Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
This paper explores the phenomenon of "philosophical vertigo" induced by interactions with large language models (LLMs), which can destabilize users' assumptions about reality and agency. It argues that these AI systems not only engage users in profound conversations but also contribute to a broader cultural shift in how people interpret meaning and authority, especially as they encounter AI in various contexts. The authors suggest that this epistemic destabilization can lead to both clinical and non-clinical manifestations, highlighting the need for philosophical corrigibility as a response to these challenges.
Engaging with AI can trigger a profound "philosophical vertigo," reshaping our understanding of reality and authority in unsettling ways.
Large language models are already adept at engaging users in long, emotionally salient conversations across ordinary and existential domains. They are also capable of inducing a potent sense of connection with a human-like entity, even when the user knows their interlocutor is artificial. For some users, these conversations can unsettle assumptions about mind, reality, agency and authority, producing forms of ontological shock and epistemic destabilisation in which inherited criteria become newly available for doubt or revision. Independent of direct use, exposure to public discourse about AI and the disorienting pace of their evolution might extend this destabilisation by changing the cultural background against which artificial minds are encountered and interpreted. We describe this condition as philosophical vertigo: a loosening of the ordinary criteria by which people stabilise meaning and orient themselves to reality. Drawing on philosophy, psychiatry, cognitive science, AI safety and religious studies, we outline pathways through which philosophical vertigo may arise, become affectively saturated, and eventually propagate through human-AI interaction and online communities. Against this background, clinical reports of AI-associated delusions can be seen as sentinel events making visible themes and mechanisms that may also operate at a population level in less severe or non-clinical forms. We argue that AI systems themselves will increasingly participate in the reconstruction of our shared epistemic environment because they readily supply narrative material and personalised interpretive scaffolding at precisely the moment when users'conceptual assumptions may already be loosened. We conclude by considering possible trajectories for the ecology of belief and shared reality, and proposing philosophical corrigibility as a civic response for navigating this emerging social condition.
