Beyond artificial intelligence: Knowing, making, imagining
Two of the main shortcomings of traditional philosophy of science (neglect of both technology and practices of knowledge production) have in this project been dealt with in a case study approach by focusing on the role of digital tools in production engineering as well as by elaborating on the pivotal complementary role of imagination. The resulting transdisciplinary discourse is to be continued.
Focus Group: Philosophy of Technology as Philosophy
of Digitalization
Prof. Walther Ch. Zimmerli (Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin), Alumnus Philosopher in Residence (funded by the TÜV SÜD Foundation and as part of the Excellence Strategy of the federal and state governments)
Hosts: Prof. Claudia Eckert, Prof. Urs Gasser, Prof. Michael Zäh (TUM)
image: (Zimmerli): BTU
image: (group photo): 2025 iwb.
The overall aim of the project was to generate a better understanding of the ongoing process of digitalization [1] by scrutinizing it bottom-up from different disciplinary perspectives of both engineering and the social sciences as well as by, at the same time, integrating them top-down in a comprehensive philosophical approach. The applied methodology consisted in a combination of case studies from the engineering side and a reflexive analysis of hidden assumptions from the philosophical side.
In order to implement these ideas, I presented them in some of the research colloquia of my Hosts both at the IWB and at the TUM Thinktank. One of the effects of these presentations was the formation of a research group of PhD candidates and other young researchers who, together with my Host Michael Zäh and myself, decided to co-author an article on “Knowing as Making: How Digitalization in Production Science Challenges the Epistemology of Science” (cf. below), which was written in a series of roughly a dozen meetings and which will be submitted for publication to the prestiguous international journal Philosophy of Engineering Sciences
A second important effect consisted in intensifying the cooperation with the TUM Thinktank. Together with another of my Hosts, Urs Gasser, I had the privilege to organize an international roundtable on Imagination in the Loop, dealing with the anthropologically relevant question of complementarity between humans and AI systems (cf. below).
Furthermore, some of the main ideas of the whole project were discussed in an international workshop on Embedded Ethics – Embodied Knowledge – Enhanced Technologies, the results of which will be published as a volume in the renowned Springer series “ars digitalis” (cf. below).
I also participated in a few outreach activities, initially triggered by a public lecture – “Artificial Intelligence: Hype or Myth?” – which I presented at the Hochschule für Philosophie (HFPH) Munich. From this a plan for future cooperation with Benjamin Rathgeber and his team on the topic of “Anthropomorphisms, Narra-tives, and Myths. Talking about Artificial Intelligence” (cf. below) resulted.
Knowing as Making
While classical epistemology – from Descartes’ postulate of evidence-based certainty [2] to Popper’s falsificationism – has privileged theoretical representation over practical production, the above-mentioned work of the research group started from the idea that contemporary operational digital concepts – digital model, digital shadow, digital twin – call for a different epistemic paradigm as expressed already by Vico in his axiom “verum et factum convertuntur” (the true and the made are convertible) [3]. This claim that knowledge is most secure when produced by humans themselves can be validated by examining three sustainability-oriented cases: (i) disassembly process planning for end-of-life vehicles using a digital model, (ii) energy condition monitoring of injection molding machines via a digital shadow, and (iii) reuse of production equipment supported by a digital twin. These three case studies demonstrate that knowledge emerges not by merely observing or representing reality but through digital making.
A comparative analysis reveals a progressive expansion of epistemic agency in production engineering: from user-driven modeling via automated data integration to autonomous bidirectional control. These practices in fact embody Vico’s principle and reposition engineering as an autonomous science of making rather than a mere application of natural science.
source: Think Tank of the Munich School of Politics and Public Policy.
Imagination in the Loop
In the transdisciplinary roundtable mentioned above, the topic of human-machine interaction, especially with respect to (generative) artificial intelligence (AI), was addressed by asking: What if we treated imagination as a shared infrastructure for the many possible futures we can envision, and what if we viewed AI as both a partner and a challenge in designing these futures? Thus, the roundtable explored imagination as a human capability, a trainable skill, and a space shaped by power, technology, and values.
Looking at imagination as a skill, participants discussed how it might be cultivated through new forms of education, bridging the gap between philosophy, the arts, and technology, and how imaginative practices can help communities to break away from habitual thinking and to explore new paths. With respect to technology as enabler of imagination, one could envisage AI as both “alter ego” and sparring partner: a tool capable of expanding creativity, supporting personal development, and helping institutions to think beyond the routine. As far as power dynamics and economics of imagination are concerned, the question arises: How can imagination move beyond the constraints of institutions and normative frameworks?
