Norms in the Age of Intelligent Machines: Bodies, Knowledge, Governmentality — Dec. 4 & 5 at Stanford

Norms in the Age of Intelligent Machines — a two-day conference organized by Shane Denson, Armen Khatchatourov, and Johan Fredrikzon and sponsored by the France-Stanford Center for Interdisciplinary Studies, Villa Albertine, and the Stanford Department of Art & Art History — will take place at Stanford on December 4-5, 2025.

Speakers
Morehshin Allahyari (Stanford)
Hannes Bajohr (UC Berkeley)
David Bates (UC Berkeley)
Bilel Benbouzid (University Gustave Eiffel, Paris)
Shane Denson (Stanford)
Jean-Pierre Dupuy (Stanford)
Noel Fitzpatrick (TU Dublin)
Johan Fredrikzon (KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm)
Julia Irwin (Stanford)
Armen Khatchatourov (DICEN / University Gustave Eiffel, Paris)
Helen Nissenbaum (Cornell Tech)
Warren Sack (UC Santa Cruz)
Antonio Somaini (University Sorbonne Nouvelle – Paris 3)
Fred Turner (Stanford)

The prospect of intelligent machines challenges our societal norms. Matters of debate over the past half century concerning digital networks – e.g. access, privacy, subjectivity, participation – must be reconsidered in the age of machine learning. More specifically, the proliferation of AI-based systems leads to new ways of understanding what normativity is. Social norms don’t change overnight; however, the mechanisms and processes that drive these changes are increasingly influenced by AI-based infrastructures, characterized by a heightened level of automation, while being opaque, inscrutable, and anthropomorphic.

Faced with such conditions, we have to ask, first, what it means to instill or break a norm and, second, what norms even mean or represent. This landscape presents both profound challenges to maintain just and stable means of interaction and, at the same time, novel and creative opportunities for alternative modes of being.

The two conferences (December 4-5, 2025 at Stanford, April or May in Paris) aim to investigate how norms of embodiment, forms of knowledge, and techniques of governmentality operate in the age of AI, and to address the imbrication of two movements: how the evolution of social norms is reflected in new algorithmic practices, and how these algorithms influence social norms in various domains. It will bring together the humanities, social sciences, and law to address issues of crucial contemporary importance.

Sponsored by France – Stanford Center for Interdisciplinary Studies, Villa Albertine, and Stanford Department of Art & Art History

Image: Brett Amory, Archive Drift ⧑⧗⧖⧔. Photo: Shaun Roberts

More info here

View the full conference program with agenda, abstracts, and speaker bios

Registration

“AI as Existential(ist) Risk and Aesthetic Opportunity” — Keynote at Media Theory Conference 2025 in Toronto, Nov. 7-8

I’m excited to be giving one of the keynotes at the Media Theory Conference 2025 at the Centre for Culture and Technology in Toronto. On Nov. 8, I’ll give a talk titled “AI as Existential(ist) Risk and Aesthetic Opportunity.” Here is the abstract:

Contemporary debates around artificial intelligence often frame the technology in terms of “existential risk.” Yet such framings rarely pause to consider what existential might mean in the existentialist sense. In this talk I return to Heidegger’s account of the “worldhood of the world” and Sartre’s concept of “hodological space” to argue that the risk posed by AI is not confined to catastrophic scenarios of planetary survival, but lies more immediately in the reconfiguration of subjectivity itself. AI systems bypass conscious perception, modulating aesthesis—the sensory, affective, and preconscious conditions of experience—and in doing so recalibrate the orientations that make ethical deliberation possible in the first place.

Seen from this angle, the hazard of AI is not external to us but infrastructural, shaping our movements, postures, and affective attunements. At the same time, this hazard can be taken up as an opportunity: artworks that use machine learning to stage glitches, detours, or dissonances do not merely represent technological change but provide laboratories for inhabiting it, exposing how bodies and worlds are being rewritten. If AI marks an existentialist risk, it also opens an occasion to engage aesthetically with the reorganization of perception and orientation, and to confront the stakes of ethics where they begin—in the aesthetic, in the felt conditions of living and acting in a changing world.

“Dimensionality, Perspective, and Imagination in Computational Media” — Talk at UC Berkeley conference on Dimensional Vision in Flux, May 29-31, 2025

I’m excited to be speaking, alongside an amazing lineup of scholars, at a conference this week (May 29-31, 2025) on Dimensional Vision in Flux: The Stereo-Aesthetics and Politics of 3D Cinema and Media, hosted by the Department of Film & Media at UC Berkeley. I’ll be giving a talk on “Dimensionality, Perspective, and Imagination in Computational Media.”

