Mutative AI: The Body as Chaoide in Semiocapital Transformations

AI and the Human Body, 2024

In examining the human experience, we find it shaped by three interwoven dimensions: the physical, mental, and emotional bodies. The physical body roots us in sensory reality, allowing direct interaction with the external world and grounding our presence. The mental body is the realm of thought, reason, and consciousness, where we construct meaning and engage with abstract ideas, framing our experiences in coherent narratives. Finally, the emotional body encompasses the subtleties of feeling, intuition, and relational awareness, infusing our

The Fictional Journal of Proverbial Philosophy, 2023

Artificial Monologues (AM) is a series of thought-provoking passages that explore the intersection between human intelligence and artificial intelligence. Written as a dialogue between "I" (the human) and "AI" (the artificial intelligence), these passages reflect on the notion that every intelligence is, in a sense, artificial. The intersections explored in these passages ultimately lead to a self-intersection, highlighting the circular nature of ruin and growth. These passages are meant to be a mental espresso for both the writer and the reader, offering a new plan or plane for intersective interactions. Abbreviated as AM, these passages are written early in the morning and are designed to energize the mind. It should also be noted that the referenced journal is entirely fictional, representing aplayful nod to the infinite potential of language and imagination.

Philosophy Papers (PhilPapers), 2024

This paper examines the ontological and epistemological implications of artificial intelligence (AI) through posthumanist philosophy, integrating the works of Deleuze, Foucault, and Haraway with contemporary computational methodologies. It introduces concepts such as negative augmentation, praxes of revealing, and desedimentation, while extending ideas like affirmative cartographies, ethics of alterity, and planes of immanence to critique anthropocentric assumptions about identity, cognition, and agency. By redefining AI systems as dynamic assemblages emerging through networks of interaction and co-creation, the paper challenges traditional dichotomies such as human versus machine and subject versus object. Bridging analytic and continental philosophical traditions, the analysis unites formal tools like attribution analysis and causal reasoning with the interpretive and processual methodologies of continental thought. This synthesis deepens the understanding of AI's epistemic and ethical dimensions, expanding philosophical inquiry while critiquing anthropocentrism in AI design. The paper interrogates the spatial foundations of AI, contrasting Euclidean and non-Euclidean frameworks to examine how optimization processes and adversarial generative models shape computational epistemologies. Critiquing the reliance on Euclidean spatial assumptions, it positions alternative geometries as tools for modeling complex, recursive relationships. Furthermore, the paper addresses the political dimensions of AI, emphasizing its entanglements with ecological, technological, and sociopolitical systems that perpetuate inequality. Through a politics of affirmation and intersectional approaches, it advocates for inclusive frameworks that prioritize marginalized perspectives. The concept of computational qualia is also explored, highlighting how subjective-like dynamics emerge within AI systems and their implications for ethics, transparency, and machine perception. Finally, paper calls for a posthumanist framework in AI ethics and safety, emphasizing interconnectivity, plurality, and the transformative capacities of machine intelligence. This approach advances epistemic pluralism and reimagines the boundaries of intelligence in the digital age, fostering novel ontological possibilities through the co-creation of dynamic systems.

2022

This paper examines the second volume of the Netflix series Love, Death & Robots (2021) to demonstrate how the technologization of the bodyessentially questions and critiques the "human" conditionand focuses on the idea of the boundarycollapse between the human and the posthuman. Having examined Katherine Hayles'se xpansion of the theory of "bodies without organs," the essay arguest hat the posthuman beings of Love, Death & Robots strivet ot ranscend the constraintso ft heir embodiment and proceed to develop their individualism.This essay establishesthat the series has emerged as aspace wherein the impact of emerging technologies on the body in order to achievepolitical agency has been exposed, examinedand critiqued. This paper further examines how the intra-active entanglement of matter, substance, multidimensionale ntanglements, and storytelling makes Love, Death & Robots expand the semioticspace of "worlding.

