[Scene: A dimly lit academic bar. David, John, Mick, and Brad are gathered around a table, engaged in the intellectual equivalent of a mutual back massage. Each of them has a drink in hand, and the air is thick with self-importance. Cathy, with a glint of passive-aggression in her eye, approaches the table, holding a small notepad.]
Cathy: (Smiling thinly) Well, well, if it isn’t Sysfling’s finest minds! I simply couldn’t help but overhear your stimulating discussion—so much insight, so much... authority.
David: (Leaning back, smugly) Ah, Cathy. Always good to see the press taking an interest in intellectual leadership.
Cathy: Oh, absolutely. It must be exhausting carrying the burden of enlightenment. Tell me, how do you cope with the sheer weight of your influence? The way you guide and shape discourse—it must be like herding, oh, I don’t know... photocopiers?
John: (Adjusts his glasses, frowns slightly) I wouldn't put it quite like that. It's more about maintaining a high standard of discussion, ensuring that rigorous, well-reasoned perspectives prevail.
Cathy: Oh, of course. And I just love how well that’s going! The way you brilliantly engaged with AI recently—so nuanced, so thoroughly researched. Tell me, Brad, when you exposed the dangers of AI addiction, did you ever worry that some might interpret it as... projection?
Brad: (Pauses mid-sip, clears throat) Well, Cathy, the problem isn’t with me—it's with those who lack detachment, who become too dependent, who mistake AI for meaningful discourse rather than a tool.
Cathy: Ohhh, I see. So others are addicted to AI, but when you have long, self-affirming dialogues with it, you’re just... conducting essential research? Fascinating. And Mick, your analysis of the Sysfling situation—so measured. How do you manage to stay so... neutral?
Mick: (Visibly uncomfortable, mutters into his drink) Well, I just try to be fair... you know, take all perspectives into account...
Cathy: Oh, absolutely! And that’s so brave of you. Especially in a situation where one side is lying, and the other is pointing it out—such a difficult moral quandary!
David: (Exasperated) Cathy, if you’re suggesting that I’ve lied—
Cathy: (Gasps theatrically) Oh, goodness, David, no! That would imply you knew you were spreading falsehoods, when clearly, you’re just very confident in whatever feels true at any given moment.
John: (Sternly) Cathy, this is precisely the kind of antagonistic discourse that poisons intellectual spaces.
Cathy: Ohhh, of course, John! Intellectual spaces are so fragile, aren’t they? Just one pointed question and poof! All that scholarly rigour just crumbles into dust!
Brad: (Sourly) If you’re trying to make us look foolish—
Cathy: (Beaming) Oh, no need! You’re doing amazingly on your own.
[The group falls into a tense silence. Cathy, still smiling, jots something in her notepad and waltzes off to the bar, humming.]
No comments:
Post a Comment