According to Phys.org, Dr. Federico Cugurullo from Trinity College Dublin has introduced the term “AIdeology” to describe how artificial intelligence has evolved beyond mere technology into a full-blown belief system. In his recently published perspective in the journal Antipode, the human geographer argues AI now shapes societal values about progress, sustainability, and humanity itself. Through combining Marxian philosophy and human geography, he demonstrates how AI influences not just physical infrastructure but how people imagine cities and future societies. The research specifically calls out three pervasive AI myths: that AI will save the planet while hiding environmental costs, that AI is becoming human through deceptive anthropomorphism, and that AI will end work and capitalism despite relying on underpaid “ghost workers.” Dr. Cugurullo warns these narratives mask deep inequalities and exploitation of both people and the planet.
When Technology Becomes Belief
Here’s the thing – we’ve been treating AI like it’s just another tool. But tools don’t fundamentally reshape how we think about progress or humanity. What Cugurullo’s getting at is that AI has crossed that line. It’s not just about what AI can do technically anymore – it’s about the stories we’re being sold about what AI means for our future.
Think about it: when every corporate presentation features smiling robots and promises of effortless abundance, that’s not technology – that’s mythology. And like any powerful mythology, it serves particular interests while hiding uncomfortable truths. The environmental costs of those data centers powering our AI dreams? The armies of invisible workers labeling data for pennies? Those don’t fit the shiny future narrative, so they get conveniently left out of the story.
The Hidden Costs They Don’t Want You to See
This is where the ideology gets dangerous. We’re being told AI will solve climate change while the infrastructure required is burning through energy and resources at an alarming rate. We’re promised human-like companions while the actual humans training these systems work in digital sweatshops. And we’re sold visions of post-work utopias while the reality is more surveillance and control.
Basically, we’re living through what Marx would recognize as technological fetishism – we’re so dazzled by the shiny objects that we can’t see the social relations and power structures being reproduced underneath. The same old exploitation, just with better branding.
There’s Another Way
But here’s the hopeful part: Cugurullo isn’t saying we should abandon AI altogether. He’s arguing for a radical rethinking of who gets to design and govern this technology. Instead of leaving it to massive corporations or authoritarian regimes, what if communities and public institutions co-created AI systems? What if we prioritized democratic control and social justice over private profit?
We’re already seeing glimpses of this with open-source AI development and participatory urban planning that actually considers community needs. The technology itself isn’t the problem – it’s the ideology wrapped around it. And ideologies can be challenged and changed.
The real question is: do we want AI that serves collective human flourishing, or just another system that concentrates power and wealth while telling us it’s for our own good? That choice is still ours to make, but we’re running out of time to make it consciously. The full research is available in Antipode journal for those who want to dive deeper into these critical ideas.
Your point of view caught my eye and was very interesting. Thanks. I have a question for you.