The three main doctrines on the future of AI

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2509.20050v1
• Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2025 12:17:29 GMT
• Title: The three main doctrines on the future of AI
• Abstract summary: The dominance doctrine predicts that the first actor to create sufficiently advanced AI will attain overwhelming strategic superiority.<n>The extinction doctrine anticipates that humanity will likely lose control of ASI, leading to the extinction of the human species or its permanent disempowerment.<n>The replacement doctrine forecasts that AI will automate a large share of tasks currently performed by humans, but will not be so transformative as to fundamentally reshape or bring an end to human civilization.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/
• Abstract: This paper develops a taxonomy of expert perspectives on the risks and likely consequences of artificial intelligence, with particular focus on Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) and Artificial Superintelligence (ASI). Drawing from primary sources, we identify three predominant doctrines: (1) The dominance doctrine, which predicts that the first actor to create sufficiently advanced AI will attain overwhelming strategic superiority sufficient to cheaply neutralize its opponents' defenses; (2) The extinction doctrine, which anticipates that humanity will likely lose control of ASI, leading to the extinction of the human species or its permanent disempowerment; (3) The replacement doctrine, which forecasts that AI will automate a large share of tasks currently performed by humans, but will not be so transformative as to fundamentally reshape or bring an end to human civilization. We examine the assumptions and arguments underlying each doctrine, including expectations around the pace of AI progress and the feasibility of maintaining advanced AI under human control. While the boundaries between doctrines are sometimes porous and many experts hedge across them, this taxonomy clarifies the core axes of disagreement over the anticipated scale and nature of the consequences of AI development.

Related papers

• The Boundaries of Automation: A Theory of Persistent Human Participation [107.84677954791773]
  We argue that human participation may persist even with highly capable AI systems.<n>In some activities, the target is not fully specified in advance but instead emerges through the interaction itself.<n>This perspective has important implications for the limits of automation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-23T17:33:43Z)
• A Beautiful Mind: Principles and Strategies for AI-Augmented Human Reasoning [0.0]
  This paper outlines a human-centered augmented reasoning paradigm.<n>It offers examples of interaction modes that can serve as bridges between human reasoning and AI algorithms.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-05T20:57:29Z)
• Aligning Generalisation Between Humans and Machines [74.120848518198]
  AI technology can support humans in scientific discovery and forming decisions, but may also disrupt democracies and target individuals.<n>The responsible use of AI and its participation in human-AI teams increasingly shows the need for AI alignment.<n>A crucial yet often overlooked aspect of these interactions is the different ways in which humans and machines generalise.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-23T18:36:07Z)
• Rolling in the deep of cognitive and AI biases [1.556153237434314]
  We argue that there is urgent need to understand AI as a sociotechnical system, inseparable from the conditions in which it is designed, developed and deployed. We address this critical issue by following a radical new methodology under which human cognitive biases become core entities in our AI fairness overview. We introduce a new mapping, which justifies the humans to AI biases and we detect relevant fairness intensities and inter-dependencies.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-30T21:34:04Z)
• Position: Towards Bidirectional Human-AI Alignment [109.57781720848669]
  We argue that the research community should explicitly define and critically reflect on "alignment" to account for the bidirectional and dynamic relationship between humans and AI.<n>We introduce the Bidirectional Human-AI Alignment framework, which not only incorporates traditional efforts to align AI with human values but also introduces the critical, underexplored dimension of aligning humans with AI.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-13T16:03:25Z)
• Visions of a Discipline: Analyzing Introductory AI Courses on YouTube [11.209406323898019]
  We analyze the 20 most watched introductory AI courses on YouTube. Introductory AI courses do not meaningfully engage with ethical or societal challenges of AI. We recommend that introductory AI courses should highlight ethical challenges of AI to present a more balanced perspective.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-31T01:48:42Z)
• Managing extreme AI risks amid rapid progress [171.05448842016125]
  We describe risks that include large-scale social harms, malicious uses, and irreversible loss of human control over autonomous AI systems. There is a lack of consensus about how exactly such risks arise, and how to manage them. Present governance initiatives lack the mechanisms and institutions to prevent misuse and recklessness, and barely address autonomous systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-26T17:59:06Z)
• Exploration with Principles for Diverse AI Supervision [88.61687950039662]
  Training large transformers using next-token prediction has given rise to groundbreaking advancements in AI. While this generative AI approach has produced impressive results, it heavily leans on human supervision. This strong reliance on human oversight poses a significant hurdle to the advancement of AI innovation. We propose a novel paradigm termed Exploratory AI (EAI) aimed at autonomously generating high-quality training data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-13T07:03:39Z)
• Intent-aligned AI systems deplete human agency: the need for agency foundations research in AI safety [2.3572498744567127]
  We argue that alignment to human intent is insufficient for safe AI systems. We argue that preservation of long-term agency of humans may be a more robust standard.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-30T17:14:01Z)
• Fairness in AI and Its Long-Term Implications on Society [68.8204255655161]
  We take a closer look at AI fairness and analyze how lack of AI fairness can lead to deepening of biases over time. We discuss how biased models can lead to more negative real-world outcomes for certain groups. If the issues persist, they could be reinforced by interactions with other risks and have severe implications on society in the form of social unrest.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-04-16T11:22:59Z)
• Trustworthy AI: A Computational Perspective [54.80482955088197]
  We focus on six of the most crucial dimensions in achieving trustworthy AI: (i) Safety & Robustness, (ii) Non-discrimination & Fairness, (iii) Explainability, (iv) Privacy, (v) Accountability & Auditability, and (vi) Environmental Well-Being. For each dimension, we review the recent related technologies according to a taxonomy and summarize their applications in real-world systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-07-12T14:21:46Z)
• Modelos din\^amicos aplicados \`a aprendizagem de valores em intelig\^encia artificial [0.0]
  Several researchers in the area have developed a robust, beneficial, and safe concept of AI for the preservation of humanity and the environment. It is utmost importance that artificial intelligent agents have their values aligned with human values. Perhaps this difficulty comes from the way we are addressing the problem of expressing values using cognitive methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-07-30T00:56:11Z)
• On Controllability of AI [1.370633147306388]
  We present arguments as well as supporting evidence indicating that advanced AI can't be fully controlled. Consequences of uncontrollability of AI are discussed with respect to future of humanity and research on AI, and AI safety and security.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-07-19T02:49:41Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.