THE GOLEM AND THE ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE, A NEW OPENING TOWARDS STORYTELLING

Headnote

Abstract: Discussing the symbolism of the Golem in relation to technology and Artificial Intelligence can be a good starting point for a multiperspective reflection on the human being's ability to create both in the sphere of symbolic goods and material, technological goods. I appealed to a literary writing as a starting point because today literature proves to be one of the most accessible custodians of our imaginative creation, of our symbolic consciousness, of ethical representations, of philosophical contents and of the openings that the human being can have in different spheres of creation. The resort to storytelling is linked to a certain magical attitude that characterizes our relationship as people of the digital age with technology. We all find ourselves under the spell of the magic of storytelling; we all live under the fascination of the magic of technology; and this happens because we fully experience the fascination of meeting new technological creations, especially those that assume the significant presence of Artificial Intelligence. The ambivalence brought by the development of a symbolic figure such as that of the Golem can be a good starting point, on the one hand, for ethical reflection, and on the other hand for the creation of strategies in which Artificial Intelligence, Cultural Intelligence and Spiritual Intelligence to merge in the harmony of a good daily life for man like all men. Also, significant from the perspective of our analysis is the fact that the figure of the Golem also entered the scientific imaginary.

Key words: Golem, Artificial Intelligence, literary imaginary, the Scientific Imaginary, magic and technology, mythical and religious representations, storytelling, Gustav Meyrink, Moshe idel.

1. The Artificial Anthropoid and the Literary Imaginary

We all live under the spell of the magic of storytelling. One of the most fascinating stories is that of the artificial anthropoid that the legend of the creation of the Golem tells us about. Although still a discreet presence in biblical and Talmudic texts, the Golem is known as a mythological figure, which we know was created by Rabbi Loew ben Betzalel, also known as Maharal (acronym for Moreinu ha-Rav Liva'), being a talmudic researcher, philosopher, mathematician and astronomer. It is also known for the fact that, resorting to mystical techniques related to the permutation of letters, the rabbi creates the Golem from clay, in 16th century Prague, with the aim of defending the community in a period of anti-Semitic threats. According to one legend, the Maharal created the Golem following the answer he receives in a dream in which he asks the deity what power would allow him to win in battle with his opponents. He is told from heaven that he will have to create a Golem, a clay being, that will help him destroy the enemies of his community. We note two significant aspects in this mythology. On the one hand, the Rabbi, together with two other collaborators of his, put together the symbolic forces that bring together the four fundamental elements: air, water, fire and earth. And on the other hand, the Maharal uses cabalistic methods related to the combination of names and letters to create a living being, the Golem, from clay. We have fixed this creation in Prague, in the year 1580 of our era, corresponding to the year 5340 from the creation of the world (Rosenberg 2007, 34-35).

Legend tells us that a word charged with magical force is either written on paper and inserted into the creature's mouth or is inscribed right on the Golem's forehead. This can be used to disable it. From one of the versions of the stories about the Golem we can learn that the Hebrew word Emet (na, which means "truth" in Hebrew) was written on its forehead. The clay man could always be deactivated by removing the letter aleph (x), which caused the word "truth" to become the word "death" (the word Emet becomes Met n, which in Hebrew means "dead"). In the end, that will actually happen, as the storylines tell us he spirals out of control and ends up disabled.

The Western public is familiar with the figure of the Golem especially thanks to Gustav Meyrink's novel. The book is first published in German in a series, then it appears in 1915. It also becomes available in Romanian in 1930, being published by the Remus Cioflec Publishing House, an interwar publishing house linked to a family whose members had important cultural and educational activities.

In Gustav Meyrink's version of the story, the action takes place at a distance of 300 years from the story involving the rabbi of Prague. In this version, the Golem returns once every 33 years and intervenes in solving some problems of the community. Even if the story leads us to a different epic area than the initial Jewish version, we can notice that, like the classic story, the action takes place in Prague, is linked to the Jewish quarter and involves the use of magical formulas. The novel tells us about "the legend of the Golem, that man-made being that long ago a rabbi versed in the lore of the Cabbala formed from elemental matter and invested with mindless automatic life by placing a magic formula behind its teeth" (Meyrink 2010, 51-52).

