Why Law Firm Leaders Need a New Lens
In The New Legal Playbook, we posed a critical question in Chapter 6: “But perhaps the real question isn’t whether AGI is happening, it’s whether we’ve misunderstood what intelligence actually is.”
This question has become increasingly relevant. As professional services firms accelerate their adoption of artificial intelligence (AI), many continue to rely on outdated conceptions of intelligence. There remains a widespread assumption that intelligence is a singular, scalable ability that machines can replicate and eventually surpass. But what if that assumption is incorrect?
Alison Gopnik, a professor of psychology and philosophy at the University of California, Berkeley, offers an alternative view. Her research challenges prevailing beliefs about both human and machine intelligence, providing a more developmental and pluralistic framework.
A Broader Understanding of Intelligence
Gopnik contends that intelligence is not a single, generalisable capacity. Instead, it encompasses a set of distinct cognitive modes that evolve over the human lifespan. These include:
- Exploration in childhood, characterised by curiosity, creativity, and hypothesis-driven learning.
- Exploitation in adulthood, focused on applying knowledge efficiently to achieve goals.
- Transmission and care in elderhood, where the emphasis is on sharing wisdom and guiding others.
In this framework, intelligence is adaptive and context sensitive. Gopnik also argues that AI, particularly large language models, should be understood as cultural technologies. Like books or the internet, they help organise and transmit human knowledge but do not possess the same capabilities as human minds.
Implications for Law Firm Strategy
Gopnik’s perspective has practical consequences for how law firms design and implement AI strategies.
Firstly, it encourages firms to treat AI as a layered system. Different tools serve different cognitive purposes. AI should not be expected to perform all tasks equally well. For example, a tool that supports strategic insight differs fundamentally from one that automates document production or facilitates mentoring. As we say in The New Legal Playbook – “none are the solution, and if a law firm is serious about using AI and gen AI to best effect, it should not be using only one. The right choice depends on the task at hand”.
Secondly, it elevates the value of human diversity. Junior lawyers often excel at exploration and experimentation, while senior partners contribute institutional memory and cultural continuity. A well-considered AI strategy should support and enhance these complementary capabilities.
Thirdly, it shifts attention away from the pursuit of general intelligence. Instead of investing in broadly capable AI systems that aim to replicate the entire legal brain, firms should focus on purpose-built tools that reflect specific needs, regulatory contexts and client expectations.
Acknowledging the Debate
It is important to recognise that Gopnik’s views are not without criticism.
Some researchers, including cognitive scientist Paul Thagard, argue that AI systems already demonstrate causal reasoning and explanatory capabilities. Others maintain that the concept of general intelligence, or the “g factor,” remains a valid and predictive construct.
Additionally, critics suggest that viewing AI only as a cultural artefact, risks underestimating its emerging generative and decision-making capacities.
Nonetheless, these critiques do not diminish the value of Gopnik’s core insight. Intelligence is a complex, evolving construct. It is not yet fully understood, and its replication in machines should be approached with both ambition and caution.
Designing With Intelligence in Mind
For law firm leaders, the takeaway is clear. AI strategy must move beyond binary thinking. The real opportunity lies in adopting a more layered and open-ended approach to intelligence. This means:
- Aligning AI use with exploration, exploitation, and transmission functions.
- Encouraging experimentation and cross-generational learning.
- Framing AI as an augmentation tool rather than a replacement for judgment and culture.
Ultimately, the most effective firms will not be those that rush to implement the most powerful tools, but those that reflect most carefully on what intelligence really is and how it can best be applied. The question posed in The New Legal Playbook remains unresolved. But what is increasingly apparent is that the answer will not be found in traditional assumptions.
It will be found in the willingness to think differently.