Tracing the Techno-Supremacy Doctrine: A Critical Discourse Analysis of the AI Executive Elite

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2509.18079v1
• Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2025 17:55:38 GMT
• Title: Tracing the Techno-Supremacy Doctrine: A Critical Discourse Analysis of the AI Executive Elite
• Authors: Héctor Pérez-Urbina,
• Abstract summary: This paper critically analyzes the discourse of the 'AI executive elite,' a group of highly influential individuals shaping the way AI is funded, developed, and deployed worldwide.<n>The primary objective is to examine the presence and dynamics of the 'Techno-Supremacy Doctrine' (TSD), a term introduced in this study to describe a belief system characterized by an excessive trust in technology's alleged inherent superiority in solving complex societal problems.<n>The analysis identifies key discursive patterns, including a dominant pro-TSD narrative that combines utopian promises with claims of inevitable progress, and the common tactic of acknowledging risks only as a
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: This paper critically analyzes the discourse of the 'AI executive elite,' a group of highly influential individuals shaping the way AI is funded, developed, and deployed worldwide. The primary objective is to examine the presence and dynamics of the 'Techno-Supremacy Doctrine' (TSD), a term introduced in this study to describe a belief system characterized by an excessive trust in technology's alleged inherent superiority in solving complex societal problems. This study integrates quantitative heuristics with in-depth qualitative investigations. Its methodology is operationalized in a two-phase critical discourse analysis of 14 texts published by elite members between 2017 and 2025. The findings demonstrate that the elite is not a monolithic bloc but exhibits a broad spectrum of stances. The discourse is highly dynamic, showing a marked polarization and general increase in pro-TSD discourse following the launch of ChatGPT. The analysis identifies key discursive patterns, including a dominant pro-TSD narrative that combines utopian promises with claims of inevitable progress, and the common tactic of acknowledging risks only as a strategic preamble to proposing further technological solutions. This paper presents TSD as a comprehensive analytical framework and provides a 'diagnostic toolkit' for identifying its manifestations, from insidious to benign. It argues that fostering critical awareness of these discursive patterns is essential for AI practitioners, policymakers, and the public to actively navigate the future of AI.

