Close

AI’s Humility Problem (fPET 2026)

Citation

2026. Graeff, E. “AI’s Humility Problem: Threats to the Practice of Design.” Presented at the 2026 Forum on Philosophy, Engineering, and Technology (fPET 2026), University of Maryland, College Park, MD, Jun 11.

Presentation Slides

Abstract

This paper will examine the relationship between artificial intelligence and humility, arguing that humility—especially epistemic humility—is a crucial civic virtue that contemporary AI systems place at risk. Generative AI technologies allow us to use knowledge that is beyond us without helping us appreciate the boundaries of our understanding. While AI could help reveal our limitations in ways that augment humility, more common uses threaten to erode humility, the social practices that sustain it, and our civil society that relies on it.

I am approaching this concern through exploratory engagement with multidisciplinary scholarship on humility, ethics, computing, and AI, alongside reflection on my formative experiences in computing and my current work in engineering education. Drawing on my graduate education within the innovation culture of the MIT Media Lab, I will consider, from this situated vantage point, how many computing environments have rewarded anti-humble performances of speed, certainty, and mastery. Generative AI intensifies these tendencies by giving users the illusion that they need not be limited by their own experiences and education—that one can access collective knowledge on demand, even though this is far from the totality of human knowledge. I will use these experiences to ask how everyday encounters with AI may reshape dispositions toward doubt, listening, and deference to others.

A guiding premise is that humility is not merely a private moral trait but a foundation for democratic and collaborative life via openness to plural forms of knowledge and deliberative capacity. Humility ensures that we value the creation of new knowledge, that we are awed when others do things we cannot or did not think to do, and that we embrace curiosity and deep listening. Awareness of our limitations enables us to be more open and tolerant, to collaborate with people from different backgrounds, and to become well-rounded humans. If generative AI obscures our lack of knowledge and ability, I fear we will diminish a key part of our humanity and civic capacity.

I am exploring these questions through a review of literature on intellectual humility, AI and engineering ethics, engineering and computer science education, and critical approaches to human-computer interaction, with strong influence from Shannon Vallor’s account of “technomoral humility” and her arguments in The AI Mirror. Rather than claiming a settled literature, the paper will map concerns about how AI mediates experiences of competence and ignorance. It will also consider the responsibility of developers and educators to account for what happens when humility is undermined and these effects operate at scale.

Ultimately, I contend that AI strengthens the need to cultivate technomoral humility. Particular attention will be given to implications for undergraduate engineering and computer science programs. We need engineers and technologists who see humility as a virtue in their work. The paper will argue for an AI ethics more centrally concerned with humility and for pedagogical directions that normalize admitting uncertainty, foreground the social origins of knowledge, reward engagement with unfamiliar perspectives, and connect humility to civic-mindedness and democracy.

What Can a Body Do? book review

What Can a Body Do?: How We Meet the Built WorldWhat Can a Body Do?: How We Meet the Built World by Sara Hendren
My rating: 5 of 5 stars

Disclosure: The author is a friend and a colleague. I have known her and her work for 10+ years. As part of the Awesome Foundation in Boston I helped select her Accessible Icon Project to receive a $1000 grant to print and distribute its graffiti stickers.

Though I know the author personally and have been excited for her fully realized thesis on disability and design, I am confident in saying this book deserves 5 stars for the last chapter alone. Hendren’s reflection on how she came to appreciate “crip time” as the parent of a son with Down syndrome is profoundly moving and insightful. The chapter is anchored by her honest retelling of the difficulty of shifting her mindset and moving past the dehumanizing and stigmatizing industrial age narratives of productivity, efficiency, and ordinality of people, by which medical professionals and many in society view her son. By connecting with a wider community of people with disabilities and those who love and respect them, she slowly refines a lens on the world that offers a better narrative, a society in which we choose humanity, dignity, and interdependency—a world we could build together.

