Art vs. Science
May. 1st, 2008 09:55 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
mrlichI'm no scientist. Not in any real sense of the word. I am, however, not completely ignorant either. I listen to reason (most of the time).
Thus we come to the crux of a conflict that I've been waging in my daydreaming moments. I thought that I would open those thoughts to you, oh Great and Powerful Intarwebs, and seek your thoughts on the subject.
I've encountered a number of different articles over the years about different ways in which technology is replacing humans in the world of art. While this has been happening all over the world in a number of different industries, the world of art seems somehow different to me. Sure - robots can do dangerous jobs on an assembly line. Sure - they can provide recon on the battlefield. But I've worked on assembly lines. You don't need anything more creative or intellectual than a robot. I'm thankful that I've never had to step foot on a battlefield, but I understand the value of technology there.
When technology replaces us in the world of art? That's where I start to get really twitchy. People are creating robots that create 'graffiti'. Other robots are going to conduct a symphony.
I guess when it comes down to it, there's something in me that feels it's alright when an artist uses technology to create art, but a very large part of me feels like it's very not ok when technology 'creates' something and we allow it to be called art.
I know. I'm being a purist. I know that humans created the technology, so it could be argued that the final art is indirectly created by the real artist - the creator of the robot. It feels like watering down. It feels like the dissolution of what makes humanity something more than all the other creatures on the planet. It feels like we're willingly saying that there's no such thing as creativity.
And suddenly I feel like I know how those who are devoutly religious feel when confronted with the concept of Faith vs. Science.
I would really like to get some feedback here folks. How do you feel about this?
Thus we come to the crux of a conflict that I've been waging in my daydreaming moments. I thought that I would open those thoughts to you, oh Great and Powerful Intarwebs, and seek your thoughts on the subject.
I've encountered a number of different articles over the years about different ways in which technology is replacing humans in the world of art. While this has been happening all over the world in a number of different industries, the world of art seems somehow different to me. Sure - robots can do dangerous jobs on an assembly line. Sure - they can provide recon on the battlefield. But I've worked on assembly lines. You don't need anything more creative or intellectual than a robot. I'm thankful that I've never had to step foot on a battlefield, but I understand the value of technology there.
When technology replaces us in the world of art? That's where I start to get really twitchy. People are creating robots that create 'graffiti'. Other robots are going to conduct a symphony.
I guess when it comes down to it, there's something in me that feels it's alright when an artist uses technology to create art, but a very large part of me feels like it's very not ok when technology 'creates' something and we allow it to be called art.
I know. I'm being a purist. I know that humans created the technology, so it could be argued that the final art is indirectly created by the real artist - the creator of the robot. It feels like watering down. It feels like the dissolution of what makes humanity something more than all the other creatures on the planet. It feels like we're willingly saying that there's no such thing as creativity.
And suddenly I feel like I know how those who are devoutly religious feel when confronted with the concept of Faith vs. Science.
I would really like to get some feedback here folks. How do you feel about this?
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
My $0.02
Date: 2008-05-02 07:13 pm (UTC)I believe they can, see: http://deeptape.livejournal.com/480344.html
When Corinna and I went to Basel for the visionary conference, we dropped in on the Art Machines Machine Art exhibition at the Museum Tinguely.. Amazing stuff, I'll post pictures soon. But it raised the question of the artist moving creative agency further and further away from the original human artist. It's an interesting question.
Whether we call it "art" or not is a cultural consideration, IMHO. But whether it's creative, emotive, a creation of a conscious being, that's the real question, isn't it?
So let's go a step further. Can the processes and mechanisms of thought, emotion, and consciousness be codified and expressed in machine-executable form? Again I say yes.
Xtingu identifies the shortcoming of today's conductor robot, which falls short or expressing emotion, creating art, because the robot only does as it's programmed and that programming is limited. It is not programmed to be creative. It has a minimal model of the world and no capability for emergent behavior.
But I believe tomorrow's robot will display such creative behaviors. It will embody a synthetic consciousness that appropriately models what is going on in our heads. It will run process similar to the sensing, integrative, generative, and emotional processes of own organic machines. That kind of robot will create new works -- and those works will eventually be recognized by a future culture as art.
Re: My $0.02
Date: 2008-05-02 07:40 pm (UTC)In fact, I really have no problem calling that artistic creation art. If it's coming from a being (whether organic or otherwise) that has a sense of emotion and can... 'feel'? I have no problem with such things being called art.
"Whether we call it "art" or not is a cultural consideration, IMHO."
Again - I solidly agree. In fact, it's this that I believe is at the core of my fears. I fear that we're going to produce a wide range of 'conveyor belt art' from devices now and in the near future which will be called art by the masses who don't care about the definition of art.
This, to me, feels like a discredit to those who create art.
I look forward to seeing the pictures.