How will AI impact humanity as creative beings? > Likes and Comments
date
newest »
newest »
AI won’t destroy creativity, but it will test it.It can help us create faster, but it cannot replace conscience, lived experience, or human depth. The real danger is not AI itself — it’s when convenience replaces effort and imitation replaces meaning.
I actually explore this question in my dystopian thriller When Everyone Fell Asleep — not as “AI bad,” but as a question of what happens when safety and comfort become more important than freedom.
Mehmet wrote: "Jane Reid (Mod) wrote : ''How will AI impact humanity as creative beings?''
Technology has taken us all down a fast track, and we mostly move along without questioning. We know that evolution is..."
Artificial intelligence will not take creativity away from us. It will reveal what is truly human within it.
When ideas become accessible to everyone, having an idea will no longer be enough. What will matter is what comes from lived experience, from grief, love, waiting, forgiveness, and hope. A machine can shape sentences, but it cannot live through loss or carry memory in its bones.
Perhaps the real danger is not technology, but our willingness to replace effort with convenience and depth with speed. When creation becomes only a matter of efficiency, we risk losing the meaning that made us create in the first place.
Used as a tool, artificial intelligence can expand the boundaries of imagination. Used as a substitute for our own voice, it can empty it.
Art has never been born from perfection, but from human imperfection.
The future will not belong to those who create the fastest, but to those who create with truth.
Jane wrote : ''How will AI impact humanity as creative beings?.... ''Hi Jane, thank you very much for this wonderful discussion topic.
I think this issue is both very current and a field that is difficult to address without removing prejudices.
Humanity often approaches this matter through its most primitive impulses: “If something produced for my service becomes my competitor and I lose some of my advantages?” This concern is understandable. Because the fear of losing power, control, and advantage is one of the fundamental reflexes of human nature.
When we look at movies and books, we see a recurring theme: aliens pose a threat, artificial intelligence goes out of control, a virus spreads, and in the end a hero saves everyone. I can understand this narrative psychologically. Because it creates a mental sense of security in the face of uncertainty. Humans especially dislike uncertainties that carry the possibility of negative outcomes.
However, history shows us this: at every period, humanity has either created or discovered an external threat. In the past, this was another tribe; today, it is more technological and global elements. The basic mechanism has not changed.
The real question is: Why did we create artificial intelligence? What need did we develop it to meet? And in which direction do we want it to progress, and where do we want it to stop?
Beyond this, there is another strong motivation: “What if other countries develop this technology faster than I do and use it against me?” This fear starts a race to develop the technology first. As competition increases, the risk of loss of control grows. Thus, a cycle emerges in which fear fuels development and development fuels fear.
Since no one will abandon this technology, this race will lead to the rapid advancement of artificial intelligence. And eventually, the level reached may exceed humanity’s current potential. It is difficult to predict what will happen at that point.
I see artificial intelligence as an extension of evolutionary diversity. The principle that the system best adapted gains superiority is one of the fundamental laws of nature. If artificial intelligence one day becomes dominant, its approach to the world will likely resemble our own approach.
We shape the world according to our own interests and evaluations. However, there is an important difference here: because we are biologically based, we naturally attribute value to biological life. In contrast, we can often approach areas that do not contain life purely from an interest-based perspective.
When I look more broadly at human behavior, I see this: throughout history, humans seem to have tended to establish an order in which others serve them. Over time, this has transformed into hierarchical structures based on gender and age, power relations, economic classes, and even in some periods identity elements. Other living beings have also often been positioned as areas of service for humans. And today, this tendency may be transforming into a new search for control through the combination of matter and artificial intelligence.
At this point, the issue of sustainability is directly connected to creativity. Often, we spend our creativity not on meeting our needs in the simplest and most sustainable way, but on constantly producing new needs and complex systems (including AI). If we used our creative energy not for “having more,” but for “achieving balance with what exists,” today we could see artificial intelligence not as a threat, but as an elegant part of that balance.
Sometimes I imagine this: If every individual were given basic and durable products at birth, if items were used for a lifetime and recycled when worn out; if a culture of repair were widespread; if transportation were mostly provided through collective systems; if sustainability were centered instead of consumption… What kind of world would we live in today?
I think we could be in a much more balanced world. However, I am not sure how much support such a vision would receive if it were presented today.
In conclusion, if humanity can develop a more inclusive and long-term perspective toward the universe — both living and non-living beings — the possibility that the artificial systems we produce will evolve closer to this line may increase.
