I disagree, at a certain point the AI will be able to create new things for me. To think only humans have some innate fundamental notion of creativity is foolish, in my opinion. We're just biological machines, if you follow the physicalist school of thought.
I don't understand why you (and others) think this is an important point, though. Let's say, for the sake of argument, not just that you're correct, but that we're not even made of flesh. That we're actual robots called "humans".
I don't see how that changes anything. I'd still prefer "human" communication over communication from a different machine pretending to be "human".
Why? Because what others of my species/model feels and thinks has a unique importance and meaning to me, and having fake versions of that communication around reduces my connection to others of my species/model and devalues the society of them that I am a part of.
That's good for you, I never claimed otherwise, that one shouldn't have an affinity for their own species. My claim was merely that nothing about creativity is innately and only a human property.
Comments
I disagree, at a certain point the AI will be able to create new things for me. To think only humans have some innate fundamental notion of creativity is foolish, in my opinion. We're just biological machines, if you follow the physicalist school of thought.
I don't understand why you (and others) think this is an important point, though. Let's say, for the sake of argument, not just that you're correct, but that we're not even made of flesh. That we're actual robots called "humans".
I don't see how that changes anything. I'd still prefer "human" communication over communication from a different machine pretending to be "human".
Why? Because what others of my species/model feels and thinks has a unique importance and meaning to me, and having fake versions of that communication around reduces my connection to others of my species/model and devalues the society of them that I am a part of.
That's good for you, I never claimed otherwise, that one shouldn't have an affinity for their own species. My claim was merely that nothing about creativity is innately and only a human property.
Humans are the ones who created the very AI that you're talking about. The AI is not an act of nature but something made real by human creativity.
The claim is not "humans don't have creativity," the claim is that "only humans having creativity (or the potential for creativity) is false."