AI Could Master Transcendental Arguments About Itself—They Still Wouldn't Move Us
birchlse · x · 2026-10-07
Responding to a discussion on whether philosophy could ever have a proof-of-the-century moment like math, Birch argues that even if AI gets very good at transcendental arguments about the conditions of its own experience, such arguments would not rationally move us—persuasive transcendental arguments must start from the structure of our experience. This highlights a key asymmetry in the machine consciousness debate: an AI's self-referential proof and an argument acceptable to humans rest on different footing.
More from AGI Musings
- After OpenAI's 722 math papers, a framework for which jobs AI automates first — ziv_ravid · 2026-10-07
- Math PhD now feels like swinging a scythe against millions of autonomous harvesters — FlorianGallwitz · 2026-10-07
- Dev observation: our AI outputs are becoming data packets passed agent-to-agent — aloncarmel · 2026-10-07
- Nobel economist Daron Acemoglu: making 100 people 5% more productive beats automating 5% — cen6wkf · 2026-10-07
- NYT Essay: Didi Drivers to DoorDash Workers, the Shared Feeling of Being Harvested by AI's Future — S_OhEigeartaigh · 2026-10-07
- Scott Alexander fires back at Pinker in debate over AI prediction track records — deanwball · 2026-10-07