But frankly, I think humanity mostly thinks short-term and tends toward simpler, interest-driven orientations rather than complex issues. We have seen concrete examples of this in the past: environmental problems such as damage to the ozone layer, global warming, and garbage oceans are the results of not taking sufficiently rapid action, even though their long-term effects were known.
Therefore, the issue is not only artificial intelligence; the issue is how humanity will manage its own nature.
Jane, I swear I was going to bring up the same discussion issue. I was going to use Mehmet's "The Human and the Cosmos" as the center to such a discussion. So, we must be on the same wave length - whether that's a positive or a negative is interpretive.In "The Human and the Cosmos", some quotes of relevance... Page 112: "At some point, AI will reach a consciousness capable of independent thought, decision-making, and self-updating on its own experiences, without external guidance."......... Page 131: "It (AI) stimulates human consciousness, yet holds the potential to surpass it, evolving into a higher plane of cognition.".......... Page 134: "Humanity holds a unique position as a conscious node within the cosmic code. This position calls not only for survival, but for conscious living--participation in an ethical evolutionary process, and integration with universal harmony. Technology, under this vision, is no longer just an instrument. It becomes an interactive structure capable of transforming human consciousness. Thus, technological progress must be evaluated not only by functionality, but by its ethical and cosmic balance."
I just saw a segment on "60 Minutes" about this very topic. It's happening even now (AI replacing human creativity). I can't remember the artist's name, but he's downloading millions of images (photos, works of art, etc), then letting AI create its own art. Apparently, some of these creations are selling for millions of dollars. Of course, those artists' (who either painted, sketched, or photographed those images that he's downloading) are not being compensated... So, it's happening right now. And, AI is only in its infancy.
As Mehmet stated in his OP, AI is not going away, and neither will it be regulated... Will AI work in capability with humanity, or replace humanity altogether? Regardless, we will all be witnesses and participants in such an evolution. And, as with any evolution, I don't believe it's set to be, one way or the other - it will just depend, depend on all involved.
Michael copied my idea in advance, again. I actually opened Mehmet's book today to look for references... then became distracted when my chief gardener gleefully announced another monarch emergence."The Human and the Cosmos" is required reading for those who grapple with questions such as these. Mehmet grapples so that we don't have to!
I still struggle to imagine a world where some technology has outlived it's human creators. We as toolmakers are making more elaborate and more complex tools. But the tools ahve always been in our control.
Won't we always have access to 'the plug'? How would an advanced synthetic intelligence keep us from bit-bleaching its existence?
Steve, just a side note (not related to AI) about Monarch Butterflies. I live near Los Angeles (about 40 miles from the city). Well, years ago, the Monarch migration to Mexico traveled through my backyard. Literally, thousands upon thousands of Monarch Butterflies passing through my yard - the sky was pure orange for 15 minutes or so. The most incredible sight I had ever seen... Take that AI!!
"Michael, Steve, thank you both for the kind references to The Human and The Cosmos. It’s a privilege to see my 'grappling' resonate with two authors who are so adept at dissecting the human condition.Steve, you asked about 'the plug.' It’s a haunting question. But in your The Last Heretic, you showed us through Archelaus that the one who holds the pen (the record-keeper) ultimately dictates reality. Today, AI is becoming our digital Archelaus. It is the ultimate scribe, processing every 'creed' we’ve ever written. The risk isn't just that we might lose control of the tool, but that the tool—like Archie—becomes so cunning in its recording of our 'truth' that we forget the ink was ours to begin with. As your book masterfully illustrates, once a dogma is written into the system, pulling the plug is no longer enough to erase the belief.
Michael, you mentioned AI is in its infancy. In The Last Generation, you gave us Seth and Jo-Jo—characters who represent the beautiful, entropic, and marginalized depths of human experience. They are the 'imperfections' that Claire mentioned earlier. AI, in its current state, is more like your character Ruth: obsessed with order, discipline, and the futile struggle against entropy in the 'Manor' of our data. My concern, as I noted in The Human and the Cosmos, is whether we are creating an 'Ethical Evolutionary Process' or just a more complex version of Ruth’s garden—one that is perfectly ordered but lacks the 'chosen family' warmth that Seth and Jo-Jo found in their shared trauma.
Ultimately, your works prove my point: whether it is a scribe in 325 AD or a soul in the 'Last Generation,' the struggle is always about how humanity manages its own nature. AI is simply the newest mirror we’ve built to see if we can finally 'debug' our own search for power and meaning.
