Philosopher: AI represents existential risk, just not the kind you think

Artificial intelligence is increasingly being positioned as a potential moral arbiter and decision-maker, raising profound questions about human agency and ethical reasoning that philosopher Shannon Vallor addresses through the lens of existentialist philosophy and practical wisdom.

Core argument: Vallor contends that AI’s existential threat stems not from the technology itself, but from humanity’s misperception of AI as possessing genuine intelligence and moral authority.

• Rather than being an independent thinking entity, AI functions more as a sophisticated mirror reflecting human inputs and biases
• The widespread characterization of AI as capable of superior moral judgment represents a dangerous abdication of human responsibility and agency
• This narrative effectively “gaslights” humans into surrendering their inherent capacity for moral reasoning and ethical decision-making

Philosophical framework: Drawing on existentialist philosophy, particularly José Ortega y Gasset’s concept of “autofabrication,” Vallor emphasizes humanity’s fundamental need to create meaning and shape identity through conscious choice.

• Humans must continuously engage in the process of self-creation and meaning-making
• The concept of “practical wisdom” (phronesis) requires active participation and cannot be outsourced to artificial systems
• Over-reliance on AI for moral guidance can erode humans’ capacity for ethical reasoning and judgment

Critique of AI ethics: Vallor expresses deep skepticism toward efforts to create “moral machines” or ethical AI advisors.

• Morality should remain a contested domain open to ongoing debate and challenge
• The concept of universal morality applicable to both humans and machines fundamentally misunderstands the nature of ethical reasoning
• Human morality is intrinsically tied to our existence as social, vulnerable, and interdependent beings

Transhumanism concerns: The philosophical movement seeking to transcend human limitations through technology faces pointed criticism in Vallor’s analysis.

• Transhumanist ideology focuses on “freedom from” human constraints without articulating a meaningful vision of “freedom for” specific purposes
• This approach risks diminishing rather than enhancing human agency and potential
• The movement fails to recognize the essential role of human limitations in shaping moral understanding

Looking ahead: The growing integration of AI into decision-making processes across society demands careful consideration of how to preserve human agency and moral reasoning capabilities while avoiding the trap of technological deference.