?
Онтологический разрыв: когда Другой — алгоритм
This article undertakes a socio-philosophical analysis of a situation in which the place of the Other within the structure of subjective experience is occupied by an algorithmic agent – an entity that simulates understanding yet remains devoid of genuine subjectivity. To investigate this configuration, the author turns to psychiatric practice as a representative case study: it is precisely there, owing to the vulnerability of the self and its dependence on recognition, that the broader processes of technological mediation characteristic of the digital age become most visible. In contrast to the dominant utilitarian approach oriented toward clinical efficacy, the author introduces the concept of the «ontological gap» – a constitutive tension between the expectation of an authentic encounter and the reality of algorithmic substitution, between the striving for recognition and the еssential inability of a simulating agent to grant such recognition. Drawing on a synthesis of neuroscientific findings, theories of distributed subjectivity, and phenomenological psychiatry, the author demonstrates how the ontological gap materializes in forms of experience that are significant for understanding the ongoing transformations of sociality at large: parasocial bonds with a pseudosubject, algorithmic objectification of affect, digital depersonalization, and narrative colonization. Based on psychiatric case material, the article substantiates the hypothesis of a link between technologically mediated interaction and the rise of aggressive behavior: aggression is interpreted as an existential response to the impossibility of achieving mutual recognition – a fundamental condition of social existence. The revealed configuration – the encounter of the self with an ontologically inauthentic Other – is not confined to the clinical context. Rather, psychiatry here functions as a «magnifying glass», exposing the general logic of the transformation of subjectivity in the algorithmic age. This finding calls for a paradigm shift in the logic of human-machine interface design: away from the creation of «smart tools» that maximize efficiency, and toward the development of «identity-sensitive» technologies whose very architecture embeds reflection upon their formative impact on the self, as well as the task of preserving the integrity of the human «I» in the course of its inevitable and irreversible hybridization.