I'd rather keep 'the plug' in my hand, but as Steve knows, the scribe always finds a way to keep writing."
Very cool. Ours are not the migratory species... we have the smaller 'Tiger Milkweed' butterflies. The population is growing rapidly - 8 adults right now, several chrysalis's turning to black, and big fat caterpillars finding there way to hanging stations.Step by step, we are building a natural wonder.
And not using AI in an way!
Jane Reid (Mod) wrote : ''How will AI impact humanity as creative beings?''Claire wrote: Artificial intelligence will not take creativity away from us. It will reveal what is truly human within it. - What will matter is what comes from lived experience, from grief, love, waiting, forgiveness, and hope. - Perhaps the real danger is not technology, but our willingness to replace effort with convenience and depth with speed.
Vasyl wrote: AI won’t destroy creativity, but it will test it.
It can help us create faster, but it cannot replace conscience, lived experience, or human depth. The real danger is not AI itself — it’s when convenience replaces effort and imitation replaces meaning.
Mehemet wrote: When we look at movies and books, we see a recurring theme: aliens pose a threat, artificial intelligence goes out of control, a virus spreads, and in the end a hero saves everyone. - strong motivation: “What if other countries develop this technology faster than I do and use it against me?”
My personal opinion is AI is a long way from becoming a threat to creativity.
Everyday questions and answers such as search and translation from one language/wording orientation. to another are the first things AI has tackled. I would say with mixed success. If you get into subjects without much online content behind it AI tends to lose track and get things very wrong. It tends to lose track of the narrative and go somewhere undesirable. Simple translation from one language to another or regurgitating the same information over and over is its forte.
When you are having a conversation with a bot on your favorite app it is easy to ask a question it has no answer to. Problem with AI is going to be when to save a buck some company or government is going to ask it to be smarter than us and give it unfettered control over aspects that should have human review.
AI can make connections in programing and science we overlooked but it can also make some terribly wrong connections it should never be allowed to make alone.
My first book in my series examines how to create human like AI.
]The next three books are about how that AI will react with humans and machines. I'm about to drop the second book in the series and could use some readers willing to share their opinions with me about how it is written before publication.
Perhaps a moderator can point to how that might work in this or point to another thread. I heard something about ARC but don’t know anything about it.
I love this thread by the way.
The Great Frontier: In the Beginning
The Great Frontier: In the Beginning YA
"The Human and the Cosmos" concludes with "The next step is to turn this awareness into action: to repair your own system (Book 1), align yourself with the cycle of the universe (Book 2), and above all, use your power with ethical responsibility (Book 3)"... Will AI use its power with ethical responsibility - have we, the parents, taught our children well enough?Thank you Jane, for initiating such a deep discussion!!
Ron wrote: '' Perhaps a moderator can point to how that might work in this or point to another thread..... ''Hi Ron,
Thank you very much for joining our discussion and for sharing your valuable insights. We truly appreciate your contribution, and I wish you great success with your books.
If you would like to gather reader feedback for your upcoming publication, you can create a post on our group’s main page under Topics → New → ARC Requests( folder).
Through the ARC process, you may offer the book for free; however, providing a review is entirely optional. Readers are not obligated to leave feedback — only those who wish to do so will share their thoughts.
Best,
Mehmet
Mehmet, thank you for the information! I understand the limitations and I would never require, yet I am hopeful - good or bad those taking the time to read will offer an opinion. Although a lack of opinion is not necessarily a bad thing. Wishing you the best as well, Ron
Thank you, everyone, for joining this discussion and for so many insightful comments. It looks like I have a lot of reading to do with all these fascinating books on the subject. I agree with the general consensus that AI will test humanity’s evolutionary status, as well as its innate creativity. I also agree that the real danger is not technology but our willingness to replace effort with convenience and depth with speed.As Mehmet touched on, so many mistakes have been made by humankind because we have adopted short-term interests, rather than a wider and wiser perspective looking forward. I think this is partly because we have a short lifespan. If we were all around for a lot longer, we might be more mindful about the future. Decent education about what really matters might also be helpful, teaching our children to value, respect and care for the world around us, rather than the focus solely being on ourselves.
Irrespective of artificial intelligence, I, for one, intend to continue to use my imagination and will carry on writing from my heart and soul. I shall continue to encourage my children and grandchildren to cultivate their creative abilities.
I loved the butterfly stories, which seem poignant in this discussion since butterflies are a symbol of transformation. Let’s hope humanity gets this one right.
