What Understanding Means in AI-Laden Astronomy

TL;DR

This article discusses the epistemological implications of AI in astronomy, emphasizing the need for philosophical frameworks to understand AI's role in scientific discovery and the importance of human judgment.

Contribution

It introduces the concept of 'pragmatic understanding' to guide AI integration in astronomy, highlighting epistemological challenges and proposing new norms for validation.

Findings

AI does not derive fundamental physics from data as often assumed.

Narrative construction and judgment are essential for scientific understanding.

Human peer review remains crucial despite AI's capabilities.

Abstract

Artificial intelligence is rapidly transforming astronomical research, yet the scientific community has largely treated this transformation as an engineering challenge rather than an epistemological one. This perspective article argues that philosophy of science offers essential tools for navigating AI's integration into astronomy--conceptual clarity about what "understanding" means, critical examination of assumptions about data and discovery, and frameworks for evaluating AI's roles across different research contexts. Drawing on an interdisciplinary workshop convening astronomers, philosophers, and computer scientists, we identify several tensions. First, the narrative that AI will "derive fundamental physics" from data misconstrues contemporary astronomy as equation-derivation rather than the observation-driven enterprise it is. Second, scientific understanding involves more than prediction--it requires narrative construction, contextual judgment, and communicative achievement that current AI architectures struggle to provide. Third, because narrative and judgment matter, human peer review remains essential--yet AI-generated content flooding the literature threatens our capacity to identify genuine insight. Fourth, while AI excels at well-defined problem-solving, the ill-defined problem-finding that drives breakthroughs appears to require capacities beyond pattern recognition. Fifth, as AI accelerates what is feasible, pursuitworthiness criteria risk shifting toward what AI makes easy rather than what is genuinely important. We propose "pragmatic understanding" as a framework for integration--recognizing AI as a tool that extends human cognition while requiring new norms for validation and epistemic evaluation. Engaging with these questions now may help the community shape the transformation rather than merely react to it.