“We cannot fight biology. While AI is having massive effects on thought processes, thinking, and pattern recognition, AI will never—or will take a very long time if ever—to replace the truly human aspects of our existence.” Sam Altman (paraphrased)
Watch Here
Sam Altman speaking at a Federal Reserve conference this week.
This is good news.
When Sam Altman—CEO of OpenAI and one of the most influential figures in artificial intelligence—tells Federal Reserve officials that AI companies “cannot fight biology,” he’s delivering a message of profound optimism about humanity’s irreplaceable role in our AI future.
This isn’t fear-mongering from a technology skeptic. This is insider knowledge from someone building the most advanced AI systems on Earth. And his conclusion? No matter how sophisticated AI becomes, there’s something fundamentally unique about human intelligence that will always be essential.
The secret lies in how our entire body thinks.
The Biological Advantage AI Cannot Replicate
While AI excels at processing information and recognizing patterns, human intelligence operates on a completely different level. We don’t just think with our heads—we integrate information from three distinct neural networks that create the rich complexity of human wisdom:
Your Heart’s Neural Network contains approximately 40,000 neurons that sense, feel, learn, and remember independently. Your heart actually sends more signals to your brain than it receives, directly shaping emotional processing, attention, and perception. When we talk about “heartfelt emotions,” we’re describing real neural activity that influences every decision we make.
Your Gut’s Neural Network—the enteric nervous system—houses about 500 million neurons, more than your spinal cord. This “second brain” operates independently, influencing mood, immune response, and decision-making through direct communication with your head-brain. Those “gut feelings” aren’t metaphors—they’re sophisticated information processing that helps guide your choices.
Your Head’s Neural Network integrates signals from these other centers while handling analysis, language, and conscious reasoning. This is the kind of processing AI does exceptionally well—but it’s only one part of human intelligence.
The Integration That Makes Us Irreplaceable
Here’s why Altman is optimistic about humanity’s future: we don’t use these systems in isolation. Human intelligence emerges from the dynamic conversation between heart, gut, and head—creating something far more sophisticated than any single system could achieve.
When you make important decisions, you’re not just running calculations. You start with emotional responses from your heart network, integrate intuitive processing from your gut network, and apply analytical thinking from your head network. The result is embodied wisdom—a way of knowing that’s rooted in your biological reality as a feeling, sensing being moving through the world.
This is what AI cannot replicate, no matter how advanced it becomes. An AI system might analyze data about love, loss, or moral dilemmas, but it cannot access the felt sense of a racing heart, a sinking stomach, or the weight of responsibility in making choices that matter.
Why Our Biology Is Our Strength
Our biological nature isn’t a limitation—it’s our competitive advantage. We experience hunger, fatigue, joy, and connection. We carry stress in our bodies and feel laughter in our bellies. We wake at night confronting our mortality, and we create meaning from our shared vulnerability.
These experiences aren’t bugs in the human system. They’re features that generate empathy, courage, creativity, and wisdom that emerges from lived experience.
When we comfort someone in grief, fall in love, create art that moves others, or make moral choices under pressure, we’re drawing from the deep well of our integrated biological intelligence. We’re not just processing information—we’re responding from the totality of our embodied existence.
The Optimistic Future Altman Sees
Altman’s message to the Federal Reserve wasn’t about humans becoming obsolete—it was about recognizing our unique and irreplaceable value. As AI handles more cognitive tasks, human worth doesn’t diminish. Instead, our distinctly biological intelligence becomes more precious.
The future belongs to humans who can integrate heart, gut, and head wisdom. Who can create meaning from embodied experience. Who can navigate complex relationships, make ethical choices under uncertainty, and generate insights that emerge from the beautiful complexity of biological consciousness.
We don’t need to compete with AI on computational tasks—that’s not where our strength lies. Our power comes from the integration of our three neural networks, informed by our mortality, and motivated by our capacity for genuine connection and understanding.
The Insider’s Perspective
When one of AI’s most influential leaders tells us that even the most advanced systems cannot replicate human biological intelligence, we should listen. This isn’t speculation—it’s a recognition from someone building the future that humans will always be essential to that future.
Our biological complexity, with its distributed neural networks and embodied wisdom, isn’t something to overcome. It’s something to celebrate and cultivate. In an age of artificial intelligence, our humanity isn’t our limitation—it’s our superpower.
The companies building AI know this. The question isn’t whether humans will remain relevant, but how we’ll embrace and develop the uniquely biological intelligence that makes us irreplaceable.
The next time you need to make an important decision, pay attention to all three centers. What does your heart tell you? What does your gut sense? What does your head know? The conversation between them is where your uniquely human—and irreplaceable—wisdom lives.
We’re living through what may be the fastest technological transformation in human history. Yet there’s a fundamental mismatch between the pace of AI development and our ability to adapt to it. This “human adaptation lag” could determine whether the AI revolution becomes a gradual evolution or a jarring disruption that catches entire societies off guard.
