SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Pamukkale Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi / 2026 / Sayı: 75

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND THE SOCIAL SCIENCES IN THE LIGHT OF ARENDT’S VITA ACTIVA: AN ANALYSIS IN THE CONTEXT OF THE PUBLISHING PRESSURE

ARENDT'İN VITA ACTIVA'SI IŞIĞINDA YAPAY ZEKÂ VE SOSYAL BİLİMLER: YAYIN BASKISI BAĞLAMINDA BİR İNCELEME

Muhammet Ali Yunus(Hatay Mustafa Kemal University)0000-0001-6431-789X
Soner Akın(Hatay Mustafa Kemal University)0000-0002-2403-8041
Pages
223–237
Publication Date
2026-07-14
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

In conclusion, by carrying the AI debate beyond the dichotomy of 'good' or 'bad,' the study offers a perspective on how technology can erode even the most unique spheres of human activity.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:As a technological revolution, Artificial Intelligence (AI) qualitatively distinguishes itself from previous technological revolutions by mimicking human cognitive abilities and possesses the potential to assume the faculties that distinguish humans from other beings.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Consequently, this potential subjects human activities to a transformation in every field.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:In conclusion, by carrying the AI debate beyond the dichotomy of 'good' or 'bad,' the study offers a perspective on how technology can erode even the most unique spheres of human activity.
🔬Design:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Yapay zeka · Vita ctiva · Sosyal Bilimler

Abstract

As a technological revolution, Artificial Intelligence (AI) qualitatively distinguishes itself from previous technological revolutions by mimicking human cognitive abilities and possesses the potential to assume the faculties that distinguish humans from other beings. Consequently, this potential subjects human activities to a transformation in every field. In this study, the transformation in question is analyzed within the framework of Hannah Arendt’s concept of vita activa. Designed as a theoretical case analysis based on conceptual analysis, the article examines the effects of AI specifically within the context of 'social sciences practice.' The main thesis of the article is that when combined with the existing 'publish or perish' pressure in academia, AI carries the risk of reducing academic activity from a meaning-creating 'action' to the category of 'labor,' which is an endless cycle of production and consumption. Moreover, the advantages AI provides to the practice of social sciences are discussed, and in this context, the article also aims to present solution proposals. In conclusion, by carrying the AI debate beyond the dichotomy of 'good' or 'bad,' the study offers a perspective on how technology can erode even the most unique spheres of human activity.

Özet

Bir teknolojik devrim olarak yapay zekâ (YZ), insanın bilişsel yeteneklerini taklit ederek önceki teknolojik devrimlerden niteliksel olarak ayrılmakta ve insanı diğer varlıklardan ayıran yetilerini üstlenme potansiyeline sahip olmaktadır. Dolayısıyla bu potansiyel insan faaliyetlerini her alanda bir dönüşüm ile karşı karşıya bırakmaktadır. Bu çalışmada, söz konusu dönüşüm Hannah Arendt’in vita activa kavramı çerçevesinde analiz edilmektedir. Kavramsal analize dayalı teorik bir vaka analizi olarak tasarlanan makalede, YZ’nin etkileri 'sosyal bilimler pratiği' özelinde ele alınmaktadır. Makalenin temel tezi, YZ’nin, akademideki mevcut ‘yayınla ya da yok ol’ baskısıyla birleştiğinde, akademik faaliyeti anlam yaratan bir ‘eylem’ (action) olmaktan çıkarıp, sonu gelmeyen bir üretim-tüketim döngüsü olan ‘emek’ (labor) kategorisine indirgeme riski taşıdığıdır. Bununla birlikte YZ’nin sosyal bilimler pratiğine sağladığı avantajlar tartışılmakta ve bu bağlamda makalede çözüm önerileri sunma amacı da taşınmaktadır. Sonuç olarak çalışma, YZ tartışmasını ‘iyi’ ya da ‘kötü’ ikileminin ötesine taşıyarak, teknolojinin, insanlığın en özgün faaliyet alanlarını dahi nasıl aşındırabileceğine dair bir perspektif sunmaktadır.

🔖

Cite This Article

Yunus, M. A., Akın, S. (2026). ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND THE SOCIAL SCIENCES IN THE LIGHT OF ARENDT’S VITA ACTIVA: AN ANALYSIS IN THE CONTEXT OF THE PUBLISHING PRESSURE. Pamukkale Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, Sayı: 75, 223–237. https://doi.org/10.30794/pausbed.1794628

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (26)

