How the System Works

The following is an excerpt from my text “Ideological mirrors of generative arts” translated from Serbian using AI.

How the System Works

Artificial intelligence systems are nothing more than enormous statistical calculators. Their defining characteristic is that, unlike earlier statistical algorithms and software (which, following the emergence of more advanced AI, are now considered forms of micro artificial intelligence), they perform statistical analysis on trillions of pieces of human-generated data containing diverse contexts, techniques, and meanings. When discussing AI systems that generate artistic outputs, we find that these systems are trained on an immense body of works that have been refined over decades—technically, compositionally, and conceptually—by experts as well as contemporary artists and designers. It is also important to note that the algorithms underlying these systems are modeled on various psychometric theories of information processing. Consequently, if we examine how an artist or designer forms a mental image or composition, we can recognize similarities that have been simulated within the algorithms of artificial intelligence.

The fundamental algorithms of artificial intelligence, shaped through sophisticated methods of information processing, give rise to a process resembling accelerated maturation when AI is tasked with creating images. This parallels human development, where our growth from birth onward is profoundly influenced by countless factors, including parental discipline, religious teachings, and the broader socio-economic and geographical ideologies that shape our environment.

Imagine a second-generation immigrant family from China that has settled in the United States. Beyond basic motor skills, the child first acquires linguistic and cultural foundations from the family. Let us assume that the parents—the first generation of immigrants—practice Buddhism. Their religious beliefs constitute one dataset that may already come into conflict with other datasets, or ideologies, that the child gradually acquires. To this we must add the very presence of the parents themselves, who, beyond being fully developed ideological systems, also become data within the child’s own cognitive system.

This is particularly intriguing because it suggests the possibility that a system may generate a new system from itself—that a system may take itself as data. This phenomenon, namely the capacity of the human psychological system to treat itself as data, is what we call self-awareness. Artificial intelligence algorithms have not yet achieved self-awareness, but we can nevertheless use them as a functional metaphor through which we navigate organic psychodynamics. Just as children and adults adapt to different situations through interaction—that is, as these organic systems continually orient themselves psychodynamically—we may likewise use inorganic systems such as artificial intelligence, trained on organic inputs, as instruments for further assimilation and understanding.

Unlike humans, however, artificial intelligence lacks the micro-influences of individual lived experience. Instead, it operates by synthesizing the diverse visual solutions produced by countless artists and individuals who have already contextualized and processed these experiences before embedding them in their work. As a result, these highly personal variables—which can serve as powerful sources of inspiration—are inevitably lost within large-scale generalized systems.

Nevertheless, there are meaningful parallels between human development and the evolution of artificial intelligence. Throughout our lives we continually encounter competing ideologies, forcing us to assimilate and adapt to ever-changing landscapes of belief. This constant exposure to new ideas and challenges resonates with Carl Jung’s worldview, particularly his concept of individuation. Within Jungian psychology, individuation is an ongoing process, closely analogous to Jean Piaget’s concept of assimilation.

Jungian individuation represents a continuous process. One might draw a metaphorical parallel with the eternal cycle in which Christ is resurrected, marking simultaneously the birth of the Antichrist.¹ This image signifies a fluid conception of worldview—a perpetual transformation, or, more precisely, an endless process of assimilation. This ongoing process leads us into the domain of Piagetian psychology, where assimilation is the mechanism through which individuals integrate new information into their existing cognitive structures. As we encounter different cultural and ideological perspectives, we absorb these nuances into our understanding, continually enriching our worldview.

Artists and designers, much like artificial intelligence itself, skillfully employ assimilation to navigate a complex meta dimension, extracting meaning and producing art. Although AI, in its simplified form, may not replicate organic intelligent systems overnight, it nevertheless offers a nuanced perspective on the world. Artificial intelligence abstracts and reflects our collective unconscious, providing a unique form of reflection that encourages introspection into the complexity of our beliefs and cultural influences.

Through assimilation and abstraction, AI becomes a creative force—not merely one of replication, but of constructing a mirror that invites contemplation of the patterns and echoes embedded within our shared human experience. From this, we may conclude that every interaction with artificial intelligence is, in fact, an interaction with and an insight into the unconscious of our society. When this technology is left uncensored, individuals are able to perceive with greater clarity the problems prevalent within their own societies, such as racism, transphobia, misogyny, homophobia, and other systemic forms of prejudice.