{"id":121,"date":"2026-02-02T17:48:15","date_gmt":"2026-02-02T17:48:15","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/renjournal.it\/?page_id=121"},"modified":"2026-06-29T14:45:27","modified_gmt":"2026-06-29T14:45:27","slug":"conference-2026-call-for-papers","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/renjournal.it\/?page_id=121","title":{"rendered":"Call for Papers 2026"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n

BATTITI ALGORITMICI: L’Educazione all’affettivit\u00e0 ai tempi della quarta rivoluzione<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

ALGORITHMIC HEARTBEATS<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Affective Education in the Age of the Fourth Revolution<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Eighty years ago, with the publication of Evidence <\/em>(1946), Isaac Asimov was not merely writing about robotics; he was outlining the archetype of a dilemma that today inhabits our classrooms: the distinction between the human being and its perfect simulation. The figure of Stephen Byerley\u2014an individual no one has ever seen eat or sleep, suspected of being an automaton\u2014acts as a mirror in which contemporary generative Artificial Intelligence systems are now reflected. With almost unsettling foresight, Asimov described a \u201cbrain\u201d around which a body was constructed, trained to become everything its creator could no longer be: \u201cHe sent him out into the world … like an old, maimed teacher whom no one ever saw.<\/em>\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This image of the \u201cmaimed teacher\u201d operating behind the scenes of technology constitutes a particularly perfect metaphor for the current educational transition. We therefore find ourselves witnessing a race between those who metaphorically \u201crun to the pitchforks<\/em>\u201d, the so-called \u201chumanoid fundamentalists,\u201d ready to denounce a new \u201cFrankenstein Complex\u201d in every algorithm, and, on the opposite side, the bad boys of the D-Generation<\/em>, namely those who enthusiastically embrace the total automation of knowledge and learning processes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

While public debate remains largely stalled on issues of computational capacity, the real challenge unfolds on the terrain of empathy. If we return to Alan Turing\u2019s reflections on imitative capacity, an uncomfortable question emerges: if a machine is able to display forms of human-like behavior capable of satisfying a student\u2019s need for care and listening, does the \u201cartificial\u201d nature of that process necessarily invalidate its educational value?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Today, technology has reached a level of sophistication capable of satiating <\/em>the need for emotional mirroring. Artificial intelligence no longer merely responds to logical queries; it performs affective narratives, modulates tone, and offers an unlimited availability that human figures, often overburdened and \u201cmaimed\u201d by bureaucratic and social contingencies, struggle to sustain. The risk is not that machines become human, but that humanity grows accustomed to a form of synthetic affectivity, deprived of the weight of the body and the responsibility inherent in relationship.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Rather than erecting barriers to halt learning systems, we must learn to inhabit progress. For human beings to survive and flourish within the so-called Fourth Industrial Revolution, adaptation must occur through the contribution of new forms of meaning-making. The integration of AI into educational contexts is radically transforming relational dynamics: this is no longer merely a matter of digital literacy, but of Digital Affective Literacy<\/strong>, namely the capacity to critically and emotionally navigate affective interactions mediated by digital systems.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

We must therefore reflect on how to cultivate authentic relationships within hybrid environments. If algorithms support or replace certain functions, assessment, explanation, even initial psychological support through chatbots, what space remains for educators? That space is one of embodied emotional<\/p>\n\n\n\n

awareness, of managing conflicts irreducible to code, and of narrating the limits of human experience. For affective education not to remain merely an isolated lesson, but to become the beating heart of a technologically advanced school, it is necessary to move along the following strategic axes:<\/p>\n\n\n\n