Evaluation of ethical response to the use of artificial intelligence in aesthetics

IF 6.1 Q2 COMPUTER SCIENCE, ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
Matthew S.W. Silk
{"title":"Evaluation of ethical response to the use of artificial intelligence in aesthetics","authors":"Matthew S.W. Silk","doi":"10.1007/s00146-026-03158-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Public debate over generative AI has increasingly centered on the morality of AI-produced art, often framed as an issue of theft, deception, or the displacement of human creativity. This paper argues that such critiques frequently are overly broad or are based on misconceptions about how Gen-AI works. Using a pragmatic aesthetics framework, I argue that artistic expression should be understood as a form of human experience involving doing and undergoing, and that when humans employ AI systems as instruments within this experiential process, authorship and creativity remain fundamentally human. The paper also clarifies how objections grounded in copyright differ from those concerning artistic integrity or democratic access to technology. Rather than condemning AI art wholesale, a pragmatic framework invites inquiry into how generative technologies can enrich or impoverish the quality of experience and participation in art. This pragmatic orientation reframes the ethics of AI art from the search for fixed rules toward a contextual evaluation of consequences, emphasizing how creative tools, such as cameras or algorithms, reshape the possibilities of aesthetic expression and moral judgment.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":47165,"journal":{"name":"AI & Society","volume":"41 9","pages":"8543 - 8555"},"PeriodicalIF":6.1000,"publicationDate":"2026-06-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"AI & Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00146-026-03158-8","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Public debate over generative AI has increasingly centered on the morality of AI-produced art, often framed as an issue of theft, deception, or the displacement of human creativity. This paper argues that such critiques frequently are overly broad or are based on misconceptions about how Gen-AI works. Using a pragmatic aesthetics framework, I argue that artistic expression should be understood as a form of human experience involving doing and undergoing, and that when humans employ AI systems as instruments within this experiential process, authorship and creativity remain fundamentally human. The paper also clarifies how objections grounded in copyright differ from those concerning artistic integrity or democratic access to technology. Rather than condemning AI art wholesale, a pragmatic framework invites inquiry into how generative technologies can enrich or impoverish the quality of experience and participation in art. This pragmatic orientation reframes the ethics of AI art from the search for fixed rules toward a contextual evaluation of consequences, emphasizing how creative tools, such as cameras or algorithms, reshape the possibilities of aesthetic expression and moral judgment.

评价在美学中使用人工智能的伦理反应
关于生成式人工智能的公共辩论越来越多地集中在人工智能产生的艺术的道德上,通常被定义为盗窃、欺骗或取代人类创造力的问题。本文认为,这些批评往往过于宽泛,或者是基于对Gen-AI如何运作的误解。使用实用主义美学框架,我认为艺术表达应该被理解为一种涉及行为和经历的人类体验形式,当人类在这一体验过程中使用人工智能系统作为工具时,作者身份和创造力从根本上来说仍然是人类。本文还澄清了基于版权的反对意见与那些涉及艺术完整性或民主获取技术的反对意见是如何不同的。务实的框架不是全盘谴责人工智能艺术,而是邀请人们探讨生成技术如何丰富或削弱艺术体验和参与的质量。这种实用主义取向将人工智能艺术的伦理从寻找固定规则转向对结果的情境评估,强调创造性工具(如相机或算法)如何重塑审美表达和道德判断的可能性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
AI & Society
AI & Society COMPUTER SCIENCE, ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE-
CiteScore
8.00
自引率
20.00%
发文量
257
期刊介绍: AI & Society: Knowledge, Culture and Communication, is an International Journal publishing refereed scholarly articles, position papers, debates, short communications, and reviews of books and other publications. Established in 1987, the Journal focuses on societal issues including the design, use, management, and policy of information, communications and new media technologies, with a particular emphasis on cultural, social, cognitive, economic, ethical, and philosophical implications. AI & Society has a broad scope and is strongly interdisciplinary. We welcome contributions and participation from researchers and practitioners in a variety of fields including information technologies, humanities, social sciences, arts and sciences. This includes broader societal and cultural impacts, for example on governance, security, sustainability, identity, inclusion, working life, corporate and community welfare, and well-being of people. Co-authored articles from diverse disciplines are encouraged. AI & Society seeks to promote an understanding of the potential, transformative impacts and critical consequences of pervasive technology for societies. Technological innovations, including new sciences such as biotech, nanotech and neuroscience, offer a great potential for societies, but also pose existential risk. Rooted in the human-centred tradition of science and technology, the Journal acts as a catalyst, promoter and facilitator of engagement with diversity of voices and over-the-horizon issues of arts, science, technology and society. AI & Society expects that, in keeping with the ethos of the journal, submissions should provide a substantial and explicit argument on the societal dimension of research, particularly the benefits, impacts and implications for society. This may include factors such as trust, biases, privacy, reliability, responsibility, and competence of AI systems. Such arguments should be validated by critical comment on current research in this area. Curmudgeon Corner will retain its opinionated ethos. The journal is in three parts: a) full length scholarly articles; b) strategic ideas, critical reviews and reflections; c) Student Forum is for emerging researchers and new voices to communicate their ongoing research to the wider academic community, mentored by the Journal Advisory Board; Book Reviews and News; Curmudgeon Corner for the opinionated. Papers in the Original Section may include original papers, which are underpinned by theoretical, methodological, conceptual or philosophical foundations. The Open Forum Section may include strategic ideas, critical reviews and potential implications for society of current research. Network Research Section papers make substantial contributions to theoretical and methodological foundations within societal domains. These will be multi-authored papers that include a summary of the contribution of each author to the paper. Original, Open Forum and Network papers are peer reviewed. The Student Forum Section may include theoretical, methodological, and application orientations of ongoing research including case studies, as well as, contextual action research experiences. Papers in this section are normally single-authored and are also formally reviewed. Curmudgeon Corner is a short opinionated column on trends in technology, arts, science and society, commenting emphatically on issues of concern to the research community and wider society. Normal word length: Original and Network Articles 10k, Open Forum 8k, Student Forum 6k, Curmudgeon 1k. The exception to the co-author limit of Original and Open Forum (4), Network (10), Student (3) and Curmudgeon (2) articles will be considered for their special contributions. Please do not send your submissions by email but use the "Submit manuscript" button. NOTE TO AUTHORS: The Journal expects its authors to include, in their submissions: a) An acknowledgement of the pre-accept/pre-publication versions of their manuscripts on non-commercial and academic sites. b) Images: obtain permissions from the copyright holder/original sources. c) Formal permission from their ethics committees when conducting studies with people.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书