Skip to content

Thinking (with) Machines: Epistemic Autonomy in Human–AI Interaction

Sep 2026 · Human Affairs · 0 citations · 39 references
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI

TL;DR

It is argued that generative AI does not make human beings smarter as such; its epistemic significance depends on how human–AI interaction is structured and normatively governed.

Abstract

Abstract Generative artificial intelligence has intensified longstanding philosophical questions concerning human cognition and epistemic autonomy. This paper argues that generative AI does not make human beings smarter as such; its epistemic significance depends on how human–AI interaction is structured and normatively governed. Drawing on Kant’s conception of maturity (Mündigkeit), theories of extended cognition, and recent debates on cognitive offloading, it distinguishes instrumental from structural offloading: the former can extend human judgment, while the latter risks replacing autonomous reasoning with algorithmic dependence. On this basis the paper proposes the concept of AI maturity as the capacity to use generative AI in ways that preserve epistemic autonomy and reflective judgment. Against the objection that such an ideal presupposes an untenably individualistic epistemology, the account is situated within social epistemology: autonomy is defined not as independence from external authorities but as answerability for the standards governing one’s own judgments. This yields explicit criteria for distinguishing legitimate epistemic dependence from heteronomy, and locates the specific risk of generative AI not in dependence as such but in dependence on a non-answerable and epistemically correlated source.

View source

Similar papers

Review Open access Aug 2026

Epistemic dependence in AI-mediated learning

This critical-integrative review argues that the central educational question is not whether learners rely on AI, but whether that reliance preserves or displaces the epistemic work through which judgement develops, and proposes relational epistemic agency as the normative aim.

Yi-Ran Du, Yi-Xuan Yuan · 1 citation
Aug 2026

The Illusion of Understanding: Generative AI, Epistemic Humility, and the Erosion of Intellectual Character

It is argued that intelligence should be assessed not by output quality or efficiency alone, but by its impact on intellectual character, arguing that intelligence should be assessed not by output quality or efficiency alone, but by its impact on intellectual character.

Dylan S. Bailey · 0 citations
Open access 2026

AI and the Transformation of Scientific Knowledge

This article proposes a rethinking of the role of artificial intelligence in contemporary science through an analysis of Harry Collins’s concept of expertise. The point of departure is the observed tension between normative accounts of expertise – grounded in ideas of socialisation, tacit knowledge and membership in a...

A. Filatova · 0 citations
Open access Sep 2026

The Epistemic Impropriety of Artificial Intelligence

Artificial intelligence has become increasingly embedded in the practices through which human beings acquire, organize, evaluate, communicate, and act upon information. The philosophical problem raised by this development is therefore not exhausted by the familiar observation that artificial intelligence sometimes prod...

OP Joseph Thomas Ekong · 0 citations
Open access Aug 2026

Alienated Intelligence

The concept of “alienated intelligence” is introduced to critically examine contemporary cultural perceptions of artificial intelligence to argue that certain visions of AI function as cultural projections of human cognitive capacities that become externalized, idealized, and reified in technological systems.

Jakub Walicki · 0 citations
Open access Sep 2026

AI As Epistemic Enframing:

This study argues that AI embodies a calculative mode of thought that reduces knowledge to data, patterns, and predictive models, treating both the world and human subjects as resources for optimization, and proposes Heideggerian meditative thinking (Gelassenheit) as a framework for preserving human insight, reflection...

Ninio Sagucom · 0 citations

Related blog posts

Microsoft Research Blog Oct 7, 2026

Agent Lightning v1.0: A 3,500-Line Lightweight Agentic RL Framework for Training Agents with Real Harnesses

Training AI agents with reinforcement learning can be challenging because their tools, context, and decision-making are managed by complex frameworks. Agent Lightning connects existing agents to RL training, making it easier to improve them without rebuilding them. The post Agent Lightning v1.0: A 3,500-Line Lightweight Agentic RL Framework for Training Agents with Real Harnesses appeared first on Microsoft Research.

Microsoft Research Blog Oct 6, 2026

What AI gets wrong and what failure teaches us

Jennifer Neville did not want to go into computer science—but that’s exactly where she landed. Neville discusses the starts and stops that led to her professional sweet spot and her work identifying “surprising failures” making it hard for AI to handle complexity.  The post What AI gets wrong and what failure teaches us appeared first on Microsoft Research.

We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads. See our Cookie Policy.