The complete program can be found here. And here’s my abstract:

Dimensionality, Perspective, and Imagination in Computational Media

Dimensional vision finds itself in flux, as the title of this symposium would have it. The flux in question has to do with recent and contemporary transformations in visual media: witness the many booms and busts of 3D cinema, recall the short-lived push to put 3D televisions in our living rooms, and consider the rapidly changing landscape of VR, AR, MR, XR, whatever-R. In order to get a handle on the flux of dimensional vision in relation to such media-technological changes, however, I would like to take a step back and observe that dimensional vision has always and only ever been in flux. I mean this, first, in the sense that dimensionality is given to human experience immediately and inseparably from the spatiotemporal flux of embodied existence; this “microperceptual” dimension (in Don Ihde’s terms) is epitomized in Edmund Husserl’s descriptions of the flux of “adumbrations” as he walks around a tree, whereby a multidimensional model of “the tree,” never wholly seen, takes shape in his mind. In a second, more historical sense, dimensional vision has always been in flux in a way that is more closely attuned to the media changes described above; rather than exceptional, however, such flux is a constant because there is no natural or neutral state apart from mediation: the “microperceptual” level of embodied experience can never be thought apart from what Ihde calls the “macroperceptual” level of cultural and technological conditioning (and vice versa).

Taken seriously, this means that dimensionality and perspectival vision are inherently contingent and deeply political—not just perspectival representation, but the embodied experience of perceptual perspective and spatial orientation itself. And while I argue that this has always been the case for humans as an essentially biotechnical species, the political stakes are heightened in an era of computational media. The latter, including VR and similar media of 3D visuality, operate faster than and bypass human perception, opening dimensional vision to fine-grained reengineering. In order to make this argument, I turn to Kant’s notion of the productive imagination (Einbildungskraft) and the stereotyping operation of the “schematism” that connects visual stimuli to concepts of the understanding. Following philosophers Wilfrid Sellars and Alan Thomas, schemata are perspectivally indeterminate but determinable, and through them the Kantian imagination is responsible for our empirical experience of things as having depth and unseen backsides—responsible, that is, for our sense of the world as a dimensional, volumetric space within which I am positioned. Meanwhile, computational media are constructing their own spatial models of the world (or worlds), models that exceed and resist human perceptual access while positioning us both virtually and physically. In this way, they assume functions of the imagination and modulate the flux of dimensional vision at both microperceptual and macroperceptual scales. 

“Rise of the Machines” — Spiral Film and Philosophy Conference, May 23-24 2025

I am excited to announce that I will be giving the keynote lecture at the Spiral Film & Philosophy conference in May. I attended Spiral back before the pandemic, when Deborah Levitt gave the keynote, and I have been wanting to return ever since.

They’ve put together an excellent theme this year — please share the CFP widely!

Announcing the New Co-Chair of SCMS Philosophy & Theory SIG: Bernard Dionysius Geoghegan

Congratulations to Bernard Dionysus Geoghegan, who has been elected new Co-Chair of the SCMS Philosophy & Theory SIG! And thanks to Will Brown for running in the election. It was a very tight race, and we were extremely proud to present the SIG with two amazing candidates.

It has been an honor to serve in the role of Co-Chair for the past three years, first alongside Co-Chair Victor Fan and Secretary John Winn, and more recently Co-Chair Deborah Levitt and Secretary Hank Gerba. It has been a pleasure working with them all.

I look forward to seeing where Bernie, Deborah, and Hank take the SIG in the coming years!

“AI and the Future of (Media) History” — Updated Keynote Time & Conference Info

Please note the time for my keynote at the “Questioning History in the Age of AI” symposium this coming Thursday, April 11 has been updated to 5-7pm.

The full conference schedule is posted above, and here is some additional info from the organizers:

Please join us at UC Berkeley on Thursday, April 11 and Friday April 12 for a symposium on the theme of “Questioning History in the Age of AI.” 

Seminars will run each day, beginning at 10am, and will be held in the Social Sciences Matrix
Our keynote, given by Shane Denson, will be held Thursday, 5–7pm in 142 Dwinelle

Please register HERE for the seminars, and we will send you the seminar papers in advance of the symposium.

Questioning History in the Age of Artificial Intelligence — Berkeley, April 11-12, 2024

On April 11, I’ll be giving a keynote titled “AI and the Future of (Media) History” at the symposium “Questioning History in the Age of Artificial Intelligence,” organized by David Bates, Julia Irwin, and Johan Fredrikzon. I’m excited to be in conversation with a stellar group of scholars thinking about what AI means for history and historical thinking!

“Endurance Media: Making, Breaking, and Remaking the Body” — #SCMS24 Panel

On Sunday, March 17 (10:15am-12pm), I’ll be part of the panel “Endurance Media: Making, Breaking, and Remaking the Body,” co-chaired by Neta Alexander and Rachel Plotnick, and also featuring David Parisi.

My paper is titled “Interfacing with Metabolic Media.” In lieu of an abstract, here’s my talk as an animated gif:

Intermediations/MTL Presents: Mediation Between the Lines — January 29, 2024

On Monday, January 29, 2024 (6pm in the Terrace Room, 4th floor of Margaret Jacks Hall), four PhD students will present talks originally given at the 2023 Society for Literature, Science, and the Arts (SLSA) conference: Danielle Adair (Theater & Performance Studies), Hank Gerba (Film & Media Studies/Art History), Grace Han (Film & Media Studies/Art History), and Kola Heyward-Rotimi (Modern Thought & Literature).

The panel, entitled “Mediation Between the Lines,” will be accompanied by some finger food and refreshments. Please RSVP here so that we have an idea of how many to expect.