What Would Robert Merton Do if He Had ChatGPT?

In 2023, ChatGPT became the subject of many discussions, particularly about the potential negative impact of generative model usage practices on scientific creativity. This article explores the assumption that such alarming concerns are not related to the technology itself, but to how it reveals and makes noticeable the implicit cultural and value aspects of culture. The concept of R. Merton's scientific ethos is proposed as a theoretical basis for studying hidden value mechanisms in science. However, unlike the original concept, the author assumes that value orientations vary depending on whether they manifest in formal or informal discussions, whether they come from the scientists themselves during their professional practice or from other participants influencing their practice. The study is based on comparing two sets of information about how the use of ChatGPT reflects the values of modern science: formal and official sources describing the activities of scientists from a third-person perspective (“they, scientists”), and informal messages discussed and commented on in online communities of academic workers (“I, scientist / we, scientists”). It was found that the description of the problem situation changes depending on the chosen perspective. Pessimistic and anxious forecasts about the “loss of human contribution” are not characteristic of the “first-person” perspective, where through ChatGPT there is a need for discussion on a specialized topic and a desire to focus on the content of scientific activity, saving time on formal tasks (grammar, punctuation, translation into a foreign language). This leads to the conclusion that the ethos of the scientific community is not singular, as the scientific community itself does not consist solely of scientists, and alarming fears arise as a reaction to changes in trust mechanisms between such sub-ethoses. The author declares no conflict of interests.

Keywords

Authors

References