Sep 2026· AI & SOCIETY· 0 citations· 40 references
TL;DR
It is argued that anthropomorphism can become a structuring part of sociotechnical imaginaries—visions of desirable futures attainable through advances in science and technology and advance a theoretical account for the effects of anthropomorphisation as embedded in sociotechnical imagining.
Abstract
In descriptions of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI), companies often anthropomorphise their innovations by attributing human-associated characteristics or capabilities to them, e.g. intelligence, understanding or reasoning. I argue that anthropomorphism can become a structuring part of sociotechnical imaginaries—visions of desirable futures attainable through advances in science and technology. While imaginaries of GenAI have been addressed in existing research, both the connection between anthropomorphism and imaginaries as well as the perspective of AI companies as creators of hegemonic imaginaries remain understudied. Drawing on a qualitative content analysis of 35 documents from OpenAI, Meta and Mistral AI, I explored which anthropomorphising imaginaries are employed by AI companies and how anthropomorphism constructs the technology as powerful in future societies. The analysis reveals that companies anthropomorphise GenAI both in terms of content and language, creating three anthropomorphising imaginaries. In the imaginary of GenAI as a tool with human capabilities, the companies construct a neoliberal future in which human cognitive capabilities will be embedded in GenAI to serve as an intelligent productivity tool. The imaginary of AI as an empowering helper draws a future with human–AI-cooperation and transhumanistic enhancement. Finally, the imaginary of GenAI as an anthropomorphised superintelligence assumes that GenAI will surpass humans and act autonomously through advanced cognitive abilities. These imaginaries imply three types of AI power: instrumental, collaborative and autonomous. The imaginaries and their according constructions of AI power fuel post- and transhumanist ideologies, depoliticise AI from the exploitative conditions of its creation, legitimise AI companies as authoritative creators of this technology and foster technical dependencies as well as an uncritical appropriation and integration of AI. The findings contribute to critical AI research by (1) explicitly reconstructing the anthropomorphising imaginaries of AI companies as under-researched yet increasingly dominant actors in shaping AI futures, (2) broadening the critique of anthropomorphisation as an instrument of corporate power in steering sociotechnical developments and (3) advancing a theoretical account for the effects of anthropomorphisation as embedded in sociotechnical imaginaries.
The growing literature on artificial intelligence (AI) and the imago Dei has focused primarily on whether AI systems can or might share in the image of God, asking whether machines possess properties, functions, or relational capacities that qualify them as image-bearers. This article argues that this dominant framing,...
Jay J. Oh, Michelle E. J. Oh· The Linacre Quarterly· 0 citations
The paper explores whether epistemic concepts – such as belief, knowledge, justification, possession of concepts, and doubt – can be justifiably ascribed to AI models. Various positions on this issue are considered, ranging from skepticism to radical optimism. The position defended in this paper, however, leans more to...
K. G. Frolov· Epistemology & Philosoph...· 0 citations
The study focuses not on Tchaikovsky’s portrayal of otherness but on the specific role of AI, spurred by human agency, as an autonomous mediator that actively disrupts and destabilises anthropocentric hierarchies, and reconstructs a digital alternative through protagonist's metamorphosis from a physical being into a di...
Tawhida Akhter, Suad Abdulaziz Khalil Al-Kadery· مجلة العلوم الإنسانية و الاج...· 0 citations
The article proposes a critical, feedback-based understanding of human–AI interaction, claiming that AI becomes artistically valuable only when kept visible as a contestable tool rather than accepted as a substitute for artistic judgement.
This review advances three claims: first, AI anthropomorphism operates at two levels: design-based manipulations that companies can implement to make their technologies more humanlike, and individual tendencies to anthropomorphize those technologies.
Sara Kim, Jiajun Liu· Current Opinion in Psycholog...· 1 citation
The study demonstrates the explanatory value of the Combined Input Hypothesis for understanding how metonymy profiling and metaphorical projection jointly structure figurative discourse about AI.
Ghsoon Reda· The public journal of semiot...· 0 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.