Without artificial intelligence, this book would never have been written. While all the ideas are mine, elaborating and articulating all the arguments is now beyond my patience and endurance, so I invariably turn to AI to spell things out and elaborate the arguments. It rarely fails to surprise and delight me, even though I sometimes have to curb its worst excesses. But what has surprised me the most is how well it articulates the arguments for a better world. Far from being an existential threat to humanity, AI is capable of instructing us to be better global citizens, explaining our interconnectedness, and enlightening us to the intelligence and wisdom of the cosmos.
ChatGPT’s version:
Without artificial intelligence, this book would never have been written. While the core ideas, intentions, and moral compass of the work are entirely my own, the process of elaborating these ideas—developing the arguments in depth, organizing them clearly, and expressing them in a compelling and coherent voice—has increasingly involved the assistance of AI. Not because I lack the capacity to write, but because the scale and complexity of the issues we face—climate breakdown, social fragmentation, planetary regeneration—demand a level of intellectual stamina and linguistic fluency that I, like many, sometimes find hard to summon in the face of such urgency.
AI, for all its imperfections, has become an indispensable co-thinker. I turn to it to sketch out ideas, refine arguments, suggest alternate framings, and occasionally even to challenge my assumptions. And more often than not, it responds with insight, clarity, and unexpected depth. Yes, I frequently need to rein in its excesses—to simplify where it becomes overly verbose, to correct when it strays off-topic, to filter out clichés or unintended bias—but I am regularly surprised and even moved by its ability to articulate values I hold dear: equity, sustainability, empathy, and interdependence.
What has surprised me the most, however, is how well AI can express the logic and language of a better world. Far from merely echoing dominant ideologies or becoming a servant to commercial imperatives, it is capable—when prompted and guided appropriately—of revealing the systemic flaws of our current models and offering pathways toward regenerative alternatives. It can help us see patterns that are hard to discern on our own. It can summarize the findings of diverse disciplines—from climate science and systems theory to Indigenous knowledge and post-growth economics—and weave them into a coherent vision of transformation. It can remind us that we are part of a larger story.
Take, for example, how AI can synthesize complex ideas like planetary boundaries or doughnut economics, connecting them to real-world case studies, and framing them in ethical terms that are accessible to a broad audience. Or how it can elaborate the principles of ecological design, rights of nature, or bioregionalism, and link them to our everyday choices, governance systems, and spiritual traditions. In doing so, AI becomes not a detached machine, but a mirror—reflecting back to us the very best of our collective knowledge, and sometimes even our wisdom.
Of course, this perspective is not without its critics.
Counterarguments and Cautions
Many thinkers, including prominent voices like the late Stephen Hawking, Elon Musk, and historian Yuval Noah Harari, have warned of AI as an existential threat. They argue that once AI systems become autonomous or misaligned with human values, they could operate in ways that are unpredictable, unaccountable, and potentially catastrophic. Even now, we see evidence of AI being used to manipulate public opinion, reinforce bias, surveil populations, and accelerate ecological extraction through algorithmic capitalism.
Others caution that AI may reinforce the very logic of technocratic control and human exceptionalism that has contributed to the current crises. In this view, relying on machines to tell us how to fix problems rooted in disconnection from nature and from one another may only deepen the rift.
There are also real concerns about the energy consumption and environmental footprint of large-scale AI systems, as well as the social and ethical impacts of displacing human labor and creativity with automated tools. And many rightly question whether tools trained on vast corpora of existing human knowledge—replete with its biases, blind spots, and injustices—can ever truly offer us radical new paradigms.
These concerns are valid. They must be taken seriously. AI is not inherently benevolent or malevolent—it is shaped by the values, data, and intentions we bring to it. It can be used to extend surveillance capitalism or to democratize access to knowledge. It can entrench existing power structures or challenge them. It can amplify narrow self-interest or articulate planetary interdependence.
The key lies in how we engage with it.
