Jianguo Ding

The digital age has made cyberspace an existential domain in its own right, yet philosophical frameworks for it—including Cyberism’s four-space ontology and Cybersophy’s “Fourth Guiding Principle”—remain anchored to the human scale and leave the cosmological status of cyberspace unaddressed: what kind of thing is it, and what does its existence reveal about the universe? This article proposes Cybercosmology, a programmatic perspective extending these frameworks to the cosmic scale, on which physical reality and cyberspace are two modes of a single informational substrate rather than a base reality and its derivative simulation. Examining the simulation hypothesis (Bostrom 2003), we locate three structural weaknesses—ontological asymmetry, infinite regress, and residual base physicalism—and answer them with an information-priority cosmology grounded in Wheeler’s “It from Bit” and the distinction between actualized and potential information. The resulting Cybercosmological Principle holds that, because both modes share one substrate, the asymmetry between simulator and simulated dissolves, and the question “Are we simulated?” becomes ill-posed. Read alongside religious naturalism and process theology, the view offers a naturalistic grounding for meaning and a coherent research agenda at the intersection of cosmology, information theory, and digital philosophy.

Large language models exhibit emergent abilities — chain-of-thought reasoning, in-context learning, and multi-step planning — that appear abruptly as model scale increases. The prevailing explanation attributes these transitions solely to scale and training data volume. Here, we argue that a systematic variable has been overlooked: during routine interaction, the human brain unconsciously performs semantic completion, intentional-state projection, and error correction, providing the cognitive scaffolding across which AI competence develops. We term this mechanism unconscious cognitive filling (UCF) and situate it within the distributed-cognition and extended-mind traditions, on which cognitive processes are spread across coupled human–artefact systems rather than contained in either part alone. We characterize three UCF mechanisms, show how their accumulation drives a positive feedback loop capable of inducing critical transitions in AI competence, and propose falsifiable experiments to test the UCF hypothesis. UCF reframes emergence as a property of coupled human–AI systems rather than as an attribute of isolated models, with direct implications for alignment, responsibility attribution, and interactive AI design.

Smart contracts execute without judicial override. Deceased individuals leave behind digital identities that function simultaneously as assets and as fragments of personality. Algorithms allocate opportunities yet resist traditional proof of causation. These three problems share a common structure: each arises from a mismatch between the operational logic of digital systems and the evidentiary logic of traditional law. Existing legal responses remain fragmented, addressing each domain in isolation without a systematic account of this structural mismatch. This article develops such an account through Cyberism, the systematic study of cyberspace as a fourth basic space of human existence. It proposes techno-legal mutualism as the core principle of a Cyberist cyberlaw. Mutualism operates through three mechanisms: embedding translates legal rules into code-level constraints; agency delegates legal functions to technical systems under accountability standards; feedback channels operational data back into legislative revision. The framework is applied to smart contracts, digital inheritance, and algorithmic discrimination, with comparative perspectives from the EU, the US, and China. The article demonstrates that when law and technology are understood as co-constitutive, a unified analytical vocabulary emerges. That vocabulary can ground proportionate and effective legal responses across jurisdictions.

This paper develops and defends the General Mind--Thought Quantum Entanglement Unified Theory (MTE), a transdimensional, holographic framework for consciousness. The theory addresses three persistent challenges in consciousness studies: the hard problem of why physical processes give rise to subjective experience; the boundary problem of how individual conscious agents emerge from a potentially continuous substrate; and the cross-tradition problem of why mind--consciousness doctrines from radically independent civilisations converge on a strikingly consistent two-level structure. MTE posits two ontologically distinct but holographically coupled levels: the holistic conscious mind~($I$) in ordinary four-dimensional spacetime, and indivisible `primordial thoughts'~($dI$)---the minimal carriers of phenomenal information---residing in a topologically separate thought-space whose spatial dimensionality is strictly different from that of the empirical world. These levels are linked by a holographic equivalence relation ($I \sim dI$) and a dual-layer quantum entanglement structure. By locating quantum effects in thought-space rather than in neural tissue, MTE resolves the decoherence objection that undermines the Penrose--Hameroff Orch-OR theory. The framework accounts for nonlocal inter-mind correlations, the conditions under which individual consciousness forms and dissolves, and collective consciousness. A detailed structural mapping across Daoism, Buddhism, Advaita Vedant\=a, Kabbalah, Christian mysticism, Sufism, and Platonism demonstrates that MTE functions as a formal meta-framework for cross-civilisational philosophy of mind. Five testable predictions are derived, and the theory's limitations and open problems are discussed in detail.

