Generative AI as a Philosophical Mirror: Machine Hallucination and the Aesthetics of Algorithmic Representation
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.63385/cvca.v1i1.98Keywords:
AI, Digital Art, Contemporary Visual, Refik Anadol’s Machine Hallucination, EthicsAbstract
This case study delves into the unresolved philosophical complexities of representation in contemporary visual arts, using Refik Anadol’s Machine Hallucination series (2019–present) as a pivotal lens. By harnessing artificial intelligence (AI) to create immersive, data driven installations, Anadol’s work disrupts traditional notions of representation, authorship, agency, and viewer engagement within the dynamic, technology saturated landscape of 21stcentury visual culture. The study positions Machine Hallucination as a philosophical mirror, reflecting tensions between human creativity and algorithmic processes, reality and hyperreality, and individual versus collective meaning making. Through an interdisciplinary analysis grounded in philosophical, technological, and cultural frameworks, alongside comparisons with artists like Mario Klingemann and Hito Steyerl, this study illuminates the series’ role in redefining artistic practice while raising critical ethical questions about data, bias, and authenticity. The findings underscore representation as an evolving, unresolved issue, offering insights into its future in a world shaped by AI, virtual realities, and digital circulation.
References
[1] Anadol, R., 2019. Machine Hallucination — NYC. Available from: https://refikanadol.com/works/machine-hallucination-nyc/ (cited 1 May 2025).
[2] Woodruff, P., 1992. Aristotle on mimesis. Essays Aristotle’s Poet. 73. Princeton University Press: Princeton, NJ, USA.
[3] Benjamin, W., 1935. The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction, Routledge 1936. Toronto Press: New York, NY, USA
[4] Baudrillard, J., 2019. Simulacra and simulations (1981). In Crime and Media. Routledge: London, UK. pp. 69–85.
[5] Manovich, L., 2002. The Language of New Media. University of Toronto Press: Toronto, Canada.
[6] Missagia, A., Tavano, M.N., 2023. Poor Power Images in the Work of Hito Steyerl. A Driving Force: Rhetoric of Images and Power. 7, 214.
[7] Icsik, V., 2024. Exploring Artistic Frontiers in the Era of Artificial Intelligence. Sanat ve Tasarım Dergisi. 14(2), 577–603.
[8] Dinh, P.K., 2025. The Dialectical Relationship Between Philosophy and Art: The Interplay of Thinking and Creativity. Futures of Philosophy. 4(1), 4–19.
[9] Elnawawy, A., 2025. The Role of Refik Anadol's Digital Art in Environmental Awareness throughout the visual artworks of the researcher. Arab International Journal of Digital Art and Design. 4, 185–200.
[10] Anadol, R., Kivrak, P., 2023. AI, Architecture, and Performance: Walt Disney Concert Hall Dreams. In: Choreomata. Chapman and Hall/CRC: London, UK. pp. 379–389.
[11] Bender, E.M., Gebru, T., McMillan-Major, A., et al., 2021. On the dangers of stochastic parrots: Can language models be too big?? In Proceedings of the 2021 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, Virtual Event, Canada, 3–10 March 2021;. pp. 610–623.
[12] Pasquinelli, M., 2023. The Eye of the Master: A Social History of Artificial Intelligence. Verso Books: London, UK.
[13] Wolny, R.W., 2017. Hyperreality and Simulacrum: Jean Baudrillard and European Postmodernism. European Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies. 3(3), 75–79.
[14] Manovich, L., 2001. What is New Media. In: The Language of New Media. 6, 1–15.
[15] Barthes, R., 2016. The death of the author. In: Stoddart, D. (ed.). Readings in the Theory of Religion. Routledge: London, UK. pp. 141–145.
[16] Deleuze, G., 1994. Difference and Repetition. Columbia University Press: New York, NY, USA.
[17] Klingemann, M., 2018. Memories of Passersby I. Available from: https://www.sothebys.com/en/auctions/ecatalogue/2019/contemporary-art-day-auction-l19021/lot.109.html (cited 1 May 2025).
[18] Merleau-Ponty, M., Landes, D., Carman, T., et al., 2013 Apr 15. Phenomenology of Perception. Routledge: London, UK.
[19] Lawhead, E., 2022. Networks of Experience: Interactive Digital Art in the 21st Century [Doctoral dissertation]. University of Oregon: Eugene, US.
[20] Carman, T., 2019. Merleau-Ponty. Routledge: London, UK.
[21] Makowska, B., 2015. New posibilities of using processing and modern methods of the ‘generative art’ graphics in architecture. Technical Transactions. 2015(Architecture Issue 4-A(4)). 17–24.
