This paper critically discusses the implications of integrating Artificial Intelligence (AI) within Futures Studies methodologies. Juxtaposing divinatory practices, specifically the Delphi Oracle and Tarot, with more contemporary approaches such as scenario planning and wargaming challenges the Modern assumption of Futures methodologies as exclusively rational. The contextual background established in Part 1, and discussion in Part 3 follow Media Archaeology methodologies: we examine emerging media (AI) informed by the perspective and critical review of past/established media (Divination, Futures methods). Drawing on Gilbert Simondon’s concept of the Technical Object and Heidegger’s notion of ‘enframing’, we advocate for a reflexive approach to AI’s role, critiquing its deterministic tendencies, the way it shapes our understanding of the world. The creation of futures emphasises the importance of the practitioner in negotiating AI’s role. Utilising Candy and Kornet's Ethnographic Experiential Futures (EXF) framework, we analyse the affordances of “provotypes” (provocative prototypes) to propose a pluralistic approach to Futures studies with emphasis on process and participatory engagement. Ultimately, we transpose the common metaphor of the ‘Oracle’ from the AI system to serve as a figure for the human practitioner, arguing that the futurist may act as a critical mediator of meaning. This paper encourages Futures practitioners to rethink the epistemological assumptions underlying their methodologies when considering the integration of AI in interfacing with futures.
Welisch et al. (Fri,) studied this question.