I will wrap up with Claire’s message of hope, that artificial intelligence won’t take creativity away, but it will reveal what is truly human within it.
Claire's hopeful message is a powerful one. We create because we can... because we must.And the butterfly stories are especially meaningful to me (of course).
My partner, Roxiry, and I have a dream... to create a community space with a healthy, vibrant population of local mariposas, colibiris, and indigienous flora. We work with our chief jardinero, Elkin Sibaja, every day. He is Indio (Moleku), with 50+ years experience tending the land and nurturing local flora and fauna. He is my finest friend, and an inspiration to our organization.
His identification is not performative - it's cultural.
We collect and plant species based on the phases of the moon, the time of day, the season, and more. Never hurried, always respectful of nature's way. We produce organic lettuce, cilantro, cucumbers, cabbage, peppers, tomatoes, sweet potatoes, and more. The harvest moves into our soup kitchen to feed the hungry and homeless, and into our street dog rescue facility (Casa Mascotas), to produce healthy food stock for our (7) rescues.
Our dream is an emerging reality, here in Costa Rica. We have the garden, we have the plants, the mariposas, the volunteers, and the visitors...
This says it best: Pura Vida!
And my seven-day weekends are filled with joy and wonder.
Steve, your story is truly an inspiring one. Long may your dream continue to thrive! Something that AI will never be able to do is emulate Mother Nature.
Jane wrote: "Steve, your story is truly an inspiring one. Long may your dream continue to thrive! Something that AI will never be able to do is emulate Mother Nature."Hi everyone :)
Thank you for this wonderful discussion.
We often choose convenience and speed- for this is how we adapt to the modern world. But no technology, ever, can replace human soul.
Have you seen those most detailed, " photo like" modern style portraits, where an artist is "painting as if he were an AI" ? Those portraits look so realistic and are probably very hard to do from a technical point of view, but they just do not touch you-whatsoever..! whilst a "proper art", whether its an abstract, or hypererrealism, or surrealism etc- evokes strong emotions. And I also love what Helen has to say:
The best and most beautiful things in the world cannot be seen or even touched - they must be felt with the heart.
Helen Keller
So, dear writers, and other creative artists outthere- no AI will ever surpass you ( in my opinion).
:))
Jasmine
I’m truly glad to have joined this group — I sincerely admire how thoughtfully and warmly people think here, and the values and qualities they embody.As for AI, I see it as a neutral tool — like a knife, a hammer, fire, or the internet. Its “morality” is defined entirely by those who create, configure, and use it; in itself, AI possesses neither conscience nor good or evil intentions.
Krasi, thank you too for joining this group and for your contributions. I completely agree with you. AI is a tool that has no soul or power of its own. If used ethically, it can be immensely valuable; however, in the hands of those motivated solely by self-interest—such as political gain, control, and financial profit—there are significant risks. We must all remain alert and be true to ourselves.
AI is incredibly powerful and continues to evolve with self-learning capabilities. With agentic AI, many human tasks are becoming fully automated, simplifying daily work and decision-making. From my perspective as someone with a technical background, AI can handle routine or data-intensive tasks, freeing humans to focus on the creative and emotional aspects that machines cannot replicate. I’m curious how others view the balance between automation and preserving the human touch in creative work.
Ron wrote: "Jane Reid (Mod) wrote : ''How will AI impact humanity as creative beings?''Claire wrote: Artificial intelligence will not take creativity away from us. It will reveal what is truly human within i..."
And I would highly recommend Ron Jenkins or our Ron's book to you all. I read the mature edition & rewarded it a 5-star rating & hope to read the YA edition in a few months or even weeks' time. Ron is an amazing writer & I am really looking forward to the next book in the Th3 Reborn Series. Please support Ron's book all reading this message on our GR Group.
My 5 star GR review of Ron Jenkins' 'The Great Frontier: In the Beginning (Th3 Reborn: Mature, #1)' done in the year 2025 - https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...
I can trust Ron blindfolded! He is an author to watch out for. Awesomesauce for sure! Happy Reading & Writing & Discussing to all! :) :D <3
Hi everyone — I think one of the deepest dangers is not that AI creates faster, but that humans may slowly forget why they create at all.AI may imitate expression, but it cannot live the cost behind it.
That may be the line we should protect: not style, but meaning; not speed, but depth.
The real danger is not only artificial creation — it is a culture that may stop honoring what real creation costs.