In many aspects, the novel leads us to a fantastic story and is built around a figure that rather produces fear. He appears as a largely evil character in a context full of ambiguities, magical and mystical elements. At the same time, we have dreamlike elements that intertwine with mental states that we could place on the border of the pathological. These diminished states of consciousness are a good background to make it possible to superimpose the imaginary of the Golem on the one related to the outline of one of the characters. All the possible associations are as if thought to facilitate the possible connections between the central character of the novel and the mythical figure of the Golem. It's all meant to familiarize us with a world of crisis where the Golem seems to have the savior mission of restoring order to the community.

Due to the mystical and esoteric aura with which it is enveloped, due to the difficulty to distinguish between what is unreal and what can enter the scope of a real action, we find that the author always has in mind the fact that "the story of the Golem is so difficult to pin down" (Meyrink 2010, 75). The atmosphere is one of oscillating between the dream register and the real experience. To make his presence familiar, the narrator tells us about the life of a resident of the Jewish ghetto in Prague, Athanasius Pernath, whom he outlines as an art restorer and jeweler. He is an artist soul who carries with him bizarre thoughts. He leads an existence marked by more or less imaginary adventures. Including he has the privilege of seeing the Golem, the one who did not let himself be seen, or if anyone saw him he could not retain his image. Thus, considering this lack of representational support, we can understand why "everyone says it's a myth until one day there's something happens in the streets that brings it back to life" (Meyrink 2010, 72).

Following the dynamics of the text, we identify this phantasmal figure with one of the novel's characters, the jeweler. However, we must note that many of the commentators on Meyrink's writing have come to circumscribe him rather as a kind of community spirit. He identifies himself in the public consciousness in the manner of an expectation, which makes him appear once every 33 years as a kind of community consciousness of the Jewish ghetto, as a kind of witness and testimony of the experiences of a community that has known suffering, vulnerabilities, and symbolic violence throughout his own history and to be perceived as a defender and savior.

The need for the re-appearance of the Golem is as if claimed by the experience of the community crisis. To create the atmosphere of crisis and mystery in which the magical action of the Golem takes place, the storyteller also introduces us to a series of other characters, in an arcane and even occult key. They are characters built on the symbols of some Tarot cards. The presence of the occult imaginary seems to have the role of intensifying the ambiguity between reality, hallucination, and fictional dream of the book's central character. Such a context facilitates the association of Athanasius Pernath with the Golem because like the clay creature, which is something like what we might call in philosophical terms an automaton, or in technical terms a robot, he seems to have a moment of mental breakdown. He reaches an altered state of consciousness, in which he is emptied of his own identity. Obviously, he has no memory of this experience, just as he has no memory of any series of events in his past. This forgetfulness can be attributed to a form of mental pathology. But, I think the author resorts to it rather as a form of approach and expression of his identification with the figure of the Golem, the creature that has no consciousness, no memories, does not even have feelings, but has an acute responsibility in relation to the community.

In this atmosphere filled with the magic of Kabbalah, but also with the confusion of the interpenetration of reality planes and ambiguous and imaginary mental levels, the character Athanasius Pernath has visions with the character Golem. Thus, it becomes easy to discover that he gets to acquire a series of features that even help us to identify him with it, beyond the oneiric register in which we sense the ambiguity of the relationships between the real register, the imaginary register, and the fantastic register.

The character of Athanasius Pernath is soaked in all this atmosphere impregnated with the fears and hallucinations of the community, and all the experiences he has lived seem to reveal to him the significance of his encounter with the Golem. He must undertake a mission, which he only partially remembers, which does not have enough concreteness. But his saving mission is aimed at writing a book in which the Golem is the main character, which, on the one hand, already occupies his personal history and mental universe, and on the other hand, is an embodiment of the saving expectations of the community.

