Subject of the Project of Reconceptualizing the Subject: The Problem of Responsibility

The article examines the trend toward reconceptualizing the subject in post-non-classical philosophy and analyzes how the problem of responsibility transforms within contemporary human–machine interaction. Reconceptualizing the subject involves conceptually rethinking the classical philosophical subject while accounting for critiques advanced by the deconceptualization project. The authors identify three stages of conceptual engagement with the subject: classical conceptualization undertaken by early modern philosophy; the deconceptualization project pursued by non-classical philosophy; and the contemporary reconceptualization project, which the authors situate within post-non-classical philosophy. The problem of responsibility emerges as one of the most critical junctures in the transition from deconceptualization to reconceptualization. The deconceptualization project attempted to replace the classical subject with external objective forces that systematically influence and ultimately strip it of agency. This has prompted efforts to rethink both the deconceptualization project and the subject itself, manifesting as a refusal to refuse the subject. The authors propose the concept of reassembling the subject, whereby the subject emerges as an agent capable of autonomous action through a complex process of ontogenetic and phylogenetic development alongside the internalization of various components. Through reassembling, the subject retains responsibility for its actions because, despite lacking a fixed center or “natural” essence, it remains capable of self-reprogramming and autonomous agency. Particular attention is given to actualizing the subject reassembling project within human–machine interaction. The development of artificial intelligence systems generates a complexity continuum wherein the traditional subject–object dichotomy gives way to a dynamic network of distributed subjectivity (agency). The concept of the subjective membrane describes the selective permeability of subjective boundaries, allowing for the integration of technical elements without sacrificing the subject’s capacities for reflection and responsibility. The authors discuss the problem of delegating responsibility to technical systems and establishing ethically permissible boundaries for constructing techno-subjectivity. The reconceptualization project not only rehabilitates the concept of responsibility but expands its scope, shifting it from individual morality to systemic architectural ethics.

1. Arshinov V.I. (2013) What is Post-Non-Classical Science for Me? Epistemology & Philosophy of Science. Vol. 36, no. 2, pp. 92–95 (in Russian).

2. Arshinov V.I. & Svirskiy Ya.I. (2016) The Complex World and its Observer. Part Two. Filosofiya nauki i tekhniki = Philosophy of Science and Technology. Vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 78–91 (in Russian).

3. Arshinov V.I. & Yanukovich M.F. (2024) The Issue of Technosubject through the Lens of “Together-with-Complexity” Thinking. Russian Journal of Philosophical Sciences = Filosofskie nauki. Vol. 67, no. 3, pp. 53–74. (in Russian).

4. Badiou A. (1988) L’être et évènement. Paris: Seuil (in French).

5. Badiou A. (1991) On a Finally Objectless Subject. In: Cadava E., Connor P., & Nancy J.-L. (Eds.) Who Comes after the Subject? (pp. 24–32). New York: Routledge.

6. Bourdieu P. (1965) Culte de l’unité et différences cultivées. In: Bourdieu P. (Ed.) Un art moyen. Essai sur les usages sociaux de la photographie (pp. 32–106). Paris: Minuit (in French).

7. Braidotti R. (2021) The Posthuman. Moscow: Logos (Russian translation).

8. Budanov V. (2015) Transdisciplinary Discourses of Post-Non-Classics: Cognition, Communication, Self-Organization in the Anthroposphere. In: Bazhanov V. & Scholz R.W. (Eds.) Transdisciplinarity in Philosophy and Science: Approaches, Problems, Prospects (pp. 145–159). Moscow: Navigator (in Russian).

9. Budanov V.G. (2024) Technosubject and Anthroposocial Challenges of Human–Artificial Intelligence Interaction: Synergy, Demarcation, New Rationality, and Risks. Russian Journal of Philosophical Sciences = Filosofskie nauki. Vol. 67, no. 3, pp. 27–52 (in Russian).

10. Daston L. & Galison P. (2018) Objectivity. Moscow: Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie (Russian translation).

11. Davydov A.P. (2024) The “Middle” as a Method: In Search for the Socio-Individual. Russian Journal of Philosophical Sciences = Filosofskie nauki (in Russian).

12. Foucault M. (1994) Nietzsche, Freud, Marx. Kentavr. No. 2, pp. 48–56 (Russian translation).

13. Heidegger M. (2013) Being and Time. Moscow: Akademicheskiy proekt (Russian translation).

14. Hume D. (1996) A Treatise of Human Nature. In: Hume D. Works in 2 Vols. (Vol. 1). Moscow: Mysl’ (Russian translation).

15. Kant I. (1994) Critique of Practical Reason. In: Kant I. Collected Works in 6 Vols. (Vol. 4). Moscow: Choro (Russian translation).

16. Karneev R.R. (2022) Project of Reconceptualization of the Subject: Unfinished Assembly. Kontsept: filosofiya, religiya, kul’tura. Vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 7–19 (in Russian).

17. Karneev R.R. (2025) Reassembly of the Subject and the Subject Membrane: Philosophical Understanding of Education in the Era of Neural Networks. Vysshee obrazovanie v Rossii = Higher Education in Russia. Vol. 34, no. 6, pp. 136–151 (in Russian).

18. Karneev R.R. & Mukhortov A.S. (2022) Philosophy as Practice: Spiritual Exercises and the Creation of Concepts. Kaspiyskiy region: politika, ekonomika, kul’tura = The Caspian Region: Politics, Economics, Culture. Vol. 73, no. 4, pp. 125–129 (in Russian).

19. Kuznetsov V.Yu. (2008) The Shift from Classics to Non-Classics and the Increase in Orders of Reflection in Philosophy. Vestnik Moskovskogo universiteta. Seriya 7: Filosofiya = Lomonosov Philosophy Journal. No. 1, pp. 3–18 (in Russian).

20. Kuznetsov V.Yu. (2017) Reassembly of Subjects and the Problem of Development. Filosofiya nauki i tekhniki = Philosophy of Science and Technology. Vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 148–156 (in Russian).

21. Kuznetsov V.Yu. (2022) Post-Non-Classical Unity of the World. Moscow: RIPOL klassik (in Russian).

22. Latour B. (2014) Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor-Network-Theory. Moscow: HSE Publishing House (Russian translation).

23. Lepskiy V. (2016) Analytics of the Assembly of Development Subjects. Moscow: Kogito-Tsentr (in Russian).

24. Meillassoux Q. (2015) After Finitude: An Essay on the Necessity of Contingency. Yekaterinburg: Kabinetnyy uchenyy (Russian translation).

25. Negarestani R. (2021) The Labor of the Inhuman. Logos. Vol. 31, no. 3, pp. 1–38 (Russian translation).

26. Nietzsche F. (2012) On the Genealogy of Morality. In: Nietzsche F. Complete Works in 5 Vols. (Vol. 5). Moscow: Kul’turnaya revolyutsiya (Russian translation).

27. Rickert H. (1998) On the System of Values. In: Rickert H. Science and History: A Critique of Positivist Epistemology (pp. 363–391). Moscow: Respublika (Russian translation).

28. Stepin V.S. (2009) Classics, Non-Classics, Post-Non-Classics: Criteria for Distinction. In: Kiyashchenko L.P. & Stepin V.S. (Eds.) Post-Non-Classics: Philosophy, Science, Culture (pp. 249–295). Saint Petersburg: Mir (in Russian).

29. Žižek S. (2014) The Ticklish Subject: The Absent Centre of Political Ontology. Moscow: Delo (Russian translation).