Can AI replace Teachers? An Indian Knowledge Systems Perspective

Abstract

DOI : https://doi.org/10.82471/ctd22-ahg08

The question of whether artificial intelligence (AI) can replace teachers is an important one. Recent studies and public discourse increasingly suggest that AI systems can equal or even outperform human instructors in selected tasks such as content delivery, personalization, assessment, and feedback. This paper examines the question of AI replacing teachers from the perspective of Indian Knowledge Systems (IKS). The question we ask is whether AI can move beyond transmitting information and fulfill the deeper epistemic and civilizational role of the teacher. Among the different types of teachers in the Sanskrit tradition, we use the concept of Apta, a trustworthy authority on a topic, as seen in the Nyaya framework. We assess contemporary AI against the three criteria of an Apta: trustworthy source possessing direct knowledge, an intention to communicate truth, and the capacity to convey it properly. A desk review of current AI literature is conducted. Our results show that current AI systems do not qualify as an Aptasince none of the three criteria are met. We conclude that while AI may simulate or partially perform certain instructional functions, it cannot be a complete substitute for the human teacher in the Indian philosophical sense.

References

1. Au, L. N., Do, M. T. N., & Nguyen, H. D. P. (2025). Controversies surrounding utilitarian learners and their learning behaviours: Do educators know the facts? Creative Education, 16(3), 221–229. https://doi.org/10.4236/ce.2025.163013

2. Bender, E. M., Gebru, T., McMillan-Major, A., & Shmitchell, S. (2021). On the dangers of stochastic parrots: Can language models be too big? Proceedings of the 2021 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (FAccT ’21), 610–623. https://doi.org/10.1145/3442188.3445922

3. Caliskan, A., Bryson, J. J., & Narayanan, A. (2017). Semantics derived automatically from language corpora contain human-like biases. Science, 356(6334), 183–186. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aal4230

4. Gjermeni, F., Sena, I., Prodani, F., & Pereira, A. I. (2026). AI-powered tutoring for personalized learning. In A. I. Pereira, F. P. Fernandes, J. P. Coelho, J. P. Teixeira, J. Lima, M. F. Pacheco, L. Oneto, & R. P. Lopes (Eds.), Optimization, learning algorithms and applications (Vol. 2618, pp. 191–204). Springer Nature Switzerland. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-032-00140-5_13

5. Harnad, S. (1990). The symbol grounding problem. Physica D: Nonlinear Phenomena, 42(1–3), 335–346. https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-2789(90)90087-6

6. Huang, C., Zhang, Z., Mao, B., & Yao, X. (2023). An overview of artificial intelligence ethics. IEEE Transactions on Artificial Intelligence, 4(4), 799–819. https://doi.org/10.1109/TAI.2022.3194503

7. Jackson, M. (2021). Artificial intelligence & algorithmic bias: The issues with technology reflecting history & humans. Journal of Business & Technology Law, 16(2), 299.

8. Jha, G. (1984). The Nyāya-sūṭras of Gauṭama: With the Bhāṣya of Vāṭsyāyana and the Vārṭika of Uḍḍyoṭakara. Motilal Banarsidass.

9. Kestin, G., Miller, K., Klales, A., Milbourne, T., & Ponti, G. (2025). AI tutoring outperforms in-class active learning: An RCT introducing a novel research-based design in an authentic educational setting. Scientific Reports, 15(1), 17458. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-97652-6

10. Mukhopadhyay, S., & Reddy, D. (2023). Artificial intelligence as an enabler of Western universalism. In R. Malhotra, T. N. Sudarshan, & M. Sastry (Eds.), The power of future machines: Essays on artificial intelligence (pp. 241–263). BluOne Ink LLP.

11. Nikitina, I., & Ishchenko, T. (2024). The impact of AI on teachers: Support or replacement? Scientific Journal of Polonia University, 65(4), 93–99. https://doi.org/10.23856/6511

12. Oka, S. (2025). Evaluating large language models on the frame and symbol grounding problems: A zero-shot benchmark (Version 1). arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/ARXIV.2506.07896

13. Sarukkai, S. (2005). Indian philosophy and philosophy of science (1st ed.). Centre for Studies in Civilizations.

14. Segal, H. P. (1986). The technological utopians. In J. J. Corn (Ed.), Imagining tomorrow: History, technology, and the American future. MIT Press.

15. Shanahan, M. (2016). The frame problem. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (Spring 2016 ed.). Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2016/entries/frame-problem/

16. Sun, Y., Sheng, D., Zhou, Z., & Wu, Y. (2024). AI hallucination: Towards a comprehensive classification of distorted information in artificial intelligence-generated content. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 11(1), 1278. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-03811-x

17. Swami Sivananda. (2025, July 6). The role of the guru. The Divine Life Society. https://www.sivanandaonline.org/newsupdates/the-role-of-the-guru/

18. Team, L., & Eedi. (2025). AI tutoring can safely and effectively support students: An exploratory RCT in UK classrooms (arXiv:2512.23633). arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2512.23633