Art: Brought to You by Creative Machines
- 745 Downloads
In this paper, I argue that machines can create works of art. My argument is based on an analysis of the so-called creative machines and focuses on technical functions and intentions. If my proposal is correct, then creative machines are technical artifacts with the proper function to bring about works of art. My account is based on sensible conceptual connections between makers, technical artifacts, intentions, and the creation of art. One upshot of the account presented here is that we do not need a new conceptual framework or dubious assumptions about artistic agency on part of machines in order to arrive at the conclusion that creative machines make art. I will conclude the paper with some remarks regarding the artistic value of items produced by creative machines.
KeywordsCreative machines Technical function Proper function Intentions Artworks Artistic value
- Barton, S. (2013). The human, the mechanical, and the spaces in between: explorations in human-robotic musical improvisation. Musical Metacreation: Papers from the 2013 AIIDE Workshop (WS-13-22), online: http://www.aaai.org/ocs/index.php/AIIDE/AIIDE13/paper/view/7466/7667; Accessed: April 28, 2016.
- Carter, J. (2012). Could robots be the writers of the future?, http://www.techradar.com/news/computing/could-robots-be-the-writers-of-the-future--1141399/2; Accessed April 28, 2016.
- Danto, A. C. (1981). The transfiguration of commonplace. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
- Davies, S. (2015). Defining art and artworlds. The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, 73(4), 375–384.Google Scholar
- Gatys L. A., Ecker, A., Bethge, M. (2015). A neural algorithm of artistic style, www.arXiv:1508.06576.Google Scholar
- Houkes, W., & Vermaas, P. E. (2009). Produced to use : combining two key intuitions on the nature of artefacts. Techné, 13(2), 123–136.Google Scholar
- Levinson, J. (1996). The pleasures of aesthetics: philosophical essays. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
- Levinson, J. (2007). Artworks as artifacts. In E. Margolis & S. Laurence (Eds.), Creations of the mind (pp. 74–82). Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Mitcham, C. (1994). Thinking through technology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
- Nanay, B. (2015). Cognitive penetration and the gallery of indiscernibles. Frontiers in Psychology, 5. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01527
- Sauchelli, A. (forthcoming). Aesthetic value, artistic value, and morality. In D. Coady, K. Brownlee, & K. Lipper-Rasmussen (Eds.), Blackwell companion to applied philosophy. Malden, Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
- Searle, J. R. (2000). Mind, language and society: philosophy in the real world. London: Phoenix.Google Scholar
- Simonite, T. (2015). Robot journalist finds new work on Wall Street. Technology review; https://www.technologyreview.com/s/533976/robot-journalist-finds-new-work-on-wall-street/; Accessed April 28, 2016.
- Sperber, D. (2007). Seedless grapes: nature and culture. In E. Margolis & S. Laurence (Eds.), Creations of the mind (pp. 124–138). Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Stecker, R. (2003). Definition of art. In J. Levinson (Ed.), Oxford handbook of aesthetics (pp. 136–155). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Sullins, J. P. (2006). When is a robot a moral agent? International Review of Information Ethics, 6(12), 23–30.Google Scholar
- Thomasson, A. (2007). Artifacts and human concepts. In E. Margolis & S. Laurence (Eds.), Creations of the mind (pp. 52–74). Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- US Department of Defense (2013). Unmanned systems integrated roadmap FY 2013–2038; Online: http://www.defense.gov/Portals/1/Documents/pubs/DOD-USRM-2013.pdf; Accessed: April 27, 2016.