I find your comment quite confusing.
>> A combination of "all categories are fuzzy" and "all models are wrong but some are useful"?
Are you talking about my first paragraph or symbolic AI?
>> The fallible sensors directly reporting readings from reality already has sufficient noise related issues.
I assume here you are trying to say that human input is not reliable.
I don't understand what's your approach with AI here. You seem to want to use it to better inform people? How? You are going to say that human input is not reliable, but then train an AI that can't explain itself and expect people to take its advice? Either noise can be palliated at scale in both places or none.
Finally, I'm very familiar with meditations on moloch. But you seem to be betting on an "education-based" solution, which doesn't fit very well with the scenario that meditations on moloch exposes, which is not that some people couldn't make better choices (for society, the collective), but rather that the "questionable" choices of a few can deeply compromise the game for everyone else. I mean, we all probably agree that it would be great to educate people on these concepts, but I doubt that will be enough to stop the dynamics that cause it.