COMPLEX NET DIAGRAM: TRANSGRESSION – MODIFICATION – TRANSMOGRIFICATION

  • Oleh Perepelytsia V.N. Karazin Kharkiv National University https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9825-7573
  • Vladyslav Mohylat V.N. Karazin Kharkiv National University
Keywords: Human, machine, artificial intelligence (AI), transgression, modification, transmogrification, neurointerfaces

Abstract

The article offers a philosophical analysis of transformations of the human being in the context of the development of contemporary technologies, particularly artificial intelligence (AI). It argues that a post-anthropological situation has emerged in which traditional notions of the autonomous subject, the boundaries of the human body, and the space of cognitive activity are undergoing radical reconsideration. A conceptual diagram is proposed that outlines three levels of (post-/trans-)human transformation – transgression, modification and transmogrification – allowing for the conceptualization of diverse bodily, networked and cultural practices of contemporary society. It is demonstrated that transgression does not abolish the distinctions between the internal and the external, the human and the technological, but rather renders these boundaries mobile and nomadic. It is precisely within the field of transgressed boundaries that human–machine interaction takes place, particularly through neurointerfaces and algorithmic systems, which simultaneously erode the figure of the classical anthropocentric autonomous subject. Modification is interpreted as the main trajectory of transformation, embodied in various transhumanist programs, ideologemes, and practices aimed at the functional enhancement of the body and psyche, especially at the neurocognitive level in interaction with AI. By contrast, transmogrification is understood as a radical form of technogenic deformation that exceeds any formal normativity, image, or stable form, while not altering the already transgressed “essence.” Accordingly, the article argues that contemporary technologies give rise to the figure of the trans(in)dividual – a multiple, decentered being that acts and thinks within networks of human and non-human actors. This perspective opens the possibility of rethinking key modern concepts such as subjectivity, property, and creativity. At the same time, it is concluded that a crucial issue for the human today concerns the relationship between technological development and practices of emancipation.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

Oleh Perepelytsia, V.N. Karazin Kharkiv National University

D.Sc.in Philosophy,

Professor of the Department of Theoretical and Practical Philosophy named after Professor J. B. Schad

V.N. Karazin Kharkiv National University

4, Svobody sqr., 61022, Kharkiv, Ukraine

Vladyslav Mohylat, V.N. Karazin Kharkiv National University

PhD Student, Educational and Scientific Institute Philosophy, Cultural Studies, Political Science

V. N. Karazin Kharkiv National University

4, Maidan Svobody, Kharkiv, Ukraine

References

Hayles, N. K. (2025). How We Became Posthuman: Virtual Bodies in Cybernetics, Literature, and Informatics / Transl. by E. Marichev. Kyiv: Nika-Center. (In Ukrainian)

Khrabrov, H. (2023). Decentration of authentic authoritative Author. The Journal of V. N. Karazin Kharkiv National University, Series Philosophy. Philosophical Peripeteias, (68), 52-59. https://doi.org/10.26565/2226-0994-2023-68-6 (In Ukrainian)

Abe Linkoln. (2003). Complex Net Art Diagram. https://www.linkoln.net/complex/

Clark A. (2008). Supersizing the Mind: Embodiment, Action, and Cognitive Extension. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press.

Coeckelbergh M. (2019). Moved by Machines: Performance Metaphors and Philosophy of Technology. (Series: Routledge Studies in Contemporary Philosophy) New York: Routledge.

Coeckelbergh M., Gunkel D. J. (2025). Communicative AI: A Critical Introduction to Large Language Models. Cambridge: Polity Press.

Ferguson J., Bussigel P. (2021). TRaNsMOG-RiFiER: Fictional Narratives as Catalyst for Experimental Instrument Building and Musical/Artistic Collaboration. Leonardo, 54 (2), 228–233. https://doi.org/10.1162/leon_a_01961

Foucault M. (1980). A Preface to Transgression. Language, Counter-memory, Practice: Selected Essays and Interviews / Ed. by D. F. Bouchard; transl. from the French by D. F. Bouchard and Sh. Simon. Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Press, 29-52.

Hayles, N. K. (2025). Bacteria to AI : human futures with our nonhuman symbionts. Chicago, London: The University of Chicago Press.

Ihde D. (2009). Postphenomenology and Technoscience. The Peking University Lectures. New York: State University of New York Press.

Ihde D. (1990). Technology and the Lifeworld. Indiana University Press.

Pawlett W. (2025). Bataille, Foucault and the lost futures of transgression. Journal for Cultural Research, 29, 1–2, 146–160. https://doi.org/10.1080/14797585.2024.2408330

Stark R. J. (2009). Rhetoric, Science, and Magic in Seventeenth-Century England. Catholic University of America Press.

The Magic of Transmogrification. By Kassie Jones Instructions assignment English 235 – Technical Writing Instructions brought to you by DSR Inc. https://josiejones937730275.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/the-magic-of-transmogrification.pdf

Published
2025-11-24
Cited
How to Cite
Perepelytsia, O., & Mohylat, V. (2025). COMPLEX NET DIAGRAM: TRANSGRESSION – MODIFICATION – TRANSMOGRIFICATION. The Journal of V. N. Karazin Kharkiv National University, Series Philosophy. Philosophical Peripeteias, (73), 107-115. https://doi.org/10.26565/2226-0994-2025-73-9
Section
Articles