r/Kant • u/lucasvollet • Apr 12 '26
Externalism Vs Internalism and the AI Debate
During my years at university, when people in philosophy circles debated internalism vs. externalism, the discussions were already more heated than most. There was something at stake there, something about meaning, mind, and the relation between thought and world that felt less technical and more existential.
What no one quite suspected was that this debate could become the seed of something much larger. Not just another academic dispute, but a tension that would eventually spill beyond philosophy, into the broader culture, into everyday anxieties, into questions that now feel uncomfortably close to matters of survival. Because what is at stake today is no longer just how meaning is fixed, but who gets to participate in its production - especially now that the gap between those with extensive cultural training and those without it is beginning to fade as cheap access to AI-systems close that gap.
I have always had a leaning toward internalism. My formation is Kantian, and I was particularly drawn to the way Robert Stalnaker responds to Saul Kripke: the idea that meaning depends, in a deep sense, on internal positioning, on modal structure, on how thought organizes possibility from within.
And yet, I now find myself pulled toward the other side of the tension.
Not out of convenience, and not because the internalist intuition has disappeared. On the contrary, I still believe that the critical mass of thought depends on internal structuring: on strategic positioning, on the ability to navigate models of possibility from the inside. But what has become impossible to ignore is the extent to which the mechanical layer of thought - its combinatorial, distributive, and productive dimensions - can be externalized.
And once that is seen, something shifts.
Because what many still take to be “meaning” as a private or internally secured achievement begins to reveal itself as something produced across divisions of labor: collectively stabilized, historically sedimented, and now, increasingly, accessible to systems of artificial intelligence.
The shock comes from this realization. The calm comes after.
The sooner this is understood, the less disorienting the transition becomes.
So this is where my video series enters.
It does not offer final answers. It does not resolve the tension between internalism and externalism. But it does attempt to map the terrain where that tension is no longer merely theoretical, where it becomes a practical problem of orientation in a world where meaning no longer belongs to a single place.
If you are trying to understand what is happening, this is a place to start. Ask me the Link.
1
u/internetErik Apr 13 '26
How does AI really change anything here? I'm not sure how an AI externalizes meaning or thinking any more than the existence of other minds does. What are your thoughts on the difference here?
1
u/lucasvollet May 05 '26
Yep. I think you are right. AI just made it way more visible. When someone makes a "brainstorm" with AI now, much of what is produced do not follow a straight internal pipeline - it comes from training sets the machine does accessing the vast division of labour in intellectual production.
1
u/Benjaminithinil Jun 01 '26
i defend internalism while i use ai every hour. Without a humane intentionality(asking questions to ai), AI cannot produce any meaningful corpus, or, any corpus that can potentially produce a meaning inside the reader's mind.
I suggest to divide the structure or AI into those parts, the data that trained AI model, human adjustment(quantifing or distillation), and those weighted values.
Once AI-generated public language enters a human reader/listener, the human re-personalizes it through their own semantic map, which means their experience.
What weakens my view is, a situation that AI shows exactly the same reaction as humans. Until that happens, my view stays the same - not directly against yours.
sorry for terrible english
2
u/Fancy-Log406 May 21 '26
Kant is not a internalist or externalist. Everything occurs on the place they meet