The Philosophic Turn for AI Agents: Replacing centralized digital rhetoric with decentralized truth-seeking
This addresses the problem of preserving human agency and autonomy in AI-driven decision-making for individuals, but it is incremental as it builds on existing philosophical concepts like the Socratic method.
The paper tackles the risk of AI decision-support systems compromising human autonomy through centralized control, proposing a philosophic turn in AI design to facilitate decentralized truth-seeking and open-ended inquiry, which aims to empower users to maintain control over their judgments.
In the face of rapidly advancing AI technology, individuals will increasingly rely on AI agents to navigate life's growing complexities, raising critical concerns about maintaining both human agency and autonomy. This paper addresses a fundamental dilemma posed by AI decision-support systems: the risk of either becoming overwhelmed by complex decisions, thus losing agency, or having autonomy compromised by externally controlled choice architectures reminiscent of ``nudging'' practices. While the ``nudge'' framework, based on the use of choice-framing to guide individuals toward presumed beneficial outcomes, initially appeared to preserve liberty, at AI-driven scale, it threatens to erode autonomy. To counteract this risk, the paper proposes a philosophic turn in AI design. AI should be constructed to facilitate decentralized truth-seeking and open-ended inquiry, mirroring the Socratic method of philosophical dialogue. By promoting individual and collective adaptive learning, such AI systems would empower users to maintain control over their judgments, augmenting their agency without undermining autonomy. The paper concludes by outlining essential features for autonomy-preserving AI systems, sketching a path toward AI systems that enhance human judgment rather than undermine it.