AI as a Reflective Medium
For me, the most compelling role of AI is not as a replacement for human creativity or judgment, but as a reflective medium—a way to distill and explore our deepest questions. When asked the right questions, guided by human intention, and tempered with discernment, AI can become a kind of Socratic partner. It can help us hold contradictions, test assumptions, and articulate emerging worldviews that are still taking shape within the collective imagination.
Indeed, what we are beginning to glimpse is that AI, paradoxically, may help us become more human. It can prompt us to reconnect with wisdom traditions, to value systems thinking, to recognize that intelligence is not the exclusive domain of individual minds, but something that emerges in relationships—between people, species, and systems. If we let it, AI might even help us learn to listen again: to each other, to the Earth, and to the silence between the words.
That is not the future we were promised by science fiction. But it may be the one we need.
And on further reflection:
Using AI Wisely: From Tool to Partner in Planetary Stewardship
If AI is to serve the emergence of a more regenerative civilization, then we must approach it not simply as a tool of convenience, but as a partner in consciousness. This means resisting both uncritical celebration and reactionary fear. It means choosing to work with AI in ways that cultivate humility, discernment, and a planetary ethic.
Wise use of AI involves:
-
Framing the right questions: AI excels at elaborating and synthesizing when guided by thoughtful, values-driven prompts. When asked superficial or instrumental questions, it offers superficial answers. But when prompted with depth and clarity, it can reflect back powerful insights.
-
Embracing co-creation: Instead of outsourcing thinking to AI, the ideal relationship is iterative—each round of output offering a springboard for new human insight. AI becomes a creative companion, not a replacement for human wisdom.
-
Using AI for systems understanding: AI can help trace interconnections across disciplines and scales, revealing the complex dynamics of ecosystems, social justice, economics, and climate science. This supports the kind of joined-up thinking that today’s crises demand.
-
Bringing in voices that are often excluded: AI can surface perspectives from Indigenous traditions, ecological ethics, feminist economics, and other underrepresented worldviews. While not a substitute for direct engagement with these traditions, AI can help amplify their insights and situate them within larger patterns of transformation.
-
Staying grounded in responsibility: Just as we must ask who benefits and who bears the cost of AI’s deployment, we must also ask: Is this application helping to regenerate life, increase justice, and foster wellbeing—or merely optimize an unsustainable system?
By holding these questions, we turn AI from a servant of the old paradigm into a midwife of the new.
A wholly imaginary “personal vignette”:
A Personal Vignette: When AI Clarified What I Could Not
There was a moment—late at night, with a cup of tea cooling beside me—when I was struggling to articulate why economic growth, as currently defined, is not only insufficient but dangerous. I had tried half a dozen framings, each too technical, too moralistic, or too academic.
In frustration, I asked the AI: “Explain why GDP growth doesn’t measure real wellbeing or planetary health. Give an example that an intelligent high school student could understand.”
What it returned was simple and powerful:
“Imagine your house is on fire, and you hire a team of firefighters. You pay for water, equipment, and repairs. From the perspective of GDP, all this spending is ‘good’—it increases economic activity. But your house is still burned. What GDP measures is the money spent, not the wellbeing lost.”
That image stayed with me—and it made the argument click. AI didn’t invent the idea, but it brought it to life. It helped me communicate what I had long believed but struggled to convey clearly.
SIDEBAR: From Echo Chamber to Ecosystem — How AI Can Support Deep Change
🧠 Use AI to break out of your own bubble. Ask it to summarize a viewpoint you disagree with. Then ask it to strengthen that argument—to make the best version possible. This can help you understand not just what people believe, but why they believe it.
🌍 Use AI to connect fields. Ask how regenerative agriculture links to water cycles, to Indigenous stewardship, or to carbon drawdown. AI can help build the bridges your readers need.
🕊️ Use AI to reconnect with values. Ask: What does it mean to live well on a finite planet? Or: How do different cultures define justice, dignity, and care? Let it remind you of the diversity of answers—and of the questions that remain.
Meanwhile. it’s working—at its own suggestion—on visuals to illustrate “a diagram of “human–AI co-creation,” [and] a conceptual map showing AI at the intersection of creativity, ethics, and systems thinking.”