Anthony Elliott’s Algorithmic Self in Relation to Psychoanalysis and Posthumanism
Elliott’s concept of the algorithmic self intersects with both psychoanalysis and posthumanism in profound ways. Below, I’ll break it down through these two lenses:
1. Psychoanalytic Perspective: The Algorithmic Self and the Unconscious
From a psychoanalytic standpoint, particularly one informed by Freud, Lacan, or even contemporary object relations theory, the algorithmic self challenges traditional notions of subjectivity and the unconscious.
A. Reconfiguring Desire: The Algorithm as a New ‘Big Other’
• In Lacanian psychoanalysis, the Big Other refers to the symbolic order that structures our desires—traditionally, this was the law, language, or institutions like the family.
• Today, the algorithm functions as a new ‘Big Other,’ shaping and anticipating desires even before they are consciously recognized.
• Rather than desire emerging through lack (as in traditional psychoanalysis), it is now preemptively fulfilled or directed by machine learning models that analyze behavioral patterns and optimize engagement.
B. The Death of the Psychoanalytic Subject?
• Traditional psychoanalysis posits an irreducible gap between the self and its unconscious—a space where subjectivity forms through repression, fantasy, and symbolic structures.
• The algorithmic self, however, operates on real-time, data-driven feedback loops, compressing this gap:
• Instead of unconscious fantasies emerging unpredictably, platforms anticipate and manufacture fantasies based on behavioral data.
• Rather than repression, we experience hyper-expression—continuous self-documentation and algorithmic nudging toward certain self-narratives.
This raises the question: If the unconscious is structured like a language (Lacan), what happens when that language is programmed by AI?
C. From ‘Divided Self’ to ‘Fragmented Self’
• The Freudian subject was always divided (ego, id, superego).
• The algorithmic self, however, is not just divided but fragmented across multiple digital selves—curated identities optimized for different platforms (Instagram persona, LinkedIn professional self, anonymous Reddit poster, etc.).
• The key psychoanalytic concern is whether this fragmentation leads to new forms of alienation or even psychosis-like states where the subject lacks a coherent narrative of self.
2. Posthumanist Perspective: The Algorithmic Self and the Death of ‘the Human’
Posthumanism, particularly in its critical posthumanist and technological posthumanist variants, sees the algorithmic self as a step toward the de-centering of traditional human subjectivity.
A. From Humanism to Algorithmic Assemblages
• Classical humanism defined the self as a rational, autonomous being.
• Posthumanism argues that this autonomy is an illusion, and the algorithmic self makes this explicit:
• Our choices are not freely made but shaped by data-driven feedback mechanisms.
• Subjectivity is no longer contained within the human body but extends into digital networks, surveillance systems, and AI infrastructures.
• This aligns with Deleuze & Guattari’s schizoanalysis, where the self is not a stable identity but a flow of intensities, deterritorialized across digital assemblages.
B. From Human-to-Human Relations to Human-Machine Relations
• Posthumanism challenges the traditional humanist assumption that identity emerges through social interaction (Hegel’s master-slave dialectic, Levinas’ face-to-face ethics).
• Instead, we increasingly relate to machines and AI as intimate ‘others’—chatbots, recommendation systems, virtual assistants, and AI-generated content.
• This marks a shift from intersubjective recognition (Hegelian) to algorithmic modulation—where one’s identity is formed not through recognition by another human but through machine-driven feedback loops.
C. Becoming Algorithmic: Are We Still ‘Human’?
• One extreme posthumanist position argues that the algorithmic self is already posthuman, because:
• It is defined more by its data traces than its internal consciousness.
• It merges seamlessly with non-human systems (AI, machine learning, surveillance tech).
• It suggests an ontology of flows rather than a stable humanist subject.
• However, a more critical posthumanist approach (à la Rosi Braidotti) might argue that rather than accepting a full surrender to algorithms, we must negotiate new forms of human-machine ethics and resistance.
Final Thoughts: Psychoanalysis vs. Posthumanism on the Algorithmic Self
• Psychoanalysis mourns the loss of the unconscious as a space of human autonomy. The algorithmic self collapses the gap between conscious and unconscious by rendering desire predictable and machine-readable.
• Posthumanism sees this collapse as a natural step in the evolution beyond human-centered subjectivity. Rather than resisting, it explores how we might embrace new hybrid forms of existence (human-machine assemblages).
Key Question:
Are we being “subjected” by algorithms (psychoanalysis: loss of unconscious autonomy), or are we evolving into something else entirely (posthumanism: hybrid self beyond human limits)?
Would you like to explore how this relates to existential psychotherapy or Schizoanalysis?
