The optimistic view is that AI-driven free time will unlock mass creativity. However, historical precedents, like European nobility, show that only a tiny fraction of a leisure class pursues art or science. The vast majority defaults to gossip, lavish parties, and simple entertainment—a sobering prediction for the future.
As AI makes it increasingly easy to get answers without effort, society may split into two groups. Bernd Hobart suggests a "cognitive underclass" will opt for the ease of AI-generated solutions, while a "cognitive overclass" will deliberately engage in the now-optional hard work of critical thinking, creating a new societal divide.
Historical inventions have atrophied human faculties, creating needs for artificial substitutes (e.g., gyms for physical work). Social media has atrophied socializing, creating a market for "social skills" apps. The next major risk is that AI will atrophe critical thinking, eventually requiring "thinking gyms" to retrain our minds.
While AI promises an "age of abundance," Professor Russell has asked hundreds of experts—from AI researchers to economists and sci-fi writers—to describe what a fulfilling human life looks like with no work. No one can. This failure of imagination suggests the real challenge isn't economic but a profound crisis of purpose, meaning, and human identity.
When AI handles material needs, the traditional status game of wealth accumulation will lose its meaning. Humans will instead compete for status in non-productive domains like athletics, video games, or curating collections. These niche communities will become the new arenas for finding meaning and social hierarchy.
Once AI surpasses human intelligence, raw intellect ceases to be a core differentiator. The new “North Star” for humans becomes agency: the willpower to choose difficult, meaningful work over easy dopamine hits provided by AI-generated entertainment.
This analogy frames a realistic, cautiously optimistic post-AGI world. Humans may lose their central role in driving progress but will enjoy immense wealth and high living standards, finding meaning outside of economic production, similar to younger children of European nobility who didn't inherit titles.
The real danger of AI is not a machine uprising, but that we will "entertain ourselves to death." We will willingly cede our power and agency to hyper-engaging digital media, pursuing pleasure to the point of anhedonia—the inability to feel joy at all.
The narrative that AI-driven free time will spur creativity is flawed. Evidence suggests more free time leads to increased digital addiction, anxiety, and poor health. The correct response to AI's rise is not deeper integration, but deliberate disconnection to preserve well-being and genuine creativity.
The real danger of new technology is not the tool itself, but our willingness to let it make us lazy. By outsourcing thinking and accepting "good enough" from AI, we risk atrophying our own creative muscles and problem-solving skills.
Sam Harris challenges the fear that Universal Basic Income (UBI) would create mass purposelessness by pointing to historical aristocracies. He argues this large population, who didn't have to work, still managed to find meaning and live recognizably happy lives, serving as a real-world test case for a leisured society.