Artificiality of the «Artificial Sociality»

Artificiality of the «Artificial Sociality»

Tavokin E.P.

Dr. Sci. (Sociol.), Prof., MIREA – Russian Technological University, Moscow, Russia

ID of the Article:

For citation:

Tavokin E.P. Artificiality of the «Artificial Sociality». Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya [Sociological Studies]. 2019. No 6. P. 115-122


On the example of published in the journal Monitoring of Public Opinion (2018. № 5) articles by A.V. Rezaev and N.D. Tregubova about «artificial sociality» methodological errors are considered, which are widespread in the works on sociology and lead to the substitution of scientific analysis by its imitation. It is shown that the authors of the criticized article deviated from the definition of key categories («artificial intelligence» and «artificial sociality»), which is why the subject content of the article is actually dissolved. Due to the initial methodological error, the study was performed incorrectly, the results demonstrate banality and are non-constructive. The author of the critical review proves by the materials of the history of technology that «artificial sociality» is an imaginary social object. There are real phenomena of the influence of the evolution of technology on socio-cultural stereotypes (for example, likening society to a ship or mechanism), but they are associated with the only possible «natural» sociality. According to the critic, the article represents a dangerous process of the general crisis of modern Russian sociological science.

artificial intelligence; computers; information technologies; social communications; sociology; science


Andrew A.M. (1983) Artificial Intelligence. Tunbridge Wells, UK: Abacus Press.

Biryukov V.V. (1985) Heat of Cold Numbers and Pathos of Dispassionate Logic. Moscow: Znanie. (In Russ.)

Carr N.J. (2005) Shine and Poverty of Information Technologies: Why Are Not It a Competitive Advantage. Moscow: Sekret firmy. (In Russ.)

Doroganov V.S., Baumgarten M.N. (2017) Possible Problems Arising from the Creation of Artificial Intelligence. In: Computer Science in the Philosophical and Social Aspects. Kemerovo: Izdatel'stvo KuzGTU: 60–66. (In Russ.)

Dreyfus H.L. (1972) What Computers Can’t Do. A Critique of Artificial Reason. New York: Harper and Row.

Gorelov I.N. (1987) Talking to a Computer: the Psycholinguistic Aspect of the Problem. Moscow: Nauka. (In Russ.)

Hazen A.М. (1988) About Possible and Impossible in Science, or Where the Boundaries of Intelligence Modeling Are. Moscow: Nauka. (In Russ.)

Petrunin Yu.Yu., Ryazanov M.A., Savelyev A.V. (2010) Philosophy of Artificial Intelligence in the Concepts of Neuroscience. Moscow: MAX Press. (In Russ.)

Rezaev A.V., Tregubova N.D. (2018) Are Sociologists Ready for ‘Artificial Sociality’? Current Issues and Future Prospects for Studying Artificial Intelligence in the Social Sciences. Monitoring obshchestvennogo mneniya: ekonomicheskie i sotsial'nye peremeny [Monitoring of Public Opinion: Economic and Social Changes]. No. 5: 91–108.

Russian Encyclopedic Dictionary. (2001) Moscow: Bol’shaya Rossiyskaya entsilopediya. (In Russ.)

Weizenbaum J. (1976) Computer Power and Human Reason. From Judgment to Calculation. San Francisco: Berkeley University Press.

Content No 6, 2019