"A systematic examination was conducted to investigate the theoretical counter-arguments against the integration of artificial intelligence in assessing English listening skills for English as a Foreign Language learners. The prevailing discourse has been dominated by techno-optimistic perspectives, yet substantial theoretical opposition has been identified within the scholarly literature. This review synthesizes contradictory theoretical frameworks that challenge the assumed neutrality, objectivity, and pedagogical superiority of AI-driven assessment systems. Three primary counter-argument categories were identified: epistemological relativism, which questions the validity of AI-generated knowledge claims; pedagogical relativism, which challenges the appropriateness of algorithmic instructional decisions; and cultural-linguistic relativism, which interrogates the contextual appropriateness of standardized AI assessments across diverse learning environments. The analysis revealed that AI assessment systems, despite their technological sophistication, inevitably embed particular value systems, linguistic norms, and cultural assumptions that may not align with the diverse realities of EFL learners worldwide. Furthermore, the reduction of listening comprehension to machine-analyzable components was found to potentially undermine the holistic, situated, and socially constructed nature of communicative competence. The review concluded that theoretical counter-arguments, grounded in relativist perspectives, provide essential critical frameworks for evaluating AI integration, suggesting that a dialectical approach\u2014rather than uncritical adoption\u2014is necessary for responsible educational innovation. "