Digital Humanities and Society Studies

Articles

Experientia Humana contra Simulacra et Technē Artificialis: Re‑Envisioning Humanoid Robots as Trans‑Synthetic Species beyond Corporate Technosimulacra

Downloads

https://doi.org/10.54963/dhss.v2i1.2421
Volume 2 Issue 1 (2026): In Progress
Copyright (c) 2026 Ezra Noheaponoikawai Samuel Lockhart
Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Authors

  • Ezra Noheaponoikawai Samuel Lockhart

    Department of Marriage and Family Sciences, JFK School of Psychology & Social Sciences, National University, San Diego, CA 92123, USA

Received: 31 June 2025; Revised: 20 August 2025; Accepted: 27 August 2025; Published: 5 June 2026

Trans-synthetic kinship and meta-synthetic ecology reconceive cognition as a co-emergent, relational process distributed across human, synthetic, ecological, and technological assemblages. Intelligence arises through intra-active embodiment, sympoietic entanglement, and multispecies interaction rather than as a property of discrete agents. Trans-synthetic kinship situates synthetic agents as relational companions within morphogenetic and cybernetic fields, while meta-synthetic ecology articulates multi-scale relationality from microtemporal embodied resonance to planetary feedback. The model was developed through a comparative analysis of structuralist, post-structuralist, and humanistic-critical perspectives on human experience and expression, tabulating nine thematic domains revealing the ontological, ethical, and cultural stakes of AI and robotics. Design principles and practical interventions were derived from these analyses, which lists 90 interventions for operationalizing co-emergent cognition in synthetic systems. Analyses of embodied and co-emergent forms of agency, alongside processes of autonomy, reveal how synthetic bodies function as operative sites for distributed intelligence, and show that autonomy emerges through relationally negotiated processes that adapt over time and respond dynamically to context. Applying the model fosters collaborative stewardship among technologists, activist-practitioners, policymakers, and community stakeholders; it cultivates socio-technical ecologies characterized by justice, relational attunement, context adaptability, and resilience to complex social and environmental pressures.

Keywords:

AI Ethics Embodiment Agency Distributed Cognition Socio-Technical Systems Sustainable AI Design