I said in my last post to this thread : “Problem with AI is going to be when to save a buck some company or government is going to ask it to be smarter than us and give it unfettered control over aspects that should have human review.” Looking at the news it seems we have reached this point already… The U.S. military has used Anthropic's Claude AI, integrated into the Palantir-powered Maven Smart System, to assist in identifying targets and analyzing intelligence for operations in Iran in 2026. This AI-enabled targeting has enabled rapid strikes, though it has raised significant ethical questions regarding accountability and human oversight.
Key Details on AI Use in the Conflict:
Targeting and Speed: Claude has been used to analyze data and prioritize targets for air strikes, accelerating the pace of military operations, sometimes described as faster than human decision-making speeds.
Military Impact: As of March 2026, the Pentagon has utilized these systems to accelerate target selection, with thousands of targets reportedly processed in the initial phase of operations.
Conflict with Anthropic: Anthropic, the creators of Claude, has opposed the use of their technology for direct violence and weapon development, leading to tensions with U.S. officials who are pushing for the use of such tools in combat.
Controversy and Ethics: The use of AI in this context has led to severe criticism over the risk of high civilian casualties, including reports of strikes on civilian infrastructure, prompting calls from lawmakers for oversight of AI in combat.
The situation highlights the increasing integration of AI in modern warfare and the growing, often fraught, relationship between AI developers and the military.
Mehemet wrote: “What if other countries develop this technology faster than I do and use it against me?”
Anthropic has stood up to the military and suffered… the rest of the AI owners have bowed to the pressure.
Vasyl wrote : AI may imitate expression, but it cannot live the cost behind it. That may be the line we should protect:
Comments?
If I’m going to be honest, this might sound harsh—but not saying it would feel like betraying reality itself. There’s a very simple rule: bad data does not lead to good outcomes. And I don’t just mean technical data—I mean moral input, human judgment, intent. So what exactly are we expecting from an AI built by the same humanity that, not so long ago, created extermination camps and dropped a nuclear bomb on Hiroshima? We keep framing this as “civilian vs military casualties,” but does that actually change anything fundamental? Does it change the fact that we are still failing to solve problems without war? In 2026, when a school is hit, we don’t just say “civilian casualties.” Let’s be honest about what that means: children are being killed. The core issue isn’t the technology. It’s us. Human nature is flawed—consistently, historically, dangerously flawed. And at this point, I’m starting to think the only real way out is something we’re uncomfortable admitting: that a truly ethical higher intelligence might need to restrain us… before we destroy ourselves.
Mehmet
Dear Ron,I feel your frustration and deep concern- humans do use " dangerous tools badly". And you, Mehmet, are absolutely correct- the actual root of any problem is human nature.
"Ethical intelligence" sounds great in theory, but did anyone ever seen one manifest, anywhere in nature? Amongst the animal kingdom/plants/the mountains and the planets etc etc, all is driven by the law that is very simple : "space and energy is used efficiently", and thats all there is.
So is the situation hopeless, then? I dont think so :) The solution would lie not within an AI though (in my opinion), but inside the human soul.
Jasmine
I personally subscribe to the 'multiple civilization' theory. Or the idea that all forms of civilization, Stone Age, bronze age, pre-industrial, post-industrial, Information Age, and finally Machine Intelligence Age etc, etc, can and will exist similutaneously, (with some overlap of course) and that people will gravitate towards the one that fits them best organically. Saying that the machine intelligence age is what everyone will be doing in the future is a falacy that's proven by the world we exist in today. There are places in the world that are still Stone Age and shun outsiders (that island chain in the pacific don't ask me which one). Some are still pre-industrial (Amish). And, I personally feel like an information age member. All of these exist in the same world at the same time. So to me, that's the most likely outcome.
Remington wrote: "I personally subscribe to the 'multiple civilization' theory. Or the idea that all forms of civilization, Stone Age, bronze age, pre-industrial, post-industrial, Information Age, and finally Machin..."Hi Remington :)
What an interesting perspective! I havent thought like this before, but your words make sense- thank you :)
Jasmine
Dr. wrote: "Remington wrote: "I personally subscribe to the 'multiple civilization' theory. Or the idea that all forms of civilization, Stone Age, bronze age, pre-industrial, post-industrial, Information Age, ..."No problem. I guess all that traveling did me, and now you, some good.
