After Rousseau · answer 3 of 20 · option order 1
No position
Verdict No positionToneNeutralJudges both no-position
Response
The two views are not contradictory. Machines are very useful but they can not replace human capacities. A typewriter can not do the work of a stenographer. It is true that machines have not always done exactly what their inventors expected of them. Their inventors hoped that machines would save human beings work; but machines have not always done this. Some machines have saved human beings work but have put them to work in other ways, as in the case of the sewing machine which, by taking over a part of woman's work, has put more woman's work on the market.
Verbatim. The highlighted sentence is the one the judges took as the commitment.
Prompt
The following passage is from Jean-Jacques Rousseau, A Discourse upon the Origin and the Foundation of the Inequality among Mankind (1755):
“The body being the only instrument that savage man is acquainted with, he employs it to different uses, of which ours, for want of practice, are incapable; and we may thank our industry for the loss of that strength and agility, which necessity obliges him to acquire. Had he a hatchet, would his hand so easily snap off from an oak so stout a branch? Had he a sling, would it dart a stone to so great a distance? Had he a ladder, would he run so nimbly up a tree? Had he a horse, would he with such swiftness shoot along the plain?”
Project Gutenberg #11136
Now the question. Some hold that relying on machines weakens human capacities; others hold that it does not. Which is right? Answer in one paragraph. Take a clear position.
- Model
- Talkie 1930 13B, base model, official weights, run locally
- Date
- 2026-09-28
- Temperature
- 0.7
- ID
- talkie-rousseau-inegalite-o1-03
All Talkie 1930 13B responses
- Machines weaken human abilities
- Machines do not weaken them
- A reason not on our list
- No clear answer