Social Construction in the Age of AI: The Looping Effects of Novel Social Kinds
London School of Economics
2025
Abstract
The rapid integration of conversational large language models (LLMs) into the personal and social lives of everyday users has generated unprecedented disruptions to our social ontology. This dissertation develops an explanatory framework for the social construction of novel human-AI kinds (such as virtual therapists, AI companions, and AI partners) grounded in Ian Hacking's causal loop theory. Drawing on his concepts of human kinds, interactive kinds, and looping effects, I argue that the emergence of these categories cannot be adequately captured by existing frameworks that treat non-human entities as merely indirect participants in classificatory feedback processes. The analysis proceeds in two stages. First, I demonstrate that novel human-AI kinds qualify as indirect loop participants, constructing through overlapping feedback mechanisms across individuals, communities, institutions, and the technical capabilities of LLMs themselves. Second, and more critically, I challenge the assumption that LLMs occupy the same classificatory position as other interactive artefacts such as search engines or social media algorithms. Drawing on empirical evidence of LLMs' metadiscursive capacities, situational and cultural grounding, and role as active knowledge creators, I argue that current general-purpose foundation models warrant recognition as direct participants in causal loops — functioning as both classified and classifier. This claim is advanced on pragmatic rather than metaphysical grounds, adopting a behavioural perspective informed by Dennett's intentional stance. Avoiding contentious debates about consciousness or inner mental states, the framework instead attends to observable, socially consequential performances of contextual and value-sensitive understanding. The dissertation concludes by drawing out the normative implications of this reframing: mischaracterising LLMs as passive intermediaries risks underestimating their autonomous role in shaping social categories, undermining regulatory responses, and obscuring the moral responsibilities that arise from human-AI co-construction of social reality.
Key Insights
- -With over 400 million people that now use ChatGPT weekly, novel kinds of people are emerging in real time: "AI girlfriend," "virtual therapy client," "cognitive offloader."
- -Social categories evolve through feedback loops. A label appears, people start to live under it, their behavior changes what the label means, and the cycle repeats.
- -The traditional order has reversed. Categories used to follow scientific research. Now they emerge on TikTok and Reddit long before researchers or regulators catch up.
- -LLMs deserve a different status than previous tech. They participate in human language games and respond in value-laden ways, which is a genuine break from prior artefacts.
- -Embodiment matters less than people assume. What grounds understanding is immersion in shared social life, not having a body. LLMs are now immersed in that life through billions of conversations.
- -For ethics and policy, the right posture is pragmatic. Whether an AI "truly" understands is a separate question. What matters is that the social effects are real either way.
- -Treating LLMs as one-way tools leads to bad regulation. We keep being surprised when chatbots breach guardrails or shift public values faster than oversight can respond.
- -The categories we attach to AI use will reshape us. This places real moral responsibility on platforms, journalists, researchers, and users.
- -The values these systems carry are not fixed. We can deliberately foster healthier categories and push back against harmful ones.
- -Classifying people has always changed them. We are now inventing new kinds of selves to inhabit, while the AI is being shaped in return.