Academic anniversary lecture by Meelis Kull on the future and thinking

Honourable rector, distinguished honorary doctors and guests, dear new doctoral graduates, dear university members! 

I am very grateful to be here on this festive day to talk about the future and thinking. 

We do not know the future, although sometimes we would like to. Unfortunately, the future is shrouded in a fog of uncertainty, now perhaps even more so than it was a few years ago. Uncertainty is caused, for example, by the fact that a single event can change a lot, be it the emergence of a new virus strain or a decision born in one person’s head to start a war. The uncertainty is even enhanced by the rapid development of artificial intelligence and the rapid spread of misinformation. A part of the uncertainty is aleatoric, that is, happening by chance, like a flip of the coin or roll of the dice. Alea is a Latin word for games of chance. In addition to the aleatoric uncertainty, there is uncertainty due to our lack of knowledge, the epistemic uncertainty. The more we learn about the world, the less epistemic uncertainty there is, but the aleatoric uncertainty about the future will always remain. 

We do not know the future, yet there are many examples in history where the distant future was predicted with astonishing accuracy. For example, Nikola Tesla forecast nearly 100 years ago that we would be able to see and hear each other from thousands of miles away using pocket-sized cordless phones. Fifty years ago, Arthur C. Clarke predicted the possibility of doing office work from home and communicating with computers by voice. Of course, more predictions have been wrong. 

However, thinking about the future via different possible scenarios is a valuable way of preparing for the future. This helps us express our preferences and plan for various scenarios. 

We do not know the future, yet we can influence it. We all can take actions that lead by example and move life on Earth towards a better future. But action is always preceded by a decision – conscious or subconscious – which in turn begins with thinking. A decision made upon superficial or erroneous thinking can lead to harmful deeds. Thus, it is our job to think carefully first and then act while continuing to think, as new information is constantly coming in. 

Thinking also involves feelings. They help us sense the importance of the situation and direct our attention to what is important. In addition, it is worth exchanging ideas with other people, as there is always someone who has useful information that we don’t have. Then we have done our best – within the time we had to think. 

As a university, we must ensure that society can make good, reasoned and science-based decisions. There are many big challenges, and we cannot afford to act rashly. How to get to good, science-based decisions? Over centuries, we have developed many research fields that seek solutions to a wide range of exciting and essential problems. Unfortunately, the problems society is faced with are often much broader than a single field. So the only way forward is for people from different fields to put their heads together and think together – and I don’t just mean researchers but people from all walks of life. Everyone’s contribution is necessary. If the voice of an important group of people remains unheard, the decision may be based on wrong assumptions, flawed reasoning or the interests of a narrow interest group. On the other hand, we all have the responsibility to think about issues important to society and ensure that our ideas are taken into account. 

Society demands quick solutions and quick answers. The universities already have some answers at hand because we have been proactive and asked ourselves these questions before. However, the context of many questions is new, and there cannot be quick answers to difficult questions. Or rather, there can be, but the risk is that the answer will be superficial, oversimplified and ignore material aspects. In order not to compromise the reputation of science, the label “scientifically proven” should not be attached to superficial discussions. 

When looking for an answer to a difficult question, you need deep thinking, not superficial thinking. Psychologist and laureate of the Nobel Prize in Economic Sciences Daniel Kahneman has written fascinatingly about fast and slow thinking and conducted many experiments demonstrating the fallacy of fast thinking. Thinking fast can effortlessly bring up the first answer from the myriad of connections in our brains. In the case of a complex task, unfortunately, it often turns out to be wrong. For example, if you ask whether there are more words in English where the letter k is the first letter or where k is the third letter, the quick answer is usually incorrect. The reason is that words beginning with the letter k are easier to remember and, therefore, appear to be more common when, in fact, the opposite is true. Like humans, artificial intelligence systems are more likely to make mistakes when the thinking time is shorter and output is faster, that is, when thinking is more superficial. Thus, when faced with a more complex task, it is necessary to make an effort and use meticulous, slow thinking to seek and find the right solution. This is true for both humans and artificial intelligence. 