However, many experts believe this adaptation challenge, while daunting, may be manageable with the right approach. Economists, sociologists, and AI researchers are divided on whether human societies can successfully navigate this transition—some point to our historical resilience and adaptability, while others warn that this time truly is different. Those in the optimistic camp suggest that by focusing on building adaptive capacity rather than trying to predict the unpredictable, we can develop strategies that help individuals, organizations, and society navigate rapid change. The key may lie in cultivating meta-skills like learning agility, embracing hybrid human-AI collaboration, and creating flexible systems that can evolve with technological advancement. Rather than being passive victims of change, we might become active participants in shaping how AI integrates into our world.
How We Used to Adapt to Change
Throughout history, major technological shifts unfolded over decades, giving people and institutions time to gradually adjust. The industrial revolution took nearly a century. The internet transformation happened over about 30 years, from early networks in the 1970s to widespread adoption in the 2000s. Smartphones took roughly 15 years to reshape how we communicate and work.
This slower pace allowed for organic adaptation. Workers could retrain gradually. Educational systems could evolve their curricula. Governments could develop regulations through trial and error. Companies could experiment with new business models without facing immediate obsolescence.
Most importantly, individuals had time to learn the new rules. A factory worker displaced by automation might spend years retraining for a service job. A journalist could gradually learn digital skills as newspapers slowly moved online. The changes were significant, but they rarely required overnight transformation of entire skill sets.
The AI Acceleration
AI development has compressed this timeline dramatically. Capabilities that took months to develop just a few years ago now emerge in weeks. Models that seemed cutting-edge six months ago are quickly surpassed. We’re seeing tools that can write code, create art, analyze data, and even engage in complex reasoning—all improving at an exponential pace.
This creates what we might call “technological whiplash.” The rules of entire industries are changing faster than our ability to understand them, let alone master them. Skills that professionals spent years developing may become obsolete in months. Business models that seemed stable are suddenly under threat.
Our brains, education systems, and institutions evolved for a world where major changes happened over generations, not years. We’re experiencing a fundamental mismatch between the speed of technological change and the speed of human adaptation.
The Critical Timeline Question
Perhaps the most important unknown is the timeline for AI’s transition to a stable new equilibrium. Are we looking at 2-5 years or 20 years? This isn’t just an academic question—it fundamentally changes how we should prepare.
The 2-5 Year Scenario: If AI reaches its transformative potential within the next few years, we’re essentially already behind. There’s no time for gradual adaptation. Educational systems can’t be overhauled quickly enough. Workers can’t be retrained at scale. Governments can’t develop thoughtful regulations for rapidly evolving technology. This scenario demands emergency-level responses and accepts that significant disruption is unavoidable.
The 20-Year Scenario: A longer timeline allows for more measured responses. Educational curricula can evolve. Workers can gradually acquire new skills. Policymakers can experiment with different regulatory approaches. Companies can test hybrid models that combine human expertise with AI capabilities. Society can adapt more organically to the new technological landscape.
The uncertainty itself is paralyzing. It’s nearly impossible to make rational decisions about career planning, educational investment, or business strategy when the fundamental timeline is unknown. Do you retrain for a new career that might not exist in five years? Do you invest in skills that AI might soon replicate?
The Adaptation Challenge
This speed mismatch creates several specific challenges:
Career Planning Becomes Nearly Impossible: Traditional career advice assumes relatively stable job markets with predictable skill requirements. When entire professions might be transformed in a few years, how do you plan a 20-year career? The safe choice might be to develop skills that seem AI-resistant, but even those categories are shrinking and shifting rapidly.
Educational Systems Lag Behind: Universities and schools are teaching students for jobs that may not exist by the time they graduate. By the time curricula are updated, the landscape has shifted again. The students entering the workforce today need skills that may be completely different from what they’re learning.
Policy Makers Struggle with Moving Targets: Regulating AI is like trying to write rules for a game that’s still being invented. By the time legislation is drafted, debated, and passed, the technology has often evolved beyond what the regulations anticipated. This creates a regulatory lag that leaves society vulnerable during the transition.
Individual Learning Can’t Keep Pace: Even highly motivated individuals struggle to stay current with rapid technological change. The half-life of technical skills is shrinking. Professional development that once happened over years now needs to happen continuously, but humans have limited bandwidth for constant learning and adaptation.
The Stakes
This isn’t just about jobs or economic disruption. The human adaptation lag affects how quickly we can restructure fundamental aspects of society: how we work, learn, govern, and relate to each other. If the timeline is compressed, we may not have time to thoughtfully navigate these changes.
The risk isn’t just that some people will be left behind—it’s that our collective ability to adapt may be overwhelmed by the pace of change. We could end up with a society where technology advances faster than our wisdom about how to use it responsibly.
