Are there holes in my argument?
Are there holes in my argument?

Are there holes in my argument?

I have a debate in British parliamentary format in a few days and it discusses artificial intelligence, specifically AI art. Here is my argument It is quite obvious that artificial intelligence is integrating rapidly into human life. This includes the art industry, a representation of the times we live in through vivid illustration. AI art is not only real art, it is art that showcases our innovation as a society and we must not abandon it or regret its spread accross mainstream media. The opposing side believes insert points the opposing side made. However, they are gravely mistaken. Insert rebuttals here

Moreover, I shall now proceed to elaborate extensively on the intrinsic value found within art generated by Artificial Intelligence.

To prove this, let's say if art gains value from backstories, then AI art is by definition inferior to original art and therefore should not be considered as competition. Notwithstanding, simplifying art's value to only its background, completely neglects the perspective and aesthetic appeal of the art itself. In today's fast-paced world, the relevance and impact of art extend beyond its backstory. Additionally, if art is valued solely for the art's sake, then AI art is playing on a level field and it should not matter if art is human or AI-generated.

Expanding on this notion, it's crucial to recognize that art appeals to a diverse range of tastes and preferences. While enthusiasts may deeply appreciate the intricate craftsmanship and countless hours invested in a human-made masterpiece, the broader casual population may prioritize aesthetic appeal above all else. This is similar to choosing between a meticulously handcrafted gourmet meal and a deliciously satisfying fast-food burger. In the end, both offer unique pleasures catering to different cravings. If we neglect and abandon AI art as a whole, people would still be incentivized to use it due to its cost-effectiveness and it would then be adapted and disguised as human art, giving it a severe disadvantage and defeating its purpose. Not only would this harm artists in the end but it would also completely sever integration between humans and AI and thus, push society back as a whole. This is a strong call for the equal and, if needed, distinctive treatment of AI art for artistic equality.

Can anybody try to find holes are refute what I am stating or add more validity and help me strengthen my argument for AI?

submitted by /u/Anishaiscool
[link] [comments]