Artificial general intelligence may erode human purpose by overtaking decision-making and rendering core skills obsolete.
At a Glance
- AGI threatens to undermine human autonomy and societal roles
- Philosopher Shannon Vallor warns AI mirrors bias, not wisdom
- Experts raise alarms over skill loss and moral atrophy
- Surveys show ≥10% chance AGI could cause human extinction
- Bostrom proposes alignment and economic reform to avert collapse
Existential Mirror
As Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) nears deployment, experts are beginning to ask whether its most profound effect may be existential rather than economic. A feature by Inthacity explores how AGI could reshape the foundations of meaning by replacing not just labor, but identity. Philosopher Shannon Vallor argues that AI systems act as “mirrors made of code,” reflecting our biases and routines rather than offering new moral insight. By automating decisions that require judgment, AGI may dilute the very faculties that distinguish human agency from mechanical process.
Gradual Disempowerment
Legal theorist Joshua Krook warns that AGI’s threat lies not only in disruption, but in disuse. His “gradual disempowerment thesis,” outlined in a recent arXiv preprint, suggests that as we outsource caregiving, mediation, and interpretation to machines, humans may suffer a slow decay in emotional and ethical capacity. This silent erosion—less cinematic than AI takeover scenarios—could produce a future where humanity still exists, but no longer knows why or for what purpose.
Watch a report: AGI Is Humanity’s Last Invention: How Close Are We?.
Risk and Governance
As AGI systems approach superhuman performance, leading AI researchers have voiced growing alarm. A recent survey found over 50% of experts believe there’s at least a 10% risk that AGI could cause human extinction. Philosopher Nick Bostrom has proposed a combination of alignment research, global governance, and universal AI dividends to mitigate these risks. Meanwhile, Demis Hassabis of DeepMind believes AGI could enrich humanity—if handled wisely.
Yet as debates rage over control and alignment, the deeper question remains: what does it mean to be human in a world where machines think for us? The future may depend not just on technical safeguards, but on reclaiming the very concept of purpose.
