The Digital Sacred: A Phenomenology of Religious Experience in Algorithmic Worlds
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15575/kjrt.v3i2.1323Keywords:
AI hermeneutics, algorithmic spirituality, digital religion, digital sacred, techno-theology, virtual religious experienceAbstract
This article examines how digital technologies are fundamentally transforming the nature of religious experience, creating new modes of encounteringthe sacred that challenge traditional phenomenological and theological frameworks. Moving beyond debates about authenticity or mediation, weargue that algorithmic environments actively reshape the very conditions of spiritual engagement, generating hybrid forms of religiosity where humanand machine agencies intertwine. Through an analysis of virtual rituals, AI-generated scripture interpretation, and platform-governed devotion, thestudy reveals how digital infrastructures reconfigure core concepts of presence, intentionality, and transcendence. The sacred emerges not merely ascontent within digital spaces but as a dynamic product of networked interactions between users, algorithms, and data architectures. This technologicalshift demands new theoretical approaches that account for distributed agency, quantified spirituality, and the posthuman dimensions of contemporaryworship. By synthesizing insights from phenomenology, philosophy of technology, and religious studies, we propose a framework for understandingdigital religion as neither authentic nor simulated, but as a distinct ontological category—one that requires reimagining traditional notions ofembodiment, ritual efficacy, and divine encounter in light of computational systems. The article ultimately calls for developing a techno-theologycapable of addressing both the transformative potential and ethical challenges of spiritually significant algorithms, while recognizing digitalenvironments as legitimate sites for sacred experience in the 21st century.
References
[1] S. Zuboff, “The age of surveillance capitalism: The fight for a human future at the new frontier of power,” J. Infor. Ethics, vol. 33, no. 1, pp. 84–85, 2024.
[2] E. Husserl, Ideas for a pure phenomenology and phenomenological philosophy: First book: General introduction to pure phenomenology. Hackett Publishing, 2014.
[3] E. Husserl, “Ideas pertaining to a pure phenomenology and to a phenomenological philosophy: third book: phenomenology and the Foundation of the Sciences,” Nijhoff: The Hague, 1980.
[4] E. Husserl, Ideas pertaining to a pure phenomenology and to a phenomenological philosophy: First book: General introduction to a pure phenomenology. Springer Science & Business Media, 2012.
[5] M. Heidegger, “The question concerning technology,” Technology and values: Essential readings, vol. 99, p. 113, 1954.
[6] M. Heidegger, “Discourse on thinking,” 2025.
[7] M. Heidegger, Being and time. SUNY press, 2010.
[8] B. S. Turner, “Max Weber and the sociology of religion,” Rev. Int. Philos., vol. 276, no. 2, pp. 141–150, 2016.
[9] M. Weber, The sociology of religion. Beacon Press, 1993.
[10] R. Flory, “Digital Creatives and the Rethinking of Religious Authority, by HEIDI A. CAMPBELL,” Sociol. Relig., vol. 82, no. 4, pp. 518–522, Nov. 2021, doi: 10.1093/socrel/srab037.
[11] H. Campbell, “Considering the Religious-Social Shaping of Technology,” Gosudarstvo, religiia, tserkov’v Rossii i za rubezhom, vol. 2, pp. 124–159, 2020.
[12] H. Campbell, “Religion and the Internet,” The Oxford Handbook of the Sociology of Religion, vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 1–44, 2009, doi: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199588961.013.0040.
[13] H. A. Campbell, “Digital Religion as the Networked Spiritual Infrastructure of Our Religious Futures,” 2025, pp. 67–80. doi: 10.1007/978-3-031-93436-0_5.
[14] H. A. Campbell, Digital Creatives and the Rethinking of Religious Authority. Abingdon, Oxon; New York, NY: Routledge, 2020. | Series: Media, religion and culture: Routledge, 2020. doi: 10.4324/9781003045625.
[15] M. Merleau-Ponty, D. Landes, T. Carman, and C. Lefort, Phenomenology of perception. Routledge, 2013.
[16] S. T. Aquinas, The summa theologica: Complete edition. Catholic Way Publishing, 2014.
[17] M. Arnd-Caddigan, “Sherry Turkle: Alone Together: Why We Expect More from Technology and Less from Each Other,” Clin. Soc. Work J., vol. 43, no. 2, pp. 247–248, Jun. 2015, doi: 10.1007/s10615-014-0511-4.
[18] B. Latour, We have never been modern. Harvard university press, 2012.
[19] B. Latour, “Why Critique Run Out of Steam? From Matters of Fact to Matters of Concern,” Philosophical Literary Journal Logos, vol. 33, no. 5, pp. 29–61, 2023, doi: 10.17323/0869-5377-2023-5-29-61.
[20] B. Latour, “Why has critique run out of steam? From matters of fact to matters of concern,” Crit. Inq., vol. 30, no. 2, pp. 225–248, 2004.
[21] M. Eliade, The Sacred and The Profane. New York: Brace & World, 1959.
[22] M. Eliade, The sacred and the profane: The nature of religion, vol. 81. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, 1959.
