Philosophers tend to be sceptical about the use of GenAI for professional purposes, often emphasizing its tendency to hallucinate, flatten conceptual nuance, or encourage intellectual laziness. I will argue that philosophers should not only abandon this scepticism but actively use GenAI if they want to become better at their job.
The argument builds on the interactionist theory of reasoning developed by Hugo Mercier and Dan Sperber. On this view, reasoning is not primarily an individual cognitive mechanism aimed at improving beliefs in isolation. Rather, it is a fundamentally social practice in which reasons are produced, challenged, criticized, and revised through interaction with critical interlocutors.
When used properly—and the conditions for such proper use can themselves be discussed—GenAI can function as precisely such an interlocutor. It generates objections, formulates alternative interpretations, and challenges philosophers to clarify their positions. Rather than replacing philosophical reasoning, GenAI may thus reinforce the dialogical character of philosophy.
Speaker: Stefaan Blancke