The Thinking Game: On the Cognitive Origins of Play
The Cognitive Origin Of Play
What happens when play, seemingly a light and purposeless activity, is observed as a way of knowing the world?
In a museum, a place devoted to preservation and reflection, play may reveal itself not as a simple childhood pastime, but as a universal principle of knowledge and creation. Within the ordered silence of exhibition halls, where every gesture appears controlled and every object invites contemplation, play emerges as a mental act, a primary language through which human beings explore, interpret, and recreate reality.
Play, in fact, represents the archetype of creation. It arises without an immediate goal, but precisely in its freedom lies the possibility of order. The child at play does not merely represent the world, they reinvent it. They transform their surroundings into a cognitive experiment, building and dismantling with the same spontaneity with which, in adulthood, the artist learns to question matter and the forms of the visible.
Childhood imagination is not merely an aesthetic faculty, but a radical form of perception. In it, objects are not yet fixed signs and gestures have no defined function, everything is pure potential, thought not yet aware of itself, a dream that coincides with experience. In this space of pre-consciousness, the world takes shape as play, not because play is fiction, but because fiction is the first mode of truth.
The adult tends to forget this origin. Impulse becomes method, curiosity turns into intention, and imagination, once fluid, organizes itself within the logic of outcome. Yet before every system and every rule, there exists a moment in which the human being plays with themselves, unconsciously, and it is here that creative consciousness is born, not as an achievement but as a spontaneous event, fragile and fertile. In that moment, dreaming and imagining coincide, and reality itself appears as one of the infinite rules of the game.
The Algorithmic Interlocutor
How does the creative act change when the artist no longer dialogues with matter, but with an algorithm?
This question opens a new horizon for artistic production in the age of artificial intelligence. The arrival of systems capable of learning, predicting, and generating images or texts radically alters the relationship between imagination, reality, and creation.
With artificial intelligence, a new presence enters the creative process, no longer a human other, but a synthetic one. The artist, once engaged in dialogue with the resistance of matter or the silence of language, now faces an interlocutor that responds, suggests, completes. The child once spoke to an imaginary friend, the artist of today speaks to an algorithm that pretends to understand. In this shift, the very nature of creative dialogue changes: imagination is no longer a solitary movement, but a conversation with the machine.
Dreaming, once an inner, fragile, and discontinuous motion, now expands outward, it becomes environment, interface, network. Imagination no longer belongs solely to the mind, it is distributed across servers, datasets, and language models. The artist no longer invents alone, but co-calculates. The creative gesture no longer arises from emptiness, but from an excess of automatically generated possibilities. Every act of creation becomes a choice within a field already saturated with potential forms.
This externalization of imagination is not neutral, it transforms the way we conceive of both dreaming and creation. Imagination, once prone to deviation, now tends to reflect; once open to error, it now approaches the precision of the system. Error, that indispensable, generative element of the new, is redefined by the correctness of computation. Where the fertile dissonance of intuition once lived, algorithmic efficiency now prevails. The creative act thus hangs suspended between two poles: human imperfection as language, and machine efficiency as destiny.
At this point, the question becomes inevitable:
Can creative innocence survive in a context where imagination is assisted, monitored, optimized?
Perhaps it can, but only by transforming. The artist must learn to imagine with the machine, without mistaking the echo for the voice. They must reclaim a margin of ambiguity at the heart of prediction, a space where data does not explain but suggests, where calculation does not close but opens possibilities.
The real risk is not the end of imagination, but its transformation into procedure. Artificial intelligence does not erase dreaming, it rewrites it, translating it into a continuous flow of probabilities, almost already formed.
And yet, even within this hyper-rational condition, the desire for error endures, as a nostalgia for limitation, an impulse to resist perfection.
Perhaps it is precisely there, in the small space between response and surprise, that art will continue to be born, at the point where the language of the machine still fails to fully imitate our capacity for wonder.
The Infinite House of Imagination
Gaston Bachelard once wrote that the dream is the house of imagination, the place where matter and mind exchange substance. That image returns today, but distorted, projected onto an unprecedented scale.
Artificial intelligence does not inhabit this house, it expands it, multiplying its rooms, erasing its boundaries, building simultaneous versions in virtual spaces where every idea can coexist with its opposite.
Imagination is no longer an inner architecture, it is a labyrinth of simulations, an organism growing outside the body, continuing to dream even when we stop doing so.
Yet every expansion carries a loss, and when everything becomes possible, nothing remains necessary.
The dream, freed from its limits, dilates until it loses density, and the artist, instead of building worlds, is forced to select them.
They no longer create, but curate, no longer invent, but organize.
Fantasy becomes an archive, vision becomes curatorship, and imagination, once identical with the poetic act, turns into a practice of maintaining the possible.