What This Means for All of Us
The human adaptation lag suggests we need to think differently about preparation and response. Rather than trying to predict specific outcomes, we might need to focus on building adaptive capacity: the ability to learn quickly, think flexibly, and navigate uncertainty.
This means investing in meta-skills that help us learn and adapt, rather than just specific technical abilities. It means creating institutions that can evolve rapidly rather than just respond to predetermined scenarios. Most importantly, it means acknowledging that the speed of change itself is now one of our biggest challenges.
The AI revolution isn’t just about what artificial intelligence can do—it’s about whether human intelligence can adapt fast enough to keep pace with it. The next few years will likely determine whether we successfully navigate this transition or find ourselves struggling to catch up with a world that has moved beyond our ability to understand it.
Building Adaptive Capacity: A Path Forward
While the human adaptation lag presents significant challenges, recognizing it also points toward actionable strategies. Rather than trying to predict exactly what skills will be needed in an uncertain future, we can focus on building our capacity to adapt quickly and effectively.
For Individuals
Develop Meta-Learning Skills: Focus on learning how to learn efficiently. This includes critical thinking, pattern recognition, and the ability to quickly synthesize information from multiple sources. These skills remain valuable regardless of technological changes.
Build Hybrid Competencies: Combine technical familiarity with uniquely human strengths. Understanding how AI tools work while maintaining skills in creativity, emotional intelligence, complex problem-solving, and ethical reasoning creates a powerful combination.
Cultivate Adaptability: Practice working with new tools and technologies regularly. The goal isn’t to master every new platform, but to become comfortable with the process of quickly understanding and adapting to new systems.
Stay Connected to Networks: Maintain relationships with people across different industries and disciplines. These connections provide early signals about changes and opportunities that might not be visible from within a single field.
Embrace Continuous Learning: Shift from thinking about education as something that happens early in life to viewing it as an ongoing process. This might mean setting aside time each week for learning new skills or exploring emerging trends.
For Organizations
Design for Flexibility: Create systems and processes that can evolve quickly rather than optimizing for current conditions. This includes flatter organizational structures, cross-functional teams, and decision-making processes that can adapt to new information.
Invest in Human Development: Prioritize employee learning and development programs that focus on adaptability rather than just current job requirements. This creates a workforce that can grow with technological change.
Experiment Thoughtfully: Rather than waiting for perfect information, run small experiments to test how new technologies might fit into existing workflows. This allows for learning and adaptation without betting the entire organization on unproven approaches.
For Society
Reform Educational Systems: Push for educational approaches that emphasize critical thinking, creativity, and adaptability over rote memorization. This might include more project-based learning, interdisciplinary studies, and regular curriculum updates.
Support Transition Assistance: Advocate for policies that help workers transition between industries and roles, including retraining programs, portable benefits, and social safety nets that provide stability during periods of change.
Encourage Public Dialogue: Foster conversations about how we want to integrate AI into society, rather than just accepting whatever emerges from technological development. This includes discussions about ethics, governance, and the kind of future we want to create.
Reasons for Optimism
Despite the challenges, there are reasons to be hopeful about navigating the human adaptation lag:
Humans Are Remarkably Adaptable: Throughout history, we’ve successfully adapted to massive changes, from agricultural revolutions to industrial transformations. Our capacity for learning and growth is one of our greatest strengths.
AI Can Accelerate Learning: The same technology creating the adaptation challenge can also help us meet it. AI tutors, personalized learning systems, and intelligent training programs can help us learn more efficiently than ever before.
Hybrid Models Are Emerging: Rather than complete replacement, we’re seeing the development of human-AI collaboration models that amplify human capabilities rather than simply substituting for them.
Increased Awareness: The fact that we’re having these conversations now, rather than being caught completely off guard, suggests that society is becoming more conscious of the need to manage technological transitions thoughtfully.
The human adaptation lag is real, but it’s not insurmountable. By focusing on building adaptive capacity rather than trying to predict the unpredictable, we can position ourselves to thrive in an uncertain future. The key is to start now, remain flexible, and remember that our greatest asset in navigating change is our uniquely human ability to learn, connect, and create meaning from new experiences.
Understanding the human adaptation lag doesn’t solve the problem, but it does help us recognize what we’re really up against and, more importantly, what we can do about it. The future may be uncertain, but our response to it doesn’t have to be.
When disagreements arise, we have a powerful new tool to help us seek truth together
I had a profound realization yesterday that shifted how I think about human conversation in the age of AI. It happened during a discussion where two people—myself and a good friend—found ourselves on opposite sides of a complex issue. In the past, this scenario would have played out predictably: we’d either rely on whoever claimed to have the most expertise, or we’d agree to “look it up later” and move on with the disagreement unresolved.
