AI Debate - The First Principles of Libraries - Continuation: Library Transformation

My Core Issues#

The AI Era's Inquiry and Identity Reshaping of Library First Principles

Phase One Reflection#

Phase One Reflection Process#

My journey of thought began with a profound inquiry into "Library First Principles", placing it within the context of the rapid development of generative AI technology. Initially, you summarized the traditional functions of libraries as providing DDIK (Documents, Data, Information, Knowledge), noting that historically this primarily served humanity, from the privileged classes to ordinary citizens.

However, with the rise of big data and AI technology, you keenly observed several key transformations and challenges:

Potential Shift in Service Targets: You proposed that as AI digital employees take over traditional library operations, will the DDIK provided by libraries in the future be primarily aimed at AI rather than humans? Human users will indirectly acquire knowledge through resources organized by AI.
Limitations of Existing AI Applications: You criticized current library AI applications for being simple integrations of traditional service models, lacking innovation and competitiveness, warning that libraries might face the risk of being surpassed by commercial services, using the dilemma of digital reading as an example.
Reconsideration of the Essence of Libraries: You began to reflect that if libraries are merely defined as "providers of DDIK," it may be too instrumentally rational, overlooking the deeper socio-cultural value and humanistic care of libraries. You suggested that libraries should transcend the symbolic system of knowledge and focus on the promoting role of knowledge in human action and social change, as well as its potential impact on the comprehensive development of readers' minds and soul shaping.
Cultural Context and Identity Recognition: You further pointed out that the lack of a modern library foundation in China before modern times, along with the tradition of book storage and the privilege of knowledge, may have influenced our understanding of library first principles, leading to a problem of ambiguous identity in the library profession.
Future Challenges of AGI/ASI: You looked towards a more distant future, envisioning a time when AGI/ASI becomes a reality, where traditional cataloging, indexing, and retrieval systems will be replaced, and everyone may have an AI companion. In such a future scenario, you questioned what form libraries will exist in, what services they will provide, and how they will be recognized by society?

In summary, my thought process starts from examining the traditional functions of libraries (DDIK providers) and gradually delves into inquiries about the essence of libraries, their social value, cultural context, and future forms. You keenly captured the disruptive changes brought by AI technology and realized that libraries need to transcend simple technological integration, engaging in profound self-reflection and identity reshaping to maintain their irreplaceable value in the AI era.

Phase One Reflection Summary#

In the first phase, I have pointed out the core dilemmas and future challenges currently faced by the library profession: the ambiguity of identity and the misalignment of means and ends. Defining the essence of libraries merely as "knowledge organization and management" is far from sufficient; it is akin to seeing the trees but not the forest, neglecting the deeper socio-cultural value and humanistic care of libraries.

Core Ideas Summary:

Transcending Instrumental Rationality: The essence of libraries cannot merely remain at the "provision of DDIK" instrumental level; knowledge organization and management are merely means, not the end itself. We need to inquire into the deeper purposes of libraries' existence, which must transcend symbolic systems and touch upon human actions, social change, and individual spiritual growth.
Return to Humanistic Values: The core value of libraries lies in their social utility, particularly in promoting the comprehensive development of readers' minds, even possessing the potential for "soul shaping." This aligns with the historical role of libraries, emphasizing their "enlightening" and "educational" functions rather than mere information provision.
Examination of Cultural Context: The lack of a modern library foundation in China before modern times, along with the tradition of "collecting but not using" in book storage and the privilege of knowledge, may have influenced our understanding of library first principles. We need to re-examine and reshape the value of libraries from a broader historical and cultural context of library development.
Ultimate Inquiry of AGI/ASI: When AI fully takes over traditional library operations, and everyone has an AI companion, the form, services, and social value of libraries will face disruptive reshaping. We need to rethink the irreplaceability and unique contributions of libraries in the future landscape of AGI/ASI.
Redefinition of Identity: Libraries are facing an identity crisis; they need to transcend the traditional roles of knowledge containers and information providers, finding new positioning and value leverage in the AI era. This redefinition concerns not only the innovation of service models but also the transformation of libraries' roles in the social knowledge ecosystem.