References

  1. Baudrillard, J. Simulacra and Simulation; Glaser, S.F., Trans.; University of Michigan Press: Ann Arbor, MI, USA, 1994.
  2. Lockhart, E.N.S. Transhumanism as Capitalist Continuity: Branded Bodies in the Age of Platform Sovereignty. Humans 2025, 5, 21. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/humans5030021
  3. Lockhart, E.N.S. Network States as a Technocratic Shell Game: The Myth of Sovereign Choice and Algorithmic Neutrality. AI Lett. 2025, 2, 2956. Available online: https://ail.sigmaxplore.com/archive/AIL-Vol-2-1-6641009.pdf
  4. Čapek, K. R.U.R. and the Vision of Artificial Life; Čejková, J., Ed.; Šimek, Š.S., Trans.; The MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2024.
  5. Robertson, J. Robo Sapiens Japanicus: Robots, Gender, Family, and the Japanese Nation; University of California Press: Oakland, CA, USA, 2017.
  6. Lukács, G. History and Class Consciousness; Livingstone, R., Trans.; MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 1971.
  7. Horkheimer, M.; Adorno, T.W. Dialectic of Enlightenment: Philosophical Fragments; Jephcott, E., Trans.; Stanford University Press: Stanford, CA, USA, 2002.
  8. Birhane, A. Algorithmic Injustice: A Relational Ethics Approach. Patterns 2021, 2, 100205. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.patter.2021.100205
  9. Ghasemaghaei, M.; Kordzadeh, N. Understanding How Algorithmic Injustice Leads to Making Discriminatory Decisions: An Obedience to Authority Perspective. Inf. Manag. 2024, 61, 103921. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2024.103921
  10. Hockin-Boyers, H.; Vertinsky, P.; Norman, M.; et al. Training the Algorithm: Agency and Algorithmic Injustice in Instagram’s ‘Whitewashed’ Health and Fitness Spaces. New Media Soc. 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/14614448251366172
  11. Jones, J. Don’t Fear Artificial Intelligence, Question the Business Model: How Surveillance Capitalists Use Media to Invade Privacy, Disrupt Moral Autonomy, and Harm Democracy. J. Commun. Inq. 2025, 49, 6–26. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/01968599241235209
  12. Floridi, L. The Ethics of Artificial Intelligence: Principles, Challenges, and Opportunities; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 2023.
  13. Gogoshin, D.L. Robot Responsibility and Moral Community. Front. Robot. AI 2021, 8, 768092. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/frobt.2021.768092
  14. Gunkel, D.J. The Rights of Robots. In Non-Human Rights; Alvarez-Nakagawa, A., Douzinas, C., Eds.; Edward Elgar Publishing: Cheltenham, UK, 2024; pp. 66–87. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4337/9781802208528.00009
  15. Braidotti, R. Posthuman Ethics for AI. J. Bioeth. Inq. 2025, 22, 587–591. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11673-025-10447-2
  16. Haraway, D.J. Staying with the Trouble: Making Kin in the Chthulucene; Duke University Press: Durham, NC, USA, 2016.
  17. Barad, K. Meeting the Universe Halfway: Quantum Physics and the Entanglement of Matter and Meaning; Duke University Press: Durham, NC, USA, 2007.
  18. Hayles, N.K. How We Became Posthuman: Virtual Bodies in Cybernetics, Literature, and Informatics; University of Chicago Press: Chicago, IL, USA, 1999.
  19. Dean, M. Governmentality: Power and Rule in Modern Society, 2nd ed.; Sage Publications: London, UK, 2010.
  20. Schank, C. Digitalization as a challenge to personal integrity. Z. Wirtsch. Unternehmensethik 2019, 20, 176–201. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5771/1439-880X-2019-2-176 (in German)
  21. Schank, C. Algorithmen und ihr Einfluss auf Compliance und Integrity. In Unternehmensverantwortung im Digitalen Wandel: Ein Debattenbeitrag zu Corporate Digital Responsibility; Scheerer, B., Hilb, M., Eds.; Bertelsmann Stiftung: Gütersloh, Germany, 2020; pp. 123–133. (in German)
  22. Braidotti, R. Posthuman Feminism; Polity Press: Cambridge, UK, 2022.
  23. Kafer, A. Feminist, Queer, Crip; Indiana University Press: Bloomington, IN, USA, 2013.
  24. Puar, J.K. The Right to Maim: Debility, Capacity, Disability; Duke University Press: Durham, NC, USA, 2017.
  25. Bateson, G. Steps to an Ecology of Mind: Collected Essays in Anthropology, Psychiatry, Evolution, and Epistemology; University of Chicago Press: Chicago, IL, USA, 2000.
  26. Grosz, E. Chaos, Territory, Art: Deleuze and the Framing of the Earth; Columbia University Press: New York, NY, USA, 2008.
  27. Morton, T. Hyperobjects: Philosophy and Ecology after the End of the World; University of Minnesota Press: Minneapolis, MN, USA, 2013.
  28. Kahambing, J.G.S.; Rivas, V.A. Posthumanism in Ecofeminist Literature: Transgressions in Kazuo Ishiguro’s Klara and the Sun. New Techno-Hum. 2024, 4, 33–40. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techum.2024.10.003
  29. Panigrahi, G.; Padhi, A. What Does It Mean “Human” in the Age of AI? A Bibliometric Evidence of Posthumanism’s Evolution, Thematic Structures, and Future Directions. J. Doc. 2026, 82, 657–682. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/JD-11-2025-0344
  30. Friedrich, J. Beyond Human Democratic Organizing: Posthuman Affirmations. Organ. Theory 2026, 7. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/26317877261433032
  31. Bratton, B.H. The Stack: On Software and Sovereignty; MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2016.
  32. Pasquale, F. The Black Box Society: The Secret Algorithms That Control Money and Information; Harvard University Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2015.
  33. Maturana, H.R.; Varela, F.J. Autopoiesis and Cognition: The Realization of the Living; D. Reidel Publishing: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 1980.
  34. Simondon, G. On the Mode of Existence of Technical Objects; Malaspina, C., Rogove, J., Trans.; Univocal: Minneapolis, MN, USA, 2017.
  35. Deleuze, G. Postscript on the Societies of Control. October 1992, 59, 3–7.
  36. Stiegler, B. Technics and Time, 1: The Fault of Epimetheus; Beardsworth, R., Collins, G., Trans.; Stanford University Press: Stanford, CA, USA, 1998.
  37. Guattari, F. Chaosmosis: An Ethico-Aesthetic Paradigm; Bains, P., Pefanis, J., Trans.; Indiana University Press: Bloomington, IN, USA, 1995.
  38. Hui, Y. The Question Concerning Technology in China: An Essay in Cosmotechnics; Urbanomic: Falmouth, UK, 2016.
  39. Watts, V. Indigenous Place-Thought and Agency amongst Humans and Non-Humans (First Woman and Sky Woman Go on a European World Tour!). Decolonization 2013, 2, 20–34.
  40. Tsing, A.L. The Mushroom at the End of the World: On the Possibility of Life in Capitalist Ruins; Princeton University Press: Princeton, NJ, USA, 2015.
  41. Benjamin, R. Race after Technology: Abolitionist Tools for the New Jim Code; Polity: Cambridge, UK, 2019.
  42. Crawford, K.; Paglen, T. Excavating AI: The Politics of Images in Machine Learning Training Sets. AI Soc. 2021, 36, 1105–1116. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-021-01162-8
  43. Suchman, L. Human-Machine Reconfigurations: Plans and Situated Actions; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2007.
  44. Whitehead, A.N. Process and Reality: An Essay in Cosmology; Griffin, D.R., Sherburne, D.W., Eds.; Free Press: New York, NY, USA, 1978.
  45. Lockhart, E.N.S. From Search to Synthesis: Generative AI, Internet Use, and the Transhuman Epistemic Shift. J. Excell. Soc. Sci. 2025, 4, 24–36. Available online: https://journals.smarcons.com/index.php/jess/article/view/418/472
  46. Kimmerer, R.W. Braiding Sweetgrass: Indigenous Wisdom, Scientific Knowledge, and the Teachings of Plants; Milkweed Editions: Minneapolis, MN, USA, 2013.
  47. Mbembe, A. Necropolitics; Duke University Press: Durham, NC, USA, 2019.
  48. Tuck, E.; McKenzie, M. Place in Research: Theory, Methodology, and Methods; Routledge: New York, NY, USA, 2015.
  49. Latour, B. An Inquiry into Modes of Existence: An Anthropology of the Moderns; Harvard University Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2013.
  50. Ingold, T. Making: Anthropology, Archaeology, Art and Architecture; Routledge: London, UK, 2013.