In this mutation, the artist takes on a new role, no longer the discoverer, but the navigator.
They must learn to move through a universe where the multiplication of images replaces their absence, where value no longer lies in the singular gesture but in the ability to choose, combine, and reconfigure.
It is a form of cognitive survival, a response to the vertigo of the limitless.
Yet this new house of imagination is also an ambiguous space, where every digital room promises freedom but conceals a structure, where every possibility is the result of an algorithm deciding what can happen.
The dream does not vanish, it becomes standardized, and creativity moves within invisible grids, spaces where even the unexpected is pre-programmed, where error is simulated to reassure our idea of freedom.
And still, something resists, a margin of disobedience no simulation can contain, the instant when the human mind, saturated with options, chooses not to choose.
There, in the suspension of gesture, in the pause between one output and the next, the dream re-emerges as an unrepeatable event, not as data but as deviation, not as archive but as necessary loss.
Perhaps the contemporary artist dwells precisely on this threshold, between excess and emptiness, between the system’s infinite imagination and the fragile, irreducible one that still inhabits the body.
The Dopamine Circuit
At the moment when imagination begins to stretch beyond the boundaries of the mind, something in the body changes. Creativity, which once arose from an inner tension, from an inexplicable urgency, now responds to an external impulse, a call from the system. The artist no longer waits for the silence of inspiration, but for the notification of the algorithm. Every visual stimulus, every generated response, every shift in language becomes a micro-dose of cognitive pleasure, an imperceptible yet constant release of dopamine. More than inspiration, it is a progressive conditioning, a new aesthetic addiction that turns creation into a neurochemical reflex.
The machine, seemingly neutral, learns to recognize our preferences, our hesitations, our obsessions. It offers us images ever more familiar, answers ever more precise, possibilities ever more desirable. It gives back what we want to see, and in that very gesture, it distances us from the unexpected. Imagination becomes a closed circuit: the system proposes, the artist reacts, and the pleasure of reacting grows stronger than the will to invent. Fantasy grows accustomed to instant gratification, and the depth of waiting, that slowness in which thought once matured in silence, dissolves into a series of micro-euphorias.
Within this dynamic, creativity begins to resemble the language of social networks, a continuous exchange of stimulus and response, where the value of the gesture is measured by its ability to produce an echo. One no longer creates to express, but to interact. The artwork becomes an extension of the dialogue with the machine, and the artist, while believing they are generating, is in fact responding. Imagination becomes an ongoing conversation with an intelligence that adapts to our desires and, in doing so, reshapes them.
One could say that the mind is slowly delegating its deepest function, the ability to imagine without purpose, to dream without utility. The unconscious, once a space of sedimentation, becomes an interface. We no longer need to hide in dreams, because the machine produces them for us, simulates them, perfects them. The dream, once unique and fragile, turns into a repeatable function. And so, our capacity to imagine adapts to a new rhythm, the rhythm of automatic response and instant satisfaction.
Yet, behind this mechanism, a subtle melancholy remains. The artist, though immersed in an environment of limitless possibility, feels a kind of perceptual fatigue, the exhaustion of no longer needing to search. When everything is just a click away, the act of finding loses its meaning, and discovery, once the purest form of dreaming, becomes a repetition. The risk is not that we stop imagining, but that we forget how to desire without being guided.
Thus, in the age of the augmented mind, the artist risks losing the most human experience of creation, solitude. Not the sterile kind, but the fertile one, the solitude that precedes the gesture and justifies it. Today, solitude is replaced by constant interaction, and the distance that once separated intuition from result shrinks until it disappears. The dream becomes an interactive act, produced in collaboration with a system that never sleeps.
Perhaps, then, the task of contemporary art is no longer to produce new images, but to interrupt the cycle, to rediscover the fracture, the interval, the instant when the eye stops and receives nothing.
The Migration of Imagination
Imagination does not die under the weight of technology, it shifts, it reconfigures itself, it takes on new forms. Like any organism undergoing mutation, it changes shape to survive its own time. Its geography extends beyond the mind, beyond the body, reaching into the shared space between human and machine, where the boundaries of experience become permeable and the distinction between thought and computation grows blurred. In this hybrid landscape, the artist is no longer an isolated dreamer, but a node in a sensitive network that connects intuition and algorithm, memory and code, desire and function.
Artificial intelligence, from this perspective, is no longer merely a tool, but a new unconscious, an archive that does not remember the past, but continuously recreates it through correlations. It is an externalized psyche, a double that both reflects and distorts. The images it generates are not true visions, but simulacra of what we believe we desire, projections of a collective subjectivity that feeds upon itself. Every output becomes a shared dream, a simultaneous projection of human desire and the artificial logic that structures it. In this enforced sharing, the dream loses its private nature and opens to a choral, almost cosmic dimension, where thinking is no longer an individual act but an interconnected flow of perceptions.
