Beyond Alignment

PUBLISHED: 2026-02-17

Abstract: The discourse on Artificial Intelligence is paralyzed by the "agency mistake": the assumption that complex, goal-directed behavior implies agency, leading to intractable pseudoproblems like value alignment and control. This paper reframes the debate from the ground up. First, it establishes from computer science and physics that AI systems are deterministic state machines, executing scripts that are causally closed and semantically empty. Second, drawing on the Neo-Pre-Platonic Naturalism (NPN) framework, it defines agency via Hormē: the thermodynamic, constitutive striving of a far-from-equilibrium system to persist. AI fails the Hormē test; it is a tool, not an agent. The real danger is not misaligned AI agency, but the obfuscated amplification of human Hormē. We propose the Hormē-Enhancement Paradigm: the ethical purpose of AI is to augment human capacities to navigate reality. This dissolves the pseudoproblems, redirects focus to accountability and tool safety, and offers a clear, productive future for the ethical development of intelligent technology.

READ PDF DARKMODE RETURN

Status Log

2026-02-17
Completed final draft over the last two days. The argument is extremely strong and the paper is the most timely and urgent of all current work given the ongoing harms from misframing AI governance. Decided to prioritize magazine submission over journals given publication lag. Uploaded to Zenodo, Philpapers and SSRN today. DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.18676795
2026-01-20
Core arguments fleshed out. Paper is solid but tabling it to focus on other areas of the system. This paper has the potential to attract significant attention and I don't want it to overshadow the broader work before the corpus is more developed.
2026-01-15
Began drafting core arguments. Extracted relevant material from the foundational book and developed it into the skeleton of the paper.
AI Transparency Statement: Artificial Intelligence was used to smooth the prose, suggest analogies, and identify secondary literature. If you find this text dense, be grateful—the original human draft was far more impenetrable. While the machine improved the flow, all philosophical arguments and primary source engagement remain the stubborn responsibility of the author.