To maintain the ambiguity of the identification between Athanasius Pernath and the Golem, the character is involved in seemingly meaningless stories that get out of his control. There is always present or implied a philosophical, magical, and mystical dimension that he can only partially penetrate, which once again emphasizes the mental vulnerability or even the contentlessness of his inner world. At the same time, we have a double charge here. On the one hand, the psychological states of the character, with all the pathological load that it reveals in a phantasmatic manner. On the other hand, the most intense tension with which the novel is loaded is not related to the personal experiences of Athanasius Pernath, but to the overwhelming magical tension that Meyrink places on the Jewish ghetto through its periodic domination by the Golem.

It is significant that the narrator tells us: "I sold the precious stones I had on me and rented two small furnished rooms in the attic of a house in Altschulgasse, the only street that had been excluded from the demolition of the old Ghetto. By a strange coincidence it was the very house into which, according to legend, the Golem disappeared" (Meyrink 2010, 361-362). But talking to those who lived around him, he is surprised that they rather surround him with irony. No one could believe that such a story could be true. He himself wonders if it is not merely something of an inner vision, an experience of his inner world, rather than something that could appear as a tangible reality. Although local mythology said that after each appearance, once every 33 years, the Golem stops somewhere in an old house near the Synagogue, it could be any other house in Prague or in an imaginary world where the Golem could have lived. Dream and reality are interchangeable. They are part of the game of a rescue that Athanasius Pernath, the Golem, and the Jewish ghetto community alike seem to need. This kind of imaginary is used to create the atmosphere in which the character, the community and the Golem are circumscribed to a rhythm of salvation.

Beyond the esoteric, occult fascination with elements of soteriology, which Gustav Meyrink's novel exercises, the way in which it transfigures the symbolism of the Golem for literary purposes has not escaped criticism from the scholarly research of the theme in Jewish circles. Noting that his writing can be placed within a tradition of reworking the golem legend (which includes, among others, Jakob Grimm, Achim von Arnim, and E. Th. Hoffmann), scholar of Jewish philosophy and mysticism Gershom Scholem argues that the reworking made by Meyrink is full of confusion and can be appreciated as a form of mystical charlatanism developed in a literary writing that cultivates the fantastic. It seems problematic to the researcher that this fantastic is pushed to the point of grotesque in the way it builds the atmosphere of the ghetto, in the way it introduces the theme of rescue and in the way the imaginary of the Golem is configured to be, at the same time, a double of the community and the main hero of the novel. Including the fact that the idea of the 33-year interval is invoked, an obvious association with the age at which Jesus was crucified, is considered by Scholem to be part of the suite of diversions of the Golem myth in relation to the original background of its symbolic meanings. He believes that even a cursory analysis of Jewish traditions reveals how foreign Meyrink's writing is to even the legendary forms of the Golem's appearance (Scholem 1969, 158-159).

Beyond any possible scholarly criticism of the imagery used, it should be noted that there is no indication in Gustav Meyrink's novel that would lead to the idea that he would claim that his writing expresses a truth of Jewish tradition. Even if we have a type of imaginary that also creates expectations with relevance for the mentality of the ghetto community tradition, we are facing a literary creation.

The literary metamorphoses of the figure and action of the Golem may seem more fluid and more acceptable to us, even when they depart from the imaginary of Jewish stories as soon as we notice that in the analyzes of a philosopher and researcher of Judaism such as Moshe Idel the theme of anthropoids is presented as being much earlier than the 16th century. The researcher of Jewish thought shows that these ideas are drawn from ancient Judaism, the theme can be found, in certain forms, also in the mysticism of other cultures, as we can see that it always returns enriched in the Jewish magical and mystical tradition (Idel 1990, xxiii).

Moreover, today we are faced with a great diversity of forms in which the imaginary of the golem is used in novels, plays, fiction writings, poems, in films or in the visual arts, in digital art, etc. The figure of the Golem also entered the scientific imaginary.