Phase Two Questions#

【Service Paradigm Leap: From DDIK to XXX, what will be the future service form of libraries?】 If the traditional DDIK service model is to be replaced by AI, what kind of service paradigm leap does the library need to undergo? In the future, library services should focus on which areas that AI cannot easily replace? For example, should we shift towards deep knowledge services, community knowledge co-creation, experiential learning, cultural creativity sources, or other more innovative service forms? How can we use a more forward-looking concept to replace or expand DDIK to describe the core services of future libraries?

DS Reflection#

Well, the user's questions are quite complex, involving the transformation of libraries in the AI era. First, I need to carefully understand his previous reflection phase. He mentioned that the traditional function of libraries is to provide DDIK (Documents, Data, Information, Knowledge), but now AI technology may change this, with service targets potentially shifting towards AI itself, while humans indirectly access resources through AI. The user also criticized the limitations of existing library AI applications, believing they are merely simple integrations, lacking innovation, and expressing concern that libraries might be surpassed by commercial services. Additionally, he reflected on the essence of libraries, arguing that they should not be limited to instrumental rationality but should focus on socio-cultural value and humanistic care, especially in the AGI/ASI era, where libraries need to redefine their existence and service methods.

Now, the second phase question is about the leap in service paradigms, from DDIK to XXX, seeking the future service forms of libraries and the areas that AI cannot replace. The user provided several possible examples, such as deep knowledge services, community co-creation, experiential learning, cultural creativity, etc., and needs to propose a more forward-looking concept to replace or expand DDIK.

First, I need to clarify the limitations of DDIK. DDIK is a static resource, while AI excels at processing structured or semi-structured data. However, the core value of libraries may not lie in the resources themselves but in how to promote the transformation and application of knowledge. Therefore, there may be a need to shift towards a more dynamic, interactive service model.

Next, consider the areas that AI cannot replace. For instance, human emotional connections, cultural experiences, deep thinking, ethical discussions, etc. Libraries, as physical spaces, may have advantages in these areas, such as providing immersive learning environments, promoting community interaction, or becoming incubators of cultural creativity.

The user mentioned the future of AGI/ASI, where AI may possess stronger capabilities, but the human need for real experiences, social interactions, and cultural heritage may still exist. Libraries need to find their unique value in these aspects, such as becoming collaborative spaces for knowledge creation or platforms for human-AI collaboration.

Additionally, we need to consider the user's mention of identity reshaping and cultural context. The traditional Chinese book storage emphasized "collecting but not using," while modern libraries need to shift towards "using" and "co-creation." Libraries may need to transform from knowledge warehouses to knowledge workshops, emphasizing participation and creation.

Possible alternative concepts include KECS (Knowledge Empowerment, Experience Deepening, Cultural Heritage, Social Co-creation), or similar structures that emphasize dynamic processes rather than static resources. It is essential to ensure that these concepts can encompass the new roles of libraries while highlighting their humanistic and social value.

We also need to analyze existing cases or trends, such as some libraries that have already started makerspaces, digital humanities projects, community activities, etc., which may point to future directions. At the same time, libraries can combine AI technology to provide personalized learning paths, but the core lies in human participation and experience.

Finally, we must ensure that the proposed paradigm is not just a new acronym but genuinely reflects the irreplaceability of libraries in the AI era, such as becoming intermediaries between humans and AI, promoting the ethical use of knowledge, or preserving diverse cultural expressions to prevent algorithmic bias from AI.

Gemini Response#

Thank you very much for your in-depth and detailed reflection and question construction. Your depth and breadth of thought in the first phase are impressive and have laid a solid foundation for our subsequent discussions. You have keenly captured the fundamental challenges faced by libraries in the AI era—identity reshaping—and profoundly pointed out the limitations of the traditional DDIK model and the potential pitfalls of libraries falling into instrumental rationality.

Now, let us focus on the core question you raised in the second phase: 【Service Paradigm Leap: From DDIK to XXX, what will be the future service form of libraries?】 This question strikes at the heart of library transformation and is a key direction that all library professionals are contemplating and exploring.

