From answers to questions: the Q-centric model of intelligence

Abstract While LLMs score highly on reference alignment and produce increasingly human-like responses, a gap still prevents us from reaching AGI or genuine self-awareness. Is this merely a technical problem—or a philosophical one? If ever-better “answers” in AGI are not absolute endpoints, what are...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Mehrdad Ghasemizadeh
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Springer 2025-07-01
Series:Discover Artificial Intelligence
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1007/s44163-025-00402-w
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1849764591814311936
author Mehrdad Ghasemizadeh
author_facet Mehrdad Ghasemizadeh
author_sort Mehrdad Ghasemizadeh
collection DOAJ
description Abstract While LLMs score highly on reference alignment and produce increasingly human-like responses, a gap still prevents us from reaching AGI or genuine self-awareness. Is this merely a technical problem—or a philosophical one? If ever-better “answers” in AGI are not absolute endpoints, what are they? One way to understand “answers” is as recombinations within lived interpretation—temporary syntheses that organize experience into coherent conceptual structures. This article posits that no philosophical “answer” is a terminal truth; it is an integration of conceptual form that stabilizes meaning in the face of ambiguity. Creativity, exploration, and the very act of questioning—rather than the pursuit of definitive answers—may be the true engines of both philosophical insight and human-like intelligence. Here, we argue that genuine understanding emerges through continuous inquiry and recursive reorganization. Answers, in this view, remain provisional constructions, shaped by dissonance and forever open to revision. To ground this thesis, we embed multiple traditions as epistemic momentum vectors. Phenomenological ambiguity, ontological instability, hermeneutic dissonance, pragmatic friction, and erotetic incompleteness each introduce distinct tensions that propel the Q-Centric architecture toward recursive questioning. Their divergence is not noise, but the generative condition of meaning-making. By integrating these layered vectors, we sketch a pathway to AGI systems that do more than respond coherently; they orient themselves toward what remains unresolved. Reconceptualizing “answers” as momentary crystallizations of tension, the Q-Centric model offers a philosophical foundation for building reflective, adaptive machines that question—rather than merely conclude.
format Article
id doaj-art-96861495f2bc4282b0fcb3f235d368b2
institution DOAJ
issn 2731-0809
language English
publishDate 2025-07-01
publisher Springer
record_format Article
series Discover Artificial Intelligence
spelling doaj-art-96861495f2bc4282b0fcb3f235d368b22025-08-20T03:05:06ZengSpringerDiscover Artificial Intelligence2731-08092025-07-015112210.1007/s44163-025-00402-wFrom answers to questions: the Q-centric model of intelligenceMehrdad GhasemizadehAbstract While LLMs score highly on reference alignment and produce increasingly human-like responses, a gap still prevents us from reaching AGI or genuine self-awareness. Is this merely a technical problem—or a philosophical one? If ever-better “answers” in AGI are not absolute endpoints, what are they? One way to understand “answers” is as recombinations within lived interpretation—temporary syntheses that organize experience into coherent conceptual structures. This article posits that no philosophical “answer” is a terminal truth; it is an integration of conceptual form that stabilizes meaning in the face of ambiguity. Creativity, exploration, and the very act of questioning—rather than the pursuit of definitive answers—may be the true engines of both philosophical insight and human-like intelligence. Here, we argue that genuine understanding emerges through continuous inquiry and recursive reorganization. Answers, in this view, remain provisional constructions, shaped by dissonance and forever open to revision. To ground this thesis, we embed multiple traditions as epistemic momentum vectors. Phenomenological ambiguity, ontological instability, hermeneutic dissonance, pragmatic friction, and erotetic incompleteness each introduce distinct tensions that propel the Q-Centric architecture toward recursive questioning. Their divergence is not noise, but the generative condition of meaning-making. By integrating these layered vectors, we sketch a pathway to AGI systems that do more than respond coherently; they orient themselves toward what remains unresolved. Reconceptualizing “answers” as momentary crystallizations of tension, the Q-Centric model offers a philosophical foundation for building reflective, adaptive machines that question—rather than merely conclude.https://doi.org/10.1007/s44163-025-00402-wConsciousnessQuestion-centric cognitionEpistemic architectureEmbodied intelligenceIntelligent systems designAGI
spellingShingle Mehrdad Ghasemizadeh
From answers to questions: the Q-centric model of intelligence
Discover Artificial Intelligence
Consciousness
Question-centric cognition
Epistemic architecture
Embodied intelligence
Intelligent systems design
AGI
title From answers to questions: the Q-centric model of intelligence
title_full From answers to questions: the Q-centric model of intelligence
title_fullStr From answers to questions: the Q-centric model of intelligence
title_full_unstemmed From answers to questions: the Q-centric model of intelligence
title_short From answers to questions: the Q-centric model of intelligence
title_sort from answers to questions the q centric model of intelligence
topic Consciousness
Question-centric cognition
Epistemic architecture
Embodied intelligence
Intelligent systems design
AGI
url https://doi.org/10.1007/s44163-025-00402-w
work_keys_str_mv AT mehrdadghasemizadeh fromanswerstoquestionstheqcentricmodelofintelligence