Digital Humanism and Evolutionary Design

Wolfgang Höhl

cs.AIJun 22, 2026

Digital Humanism and Evolutionary Design

Authors: Wolfgang Höhl

Organizations: Technical University of Munich (TUM) School of Computation, Information and Technology (CIT) München, Germany, EU

Abstract

This paper examines the two concepts of digital humanism and evolutionary design. The aim is to identify and highlight potential common structures, synergies, and challenges. How should and can technical systems be designed, and what implications does this have for the design of our environment? In light of the current debate surrounding artificial intelligence, this paper aims to serve as a preliminary study to help better understand the two concepts of digital humanism and evolutionary design within the context of human-centered technological development. Following a brief introduction, the two concepts of Digital Humanism and Evolutionary Design are presented and graphically visualized. The terms of freedom and responsibility in human decision-making, conviviality, and subjectivity are discussed, along with examples illustrating the distinction between human and artificial intelligence (Turing Test and Chinese Room). The various concepts of evolutionary design (e.g., co-evolutionary or sustainable software development, clean code, or green IT) and Gilbert Simondon's concept of the "open machine" are introduced. The interdependencies between functional specialization and open technology development are highlighted. Both concepts share similar structures. In joint cooperation, they can lead to positive effects and mutual synergies. Significant differences lie in the areas of autonomy and determination in decision-making, as well as in genuine and simulated subjectivity. Open technology development is also currently suffering from the functional specialization of software and AI applications due to a purely market- and consumer-oriented approach. Even optimizations for energy efficiency in sustainable software development lead to greater specialization and thus also have a detrimental effect on open and quality-oriented technology development.

Explore similar work

Jul 11, 2026cs.AI

Comparing Socio-technical Design Principles with Guidelines for Human-centered AI

Human-centered AI (HCAI) refers to guidelines or principles that aim on ethi-cally oriented design of systems. We compare HCAI- guidelines with princi-ples of socio-technical systems that emerged in the context of conventional in-formation technology. The comparison leads to a revision of socio-technical heuristics by including aspects of AI-usage. The comparison reveals that con-tinuous evolution is a basic characteristic of socio-technical systems, and that human oversight or interventions and the subsequent appropriation of AI-systems lead to continuous adaptation and re-design of the systems, if autono-my is collaboratively exercised. From a socio-technical point of view, the cru-cial requirement of transparency has not only to be fulfilled with technical fea-tures, but also by contributions of the whole system including human actors. It will be promising for using AI, if not only technical features, but organization-al and social practices are socio-technically designed in a way that compen-sates shortcomings of AI.

Thomas Herrmann

Sociotechnical Systems Human Oversight Principles Evolution

Ask PDF

Apr 24, 2026cs.CY

A Co-Evolutionary Theory of Human-AI Coexistence: Mutualism, Governance, and Dynamics in Complex Societies

Classical robot ethics is often framed around obedience, including Asimov's laws. This framing is insufficient for contemporary AI systems, which are increasingly adaptive, generative, embodied, and embedded in physical, psychological, and social environments. This paper proposes conditional mutualism under governance as a framework for human-AI coexistence: a co-evolutionary relationship in which humans and AI systems develop, specialize, and coordinate under institutional conditions that preserve reciprocity, reversibility, psychological safety, and social legitimacy. We synthesize concepts from computability, machine learning, foundation models, embodied AI, alignment, human-robot interaction, ecological mutualism, coevolution, and polycentric governance. We then formalize coexistence as a multiplex dynamical system across physical, psychological, and social layers, with reciprocal supply-demand coupling, conflict penalties, developmental freedom, and governance regularization. The model gives conditions for existence, uniqueness, and global asymptotic stability of equilibria. We complement the analytical results with deterministic ODE simulations, basin sweeps, sensitivity analyses, governance-regime comparisons, shock tests, and local stability checks. The simulations indicate that governed mutualism reaches a high coexistence index with negligible domination, whereas insufficient or excessive governance can produce domination, weak-benefit lock-in, or suppressed developmental freedom. The results suggest that human-AI coexistence should be designed as a co-evolutionary governance problem rather than as a static obedience problem.

Somyajit Chakraborty

Symbiotic Paradigm Human-Ai Collaboration Co-Evolution Artificial Intelligence Governance Human-Robot Collaboration Social Dynamics

Ask PDF

Jun 9, 2026cs.AI

Soul Computing: A Theoretical Framework and Technical Architecture for Intelligent Agents with Independent Consciousness

Breakthroughs in large language models and multimodal generation technologies have propelled the digital reconstruction of human mental traits, emotional patterns, and long-term memory from science fiction toward engineering practice. Yet current research and industry practices at the intersection of AI and digital humans remain hampered by fundamental conceptual ambiguities: the essential differences between next-generation intelligent agents and traditional virtual humans, the construction pathways for digital entities possessing self-identity, and the core technical and ethical challenges confronting this domain all demand urgent clarification. This paper systematically examines the transformative logic underlying the transition from traditional virtual humans to the

Soul Computing'' paradigm, driven by frontier AI technologies. We first analyze the evolutionary patterns of human consciousness and memory mechanisms, reassessing the core value of massive multimodal digital fragments in the reverse reconstruction of individual mental worlds. On this basis, we formally delineate the academic connotations of narrow and broad Soul Computing for the first time, clarifying its academic boundaries and essential distinctions from Affective Computing, Historical Reconstruction, and Mortal Computation. We argue that Soul Computing systems must architecturally construct an

Intensional'' core rather than serving as purely ``Extensional'' functional carriers, thereby enabling the fundamental transition of AI from toolhood to living agency.

Jinshan Zhang, Xishi Zhou, Qiu Peng +1

Artificial Intelligence Agents Affective Computing Theoretical Foundations

Ask PDF