MyCall

No. But it might make life so much easier if I did.

This is pretty confusing. The title of your post is intricating. Unfortunately I can not react, since your question is unclear.

What exactly do you mean? Do you want to know the purpose of YOUR life ? If so; only you will have that answer. Do you want to know the purpose of life in general, of all that lives and exists? Religious answer : The purpose of life is to serve the god or gods that you have chosen. Scientific answer: Life has NO purpose.

I can agree with StringJunky. Google is and should be thinking ahead of the ethical consequences their Algo's could have. And Google is not the only one. Mankind should be aware that Algo's , certainly in the long term, have the capablitly of misleading humans by giving answers and reactions that can impossibly be valitdated. In the future it is certainly possible that algo's outsmart (some or most) people. What if an algo gives an answer a human being does not understand. Should the human just trust the algo and rely on it's judgement. At the beginning that will give struggles. But for next generations of humanity, we'll get used to it, and obey the algo;s judgments. Humanity should be aware and cherish and nurture healthy criticism. Some deciscions should always be made by responsible humans. What is happening, imho is at least two things. 1 The interviewer asks the wrong questions in a leading question format. 2 Technical. The algo is based on GPT3, a encoder-decoder neural network. Basically that is a well trained parrot. Parrots copy and 'krauw'.

Of course it all depends on the definitions whether there is a difference between rational and logical thinking. At first impression I could make that difference. Using rational for structered thinking and logical for mathematical thinking. And then the difference might be that you use logical thinking in a closed system. Rational thinking is used on a meta-level in which you think about your logical thoughts. Therewith it is possible to think logical but irrational at the same time. That is if your logical system turn out to be false. Or am I wrong ? Another example. Millenia ago some people thought that the sun dies everyday and will be given birth by an entity the next day. In relgious context this is logical and makes rational sense. Nowadays we learned about the existence of planets. No longer it's called rational that the sun is a child of some entity. At a meta-level we adjusted our logic about the sun(rise), night and day.