This article examines how practitioners engage with the technology's perceived opacity by placing practitioners’ own descriptions of AI within broader anthropological discussions of magic, and argues that references to ‘AI as magic’ help situate rapidly evolving technological systems within everyday lifeworlds.
Abstract
Research on artificial intelligence (AI) frequently highlights the technology's inherent unpredictability – often captured through the metaphor of the ’black box’ – which makes it difficult, and perhaps even impossible, to determine how particular results are produced. These discussions typically culminate in debates about ethics, reliability and responsibility, yet they say relatively little about how those working with and developing AI themselves relate to this mystification. Drawing on extensive ethnographic fieldwork among two distinct groups in the South Indian city of Bengaluru – artists experimenting creatively with AI and data scientists developing AI-powered applications – this article examines how practitioners engage with the technology's perceived opacity. Many interlocutors acknowledged that beyond a certain threshold, they could no longer fully explain how ‘their’ AI systems arrived at particular decisions or outputs. Instead, they frequently invoked expressions such as ‘that's the magic of it’ or described their work as a form of ‘geek wizardry’. Taking these formulations seriously, the article explores how the seemingly ‘unexplainable’ aspects of AI come to be experienced as magical. Rather than dismissing such language as metaphor, it approaches these references as part of the ways practitioners make sense of technologies that appear to exceed their own knowledge and explanatory frameworks. Drawing on Ernesto De Martino's theorization of magic – particularly his emphasis on context, history and meaning – the article argues that references to ‘AI as magic’ help situate rapidly evolving technological systems within everyday lifeworlds. In a field where developments occur at extraordinary speed and even specialists struggle to remain fully up to date, the language of magic provides a way of articulating encounters with systems whose operations remain only partially intelligible. By placing practitioners’ own descriptions of AI within broader anthropological discussions of magic, the article offers a new perspective on how people live with and interpret the opacity of contemporary algorithmic systems.
How AI systems work by recycling a narrow set of visual tropes in their training data that have very little to do with human notions of intelligence or creativity is shown.
Matti Pohjonen· Anthropological Theory· 0 citations
Artists and cultural theorists, although they use dif ferent means, share the task of problematizing culture. The urgent task now is to critically examine the ways we use AI text-to-image generators and create space for ref lection about engaging with these systems. I approach this through what I term the cultural logic of computational capitalism, drawing on Fredric Jameson and Bernard Stiegler. The paper addresses how arts and humanities can help overcome this logic and transform AI’s visual culture itself. Such an inquiry is essential given that AI text-to-image generators not only disrupt traditional art production but also concentrate creative power in the hands of a few dominant platforms. While these concerns are global, they require specific regional responses. Focusing on East-Central European countries, I argue that the underrepresentation of their visual cultures in AI models stems from their semi-peripheral status within global technological and economic systems. Rather than simply feeding existing AI models with better regional training data, I propose supporting dissident artistic practices that promote regional digital and digitally sustainable cultures.
It is argued that anthropology requires a new conceptual framework for understanding the contemporary social life of artificial intelligence (AI), and "the magic of AI" is proposed as an analytical concept that shifts attention from AI's technical capacities to the beliefs, uncertainties, and sociotechnical imaginaries through which it acquires authority and efficacy.
M. Baas, Roanne van Voorst· Anthropological Theory· 2 citations
When the history of the United States in 2025 is written, it is likely to go down as the year when the hype around AI reached a fever pitch and the beginning of a fundamental shift in how businesses approach task assignment and staffing. Many CEOs are spending millions of dollars investing in AI tools while enacting mass layoffs under the impression that thousands of humans are no longer needed as AI will fulfill many roles faster and more efficiently. In the tech industry, I have observed that the remaining employees tend to express an almost rabid enthusiasm for rapid AI adoption as their path to promotion. Or, they are careful to conceal their concerns behind a veneer of support for fear of being perceived as an obstacle to a profitable future. How do anthropologists in business break through the façade to educate others on the limits of AI’s capabilities and the risks, ethical concerns, and appropriate use cases, while still keeping their jobs? Or should they bother? After all, in the US, we are reaching a critical inflection point for anthropology as a discipline, as it is targeted by the current administration for its support of diversity and equality. This essay explores the dilemma facing anthropologists across industries as their employers forge ahead with AI adoption, often without careful consideration of the pros and cons. I offer strategies for navigating the complexities of AI hype while doing in-house evaluation of these tools based on my experience working in the tech industry.
Melissa A. Vogel· Journal of Business Anthropo...· 2 citations
The article demonstrates how attempts to decentre the human often reconstitute new forms of authority in attempts to decentre the human and examines the possibility of surpassing standard anthropocentric approaches in AI while maintaining a critical philosophical engagement with the structurally necessary yet precarious character of organizing principles.
This paper uses disparate examples of AI resistance and theoretical lenses to render explicit an underlying logic which connects varied forms of resistance, grounded in the ethical value(s) that effort can manifest, and reframe one side of the debate between embracers and resisters.
R. Downes, Rebecca Mines· AI and Ethics· 0 citations