Can AI Truly Understand Us—Or Just Imitate Us Well?
Despite AI’s ability to generate human-like language, it lacks the lived experience and emotional insight needed for real understanding, a neuroscientist argues.
Introduction: Is AI Smarter—Or Just Smarter at Faking It?
As artificial intelligence becomes increasingly fluent in human conversation, it’s natural to wonder: does it actually understand us, or is it simply mimicking our behavior with incredible skill? While tools like ChatGPT can produce answers that feel eerily human, experts in neuroscience argue that this is not the same as genuine comprehension. According to Veena D. Dwivedi, a neuroscientist at Brock University, the distinction between appearing intelligent and truly understanding is more profound than most people realize.
Understanding the Meaning of “Understanding”
Before deciding whether AI can truly grasp language, it’s important to unpack what we mean by “understanding.” Humans interpret meaning not just from words, but from tone, context, body language, and lived experience. AI, by contrast, functions through complex algorithms that identify patterns in massive datasets.
Renowned AI pioneer Geoffrey Hinton once suggested that neural networks may “really understand” language. While impressive, this interpretation is controversial. Dwivedi challenges the notion, pointing out that pattern recognition isn’t the same as conscious thought or emotional intuition. Machines don’t live in the world—they calculate probabilities.
️ Why Context Makes All the Difference
Take the phrase: “Let’s talk.” It’s deceptively simple—yet its meaning can shift wildly depending on who says it, when, and how. An email from your manager after a tense meeting might raise your anxiety. A late-night text from a friend might bring comfort or worry. From a romantic partner, it could signal intimacy or impending conflict.
Humans decode these layers of meaning effortlessly through context, relational cues, and emotion. AI, however, lacks this toolkit. It doesn’t have a history with you, nor does it experience emotions. It only knows that certain phrases often appear near others in similar datasets.
Language Is More Than Just Written Words
Dwivedi, who directs the Centre for Neuroscience at Brock University, stresses that language is not just text—it’s sound, rhythm, and culture. Spoken Hindi and Urdu, for example, are nearly indistinguishable by ear, but their written scripts are completely different. The same goes for Serbian and Croatian.
AI excels at processing written inputs, but it doesn’t “hear” language as humans do, nor does it intuit cultural context. What’s more, it doesn’t “know” a language in the lived sense—it can’t dream in it, joke in it, or feel excluded from it. It simply calculates what word comes next.
Human Brains vs. Machine Algorithms
Legendary linguist Noam Chomsky proposed the theory that humans are born with an innate capacity for language. Still, even he admitted that we don’t fully understand how the brain processes meaning in real time. AI neural networks—despite the name—are not modeled on conscious thought. They’re statistical engines, not sentient minds.
Unlike human brains, these systems don’t possess emotions, intentions, or sensory experiences. They don’t get nervous before speaking in public or feel warmth when hearing a loved one’s voice. Their outputs may sound natural, but there’s no understanding behind the words—only code.
⚕️ Expert Insight: The Illusion of Intelligence
Dwivedi cautions against confusing AI’s performance for genuine intelligence. While the language models can produce responses that appear smart, this is the result of massive computation—not insight. The danger, she warns, is that overestimating AI’s abilities could lead us to trust it in situations where human nuance is essential, such as therapy, education, or diplomacy.
Machines are not malicious, but they’re not moral either. They don’t “care” about truth, empathy, or fairness unless trained to mimic those values. And mimicry is where the line between understanding and imitation becomes dangerously blurred.
What This Means for the Future of AI
The temptation to attribute human-like qualities to AI is strong—especially as systems grow more advanced. But acknowledging the limits of machine understanding is vital as we integrate AI into sensitive areas of society.
Knowing when AI is useful—and when it’s not—is a responsibility shared by developers, policymakers, and users alike. Machines may support communication, but they should never replace the human touch in areas that require empathy, ethics, or cultural sensitivity.
Conclusion: Impressive, But Not Intuitive
AI is a remarkable achievement in computation, but it’s not a sentient being. It can generate poetry, simulate dialogue, and offer support, but it doesn’t know what it’s saying in the way we do. According to neuroscientist Veena Dwivedi, understanding involves far more than producing the right words. It requires consciousness, context, and connection—things machines still cannot replicate.
As we navigate the expanding role of AI in our lives, it’s essential to remain grounded in this distinction. Technology can enhance our world, but human understanding remains uniquely irreplaceable.
️ (Disclaimer: This article is a journalistic reinterpretation of insights originally shared by neuroscientist Veena D. Dwivedi and other referenced experts. It aims to clarify and explore the boundaries of artificial intelligence without exaggerating its capabilities. The information presented does not imply that AI is sentient or capable of emotional cognition.)
Also Read: Preserving AI Outputs in Court: Legal and Governance Essentials