The introduction to What Can a Body Do? sets the themes for the book—forcing us to rethink our conceptions of disability and people with disabilities and consider the innovative energy they have always brought to the world and how our world has been made better by it. When we understand that all technology is actually assistive technology and all bodies are different, we free ourselves from many limiting beliefs about what design is and should do. We also appreciate the beauty possible in all expressions of life and that we are all deserving of spaces and things that allow us to express ourselves.

I related to this book even though I am someone dripping with privilege and ability. White, male, cisgender, cissexual, able-bodied, and able-minded, I have few attributes that would be described as disability. My tallness is usually understood as a particularly desirable trait. But that does not mean that technology and the built world are necessarily friendly to me. This book gave me some language and perspective to make sense of my own experience. My body is not average. Fixed seats on buses and airplanes can be painfully uncomfortable to me. In fact, I am asked to pay more to find a seat that fits me on a flight. When bodies defy the narrow boundaries of “normal,” outliers like me can sometimes seek (or pay for) “accommodation” or they might be left out.

Mass production, just like the mass housing of people with disabilities to provide specialized medical care, is a modern phenomenon. We used to tailor clothing, furniture, spaces, and understood the members of our family with disabilities as family members, different like everyone was different. It took (and continues to take) disability-rights activists to shame us as a society into seeing the dehumanizing and disempowering ways we had built the world, assuming those with bodies and minds outside of the statistical average were not really a part of our world. In the process, these activists have given us curb cuts for parents with strollers and older people. They gave us spaces and mobility options reserved for people with disabilities, so that they can easily access public and private places through close parking spaces, ramps, and elevators. We all benefit from these features.

Through chapters challenging our preconceived notions about limbs, chairs, rooms, streets, and clocks, Sara Hendren provides a tour through the built world and we meet people who have met the challenges posed by a world not designed for them through invention, grace, and prophetic visions of what we could be and do together. I strongly recommend this book to my colleagues in the design and engineering fields but also to many interested in civics and democracy. The questions the author poses are about what we should value, how we should see ourselves in the world, how we should relate to one another, and how we define diversity, inclusion, and community.

View all my reviews

Toward Equitable Participatory Design: Data Feminism for CSCW amidst Multiple Pandemics

Catherine D’Ignazio, Erhardt Graeff, Christina N. Harrington, and Daniela K. Rosner. 2020. Toward Equitable Participatory Design: Data Feminism for CSCW amidst Multiple Pandemics. In Conference Companion Publication of the 2020 on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing (CSCW ’20 Companion). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 437–445. https://doi.org/10.1145/3406865.3418588

Link

https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3406865.3418588

Abstract

CSCW, like many other academic communities, is reckoning with its roles, responsibilities, and practices amidst 2020’s multiple pandemics of COVID-19, anti-Black racism, and a global economic crisis. Reviewing our work with data and communities demands we address harms from overexposure caused by surveillance or algorithmic bias and from underexposure caused by design that is insufficiently participatory and equitable. This workshop will elicit narratives of good and bad design and data work with communities, apply the lenses of equitable participatory design and data feminism to current CSCW projects and our global context, and develop practical outputs for supporting academics and practitioners in pursuit of democratic and just partnerships.

The Responsibility to Not Design and the Need for Citizen Professionalism

Citation

Graeff, E. 2020. The Responsibility to Not Design and the Need for Citizen Professionalism. Computing Professionals for Social Responsibility: The Past, Present and Future Values of Participatory Design. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.21428/93b2c832.c8387014

Link

https://doi.org/10.21428/93b2c832.c8387014

Abstract

I advise two programs at Olin College of Engineering that invite undergraduate students to conduct community-engaged design work. In the fall of 2019, project teams in both of those programs decided not to design systems requested by their outside collaborators based on ethical concerns about the harm they might cause. This paper briefly describes how those decisions came to be, the need to educate for and celebrate design refusal, and how this exemplifies the need to develop the next generation of designers and technologists to be citizen professionals.