AI and Bullshit

Abstract A common charge levelled at the current wave of generative AI is that the informational outputs that it produces are bullshit. Drawing on the philosophical literature on bullshit, an examination is offered of the analogies and disanalogies between AI and bullshit. It is argued that there is a fundamental disanalogy between AI and bullshitting which ensures that, strictly speaking, AI’s informational outputs are not bullshit. Nonetheless, it is also argued that there are significant parallels between the nature and source of the epistemic deficiencies of both AI and bullshitting. In particular, it is argued that both AI and bullshitters are untrustworthy informants, and for similar reasons. We are thus in a position to explain why it is natural to describe AI’s informational outputs as bullshit, as it signals their distinctive kind of epistemic deficiencies, which they share with bullshit.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Human Affairs
Published
2026-08-21
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1515/humaff-2026-0061
Primary Topic
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

AI and Bullshit

Duncan Pritchard
Human Affairs
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
article

AI and Bullshit

Duncan Pritchard
article en

Abstract

Abstract A common charge levelled at the current wave of generative AI is that the informational outputs that it produces are bullshit. Drawing on the philosophical literature on bullshit, an examination is offered of the analogies and disanalogies between AI and bullshit. It is argued that there is a fundamental disanalogy between AI and bullshitting which ensures that, strictly speaking, AI’s informational outputs are not bullshit. Nonetheless, it is also argued that there are significant parallels between the nature and source of the epistemic deficiencies of both AI and bullshitting. In particular, it is argued that both AI and bullshitters are untrustworthy informants, and for similar reasons. We are thus in a position to explain why it is natural to describe AI’s informational outputs as bullshit, as it signals their distinctive kind of epistemic deficiencies, which they share with bullshit.

Human Affairs
University of California, Irvine (US)
John Templeton Foundation
Openalex Percentile: Top 7%
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.