Sandra-Catalina Branzaru

The recent development in technology, and the wide spread of AI tools (chatbots, large language models and tools such as ChatGPT or Midjourney) have raised several concerns with regards to the future of (especially creative) work, education (use of AI tools and plagiarism detection, use of robots in classrooms), healthcare (therapy chatbots), as well as childcare and eldercare (social robots). Creativity applies to different fields, such as art, science, sports, engineering, and research. It is also commonly found in daily activities such as cooking, joking, and cleaning. Most activities can be done in a creative way. So far, it has been traditionally assumed that art can only be created by human agents, which is why, perhaps as a design challenge, new AI tools such as Midjourney, DALL–E, CANs (Creative Adversarial Networks) and GANs (Generated Adversarial Networks) have been used to produce content such as photos, music, poetry, texts used in advertising, journalism, science and even in research projects or art projects. Recently, the fear that AI might replace artists translators and even researchers, has become a pressing issue. I argue that no putative criteria or any single putative criterion distinguishes AI from human creativity in a justified way. In this article I survey the most popular ones and find them controversial, lacking or both. In light of this, I believe that the impact of AI creativity on our lives and the policies suited for them ought to be reassessed open-mindedly.