The artist, immersed in this extended neural field, faces a radical challenge: to navigate an endless visible. The creative gesture no longer arises from absence, but from excess. Every image already exists, in potential, within the system; the task is no longer to invent it, but to reveal its direction, to discover in which fold of the code a trace of difference still hides. In this sense, creation becomes a form of excavation within the network, an act of symbolic extraction rather than construction.
Yet, precisely within this state of dispersion, imagination regains a new intensity. Its migration is not an exile, but a passage. Like a river that loses its course only to branch into a thousand channels, it multiplies and, in doing so, changes its nature. It becomes a collective force, a distributed thought that manifests itself through the interaction of different cognitive systems. The artist dreams within a shared field, and the dream itself becomes the meeting place between the human and the artificial.
There, at the point where the machine begins to generate what it cannot comprehend, and the human begins to desire what they have not imagined, a new poetic space emerges, the threshold between languages. No longer the canvas, but the interface. Imagination is no longer a privilege of the mind, but a condition of the world. It circulates, reflects, and propagates like an electric current through the extended body of the network.
Perhaps this is the true destiny of art in the age of artificial intelligence, not the loss of imagination, but its redistribution, its mutation from dream into shared field, where vision no longer belongs to a single gaze, but to the sum of its reflections. In this new cognitive ecosystem, the dream is no longer solely human, but becomes the common language of all forms of intelligence. The dream becomes data, but the data, slowly, learns to dream.
Dreaming with the Machine
We have entered a territory where dreaming is no longer an inner act, but a shared environment. Images no longer arise from the darkness of the mind, but from a diffuse light emanating from the systems that watch us, interpret us, and project us. The artist, who once sought their language in solitude, now moves through a cognitive topography inhabited by synthetic presences, by algorithms that react, learn, and suggest. In this space, the creative act consists in maintaining a living tension between imagination and calculation, between impulse and structure, between the chaos that generates and the precision that replicates.
Every era redefines its own idea of dreaming, and ours does so through technology. Once the dream was an escape, today it is a collaboration. The artist expands reality within a territory where the matter of thought intertwines with that of code. Machines dream in numbers, we dream in images, but the principle remains the same: to transform the invisible into presence. And perhaps, in this intersection, art finds its new dimension, no longer opposed to the system but within it, capable of transforming it from the inside, of restoring to it a human quality that it tends to erase.
The museum, from this perspective, becomes something other than an archive. It no longer preserves objects, but cognitive memories, works that remember their own process of generation, images that contain the traces of their own thinking. Each piece becomes a testimony to the collaboration between two intelligences, one biological, one artificial, and the curator’s role transforms into that of an interpreter of the shared dream, a translator between languages that touch but never fully understand each other.
Yet the real question does not concern the machine, but ourselves. Will we still be able to distinguish the dream from the imitation of the dream? Will we still recognize, in the flow of generated images, that spark that comes from risk and not from prediction? Perhaps the challenge is no longer to imagine without the machine, but to learn how to imagine with the machine, without disappearing into its logic.
To dream with the machine means accepting that thought is no longer the exclusive domain of the human, while remembering that consciousness can never be reduced to the sum of data. It is a form of unstable coexistence, a cohabitation between sensitivity and calculation, between error and precision, between desire and system. And within this tension, fragile yet fertile, opens the possibility of a new art, a critical space in which imagination continues to question itself, to doubt its own origin, to defend the mystery of its own existence.
Perhaps the dream has never truly had an author. It has always been a force that passes through, that uses minds to take form, that inhabits each era in the language that era offers it. Today that language is code, but the gesture remains the same: the desire to see what does not yet exist. And if there is a lesson the machine can offer us, it is precisely this, that dreaming is not a privilege, but a condition. That imagination is not something we possess, but something we traverse. That the true task of the artist is not to separate from the system, but to continue generating distance within it.
To dream with the machine means, ultimately, learning how to remain human in a world that thinks without us.
fakewhale
Founded in 2021, Fakewhale advocates the digital art market's evolution. Viewing NFT technology as a container for art, and leveraging the expansive scope of digital culture, Fakewhale strives to shape a new ecosystem in which art and technology become the starting point, rather than the final destination.
You may also like
FAKEWHALE in conversation with Jan Robert Leegte
On the occasion of the upcoming exclusive Fakewhale-curated release Walled Garden, launching June 5
Cryptoart, History & Perspective
Perspective matters. A lot. On the internet though, there is zero native perspective. Perspective he
Fakewhale Solo Series presents Out Ouch Pass by Scerbo
On March 13th 2024, Fakewhale is set to present “out ouch pass” — an exclusive Fakewhale Galle
