progression as the foundation of true creativity?
      After my final exam and a bit of discussion as to what differentiates Artificial creativity from human creativity - a few things came up; originality, uniqueness, progression, error/accident

In this discussion I realized that although AI is capable of what seems to be creativity -  Aaron creating original works with no human input, the AIs creative abilities do not grow - there is not progression in the style or subjects of the work.

why?

     human creativity progresses, artists experiment with lines, colors, realism, abstractions, etc. They make the wrong line, spill paint, experiment with different movements, techniques and medias. Their perception of what they are trying to represent changes with their life experiences. Computer programs and artificial intelligence are not capable of this; they are made to do completely the opposite. They are made to not err, to follow a certain program, with computers there are no accidents or trial and error. If they do err and there is no gained accidental knowledge.

Examples of fallacies in propaganda:

Both of these propaganda ads from World War II employ the same logical fallacy, the false dilemma fallacy - this fallacy creates a false sense of urgency in an audience and makes them believe that there are only two possibilities. The dilemma is false because it represents a distortion of the actual state of affairs and forces the audience to choose between two alternatives, where one of them is usually unpleasant/evil/negative.

this ads intention is to make people believe that if they do not join a car-sharing club they are joining Hitler and supporting the Nazi army. The choices are car club or Hitler, there are no other options.

this ad only poses two options, buy "Victory bonds" or the Nazi's will get your baby. If you do not buy bonds you will not be able to keep your children/family safe. 

    Along the topic of transhumanism, my group and I have been discussing human creativity and whether or not it can be accomplished by AI. And if AI were capable of creativity wouldn't it only be the product of human creativity, wouldn't it merely mimic our own creativity?

    While dealing with these questions I discovered that there is AI that is creative. Aaron is a computer program designed by artist and art professor Harold Cohen. Cohen has been working on the art creating program since 1973. "It's roughly 1.5 megabytes of LISP code, and this ever-evolving project has spawned articles, college lectures and an entire book analyzing just what Aaron is and does." Aaron draws and paints stylized still lifesand portraits of human figures out of its programmed "imagination." No images or additional human input are necessary.

Liberty and Friends, 1985. Ink and dyes on paper, 22x30 inches.

Meeting On Gauguin's Beach, 1988. Oil on canvas, 90x68 inches

   

Transhumanist Art

     "Transhumanist art is an art movement which focuses on the concept of transhumanity, a transitional stage in a perceived progression from human to transhuman to posthuman. First named in 1983 by Natasha Vita-More, transhumanist art claimed a role for artists as purveyors of futuristic aspiration and visionary thinking in an era of scientific and technological challenge, questioning traditional roles of the artist, the era of modern art and conventional aesthetics. Instead its proponents advocate a future-oriented aesthetics, often reflecting transdisciplinary works in art, science and technology."

Transhumanist Arts represent the aesthetic and creative culture of transhumanity.
Transhumanist Artists are developing new and varied modes of art.
Our aesthetics and expressions are merging with science and technology in
designing increased sensory experiences.

Transhumans want to improve and extend life.
We are designing the technologies to improve and extend life.
Emotions are integral to our senses and understanding.
We are designing the technologies to enhance our senses and understanding.

The transhumanist ecology and freedom exercises self-awareness and self-responsibility.
If our art represents who we are, then let us choose to be transhumanist
not only in our bodies, but also in our values.
Transhumanist Artists embrace the creative innovations of transhumanity.
We are ardent activists in pursuing infinite transformation, overcoming death and exploring the universe. 

Transhumans want to improve and extend life.
We are designing the technologies to improve and extend life.
Emotions are integral to our senses and understanding.
We are designing the technologies to enhance our senses and understanding.

As Transhumanist Arts come into focus
As more artists join our efforts
As more designs are produced
As more music is composed
As more stories are written
As the tools and ideas of our art continue to evolve,
So too shall we.

-Natasha Vita-More

Pin up - Anatomy - Fernando Vicente

Gheisa - Anatomy - Fernando Vicente

“You are free to speculate, as you wish, about the philosophical meaning of 2001: A Space Odyssey.” - Stanley Kubrick

     I'm not really even sure how to write a short paragraph about or attempt to explain 2001. As Kubrick said we are free to speculate about the meaning behind the film and I'm inclined to believe I'm far from the only one who has felt at a loss for words (or lack, really) at this proposition to do so.

     Every time I try to analyze the film or interpret it's symbols I find myself speculating more and ending up with a seemingly endless list of possible interpretations. One theory I've toyed with was that Kubrick was presenting the argument that human evolution and our endless movement forward will eventually lead to and be the cause of our demise. The ultimate goal, Nietzche's Übermensch, will lead to a world where the "superhuman" is not human at all, and the necessity for human beings is questionable.

     Man's evolution is founded on his greatest creation; the tool. They evolve together. The evolution of man and tool are interdependent We see this in Kubrick's film; the apes discover tools to defeat their competitors. Fast forward to 2001 and man is surrounded by tools, he depends on them, they are the symbol and product of his evolution, they allow him to explore beyond the limits of earth to not only win and claim sources of food and water over other tribes but to claim the universe. 

     The ultimate tool is HAL 9000, a computer ---a tool who believes he is human, or more accurately, believes he is better than humans. At the end of their evolution the ultimate tool no longer needs man. HAL tries to replace man; he attempts to take over the mission for fear that the humans are incapable of properly carrying it out. 

     After our in class discussion/explanation of transhumanism and the questions that arose from this discussion, I couldn't help but remember this TEDtalk I had watched. 

     One of the questions that was presented was the question of at what point do human beings cease to differ from computers? Are we able to replicate the human brain to the point that there is no difference in the capabilities of a human being vs. a computer (e.g. Watson on Jeopardy)? Can we program computers to replicate the responses of human beings to the point that their reactions are indiscernible from the reactions and emotions we would have? Can computers one day have emotion?

    From these sort of questions the topic of creativity and art came up. Some of the class argued that art/creative ability and the ability to appreciate art was something unique to human beings. Others argued that this sort of creativity could one day be mimicked by computers programmed with creativity, that works of art such as the Mona Lisa or a symphony by Beethoven were bound to be created as human beings evolved and refined their creative abilities. 

     This TEDtalk, by Dennis Dutton, approaches the idea of beauty and art from a Darwinian perspective. Dutton proposes that beauty, natural and artistic, are not "in the eye of the beholder" but that tastes for beauty that transverse cultures and time are proof that there is universality in beauty. According to Dutton, this universality can be explained by a evolutionary refinement of aesthetic and artistic taste. "For moderns, virtuoso technique is used to create imaginary works in fiction and movies and to express intense emotions in movies painting and dance, but still one fundamental trait of the ancestral personality persists in our aesthetic cravings--- the beauty we find in skilled performances. Human beings have a permanent innate taste for virtuoso displays in the arts; we find beauty in something done well." ---Basically, great art is reflective of desirable traits such as skill, intelligence and ability.
     It is beneficial for us to be attracted to a great work of art because it is representative of the artist's ability. Our ability to appreciate and create works of art is merely an evolutionary development; one that helps us select a suitable mate or environment to live in.