This article aims to clarify the essence of the concept of “artificial sociality” in the context of human-machine interaction, answering the main research question of this study - is artificial sociality a prerequisite or a result of this interaction? To achieve this aim, the authors conducted a logical analysis of the definitions of sociality and artificial sociality presented in the scientific literature as well as empirically studied artificial sociality in the context of human-machine interaction, using three methods - method of comparing means, correlation and discriminant analysis. All three methods applied for the analysis of the same data: indicators of the potential of human-machine interaction and G. Hofstede’s six cultural dimensions in the countries of the world (n = 63). With the help of cultural dimensions the authors tried to interpret empirically the degree of “artificiality” of the culture of a particular country (based on the methodological approach about the presence of “natural” and “artificial” in a culture), which [“artificiality”of the culture] determines the development of artificial sociality. The main conclusions of the research are as follows: 1) sociality is understood by the authors not as characteristics of agents included in the communication network, but as a result of the implementation of these characteristics - the mechanism of social interactions created and used by communicating agents, which [social interactions] are of various types: cooperation, rivalry, grouping, merging, etc.; 2) artificial sociality presupposes - and thus differs from natural sociality ñ artificial (algorithmic), as opposed to natural (associative or intuitive), mechanism of interaction between social agents in the course of their communication; 3) artificial sociality arose in human society along with the development of writing and, after that, various methods of processing and storing information (cataloging, archiving, etc.), i.e. long before the appearance of machines, it [artificial sociality] is determined by the relative “artificiality” of a culture and is a prerequisite, but not a result of human-machine interaction. The research funded by the Erasmus+ Programme of the European Union, Eurokey project No. 2017-1-TR01-KA202-046115.
In the present article, the author considers the topical issue of human-machine collaboration, as interest in such an issue is caused not only by the technical and economic consequences of the broadening of the scope of artificial sociality. The article aims to clarify the scientific and theoretical prerequisites for the statements made by some sociologists on the emergence and broadening of the scope of artificial sociality as a real result of human-machine communication. This is achieved by solving the following tasks: 1) analysis of the scientists’ and researchers’ statements either on the presence or the fundamental impossibility of artificial sociality; 2) analysis of N. Luhmannís theory on communication as the basis of sociality; 3) considering some assessments by certain authors given to the deepening of human-machine cooperation, which contribute to the broadening of the scope of artificial sociality; 4) outlining further directions for studying the artificial sociality. In the given article, the author uses the methods of comparative analysis, analogy, generalization, classification, structural-functional and semiotic methods. All of them are united within an interdisciplinary approach to the study of the stated theory. The scientific novelty of the article lies in the comparative historical analysis of the concepts of changing sociality, especially N. Luhmann’s theory of communication. This allowed the author to formulate his own definition of sociality - natural and artificial - from the point of view of the sociology. The author understands sociality as the essence of communication of agents, who autonomously function in a self-organizing network of an autopoiesis nature. In the final part of the article, the author considers several issues that demand more active and innovative participation of sociologists in their solution: the need of a new methodology for assessing the scope and consequences of the broadening of artificial sociality in the short-term and the long-term; study of the forms of organizing contact between humans and devices with artificial intelligence, especially in the case of machines using non-binary logic; the role of culture in broadening human-machine collaboration.
Šī raksta mērķis ir izpētīt mākslīgo socialitāti, izmantojot piemēru par autoru komunikāciju ar ChatGPT, kā arī pamatojoties uz humanitāro, sociālo un tehnisko pētījumu pieredzes analīzi mākslīgā intelekta jomā un citu pētnieku komunikāciju ar mākslīgā intelekta rīkiem. Pētījuma priekšmets ir mākslīgās socialitātes dalībnieki (cilvēki un mākslīgā intelekta rīki) un komunikācija starp tiem. Pētījums ir pārsvarā sociāli humanitārais, bet ietver mēģinājumu pievērsties mākslīgā intelekta rīku funkcionēšanas matemātiski tehnoloģiskajiem aspektiem saistībā ar to, kā tie veido cilvēku sabiedrībai jaunu sociālo realitāti – mākslīgo socialitāti. Raksta pirmajā daļā autori analizē komunikāciju kā socialitātes pamatu, izmantojot N. Lūmana metodoloģiju. Otrajā daļā parādīts, kā mākslīgā intelekta matemātiskās tehnoloģijas ir kļuvušas par sociālajām tehnoloģijām mākslīgās socialitātes ietvaros. Trešajā daļā aprakstīta eksperimentālā komunikācija starp cilvēkiem un mākslīgā intelekta rīkiem, izmantojot ChatGPT piemēru. Pētījuma autori pirmo reizi Baltijas valstīs aplūkojuši mākslīgo socialitāti un mākslīgo intelektu to socioloģiskajā aspektā un mēģinājuši starpdisciplināru izpēti šajā jomā. Nākotnē pieprasījums pēc starpdisciplināras pieejas mākslīgā intelekta rīku izpētē tikai pieaugs, jo šis priekšmets pats par sevi ir starpdisciplinārs, un neviena zinātne nespēs panākt izrāvienu izolētībā. Autori uzskata, ka mākslīgās socialitātes ietvaros vairāku veidu prāti (īpaši cilvēka un datora) var konstruktīvi līdzdarboties, tāpat kā līdz šim līdzfunkcionēja cilvēku un dzīvnieku prāti.
EN
The purpose of this article is to study artificial sociality using the example of the authors’ communication with ChatGPT, as well as based on an analysis of the experience of humanitarian, social and technical research in the field of artificial intelligence and the communication of other researchers with artificial intelligence tools. The subject of the study is the participants in artificial sociality (people and artificial intelligence tools) and communication between them. The research is predominantly social and humanitarian, but includes an attempt to address the mathematical and technological aspects of the functioning of artificial intelligence tools in the context of how they create a new social reality for human society – artificial sociality. In the first section of the article, the authors analyze communication as the basis of sociality, using the methodology of N. Luhmann. The second section shows how mathematical technologies of artificial intelligence became social technologies in the framework of artificial sociality. The third section describes experimental communication between people and artificial intelligence tools using ChatGPT as an example. For the first time in the Baltic countries, the authors of the study examined artificial sociality and artificial intelligence in their sociological aspect and attempted interdisciplinary research in this area. In the future, the demand for an interdisciplinary approach to the study of artificial intelligence tools will only increase, since this subject itself is interdisciplinary, and no single science will be able to make a breakthrough in isolation. The authors believe that in the framework of artificial sociality, several types of minds (in particular, human and computer) may well co-function constructively, just as human and animal minds have co-functioned so far.
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.