Artificial Intelligence in Subject-Oriented Control Paradigms

The article discusses unresolved problems and limitations that arise with application of artificial intelligence (AI). These problems are largely related to the fact that ideas about AI are often formed without taking into account the control paradigms. The most common ones are paradigms that consider artificial intelligence not as means included in control activities or control paradigms, but as independent objects of research in the paradigms corresponding to the specifics of such objects. Such paradigms contribute to the development of certain areas of AI, but they also complicate their application in control processes and ignore many potential areas of AI that are relevant to the development of control problems. The organization of control processes is based on their specific paradigms (subjective, cybernetic, etc.) that set such specific requirements to AI implementations as well as to tasks in which it is advisable to use AI. Such control paradigms form tasks for AI, which contributes to successful practical application and development of AI as well as to mechanisms for controlling and neutralizing negative consequences. The author proposes a mechanism for interaction of subjects (persons) and active forms of AI (considered as pseudo-subjects). Taking into account the increasing role of reflexive activity in the processes of social control, the article considers the place and role of AI in ensuring reflexive activity in the subject paradigms of control. Analysis of trends in the development of controlling from the standpoint of the development of scientific rationality (classical, non-classical, and post-non-classical) allows us to conclude that each subject paradigm of control (“subject - object,” “subject - subject,” and “subject - meta-subject”) has its own specifics, which should be considered when developing active forms of AI.

1. Espejo R. (2015) Good Social Cybernetics is a Must in Policy Processes. Kybernetes. Vol. 44, no. 6/7, pp. 874-890.

2. Kauffman L.H. (2016) Cybernetics, Reflexivity and Second-Order Science. Constructivist Foundations. Vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 489-497.

3. Lefebvre V.A. (1973) Conflicting Structures. Moscow: Sovetskoye radio (in Russian).

4. Lefebvre V.A. (1986) Second Order Cybernetics in the Soviet Union and the West. In: Trappl R. (Ed.) Power, Autonomy, Utopia: New Approaches toward Complex Systems (pp. 123-131). New York: Plenum Press.

5. Lektorsky V.A. (2001) Classical and Non-Classical Epistemology. Moscow: Editorial URSS (in Russian).

6. Lepskiy V.E. (1998) The Conception of Subject-Oriented Computerization of Management Activity. Moscow: RAS Institute of Psychology (in Russian).

7. Lepskiy V.E. (2010) Reflexive-Active Environments of Innovative Development. Moscow: Kogito-Tsentr (in Russian).

8. Lepskiy V.E. (2016) Management Technologies in Information Wars (From Classics to Post-Non-Classics). Moscow: Kogito-Tsentr (in Russian).

9. Lepskiy V.E. (2017) Reflexive activity in management. Chelovek i mir. Vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 53-80 (in Russian).

10. Lepskiy V. (2018) Evolution of Cybernetics: Philosophical and Methodological Analysis. Kybernetes. Vol. 47, no. 2, pp. 249-261.

11. Lepskiy V.E. (2019) Methodological and Philosophical Analysis of the Development of Management Problems. Moscow: Kogito- Tsentr (in Russian).

12. Lepskiy V.E. (2020) Philosophical and Methodological Grounds for Assessing the Socio-Psychological Consequences of the Introduction of New Technologies. Psikhologicheskii zhurnal. Vol. 41. No. 4. P. 105-108.

13. Muller K.H. (2015) The Multiple Faces of Reflexive Research Designs. Systemics, Cybernetics and Informatics. Vol. 13, no. 6, pp. 87-98.

14. Novikov D.A. (2016) Cybernetics: From Past to Future. Heidelberg: Springer.

15. Rubinstein S.L. (1997) Selected Philosophical and Psychological Works. Foundations of Ontology, Logic and Psychology. Moscow: Nauka (in Russian).

16. Shchedrovitsky G.P. (1975) Design Automation and Development Tasks of Design Activities. In: Sazonov B.V. (Ed.) Development and Implementation of Automated Systems in Design (Theory and Methodology) (pp. 9-177). Moscow: Stroyizdat (in Russian).

17. Stepin V.S. (2003) Theoretical Knowledge. Moscow: Progress-Traditsiya (in Russian).

18. Umpleby S.A., Medvedeva T.A., & Lepskiy V. (2019) Recent Developments in Cybernetics, from Cognition to Social Systems. Cybernetics and Systems. Vol. 50, no. 4, pp. 367-382.

19. Vedyakhin A.A. et al. (2021) Strong Artificial Intelligence. On the Approaches to the Supermind. Moscow: Intellektual'naya literatura (in Russian).