[22] Min, J., Chung, J., 2025. The Aesthetics of Immersion through AI: The Cosmic Visualization of Refik Anadol’s ‘Machine Hallucinations’. International Journal of Internet, Broadcasting and Communication. 17(2), 70–75. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.7236/IJIBC.2025.17.2.70
[23] Luccioni, S., Crawford, K., 2024. The nine lives of ImageNet: A sociotechnical retrospective of a foundation dataset and the limits of automated essentialism. Journal of Data-centric Machine Learning Research. 1–18
[24] Raji, I.D., Gebru, T., Mitchell, M., et al., 2020. Saving face: Investigating the ethical concerns of facial recognition auditing. In Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, New York, NY, USA, 7–8 February 2020; pp. 145–151.
[25] Boddington, R., 2019. Anna Ridler uses AI to turn 10,000 tulips into a video controlled by bitcoin. It’s Nice That. Available from: https://compart.uni-bremen.de/content/4-teaching/0-sommer-20/1-neural-networks-aesthetics/3-material/paper-2019-boddington_ridlerusesai.pdf (cited 1 May 2025).
[26] Paglen, T., Crawford, K., 2019. ImageNet Roulette. Available from:https://paglen.studio/2020/04/29/imagenet-roulette/ (cited 1 May 2025).
[27] Crawford, K., Paglen, T., 2021. Excavating AI: The politics of images in machine learning training sets. AI & Society. 36(4), 1105–1116. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-021-01301-1
[28] Offert, F., Phan, T., 2022. A sign that spells: DALL-E 2, invisual images and the racial politics of feature space. Available from: https://arxiv.org/abs/2211.06323 (cited 1 May 2025).
[29] Gebru, T., Morgenstern, J., Vecchione, B., et al., 2021. Datasheets for datasets. Communications of the ACM. 64(12), 86–92.
[30] Crawford, K., 2021. The Atlas of AI: Power, Politics, and the Planetary Costs of Artificial Intelligence. Yale University Press: New Haven, CT, USA.
[31] Buolamwini, J.G., Gebru, T., 2018. Gender shades: Intersectional accuracy disparities in commercial gender classification. In Proceedings of the 1st Conference on Fairness, Accountability and Transparency: Proceedings of Machine Learning Research, New York, NY, USA, 23–24 February 2018; p. 77.
[32] Jones, D., n.d. Artforum. Available from: https://www.artforum.com/author/darren-jones/ (cited 1 May 2025).
[33] Grájeda, A., et al., 2024. Embracing artificial intelligence in the arts classroom: understanding student perceptions and emotional reactions to AI tools. Cogent Education. 11(1), 2378271.
[34] Mitchell, W.J.T., n.d. Landscape and Power, Second Edition. Available from: https://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/L/bo3626791.html (cited 1 May 2025).
[35] Raley, R., Rhee, J., 2023. Critical AI: A field in formation. American Literature. 95(2), 185–204.
[36] Grau, O., n.d. Virtual Art. Available from: https://mitpress.mit.edu/9780262572231/virtual-art/ (cited 1 May 2025).
[37] Hertzmann, A., 2025. Generative Models for the Psychology of Art and Aesthetics. Empirical Studies of the Arts. 43(1), 23–43.
[38] Paul, C., 2023. Digital Art (World of Art). Available from: https://www.amazon.com/Digital-Art-World-Christiane-Paul/dp/0500204802 (cited 1 May 2025).
[39] Lyubchenko, I., 2022. What is art? NFTs, beeple, and art connoisseurship in the 21st century. Interactive Film & Media Journal. 2(3), 174–190.
[40] Wagemans, J., Elder, J.H., Kubovy, M., et al., 2012. A century of Gestalt psychology in visual perception: II. Conceptual and theoretical foundations. Psychological Bulletin. 138(6), 1218–1252.
[41] Adcock, C.E., Turrell, J., 1990. James Turrell: The Art of Light and Space. University of California Press: Berkeley, CA, USA.
[42] Seyppel, J.H., 1956. A Criticism of Heidegger’s Time Concept with Reference to Bergson’s “Durée”. Revue Internationale de Philosophie. 10(38), 503–508.
[43] Svenaeus, F., 1999. Freud’s philosophy of the uncanny. Scandinavian Psychoanalytic Review. 22(2), 239–254.
[44] Chun, W.H.K., 2021. Discriminating Data: Correlation, Neighborhoods, and the New Politics of Recognition. MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, USA.
[45] Zylinska, J., 2020. AI Art: Machine Visions and Warped Dreams. Open Humanities Press: London, UK.
[46] Debord, G., 1967. The Society of the Spectacle. English trans. 1994, Zo. Books: Paris, France.
[47] European Parliament, 2023. EU AI Act: first regulation on artificial intelligence. Available from: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/topics/en/article/20230601STO93804/eu-ai-act-first-regulation-on-artificial-intelligence (cited 1 May 2025).
[48] UNESCO, 2021. UNESCO’s Recommendation on the Ethics of Artificial Intelligence. Available from: https://www.unesco.org/en/articles/unescos-recommendation-ethics-artificial-intelligence-key-facts?hub=32618 (cited 1 May 2025).
PDF