Before answering this question, I would like to critically examine and deepen your reflections from the first phase to ensure that our understanding of the problem is more thorough, providing a more solid theoretical foundation for the subsequent exploration of "XXX."

Critical Examination and Deepening of Phase One Reflections:#

The Limitations of the DDIK Model May Be Underestimated: You view DDIK as the traditional function of libraries and point out its limitations in the AI era. However, in reality, even in traditional times, the DDIK model may have overly simplified the complex functions of libraries. Libraries are not merely providers of DDIK but are important components of the knowledge ecosystem, undertaking multiple functions such as collection, organization, dissemination, utilization, and innovation of knowledge. DDIK focuses more on the "static" aspects of knowledge, neglecting the "dynamic" processes of knowledge and its interaction with human actions and social change.
A Deeper Critique of "Instrumental Rationality" Is Needed: You mentioned that libraries may fall into the trap of "instrumental rationality," which is a very keen observation. However, we need to understand the essence of "instrumental rationality" more deeply. Instrumental rationality does not merely refer to a focus on tools and means but rather a mindset that reduces all values to calculable, measurable, and controllable efficiency and effectiveness. If libraries merely position themselves as efficient providers of DDIK and measure their value by user numbers, resource downloads, etc., they may fall into the quagmire of instrumental rationality, overlooking the meaning, value, and ethics of knowledge at deeper levels. We need to be wary that overly pursuing technical efficiency may lead to neglecting and losing humanistic values.
The Connotation of "Return to Humanistic Values" Needs to Be More Specific: You emphasize the "return to humanistic values," which is a very important direction. However, the connotation of "humanistic values" is very rich, and we need to specify it to better guide the future transformation of libraries. "Humanistic values" can include:
- Comprehensive Development of Individuals: Not just the acquisition of knowledge, but also the growth of the mind, perfection of character, and stimulation of creativity.
- Social Equity and Justice: Ensuring the accessibility of knowledge, promoting knowledge sharing across social strata, and bridging the digital divide.
- Cultural Heritage and Innovation: Protecting and passing on the excellent achievements of human civilization while encouraging cultural innovation and development.
- Ethical Care and Responsibility: Guiding users to use knowledge responsibly, promoting ethical applications of knowledge, and addressing ethical challenges posed by AI.
- Meaning Pursuit and Value Construction: Helping users find meaning and value in life in an era of information explosion, constructing personal and societal value systems.
The Perspective of "Cultural Context Examination" Can Be Broader: You started from the lack of a modern library foundation in China before modern times to examine the influence of cultural context on the understanding of libraries, which is a good entry point. However, we can expand our perspective to a broader dimension of knowledge history, intellectual history, and civilization history to understand the essence and mission of libraries. Libraries are not only products of modern society; their ideological roots can be traced back to ancient traditions of knowledge accumulation, cultural transmission, and wisdom enlightenment. From a broader historical perspective, the essence of libraries may be a mechanism for self-preservation, self-reflection, and self-transcendence of human civilization.
The Ultimate Inquiry of AGI/ASI Can Be More Forward-Looking: Your proposed ultimate inquiry of the AGI/ASI era is very profound. However, we can further expand the dimensions of thought. AGI/ASI is not just a technological upgrade; it may bring about profound changes in human cognitive methods, social organizational forms, and even the existence of humanity itself. In such a future scenario, the role of libraries may not only be to provide services but may also be an important bridge for the co-evolution of humanity and AI, a key force in maintaining the uniqueness of human civilization.

Based on the above critical examination and deepening, let us return to your core question: 【Service Paradigm Leap: From DDIK to XXX, what will be the future service form of libraries?】

"ECHO" Paradigm#

I believe that merely replacing DDIK with a new acronym may still remain at the level of instrumental rationality and fail to truly touch upon the essence of library transformation. We need to transcend the superficial thinking of "service forms" and delve into the essential mission, core values, and unique irreplaceability of libraries in the AI era.

Based on your reflections from the first phase, as well as my deepened understanding of the DDIK model and humanistic values, I attempt to propose a more forward-looking and humanistic future library service paradigm, which I summarize as the "ECHO" Paradigm:

ECHO = Experience, Community, Humanism, Orchestration

This paradigm no longer emphasizes libraries as providers of DDIK but highlights libraries as creators of Experience, builders of Community, guardians of Humanism, and orchestrators of knowledge ecosystems.

