ChatGPT said:
Great question — and yes, in a meaningful way, AI could be seen as a partial realization of Leibniz’s dream.
Leibniz famously said: “Let us calculate, without further ado, to see who is right.” His vision was for a characteristica universalis — a universal logical language — and a calculus ratiocinator, a reasoning engine that could resolve disputes by computation rather than debate.
In some respects, modern AI — especially symbolic logic systems, theorem provers, and even large language models like me — can be seen as steps toward that. Here’s how:
- Formalization of Argument: Tools like automated theorem provers and symbolic AI allow logical propositions to be encoded and tested systematically — essentially what Leibniz envisioned.
- Dispute Resolution: In domains like legal reasoning, AI can already help identify inconsistencies, suggest precedents, and weigh logical consequences — again echoing Leibniz’s dream of resolving disputes through reasoned calculation.
- Language and Semantics: While large language models don’t reason in the strict formal-logical sense Leibniz imagined, they do process vast semantic relationships in language and generate arguments — albeit probabilistically rather than deductively.
But Leibniz also hoped for a kind of universal clarity and truth from such a system — and here’s where we fall short. Much of human disagreement isn’t about logic or calculation, but about values, meanings, and premises — areas where even AI can’t simply “calculate” an answer.
Would you say the AI should aim to become more like the calculus ratiocinator, or is its current metaphorical, language-based capacity closer to the real spirit of human conversation?
4o
Search
Reason