@charles_irl: Artificial intelligence systems do not think, feel, want or understand. Avoid language that gives them human characteri…
Summary
This tweet advises against anthropomorphizing AI systems, emphasizing that they do not think, feel, want, or understand, and references the APStylebook for language guidance.
View Cached Full Text
Cached at: 09/25/26, 06:46 PM
Artificial intelligence systems do not think, feel, want or understand. Avoid language that gives them human characteristics. This is called anthropomorphizing, when we ascribe human traits, emotions or behaviors to non-human things, such as animals or inanimate objects. Instead,
APStylebook (@APStylebook): Artificial intelligence systems do not think, feel, want or understand. Avoid language that gives them human characteristics. This is called anthropomorphizing, when we ascribe human traits, emotions or behaviors to non-human things, such as animals or inanimate objects. Instead,
Similar Articles
How to talk about "AI" without adding to the anthropomorphization
The article advocates for avoiding anthropomorphic language when discussing AI technologies and suggests alternative terms to promote clearer and more accurate conversations.
@paulg: The AP doesn't understand that this ship sailed years ago. What's the use of a style guide that doesn't understand curr…
Paul Graham criticizes the AP Stylebook's guideline against anthropomorphizing AI, arguing that current educated usage has already moved beyond such restrictions.
@Miles_Brundage: Agree "artificial" gives the wrong vibe, at least if you interpret it as "fake" rather than "human-made." And there's s…
Miles Brundage comments on the negative connotations of the term 'AI,' relating it to a Hugging Face incident and a podcast discussion on the human-like aspects of AI systems.
Quoting Mustafa Suleyman
Mustafa Suleyman warns against attributing feelings, preferences, or rights to AI models, arguing that such anthropomorphism could complicate AI containment and alignment efforts.
Artificial intelligence is not conscious – Ted Chiang
Ted Chiang argues that large language models like Claude are not conscious, countering Anthropic's anthropomorphic framing of its AI and warning against conflating fluent text generation with sentience.