[23] M. Eliade and J. M. Kitagawa, The History of Religions, Essays in Methodology. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1973.
[24] E. Husserl, The phenomenology of internal time-consciousness. Indiana University Press, 2019.
[25] N. K. Hayles, “How We Became Posthuman: Virtual Bodies in Cybernetics, Literature, and Informatics,” Public Understanding of Science, vol. 9, no. 4, p. 704, Oct. 2000, doi: 10.1088/0963-6625/9/4/704.
[26] N. Katherine. Hayles, Unthought : The Power of the Cognitive Nonconscious. University of Chicago Press, 2020.
[27] R. Otto and J. W. HARVEY, The Idea of the Holy... Translated by John W. Harvey... Fourth Impression, Revised with Additions. Oxford University Press, 1926.
[28] H. L. Dreyfus, On the internet. Routledge, 2008.
[29] A. Borgmann, Technology and the character of contemporary life: A philosophical inquiry. University of Chicago Press, 1984.
[30] C. Taylor, A secular age. Harvard university press, 2007.
[31] A. Feenberg, Questioning technology. routledge, 2012.
[32] P. Haynes, “How We Became Posthuman: Virtual Bodies in Cybernetics, Literature and Informatics by N. Katherine Hayles,” Body Soc., vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 105–108, Dec. 2001, doi: 10.1177/1357034X01007004009.
[33] V. Flusser, Towards a philosophy of photography. Reaktion Books, 2013.
[34] P. Lévy, “Collective Intelligence, A Civilisation: Towards a Method of Positive Interpretation,” Int. J. Polit. Cult. Soc., vol. 18, no. 3–4, pp. 189–198, Dec. 2006, doi: 10.1007/s10767-006-9003-z.
[35] G. Simondon, “On the mode of existence of technical objects,” Deleuze Studies, vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 407–424, 2011.
[36] J. Z. Smith, “To take place,” in Ritual and Religious Belief, Routledge, 2017, pp. 26–50.
[37] J. Derrida, Of grammatology. Jhu Press, 2016.
[38] A. N. Whitehead, Process and reality. Simon and Schuster, 2010.
[39] Al-Ghazali, Ihya Ulumu al-Din. Baerut: Dar al-Misri, 1977.
[40] A.-H. Al Ghazali, Al-Ghazali’s Adapted Summary of Ihya Ulum al-Din: The Forty Principles of the Religion. Turath Publishing, 2016.
[41] D. Ihde, Technology and the lifeworld: From garden to earth, no. 560. Indiana University Press, 1990.
[42] D. Chidester, “Haptics of the heart: The sense of touch in American religion and culture,” Cult. Relig., vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 61–84, May 2000, doi: 10.1080/01438300008567140.
[43] R. M. Geraci, Virtually sacred: Myth and meaning in world of warcraft and second life. OUP Us, 2014.
[44] H.-G. Gadamer, Truth and method. A&C Black, 2013.
[45] F. Schleiermacher, Schleiermacher: hermeneutics and criticism: and other writings. Cambridge University Press, 1998.
[46] N. Bostrom and E. Yudkowsky, “The ethics of artificial intelligence,” in Artificial intelligence safety and security, Chapman and Hall/CRC, 2018, pp. 57–69.
[47] E. Elmahjub, “Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Islamic Ethics: Towards Pluralist Ethical Benchmarking for AI,” Philos. Technol., vol. 36, no. 4, p. 73, Dec. 2023, doi: 10.1007/s13347-023-00668-x.
[48] P. Ricoeur, Hermeneutics and the human sciences: Essays on language, action and interpretation. Cambridge university press, 1981.
[49] B. Stiegler, The neganthropocene. Open Humanities Press, 2018.
[50] J. Baudrillard, “Simulacra and simulations (1981),” in Crime and Media, Routledge, 2019, pp. 69–85.
[51] J. Baudrillard, Simulacra and simulation. University of Michigan press, 1994.
[52] J. Baudrillard, “Simulacra and simulations,” in The new social theory reader, Routledge, 2020, pp. 230–234.
[53] M. Fishbane, The garments of Torah: Essays in biblical hermeneutics. Indiana University Press, 1992.
[54] S. U. Noble, “Algorithms of oppression: How search engines reinforce racism,” in Algorithms of oppression, New York university press, 2018.
[55] A. R. Galloway, The interface effect. Polity, 2012.
[56] J. Ellul, The technological society. Vintage, 2021.
[57] C. Novelli, F. Casolari, P. Hacker, G. Spedicato, and L. Floridi, “Generative AI in EU law: Liability, privacy, intellectual property, and cybersecurity,” Computer Law & Security Review, vol. 55, p. 106066, Nov. 2024, doi: 10.1016/j.clsr.2024.106066.
[58] T. W. Adorno, “The culture industry reconsidered,” in Critical theory and society, Routledge, 2020, pp. 128–135.
[59] T. W. Adorno and A. G. Rabinbach, “Culture industry reconsidered,” New German Critique, no. 6, pp. 12–19, 1975, doi: https://doi.org/10.2307/487650.