2. The Golem, the Magic and the Science

It is significant to note that in the Western modernity of the 20th century, the mathematician and philosopher Norbert Wiener, the creator of cybernetics, steps into the field of philosophy and cultural anthropology, recovering the figure of the Golem for purposes of scientific reflection. Wiener's last published work was entitled "God and Golem, Inc." and ended with the statement: "I have now run through a number of essays that are united by their covering the entire theme of creative activity, from God to the machine, under one set of concepts. The machine, as I have already said, is the modern counterpart of the Golem of the Rabbi of Prague. Since I have insisted upon discussing creative activity under one heading, and in not parceling it out into separate pieces belonging to God, to man, and to the machine, I do not consider that I have taken more than an author's normal liberty in calling this book GOD AND GOLEM, Inc." (Wiener 2019, 91).

We all live under the spell of magic and technology. And Artificial Intelligence seems to bring into the full plane of our lives the magical kind of thinking and acting with the force that it had in traditional societies. The perspective that allows for such an association aims at a separation of the magical from the religious and a discussion of magic in its relationship to science.

In the history of culture, we can find the representation of the image of magic as something that works according to a pre-scientific order,sometimes as a pseudo-science, at other times as a pre-scientific form of thought and action. Magic is always related to the idea of action and its effectiveness is measured in the territory of action. We can recall that, among the classics of cultural anthropology, Edward Tylor considered that magic is based on a logical way of thinking. Although he mentions that this is faulty logic, he believes that in tribal society the magician behaved like a later scientist when he set in motion the principles of causality and the laws of magic (Tylor 2010). For his part, James Frazer, from an evolutionist position, thought in a staged manner about the evolution of human thought and considered that magic and magical thinking should be seen as a stage that was surpassed by the religious stage (Frazer 1980).

This does not exclude the possibility that magic can relate to religion or spirituality. As it happens today, for example, in the currents of neo-paganism where magic considers the possibility of communication between alternative worlds, which the magician, in his capacity as a cosmic being, can cross in order to improve himself and to influence the sphere natural, but also that of the divine (Greenwood 2000, 23). Sometimes magic comes very close to religion, as happens in divinatory practices. But even when they accept that the word divination comes from a common root with the word divinity, magic theorists tend to see magic rather detached from religion and spirituality (Stein and Stein 2017). This, probably also under the pressure of Christian culture, which removes magic from religious practices and explains spiritual phenomena in a different way than that assumed by magical thinking.

From the perspective I wish to portray here, we can accept that there is a close relationship between magic and technology, without such acceptance in any way conflicting with the relationship between magic and religion. In the history of culture and in the history of religions we can find meeting points between magical thinking and mythical thinking or symbolic thinking. Bronislaw Malinowski's belief that there are no peoples without specific forms of religion, magic, and science as concerns at all stages of their existence is auspicious (Malinowski 1993).

Moreover, we can see that Wiener convinces us that technology can very well be put in relation to magic. Unlike symbolic thought and action, magical thinking operates on a literal dimension, one that leads to action where automation is present, and this makes everything happen in the spirit of rules that apply and develop mechanically, according to the internal laws and logic of the system (Wiener 2019, 61).

Mechanical action seems to diminish or even destroy creativity. That's the danger Wiener has in mind with the "magic of automation." Such clarification is relevant in the context of a debate about Artificial Intelligence because, as we have seen with recent productions in Artificial Intelligence, they can be as intelligent as they are fed with databases, especially through learning. There is a possibility that the learning to which these entities are subjected has different results than the expected precisely because, being fixated on the performance of tasks, they lack the context and above all they lack the nuances: "This seems to lie in the fact that the operation of magic is singularly literal-minded, and that if it grants you anything at all it grants what you ask for, not what you should have asked for or what you intend" (Wiener 2019, 61).

3. Golem, Artificial Intelligence and the Scientific Imaginary

Today we fully experience the fascination of meeting new technological creations, especially those that involve the significant presence of artificial intelligence. And this magical fascination is to a certain extent also accompanied by a fear awakened by the performances that our own creations have come to have. From Wiener's statement that "The machine is the modern counterpart of the Golem", we can infer an overlap of technological creation with magical techniques. To understand the kind of association proposed by Wiener regarding magic, intelligent machines, implicitly to Artificial Intelligence, we must remember that the Rabbi of Prague gives birth to the Golem through magical and mystical techniques, bringing into play a subtle technology of permuting the letters of the alphabet. It is about technologies that man has at hand. Although these have symbolic elements in common with those of the story of the creation of man, they are not instruments by which an actual act of creation of a human or superhuman being is produced. Creation is still reserved for God alone.

