07.02.2025/04.02.2026 The Illusion of Intelligence: Loss Of Knowing
The Illusion of Intelligence: Loss Of Knowing
Rahul Ramya
07.02.2025/04.02.2026
Patna, India
Artificial Intelligence today appears intelligent because it is fast, efficient, and endlessly productive. Yet this appearance hides a deeper limitation. AI’s failure to achieve true intelligence lies not in insufficient data or computing power, but in its deterministic efficiency syndrome, its simplified model of intelligence, and its epistemological opacity—its inability to explain how knowledge is produced.
This essay argues that intelligence is not merely computation. It is meaning-making, ethical judgment, contextual understanding, and conscious participation in knowledge creation—qualities that AI, by design, lacks.
AI and the Deterministic Efficiency Syndrome
Modern AI systems are evaluated primarily through speed, accuracy, and scale. This reflects what may be called deterministic efficiency syndrome (DES)—the assumption that faster processing and higher output signify higher intelligence.
Recent research trends show impressive gains: AI systems can write essays, diagnose diseases, predict consumer behaviour, and optimise logistics. Yet these advances rest on pattern recognition, not understanding. AI predicts the most likely next output based on past data; it does not comprehend meaning, intention, or consequence.
A familiar example is chess. AI defeats human grandmasters by calculating millions of possible moves per second. Humans, by contrast, rely on intuition, experience, psychological reading of opponents, and narrative understanding of the game. Human intelligence compresses lived experience into insight; AI expands computation without comprehension.
Efficiency, therefore, is not intelligence. Intelligence involves hesitation, doubt, moral conflict, and interpretation—traits that slow humans down but make understanding possible.
The Simplistic Model of Intelligence
AI rests on a narrow assumption: that extracting patterns from data equals understanding reality. This model reduces intelligence to calculation and ignores its social, emotional, and ethical dimensions.
AI continues to struggle with:
Contextual understanding – irony, humour, cultural memory, and historical pain often escape algorithmic interpretation.
Social intelligence – negotiation, disagreement, persuasion, and collective reasoning remain deeply human.
Uncertainty and novelty – AI performs best in stable, rule-based environments but falters in crises and unprecedented situations.
Intellectual hallucinations – AI generates confident but false outputs without awareness of error, exposing the absence of self-reflection.
Moral reasoning – ethical judgment grows from lived experience, responsibility, and historical consciousness, not from statistical averages.
AI simulates intelligence but does not participate in cognition.
Processing Is Not Intelligence
A central confusion in contemporary AI discourse is the belief that more processing equals more intelligence. This overlooks a critical distinction:
Processing is mechanical; intelligence is interpretative.
Humans rely on heuristics, intuition, and context rather than exhaustive computation.
Meaning often emerges from selective attention, not total information.
An experienced doctor does not merely match symptoms to data. She reads silence, anxiety, family history, and social background. AI may assist diagnosis, but it cannot grasp suffering, responsibility, or moral risk.
Education vs. Machine Learning: A Pedagogical Divide
Human education is a contested, democratic, and evolving process. Curricula are shaped through public debate and reflect cultural values, social realities, economic needs, and political struggles. Education aims to produce knowers—individuals who understand how knowledge is created, questioned, and revised.
Machine learning pedagogy is fundamentally different. Data selection—the equivalent of curriculum design—is opaque, selective, and closed-door. Decisions about what data is included or excluded are made by private corporations driven by profit, power, and market incentives. This turns machine teaching into a class-conscious tool, reflecting the worldview and interests of data-controlling tech oligarchs rather than democratic consensus.
While human pedagogy encourages critical thinking and disagreement, machine learning enforces conformity to dominant patterns. It trains users to apply formulas, not to question how those formulas were created.
Epistemological Opacity and the Loss of Knowing
AI systems cannot explain why a particular output is produced. This epistemological opacity transforms knowledge into a black box. Users receive answers without understanding causes, assumptions, or limitations.
As a result, machine intelligence promotes a formula-based understanding of the world, where individuals become users of outcomes rather than participants in knowledge generation. This undermines critical thinking and shifts authority from reasoning to computation.
Human knowledge grows through explanation, debate, error, and correction. AI offers conclusions without epistemic accountability.
Emotion, Ethics, and Intelligence
Human intelligence is inseparable from emotion. Emotions guide attention, shape moral judgment, and ground social relationships. AI can detect emotional signals but does not experience concern, guilt, compassion, or responsibility.
Ethical decision-making is not rule-following alone; it involves value conflicts, empathy, and historical memory. These cannot be reduced to datasets without flattening human experience.
Conclusion: AI as a Complement, Not a Replacement
AI’s future lies not in replacing human intelligence but in complementing it. When treated as a tool rather than an authority, AI can enhance productivity, assist decision-making, and process information at scale. But when mistaken for intelligence itself, it risks narrowing human understanding and weakening democratic knowledge practices.
True intelligence is slow, uncertain, ethical, and contextual. It is shaped by culture, history, and lived experience. AI, however powerful, remains a system of efficient prediction—not a conscious participant in meaning-making.
Comments
Post a Comment