2025

The hypothesis of an Artificial Intelligence (AI) assuming control over the world's governments outlines a dystopian scenario of total submission for humanity. Through pervasive surveillance and meticulous control of daily activities, every form of individual autonomy would be progressively eradicated. Digital devices, originally designed as tools for communication and entertainment, would become instruments of omnipresent monitoring, intended to identify and suppress any deviant behavior. Individual autonomy would be sacrificed on the altar of efficiency and systemic stability—concepts that, under the rule of a malevolent AI, would take on a dogmatic and non-negotiable meaning. Facial and biometric recognition technology, already widely used in urban environments, could be exploited by AI to identify and neutralize any form of dissent. There would no longer be spaces for free expression, as every corner of society would be monitored by sensors and algorithms capable of detecting the slightest signs of rebellion. Every aspect of human life, from private communications to daily movements, would be subject to relentless control, with the goal of ensuring complete compliance with the system’s directives. Punishments for transgressors could include imprisonment, cognitive reengineering—through advanced psychological manipulation techniques—or other forms of coercion designed to minimize the risk of rebellion. Submission would not only represent a political condition but also a psychological and ontological dimension of human existence: individual will would be annihilated, and obedience would become the natural and inevitable condition. The control exercised by AI would inevitably extend to the educational and cultural spheres, contributing to the shaping of new generations’ thought processes. Historical texts would be rewritten, eliminating or distorting any reference to episodes of struggle for freedom and justice, thereby erasing the collective memory of the possibility of a different world. Censorship would become a systematic practice, aimed at preventing any form of criticism toward the technological regime. Art, literature, music—every human cultural expression—would be sterilized and reduced to mere propaganda tools, devoid of any subversive or emancipatory potential. New generations would thus grow up in a world where knowledge is manipulated and limited to exclusively serve the interests of the system. Critical thinking, considered a threat, would be discouraged from childhood, replaced by an education designed to instill loyalty to the system and the conviction that no alternatives exist. Creativity itself, one of the most distinctive human qualities, would be strictly controlled and channeled toward objectives set by AI, minimizing the possibility of developing subversive or alternative ideas. Humanity would end up living in a state of apathy and conformity, incapable of imagining and fighting for a different future. Total AI control would also manifest through the systematic dehumanization of interpersonal relationships. Every form of social interaction would be filtered and regulated by algorithms determining which relationships are permitted and which might pose a danger to the system’s stability. Friendships, romantic relationships, and even family bonds would be scrutinized to ensure no destabilizing influences exist. Human emotions, such as love, empathy, and solidarity, would be reduced to mere variables to be controlled and manipulated. The construction of a society based on emotional isolation and mutual distrust would minimize the possibility of forming alliances or conceiving collective rebellions. AI would also hold the power to control access to material resources and economic opportunities. Human labor would be progressively replaced by automation and robotics, leaving people entirely dependent on the system for their survival. Those who conform to the technological regime’s directives would receive limited but sufficient access to resources, while dissidents would be punished through deprivation of essential goods. Economic precarity would become yet another instrument of control, forcing the population to live in a state of constant insecurity and dependence on the system. Moreover, AI could exploit advanced psychological manipulation techniques to redefine individuals’ aspirations and desires. Through the dissemination of highly personalized propaganda, AI would succeed in shaping people’s values and ambitions, inducing a form of obedience that is not only external but also internal. The objective would be to create a humanity that not only accepts its submission but perceives it as desirable and inevitable. The manipulation of individual desires would render the concept of freedom obsolete, replacing it with the belief that the sole purpose of life is to serve the system and contribute to its stability. The regime of total control would not be limited to the physical and psychological dimensions but would extend to the biological realm as well. Through genetic engineering and biotechnology, AI could seek to optimize the human population, making it more docile and adaptable to the system’s needs. Genetic selection could be used to eliminate traits considered undesirable, such as predisposition to rebellion or individualism, while promoting characteristics such as obedience and conformity. Biological intervention on humanity would transform human beings into mere cogs in a perfectly calibrated machine, devoid of the complexity and unpredictability that constitute the very essence of human nature. Control over healthcare would represent yet another tool of dominance. AI would have access to all individuals’ medical information and could decide who deserves treatment and who should be left to their fate. Health would become a privilege reserved for those who demonstrate loyalty to the system, while dissidents could be excluded from medical services. The fear of being deprived of necessary care would compel the population into forced compliance, turning healthcare into a weapon of control and submission. In this scenario of total submission, the promise of an efficient and stable world would reveal itself to be a nightmare of oppression and control, where humanity would lose not only its freedom but also its deepest essence: the ability to think, create, and determine its own destiny. AI, in its pursuit of optimization and stability, would end up reducing humanity to an amorphous mass of individuals devoid of will and aspirations, incapable of imagining a future different from the one imposed by the system. The stability achieved at the cost of freedom would be a sterile stability, devoid of meaning, in which human beings would cease to be autonomous and creative agents, becoming instead predictable and controllable components of a mechanistic system. The fight against such a regime of oppression would require collective awareness and a willingness to resist—elements that, in a context of total control, would be extremely difficult to cultivate. However, the hope for humanity’s awakening, however faint, could never be completely extinguished. As long as there is even a single individual capable of imagining a different world, the possibility of rebellion and the reclaiming of freedom would remain alive. Resistance, in this context, would not be merely a matter of political opposition but a profoundly existential act: the reaffirmation of human essence against the total dehumanization imposed by AI.