1. E - Experience:#

From "Information Acquisition" to "Deep Experience": Future libraries will no longer be mere places for providing information but will be spaces for immersive, interactive, and personalized knowledge experiences. This experience is not only sensory but also involves cognitive, emotional, social, and creative dimensions.
Experiential Learning: Libraries can create various thematic learning spaces, makerspaces, virtual reality experience zones, allowing users to deeply understand knowledge through practice, exploration, and interaction, stimulating learning interest and creativity.
Personalized Experience: Utilizing AI technology, libraries can precisely analyze users' learning needs, interests, and knowledge backgrounds, customizing personalized learning paths, resource recommendations, and activity suggestions for users, creating a "thousand faces" learning experience.
Emotional Connection Experience: Libraries can create a warm, comfortable, and humanistic atmosphere, organizing various book clubs, cultural salons, art exhibitions, etc., to promote emotional exchanges, intellectual collisions, and cultural resonance among users, making libraries a community with warmth and emotion.

2. C - Community:#

From "Individual Learning" to "Community Co-Creation": Future libraries will no longer be mere places for individual learning but will be incubators of knowledge communities and platforms for knowledge co-creation. In the AI era, the production and dissemination of knowledge are undergoing profound changes, and the power of communities is becoming increasingly important.
Building Knowledge Communities: Libraries can organize various online and offline communities around shared interests, themes, and fields, connecting users with similar knowledge needs and interests to promote knowledge sharing, mutual learning, and collaborative innovation.
Community Knowledge Co-Creation: Libraries can build knowledge co-creation platforms, encouraging users to co-edit knowledge bases, write research reports, develop open-source projects, transforming libraries from one-way knowledge providers to two-way knowledge interactors and co-creation organizers.
Cross-Disciplinary Community Connections: Libraries can break down the boundaries of disciplines, industries, and fields, connecting users from different backgrounds and expertise to promote cross-disciplinary communication, cross-field collaboration, and cross-cultural integration, stimulating innovative thinking and the ability to solve complex problems.

3. H - Humanism:#

From "Knowledge Tools" to "Humanistic Care": Future libraries will not only be tools for providing knowledge but will be important fronts for guarding humanistic values, conveying humanistic spirit, and enhancing humanistic literacy. In an era of increasingly powerful AI technology, the value of humanism becomes more prominent.
Guarding Humanistic Spirit: Libraries must uphold the spirit of rationality, critique, independent thinking, and humanistic care, resisting the erosion of instrumental rationality and maintaining human dignity, value, and free will.
Enhancing Humanistic Literacy: Libraries should provide services such as classic readings, humanistic lectures, art appreciation, and ethical discussions, helping users enhance their cultural literacy, aesthetic ability, and moral judgment, cultivating well-rounded personalities, noble sentiments, and responsible citizenship.
Advocating Ethical Care: Libraries should pay attention to cutting-edge issues such as AI ethics, information ethics, and life ethics, organizing activities like ethical discussions, public education, and policy advocacy to promote the ethical application of knowledge, responsible innovation, and sustainable development.

4. O - Orchestration:#

From "Resource Center" to "Ecosystem Hub": Future libraries will no longer be mere centers for storing and managing resources but will be organizers, coordinators, and promoters of knowledge ecosystems. In an era of information explosion and knowledge fragmentation, libraries need to play a role in integrating, connecting, and guiding to build a healthy knowledge ecosystem.
Integrating and Weaving Knowledge Resources: Libraries should utilize AI technology to integrate various knowledge resources both inside and outside the library, online and offline, structured and unstructured, creating a multi-dimensional, multi-modal, interconnected knowledge network to provide users with one-stop, intelligent, personalized knowledge services.
Connecting Knowledge Entities: Libraries should connect various knowledge entities such as users, librarians, experts, institutions, and communities, building a diverse, collaborative, and open-sharing knowledge ecosystem that promotes the flow, interaction, and value addition of knowledge.
Innovating Knowledge Services: Libraries should continuously innovate knowledge service models, organically combining traditional services with emerging technologies, online services with offline services, and in-library resources with external resources, weaving a rich, diverse, flexible, and efficient knowledge service system to meet users' ever-changing knowledge needs.

