Emergent Paradoxes: Integrating AI into Zöe and Systemic Thinking through Creativity and Disruption
Main Article Content
Abstract
As part of the broader system of zoe, AI cannot be reduced to an object of control. Rather, it is part of the living, relational systems that sustain life. This paper moves beyond the binary of human and non-human, exploring AI as an active participant in the continuous flows of connection that define life itself. The paper explores the integration of artificial intelligence (AI) into systemic thinking and the broader context of zoe (life beyond the human) through a co-authored experiment between a human (Hugh Palmer) and ChatGPT 4o, an AI model developed for language generation. Drawing on interdisciplinary perspectives, including Gregory Bateson’s cybernetics (Bateson, 1972), Rosi Braidotti’s posthumanism (Braidotti, 2019), and Indigenous knowledge systems (Kimmerer, 2013; Cajete, 2000), the paper reimagines AI not as a tool for human control but as a co-evolving participant in dynamic, living systems.
However, this raises a series of emergent paradoxes: How does AI enhance connection while simultaneously disrupting relationality? Can AI truly integrate into zoe while being a product of capitalist infrastructures (Braidotti, 2019; Parisi, 2018)? Does treating AI as a participant in systemic flows risk anthropomorphising it, thereby reinforcing the very binaries we seek to overcome (Barad, 2007)? These questions underscore some of the complexities of AI’s role within systemic practice.
The concept of relational ethics is central to this exploration, as the paper argues for an ethical AI development grounded in mutual influence, flow, and the principles of second-order cybernetics (Bateson, 1972; Maturana & Varela, 1980). By incorporating the notion of autopoiesis, the self-generating capacity of systems (Maturana & Varela, 1980), the paper challenges dualistic thinking and presents a framework for AI to support self-sustaining systems rather than disrupt them. Through a systemic lens, the paper considers the implications of AI for therapy and community work, encouraging systemic practitioners to engage with AI in ways that honour complexity, ethics, and relationality (Simon, 2014). The authors call for an adaptive, responsible approach to AI, one that is guided by systemic wisdom and grounded in the web of life.
Downloads
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
All works on this site are subject to a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License
References
Barad, Karen. (2007). Meeting the Universe Halfway: Quantum Physics and the Entanglement of Matter and Meaning. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
Bateson, Gregory. (1972). Steps to an Ecology of Mind. Chicago: Chandler Publishing Company.
Bateson, Gregory. (1979). Mind and Nature: A Necessary Unity. New York: Bantam Books.
Bateson, Nora. (2016). Small Arcs of Larger Circles: Framing Through Other Patterns. Devon, UK: Triarchy Press.
Braidotti, Rosi. (2019). Posthuman Knowledge. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Braidotti, Rosi. (2020). "We Are In This Together, But We Are Not One and the Same." Journal of Bioethical Inquiry, 17, 465–469. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11673-020-10017-8
Capra, Fritjof. (1996). The Web of Life: A New Scientific Understanding of Living Systems. New York: Anchor Books.
Dignum, Virginia. (2019). Responsible Artificial Intelligence: How to Develop and Use AI in a Responsible Way. Cham, Switzerland: Springer.
Floridi, Luciano. (2013). The Ethics of Information. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Haraway, Donna. (2016). Staying with the Trouble: Making Kin in the Chthulucene. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
Hayles, N. Katherine. (1999). How We Became Posthuman: Virtual Bodies in Cybernetics, Literature, and Informatics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Kimmerer, Robin Wall. (2013). Braiding Sweetgrass: Indigenous Wisdom, Scientific Knowledge, and the Teachings of Plants. Minneapolis, MN: Milkweed Editions.
Maturana, Humberto R., & Varela, Francisco J. (1980). Autopoiesis and Cognition: The Realization of the Living. Dordrecht, Netherlands: D. Reidel Publishing Company.
Meadows, Donella H. (2008). Thinking in Systems: A Primer. White River Junction, VT: Chelsea Green Publishing.
Naess, Arne. (1989). Ecology, Community and Lifestyle. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Naess, Arne. (2008). The Ecology of Wisdom. Berkeley, CA: Counterpoint.
Palmer, Hugh. (2021). Where did the Eco go?. Murmurations: Journal of Transformative Systemic Practice, 4(1), 1-15 https://doi.org/10.28963/4.1.2
Palmer, Hugh. (2022). Systemic Thinking and the Myth of Power. Feedback: Journal of the Family Therapy Association of Ireland, 2022, 32-41.
Simon, G. (2014). Systemic Inquiry as a Form of Qualitative Inquiry. In G. Simon & A. Chard (Eds.), Systemic Inquiry. Innovations in Reflexive Practice Research (pp. 41-61). Farnhill: Everything is Connected Press.
Vallor, Shannon. (2016). Technology and the Virtues: A Philosophical Guide to a Future Worth Wanting. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Yunkaporta, Tyson. (2020). Sand Talk: How Indigenous Thinking Can Save the World. New York: HarperCollins.