A Critical Theory of Artificial Intelligence: Power, Freedom, and Democracy

Questo articolo è disponibile anche in:

Since ChatGPT made its debut in 2022, artificial intelligence (AI) has surged to the forefront of public and political debate. As Norberto González highlighted in his long review of Daniel Innerarity’s book Una teoría crítica de la inteligencia artificial, mass media coverage of AI had already surpassed, at least in international media, that of long-standing conflicts such as the clash between Hamas and Israel. Everyone now—especially legislators, politicians, universities, and even the Vatican—is questioning its ethical, political, and social implications.

Innerarity invites us to interpret the AI revolution in light of the history of technology. If in the 1990s the Internet was surrounded by libertarian and anarchic utopias, today we find ourselves immersed in “AIthoritarianism,” a climate in which technology generates skepticism, fear, and polarization. The promise of unlimited freedom associated with the early Internet has given way to platforms that, while presenting themselves as neutral, concentrate enormous economic and social power—often exceeding that of entire states.

The book is structured in three parts.

1. Critique of Algorithmic Reason
   Innerarity distinguishes artificial intelligence from human intelligence, emphasizing the qualities that make the human mind unique: common sense, creativity, contextual learning, and “embodied intelligence.” Data, no matter how vast, do not speak for themselves; they require interpretation. Quantity does not replace the quality of knowledge. Particularly compelling is his reflection on privacy: a purely contractual logic (“I have read and accept the terms”) is insufficient, because citizens do not negotiate on equal footing with platforms. Privacy should be understood as a public good, not merely an individual right.
2. Critique of Technological Reason
   AI is not simply another new technology; it is a revolution comparable to the impact of the printing press, yet it accelerates processes already set in motion by digitalization. Unlike Marshall McLuhan, who described technology as an extension of the senses, Innerarity highlights the historical novelty of AI: its ability to make decisions that even its creators do not fully understand. This raises crucial challenges regarding transparency, governance, and accountability. Opacity and dynamism are not flaws but intrinsic features of algorithmic systems, and algorithmic biases mirror human ones. The solution is not complete transparency, but rather a “collective understanding” among citizens of the technology’s implications.
3. Political Philosophy of Algorithmic Reason
   The third part examines AI’s impact on democracy. The author warns against the promise of algorithmic neutrality and objectivity: because algorithms rely on past data, they tend to preserve the status quo and reduce political reflexivity. Algorithmic governance, even if more efficient, risks rendering citizens passive, depriving them of the capacity to deliberate. Innerarity stresses the importance of balancing technological delegation with popular oversight: delegation is inevitable, but it must always be accompanied by meaningful collective control.

Key Reflections

• The human person cannot be reduced to an algorithmic profile: human freedom generates novelty that predictive models cannot anticipate.
• Democracy requires deliberation and pluralism, not mathematical calculations of aggregated preferences.
• Algorithms do not replace politics: they may amplify biases or correct them, but they cannot decide what is human and unpredictable.
• The ultimate challenge is educational and cultural: to move beyond technological seduction and preserve democracy’s decision-making principle, which is not epistemic but political.

In short, Innerarity offers a comprehensive and thoughtful guide for navigating the world of AI. He encourages us to understand both its risks and its potential, not to demonize technology, but to integrate it into society without sacrificing what makes our freedom and our democracy truly human.

The full text is available in the journal Church Communication Culture.