Humanities Studios: Pedagogy, Psychology, Philosophy

From manipulation to expression: The philosophical shift to natural language interfaces

Andrii Lykhatskyi
Download article
Abstract

The modern era of rapid artificial intelligence development witnessed a fundamental paradigmatic shift in human-computer interaction – from technocratic manipulation to conscious expression through natural language. The study aimed to philosophically examine the transition from manipulative to expressive interaction with natural language interfaces. An interdisciplinary approach was employed, combining methods of philosophical analysis, cognitive phenomenology, and digital culture critique. The findings revealed that modern large language model-based interfaces not only simplified communication but also reconfigured the ontological foundations of technological experience. The growing “semantic opacity” of large language systems challenged traditional notions of understanding, accountability, and explainability in technical interaction. A phenomenological shift toward “invisible” technology integrated into the subject’s cognitive architecture was identified. The phenomenon of technological intersubjectivity was analysed, blurring the boundary between human and machine agency. It was demonstrated that language as an interface not only transmitted information but also functioned as a medium for shaping self-identity, autonomy, and cognitive responsibility. The conclusions proved that this transformation carried profound philosophical implications and required systematic reflection to prevent the erosion of human autonomy in the context of cognitive fusion with artificial intelligence. The necessity of an ethical framework for new interfaces was emphasised – one that ensured not only functionality but also the preservation of human agency. The practical significance lay in establishing philosophical foundations for designing natural language interfaces that supported human autonomy, responsibility, and epistemic independence

Keywords

human-computer interaction; cognitive abstraction; graphical user interfaces; artificial intelligence; philosophical mediation