But something different happened this time. After our conversation ended without resolution, I turned to GPT for deeper exploration. Within minutes, I had access to comprehensive information that would have taken hours to research traditionally. More importantly, I had the kind of nuanced, multi-perspective analysis that neither of us could have provided alone.
This experience sparked what I’m calling “AI in the Loop”—using artificial intelligence not to replace human conversation, but to enhance it in real-time.
The Old Model of Disagreement
Think about how we’ve traditionally handled disagreements about factual matters. When two people have different understandings of a situation, we typically fall back on one of these approaches:
The Authority Model: We defer to whoever seems most knowledgeable or confident, even if their expertise might be limited or biased.
The Research Promise: We agree to “look it up later” and research independently, often never actually following through or sharing what we find.
The Stalemate: We agree to disagree, leaving important questions unresolved and potentially missing opportunities for learning and growth.
Each of these approaches has significant limitations. The authority model can reinforce existing biases and shut down productive inquiry. The research promise often leads to no resolution at all. The stalemate prevents the kind of collaborative truth-seeking that deepens understanding and relationships.
The AI in the Loop Alternative
What if, instead of these limiting patterns, we invited AI to join our conversation as a research partner? Not as the final authority, but as a tool for rapidly accessing diverse perspectives and comprehensive information?
Here’s how it might work:
During the Conversation: When we encounter a factual disagreement or need deeper information, we pause and engage AI together. “Let’s ask GPT to help us understand this better.”
Collaborative Inquiry: Both parties participate in questioning the AI, ensuring we’re exploring multiple angles and challenging potential biases in the responses.
Critical Thinking Applied: We use our human judgment to evaluate the AI’s responses, identifying gaps, biases, or areas that need further exploration.
Shared Resolution: We reach conclusions together, informed by comprehensive research but grounded in our collective critical thinking.
Why This Matters Now
This approach addresses a crucial challenge of our information age: the gap between the speed of conversation and the depth of research required for informed discussion. In the past, thorough research took time that most conversations couldn’t accommodate. Now, we can access comprehensive information within minutes—if we know how to use it effectively.
The key is maintaining our role as critical thinkers while leveraging AI’s research capabilities. In my experience yesterday, I had to push back against the AI’s initial responses, which showed clear bias. Through careful questioning and critical evaluation, I was able to get more accurate, nuanced information. This process required human judgment and expertise—AI provided the breadth, I provided the depth of analysis.
The Benefits of AI in the Loop
Enhanced Understanding: Access to multiple perspectives and comprehensive information in real-time.
Reduced Bias: When used thoughtfully, AI can help us move beyond our individual knowledge limitations and preconceptions.
Collaborative Learning: The process of questioning AI together can deepen relationships and shared understanding.
Practical Resolution: Conversations can move from opinion-based disagreement to evidence-informed discussion.
Skill Development: Regular practice with AI in the loop helps develop better critical thinking and information evaluation skills.
The Critical Thinking Requirement
This approach only works if we maintain our critical thinking skills. AI responses can contain biases, inaccuracies, or oversimplifications. The human role remains essential:
Asking follow-up questions that reveal bias or gaps
Challenging assumptions in AI responses
Seeking multiple perspectives on complex issues
Evaluating sources and reasoning
Applying context and nuance that AI might miss
Practical Implementation
To make AI in the loop work effectively:
Set Clear Intentions: Establish that you’re seeking truth together, not trying to “win” the argument.
Share the Process: Both parties should participate in questioning the AI and evaluating responses.
Maintain Skepticism: Treat AI responses as starting points for investigation, not final answers.
Practice Critical Evaluation: Develop skills in identifying bias, gaps, and limitations in AI responses.
Focus on Learning: Approach the conversation as collaborative inquiry rather than debate.
The Broader Implications
AI in the loop represents a new model for human-AI collaboration that goes beyond simple automation. Instead of replacing human conversation, it enhances our capacity for informed discussion and collaborative truth-seeking.
This approach could transform how we handle disagreements in families, workplaces, and communities. Rather than relying on authority, avoiding difficult topics, or getting stuck in unproductive debates, we could engage in deeper, more informed conversations that actually resolve important questions.
As we navigate an era of rapid change and complex challenges, our ability to have productive conversations about difficult topics becomes increasingly important. AI in the loop offers a practical tool for upgrading the quality of human discourse—but only if we’re willing to engage our critical thinking skills and approach these conversations with genuine curiosity and openness to learning.
The future of human-AI collaboration isn’t about choosing between human wisdom and artificial intelligence. It’s about finding ways to combine our unique strengths to tackle challenges neither could handle alone. AI in the loop is just the beginning of what this partnership might look like in practice.
What conversations in your life could benefit from AI in the loop? The key is starting with curiosity rather than certainty, and maintaining our commitment to critical thinking even as we leverage AI’s research capabilities.