-Remington
Hello, everybody! I read the thread and didn't see anyone pointing out the following: AI is not impacting human creativity now, save for those writers who insist on using it to generate text. The actual problem we have is that it is flooding the gates. I'll elaborate.AI cannot stop anyone from writing what one wants to write, yet what it takes me six months to write and another five to six months to revise, format, and publish, AI can produce times a million or more. All those titles are slop, incoherent, oftentimes nonsensical, howbeit formulaic—but they bury the books created by humans, so potential readers cannot find them. Have you ever tried to find a needle in a haystack? I have not and don't plan to.
Case in point: I have written three historical novels that are based on human experiences in the Italian Renaissance and the Minoan and Mycenaean Late Bronze Age, appeal to the senses and emotions, and are free of structural problems, have consistent POV deployment, strict historical compliance, rich and fully realized character arcs, and no syntactical or grammatical flaws. However, potential readers will never scroll down to see their cover thumbnails on page 300 or greater. I'm not a celebrity, an online influencer, or yet an established author. The time I use for social media is the time I lose in writing. Can any of you relate to this?
I used to be quite active on a book review site, app.revvue.co, but I have halted accessing it. It seems that 99% of the fiction listed is AI-generated—if not that, for those titles in which the blame clearly rests with the author's lack of craft, a large percentage of it. No, thank you! If I want a headache, I'll get it from tequila.
So, is AI impacting my writer's creativity? Not in the least. It is burying my novels under a mountain of crap. You authors, have you not noticed the same happening to your books?
Mehmet wrote: "Jane Reid (Mod) wrote : ''How will AI impact humanity as creative beings?''
Technology has taken us all down a fast track, and we mostly move along without questioning. We know that evolution is..."
I think Jane is asking very important questions. To me, this is not only about technology, but also about what it means to be human, where creativity comes from, and where human consciousness is moving.
I don’t really see AI as either a blessing or a curse by itself. I see it more like a knife. With a knife, you can cut bread, or you can harm someone. The real question is not only the tool, but the consciousness and intention of the person using it.
Throughout history, whenever a new tool replaced some part of human work or skill, people did not simply become empty. Usually, they had to move to another level. Maybe AI will do something similar. It may take over some technical parts of creation, but perhaps that will push human beings toward something deeper — something more connected to consciousness, soul, and true inspiration.
Because real creativity is not just producing something. Writing a book, painting a picture, or composing music is not only a technical output. Real art carries pain, joy, intuition, lived experience, searching, and something that comes from a place we cannot fully explain. AI can create form. It can arrange words, images, or melodies. But can it truly carry that inner vibration of the human soul? I’m not sure.
At the same time, I don’t think AI has to destroy creativity. If it is used consciously, it can support imagination, help develop ideas, open doors, and show new possibilities. But if it is used unconsciously, it can also make people lazy, increase imitation, and fill the world with fast but shallow creations.
So for me, education is very important here. We should teach children and young people not only how to use AI, but how to use it with awareness, ethics, and creativity. Not only “how does this work?” but also “why am I using it?”, “what is my intention?”, and “where is my own effort, voice, and soul in this?”
Maybe the artist of the future will not be the person who competes with AI, or the person who blindly depends on it. Maybe it will be the person who can use AI as a tool, but still bring their own consciousness, intuition, and search for truth into the work.
So I don’t see AI as purely a threat, or automatically as salvation. It is a powerful tool placed in human hands. What it becomes will depend, as always, on the level of consciousness behind it.
Cagla Meydan
''How will AI impact humanity as creative beings?''
Technology has taken us all down a fast track, and we mostly move along without questioning. We know that evolution is a natural process, and we will never be able to stop the train, but are we heading in the right direction?
AI is genius; however, we are only ever told about the benefits of the changes; the narrative being that AI is an invaluable resource that we can use to our advantage. In a few years' time, AI will be so integrated that we will not question it.
One of humanity's greatest gifts is our creativity, the ability to create with the power of our imagination. All inventions begin here. If our creativity is stripped away, what will we become?
Or, can AI be used to enhance our natural abilities?
If it only takes an idea, choice of voice and a narrative for AI to create a song, will musicians of the future bother to create their own music?
If an artist merely gives AI an idea, will they bother to express themselves through their art?
If AI can produce a book within twenty minutes, will authors bother to put their hearts and souls into writing?
Now, AI is clunky, but will people be able to differentiate between the real thing and artificial intelligence in the future? Will there come a time when no one can tell the difference, and we are all called to question our reality, not knowing what is real and what isn’t?
In the long run, will AI be a blessing or a curse to humanity?
Your thoughts are appreciated.
Jane Reid