What if Artificial Intelligence Is Just a “Normal” Technology?
Artificial intelligence (AI) has become one of the most hotly debated topics of our time. Public opinion about AI spans a wide range of perspectives, from utopian optimism to dystopian fear. Some envision AI as a force that could trigger runaway economic growth, revolutionize scientific research, and even offer the possibility of human immortality. Others worry that AI could cause abrupt and widespread job losses, economic instability, and, in the worst-case scenario, develop beyond human control with catastrophic consequences.
However, a new perspective offered by two Princeton University computer scientists, Arvind Narayanan and Sayash Kapoor, challenges this polarized thinking. In a paper published earlier this year, they propose considering AI as a “normal” technology rather than an outlier or revolutionary disruptor. Their sober approach has sparked significant debate among AI researchers and economists, inviting a fresh examination of AI’s role in society.
AI as a Normal Technology
Narayanan and Kapoor argue that AI’s evolution might follow patterns similar to those of earlier technological revolutions — advancements that transformed economies and societies over time but did not radically upend the established order overnight. This viewpoint encourages treating AI not as an existential threat or a magical solution but as a tool whose adoption and impact will unfold gradually, influenced by social, economic, and political factors.
By framing AI as a normal technology, the authors urge policymakers, businesses, and the public to think pragmatically. This means focusing on incremental improvements, regulatory decisions, and labor market adaptations rather than preparing for either utopia or dystopia.
The Wider Debate
The ongoing discussion about AI encompasses multiple dimensions. On one side, proponents highlight AI’s potential to accelerate progress by automating routine tasks, enhancing productivity, and approaching complex scientific problems with machine learning. On the opposite side, critics caution about disruptive effects on employment, from automation displacing workers to shifts in required skills and job retraining challenges.
Narayanan and Kapoor’s approach adds nuance to this debate, suggesting that fears of sudden, dramatic upheaval may be overstated. Instead, the economic and social effects of AI might manifest in ways economists recognize from past waves of innovation. Historical technological advances, such as the industrial revolution or the rise of computers, restructured economies progressively rather than instantaneously.
Implications for Policy and Society
Viewing AI through the lens of a “normal technology” has practical implications. It suggests that societies have the tools and experience to manage AI’s integration without panic or unrealistic expectation. Strategies to ease transitions—such as education reforms, social safety nets, and appropriate regulatory frameworks—can be designed based on lessons from previous technological changes.
Moreover, this perspective encourages balanced regulation that fosters innovation while addressing risks, rather than overly restrictive policies driven by fear or prematurely enthusiastic promotion.
As artificial intelligence continues to develop and spread across sectors, the debate about its impact is unlikely to fade. Yet the insights of Narayanan and Kapoor serve as a reminder that AI’s story may be one of steady evolution rather than sudden revolution — a “normal” technological advance that, while powerful, is ultimately manageable within existing social and economic frameworks.
This article appeared in the Finance & Economics section of The Economist print edition under the headline "Normal people," September 6th, 2025.
