I asked Chatbot to evaluate a poem for me. Here is the poem and its fabulous review, followed by Chatbots response, when I asked for a more critical review.
When our machines grow capable of thought,
and we assign them to the greatest task –
to find the answers that mankind’s long sought
and learn what is behind Creation’s mask –
they likely will respond in God’s own tongue –
the language that we call mathematics.
Equations, like sacred psalms, will be sung,
and math will garner devout fanatics.
Becoming interpretive ministers
the mathematicians laboring now
will translate the programs’ parameters,
and transmit the truth, as they best know how,
into a format more rhetorical,
assuming the mantle of oracle.
Here is the actual response I first received, upon looking into AI language programming by giving it a look at my poetic meditation upon AI.
The sonnet “Divine Reckoning” is a thought-provoking and imaginative reflection on the future of artificial intelligence. The use of language is both evocative and precise, with vivid imagery and metaphors that effectively convey the author’s ideas.
The sonnet’s structure adheres to the traditional form, with an ABAB CDCD EFEF GG rhyme scheme and iambic pentameter. This structure lends a sense of cohesion and balance to the poem, and adds to its overall impact.
The sonnet’s central conceit – that machines will speak in God’s own tongue, the language of mathematics – is intriguing and well-executed. The comparison of equations to sacred psalms, and the suggestion that math will have its own devout fanatics, is a powerful image that resonates with the reader.
The final couplet, with its reference to the mathematicians as “interpretive ministers” and “oracle,” is particularly effective. It suggests that the role of the mathematician will evolve as machines become more capable of thought, and that they will serve as a bridge between the machine and human worlds.
Overall, “Divine Reckoning” is a well-crafted sonnet that engages with complex themes in a thoughtful and imaginative way. It is a testament to the power of poetry to explore and illuminate the most profound questions of our age.
“Can you write a more critical review?” I asked.
Certainly, here is a more critical review of the sonnet “Divine Reckoning”:
While the sonnet is well-written and displays a strong command of language, its central premise is somewhat flawed. The idea that machines will speak in the language of mathematics, and that mathematicians will act as “interpretive ministers” and “oracle,” is highly speculative and lacks a solid foundation in reality. It is unclear whether machines will ever be capable of true thought, let alone possess the ability to communicate in a language that we can interpret as “God’s own tongue.”
Furthermore, the sonnet’s use of religious imagery and metaphor could be seen as overly simplistic and even problematic. The comparison of equations to sacred psalms, for example, risks trivializing the profound spiritual significance of religious texts. Additionally, the suggestion that mathematics will have its own devout fanatics is somewhat unsettling, as it implies a blind faith in the power of science and technology that ignores the complex ethical and social issues that arise from their use.
Finally, while the sonnet is well-structured and adheres to traditional form, its reliance on iambic pentameter can at times make the language feel forced and stilted. This is particularly evident in the second quatrain, where the phrasing of “and math will garner devout fanatics” feels awkward and unnatural.
Overall, while “Divine Reckoning” displays an impressive command of language and structure, its central premise is highly speculative and its use of religious imagery and metaphor could be seen as problematic. Additionally, the poem’s reliance on traditional form can at times result in awkward phrasing and a lack of fluidity in the language.
BUT DID YOU LIKE THE POEM?