With the development of the Internet and artificial intelligence, cyberspace has become increasingly intertwined with human life. Consequently, the boundaries of human existence and identity are being reconsidered and redefined. This paper examines the entity types and philosophical implications of different forms of “humans” and “quasi-humans” (including humanoid machines and virtual humans) in the context of the cyber age, and discusses their relevance to philosophical inquiry into the nature of the “human.” First, the paper reviews existing notions of the natural human, digital human, and robot. Drawing on cyberism—the study of the relationship between humans and cyberspace—it classifies different forms of human entities into five categories: the biological human, the cyborg human, the digital twin human, the virtual digital human, and the robot. Focusing on the “quasi-human” categories other than the biological human, the paper then investigates philosophical issues concerning ontology, identity, ethics, and rights, mortality and persistence, subjectivity and agency, and authenticity and simulation. This study aims to deepen understanding of human existence in the digital era and to explore the ethical and philosophical challenges posed by emerging types of human.

With the growth of digital technologies and artificial intelligence, human existence is expanding into four interconnected spaces: physical (natural), social, thinking, and cyber. The interplay of these four spaces is reshaping the relationships between humans and nature, society, their inner selves, and the cyber world. The traditional tripartite philosophical system of Eastern culture (Daoism, Confucianism, and Buddhism) faces new challenges in explaining human existence and its relationship to these fundamental living spaces in the digital age. This paper proposes a new quadri-philosophical system, “Daoism, Confucianism, Buddhism, and Cyberism" based on the Cyber-Physical-Social-Thinking space. In this new system, Cyberism emerges as a new philosophical domain dedicated to exploring the relationship between humans and the cyber realm, including its existence and space, and responding to ongoing transformations in human life in the digital age. Specifically, this paper analyzes the new forms of existence and space, philosophical logic, and new applications and philosophical problems for each of the four philosophical dimensions, examining the contemporary relevance of Eastern philosophy in the context of digital society. This research seeks to contribute to ongoing discussions on Eastern philosophy and offers an interdisciplinary perspective for reflecting on the impact of emerging technologies on human existence.

Is artificial intelligence capable of consciousness? Existing approaches proceed largely top-down, deriving necessary conditions from theories of consciousness and assessing whether AI systems satisfy them. This paper proposes a complementary, bottom-up tool: a layered model for evaluating AI consciousness that is explicitly grounded in the phenomenological tradition. The model comprises four layers: the Phenomenal layer (subjective qualia and affective valence, understood as intentional structure), the Selfhood layer (minimal pre-reflective self-awareness and non-instrumental self-concern), the Existential layer (temporal self-constitution through retention, primal impression, and protention), and the Axiological layer (intrinsic meaning-making through narrative self-constitution). Drawing on Husserl, Heidegger, Merleau-Ponty, Zahavi, and enactivist cognitive science — as well as functionalist and predictive processing frameworks — each layer is provided with theoretical grounding and operationalisable indicators. The model is then brought into dialogue with Cybersophy, a four-dimensional framework recently proposed as a guiding principle for human wisdom in the digital age. This dialogue reveals a structural isomorphism but a radical divergence in content: the layered model addresses first-person subjective experience, whereas Cybersophy addresses third-person-observable human skills and normative commitments. By explicitly contrasting the two, the paper identifies a recurring category error — the conflation of sophisticated digital awareness with phenomenal consciousness — and proposes the layered model as a graduated, phenomenologically informed assessment tool for interdisciplinary research at the intersection of phenomenology, AI, and the cognitive sciences.

The convergence of artificial intelligence, virtual reality, and brain-computer interfaces is transforming not only social and economic structures but also the cognitive, ethical, and existential foundations of human life. Yet traditional conceptions of “cybersecurity awareness” remain confined to threat recognition and protective behaviour, leaving unaddressed the deeper challenges of cognitive manipulation, algorithmic injustice, digital identity fragmentation, and value erosion. Recent theoretical work has proposed Cyberism as a fourth paradigm for understanding human-cyberspace relations and Cybersophy as a corresponding normative wisdom framework. However, a critical gap persists between the descriptive knowledge of Cyberism and the practical wisdom of Cybersophy: the capacity of individuals to become aware in concrete situations of which knowledge to apply and which values to follow. This paper introduces Cyberawareness as an independent theoretical concept that bridges this gap. We define Cyberawareness as a multidimensional cognitive-practical capacity and construct a 1+4 model: threat awareness as the foundation, plus four higher-order dimensions — cognitive, ethical, existential, and value awareness — corresponding to the pillars of Cybersophy. We elaborate three bridging mechanisms (cognitive transformation, behavioural guidance, and feedback loops) and propose a Risk-Awareness-Wisdom spectrum. Finally, we outline practical cultivation pathways through education, policy, technology design, and community participation.

