Artificial Creativity?

Abstract Can an artificial intelligence (AI), whose outputs are correlated with humans’ inputs in an extremely opaque way, be thought of as creative? I will answer in the negative, starting with the analysis of the case of Edmond de Belamy , together with further cases. More precisely, I will offer the following three kinds of arguments. First, what results from testing the idea of creative AI against the background of traditional definitions of creativity, especially from a philosophical perspective. Second, what results from testing the idea of creative AI against the background of the notion of meta-sensemaking. Third, what results from testing the idea of creative AI against the background of the epistemology of creativity. After arguing that the possible answer to my starting question is negative, at least in the sense that speaking of creative AI means speaking of something far different from human creativity, I will argue that the reflection upon the idea of creative AI should not make us lose sight of what is most important: what creativity is always for, i.e. making sense of our own existence, from art to anything, not only because it is a kind of existential urgency for us but also because it is pleasant in itself for us.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Minds and Machines
Published
2025-12-19
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11023-025-09758-5
Primary Topic
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Artificial Creativity?

Simona Chiodo
Minds and Machines
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
article

Artificial Creativity?

Simona Chiodo
article en

Abstract

Abstract Can an artificial intelligence (AI), whose outputs are correlated with humans’ inputs in an extremely opaque way, be thought of as creative? I will answer in the negative, starting with the analysis of the case of Edmond de Belamy , together with further cases. More precisely, I will offer the following three kinds of arguments. First, what results from testing the idea of creative AI against the background of traditional definitions of creativity, especially from a philosophical perspective. Second, what results from testing the idea of creative AI against the background of the notion of meta-sensemaking. Third, what results from testing the idea of creative AI against the background of the epistemology of creativity. After arguing that the possible answer to my starting question is negative, at least in the sense that speaking of creative AI means speaking of something far different from human creativity, I will argue that the reflection upon the idea of creative AI should not make us lose sight of what is most important: what creativity is always for, i.e. making sense of our own existence, from art to anything, not only because it is a kind of existential urgency for us but also because it is pleasant in itself for us.

Minds and MachinesVol. 36(1)
Politecnico di Milano (IT)
Openalex Percentile: Top 58%
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
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.