Should generative AIs and image generation models be desired in arts?

This paper critically engages with James Brusseau’s article How AI Generates Creativity from Inauthenticity and discusses the role of generative artificial intelligence in artistic settings. More specifically, it argues against the author’s points that propose an added value of AI generated art in comparison with traditional, man-made art. In order to argue against his points, the paper defends the idea of prioritising the artistic process over the creative output itself, with the latter being the consequence of the former but not necessarily being the one that adds value nor meaning to the piece. This initial concept will be repeatedly used (whether explicitly or implicitly) as one of the main overarching ideas when discussing counterarguments to those of the author, although more case-specific arguments will of course be presented. As a part of said arguments, the paper will bring up two different academic research papers and critically engage with them as well, those research papers being The Cyber-Creativity Process: How Humans Co-Create with Artificial Intelligence, by Giovanni Emanuele Corazza and Why AI Art Is Not Art – A Heideggerian Critique, by Karl Kraatz & Shi-Ting Xie. Not only that, but the paper also presents an alternative, more ethical role that generative AIs may have in artistic settings without erasing nor devaluating the artistic process itself.