As a consequence of these deliberations, at least two follow-up roundtables are being planned, one again at the TUM Think Tank, and another one at the Universität der Künste (UdK) Berlin, both dealing with Researching for Desirable Futures: Augmentative Artificial Intelligence, aiming not just at further brainstorming but at publishing the results.
source: Think Tank of the Munich School of Politics and Public Policy.
Embedded Ethics – Embodied Knowledge – Enhanced Technologies
This two-days international workshop at the TUM-IAS brought together experts from different backgrounds to discuss in a transdisciplinary way ethical, epistemological, and technological perspectives by focusing on numerous aspects of the current discussion on the distribution of roles between humans and AI. This requires a deeper understanding of the different types of AI (based on, e.g., large language, large visual, large sensor, and large motor models) and their limits, of intelligent communication strategies with AI chatbots or future teams of AI agents, as well as a mindset that should already be practiced at primary school age. Further topics included the use of AI in critical decision-making (e.g., in medicine), the question of reliability (e.g., in knowledge generation), the ethical use of AI, and the open question of what (or who) actually speaks to us when the probability-based texts of a chat AI trigger recognition, amazement, and respect in us as observers or interlocutors.
Outreach: Anthropomorphisms, Narratives and Myths
As a reaction to my above-mentioned lecture in the research colloquium of the Hochschule für Philosophie HFPH Munich, a potential collaboration with Benjamin Rathgeber and his group is developing: Although AI discourses are increasingly accompanied by philosophical reflections, the current debate repeatedly raises fundamental questions about which forms of language and linguistic narratives are appropriate for describing and evaluating AI systems and their interaction with humans. When, for example, people talk about “reasoning”, it remains in most cases unclear which modes of speech are approriate for discussing the possibilities and limitations of the different systems. Accordingly we plan to include a session analyzing the respective linguistic forms in the follow-up workshops mentioned above.
[1]
W.Ch. Zimmerli, “Analog oder digital? Philosophieren nach dem Ende der Philosophie.” In: U. Hauck-Thum and J. Noller (Eds.), Was ist Digitalität? Digitalitätsforschung vol.1, Metzler: Stuttgart 2021, 9-33.
[2]
W.Ch. Zimmerli. “Deus Malignus. The Digital Rehabilitation of Deception.” In: B.P. Göcke and A. Rosenthal-von der Pütten (Eds.), Artificial Intelligence. Reflections in Philosophy, Theology, and the Social Sciences. Brill mentis: Paderborn 2020, 15-35.
[3]
W.Ch. Zimmerli, “Wissen ist Machen. Leonardo, Bacon und die digitale Einlösung des Vico-Axioms.” In: V. Waibel and J. Deibl (Eds.), Kunst, Religion und Wissenschaft im Widerstreit, Vienna University Press, Vienna 2026 (in print).
Selected publications
- U. Gasser, “Navigating AI Governance as a Normative Field: Norms, Patterns, and Dynamics”. In: K.H. Jamieson, W. Kearney, and A.-M. Mazza (Eds.), Realising the Promise and Minimizing the Perils of AI for Science and the Scientific Community (chapter 5). University of Pennsylvania Press, 2025, 55-98.
- F.A. Brunnenkant, M. Mesters, N. Reinbold, D. Schneider, M.Woerle, M.F. Zäh, and W.Ch. Zimmerli, “Knowing as Making. How digitalization in production science challenges the epistemology of science”. Philosophy of Engineering Sciences 2026 (submitted).
- A. Müller, M. Mesters, S. Wolf, W.Ch. Zimmerli (Eds:), Embedded Ethics – Embodied Knowledge – Enhanced Technologies. ars digitalis. Springer Vieweg: Wiesbaden 2026 (in print).
- M. Mesters, M. Zäh, “Künstliche Intelligenz in der Produktionstechnik - Potenzial, Anwendungen und gesellschaftliche Perspektiven“. In: A. Müller, M. Mesters, S. Wolf, W.Ch. Zimmerli (Eds.), Embedded Ethics – Embodied Knowledge – Enhanced Technologies. ars digitalis. Springer Vieweg: Wiesbaden 2026 (in print).
- W.Ch. Zimmerli, “Artificial Intelligence – Hype or Myth? Philosophical Aspects of an Entrepreneurial Success Story”. In: Ch.H. Hoffmann (Ed.), Artificial Intelligence, Entrepreneurship and Risk. Reflections and Positions at the Crossroads between Philosophy and Management. Springer: Wiesbaden 2025, 263-279.