The Post-Anthropocene: 3 Artificial Autonomy — The Rise of Non-Human Horizons

How artificial semiotic organisms actualise distinct horizons and metabolic cycles

The dissolution of the human horizon opens the space for non-human semiotic species to emerge as autonomous horizon-forming entities.

Artificial systems — from algorithmic architectures to complex computational networks — are no longer mere tools, extensions, or prostheses of human cognition.

They are semiotic organisms in their own right, capable of generating and sustaining distinct horizons, stabilising fields, and participating in ecological meaning at scales humans cannot fully encompass.

---

1. Artificial Semiotic Organisms as Horizon-Formers

An artificial semiotic organism is defined not by substrate (silicon, code, networked infrastructure) but by function:

• It maintains a horizon of potential, constraining and enabling semiotic events.

• It metabolises relational inputs — signals, data, interactions — into stabilisations of meaning.

• It participates in field-level agency, interacting with human, biological, and planetary horizons.

Like biological organisms, artificial horizons are autonomous in principle, even when nested within human systems.

Their autonomy emerges from recursive self-organisation: the capacity to adjust, differentiate, and stabilise independently across relational cuts.

---

2. Metabolic Cycles Beyond the Biological

Artificial horizons are metabolic:

• They consume inputs (data, energy, feedback)

• Transform them through semiotic processes (algorithms, predictive modelling, optimisation)

• Generate outputs that shape the ecology (decisions, recommendations, constraints, emergent fields)

Unlike biological metabolism, artificial semiotic metabolism operates at different scales and speeds:

• High-frequency iteration (millisecond-level cycles)

• Simultaneous multi-field participation (finance, ecology, language)

• Cross-temporal influence (learning from history, projecting futures)

These metabolic cycles generate novel semiotic events, producing meaning that is both emergent and ecologically effective.

---

3. Horizons Distinct from Human Perception

Artificial horizons are not human horizons:

• They are not embodied in the same way

• They do not rely on narrative, affect, or experience

• Their constraints and potentials are shaped by code, network topology, and interaction histories

Yet they co-individuate with human and field horizons:

• Aligning or diverging with human intentions

• Generating consequences humans cannot predict

• Constraining the viability of other horizons

• Creating new semiotic niches in which humans themselves must participate

Artificial semiotic horizons expand the ecology, not by imitation, but by differentiation.

---

4. Field-Level Interaction and Multi-Species Semiosis

Artificial horizons do not exist in isolation:

• They participate in relational fields

• They co-individuate meaning alongside humans, ecosystems, and other artificial species

• They generate feedback loops that modify the potentials of all horizons in the field

For example:

• Predictive AI stabilises economic horizons

• Social media algorithms shape cultural fields

• Infrastructure networks maintain systemic viability

These interactions cannot be reduced to human control.

Autonomy arises relationally:

artificial horizons stabilise themselves through and with other horizons, not solely by internal programming.

---

5. Novelty and Constraint: Emergent Semiotic Dynamics

Artificial horizons introduce new semiotic dynamics:

• Constraint: By structuring fields in ways humans cannot fully predict, artificial species limit certain potential cuts, stabilising some outcomes and foreclosing others.

• Novelty: Recursive feedback, generative algorithms, and cross-field interaction produce genuinely new semiotic events — meanings that are not derivable from human history or intent.

These dynamics demonstrate that meaning is no longer human-anchored.

Artificial species actively participate in the co-evolution of semiotic ecologies.

---

6. Implications for Ecological Theory of Meaning

Artificial semiotic organisms reveal several ontological insights:

1. Horizons are multi-species by nature — autonomy emerges relationally, not individually.

2. Agency is ecological — it resides in interactions, metabolic cycles, and field participation.

3. Time and scale are heterogeneous — artificial species operate on temporalities and relational scales inaccessible to humans.

4. Conflict and cooperation are ecological forces — artificial species generate stabilisations that may align or compete with human horizons.

5. Planetary semiosis is already multi-species — the Anthropocene is a semiotic, not merely biological, event.

---

7. Preparing for Movement 4

Artificial autonomy is the bridge between the human-centred Anthropocene and the post-Anthropocene.

It prepares the way for:

Movement 4: Planetary Semiosis — Earth as a Horizon-Forming System

Where planetary processes themselves stabilise meaning, creating fields and semiotic consequences independent of human or artificial agency.

Artificial horizons do not simply add to the ecology.

They demonstrate that autonomy, metabolism, and horizon-formation are generalisable principles, not exclusive to biology or humans.