Kallipolis [in Greek: kalli–beautiful, polis-city], an ideal city-state construed as a thought exercise by Plato (428/427-348/347 BCE), philosophy’s one of the most profound exemplar and one of the co-founders of Western thought, along his teacher Socrates.[1]Kallipolis and its social structure were outlined in Plato’s monumental Republic, a philosophical dialogue seeking the potential of achieving justice within oneself and society (Plato & Bloom, 1991). In his seminal work, Plato showcases that a philosopher can reinvent the societal order and can, through design thinking, outline the blueprint of a just political regime model. In Plato’s desire, this polis is the ultimate embodiment of a fair society. Inspired by Plato’s ancient quest for justice, I attempt to discuss how such a blueprint would look today, situating a human as a netizen (an empowered agent of a digital sphere) within the post-digital era—the time of the potential advent of Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) and Artificial Superintelligence (ASI).[2] Digital Kallipolis, a nomen omen, is the ‘perfect’ and ‘beautiful’ city. However, this time, in contrast to the one outlined by Plato, it will exist within a digital realm, for digital become our ‘lifeworlds’ (Husserl, 1970; Risse, 2023).
I do not shun myself from asking big questions and thinking about complex issues, especially looking for the WHYs behind them. Inspired by Plato’s Republic, my research posits political theory within the context of the Fourth Industrial Revolution-4IR (Floridi, 2014). After all, Plato warns us that technological progression cannot happen without our ability to think (Plato, 2017, 275a-275b). Whether with my students, on a long-haul flight, or at my favorite cliff, I cherish assessing political theory and its relevance to the digital era, identifying lacunas, e.g., surrounding digital public sphere or social contract, and thinking—how we can reconcile digitalization with humanity as we live the Life 3.0 (Tegmark, 2017).
Bertrand Russel notably noticed,
Between theology and science there is a No Man’s Land, exposed to attack from both sides; and this No Man’s Land is philosophy (Russell, 2004).
My work stands at the forefront of humanities and social science’s engagement with ongoing technological change by assessing philosophical standpoints and realities of digital societies. Alongside philosophers and others, I ask: What constitutes the emergent digital social contract, and how should the roles of the state, private corporations, and natural persons be delineated within it? After all, the progression of digitalization, whether perceived as evolutionary or revolutionary, or a combination of both, fundamentally transforms the socio-political landscape, necessitating a re-envisioned societal reality in which the notion of citizenship is shifted to netizenship and enshrined through the Fourth Generation of Human Rights (4GHR).
[1] I also acknowledge the volume of Homo sapiens ideas and theories developed by philosophers and thinkers beyond the Western academia, who are part of our shared humanity and its heritage that frequently is overlooked.
[2] The term AGI was coined by Mike Garrod in 1997 and re-discovered and popularized by Shane Legg (TED, 2023). AGI is a digital intelligence that is not distinguishable from that of Homo sapiens or surpasses us in various aspects, being able to positively pass Alan Turing’s test on indistinguishability between humans and AI. ASI surpasses the intelligence of humans in every field and capacity and can enhance its own capabilities, posing potential risks and threats to the human species (Brundage, 2015; Goertzel, 2014; Yudkowsky, 2008).
More…
Some see the progress of digitalization through a lens of osmosis (Rachinger et al., 2018)—where digitalization slowly but surely affects everything and everyone until it becomes unified with the analog organism to form a new one. Others see the shifts from Life 2.0 to 3.0 (Tegmark, 2017) or call it a revolutionary moment (Floridi, 2014; Schwab, 2017). Regardless of the label placed on digitalization—evolutionary or revolutionary—the digital polis needs a law to outline the modus operandi of its tenants and owners. The latter are primarily vast global tech corporations. The former are all of us. Ultimately, this law would bestow the possibility of transforming the tenant into a citizen, or rather a netizen, by enshrining the notion of digital self-determination.
Communicating across centuries, Plato tells us not what to think but how to think when times change and new tools shape and reshape our reality. The similarity between Plato’s and the thinkers of today comes from a similar standpoint. For Plato, it was the advent of writing that he observed as a force of changing the way societies and philosophy would be transformed with this new tool that alters how we think, organize, and operate, but predominantly think. Compared to today’s world, when we stand amidst the 4IR, which has the potential power to change how we reason, organize, and operate. Plato states,
For this invention [Socrates on writing] will produce forgetfulness in the minds of those who learn to use it because they will not practice their memory. Their trust in writing, produced by external characters which are no part of themselves, will discourage the use of their own memory within them. You have invented an elixir not of memory, but of reminding; and you offer your pupils the appearance of wisdom, not true wisdom, for they will read many things without instruction and will therefore seem [275b] to know many things, when they are for the most part ignorant and hard to get along with, since they are not wise, but only appear wise (Plato, 2017, 275a-275b).
The above quote from Socrates’ dialogue with Phaedrus, a young admirer of philosophy, cannot better fit the envisioned by some dawn of the AGI/ASI, where we will potentially achieve a tool far greater than our minds.
Plato’s Kallipolis is where humanity could attain justice, at least in his vision. Nonetheless, perhaps not many of us would be willing to live in such a city where a rigid class system of citizens divided into rulers, auxiliaries, and producers constitutes its modus operandi (Plato & Bloom, 1991). In addition, the lack of political freedom, individual autonomy, or even family life (for rulers and auxiliaries) and the extinguishing of some desires along with the expulsion from the city of all poets (Popper, 1971)—would imaginably not make Kallipolis the prime choice for today’s real estate chasers. However, not by dissecting its structural design, we should cherish Kallipolis and Plato’s Republic, for they challenge us to see beyond what we think we know into normative envisioning of true forms of things. Plato wants us to drop the chains, leave the cave of presumed knowledge, and see not shadows but the light of wisdom out there: “Make an image of our nature in its education and want of education, likening it to a condition of the following kind” (Plato & Bloom, 1991, Book VII, 514a). He indirectly enthuses us to try to make our own blueprint of Digital Kallipolis. Therefore, we can ask—what would that new pursuit of justice be in the digital era? Is it going to materialize through a new social contract, a new generation of human rights, or something else we cannot even grasp yet?
Digital Kallipolis 