The anthropomorphic structure produced by man is an entity without consciousness, therefore it is problematic if the Golem could have the quality of subject, consciousness and moral responsibility, elements that differentiate the human being created by divinity in relation to any other beings. Of course, we cannot in any way ignore the fact that the Golem, as a creature, has no consciousness, no memories, not even feelings. Therefore, it seems difficult to bring in the vicinity of AI-based creations with their extraordinary computing, synthesis and content creation capabilities. The relevance of the presence of the imaginary of the Golem in the scientific imaginary is, however, not related to the dimension of knowledge, but to the ethical, symbolic and the one related to the finality and meanings of human creativity. We can note that according to Moshe Idel, "the meaning of the Golem, it seems that in this case as well the term stands for a human body that did not receive its ultimate perfection" (Idel 1990, 232).

Although the creation of the Golem is carried out according to the archetypal model of Adam, in turn created from clay, the human being does not have access to the ultimate phase of creation, which involves something added through the gesture of divine enlivening. The Golem is the being created from clay that can be animated by mystical and magical techniques, but cannot be brought to life. This symbolic gesture of enlivening by divine action can be viewed from the perspective of a metaphorical expression intended to reveal the special character of the human being, which consists in his quality of being a rational being. Mythology presents him as a silent entity, without the gift of speech. It is important to note in this regard Moshe Idel's observation that "The silence of the Golem was now explained not as the result of the inability to create a speaking being, but rather as the inability to create a rational being" (Idel 1990, 266). Essential in understanding the Golem is the fact that "An examination of the overwhelming majority of the texts related to the Golem reveals that, although the techniques proposed to create an anthropoid are substantially linguistic, the result - namely, the artificial man - is considered to be a speechless being" (Idel 1990, 264).

I learned that according to the logic of Kabbalistic creation an entity created through linguistic techniques would be expected to have characteristics related to this register. There is usually a correlation between the use of certain techniques and the purpose of that use. Not so with the creation of the Golem. A possible explanation is that offered by Moshe Idel when, analyzing linguistic techniques from ancient and medieval magic, he notes that "the above techniques assume that regular, significative language is less powerful than the combination of letters which are part of their techniques. Furthermore, it is not an attempt to communicate with a higher being by means of another language, since it is obvious that there is no possible grammar inherent in the combinations of letters as described above. Letters were conceived as sources of energies which can directly structure the inchoate matter, though they do not assume meaningful form. The role that the linguistic elements play in the Golem techniques is not so much to communicate directly some order to the matter, which is to be shaped, but rather to demonstrate the powerful effects of the letters of the Hebrew alphabet and the knowledge of their proper combination, which renders them alone creative" (Idel 1990, 265).

From the way Moshe Idel analyzes the presence of the artificial Anthropoid in the mystical and magical tradition of Judaism, we find that although the Golem is present rather as a silent witness, he speaks of the manifestation of the creative capacity of God and humans, each with its own specificity (Idel 1990, 266).

In 1965, in a conference on "The Golem of Prague and the Golem of Rehovot", Gershom Scholem talks about the Golem and the first computer in Israel. Just as Norbert Wiener, the creator of cybernetics, did in his book God and the Golem, Inc. published in 1964, on the occasion of this conference the cabal researcher will introduce the imaginary of the Golem in the context of scientific research related to artificial intelligence. Scholem believes that what develops in the minds of engineers who create new technologies today is closely related to what Kabbalists thought in the Middle Ages when they considered the Golem. Moreover, he places his references to modern technology and science in a context where the creation of a being that is functional but at the same time contains within itself a potential danger to its creator appears to us as a replica of biblical creation of Adam by God. The history of culture shows us that the artificial anthropoid is built in the image of man, which then inspires the creation of the computer. According to this religious imaginary borrowed from the technological one, the new Golem was materialized by the engineers from the Weizmann Institute in the form of WEIZAC (Weizmann Automatic Computer), the first Israeli computer (Scholem 1971, 335-340).

