tl;dr: Hullman argues that debates over AI in science reflect a lingering "value-free ideal" that treats verified correctness as equivalent to knowledge, sidelining human understanding as optional. Drawing on philosophers like Longino and Brandom, she contends that scientific knowledge depends on accountable agents who can justify claims, absorb criticism, and be held responsible—capacities today's non-persistent AI agents lack. Even if AI became accountable, science would still require humans with the trained judgment to interrogate its outputs, or we risk a field producing answers no one can meaningfully evaluate.