Using ChatGPT-3 as a writing tool: An educational assistant or a moral hazard? Current ChatGPT-3 media representations compared to Plato’s critical stance on writing in Phaedrus

ChatGPT-3, based on a large language model created by OpenAI (https://openai.com/about) that is capable of generating human-like text, has been open to the public since November 2022. Since then, ChatGPT-3 has become a much-discussed educational writing tool that is characterised in various ways in our society. In this paper, we focus on the following research questions: (1) To what extent is ChatGPT-3, as a writing tool, represented in the media and academia as an educational assistant, whether in a positive or negative sense? (2) Is this new technological device seen as a moral hazard in the media and academia? And to put this brand-new writing tool into historical perspective, we also answer the following research question: (3) How do these representations relate to Plato’s main arguments against writing in Phaedrus? First, we elaborate on what we mean by referring to ChatGPT-3 as an educational assistant and how we define moral hazard. Then, we put this writing tool, as an extension of human capabilities, in a historical perspective with an analysis of Plato’s critical stance on writing in Phaedrus. After having analysed ChatGPT-3’s current representations in the media and academia, we ask ChatGPT-3 whether its writing tool should be considered an educational assistant or a moral hazard and if it could reflect on the similarity, if any, between Plato’s critical stance on writing (in Phaedrus) and ChatGPT-3 as a writing tool and comment on the answers ChatGPT-3 provides to us. Finally, we compare these to Plato’s main arguments with regard to writing and draw a number of conclusions.