Upcycling Philosophical Ideas for a Perspective on AI and the Digital

§1 The digital realm and the many AI-applications are a relatively recent phenomenon, and the current highly controversial debates show that we have difficulty classifying these phenomena and their possible consequences.

It is unclear how we want to deal with this technological progress and what societal consequences will accompany it. Dystopian assessments and promises of salvation stand fundamentally opposed to each other.

There are many questions for which we have no clear answers:

Does the digital sphere change what it means to be human?
Do the effects of new technologies threaten or enable dimensions of our freedom?
Will AI systems limit or enhance our autonomy in decision-making processes?
To what extent can this lead to shifts in the distribution of power?
Can this new technology contribute to enlightenment or to more justice?
Does it promote scientific progress, or will it rather lead to an epistemological crisis?
Who or what can be responsible for the technological consequences?
How can we shape new technologies, or are we at their mercy?
Will human societies be confronted with novel artificial social agents in the near future?

§2 Various aspects of the new digital lifeworlds have already been the object of a number of philosophical discourses. However, engaging with thought patterns from the long history of philosophy has the potential to cast further-reaching perspectives on these novel phenomena of digitality.

Some of the seemingly novel phenomena have already attracted philosophical attention before, though in different contexts than the digital realm. Digital practices and lifeworlds can therefore be comprehended in the light of well-established debates in philosophy, as they concern central questions of human existence and their epistemological consequences. We want to show that philosophical discussions dealing with ideas of reasonable freedom, reliability and trust, appearance and reality, truth and reality, or even the concept of the masterless slave, enable the reflection of digital phenomena that have emerged from new technologies.

§3 Philosophical debates have retreated into academic isolation – that’s why it is important to formulate them in a more accessible way.

Complicated ideas from philosophy should be conveyed in an understandable manner and thus made connectable. This means that lines of thought which prove relevant and orienting for questions about what a successful digitalization can be should be brought into an interdisciplinary scientific discourse in an appropriate and connectable form.

§4 Not everything that these novel phenomena represent can be reduced to 'the same principles in a modern wrapper'. However, looking through the lens of philosophy from the 'analog' era helps to better crystallize the novelty of the phenomena and question the reduction to Western thought patterns.

The controversial debates about which properties and abilities (acting, understanding, knowing, believing, world models, or even phenomenological consciousness) can justifiably be attributed to generative AI systems show that concepts originally reserved in Western philosophy for characterizing the mental abilities of humans as rational, moral, and conscious individuals are up for discussion. New questions arise here, such as: Is consciousness a necessary condition for agency? Will AI systems play a role as social interaction partners? What role does it play that the boundaries of physical or mental materiality are increasingly perforated? Into what category do human-machine interactions fall if they cannot be described as mere tool use, but also not as full-fledged social interactions? Further thought impulses for an expansion of our conceptuality can be found in non-Western philosophical conceptions such as Shintoism, animism, and indigenous worldviews.

§5 Philosophy will not answer all these questions, but it can provide new ways of thinking.

With this project, we aim to add perspectives from philosophy through which phenomena of new technology use can be interpreted in a relatable way. These perspectives should serve as thinking tools that make non-obvious dimensions of the digital visible and can be applied especially by other disciplines of knowledge. Philosophical concepts can function as guidance in this unknown terrain – not to provide ready-made answers, but to ask the right questions. Philosophical thinking should step out of its academic niche and act as a reflective force in technological discourses. The challenges of digitalization require new ways of thinking, where the conscious inclusion of philosophical perspectives enables us to ethically shape the possibilities of our digital future.

§6 Digitization requires interdisciplinary collaboration that unites technical, ethical and philosophical knowledge.

We advocate for overcoming the artificial boundaries between academic disciplines. The separation of knowledge into technical and humanities fields should be reconsidered, as it is essentially obsolete. The development of technology benefits from philosophical understanding, just as philosophical theorizing benefits from understanding technology. There is great potential for new insights if interdisciplinary spaces are expanded in which technical and philosophical content engage in meaningful dialogue. Responsible shaping of the digital world becomes possible when we promote dialogue between different knowledge cultures and cultivate an ethos of intellectual openness.

§7 Shaping our digital futures requires active participation from all societal groups.

Technological development affects the entire society and should therefore be understood as a communal task. We see the necessity to shape the digital sphere as a public space and strive for broader participation from various fields in the discourse around technological innovation. The diverse voices of society should be heard in the design of digital technologies. It is time for an inclusive digital culture that incorporates and values local knowledge, cultural diversity, and different perspectives.