Related papers

• Beyond Explainable AI (XAI): An Overdue Paradigm Shift and Post-XAI Research Directions [95.59915390053588]
  This study focuses on Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) approaches-focusing on deep neural networks (DNNs) and large language models (LLMs)<n>We discuss critical symptoms that stem from deeper root causes (i.e., two paradoxes, two conceptual confusions, and five false assumptions)<n>To move beyond XAI's limitations, we propose a four-pronged paradigm shift toward reliable and certified AI development.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-27T16:58:27Z)
• AI Narrative Breakdown. A Critical Assessment of Power and Promise [0.0]
  The article scrutinizes the pervasive narratives that are shaping the societal engagement with AI.<n>It highlights key themes such as agency and decision-making, truthfulness, autonomy, knowledge processing, prediction, general purpose, neutrality and objectivity.<n>The article calls for a more grounded engagement with AI and proposes new narratives recognizing AI as a human-directed tool necessarily subject to societal governance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-29T19:26:45Z)
• AI Deception: Risks, Dynamics, and Controls [153.71048309527225]
  This project provides a comprehensive and up-to-date overview of the AI deception field.<n>We identify a formal definition of AI deception, grounded in signaling theory from studies of animal deception.<n>We organize the landscape of AI deception research as a deception cycle, consisting of two key components: deception emergence and deception treatment.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-27T16:56:04Z)
• Educators on the Frontline: Philosophical and Realistic Perspectives on Integrating ChatGPT into the Learning Space [3.122408196953971]
  The rapid emergence of Generative AI, particularly ChatGPT, has sparked a global debate on the future of education.<n>This study investigates the structured, grounded perspectives of a key stakeholder group: university educators.<n>It proposes a novel theoretical model that conceptualizes the educational environment as a "Learning Space" composed of seven subspaces.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-15T00:15:41Z)
• The Stories We Govern By: AI, Risk, and the Power of Imaginaries [0.0]
  This paper examines how competing sociotechnical imaginaries of artificial intelligence (AI) risk shape governance decisions and regulatory constraints.<n>We analyse three dominant narrative groups: existential risk proponents, who emphasise catastrophic AGI scenarios; accelerationists, who portray AI as a transformative force to be unleashed; and critical AI scholars, who foreground present-day harms rooted in systemic inequality.<n>Our findings reveal how these narratives embed distinct assumptions about risk and have the potential to progress into policy-making processes by narrowing the space for alternative governance approaches.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-15T09:57:56Z)
• Never Compromise to Vulnerabilities: A Comprehensive Survey on AI Governance [211.5823259429128]
  We propose a comprehensive framework integrating technical and societal dimensions, structured around three interconnected pillars: Intrinsic Security, Derivative Security, and Social Ethics.<n>We identify three core challenges: (1) the generalization gap, where defenses fail against evolving threats; (2) inadequate evaluation protocols that overlook real-world risks; and (3) fragmented regulations leading to inconsistent oversight.<n>Our framework offers actionable guidance for researchers, engineers, and policymakers to develop AI systems that are not only robust and secure but also ethically aligned and publicly trustworthy.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-12T09:42:56Z)
• Exploring Societal Concerns and Perceptions of AI: A Thematic Analysis through the Lens of Problem-Seeking [0.0]
  This study introduces a novel conceptual framework distinguishing problem-seeking from problem-solving to clarify the unique features of human intelligence in contrast to AI.<n>The framework emphasizes that while AI excels at efficiency and optimization, it lacks the orientation derived from grounding and the embodiment flexibility intrinsic to human cognition.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-29T18:24:34Z)
• Decoding the Black Box: Integrating Moral Imagination with Technical AI Governance [0.0]
  We develop a comprehensive framework designed to regulate AI technologies deployed in high-stakes domains such as defense, finance, healthcare, and education.<n>Our approach combines rigorous technical analysis, quantitative risk assessment, and normative evaluation to expose systemic vulnerabilities.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-09T03:11:32Z)
• Towards Bidirectional Human-AI Alignment: A Systematic Review for Clarifications, Framework, and Future Directions [101.67121669727354]
  Recent advancements in AI have highlighted the importance of guiding AI systems towards the intended goals, ethical principles, and values of individuals and groups, a concept broadly recognized as alignment. The lack of clarified definitions and scopes of human-AI alignment poses a significant obstacle, hampering collaborative efforts across research domains to achieve this alignment. We introduce a systematic review of over 400 papers published between 2019 and January 2024, spanning multiple domains such as Human-Computer Interaction (HCI), Natural Language Processing (NLP), Machine Learning (ML)
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-13T16:03:25Z)
• Unmasking the Shadows of AI: Investigating Deceptive Capabilities in Large Language Models [0.0]
  This research critically navigates the intricate landscape of AI deception, concentrating on deceptive behaviours of Large Language Models (LLMs) My objective is to elucidate this issue, examine the discourse surrounding it, and subsequently delve into its categorization and ramifications.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-07T00:21:46Z)
• Ethical Framework for Harnessing the Power of AI in Healthcare and Beyond [0.0]
  This comprehensive research article rigorously investigates the ethical dimensions intricately linked to the rapid evolution of AI technologies. Central to this article is the proposition of a conscientious AI framework, meticulously crafted to accentuate values of transparency, equity, answerability, and a human-centric orientation. The article unequivocally accentuates the pressing need for globally standardized AI ethics principles and frameworks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-31T18:12:12Z)
• The Role of AI in Drug Discovery: Challenges, Opportunities, and Strategies [97.5153823429076]
  The benefits, challenges and drawbacks of AI in this field are reviewed. The use of data augmentation, explainable AI, and the integration of AI with traditional experimental methods are also discussed.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-12-08T23:23:39Z)
• Fairness in Agreement With European Values: An Interdisciplinary Perspective on AI Regulation [61.77881142275982]
  This interdisciplinary position paper considers various concerns surrounding fairness and discrimination in AI, and discusses how AI regulations address them. We first look at AI and fairness through the lenses of law, (AI) industry, sociotechnology, and (moral) philosophy, and present various perspectives. We identify and propose the roles AI Regulation should take to make the endeavor of the AI Act a success in terms of AI fairness concerns.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-06-08T12:32:08Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.