Does Anthropic Care about Human intelligence, amid Military AI use?

By David Stephen

There is a new [March 1, 2026] report on WSJ, U.S. Strikes in Middle East Use Anthropic, Hours After Trump Ban, stating that, “Within hours of declaring that the federal government will end its use of artificial-intelligence tools made by tech company Anthropic, President Trump launched a major air attack in Iran with the help of those very same tools. Commands around the world, including U.S. Central Command in the Middle East, use Anthropic’s Claude AI tool, people familiar with the matter confirmed. Centcom declined to comment about specific systems being used in its ongoing operation against Iran.”

Does Anthropic Care about Human intelligence

There is a recent [February 27, 2026] report on Axios, Anthropic to take Trump’s Pentagon to court over AI dispute, stating that, “Anthropic vowed to challenge the Pentagon in court over its blacklisting of the company for refusing to lift all safeguards on the military’s use of its model, Claude — adding it’s “deeply saddened” by the escalating dispute. Defense officials want to use AI models for “all lawful purposes” in classified and not have to adhere to company’s ideas of what is safe and isn’t, particularly in matters of national security.”

U.S. Military

The United States military is likely to do what it wants, regardless of the use, or not, of Anthropic’s technology. So, taking a stance against some use cases in the military does not simply imply that Anthropic is on the side of humanity. Anthropic is an artificial intelligence firm that has not done anything to define, improve or aid human intelligence, in the brain, for at least, problem-solving. So, Anthropic, like others, is good for AI, while human intelligence can wither.

Brain Science of Human Intelligence

Whatever will become of humanity will depend on human intelligence. But, for now, in all of science, there is no definition for human intelligence, no identification of its types, components, mechanisms, their relays and stations, in the brain.

Simply, there is no resource, anywhere for now, that can show how human intelligence works, why it is special and how. Normally, as artificial intelligence soared, what the philosophical implications should be is that human intelligence has to evolve, or be better understood to make adjustments.

Understanding human intelligence is even more vital as the world is tethering on the edge of unknown with the crisis in the Iran, as well as the continuous situation in Ukraine and the also, the question of Venezuela.

There is also artificial intelligence, accelerating across benchmarks and evaluations. There are possibilities for stability with new programs for small businesses, food security Insurance, employment models and much more, that could provide answers.

There are also several other solutions that are necessary but no way to access them just because human intelligence also needs improvement with respect to problem-solving.

Artificial intelligence cannot be getting more investments, programs and solutions, while human intelligence, still has no definition, no types, no known mechanisms, even conceptual, in brain science.

This is the most important cause amid the rise of artificial intelligence, which no AI company is doing, including Anthropic, which has been hailed as a great example for strides in AI safety, mechanistic interpretability and alignment.

Even with the posturing, Anthropic’s tech is already used in combat. So, they have fed the military, but left out the core for all humanity, human intelligence.

It may not matter after a while what AI model was safe or not, used in war or not, but what AI company ensured to prioritize human intelligence amid the demotion of humanity, by intelligence, from AI.

David Stephen currently does research in conceptual brain science with focus on the electrical and chemical configurators for how they mechanize the human mind with implications for mental health, disorders, neurotechnology, consciousness, learning, artificial intelligence and nurture. He was a visiting scholar in medical entomology at the University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign, IL. He did computer vision research at Rovira i Virgili University, Tarragona.