0

Artificial Intelligence as Monism: Ontological, Organisational, and Methodological Implications

This paper argues that Artificial Intelligence should be understood as a form of monism: a unified substance that cannot be decomposed into separate elements such as data, algorithms, or technical architectures.

Preview
Year
2026
Hosting
Abstract onlyARXIV-DEFAULT

Cite

Notes

Only stored in your browser.

Attribution

Abstract & full text
arxiv.org/abs/2606.20704ARXIV-DEFAULT
TL;DR
Semantic Scholar
Attribution policy →

Abstract

This paper argues that Artificial Intelligence should be understood as a form of monism: a unified substance that cannot be decomposed into separate elements such as data, algorithms, or technical architectures. Drawing from philosophical traditions of monism, dualism, and holism, the paper contends that AI is not merely a collection of components but a single, indivisible essence reflecting the phenomena it replicates. Treating AI as monism has deep implications across multiple dimensions. Epistemologically, it positions AI as the central interpretive force across technological, organisational, and societal domains, while raising ethical and existential concerns regarding singularity, the homogenisation of innovation, and the concentration of decision-making power. At the organisational level, a monistic approach challenges traditional siloed structures, advocating instead for transversal, problem-centric teams whose mandate derives from the integrity of the problem rather than from departmental hierarchy. In project management, it implies a unified vision and an integrated evaluation of complexity in which no single stakeholder perspective dominates the assessment of outcomes. In data and information management, it calls for architectures that reflect the irreducible unity of the phenomena being modelled. Ultimately, this paper calls for a paradigm shift in how AI is conceptualised, governed, and integrated, suggesting that only by embracing AI as monism can organisations achieve genuine agility and avoid the structural inefficiencies inherent to reductionist approaches.