To support his perspective on the relationship between magic and technology, Scholem draws a number of very convincing analogies between the Golem of Prague and the new Golem of Rehovot. But he remains troubled by one question: "Can the Golem love?" It is an open question that he leaves as a meeting place where each of us could (even today) bring an answer (Scholem 1971, 340). I think it is no coincidence that Harry Collins and Trevor Pinch, in their book on the Golem, state that in some respects we should have a similar attitude towards science as we have towards love (Collins, Pinch 2002, 2). What, however, remains significant from this type of reflection is that symbolic figures, mythical and religious representations are accessible to us by the fact that man is a storytelling being, a being thirsty for telling stories. He includes himself in a wider history, that of man who has a personal history as much as he is part of the symbolic history of his community. Even if we no longer pay attention to these community narratives, the symbolic structures of the culture we are a part of can serve to understand us as people and as individual beings. That is why we can also find in the context of the current debate about Artificial Intelligence authors for whom the use of Golem symbolism in the debate on the development of technology does not seem problematic at all (Thorstensen 2017, 153-168).

4. Instead of Conclusions: Ethical Challenges for Man in the Digital Age

In an analysis of the relationship between science and technology, Harry Collins and Trevor Pinch state: "Science is a golem. A golem is a creature of Jewish mythology. It is a humanoid made by man from clay and water, with incantations and spells. It is powerful. It grows a little more powerful every day. It will follow orders, do your work, and protect you from the ever-threatening enemy. But it is clumsy and dangerous. Without control a golem may destroy its masters with its flailing vigour; it is a lumbering fool who knows neither his own strength nor the extent of his clumsiness and ignorance" (Collins, Pinch 2002, 1).

In the context of such a scientific imaginary, a story like the one about the Golem can be a challenge to ethical reflection in the current scientific and cultural context. We live in a historical interval where storytelling has become a part of our daily lives. We find that all the frameworks of our existence are imbued with storytelling or the need for storytelling. It is something to do with the human condition and its need to communicate meaningfully. What seems to have changed with the digital world refers to the multiple channels of communication and the multiple forms that stories can take with the facilities created by new communication technologies and in particular with the opportunities offered by the use of Artificial Intelligence (Grad 2021, 96; Gelbin 2021, 79-94; Frunza 2019, 129-143).

I think the idea expressed by Lisa Nocks is valuable in this context, who believes that we should give more importance to the fact that the retelling of the Golem legend in Meyrink's novel is a good opportunity to create an atmosphere of mystery, existential and mental pathology, in which an examination of the psychic dimension, of the character's inner world, takes place. This kind of turning inward is a good opportunity to reflect on the kinds of intervention that the human being can make in the context of his own life, in the context of technological development, but also on the deep relationship that the human being can have with technology. In this debate, reflections on creative power and limits, assuming responsibility and fixing ethics as a starting point, as a companion on the way, but also as an intrinsic objective of any human creation, including that aimed at the creation of autonomous entities with a high degree of complexity, can appear of the development of artificial intelligence. As soon as we fix such frames of the debate, "The Golem moves us beyond the idea of the robot/servant as a mechanical body and closer to the issues of individual identity" (Nocks 1998, 295).

Especially the debates regarding research in biotechnology and robotics, those regarding enhancement procedures applied to the human body (Nocks 1998; Rappaport 2006; Colang, Terec-Vlad 2022) reveal new ways to circumscribe life and the meaning of our humanity by returning to our humanity and to our connection to both the natural and the cultural. Greater attention should be paid to axiological and cultural factors (Havrilova, Beskorsa, Ishutina, Kapnina, Toplnyk 2021; Ang, Van Dyne 2008; Livermore 2010, Rajaram 2023). The development of Cultural Intelligence and Spiritual Intelligence can bring new clarifications on how the human being, on the one hand, rethinks himself in the context of technological development and the scientific imaginary, and on the other hand, rethinks technology in terms of ethics, culture and spirituality. Although we do not expect Artificial Intelligence to have its own spiritual aspirations, it is part of the logic of its existence to be used by human beings in their personal and spiritual development.

