Lucas Freund

Artificial intelligence is increasingly organized not only as isolated models, but as populations of interacting agents. This paper argues that such AI agent societies require a shift in how machine intelligence is understood: from individual task performance toward interactional stabilization. Building on emergence theory, agent-based modeling, distributed cognition, collective intelligence, group agency, and stigmergy, the paper develops the concept of emergent machine opinion. An emergent machine opinion is not a human belief, conscious attitude, or phenomenological state. It is a system level, functionally operative position that arises through interaction among artificial agents, persists across interaction cycles, constrains future reasoning or action, and remains open to revision. The paper distinguishes machine opinions from repeated outputs, temporary consensus, stable equilibria, and ordinary conversational regularities. It argues that machine opinions become possible when memory, role differentiation, critique, tool use, semiotic traces, and recursive simulation allow agent societies to preserve, revise, and operationalize shared positions. Simulation is identified as the key mechanism through which candidate positions are generated, tested, narrowed, and stabilized. The paper further distinguishes discursive, operational, and world-effective machine opinions according to their degree of consequence. Controlled evidence on LLM populations and diagnostic cases, such as Moltbook, Vending-Bench, and Bengt Betjänt, illustrate where these dynamics may become visible. The paper concludes that governance must move beyond output control toward interaction governance with meaningful human oversight.

Contemporary discourse on artificial general intelligence (AGI) increasingly frames advanced intelligence as a singular force capable of resolving large-scale social and political crises through superior prediction, optimization, and control. This article challenges that image. It argues that AGI discourse is often structured by a fantasy of sovereign intelligence: a wish-granting conception of intelligence as a unified authority able to overcome conflict, satisfy collective demands, and relieve political actors of the burdens of judgment—or the fear of an alien mastermind challenging and finally destroying humanity. Against this view, the article develops a critique of sovereign solutionism grounded in crisis theory, political judgment, and recent work on collective and multi-agent AI. First, it argues that crises are not reducible to well-structured problems, because they involve contested ends, legitimacy disputes, and uncertainty about the standards of resolution themselves and require transformations, not solutions. Second, the article argues that recent technical research on collective behavior, multi-agent alignment, and agent societies further weakens the plausibility of AGI as a monolithic crisis-solving entity, while not thereby vindicating a new collective sovereign. Third, it shows that the sovereign image of intelligence is inadequate in six respects: epistemically, no singular standpoint is sufficient to grasp crisis in its entirety; normatively, contested ends cannot be reduced to a single objective function; politically, judgment cannot be legitimately delegated in sovereign form; institutionally, distributed intelligence requires mediation, oversight, and contestation; ontologically, the singular image of intelligence presupposed by AGI discourse is less universal than it appears; and systemically, the decentering of intelligence dissolves the very premise that cognition must culminate in a single sovereign center from which crisis can be surveyed and mastered. The article concludes that a pluralistic philosophy of AI is necessary: one that understands intelligence as situated within plural orders of interpretation, value, responsibility, governance, and technics rather than above them as a final authority. Such a view does not reject AI as such, but rejects the inflation of bounded technical usefulness into a sovereign model of intelligence.

This paper examines the fundamental transformation of social reality through AI systems by synthesizing three critical theoretical frameworks: Baudrillard’s hyperreality, Bourdieu’s symbolic violence, and Deleuze’s societies of control. Moving beyond conventional analyses of AI as technological advancement, it introduces the concept of “meta-simulacra” to theorize how AI systems transcend mere simulation to actively construct reality through recursive feedback loops between algorithmic predictions and human behavior. Through analysis of contemporary technologies—from predictive policing to social credit systems—the research identifies four interconnected mechanisms of algorithmic power: First, as meta-simulacra, AI systems generate hyperreal environments where simulations precede and determine social reality rather than represent it. Second, through algorithmic symbolic violence, these systems naturalize their judgments while concealing their constructed nature, transforming algorithmic classifications into seemingly objective social truths. Third, they implement continuous modulation, where control operates through constant adjustment of possibilities rather than disciplinary constraints. Fourth, they create algorithmic nexus points—critical intersections where information flows, control mechanisms, and reality construction converge to generate new forms of power and control mechanisms. This theoretical synthesis reveals how AI systems produce a novel form of subjectivity—the “modulated self”—where individuals become individuals, simultaneously decomposed into data points and recomposed through algorithmic processes in a control society. The paper demonstrates that this transformation represents not merely a technological evolution but a fundamental shift in how reality is constructed, power is exercised, and human experience is shaped.

This paper explores the intersection of René Girard's mimetic theory and the algorithmic society, particularly in the context of the potential advent of Artificial General Intelligence (AGI). Girard's theory, which elucidates the dynamics of desire, rivalry, scapegoating, and the sacrificial crisis, provides a unique lens through which to examine the complexities of our relationship with AI and its role in the creation of the sacred. As individuals increasingly rely on AI recommendations, the distinction between personal choice and algorithmic manipulation becomes less clear, raising concerns about the authenticity of cultural expressions and the role of algorithms in shaping cultural narratives. The triangular structure of desire, with AI as the model and individuals as the imitators, underscores the power of algorithms in this process. The sacrificial crisis, a key concept in Girard's theory, becomes a critical point of reflection in the algorithmic society. The exposure of the scapegoating mechanism reveals the destructive potential of algorithmic manipulation and calls for new forms of understanding, empathy, and non-violent solutions. This paper argues that recognizing the sacrificial crisis can prompt individuals and society to critically examine the impact of AI's influence, challenge the narratives it perpetuates, and reclaim agency in the face of algorithmic dominance. This paper further discusses the potential implications of the emergence of AGI, which could intensify the influence of algorithms on the creation of the sacred due to its advanced cognitive capabilities and deep understanding of human desires and behaviors. This could fuel a rapid evolution of the mimetic ecosystem, with profound implications for personal freedom, independent decision-making, and the formation and preservation of individual identity. This paper concludes by emphasizing the need for responsible algorithmic practices and ethical considerations to ensure that the creation of the sacred serves the common good in the algorithmic society.

