This work reconceptualises the relationship between the political and the technical in the age of artificial intelligence. The authors reject the dichotomy that presupposes their ontological independence and propose a framework of mutual constitution: the political and the technical are two modalities of a single process of human representation and self-organisation. The investigation traces the transformation of regimes of representation from ancient Greek τέχνη – the creative supplementation of nature through knowledge and craft – to the rupture in the modern epoch, when technique was reduced to instrumental rationality and politics claimed to preserve meaning. The digital age transcends this division: mathematics and algorithms form a universal metalanguage, unifying political narratives and cultural codes into a single system of representation. Concrete examples – AI regulation in the EU, platform recommendation systems, social credit schemes – demonstrate that political decisions require technical architecture, whilst technical management bears a political character, determining the boundaries of inclusion and defining the enemy. The central analysis concerns the transformation of sovereignty. The sovereign decision (in Schmitt’s understanding) splits into three levels: developer sovereignty (data and objective function selection), algorithmic sovereignty (real-time decisions), and state sovereignty (control over systems). The enemy is redefined as an outcome of statistical computation, a mathematical category. At the level of subjectivity, AI technologies function as anthropotechnics – practices of human self-formation. From self–knowledge through language models to collective mobilisation via recommendation systems and state governance through algorithms, AI permeates all levels. These processes are ambivalent: technologies serve both subjection and resistance. The authors identify three cardinal problems: the democratisation of metalanguages, the revision of fundamental political philosophy categories, and narrowing the gap between technical velocity and ethical reflection. The work reconceptualises the foundations of political knowledge, proposing that technical governance be understood as inseparably linked to politics. The political does not disappear; it reformats itself, acquiring new modes of articulation through algorithms. The investigation opens a horizon for reconsidering the boundaries and possibilities of political action under conditions of distributed sovereignty and algorithmic power.
Paper
Full text
Political and technical dimensions of the AI age: mutual constitution
Semantic Scholar · 2026
Abstract
This work reconceptualises the relationship between the political and the technical in the age of artificial intelligence. The authors reject the dichotomy that presupposes their ontological independence and propose a framework of mutual constitution: the political and the technical are two modalities of a single process of human representation and self-organisation. The investigation traces the transformation of regimes of representation from ancient Greek τέχνη – the creative supplementation of nature through knowledge and craft – to the rupture in the modern epoch, when technique was reduced to instrumental rationality and politics claimed to preserve meaning. The digital age transcends this division: mathematics and algorithms form a universal metalanguage, unifying political narratives and cultural codes into a single system of representation. Concrete examples – AI regulation in the EU, platform recommendation systems, social credit schemes – demonstrate that political decisions require technical architecture, whilst technical management bears a political character, determining the boundaries of inclusion and defining the enemy. The central analysis concerns the transformation of sovereignty. The sovereign decision (in Schmitt’s understanding) splits into three levels: developer sovereignty (data and objective function selection), algorithmic sovereignty (real-time decisions), and state sovereignty (control over systems). The enemy is redefined as an outcome of statistical computation, a mathematical category. At the level of subjectivity, AI technologies function as anthropotechnics – practices of human self-formation. From self–knowledge through language models to collective mobilisation via recommendation systems and state governance through algorithms, AI permeates all levels. These processes are ambivalent: technologies serve both subjection and resistance. The authors identify three cardinal problems: the democratisation of metalanguages, the revision of fundamental political philosophy categories, and narrowing the gap between technical velocity and ethical reflection. The work reconceptualises the foundations of political knowledge, proposing that technical governance be understood as inseparably linked to politics. The political does not disappear; it reformats itself, acquiring new modes of articulation through algorithms. The investigation opens a horizon for reconsidering the boundaries and possibilities of political action under conditions of distributed sovereignty and algorithmic power.