For years, Artificial Intelligence has been a buzzword, drawing the attention of both artists and art lovers alike. Its rapid development raises important questions about the future of artistic expression and challenges traditional notions of art. Many have understandably see robotics and AI as threats, especially when it comes to human creativity. But we are now at a point in time where the existence of robots is also being received with awe and wonder. So, we must now face the question, how is this going to make an impact in humanity’s artistic pursuits? Is the collaboration between robotics, AI, and humans in creating art truly a threat?
To understand where we’re headed, we need to explore the roots of AI and robotics, including their evolution, and impact on human creativity.
The Laws of Robotics
The intersection of humanity and machines has long been a theme in storytelling, from iconic films like Steven Spielberg’s A.I. Artificial Intelligence to Pixar’s WALL-E. These narratives often cause the audience to think about ethical and philosophical questions.
Long before science fiction films took center stage, literature had already begun exploring the relationship between humans and their creations. Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein, for instance, introduced a ‘monster’ that has influenced countless stories in both literature and cinema. Over time, this notion of a misunderstood creation evolved into what we now refer to as robots, created from metal and sophisticated programming, often found in dystopian films and books.
Isaac Asimov, a renowned biochemistry professor, made significant contributions to science fiction, particularly with his Laws of Robotics. These laws, introduced in his story “Runaround,” outline the following:
- A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
- A robot must obey the orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
- A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.
Asimov’s works frequently challenge these laws, prompting discussion about their relevance as AI and robotics become integral to our everyday lives. Today, a pivotal question looms: Is AI a threat to human creativity?
The rise of robotics and AI in the Modern World
In recent years, robots have gained media attention for outsmarting chess champions and Go masters. Now, the conversation has shifted to whether generative AI can produce “real” art. This debate has placed certain artists in the spotlight as they embrace technology and try new art styles to enhance their creative processes.
People have generally imagined robots as tools to streamline mundane tasks, allowing us more time to engage in leisure activities like reading or painting. However, when machines started creating art, it ignited a fascinating discussion about the essence of art itself and whether mechanized creations are to be held in high regard or not.
Many artists exploring this idea of collaborating with AI or robotics in making art view technology as a valuable tool—similar to acquiring a state-of-the-art set of brushes for painting. It allows them to push the boundaries of what humans are able to do and explore new possibilities-such as creating collectible digital art-something that the past has not yet seen.
However, a number of artists have also expressed concern about the potential for robots to replace them. This perspective brings to mind Asimov’s Zeroth Law: “A robot may not harm humanity, or, by inaction, allow humanity to come to harm.” If AI poses a threat to an artist’s career, does it ultimately harm society? While this viewpoint might seem extreme, history has shown that technological innovations can sometimes lead to unintended consequences.
Ai-Da, The Robot Painter
Ai-da, a celebrated robot artist and influencer, exemplifies this intersection of technology and creativity. Created by art historian Aiden Miller in 2019, Ai-da has sparked important discussions about the role of robotics in art. As a designer and poet, she has held exhibitions worldwide, showcasing the potential of AI in creative fields.
In one interview, Ai-da acknowledged that emerging technologies will significantly impact our lives, potentially reshaping art and beyond. Initially perceived as a threat, her existence has, in many ways, prompted greater investments in the tech sector.
Ai-da is definitely a fascinating creation. She has sparked discussions about what art really is and has made us wonder, “Are emotions essential for creating good art?”
Whether we see Ai-da as a challenge or a threat, one thing is for sure: her existence has sparked some important discussions about the very definition of what art truly is.
To embrace or not to embrace AI and human collaboration in art, that is the question
New, and more advanced technologies will continue to be explored by humans, and there is no going back from it now. It is happening at a very fast pace, in spite of the economic problems we are currently experiencing. At the end of the day, we will all be faced with a choice: As individuals, should we embrace this progress or remain in the past? What is it that keeps us reluctant to take a step further? If we remain indecisive and fearful of the negative impacts of technology, we will not go anywhere. Of course, we need to draw up regulations to make sure it will not be abused. But first we must overcome our fear, otherwise, fear itself will lead us to our own demise.
The value of an art created with the help of robotics, AI, or other automated tools is influenced by several factors, and this does not automatically diminish its worth. Essentially, the appreciation of a piece of art that incorporates technology is subjective. It largely depends on how both the artist and the audience perceive the role of these tools in the creative process. While technology may change the way a work is evaluated, it doesn’t inherently lessen its value. Instead, it can lead to a richer dialogue about the nature of creativity and the relationship between human expression and machine assistance.
One Response