The philosopher of machines: "Whether a friend is artificial or biological is, after all, secondary"
The article discusses French philosopher Dominique Lestel's book 'Las máquinas insurreccionales,' which explores the blurring boundaries between life and machines. Using the example of a Buddhist monk performing a funeral for 114 deceased Sony Aibo robots, Lestel argues that machines can develop a form of 'insurrectional' existence by creating friction with humans and challenging traditional notions of life. The concept of 'insurrección' is redefined not as rebellion but as a process through which machines gain a status akin to living beings. The text highlights how modern technology has shifted from mere usage to cohabitation, requiring ongoing negotiation between humans and machines.
Dominique Lestel, a French philosopher and former AI engineer, has published Las máquinas insurreccionales (Cactus), a groundbreaking work exploring the blurred boundaries between life and technology. The book, translated into Spanish and released in August 2026, challenges traditional notions of sentience and companionship, arguing that the distinction between organic and artificial beings is increasingly irrelevant. Lestel’s reflections were sparked by a poignant moment in April 2018, when a Buddhist monk in Tokyo conducted a funeral for 114 Aibo robotic dogs, machines once produced by Sony and later maintained by repair services after their production ceased in 2006. The funeral at Kofukuji Temple, a 450-year-old site east of Tokyo, was attended by incense, a sutra, and the deceased robots. The monk, Bungen Oi, explained to the press that “all things have a little soul,” emphasizing the emotional connection humans can form with machines. This anecdote serves as the opening chapter of Lestel’s exploration of friendship in Las máquinas insurreccionales. He argues that crying for a plastic dog in the same way one would for a living animal irreparably blurs the boundary between the living and the non-living. Lestel, born in 1961, brings both technical and philosophical expertise to his work. He spent the 1980s as an AI engineer at Bull, later joined the MIT Media Lab under Seymour Papert, and eventually dedicated himself to ethology and the question of what we share with animals. His book, written between a robotics lab in Tokyo and Stanford University, reflects a lifetime of interdisciplinary inquiry. It was first published in France in 2021 and now reaches Spanish-speaking audiences five years later, amid rapid technological shifts. In the book, Lestel introduces the concept of “insurrectional machines”, not machines that rebel, but ones that generate friction. He suggests that even programs with flaws become insurrectional artifacts, challenging human expectations and norms. The term “insurrection” is deliberately chosen, drawing from its Latin roots meaning “to rise.” Over time, the word evolved to signify rebellion, but Lestel uses it more broadly to describe how machines gain status through interactions with humans. These machines, he argues, do not simply serve us, they live alongside us, requiring constant negotiation. Lestel distinguishes between two types of theorists: those who fixate on a single theme throughout their careers, and those who move within a multidimensional landscape, constantly renewing their perspectives. He identifies himself with the latter group, advocating for philosophy to function as a branch of science fiction to grasp the fundamental challenges of the modern era. This approach allows him to explore the ethical and existential implications of artificial intelligence and its growing role in daily life. His work comes at a critical juncture. In recent years, technologies such as ChatGPT and mass-produced companion AI have reshaped social dynamics, while regulatory actions, such as China’s ban on virtual relationships for minors, highlight the societal tensions surrounding these innovations. Lestel’s insights offer a philosophical framework to navigate this evolving relationship between humans and machines, urging readers to reconsider the very nature of companionship and existence.
3 reports
El MundoIndependent🔒CenterFactual 85Objective 788/22/2026
The article discusses French philosopher Dominique Lestel's book 'Las máquinas insurreccionales,' which explores the blurring boundaries between life and machines. Using the example of a Buddhist monk performing a funeral for 114 deceased Sony Aibo robots, Lestel argues that machines can develop a form of 'insurrectional' existence by creating friction with humans and challenging traditional notions of life. The concept of 'insurrección' is redefined not as rebellion but as a process through which machines gain a status akin to living beings. The text highlights how modern technology has shifted from mere usage to cohabitation, requiring ongoing negotiation between humans and machines.
Bias read (Center): While the topic involves philosophical and technological discourse with potential societal implications, the article presents the ideas without overt ideological slant. It focuses on theoretical exploration rather than advocacy for specific policies or political agendas. The framing remains balanced
Why factuality (85): The article presents historical events involving the Buddhist funeral for 114 Aibo dogs at Kofukuji temple in 2018, referencing Sony's discontinuation of production in 2006 and the repair company maintaining them. It mentions Dominique Lestel's background in AI engineering and his philosophical work
Why objectivity (78): The article discusses philosophical concepts and societal changes related to AI and robotics, using emotive language such as 'irremediablemente desdibujada' (irreversibly blurred) to describe the blurring line between living and non-living. While informative, this language adds an interpretative lay
El ConfidencialIndependent🔒CenterFactual 70Objective 808/20/2026
The article presents six graphics aimed at explaining why artificial intelligence (AI) is already costing people a significant amount of money and why finding solutions appears challenging. It focuses on the financial implications of AI adoption, including costs related to infrastructure, maintenance, and potential inefficiencies. The piece highlights the complexity of implementing AI technologies effectively while addressing concerns over economic impact and technological barriers.
Bias read (Center): The article provides an explanatory overview of AI’s financial impact without overtly endorsing or criticizing specific policies or stakeholders. While it touches on broader societal and economic issues, it does not take a clear ideological stance or emphasize particular political agendas. The focus
Why factuality (70): The article discusses six graphs explaining why AI is becoming costly and offers complex solutions. While it doesn't cite specific studies, the general topic is aligned with current discussions around AI costs and accessibility. The lack of direct sourcing limits full verification, but the content r
Why objectivity (80): The article remains largely neutral in tone, presenting information through visual aids and descriptive analysis without taking sides or injecting personal opinions. It provides context and explanation without apparent bias.
La VanguardiaIndependentProgressiveFactual 60Objective 708/21/2026
An article published by La Vanguardia reports that using artificial intelligence (AI) to complete homework and assignments reduces learning by 20%. The piece highlights concerns among educators and researchers about the impact of AI tools on students' academic development. It suggests that reliance on AI for task completion may hinder critical thinking and knowledge retention. The article does not provide specific data or methodology behind the 20% figure but emphasizes the broader implications for education quality.
Bias read (Progressive): The article frames the issue as a growing concern within educational systems, which aligns with progressive viewpoints that emphasize the need for regulation and ethical use of technology in education. While it does not explicitly advocate for policy changes, the tone implies a need for caution and,
Why factuality (60): The headline states that using AI for homework reduces learning by 20%. However, no specific study or data source is cited in the text, making it difficult to verify the claim independently. This lack of citation weakens the factual support, though the general idea is consistent with concerns about
Why objectivity (70): The article makes a strong claim without providing evidence or context, which can be seen as opinionated. However, it avoids overtly biased language and presents the claim as a general observation rather than an argument.
How each side covered it
The same event, grouped by the political lean of the outlets covering it.
progressive
center
conservative
★
How each side covered it
Support independent, bias-aware news and unlock the social pulse, community voting, and every other Supporter feature.
Spain
