Martin Jan Stránský, a Yale University professor and neuroscientist, has warned that the rapid development of artificial intelligence (AI) could lead to consequences that threaten human civilization within a short timeframe. He attributes much of the risk to financial incentives that make meaningful slowdowns in development unlikely.
Who is speaking?
Martin Jan Stránský was born in New York in 1956 and returned to Prague in 1990 after the Velvet Revolution. His background spans neuroscience, winemaking and political thought. In 2014 he founded the health ombudsman office in the Czech Republic and has advised presidents, ministers and various local and international organizations. His book The Rise and Fall of the Human Mind (Az emberi elme tündöklése és bukása) examines how thinking and learning have changed in the digital age; he is a regular speaker at Brain Bar.
What risks does he describe?
Stránský argues that while AI offers clear benefits for research and development, its everyday use—examples he cites include ChatGPT and AI in schools—appears to be linked to declines in cognitive abilities. He points to emerging studies that, in his view, show:
- reduced capacity for thinking and processing information;
- weakened reasoning skills;
- measurable anatomical and physiological changes in the brains of people who regularly use AI tools.
Stránský presents himself as an empirically minded physician who prefers to rely on research and logic rather than emotional rhetoric.
Slowdown is a money question
A central theme of Stránský’s remarks is that AI development is driven by financial motives: he says this is fundamentally an investment story and that most actors at the table have staked everything on these technologies. For that reason, he believes they will not voluntarily slow down. He describes an AI paradox: in order to function, AI must continuously scale and improve, which requires money and energy—both of which are limited.
The article quotes Stránský saying that Anthropic is the only company currently worth the investment, suggesting that most AI ventures are not yet profitable. According to him, profitability will depend on mass adoption: companies will seek to simplify systems and create dependency by tapping into human drivers of laziness and reward, so that everyone uses the technology.
Catastrophe as an inevitable transformation
Stránský takes a pessimistic view of how societal change happens: historically, he says, humanity rarely undergoes voluntary philosophical reorientation without some catastrophe or dramatic event forcing it. From that perspective, he believes a disruptive event is inevitable and hopes it will be fragmented enough to allow repeated opportunities to rethink and rebuild. He is explicit: this is not a mere possibility but an expectation, and he predicts such a catastrophe could occur within the next three years. He emphasizes that this threat concerns the present generation, not only future ones.
Why this matters
Stránský’s warnings matter because they highlight a structural issue: AI development is shaped by short-term profit motives. If early signs of cognitive decline and brain changes linked to AI use are confirmed, widespread everyday application could have significant societal consequences even in the short term.
At the same time, his view is shaped by a bleak reading of current incentives: he sees little realistic chance for voluntary, comprehensive slowdown given the financial stakes. That raises urgent questions about what political, economic and ethical measures might be employed to reduce risk and how public policy could respond to potential harms identified by neuroscientists and other experts.
Stránský’s remarks are likely to fuel debate about the direction of AI development and the precautionary steps governments and companies should consider in the near term.
