Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Jeffrey Anthony's avatar

It is dangerous to call AI a tool as it is born from the logics of cybernetics and this constitutive aspect matters.

A tool is an extension of the human body. A lens extends the eye, a paintbrush extends the hand, a guitar extends the temporal rhythms of human experience into sound. Tools are inert until picked up; they hold no agency of their own. Their meaning arises only when a human body acts through them.

AI is not inert. It is designed to anticipate, to predict, to act without waiting for intention. From its origins in cybernetic anti-aircraft systems during WWII, its logics are built upon the need to bypass the human as a lagging component. This is replacement, not extension of the human form.

Generative AI encodes the body and in so doing alters the very conditions under which expression is possible. What once operated as symbolic forms grounded in lived temporality and relation are reduced to parasitic imitations - what I call the ontological tether. They retain the appearance of meaning while feeding on its absence.

To call it a tool is to miss this ontological shift.

Tools preserve the wager of art, the irreducible risk and contingency of expression. AI collapses risk into prediction, ambiguity into certainty, freedom into compliance. It does not extend the human project of art. AI forecloses it, substituting symbolic meaning with scalable content.

Expand full comment

No posts