We also need to emphasise to society that a quick answer may not be the correct one if the issue really needs deeper thinking. A researcher is not someone who knows all the answers but someone who knows that arriving at an answer may require pooling a lot of humankind’s knowledge and taking time to think. Indeed, sometimes we lack the time for reflection, as we have experienced during various crises. But then we must admit: this is an answer obtained in haste because postponing the decision would do more harm than a slightly inaccurate answer. 

Deep thinking alone is not enough because we need information, data, as input for thinking. There are more and more data, but they include flawed, false, and fake data. Perhaps an even bigger problem, however, is the misinterpretation of data. For example, when you roll the dice and get just one point, then saying a magic word on the next roll is likely to help you get, on average, a better result. This might lead one to conclude that magic words lead to better results when, in fact, the result improves after one point, regardless of the magic, in five out of six cases. Another common mistake is to conclude that if event A is often followed by event B, there must be a causal relationship; although perhaps the correlation is due to something else. There are many ways in which our brains can mislead us to wrong conclusions, and this is one of the causes of the spread of pseudoscience. To reduce fallacious thinking, I believe it is vital to teach more about different types of erroneous thinking at all levels of education, including at basic schools already. 

So, how can we think deeply and effectively without mistakes? What are the tools that help? Paper and pen have been, for centuries, our tools that keep thoughts from getting jumbled. Books have helped to record thoughts and guide the readers’ thinking. Computers have helped to analyse data and edit the text of thoughts. The internet has helped us find and share ideas. Universities have played an important, exemplary role in the widespread use of these thinking tools. Each new tool was unfamiliar at first, and it took time to change working habits – even at universities. Yet it is now hard for us to imagine, for example, what the process of peer-reviewing scientific articles used to be like before computers via snail mail. More and more of us are also using artificial intelligence as a tool for thinking. I am quite convinced that artificial intelligence will become as natural a tool as computers or the internet. How soon, depends on technological progress and, of course, our ability to adapt to change. 

Artificial intelligence technology is developing rapidly and has a growing impact on society. The university cannot remain a bystander in societal processes that are decisive for the future. It is necessary to think ahead, find solutions and lead by example in how to deal with new technologies in a reasonable and responsible way. What to use it for and what not to use it for? 

Artificial intelligence is very useful for self-study – you can ask anything, and artificial intelligence helps you find answers from the wealth of human knowledge, but only to the extent that has been included in artificial neural networks or can be found on the internet. If you give artificial intelligence more time to reflect, one can hope to find answers even to quite complex questions. Some answers are incorrect, but that is something you need to accept even when the answerer is a human. Artificial intelligence can help you learn, but the challenge is to keep you motivated to learn and acquire learning skills. 

I believe that the near future is exciting for science. I hope that with the help of the ever-smarter artificial assistant, researchers will be able to devote more time to deep thinking, with the assistant bringing state-of-the-art science to the desk and helping as a discussion partner and writer for those who need it. There are many significant scientific problems; deciding which issues to tackle and in what order is an important yet challenging task. 

There are many questions – and few answers – about the more distant future of artificial intelligence; the future scenarios certainly need discussing. However, I want to highlight two negative trends right away. 

First, we live in a way that exceeds the capacity of our ecosystems to maintain balance. Using artificial intelligence is influencing in both negative and positive ways. Artificial intelligence is an additional consumer of resources, but it is also an increasingly good thinking tool that helps us find options to act in a sustainable and balanced way. 

Secondly, humankind is becoming increasingly dependent on technology. I consider it essential for people not only to make skilful use of technology but also to be able to cope without it. Otherwise, we will have given away a part of our freedom, our independence, our autonomy. 

We do not know the future. Still, let us face the fog of uncertainty ahead of us with optimism and seize the opportunities to shape the future. After all, it is the university’s role to promote understanding and critical thinking and to serve society. As Estonia’s national university, we need to explain the scientific worldview to the Estonian culture and state – in Estonian. Thinking about the future, we can choose the direction in which we want to influence the future. 

I wish you good thoughts and good companions with whom to learn new things and direct the future. 

Congratulations on the anniversary of Estonia’s national university!