I think that many spectators of human-made art also fall for something close to Pareidolia, Apophenia, or the sensing of meaning that is not (necessarily) there

I think that many spectators of human-made art also fall for something close to Pareidolia, Apophenia, or the sensing of meaning that is not (necessarily) there. Even expert critics can't infer exactly what authors or creators had in mind when creating a work of art or literature and without a statement from the artist it's just a heuristic guess based on culture and personal taste. People have wondered for hundreds of years what the Mona Lisa's expression means, making assumptions about Da Vinci's technique and intentions for her smile, but without definitive evidence from the artist himself it's all guesswork. Likewise in this article the author assumes that art is about communication but in fact art is a very lossy and ambiguous communication medium. Human artists choose to put concepts in juxtaposition with each other but what that means to people differs with each individual, and so what an artist intends to communicate may not come across even if people strongly feel that they are right about their own interpretation. Dall-E2 is almost as capable at the same kind of juxtaposition (astronaut riding a horse) that makes people think about what it might mean.