Steven Pinker Lists Four Objections to AI Extinction Scenarios, Sparking Point-by-Point Rebuttal
burny_tech · x · 2026-09-27
In his letter to Scott Alexander, Steven Pinker laid out four objections to AI extinction scenarios, and Jim Miller responds to each.
- Objection 1: Pinker argues the scenarios rest on an underdeveloped conception of intelligence—treating it as a quantity of power extrapolated from animals to dull humans to smart humans to AI to omniscient superintelligence. He holds that any intelligent system is a mechanism good at solving some problems but not others, inherently limited by knowledge attainable only through observation and experimentation.
- Miller's reply: nobody disputes the need for knowledge; AI systems already absorb vast amounts from books, and are now being connected to biological laboratories to learn through experiments.
A substantive exchange in the ongoing AI-risk debate among Pinker, Scott Alexander, and Scott Aaronson; the remaining points and rebuttals continue in the original thread.
Related event: Pinker Declines Debate, Rebuts AI Doom Arguments in Open Letter(4 posts)→
More from AGI Musings
- Argument: there won't be one ASI, but many locked in survival competition — JOBhakdi · 2026-09-27
- Timnit Gebru: deep learning folks ignore neuroscience and state guesses as facts — mjdramstead · 2026-09-27
- Beff Jezos: Future Will Marvel That We Once Did Knowledge Work Without AI — beffjezos · 2026-09-27
- Does ASI Have a Will to Power? The Core AI Existential Risk Debate — JOBhakdi · 2026-09-27
- AI Can't 'Read the Room': The Hard Problem of Selective Info Sharing in Enterprise AI — devanshmehta · 2026-09-27
- Blogger argues AI doom narrative will swing back, citing nuclear, IVF and internet precedents — ChrisGPT · 2026-09-27