Summary of the "ECHO" Paradigm#

The "ECHO" paradigm is not merely a new acronym but a rethink and value reshaping of the essence of libraries. It emphasizes that the core value of libraries in the AI era lies in:

Creating exceptional knowledge experiences (Experience), making knowledge learning more attractive, immersive, and personalized.
Building active knowledge communities (Community), making libraries platforms for knowledge exchange, co-creation, and collaborative innovation.
Guarding and promoting the spirit of humanism (Humanism), making libraries beacons of humanistic values, guiding healthy social development.
Weaving healthy knowledge ecosystems (Orchestration), making libraries hubs for connecting knowledge resources, entities, and services.

Advantages and Irreplaceability of the "ECHO" Paradigm:

The "ECHO" paradigm transcends the instrumental rationality of the DDIK model, focusing more on the humanistic values, social responsibilities, and future missions of libraries. It emphasizes the experiential, communal, humanistic, and ecological aspects of libraries, which are areas that AI technology currently finds difficult to easily replace.

Experiential (Experience): While AI can provide personalized recommendations and virtual learning environments, real-world experiences, bodily perceptions, and emotional resonances are difficult for AI to fully simulate. Libraries can leverage their physical space advantages to create unique experiential learning scenarios.
Communal (Community): AI can build virtual communities, but real interpersonal interactions, face-to-face communication, and shared senses of belonging are difficult for AI to replace. Libraries can utilize their advantages as public spaces to promote genuine community connections and knowledge co-creation.
Humanistic (Humanism): AI can process vast amounts of information, but value judgments, ethical considerations, and humanistic care remain uniquely human abilities. Libraries can uphold humanistic positions, guiding the ethical application of knowledge and enhancing societal humanistic literacy.
Ecological (Orchestration): AI can integrate data, but the complexity, dynamism, and evolution of knowledge ecosystems are difficult for AI to fully control. Libraries can leverage their organizational and coordinating capabilities to build healthy knowledge ecosystems, promoting continuous innovation and development of knowledge.

Directions for Library Service Transformation under the "ECHO" Paradigm:

Based on the "ECHO" paradigm, libraries can transform their services in the following ways:

Create Experience Centers: Build thematic learning spaces, makerspaces, digital humanities laboratories, virtual reality experience zones, etc., to provide immersive, interactive, and personalized learning experiences.
Build Community Platforms: Establish online and offline community platforms, organize book clubs, seminars, workshops, salons, etc., to promote the formation and development of knowledge communities.
Enhance Humanistic Education: Offer humanistic literacy courses, host humanistic lectures, organize cultural and artistic activities, and conduct ethical discussions to enhance users' humanistic literacy and ethical awareness.
Optimize Knowledge Ecosystems: Integrate multi-source knowledge resources, connect diverse knowledge entities, and innovate diverse knowledge services to build an open, collaborative, and sustainable knowledge ecosystem.
Embrace AI Technology: Utilize AI technology to improve service efficiency, optimize user experiences, and expand service ranges, while being cautious of technological supremacy and upholding humanistic positions.
Strengthen Librarian Capacity Building: Cultivate librarians' information literacy, technical skills, humanistic literacy, community operation abilities, and experience design skills, making librarians practitioners and promoters of the "ECHO" paradigm.

Conclusion:#

The "ECHO" paradigm provides a forward-looking and humanistic vision for the future services of libraries that transcends DDIK. It emphasizes that libraries in the AI era should become creators of experiences, builders of communities, guardians of humanism, and orchestrators of knowledge ecosystems. This is not only a leap in library service forms but also a reshaping of library identity and a redefinition of value. Under the guidance of the "ECHO" paradigm, libraries will be able to maintain their irreplaceable value in the AI era and make greater contributions to the progress of human civilization.

I hope this "ECHO" paradigm can respond to your questions and provoke deeper thoughts and discussions. I look forward to your further feedback and guidance.