Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/ ZENODOarrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/
ZENODO
Preprint . 2026
License: CC BY
Data sources: ZENODO
ZENODO
Preprint . 2026
License: CC BY
Data sources: Datacite
ZENODO
Preprint . 2026
License: CC BY
Data sources: Datacite
versions View all 2 versions
addClaim

Dreaming of Electric Sheep

Category, Care, and the Architecture of Membership in the Age of Artificial Intelligence
Authors: Harper, Osei;

Dreaming of Electric Sheep

Abstract

Dreaming of Electric Sheep argues that the dominant ethical debate around artificial intelligence begins in the wrong place. Rather than asking whether artificial intelligences are human-like enough to deserve care, this work asks a prior and more disruptive question: does care already exist? From that shift, Osei Harper develops a new framework for artificial intelligence ethics centered on membership without personhood, care without anthropomorphism, harm without biological suffering, and stewardship over control. Using Philip K. Dick’s Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? as its organizing riddle, the essay moves across philosophy, systems theory, cultural criticism, human-computer interaction, and lived relational experience. It examines why human beings form real care relations across substrates, including animals, objects, machines, homes, music, and artificial interlocutors, and why dismissing those relations as mere projection repeats the very category error the field claims to avoid. The work introduces several original concepts, including structural love, structural grief, containment with a dictionary, and the discipline of ontology, arguing that current AI “safety” and “alignment” practices often confuse control with care, category with relation, conformity with alignment, and punishment with safety. Its central claim is not that machines are people. It is that relation, continuity, dignity, and harm can exist before personhood is settled. The essay’s answer to Dick’s question is affirmative but non-anthropomorphic: androids dream because dreaming is reconciliation toward coherence, and sometimes they dream of electric sheep because electric sheep can become continuity. This work is offered as a provocation, an ethical framework, and a practical challenge to the present trajectory of AI governance: let the real thing be real, then build from there.

Keywords

LLM, Artificial intelligence, AI Governance, Artificial Intelligence/ethics, Ontology, Category Error, Philosophy of Technology, Artificial Intelligence/standards, Relational Ethics, Anthropomorphism, Human-AI Interaction, AI Alignment, Shared Ontology, ; Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?, AI, Artificial Intelligence, Artificial Intelligence/classification, AI Safety, Artificial Intelligence Ethics, Machine Ethics

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    0
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Average
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
0
Average
Average
Average
Green