Anil Seth Pushes Back on AI Philosophy Competition: It Fuels 'AI Thinks for Us' Narrative
anilkseth · x · 2026-09-03
Responding to the 'AI philosophy essay competition', consciousness researcher Anil Seth raised three concerns:
- Much of philosophy may not have the provable open problems mathematics does, so AI's intelligence edge may not apply
- The competition fuels the narrative of AI thinking for us — and ultimately replacing us — rather than helping us think better, with vague rules ('some human guidance is allowed')
- It reinforces the claim that LLMs are actually thinking and understanding, since genuine philosophical progress is hard to argue for without those properties
Plinz fired back: does philosophy not concern problems solvable with more intelligence? Does that include analytic philosophy, or only the parts indistinguishable from statistical text generation?
Related event: Anil Seth Criticizes AI Philosophy Prize, Sparking Debate(4 posts)→
More from AGI Musings
- David Manheim: ASI existential risk likely arrives before AI's massive economic impact — davidmanheim · 2026-10-21
- Bombadil: a foundation model for plant electrophysiology trained on 4M hours of signals — vboykis · 2026-10-21
- As LLMs Outpace Robotics, Physical-World Jobs May Hold Value Better Than Desk Jobs — venturetwins · 2026-10-21
- What would AI alignment look like if developed in a more collectivist culture? — mimi10v3 · 2026-10-21
- Researchers Debate Embodied AI Stack: Steerable S0 Controllers and Closed-Loop S2 by 2027 — chris_j_paxton · 2026-10-21
- Learning moves up a layer: AI-era devs should think in systems, not code — MoonL88537 · 2026-10-21