AI won’t kill creativity — but it might dilute it, say experts

As generative AI becomes more sophisticated, fears loom over its impact on creativity. Will it replace human imagination? Or simply reshape how we define it?

Some argue that AI threatens to marginalize artists, writers, and musicians by offering “good enough” content on demand. But experts suggest the reality is more nuanced.

A neuroscientist in Pune counters this gloom. “Humans mimic too,” he argues. “Not all mutations are bad—some give rise to wings.” He points out the brain creates poetry, code, and music using just 20 watts of power—far more efficiently than any AI.

The ecological cost of AI is another growing concern. Training a single large model like GPT-3 can use over 700,000 litres of clean water in U.S. data centers, tripling in Asia, according to Professor Shaolei Ren. Add to that the electricity and fossil fuels consumed, and the environmental burden becomes undeniable.

Experts agree: AI is a powerful tool, but one with consequences. Like processed food, it may solve problems but create new ones. The key is to ask what kind of creativity we truly value—mass-produced efficiency or imperfect human originality.