Find out and Describe are Computers Really Creative? (Essay Sample)

Are Computers really Creative?NameInstructorInstitutionDate
Are Computers really Creative?
Creativity has two fundamental aspects that include inception of a new or novel idea and its inclusion into a relevant domain for implementation. Therefore, creativity is defined as both the creation of a new novel idea or recognition of a new pattern under domain-specific standardized rules, symbols, and procedures and its selection by domain experts that consider it novel for inclusion into a relevant domain to solve a particular identified problem (Czikszentmihalyi, 1996; 1997). Boden (2009) simplified creativity by defining it as “the ability of generate novel, and valuable, ideas” (p.24), where valuable may mean interesting simple, complex, or beautiful, while ideas might include either ideas such as stories, interpretations, concepts, and theory or artifacts such as sculptures, images, and house among others. On the other hand novel has two distinct and important meanings which include psychological creativity and historical creativity. Boden (2009) explained the former as the ability to ability to create something that is new to the creator, irrespective of the number people who might be aware of the idea. The latter is the ability to create something new that has never occurred before. Boden (2009) claimed that creativity is a“feature of human intelligence in general“(p.24) suggesting that creativity exhibited by computers only mimics human intelligence.
Multiple AI research studies have shown that computer models have designed to create ideas in various fields furthering the notion that computers can be creative (Boden, 2004). Boden (2009) argued that there is an increasing desire within the scientific community to design and build information technology (IT) tools to influence, accelerate, and facilitate creativity. This desire has led to the creation of power AI programs savvy in various fields, producing outcomes that even domain experts cannot match. For instance, Deep Blue, a chess Artificial intelligence program, produced novel combinations of moves that even world champion Kasparov could not match. Moreover, other AI programs with chemical knowledge have exhibited the ability to come up with valuable new suggestions likely to have pharmaceutical benefits. On the other hand, Lenat (1983) stated that an AI program that was developed a quarter a century ago exhibited rare creativity aspects by designing a three-dimensional silicon chip, and awarded a patent- signifying that the invention was not obvious even to the domain experts. Lastly. Boden (2009) stated that the AARON program created beautifully coloured drawing, prompting praise from human originator who described the program as a “worldclass colourist” because of its ability to come up with colour schemes that even the human originator could nit have the courage to use.
In spite of the above accomplishments by AI programs, hard-headed scientists, doubt—or even deny outright that computer model designs or AI are creative. Boden (2009) claimed that although computer models’ performance might match superlative human examples, there is no computer model that can be really creative because creativity entirely depends on the programmer. He insisted that programmers can create computer models to make novel combinations of already existing or familiar concepts but computer models cannot generate or create and prune the generated combinations into a manner that many of them are valuable. The rationale behind their inability is the fact that creativity requires rich and subtle structured concepts that can only be built over time, a requirement that can only be achieved by human beings (Boden, 2009).
AI programs have access to a wide range of factual information or knowledge and concepts stored in databases and use inferential and interactive power from the semantic web (Boden, 2009). Even if they use these resources they cannot sensibly and aptly to compare with combination that human beings generate through linguistically and culturally sensitive abilities. This explains why computer-based creativity is psychological-based, that is, drawing scientific generalizations that were first discovered centuries ago, because it is not mandatory to match all the previous achievements of human beings. Nevertheless, it does not refute the possibility of computer models exhibiting some elements of creativity such as novelty but could be argued that they can only make novel combinations of previously stored concepts because they lack human beings’ ability because unlike human beings, they do not have a rich store of world knowledge including cultural knowledge that promotes...