The Choice to Think is Human Until It is Not

A colleague of mine posted about an investigation for code programming designed for the machine to produce original research questions.

It is mind-bogglingly that the question “Why” is not understood more strongly in society, particularly among policy decision-makers. Why “models can go a step further and autonomously generate novel research ideas”?

I understand the scientific curiosity. However, we have been historically here before: scientific curiosity achieving the capacity, then placing pressure for de-humanising policy change; outcomes in impoverishing human beings with less jobs and advantages for machine thinking, and disadvantaging the human condition.

Tell me why persons have trouble thinking. Answer: de-education. This is a challenge for persons to think on the broad and deep meaning of HUMANISM.

Featured Image: Young guy writer in hat and glasses using typing machine. From multiple idea through the machine thinking to the extraordinary exclamation of the problem. ID 46731607 © Adam121 | Dreamstime.com

The following two tabs change content below.

• Bio
• Latest Posts

Neville Buch

Professional Historian at Professional Historians Association (Queensland) Inc.

Neville Buch (Pronounced Book) Ph.D. is a certified member of the Professional Historians Association (Queensland). Since 2010 he has operated a sole trade business in history consultancy. He was a Q ANZAC 100 Fellow 2014-2015 at the State Library of Queensland. Dr Buch was the PHA (Qld) e-Bulletin, the monthly state association’s electronic publication, and was a member of its Management Committee. He is the Managing Director of the Brisbane Southside History Network.

Latest posts by Neville Buch (see all)

• Death in Life and Life in Death: Affective, Intellectual, and Ontological Dimensions of Human Mortality – October 2, 2026
• Psychological Symbol Cards – October 2, 2026
• The Washington Post Impact Report and American Studies – October 1, 2026