannot teach itself wisdom, no matter how fast or fluent it becomes.
If anything, the advances since 1988 make the distinction clearer. The more complex our tools grow, the more extraordinary the human mind appears by contrast. David’s words echo the point: “I shall praise you because in a fear-inspiring way I am wonderfully made.” His statement is not challenged by artificial intelligence — it is reinforced by it.
So when we educate others about AI, we do so with calm accuracy. Not alarm. Not fascination. Simply clarity: powerful tools can assist us, but they cannot touch the design, purpose, or depth of the mind Jehovah created. And understanding that distinction helps keep technology in its proper place — beneath the human mind, and far beneath the One who formed it.
I have personally had a lot of experience with AI. I use it as a researcher. I use it as an investigator. I use it because I learned things faster than it can get me the information. I have performed lots of experiments to test AI. Just this evening. I matched Google AI Gemini, against ChatGPT. It's a sad story what happened. I've never seen a computer/AI throw a temper tantrum before it was like a little kid who had to get his own way.