Communications in Humanities Research ISSN: 2753-7072
Home> Volumes> Volume CHR Vol.105> Article
Research Article

Algorithms, Judgment, and Authority: A Critical Normative Rationality from the Perspective of Neo-Kantianism

Xu JiUniversity of California, Irvine*

* Corresponding author: [email protected]

Abstract

Whether contemporary algorithmic systems constitute a normatively significant form of authority and what their legitimacy is based on are important theoretical issues in the current digital society. As judgment structures, recommendation and ranking algorithms continuously shape the visibility, temporal order and possibilities of action in the digital environment, thereby influencing individuals' ways of understanding and participating in the public world. Drawing on the theoretical resources of phenomenology, political philosophy and Neo-Kantianism, this paper constructs an evaluation framework for the legitimacy of authority with transcendental validity, reflective accountability and practical autonomy as the core. Relevant analyses show that algorithmic authority, which is often based on empirical statistics yet occupies a quasi-transcendental position, narrows the space for public reflection through opaque mechanisms and guides human behavior via adaptive feedback structures instead of resorting to rational recognition, thus undermining its normative legitimacy. At the same time, algorithmic mediation performs practical functions in the complex information environment, and its legitimacy issue does not stem from technology itself but from whether it is subject to rational scrutiny and institutional constraints. The distinction between technical validity and normative legitimacy helps to deepen the theoretical understanding of the authority structure in the artificial intelligence environment.

Keywords: Algorithmic Authority; Neo-Kantianism; Normative Rationality; Transcendental Legitimacy
Published: March 24, 2026
DOI: 10.54254/2753-7064/2026.BJ32326
Volume: CHR Vol.105
pp. 71-78
Download PDF

References

  1. Stinson, Catherine. "Algorithms are not neutral: Bias in collaborative filtering." AI and Ethics 2.4 (2022): 763-770.
  2. Bucher, Taina. If... then: Algorithmic power and politics. Oxford University Press, 2018
  3. Coglianese, Cary, and David Lehr. "Transparency and algorithmic governance." Administrative law review 71.1 (2019): 1-56.
  4. Gillespie, Tarleton. "# trendingistrending: When algorithms become culture." Algorithmic cultures. Routledge, 2016. 64-87.
  5. Lustig, Caitlin, et al. "Algorithmic authority: the ethics, politics, and economics of algorithms that interpret, decide, and manage." Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 2016.
  6. Winner, Langdon. "Do artifacts have politics?." Computer ethics. Routledge, 2017. 177-192.
  7. Zuboff, Shoshana. "The age of surveillance capitalism." Social theory re-wired. Routledge, 2023. 203-213.
  8. Nguyen, Tien T., et al. "Exploring the filter bubble: the effect of using recommender systems on content diversity." Proceedings of the 23rd international conference on World wide web. 2014.
  9. Crawford, T. Hugh. "Actor-network theory." Oxford research encyclopedia of literature. 2020.
  10. Hammer, Dean. "Hannah Arendt, identity and the politics of visibility." Contemporary Politics 3.4 (1997): 321-339.
  11. Tavani, Elena. "Hannah Arendt—Aesthetics and politics of appearance." Proceedings of the European Society for Aesthetics 5 (2013): 466-475.
  12. Petre, Caitlin, Brooke Erin Duffy, and Emily Hund. ""Gaming the system": Platform paternalism and the politics of algorithmic visibility." Social Media+ Society 5.4 (2019): 2056305119879995.
  13. Heidegger, Martin. "The question concerning technology." Technology and values: Essential readings 99 (1954): 113.
  14. Husserl, Edmund. The phenomenology of internal time-consciousness. Indiana University Press, 2019.
  15. Matthews, Eric. "Maurice Merleau-Ponty: phenomenology of perception." Central Works of Philosophy v4. Routledge, 2015. 177-194.
  16. Lemke, Thomas. Foucault, governmentality, and critique. Routledge, 2015.
  17. Verbeek, Peter-Paul. What things do: Philosophical reflections on technology, agency, and design. Penn State Press, 2005.
  18. De Warren, Nicolas, and Andrea Sebastiano Staiti, eds. New Approaches to Neo-Kantianism. Cambridge University Press, 2015.
  19. Lau, Chong-Fuk. "Transcendental concepts, transcendental truths and objective validity." Kantian Review 20.3 (2015): 445-466.
  20. Kant, Immanuel. Critique of pure reason. Cambridge University Press, 1999.
  21. Friedman, Michael. "Ernst Cassirer and the philosophy of science." Continental philosophy of science (2005): 69-83.
  22. Cinelli, Matteo, et al. "The echo chamber effect on social media." Proceedings of the national academy of sciences 118.9 (2021): e2023301118.
  23. Doshi-Velez, Finale, et al. "Accountability of AI under the law: The role of explanation." arXiv preprint arXiv: 1711.01134 (2017).
  24. Kodelja, Zdenko. "Autonomy and heteronomy: Kant and Levinas." Levinas and education. Routledge, 2008. 198-209.
  25. Kohl, Markus. Kant on Freedom, Nature and Normativity. Diss. UC Berkeley, 2012.