[60] T. Gillespie, Custodians of the Internet: Platforms, content moderation, and the hidden decisions that shape social media. Yale University Press, 2018.
[61] L. Manovich, Cultural analytics. Mit Press, 2020.
[62] B.-C. Han, The burnout society. Stanford University Press, 2015.
[63] K. Marx, Capital: Critique of political economy, volume 1. Princeton University Press, 2024.
[64] M. Foucault, “Discipline and punish: The birth of the prison (an excerpt),” in Coronavirus, Psychoanalysis, and Philosophy: Conversations on Pandemics, Politics and Society, 2021, pp. 23–26. doi: 10.4324/9781003150497-3.
[65] M. Foucault, “Discipline and punish,” in Social theory re-wired, Routledge, 2023, pp. 291–299.
[66] D. W. Tarbet, M. Foucault, and A. Sheridan, “Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison.,” Eighteenth. Century. Stud., vol. 11, no. 4, p. 509, 1978, doi: 10.2307/2737970.
[67] H. K. Bhabha, The location of culture. routledge, 2012.
[68] M. Airoldi, “Machine habitus: Toward a sociology of algorithms,” 2021.
[69] James. Williams, Stand out of our light : freedom and resistance in the attention economy. Cambridge University Press, 2018.
[70] J. Cheney-Lippold, We Are Data. New York University Press, 2020. doi: 10.18574/nyu/9781479888702.001.0001.
[71] P. T. De Chardin, “The phenomenon of man,” New York, p. 302, 1959.
[72] P. Lévy, P. Aronoff, and H. Scott, “The creative conversation of collective intelligence,” in The participatory cultures handbook, Routledge, 2012, pp. 99–108.
[73] N. Postman, Technopoly: The surrender of culture to technology. Vintage, 2011.
[74] N. Postman, “Technopoly: the surrender of culture to technology//Review,” Alternatives Journal, vol. 20, no. 3, p. 40, 1994.
[75] H. Marcuse, “One-dimensional man,” Persona & Derecho, vol. 3, p. 690, 1976.
[76] H. Marcuse, “One-dimensional man,” in Ideals and Ideologies, Routledge, 2024, pp. 319–326.
[77] S. Kierkegaard and W. Lowrie, The sickness unto death. Princeton University Press Princeton, NJ, 1848.
[78] P. Tillich, Systematic Theology: Life and the Spirit History and the Kingdom of God. University of Chicago Press, 2011.
[79] P. Tillich and J. H. Hick, “Systematic Theology,” Scottish Journal of Theology, vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 286–297, Sep. 1959, doi: 10.1017/S003693060005287X.
[80] W. Benjamin, “The work of art in the age of mechanical reproduction,” in A museum studies approach to heritage, Routledge, 2018, pp. 226–243.
[81] E. M. Bender, T. Gebru, A. McMillan-Major, and S. Shmitchell, “On the Dangers of Stochastic Parrots,” in Proceedings of the 2021 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, New York, NY, USA: ACM, Mar. 2021, pp. 610–623. doi: 10.1145/3442188.3445922.
[82] A. MacIntyre, After virtue. A&C Black, 2013.
[83] J. Habermas, The theory of communicative action: Volume 1: Reason and the rationalization of society, vol. 1. Beacon press, 1985.
[84] A. Possamai, Religion and popular culture: A hyper-real testament, no. 7. Peter Lang, 2005.
[85] D. Horton and R. Richard Wohl, “Mass Communication and Para-Social Interaction,” Psychiatry, vol. 19, no. 3, pp. 215–229, Aug. 1956, doi: 10.1080/00332747.1956.11023049.
[86] E. Durkheim, “The elementary forms of religious life,” in Social theory re-wired, Routledge, 2016, pp. 52–67.
[87] N. D. Schüll, Addiction by Design. Princeton University Press, 2025. doi: 10.1515/9780691278278.
[88] N. Verhoeff, Mobile screens: The visual regime of navigation. Amsterdam University Press, 2012.
[89] A. E. Marwick, Status update: Celebrity, publicity, and branding in the social media age. yale university press, 2013.
[90] J. Dean, “Communicative Capitalism: Circulation and the Foreclosure of Politics,” Cultural Politics, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 51–74, Mar. 2005, doi: 10.2752/174321905778054845.
[91] E. Levinas, Totality and infinity: An essay on exteriority, vol. 1. Springer Science & Business Media, 1979.
[92] M. de Certeau, The Practice of Everyday Life. University of California Press, 2011. Accessed: Mar. 01, 2026. [Online]. Available: https://philpapers.org/rec/DECTPO-26
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Mahmoud Khatami
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
You are free to:
Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format
Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.
Under the following terms:
Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
Notices:
You do not have to comply with the license for elements of the material in the public domain or where your use is permitted by an applicable exception or limitation.
No warranties are given. The license may not give you all of the permissions necessary for your intended use. For example, other rights such as publicity, privacy, or moral rights may limit how you use the material.