Suggested citation
Lykhatskyi, A. (2025). From manipulation to expression: The philosophical shift to natural language interfaces. Humanities Studios: Pedagogy, Psychology, Philosophy, 13(2), 88-102. https://doi.org/10.31548/hspedagog/2.2025.88
References
  1. Ahmed, L. (2018). Knowing how you are feeling depends on what’s on my mind: Cognitive load and expression categorization. Emotion, 18(2), 190-201. doi: 10.1037/emo0000312.
  2. Bar-Gil, O. (2025). The google self as digital human twin: Implications for agency, memory, and identity. doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.27892.67203.
  3. Bender, E.M., & Koller, A. (2020). Climbing towards NLU: On meaning, form, and understanding in the age of data. In Proceedings of the 58th annual meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (pp. 5185-5198). New York: Association for Computational Linguistics. doi: 10.18653/v1/2020.acl-main.463.
  4. Brincker, M. (2024). Smart worlds and broken habits: A contextual analysis of the technological relations of post-phenomenology. In L.R. Ingerslev & K. Mertens (Eds.), Phenomenology of broken habits (pp. 133-159). New York: Routledge.
  5. Carroll, M., Chan, A., Ashton, H., & Krueger, D. (2023). Characterizing manipulation from AI systems. In Proceedings of the 3rd ACM conference on equity and access in algorithms, mechanisms, and optimization (article number 6). New York: Association for Computing Machinery. doi: 10.1145/3617694.3623226.
  6. Chen, B., Zheng, W., Zhao, L., & Ding, X. (2025). Leveraging large language models to assist philosophical counseling: Prospective techniques, value, and challenges. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 12, article number 335. doi: 10.1057/s41599-025-04657-7.
  7. Clark, A., & Chalmers, D. (1998). The extended mind. Analysis, 58(1), 7-19. doi: 10.1093/analys/58.1.7.
  8. Cohen, P.R. (1992). The role of natural language in a multimodal interface. In Proceedings of the 5th annual ACM symposium on user interface software and technology (pp. 143-149). New York: Association for Computing Machinery. doi: 10.1145/142621.142641.
  9. Daniel, A. (2022). Technology, heidegger, craft. (Doctoral dissertation, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada).
  10. DeVrio, A., Cheng, M., Egede, L., Olteanu, A., & Blodgett, S.L. (2025). A taxonomy of linguistic expressions that contribute to anthropomorphism of language technologies. In Proceedings of the 2025 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems (article number 430). New York: Association for Computing Machinery. doi: 10.1145/3706598.3714038.
  11. Dourish, P. (2017). The stuff of bits: An essay on the materialities of information. Cambridge: The MIT Press.
  12. Du Toit, J., & Swer, G.M. (2021). Virtual limitations of the flesh: Merleau-Ponty and the phenomenology of technological determinism. Phenomenology and Mind, 20, 20-31. doi: 10.17454/pam-2002.
  13. Dupre, G. (2021). What would it mean for natural language to be the language of thought? Linguistics and Philosophy, 44, 773-812. doi: 10.1007/s10988-020-09304-9.
  14. Ellerton, P. (2022). On critical thinking and content knowledge: A critique of the assumptions of cognitive load theory. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 43, article number 100975. doi: 10.1016/j.tsc.2021.100975.
  15. Frana, P.L., & Klein, M.J. (Eds.). (2021). Encyclopedia of artificial intelligence: The past, present, and future of AI. New York: Bloomsbury Publishing USA.
  16. Gandhi, A., Nguyen, T.Q., Jiao, H., Steen, R., & Bhatawdekar, A. (2023). Natural language commanding via program synthesis. arXiv:2306.03460. doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2306.03460.
  17. Gatti, A., & Mascardi, V. (2023). VEsNA, a framework for virtual environments via natural language agents and its application to factory automation. Robotics, 12(2), article number 46. doi: 10.3390/robotics12020046.
  18. Gurcan, F., Cagiltay, N.E., & Cagiltay, K. (2020). Mapping human-computer interaction research themes and trends from its existence to today: A topic modeling-based review of past 60 years. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 37(3), 267-280. doi: 10.1080/10447318.2020.1819668.
  19. Heidegger, M. (1962). Being and time. New York: Harper & Row.
  20. Ihde, D. (2009). Postphenomenology and technoscience: The Peking university lectures. New York: State University of New York Press. doi: 10.2307/jj.18253168.
  21. Kirkwood, J. (2024). Liber indigo: The affordances of magic. Morrisville: Lulu.com.
  22. Kuznietsov, Ye., & Kuznietsova, T. (2024). Innovative models of vocational education: A symbiosis of artificial intelligence, neuropedagogy, and the competency-based approach. Professional Education: Methodology, Theory and Technologies, 10(1), 64-78. doi: 10.69587/pemtt/1.2024.64.
  23. Łozińska, J. (2021). Imagery underlying metaphors: A cognitive study of a multimodal discourse of yoga classes. Metaphor and Symbol, 36(3), 150-165. doi: 10.1080/10926488.2021.1905486.
  24. Mah, P.M., Skalna, I., & Muzam, J. (2022). Natural language processing and artificial intelligence for enterprise management in the era of industry 4.0. Applied Sciences, 12(18), article number 9207. doi: 10.3390/app12189207.
  25. Marshall, B. (2022). Evolving the natural-born cyborg. In E. Tumilty & M. Battle-Fisher (Eds.), Transhumanism: Entering an era of bodyhacking and radical human modification (pp. 87-101). Cham: Springer International Publishing. doi: 10.1007/978-3-031-14328-1_6.
  26. Miguens, S. (2022). Animal brains and the work of words: Daniel Dennett on natural language and the human mind. Topoi, 41, 599-607. doi: 10.1007/s11245-021-09745-2.
  27. Millière, R., & Buckner, C. (2024). A philosophical introduction to language models-part II: The way forward. arXiv:2405.03207. doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2405.03207.
  28. Naik, U., & Meghanandha, C. (2024). Beyond the binary: Metamind libraries and the digital revolution. Maharashtra: Laxmi Book Publication.
  29. Nefdt, R.M. (2024). The philosophy of theoretical linguistics: A contemporary outlook. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  30. Norman, D. (2013). The design of everyday things. New York: Basic Books.
  31. Pantano, E., & Scarpi, D. (2022). I, robot, you, consumer: Measuring artificial intelligence types and their effect on consumers emotions in service. Journal of Service Research, 25(4), 583-600. doi: 10.1177/10946705221103538.
  32. Pitt, B., & Casasanto, D. (2022). Spatial metaphors and the design of everyday things. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, article number 1019957. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1019957.
  33. Rahman, M.H., Kazi, M., Hossan, K.M.R., & Hassain, D. (2023). The poetry of programming: Utilizing natural language processing for creative expression. International Journal of Novel Research and Development, 8(8), 2456-4184.
  34. Searle, J.R. (1980). Minds, brains, and programs. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 3(3), 417-424. doi: 10.1017/S0140525X00005756.
  35. Sedig, K., Klawe, M., & Westrom, M. (2001). Role of interface manipulation style and scaffolding on cognition and concept learning in learnware. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, 8(1), 34-59. doi: 10.1145/371127.371159.
  36. Sovrano, F., & Vitali, F. (2022). Generating user-centred explanations via illocutionary question answering: From philosophy to interfaces. ACM Transactions on Interactive Intelligent Systems, 12(4), 1-32, article number 26. doi: 10.1145/3519265.
  37. Srikanth, N., Carpuat, M., & Rudinger, R. (2024). How often are errors in natural language reasoning due to paraphrastic variability? Transactions of the Association for Computational Linguistics, 12, 1143-1162. doi: 10.1162/tacl_a_00692.
  38. Talmy, L. (1988). Force dynamics in language and cognition. Cognitive Science, 12(1), 49-100. doi: 10.1207/s15516709cog1201_2.
  39. Tarsney, C. (2025). Deception and manipulation in generative AI. Philosophical Studies. doi: 10.1007/s11098-024-02259-8.
  40. Yung, V. (2021). A visual approach to interpreting the career of the network metaphor. Poetics, 88, article number 101566. doi: 10.1016/j.poetic.2021.101566.
  41. Zhou, K., Hwang, J.D., Ren, X., & Sap, M. (2024). Relying on the unreliable: The impact of language models’ reluctance to express uncertainty. arXiv:2401.06730. doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2401.06730.