Is AI killing art? No, but the human creative process still matters, Israeli study argues

OCTOBER 31, 2026 08:06For centuries, mastering an art form was inseparable from personal growth. A painter spent years learning to see the world before touching canvas, and a musician devoted decades to refining physical and emotional discipline.Today, generative AI can produce sophisticated compositions at the click of a button, shattering that age-old connection.But according to a new paper from Prof. Amit Zoran of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem (HUJI), this digital revolution isn’t rendering human artists obsolete; it is stripping away technical barriers so we can rediscover what made creativity meaningful in the first place.The key question is not whether AI can generate attractive paintings or music; it is whether the process of creating something has value that cannot be captured by the finished product.As AI becomes capable of producing sophisticated art in seconds, a new paper challenges us to rethink what makes human creativity valuable.PROF. AMIT ZORAN (credit: Courtesy)Zoran, who teaches and conducts research at HUJI’s The Rachel and Selim Benin School of Computer Science and Engineering, where he leads the Hybrid Design Lab, focuses on bridging the gap between emerging computational technologies (including AI, robotics, and 3D printing) and traditional human crafts, gastronomy, design, and consciousness.He earned a bachelor’s degree in Communication Systems Engineering at Ben-Gurion University of the Negev (BGU) in Beersheba and completed postdoctoral research at the prestigious Massachusetts Institute of Technology Media Lab, and also worked at Israel Aircraft Industries, followed by a master’s degree in industrial and product design at Jerusalem’s Bezalel Academy of Arts and Design.He published his paper in the journal AI & Society, titled “More than we can make: Generative AI, artistic forms, and artistic becoming.”Instead of focusing on whether AI-generated works qualify as art, Zoran argues that the significance of creativity lies not only in the finished product but also in the experiences that shape artists, audiences, and cultures.For centuries, producing sophisticated art required years of learning, experimentation, and personal development. A painter developed not only technical skills but also a way of seeing the world, while a musician refined both physical abilities and emotional expression. Generative AI is fundamentally changing this relationship, he insisted.Zoran introduces what he calls the “decoupling thesis,” arguing that AI “makes it possible to produce sophisticated artistic works without undergoing the personal development traditionally required to create them. Someone can now generate detailed illustrations without learning to draw or compose music without mastering an instrument.”“For centuries, creating art meant going through a process of learning, experimenting, and changing as a person,” he explained. “Today, AI allows us to produce sophisticated works without necessarily undergoing that journey. But this doesn’t mean that human creativity has lost its value. It means we need to rethink where that value lies.”“The real potential of AI is not just to help us produce more music, images, or designs, but to open new possibilities for how we experience, understand, and engage with the world around us,” he told The Jerusalem Post in an interview.Rather than eliminating creativity, Zoran argues that AI is shifting it toward new activities, including experimentation, interpretation, and collaboration with technology. Importantly, the value of art also extends beyond its creator, influencing how audiences perceive the world and how cultures develop.Human creativity has not lost its valueThe paper highlights creative projects that show how technology can enrich human experiences rather than simply generate more content. In one example, a tree becomes the center of an interactive artistic experience that combines smell, taste, visual projections, recorded sounds, and AI-generated music. Instead of merely producing digital content, technology helps participants engage with nature in new ways.The research also raises questions about how AI tools should be designed and evaluated. While current systems are often judged by speed, realism, and output quality, Zoran suggests considering whether they encourage curiosity, exploration, and new perspectives.“As AI makes artistic production increasingly accessible, the future of creativity may depend less on what people can make and more on what they can discover, experience, and become through the creative process. Instead of making human creativity irrelevant, AI may make it possible to rediscover what makes it meaningful,” he said.For artists, this could mean using the time saved by AI to experiment and develop richer experiences. For educational and cultural institutions, it could mean placing greater value on the creative process rather than focusing exclusively on finished products.Ultimately, Zoran argues that as AI makes artistic production increasingly accessible, the future of creativity may depend less on what people can make and more on what they can discover, experience, and become through the creative process.“Instead of making human creativity irrelevant, AI may offer an opportunity to rediscover what makes it meaningful,” he concluded.Asked if creativity is valuable because of the finished product, the process of making it, the intentions of the creator, the skills acquired, the emotions involved, or the effect on an audience, Zoran said it’s not the technical complexity but actually creating changes in the artist or the culture, not how we did it. “It doesn’t matter if I drew something myself or a computer did it – but the impact.”Asked whether someone could use AI to experience discovery, struggle, learning, and personal growth even if the system performs much of the technical work, he responded that “the experience behind it is important. We lose the experience and the authenticity. We have to think again. When musicians started using electric guitars, some said it didn’t sound good enough. But it became interesting when a computer was able to make it.”Does the effort itself confer value, or does the value come from what the person learns and experiences? “The effort creates maturity.” AI-generated art might provoke the same emotional response as art made entirely by a human, he continued.“Every era changed things. The Industrial Revolution changed the world. AI is the first technological revolution,” Zoran said. “I have faith in humanity, which finds a way to proceed. If there is painting on the wall of an ancient cave, with no name, there is a high level of art without credit.“Debates surrounding generative AI and creativity have largely focused on artifacts: Who or what produced a given image or text, whether machine outputs qualify as art, and how authorship and value should be understood. Today, art is capitalist, but it’s not the end of humanity. Maybe it’s not so important exactly who writes a good book.”While AI can bypass years of artistic training, it cannot replace the transformative experiences that give creativity its deeper meaning.“The research suggests that the future of art may lie less in producing impressive works and more in using technology to inspire exploration, meaningful experiences, and new ways of seeing the world. For centuries, creating art meant going through a process of learning, experimenting, and changing as a person.“Today, AI allows us to produce sophisticated works without necessarily undergoing that journey. But this doesn’t mean human creativity has lost its value. It means we need to rethink where that value lies. The real potential of AI is not simply to help us produce more images, music, or designs, but to open new possibilities for how we experience, understand, and engage with the world around us,” he concluded.Follow us on Google