Sumber ilustrasi: Magnific
22 Mei 2026 12.23 WIB – Akar
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Desanomia [22.05.2026] Will the meaning of education never change? In discussing this question, we do not need to begin with classical texts. Instead, we may look directly at the actual practice of education itself. What does education mean in its practical operation? Observe the entire process: entrance selection, examinations, learning activities, assignments, and final evaluations. What is truly happening there? Is the whole system intended to make human beings more human, or is it actually designed to produce “elements” that can be inserted into a larger system or a larger machine? The problem becomes even more serious when intelligent machines are increasingly capable of performing similarly to those who enter educational institutions and graduate with recognised qualifications. If that is the case, does education still possess meaning? Or is it slowly approaching an inevitable twilight?
If we return to the deeper meaning of education, we may discover that education, in its essence, is not just the transmission of information from one mind to another. It is an existential activity involving the full depth of human interiority. For centuries, educational systems have been constructed around evaluation methods that place “correct answers” as the highest form of intellectual achievement. Yet the emergence of intelligent machines has exposed the fragility of this construction. It reveals that what we have long called “intelligence” within examination systems may be nothing more than procedural logic that machines can imitate without ever touching the essence of understanding itself.
When a non-human entity becomes capable of producing outputs indistinguishable from human thought, an epistemological crisis inevitably emerges. We are forced to recognise that our systems of evaluation may never have truly measured understanding at all. They merely tested the ability to navigate formal structures and expected patterns. In systems that value only answers, understanding becomes secondary, perhaps even irrelevant, because what is ultimately measured is the degree of correspondence between output and predetermined standards.
If intelligence is traced back to its philosophical roots, it is not about how quickly one can provide correct answers, but about how deeply one can give meaning to a problem. For human beings, thinking is a way of existing in the world. It involves attachment, lived experience, doubt, vulnerability, and the courage to confront ambiguity. Intelligent machines, by contrast, operate within probabilistic structures empty of lived meaning. They never “become” anything through their thinking process; they simply perform efficient computation upon available data.
Here lies one of the greatest ironies of modern education: we often educate human beings to behave like machines. Efficiency, accuracy, standardisation, and measurable outcomes are emphasised as though the purpose of education were to minimise deviation from expected patterns. In doing so, we gradually erode capacities that are fundamentally human: the ability to question assumptions, the courage to take intellectual risks, and the willingness to bear moral responsibility for one’s own ideas.
Education trapped within an output-driven logic eventually loses its direction. It becomes transactional. The intellectual journey itself is neglected. Yet it is precisely through struggling with difficulty, through moments of uncertainty when answers are still absent, and through long reflection after failure that intellectual character is formed. Replacing this process with instant results is ultimately a betrayal of human potential itself.
The challenge before us today is not simply to create more advanced systems for testing people, but to reconstruct our understanding of intelligence itself. We must distinguish between performance and understanding. Performance can be measured, quantified, and automated. Understanding, however, is an inner quality that demands consciousness and reflection. A correct answer may demonstrate strong performance, but it does not guarantee that the individual understands why that truth matters within human life.
The meaning of education in the age of intelligent machines must therefore shift from mastery of information toward mastery of self and wisdom. Humanity no longer needs individuals who only memorise answers already available within digital systems. What is needed are human beings capable of formulating meaningful questions. Asking questions is a profoundly human act born from curiosity and the desire to understand the world. At a deeper level, this is far more difficult than simply producing answers.
Education must be repositioned as a space for dialogue rather than just a space for examination. Within dialogue, ideas collide, contexts are debated, and ethical consequences are considered. This is a domain where intelligent machines possess clear limitations, because machines do not exist socially in ways that make them care about the consequences of their outputs. Human beings, meanwhile, never think in isolation. We think within history, culture, memory, relationships, and shared existence.
Furthermore, we must recognise that intelligent machines are not independent entities. They are reflections of human ambition, values, political decisions, and economic structures. Therefore, education must also cultivate critical awareness toward technology itself. Students should not only learn how to use tools, but also how to question for whom those tools are created, what forms of power they reinforce, and how humanity can retain control over its own values amid technological domination.
Intellectual responsibility must once again become central within education. To be intelligent today means being aware of the consequences of what one produces. Every answer, decision, or solution carries implications for other people and for the future of society itself. An educational system that ignores this dimension risks producing technocrats without moral depth: individuals highly skilled in operating systems, yet blind to their ethical consequences.
Perhaps this is the moment for humanity to accept that uncertainty is not the enemy of intelligence, but one of its essential conditions. Intelligent machines seek to reduce uncertainty because they possess no existential space within which uncertainty can be lived. Human beings, however, grow precisely through uncertainty. Through uncertainty, we are forced to improvise, empathise, and search for meaning in places where no map exists. This is the uniqueness that education must preserve, nurture, and develop through systems unafraid of complexity.
In the end, education is a commitment to preserving human dignity as a thinking subject. In a world increasingly obsessed with speed and measurable results, education must dare to become a slower and more reflective space. If we fail to make this shift, we risk becoming human beings who are highly skilled at answering, yet incapable of understanding. The future success of humanity will not be determined by how closely we imitate intelligent machines, but by how far we are able to transcend them through wisdom, responsibility, and meaning.
What do you think? (njd)
Note: This article was made as part of a dedicated effort to bring everyday life around us to our minds.
