The Age of Heterogeneous Subjects: Artificial Intelligence and the Reopening of Social Theory

Counts differ because each database indexes a different set of publications. We treat OpenAlex as the canonical count; Google Scholar is not shown (no API, and crawling it violates its ToS).

This discussion paper argues that artificial intelligence makes newly difficult a simplifying condition that has supported large parts of modern social theory: the practical approximation that the principal participants in social institutions belong to the same basic kind of subject. Human societies have always contained profound differences, and law, ethics, political theory, and economic institutions have long confronted boundary cases involving children, animals, collective persons, future generations, and other forms of asymmetric agency. Artificial intelligence gives this older problem a new density by introducing nonhuman systems that can increasingly speak, learn, negotiate, produce, coordinate, evaluate, and act while their sentience, moral status, continuity, interests, and responsibility remain unsettled. The paper treats AI as a condition of reappearance through which previously compartmentalized difficulties become connected. It develops a heterogeneous-subject framework by disaggregating agency, sentience, vulnerability, continuity, responsibility, legal standing, productive capacity, learning, expression, and aesthetic participation. Across political economy and distribution, social-contract approaches to justice, ethics under moral uncertainty, jurisprudence, education, aesthetics and artistic production, and subjectivity after the centrality of labor, the paper examines how institutional roles can diverge across these dimensions. A system may perform labor-like, pedagogical, juridical, or norm-guided functions while those functions alone leave its comprehensive moral or legal status open. The central proposal is methodological: social theory increasingly requires relation-sensitive and domain-sensitive concepts capable of coordinating a shared world without presuming subject homogeneity in advance. This perspective shifts attention toward the properties, relations, uncertainties, and institutional consequences that matter within each domain of shared social life.