Capability as the Dependent Variable
Five theses, and an invitation to prove them wrong
Five theses on why AI-assisted performance and durable human capability should be measured as distinct outcomes.
Read the essay →HumanitAI · Volume 1 · 2026
The disputation begins.
HumanitAI's first volume develops the opening arguments of AI Humanism through essays intended for examination, criticism, and challenge.
The volume
Six arguments. Twenty-six theses.
The essays examine human capability, algorithmic convergence, expertise and judgment, the formation of the AI Humanist, the credibility of claims, and the changing relationship between automation and human development.
Contents
Essays in Volume 1
Doctrine Without a Church
Five theses on algorithmic convergence and the case for AI Humanism
Five theses on algorithmic convergence, machine-generated testimony, and the capacity for independent human judgment.
Read the essay →Who Is the AI Humanist?
The scholar-citizen, reconsidered under conditions of machine testimony
An account of the AI Humanist as a scholar-citizen who uses intelligent systems while retaining judgment, authorship, and institutional responsibility.
Read the essay →How a Claim Earns Trust
What the replication crisis teaches an institute that studies machines
An argument for prospective commitments, falsifiability, correction, and institutional practices that make intellectual claims contestable.
Read the essay →The Complement Becomes the Target
Four theses on why this technological moment differs from the last one
Four theses on how generative AI changes the historical relationship between automation and reasoning-intensive human work.
Read the essay →The Second Door
Four theses on artificial intelligence and the developing world's remaining path to convergence
Four theses on artificial intelligence, services-led development, and the conversion of economic opportunity into durable human and institutional capability.
Read the essay →Disputation
Claims should remain open to challenge.
Every thesis in this volume may be challenged through factual correction, counter-evidence, competing interpretation, or argument.
Claims that do not survive challenge are revised or withdrawn with a visible record of what changed and why.
The goal is not to win an argument. It is to discover which claims survive it.