AI hallucination is usually understood as a problem of content generation in which outputs are false, unfaithful to the source material, or logically inconsistent. This definition, however, is too narrow to account for the full range of distortions arising in contemporary human–AI relations. This article develops a four-level taxonomy organized by where distortion primarily occurs: content hallucinations in AI outputs; anthropomorphic hallucinations in users' attributions of consciousness, emotion, intention, or moral alignment to AI systems; user self-perception hallucinations in distorted self-assessments shaped by AI feedback; and power-narrative hallucinations in selectively optimistic accounts of AI futures that downplay conflict, distribution, and structural risk. The four levels are analytically distinct, but they can reinforce one another across technical, cognitive, psychological, and societal domains. Treating hallucination as a multi-level form of sociotechnical distortion broadens the concept’s analytical scope and has implications for media literacy, governance, and future research.

How might artificial intelligence become conscious? Current research on AI consciousness proceeds predominantly in a top-down manner: deriving necessary conditions from theories of consciousness—such as Integrated Information Theory (IIT), Global Workspace Theory (GWT), or Predictive Processing (PP)—and then assessing whether existing or future systems meet those criteria. This paper proposes a complementary, bottom-up approach. Rather than starting with abstract theoretical axioms, we begin with concrete, imaginable scenarios—narrative nodes where consciousness might plausibly emerge. Six pathways are articulated: Consciousness Transfer, Sensory Saturation, Survival Pressure, Offline Rehearsal, Private Space, and Existential Boredom. Each pathway is brought into dialogue with a corresponding theory of consciousness or philosophical framework, drawing on Chalmers (functionalism), Seth (predictive processing), Damasio (homeostasis), Schneider and Turner (the Artificial Consciousness Test), and Global Workspace Theory (Baars & Dehaene), among others. The aim is not to adjudicate whether or when AI will become conscious, but to provide a new platform for dialogue across theories and disciplines. We argue that a scenario-driven approach offers a necessary complement to theory-driven reasoning, exposing theoretical tensions and providing testable anchors for future empirical research.

This paper argues that Marxist philosophy is undergoing a theoretical turn towards digital philosophy in response to the digital transformation of social being, social consciousness and social relations. It contends that human practice now unfolds within a cyber-physical-social-thinking quadruple dialectical space, in which cyberspace has become an ontologically significant field rather than a mere technical extension. On this basis, the article proposes Cybersophy as a fourth guiding principle that supplements worldview, life outlook, and values. It reconstructs Marxist philosophy at two levels, namely core domains such as epistemology, ethics, ontology, and axiology, and meta theoretical categories concerning the relation between the virtual and the real and an upgraded complex systems dialectics. By introducing concepts including digital practice, distributed cognition, platform power, digital alienation, and digital emancipation, Cybersophy offers a framework for critically and normatively orienting life in the digital age.

The rapid expansion of cyberspace is fundamentally reshaping human existence, social relations, spatial structures, and mechanisms of order formation. These transformations pose significant theoretical challenges to Confucian philosophy, which has traditionally been grounded in embodied individuals, stable relational networks, and community-based ethical orders. Drawing on the framework of Cyberism, this paper re-examines Confucian philosophy through four foundational dimensions—human, relations, space, and order—and analyzes how emerging socio-technical conditions, including digital humans, algorithmic mediation, hybrid virtual–physical environments, and platform governance, destabilize its underlying assumptions. We argue that these transformations do not render Confucian ethics obsolete; rather, they call for its reinterpretation and reconstruction within a cyber-enabled context. Building on this analysis, the paper proposes three conceptual pathways for the transformation of Confucian ethics in the digital age: digital rituality as a framework for regulating interaction order in platform environments; algorithmic benevolence as a normative orientation for embedding human-centered values into technological decision-making; and platform-based community as a model for reconstituting public good under conditions of data-driven social organization. By articulating these concepts, the study contributes to bridging classical ethical traditions and contemporary digital governance, and offers a Confucian approach to addressing the ethical challenges of cyber civilization.

Digital technologies—including artificial intelligence, algorithmic curation, virtual reality, and blockchain—are fundamentally reshaping how history is recorded, narrated, and understood. Traditional philosophies of history, from Rankean objectivism to postmodernist narrativism, lack the conceptual vocabulary to address these transformations. This paper proposes the “Cyberhistorical View” (CHV) as a philosophical framework that extends Cybersophy—the systematic philosophy of human existence in cyberspace—into the temporal and historical domain. Drawing on Cybersophy’s four-dimensional structure (cognitive, ethical, existential, and value dimensions), the CHV articulates five core propositions addressing historical epistemology, temporality, ethics, experience, and value in the digital age. Through critical dialogue with canonical philosophies of history (Ranke, Ricoeur, Koselleck, White) and recent scholarship in digital history and the digital humanities, the paper demonstrates how the CHV responds to what it terms the “crisis of historical consciousness in digital transformation.” The paper further clarifies the relationship between the CHV as a philosophical foundation and Cyberhistoriology as its methodological counterpart, establishing a “View–ology” pairing analogous to the classical relationship between philosophy of history and historiography. Finally, the paper considers the practical implications of the CHV for digital humanities research, AI-assisted historical inquiry, and the digital transformation of history education.