Rethinking Error: “Hallucinations” and Epistemological Indifference

Abstract In our current generative AI paradigm, so-called hallucinations are typically seen as a kind of nuisance that will eventually be swept away as the technology improves. There are several reasons to question this assumption. One of them is that the very phenomenon is the result of deliberate business decisions by corporations invested in delivering diverse sentence structures through deep learning and generative pretrained transformers (GPTs). This article urges a fresh view on hallucinations by arguing that, rather than being errors in any conventional sense, they are evidence of a probabilistic system incapable of dealing with questions of knowledge. These systems are epistemologically indifferent. Yet, by presenting as errors to users of generative AI, hallucinations can function as practical reminders of and indexes to the limits of this kind of machine learning. Viewed this way, hallucinations remind us that every time one gets something reasonable-seeming from a system such as OpenAI's ChatGPT, one might as well have been given something quite outrageous; from the machine's perspective, it's all the same.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
Critical AI
Published
2025-04-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1215/2834703x-11700255
Citations
5
Primary Topic
Mental Health and Psychiatry
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
86.33
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Rethinking Error: “Hallucinations” and Epistemological Indifference

Johan Fredrikzon
5 citations
Critical AI
Mental Health and Psychiatry
86.33
article

Rethinking Error: “Hallucinations” and Epistemological Indifference

Johan Fredrikzon
article en
5 citations

Abstract

Abstract In our current generative AI paradigm, so-called hallucinations are typically seen as a kind of nuisance that will eventually be swept away as the technology improves. There are several reasons to question this assumption. One of them is that the very phenomenon is the result of deliberate business decisions by corporations invested in delivering diverse sentence structures through deep learning and generative pretrained transformers (GPTs). This article urges a fresh view on hallucinations by arguing that, rather than being errors in any conventional sense, they are evidence of a probabilistic system incapable of dealing with questions of knowledge. These systems are epistemologically indifferent. Yet, by presenting as errors to users of generative AI, hallucinations can function as practical reminders of and indexes to the limits of this kind of machine learning. Viewed this way, hallucinations remind us that every time one gets something reasonable-seeming from a system such as OpenAI's ChatGPT, one might as well have been given something quite outrageous; from the machine's perspective, it's all the same.

Critical AIVol. 3(1)
Openalex Percentile: Top 0%
Mental Health and Psychiatry
86.33
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.