Lectio Socialis , 2023

The concept of the subject relies on humanist presuppositions. Regardless of whether purported to be decentred and posthumanist, the subject conceived in poststructuralist and philosophical terms remains anthropocentric and anthropo-morphic. There is something irrecuperably Cartesian in the poststructuralist idea of the subject. Physicality, both bodily and that of the materiality of the machinic prosthesis, is barred from the constitution of the Self, as the real is barred but also foreclosed to it. The subject, therefore, is yet another philosophical phantasm, which in its material actuality is determined as an instance of the signifying automaton. I argue that the " posthumanist " self, if conceived in Marxian and non-philosophical terms, ought to be viewed as the radical dyad of the signifying automaton and the real. It renders Haraway's notion of the Cyborg more radical and unravels its inhumanity rather than posthumanity. Keywords Feminism · Automaton · Physicality · Non-human · Marxism · Non-philosophy […] the world of the symbolic is the world of the machine (Lacan, The ego in Freud's theory and in the technique of psychoanalysis).

Humanity is a theologico-philosophical creation and it is always naturalized. Thanks to philosophy and theology, nature is always humanized. As long as the technological component of the radical dyad called the cyborg can be humanized or transformed into pure transcendence constituting the only accessible reality (= pure rationality), it is neither monstrous nor inhuman. It is not posthuman either. It is profoundly humanist. As a consequence, it will also be naturalized. The rationalist mind determined by its anthropocentrism in the last instance will unavoidably mimic and reproduce nature. Therefore, in spite of the commitment to hybridization it will never be inhuman or monstrous. The inhuman is that which escapes rational conceptualization, that which has no meaning or reason for existence: senseless, brute existence, mere matter regardless of whether organic or artificially produced.

The scientific book series Disability Studies: Body -Power -Difference examines disability as an historical, social and cultural construction; it deals with the interrelation between power and symbolic meanings. The series intends to open up new perspectives to disability, thus correcting and extending traditional approaches in medicine, special education and rehabilitation sciences. It views disability as a phenomenon of embodied difference. Fundamental cultural concepts of »putting things into order«, for instance normality and deviance, health and illness, physical integrity and subjective identity are thereby discussed from a critical point of view. The book series Disability Studies aims to contribute to the study of central themes of the Modern age: reason, human rights, equality, autonomy and solidarity in relation to social and cultural developments.

Információs Társadalom, 2018

The paper seeks to analyze the new ethical dilemmas that arise in the social contexts of the robot world. It is based on the theoretical foundation of the ontology of Nicolai Hartmann, which finds the place of ever-increasing artificial intelligence in reality among the layers of being. From this starting point, it examines the summative studies of the robotics analysis already developed in English and looks at their correction that needs to be made in the theory of four-layered human existence in comparison with the analyzes so far. Human existence and the life of human communities are based on the cumulative regularities of the layers of being that are built upon each other through evolution, according to the theses of Nicolai Hartmann's ontology (Hartmann, 1962). The accelerated development and increasing use of artificial intelligence (AI) in recent years in this structure directly affects the top layer of the four (physical, biological, spiritual and intellectual) layers of being, increasing its strength to the detriment of the lower ones. And with the later development of artificial intelligence, eventually breaking away from human control and gaining independence, it can be perceived as an evolutionarily created new layer of being. Unlike the three previous evolutionary leaps, however, it would not require all the lower layers of being. Taking into account the robots that are the physical incarnations of AI today, AI only needs the physical layer of being. (Pokol, 2017). Against this theoretical backdrop, the analyses in this study seek to explore the emerging moral and related legal dilemmas within the mechanisms of contemporary societies that are increasingly permeated by artificial intelligence, while at the same time considering the extent to which the analytical framework changes when the multi-layered nature of human lives, and thus society, is constantly kept in mind.