MODELS AND METHODS IN MODERN SCIENCE
International scientific-online conference
157
DIGITAL SUBJECTIVITY OF THE INDIVIDUAL IN THE ERA OF
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
Sitora Abdusattarova
PhD in Philosophy, Associate Professor at Tashkent State University of Law,
Doctoral Candidate (DSc) at the National University of Uzbekistan
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15797505
Abstract:
In the context of the rapid development of artificial intelligence (AI)
technologies, not only institutions and governance mechanisms are being
transformed, but also the very concept of personality, its identity, and social
status. Digital subjectivity has become a key category of analysis in the
philosophy of technology, law, and socio-humanitarian sciences. This study aims
to investigate the phenomenon of digital identity and subjectivity of the
individual amid automated control, algorithmic governance, and platform
dependency. A conceptual model is proposed to assess digital subjectivity,
taking into account ethical, legal, and cultural factors, especially within the
emerging digital policies of Uzbekistan.
Keywords:
artificial intelligence, digital subjectivity, identity, autonomy,
digital law, platform, Uzbekistan
The rapid and pervasive integration of artificial intelligence (AI)
technologies into virtually all spheres of social life has fundamentally reshaped
the conceptualization of individual identity and subjectivity. Traditional
philosophical and legal paradigms that have long grounded the understanding of
the person as an autonomous, rational agent with stable rights and
responsibilities are increasingly challenged by the emergence of digital
subjectivity — a phenomenon that redefines the individual through the lens of
data, algorithms, and platform-mediated interactions.
At its core, digital subjectivity refers to the new mode of existence in which
a person’s identity is co-constructed by both the individual and complex
technological infrastructures. These infrastructures collect vast amounts of
personal data — including behavioral patterns, communication histories,
biometric markers, and socio-economic indicators — and process this data
through advanced machine learning and predictive analytics to create dynamic
digital profiles. Such profiles not only reflect past and present states but also
forecast future behaviors, preferences, and potential social actions. This
capability of AI to “anticipate” human behavior introduces novel questions about
autonomy, free will, and self-determination in the digital age. From a
philosophical standpoint, digital subjectivity complicates classical notions of
MODELS AND METHODS IN MODERN SCIENCE
International scientific-online conference
158
personhood. The boundary between the self and external systems blurs, as the
digital persona becomes both an extension and, at times, an independent actor
with emergent properties beyond direct human control. This challenges
existential and ethical frameworks by raising dilemmas around identity
fragmentation, multiplicity of selves, and the persistence of personal continuity
when mediated through digital platforms. The concept of responsibility also
becomes problematic: if algorithmic systems influence decision-making or
autonomously act on behalf of individuals, how do we assign moral and legal
accountability?
Legally, the advent of digital subjectivity necessitates significant
reevaluation and adaptation of regulatory frameworks. Existing laws on privacy,
data protection, identification, and liability are frequently inadequate to address
the complexities introduced by AI-driven environments. For example,
conventional identification methods based on physical documents or biometrics
now coexist with, or sometimes are replaced by, algorithmically generated
digital identities. Issues arise concerning the validity and legal recognition of
such identities, their susceptibility to manipulation, and their implications for
personal rights. Moreover, digital subjectivity introduces challenges in
protecting individual autonomy and preventing discriminatory practices
embedded in biased algorithms. In Uzbekistan, these global phenomena
intersect with unique socio-cultural and institutional conditions. The country is
undergoing rapid digital transformation characterized by ambitious e-
governance initiatives, expanding digital infrastructure, and growing public
engagement with online platforms. However, the legal system and public policy
frameworks are still evolving to effectively incorporate AI governance and
digital rights protection. Thus, there is an urgent need to develop contextually
relevant mechanisms that respect cultural values, address social expectations,
and ensure equitable participation in the digital society.
This study adopts a comprehensive interdisciplinary methodology to
analyze digital subjectivity, synthesizing insights from philosophy, law,
sociology, and information technology. The philosophical inquiry explores the
ontological and ethical dimensions of subjectivity transformation in AI contexts.
Legal analysis examines the adequacy of existing normative instruments and
identifies gaps concerning digital identity recognition and protection. Empirical
observations of Uzbekistan’s digitalization processes provide concrete
grounding and illustrate practical challenges and opportunities.
MODELS AND METHODS IN MODERN SCIENCE
International scientific-online conference
159
Several critical themes emerge from the investigation:
1.
Transformation of Autonomy and Agency:
AI systems mediate
and sometimes constrain human actions through algorithmic nudges, content
personalization, and automated decision-making. This modulation of behavior
raises questions about the extent of genuine autonomy in digital interactions
and the potential for subtle forms of social control or manipulation.
2.
Multiplicity and Fluidity of Identity:
Unlike fixed legal or social
identities, digital subjectivity is characterized by multiplicity and fluidity, with
individuals maintaining various digital personas across different platforms and
contexts. This complexity complicates the attribution of consistent rights and
responsibilities.
3.
Transparency and Accountability of Algorithms:
The opacity of
AI decision-making processes ("black box" problem) undermines users’ ability
to understand, contest, or correct digital representations. Establishing standards
for transparency and mechanisms for recourse is vital to protect digital
subjectivity.
4.
Data Sovereignty and Privacy:
Control over personal data is
central to preserving individual dignity and autonomy. However, data extraction
and processing often occur without informed consent or sufficient safeguards,
leading to privacy violations and loss of control over digital selves.
5.
Cultural and Ethical Specificity:
Global AI ethics principles need
localization to align with Uzbekistan’s cultural norms, social values, and
institutional realities. Ethical AI deployment must respect local conceptions of
personhood, privacy, and community.
6.
Legal Adaptation and Capacity Building:
There is a pressing need
for Uzbekistan to enhance its legislative framework, incorporating protections
for digital identity and subjectivity, while simultaneously promoting digital
literacy and awareness among citizens to empower informed participation.
The research culminates in proposing a normative model for supporting
digital subjectivity that integrates technological, ethical, and legal dimensions.
Key components include formal legal recognition of digital identities as
extensions of physical personhood, embedding principles of algorithmic
transparency and fairness into governance structures, fostering cultural
sensitivity in AI ethics, and promoting education to build societal resilience
against digital risks.
In conclusion, the emergence of digital subjectivity represents a paradigm
shift requiring holistic approaches that reconcile technological innovation with
MODELS AND METHODS IN MODERN SCIENCE
International scientific-online conference
160
human-centered values. For Uzbekistan, embracing this challenge is essential to
safeguard individual rights, uphold social justice, and harness AI’s potential for
inclusive and sustainable digital development.
References:
1.Floridi, L. (2014). The Fourth Revolution: How the Infosphere is Reshaping
Human Reality. Oxford University Press.
2.Nemitz, P. (2018). Constitutional democracy and technology in the age of
artificial
intelligence.
Philosophy
&
Technology,
31(4),
511–538.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-018-0321-5
3.Kuznetsova, T. E. (2021). Digital identity of the individual in the development
of
artificial
intelligence.
Philosophical
Sciences,
10,
123–132.
https://doi.org/10.21146/1560-9596-2021-10-123-132
