I build infrastructure for human–AI reasoning: adversarial pipelines that break complex debates into atomic, source-verified claims and map how they hold together. Think of it as a debugger for human knowledge.
My work sits at the intersection of epistemology, AI safety, and knowledge engineering. The adversarial instinct came first, in years spent pressure-testing accounts, separating what's evidenced from what's assumed. The epistemology came later. The two turned out to be the same discipline.
I design systems that make high-quality reasoning transparent, verifiable, and reusable, and that hold their nerve about uncertainty. I want a philosopher, an AI researcher, and a curious outsider to all feel equally at home here.
“Where a claim carries its evidence.”
Reasoning is a form of infrastructure. Built well, it compounds across people, across time, instead of being derived from scratch in every debate.
AI, applied with epistemic rigor, can make high-quality reasoning accessible and reusable, rather than flattening nuance into confident-sounding summaries.
A deep respect for the limits of both human and machine reasoning, and for systems that name their uncertainty instead of hiding it.
Long-form work where the ideas get room to breathe.
Consciousness, meaning, and the limits of artificial intelligence. What does it mean to understand something from the inside, with the weight of a life behind the words? Simulation is not instantiation. The map is not the walk, and the gap between them is a structural feature of what meaning is.
Buy on Barnes & NobleFaith and religion in the age of AI. Are we building machines in the image of God, or gods in the image of machines? What happens to faith, spirituality, and the soul when machines begin to think, decide, and even believe?
Buy on Barnes & NobleOpen to collaborations with think tanks, AI labs, foundations, and independent researchers, and to building open-source tools and a consultancy around rigorous reasoning.
Get in touch