<?xml version="1.0"?>
<rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"><rdf:Description rdf:about="https://dirros.openscience.si/IzpisGradiva.php?id=21182"><dc:title>The Technosphere and Nihilism</dc:title><dc:creator>Paić,	Žarko	(Avtor)
	</dc:creator><dc:subject>technosphere</dc:subject><dc:subject>nihilism</dc:subject><dc:subject>artificial intelligence</dc:subject><dc:subject>metaphysics</dc:subject><dc:subject>homo cybernetes</dc:subject><dc:description>The “essence” of the technosphere is no longer human or inhuman, because it is not a thinking machine or an instrument for other purposes. After all, the “essence” of artificial intelligence is that it is a thing, rather than an object that thinks and moves. It tends to be an autopoietic machine of cognitive calculation/planning/construction of events that do not exist in reality. Therefore, the onto-logic of the technosphere is pure digital constructivism. The technosphere becomes consequently a synthesis of metaphysics and cybernetics in post- and trans-humanism. This synthesis presupposes a transition, or becoming (devenir), into the post-biological or post-human condition that we call singularity. Autopoiesis is thus the last fundamental word or concept of metaphysics at its realized end. I attempt to offer a discussion of this problem, taking into account the question whether “contemporaneity” under the rule of the technosphere can be thought from the horizon of the figure of Übermensch, which, incidentally, with homo kybernetes, loses its “ontological” meaning.</dc:description><dc:date>2024</dc:date><dc:date>2025-01-09 11:14:59</dc:date><dc:type>Neznano</dc:type><dc:identifier>21182</dc:identifier><dc:language>sl</dc:language></rdf:Description></rdf:RDF>
