This article explores how education shapes moral judgment and personhood amidst AI, highlighting its implications for society.
The question of education in the age of artificial intelligence is typically framed in instrumental terms: what skills to teach, what digital tools to integrate, how to prepare students for a transformed labour market. This article argues that the question is not pedagogical but ontological. Drawing on a five-axiom philosophical anthropology — person/thing distinction, irreducibility of practical wisdom, the person as an end, responsibility as constitutive, and the capacity to initiate — we show that the canonical definition of "agent" in artificial intelligence theory maps exactly onto the hyperspecialised professional produced by contemporary instrumentalised education. The correspondence is not metaphorical but ontological: the human being trained exclusively for functional performance, without tools for moral judgment or reflective self-awareness, satisfies the definition of agent point by point. We distinguish two educational models: person-formation (Model A), which cultivates the capacities identified in the axioms, and agent-production (Model B), which systematically atrophies them. Building on companion articles that establish the non-delegability of moral judgment and the role of telos in determining whether AI deployment is humanising or dehumanising, we argue that education is where the telos is formed: the disposition to design technology from the person rather than from the system. The article's most consequential claim is recursive: only persons can choose to form persons; if a generation is educated without the tools of moral judgment, the choice itself becomes impossible — not because anyone prohibits it, but because no one remains capable of making it. This article is the third in a triptych on AI and personhood. The foundational manifesto is available at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18650485.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jesús Torrecilla Pinero (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: