Will Artificial Intelligence Kill Aesthetic Experience?
It is the fate of new technologies to stir up Luddite apprehensions. Observers are soon divided into two factions. The adventurous hobbyists, animated by new promises, project their wildest fantasies. The sceptics and, indeed, the Luddites, raise cautionary flags, amplifying anxieties and suspicions about a new thang.
These reactions are perhaps extensions of our evolutionary inclinations. The adventurers, being curious and restless, are set into new territories while their conservative siblings, being careful, resign to discreetness. And they must yet exist together in harmony. Otherwise, they risk extinction or, in modern circumstances, endure the totalitarian fate of politically opposing sides that refuse a middle ground.
The proliferation of AI has coincided with a time of heightened culture wars, economic stress, and geopolitical tensions. Unlike previous game-changing technologies, AI is destined to contend with unprecedented cocktails of hurdles. Within this context, there exists a silent constituency that is concerned about AI’s potential threat to original thinking and the proliferation of sameness. As social media has shown, a new way to connect with customers can come at the price of blunting originality, where every public or branded message seems alike, because of service to algorithms and platforms. It used to be easy to distinguish a brand from the tone and flavour of its communication but in the sea of blandness, the needles are the majority in the proverbial haystack.
Aesthetically and philosophically speaking, the effect of AI on creativity and beauty is, at best, limited and, at worst, detrimental to our appreciation of these essential human qualities. Of concern is its reduction of human creativity to data extrapolations. While it increases productivity and streamlines processes, it does not necessarily translate into original output that carries the resonance and intrinsic meaning attached to creative works. There is a reason that classical works speak to us at a level that photoshopped works do not — or are yet to. This enduring human appreciation and intimation of beauty and creativity explain why tourist curiosities are drawn to classical European architecture. Modern cities may draw people with eye-catching architecture but they do not command the same level of reverence as works that do not advertise technological fancy.
I prompted AI to suggest movie log lines with unusual twists. I suggested the scenes and the mood I want. It reeled out impressive log lines. But I could tell that while they seem different, they still bear the same resonance. One wonders if future iterations of AI might produce the emotional depth and complexity present in human-generated art, literature, music, etc. And that would open the question of consciousness and sapience, a moral and philosophical challenge. It can draw from a range of human experiences and insights but lacks the subtleties of human-generated work. Perhaps, it is safe to say that, AI, in its current state, is better as an enhancer, a supplement, and a brainstorming buddy to accelerate the creative process. A positive vision would anticipate a hybrid case — man and machine as service — as it has been with similarly ground-breaking technologies such as the moving type, the steam engine, and electricity.
Admittedly, this view focuses on the generative components of AI, especially in texts and visual forms. Its benefits extend across industries and unarguably hold the promise of upending the structure of society. It may take decades but the stage is set. Therefore, other aspects of society would contend with its influence in respective domains.
If the possibility of sameness is not checked in these early days, we run the risk of reenacting the worst effect of social media on our psyche and sense of aesthetics. We are overstimulated by SEO permutations, blog posts, and sponsored content, that leave nothing to desire and leave us helpless. It is my fear of what AI might do to our appreciation of beauty and originality because sameness remixed on a mass scale deludes the mind into accepting a low threshold of standards as the acceptable norm. But, on the positive side, the unintended consequence of this would be that AI would heighten the hunger for original human ingenuity that would be priced as premium in the way people appreciate handcrafted products.
Wherever the clashes between Luddites and adventurers lead, machines should find space for human aesthetic appreciation.
PS: Except for the image, no AI was involved in the creation of this post. :)
(Hey, I started a project where I curate my favourite AI tools for a non-tech audience. I’ve been having fun with it). Please, check it out and subscribe:
https://aihunted.substack.com/