References

References:

Ang, Soon and Linn Van Dyne. Eds. 2008. Handbook of Cultural Intelligence Theory, Measurement, and Applications. Foreword by Harry C. Triandis. Armonk, New York: M. E. Sharpe.

Colang, George Cosmin, Loredana Terec-Vlad. 2022. Biotechnologies and the Case of Surrogate Motherhood: Axiological Implications and Their Connection with the Law. Meta: Research in Hermeneutics, Phenomenology, and Practical Philosophy, Vol XIV, No. 2: 665-676.

Collins, Harry, Trevor Pinch. 2002. The Golem at Large. What you should know about technology. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Frazer, James George. 1980. Creanga de aur. Translated by Octavian Nistor, Notes by Gabriela Duda. Bucuresti: Editura Minerva.

Frunza, Sandu. 2019. Storytelling in the Organizational Brand Development and Personal Brand Construction in the Perspective of Symbolic Conscience. European Journal of Science and Theology, Vol.15, No.6: 129-143.

Gelbin, Cathy S. 2021. The Golem: From Enlightenment Monster to Artificial Intelligence. Bulletin of the German Historical Institute, Vol. 69: 79-94.

Grad, Iulia. 2021. Advertising and meaningful stories. Journal for the Study of Religions and Ideologies, vol. 20, issue 59: 95-107.

Greenwood, Susan, 2000. Magic, Witchcraft and the Otherworld. An Anthropology. Oxford, New York: Berg.

Havrilova, Liudmyla, Olena Beskorsa, Olena Ishutina, Halyna Kapnina, Yana Toplnyk. 2021. Introduction of Intercultural Communication Studies into the Curriculum of Pedagogical University. Revista Româneasca pentru Educa?ie Multidimensionala, 13 (3), 448-467.

Idel, Moshe. 1990. Golem. Jewish Magical and Mystical Traditions on the Artificial Anthropoid. New York: State University of New York Press.

Livermore, David A. 2010. Leading with Cultural Intelligence: The new secret to success. Foreword by Soon Ang and Linn Van Dyne. New York: AMACOM.

Malinowski, Bronislaw. 1993. Magie, stiinta si religie. Translated by Nora Vasilescu, Ia?i: Editura Moldova.

Meyrink, Gustav. 2010. The Golem. Translated by Mike Mitchell and with an introduction and chronology by Robert Irwin. Dedalus Limited.

Nocks, Lisa. 1998. The Golem: Between the Technological and the Divine. Journal of Social and Evolutionary Systems, 21(3): 281-303.

Rajaram, Kumaran. 2023. Learning Intelligence: Innovative and Digital Transformative Learning Strategies: Cultural and Social Engineering Perspectives. Gateway East, Singapore: Springer.

Rappaport, Z. H. 2006. Robotics and artificial intelligence: Jewish ethical perspectives. Acta Neurochirurgica Supplementa, 98: 9-12.

Rosenberg, Yudl. 2007. The Golem and the Wondrous Deeds of the Maharal of Prague. Translated from the Hebrew and edited and with an introduction and notes by Curt Leviant. New Haven and London: Yale University Press.

Scholem, Gershom. 1969. On the Kabbalah and Its Symbolism. Translated by Ralph Manheim. New York: Schocken Books.

Scholem, Gershom. 1971. The Golem of Prague and the Golem of Rehovot. in The Messianic Idea in Judaism and Other Essays on Jewish Misticism. Foreword by Arthur Herzberg, New York: Schocken Books, 335-340.

Stein, Rebecca L. and Philip L. Stein. 2017. The Anthropology of Religion, Magic, and Witchcraft. Fourth Edition. London and New York: Routledge.

Thorstensen, Erik. 2017. Creating Golems. Uses of Golem Stories in the Ethics of Technologies. Nanoethics, 11 (2): 153-168.

Tylor, Edward Burnett. 2010. Primitive Culture. Cambridge University Press.

Wiener, Norbert. 2019. God and Golem, Inc. A Comment on Certain Points where Cybernetics Impinges on Religion. Cambridge, Massachusetts: THE M.I.T. PRESS.