On Saturday, the discussion on artificial intelligence in art took place at the Harvard College Debating Union, hosted by the Yale Conversation Association.
The session commenced with a keynote address by Professor Shelly Kagan, focusing on his utilization of ChatGPT in exploring philosophy. Kagan engaged the audience by presenting the essays generated by the AI tool through interactive audience participation and logical puzzles.
Kagan remarked that while the AI-generated content possessed a philosophical tone, it ultimately lacked substantial meaning, describing it as “clear nothingness.”
Throughout the event, the YDA team led arguments against the use of AI in the arts, with Harvard’s team advocating in favor. Both sides referenced recent developments such as the SAG-AFTRA initiative, Pixar’s visual effects, and the utilization of DALL-E in their discourse.
Harvard’s team comprised Sam Jones, Julia Shepard, and Theo Datta, while Yale was represented by Lauren Cho, Ryan Gumlia, and Anish Beeram. The panel of judges included Kagan, Tamar Gendler, and Karen Goodrow.
Cho initiated Yale’s stance against AI in art, highlighting the short- and long-term implications while drawing parallels to current events. She contended that AI distorts the essence of art by offering a mere “mechanical duplication,” asserting that “AI is not a tool” and emphasizing the precedence of human creativity.
Jones, from Harvard, countered by underscoring the benefits of AI in art creation, emphasizing its role as another form of artistic expression that complements human creativity. He argued that AI expands artistic possibilities, making art more accessible to individuals, including those with disabilities.
Gumlia countered by asserting that AI strives to establish its artistic identity, challenging the notion that it produces inferior artworks. Shepard from Harvard argued against the oversaturation of the art market by AI, maintaining that human choice and diversity in art consumption remain paramount.
Beeram and Datta from Yale dissected Harvard’s arguments, highlighting contradictions and emphasizing AI’s potential to diversify the creative landscape.
Following the debate’s conclusion, Harvard was declared the victor by Kagan. The YDA organizers emphasized the educational value of such debates in fostering philosophical growth among students and audience members.
The interactive nature of the debate allowed for a comprehensive exploration of diverse viewpoints, providing the audience with a nuanced understanding of the subject matter from both institutions.
Members of the Harvard team expressed appreciation for the unique debate format, acknowledging its role in promoting thorough research and encouraging deeper engagement with the topic at hand.