This paper explores the perversion of reality in the context of advanced technologies, such as AI, VR, and AR, through the lens of Jean Baudrillard’s theory of hyperreality and the precession of simulacra. By examining the transformative effects of these technologies on our perception of reality, with a particular focus on the usage of digital avatars, the paper highlights the blurred distinction between the real and the simulated, where the copy becomes more ‘real’ than the original. Drawing on Baudrillard’s concept of hyperreality, the paper delves into the perversion of reality as individuals seek refuge in virtual pleasure paradises and embrace artificial pleasures through their digital avatars, disconnecting from genuine human experiences. The convergence of AI, VR, and AR technologies amplifies this hyperreal condition, where digital avatars mimic or surpass the depth of human relationships, challenging our understanding of what is real. In line with Baudrillard’s theory, the paper explores the objectification and commodification of reality within digital spaces, specifically examining the digital avatars’ role in the erosion of genuine human connections. It explores the implications of these avatars in terms of consent, exploitation, and loss of authenticity, echoing Baudrillard’s concerns about the distortion of reality in contemporary society. Recognizing the implications of these technologies, the paper calls for a critical reflection on their transformative power. It emphasizes the need for a nuanced understanding of the hyperreal condition and ethical responsibility in engaging with AI, VR, and AR, particularly in relation to the usage of digital avatars. By resisting the seductive allure of digital escapism and preserving genuine human connections, we can navigate the perversion of reality and cultivate empathy, compassion, and meaningful interactions that transcend the simulated experiences offered by technology.

This paper explores the intersection of René Girard's mimetic theory and the algorithmic society, particularly in the context of the potential advent of Artificial General Intelligence (AGI). Girard's theory, which elucidates the dynamics of desire, rivalry, scapegoating, and the sacrificial crisis, provides a unique lens through which to examine the complexities of our relationship with AI and its role in the creation of the sacred. As individuals increasingly rely on AI recommendations, the distinction between personal choice and algorithmic manipulation becomes less clear, raising concerns about the authenticity of cultural expressions and the role of algorithms in shaping cultural narratives. The triangular structure of desire, with AI as the model and individuals as the imitators, underscores the power of algorithms in this process. The sacrificial crisis, a key concept in Girard's theory, becomes a critical point of reflection in the algorithmic society. The exposure of the scapegoating mechanism reveals the destructive potential of algorithmic manipulation and calls for new forms of understanding, empathy, and non-violent solutions. This paper argues that recognizing the sacrificial crisis can prompt individuals and society to critically examine the impact of AI's influence, challenge the narratives it perpetuates, and reclaim agency in the face of algorithmic dominance. This paper further discusses the potential implications of the emergence of AGI, which could intensify the influence of algorithms on the creation of the sacred due to its advanced cognitive capabilities and deep understanding of human desires and behaviors. This could fuel a rapid evolution of the mimetic ecosystem, with profound implications for personal freedom, independent decision-making, and the formation and preservation of individual identity. This paper concludes by emphasizing the need for responsible algorithmic practices and ethical considerations to ensure that the creation of the sacred serves the common good in the algorithmic society.

This paper explores the perversion of reality in the context of advanced technologies, such as AI, VR, and AR, through the lens of Jean Baudrillard’s theory of hyperreality and the precession of simulacra. By examining the transformative effects of these technologies on our perception of reality, with a particular focus on the usage of digital avatars, the paper highlights the blurred distinction between the real and the simulated, where the copy becomes more ‘real’ than the original. Drawing on Baudrillard’s concept of hyperreality, the paper delves into the perversion of reality as individuals seek refuge in virtual pleasure paradises and embrace artificial pleasures through their digital avatars, disconnecting from genuine human experiences. The convergence of AI, VR, and AR technologies amplifies this hyperreal condition, where digital avatars mimic or surpass the depth of human relationships, challenging our understanding of what is real. In line with Baudrillard’s theory, the paper explores the objectification and commodification of reality within digital spaces, specifically examining the digital avatars’ role in the erosion of genuine human connections. It explores the implications of these avatars in terms of consent, exploitation, and loss of authenticity, echoing Baudrillard’s concerns about the distortion of reality in contemporary society. Recognizing the implications of these technologies, the paper calls for a critical reflection on their transformative power. It emphasizes the need for a nuanced understanding of the hyperreal condition and ethical responsibility in engaging with AI, VR, and AR, particularly in relation to the usage of digital avatars. By resisting the seductive allure of digital escapism and preserving genuine human connections, we can navigate the perversion of reality and cultivate empathy, compassion, and meaningful interactions that transcend the simulated experiences offered by technology.

This paper investigates the responses of GPT-4, a state-of-the-art AI language model, to ten prominent philosophical paradoxes, and evaluates its capacity to reason and make decisions in complex and uncertain situations. In addition to analyzing GPT-4's solutions to the paradoxes, this paper assesses the model's Theory of Mind (ToM) capabilities by testing its understanding of mental states, intentions, and beliefs in scenarios ranging from classic ToM tests to complex, real-world simulations. Through these tests, we gain insight into AI's potential for social reasoning and its capacity for more sophisticated forms of human-AI interaction. The paper also explores the limitations and biases of AI-generated reasoning and its implications for our comprehension of complex philosophical problems.