  1. Ashruf, C. (2025). Artificial intelligence through the eyes of Hannah Arendt: Fear, alienation, and empowerment. AI & Society. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-025-02435-2
  2. Arendt, H. (1994). İnsanlık durumu (B. Taneli, Çev.). İletişim Yayınları.
  3. Banh, L. & G. Strobel (2023). Generative artificial intelligence. Electronic Markets, 33, 63. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12525-023-00680-1
  4. Bail, C. A. (2024). Can generative AI improve social science? Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 121(21), e2314021121. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2314021121
  5. Ben-David, A., & Carmi, E. (2025). Dark cycles: Social engineering and political chatbots in Netanyahu’s 2019 election campaigns. International Journal of Communication, 19, 592–616.
  6. Christopher A. Bail (2024). Can generative AI improve social science? Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 121(21), e2314021121. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2314021121
  7. Coeckelbergh, M. (2025). AI and Epistemic Agency: How AI Influences Belief Revision and Its Normative Implications. Social Epistemology, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1080/02691728.2025.2466164
  8. Dos Santos Araújo, A., & Bacelar, L. F. L. (2025). The Value of Work in the Age of Artificial Intelligence: Meaning, Social Contribution, and Recognition amid Productive Dehumanization. Open Journal of Social Sciences, 13, 86-99. https://doi.org/10.4236/jss.2025.137005
  9. Fernandez-Cano A. (2021). Letter to the Editor: publish, publish … cursed!. Scientometrics, 126(4), 3673–3682. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03833-7
  10. França, T. F. A., & Monserrat, J. M. (2024, August 8). The artificial intelligence revolution. in unethical publishing: Surfing the liquid world and its intangible economy. https://doi.org/10.1085/jgp.202413654
  11. Guzmán-Valenzuela, C., Ortega, L., Montero, M., et al. (2023). The new knowledge production in the social sciences and in the arts and humanities in Latin America. Higher Education, 85, 587–612. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-022-00853-5
  12. Jungherr, A. (2023). Artificial Intelligence and Democracy: A Conceptual Framework. Social Media + Society, 9(3), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1177/20563051231186353
  13. Khalifa, M., & Albadawy, M. (2024). Using artificial intelligence in academic writing and research: An essential productivity tool. Computer Methods and Programs in Biomedicine Update, 5, 100145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cmpbup.2024.100145
  14. Labraña, J., Brunner, J. J., Gómez, M., & Wee, C. (2025). The shortening of temporal horizons: Acceleration in social sciences and humanities in Chilean universities. Cogent Education, 12(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2025.2541076
  15. Mollema, W. J. T. (2025). A taxonomy of epistemic injustice in the context of AI and the case for generative hermeneutical erasure. AI and Ethics. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43681-025-00801-w
  16. Mete, M. H. (2023). Sosyal Bilimlerde Büyük Veri Analitiği, Yapay Zeka ve Makine Öğreniminin Kullanımı. Anadolu Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 23(1), 99- 120. https://doi.org/10.18037/ausbd.1272565
  17. Nemec, J. (2024). ‘Publish or perish’ social science university programmes in Central and Eastern Europe. Transylvanian Review of Administrative Sciences, 20(SI), 106- 111. https://doi.org/10.24193/tras.SI2024.14
  18. Palmer, J. (2024, February 28). U.S. presidential hopeful Jason Palmer becomes first candidate to release talking AI-powered version of himself. PR Newswire. https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/us-presidential-hopeful-jason-palmer-becomes-first-candidate-to-release-talking-ai-powered-version-of-himself-302074233.html
  19. Rowe, M. (2025). Publishing with purpose: Using AI to enhance scientific discourse [Preprint]. OSF Preprints. https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/d7hwf_v1
  20. Swindell, A., Greeley, L., Farag, A., & Verdone, B. (2024). Against Artificial Education: Towards an Ethical Framework for Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) Use in Education. Online Learning, 28(2), (7-27). DOI: 10.24059/olj.v28i2.4438
  21. Osunsan, O., Ijjo, A., Mugisha, J., Pule, S., & Muhwezi, M. (2022). 'Publish or perish': A systematic review. CJSSM, 1(1), 1–22.
  22. Öztemel, E. (2020). Yapay zekâ ve insanlığın geleceği. In M. Şeker, Y. Bulduklu, C. Korkut, & M. Doğrul (Ed.), Bilişim teknolojileri ve iletişim: Birey ve toplum güvenliği (ss. 75–90). Türkiye Bilimler Akademisi. https://doi.org/10.53478/TUBA.2020.011
  23. Tangalakis-Lippert, K. (2024, March 10). Long shot Democratic challenger for president credits AI with helping him block a Biden sweep in the primaries. Business Insider. https://www.businessinsider.com/jason-palmer-ai-helped-block-joe-biden-presidential-primary-sweep-2024-3
  24. Taylor, J. B., & Richey, S. (2024). AI chatbots and political learning. Journal of Information Technology & Politics. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/19331681.2024.2422929
  25. Tosi, D., Chiappa, M., & Pizzul, D. (2025). AI chatbots in political campaigns: A practical experience in the EU’s 2024 Parliament elections. Social Science Computer Review, 44(2). https://doi.org/10.1177/08944393251320063
  26. França, T. F. A., & Monserrat, J. M. (2024, August 8). The artificial intelligence revolution. in unethical publishing: Surfing the liquid world and its intangible economy. https://doi.org/10.1085/jgp.202413654