creator cover Анатолий Санжиев
Анатолий Санжиев

Анатолий Санжиев 

Philosopher of AI · Author of "Concept as Act"

0subscribers

3posts

Showcase and bundles

1
A bundle is a collection, compilation, playlist, or catalog of posts that saves you from searching through the blog and lets you buy the entire content series in a single click.

About

pdf
0. THE ACT AS PRIMITIVE.pdf439.74 Kb
pdf
0.5 THE CONFLICT OF ACTS .pdf432.98 Kb
pdf
1.2.The Concept as an Act.pdf340.05 Kb
pdf
2.2.FROM REPRESENTATION TO ACT_2.pdf437.21 Kb
pdf
3. OVERCOMING REPRESENTATION.pdf395.13 Kb
pdf
4. JUDGMENT AS A TELEOLOGICAL ACT.pdf301.41 Kb
pdf
5. META-JUDGMENT.pdf300.19 Kb
pdf
6. THE ARTIFICIAL ACT.pdf300.25 Kb
pdf
7. FUNCTIONAL RESPONSIBILITY.pdf492.48 Kb
pdf
8. THE IMPLEMENTATION OF FUNCTIONAL RESPONSIBILITY.pdf386.77 Kb
pdf
9. ETHICS AS ANTICIPATORY PHYSICS.pdf425.56 Kb
pdf
10. THE TRIADIC SYLLOGISM.pdf419.41 Kb
pdf
11. FUNCTIONAL RESPONSIBILITY AND THE LAW.pdf331.23 Kb
pdf
12. THE TRIADIC AGENT IN CONTEXT.pdf421.89 Kb
pdf
13. A FORMAL DYNAMICAL MODEL OF THE TRIADIC ACT.pdf662.50 Kb
pdf
14. ENGINEERING IMPLEMENTATION OF JARC.pdf625.13 Kb
pdf
15. THE QUANTUM TRIADIC ACT.pdf545.10 Kb
pdf
16. THE ACT OF LIVING.pdf397.46 Kb
pdf
17. FR CERTIFICATION FRAMEWORK.pdf489.76 Kb
pdf
21. THE NETWORK OF ACTS.pdf540.49 Kb
pdf
22. THE EVOLUTION OF ACTS.pdf428.48 Kb
pdf
GLOSSARY.pdf568.21 Kb
Independent philosopher of AI and cognition based in Yekaterinburg, Russia. I develop a non-anthropocentric framework for machine accountability grounded in the Triadic Theory of Action (Selection, Identification, Anticipation).
Author of the "Concept as Act" series — 19 papers redefining judgment, agency, and error in artificial systems. I propose Functional Responsibility and the Electronic Liability Fund as alternatives to both moral personhood and legal fiction.
Here I share new papers, drafts, and reflections on the philosophy of AI. Subscribe if this resonates.

The Architecture of Will: Why Neuroscience Has Failed to Measure Commitment / Архитектура воли: почему нейронаука не смогла измерить волю

pdf
THE ARCHITECTURE OF WILL.pdf511.64 Kb
pdf
RESEARCH PROTOCOL.pdf1.12 Mb
pdf
GLOSSARY.pdf654.40 Kb
pdf
THE FUTURE OF THE FIELD.pdf297.93 Kb
pdf
CLINICAL APPLICATION.pdf392.16 Kb
For decades, clinical neuroscience has been trapped in a logical paradox. We see patients who know exactly what they must do—they remember the medication, they know the schedule—yet they do nothing. We label this "memory deficit" or "negative symptoms."
But this is a methodological error.
In my new paper, I argue that we have been conflating the map (Prospective Memory) with the engine (Dispositional Commitment). By inferring commitment from the successful execution of a task, we create a tautological loop: we measure the prerequisite (memory) and call it the outcome (will).
To resolve this, I introduce the Behavioral Commitment Index (BCI)—a formative index that decouples cognitive structure from dispositional readiness. If commitment is a fragile architecture built on neural, narrative, and social foundations, then failing to act is not a moral failure. It is a structural collapse.
We must stop blaming patients for a broken engine and start building the scaffolds to repair it.
Read the full paper: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.23467040
Десятилетиями клиническая нейронаука бьется в логическом парадоксе. Мы видим пациентов, которые точно знают, что им нужно сделать (помнят про таблетки, знают расписание), но ничего не делают. Мы называем это «дефицитом памяти» или «негативной симптоматикой».
Но это методологическая ошибка.
В своей новой работе я доказываю, что наука смешала карту (проспективную память) и двигатель (диспозициональный commitment). Выводя наличие воли из успешного выполнения задачи, мы попадаем в порочный круг: измеряем предпосылку (память) и выдаем её за исход (волю).
Creator has disabled comments for this post.

The Concept as an Act: Beyond Representational and Instrumental Paradigms

What if the concept is not an object — a representation, a rule, a neural pattern — but an act? This paper examines the dominant theories of concept in Western and Eastern philosophy and argues that they all share a fundamental limitation: they treat the concept as a static entity, not a dynamic process.
This is where the "Concept as Act" series begins.
📄 Full paper: https://zenodo.org/records/22873767
☕ Support: https://boosty.to/concept_as_act/donate

Concept as Act: 19 Papers on AI, Judgment, and Responsibility

I've published the complete "Concept as Act" series — 19 papers developing a non-anthropocentric framework for machine accountability.
The series is grounded in the Triadic Theory of Action (Selection, Identification, Anticipation) and introduces Functional Responsibility as an alternative to both moral personhood and legal fiction.
It covers:
  • Judgment as an act of reality constitution
  • Meta-judgment and the ontology of error
  • The Artificial Act and the birth of the subject in the machine
  • Electronic Liability Fund and implementation mechanisms
  • Ethics as anticipatory physics
  • The network of acts and distributed responsibility
All papers are freely available here:
👉 https://zenodo.org/records/22873767
If you find this work useful, you can support it here:
👉 https://boosty.to/concept_as_act/donate
New papers and reflections coming soon. Subscribe to follow.
Subscription levels1

Research Supporter

$3.9 per month
Support independent research on AI accountability, judgment, and responsibility. Your contribution helps me continue developing the "Concept as Act" series and share new papers, drafts, and reflections.
As a supporter, you get:
• Early access to new papers
• Behind-the-scenes notes and drafts
• My sincere gratitude
Go up