John Adams played by Paul Giamatti on HBO’s John Adams (which I highly recommend)


In recent years, the question “Will artificial intelligence steal our jobs?” has become a constant refrain in discussions about the future of work. Yet this question may well be a distraction. Since the start of the Industrial Revolution, every technological advance has brought fears of job loss while simultaneously opening doors to new opportunities. With AI, it’s likely to be no different: some jobs will be transformed, some may disappear, and others will emerge. But the most urgent question—the one often overlooked—isn’t this. The real point is: who will reap the benefits of this revolution? Will it be the workers or the capital owners?

To truly understand AI’s impact, we must shift the focus from “the risk of job loss” to “the destination of productivity gains.” AI, by automating tasks and optimizing processes, promises an explosion of efficiency and production. Rather than worrying solely about which job categories might be affected, we should be asking: will this productivity gain be distributed fairly? Will it provide workers with more leisure time, greater financial security, and perhaps the chance to dedicate themselves to cultural, artistic, and intellectual pursuits that enrich the human spirit? Or will these gains remain, predominantly, in the hands of a few?

This question leads us to a fundamental reflection about the society we want to build and reminds us of a timeless vision. John Adams, one of the founders of the United States, described an ideal of human progress with striking clarity. He said, “I must study politics and war so that my sons may have liberty to study mathematics and philosophy. My sons ought to study mathematics and philosophy, geography, natural history, naval architecture, navigation, commerce, and agriculture in order to give their children a right to study painting, poetry, music, architecture, statuary, tapestry, and porcelain.” Adams captured a dream of progress: building a society where future generations would be free from the harshest conflicts and needs, able instead to cultivate the spirit and imagination.

The promise implicit in artificial intelligence is that it could, in fact, bring us closer to this dream. By automating repetitive, low-value tasks, AI would theoretically free us to focus on more creative, personal pursuits. Imagine a society where people work fewer hours, in less alienating jobs, with the opportunity to explore art, philosophy, and leisure. Where professionals could devote themselves not only to work but also to poetry, music, and reflection. AI offers us a glimpse of this future, but this future is far from guaranteed.

History shows that productivity gains are not always fairly distributed. Over recent decades, we’ve seen a sharp rise in global productivity, but this productivity hasn’t translated into equivalent improvements in wages or working conditions for most people. Instead, much of the value generated has benefited shareholders and executives, contributing to increasing inequality. If we continue down the same path, AI’s advancement will likely intensify this dynamic, further concentrating wealth and power in the hands of those who control the technology.

Therefore, if we want a future where AI’s advances serve to realize John Adams’s dream—where technology liberates and enriches us culturally and intellectually—we need a framework of policy and ethics to ensure these gains are fairly distributed. This means confronting difficult questions about ownership, income distribution, and the role of public institutions in regulating and redistributing technological wealth.

The real question, then, isn’t whether AI will take away or create jobs, but whether it will allow us to work less and live more fully. Will AI enable us to spend more time with our families, improve our mental health, or pursue the arts and philosophy? Or will we remain trapped in a cycle where productivity increases but the average worker finds themselves ever more exhausted, without the time or resources to enjoy it?

AI’s impact on the future of work is inevitable, but its impact on quality of life will be shaped by the decisions we make today. We must ensure that the productivity gains and wealth created by AI do not perpetuate inequalities, but instead enable a richer, more balanced life for everyone. This is the ethical challenge of the AI era and the true question we should be debating.

If we look at AI not as a threat of job theft but as an opportunity to finally achieve Adams’s visionary ideal, we can work to ensure this technology fulfills its liberating potential. AI can, indeed, help build a society where each of us has the “right to study painting, poetry, and music”—a society where technical progress enables human flourishing. This is the real goal we should be striving for.