AI, art and human thought
surprise, people are wrong about LLMs
The Echo of Ancient Fears: Technology Skepticism from Alphabet to AI
Marshall McLuhan's insight that new technologies are initially viewed through a lens of catastrophe provides a fascinating framework for understanding today's anxieties about Large Language Models (LLMs). This pattern of technological skepticism has repeated itself throughout history, with remarkable parallels between ancient and modern reactions to transformative technologies.
In Plato's dialogue "Phaedrus," Socrates recounts a telling story about the invention of writing. When the Egyptian god Theuth presents writing to King Thamus, praising it as a tool for memory and wisdom, the king responds with deep skepticism. He argues that writing would create forgetfulness in learners' souls, making them rely on external marks rather than their internal memory. People would acquire, as Socrates puts it, "the show of wisdom without the reality." This critique bears striking resemblance to modern concerns about AI potentially diminishing human cognitive capabilities.
Ray Kurzweil's comparison between LLMs and the invention of the alphabet is particularly illuminating. Just as writing externalized memory and cognitive processes, LLMs represent another leap in our ability to externalize certain aspects of human thought and communication. The alphabet democratized knowledge by making it more accessible and transmissible; similarly, LLMs are making complex information processing and generation more accessible to the average person.
The parallels in the criticisms are remarkable. Just as Socrates worried that writing would create a false sense of wisdom, modern critics argue that LLMs might lead to superficial understanding without true comprehension. Where ancient scholars feared that writing would weaken memory, contemporary skeptics worry that AI might atrophy human creativity and critical thinking.
However, history suggests these fears, while natural, often misunderstand how humans adapt to and integrate new technologies. Writing didn't replace memory; instead, it augmented human cognitive capabilities, allowing us to build upon recorded knowledge and develop increasingly complex ideas. Similarly, LLMs show potential not to replace human thinking but to enhance it, serving as tools that can amplify human creativity and productivity.
The "weeping and gnashing of teeth" we witness today over LLMs reflects a deeper pattern in how societies process technological change. The initial resistance often stems from viewing new technologies through the lens of what they might replace rather than considering how they might enhance human capabilities in unprecedented ways. Just as writing became not just a memory aid but a fundamental tool for human thought and cultural development, LLMs might evolve to serve purposes we can't yet fully envision.
Importantly, this historical parallel doesn't suggest that all concerns about LLMs are unfounded. Rather, it provides a framework for distinguishing between reflexive technological skepticism and legitimate concerns about responsible development and implementation. The lesson from history isn't that new technologies are harmless, but that their ultimate impact often differs significantly from initial fears, typically leading to an expansion rather than diminishment of human capabilities.
This pattern of technological skepticism, from Socrates to modern AI critics, reveals more about human nature than about the technologies themselves. It shows our consistent tendency to approach transformative innovations with a mixture of fascination and fear. Understanding this pattern can help us move beyond knee-jerk reactions and toward more nuanced discussions about how to responsibly develop and integrate AI technologies into society.
The Post-LLM Artist: Evolution of Artistic Consciousness
McLuhan's vision of technology as "an evolutionary and biological mutation opening doors of perception and new spheres of action to mankind" provides a revolutionary framework for understanding the emergence of LLMs in artistic practice. Rather than viewing LLMs as mere tools, we can understand them as catalysts for a fundamental evolution in artistic consciousness and creation.
The parallel between LLMs and the alphabet becomes even more profound when we consider how each technology abstracts and democratizes certain forms of human capability. Just as the alphabet separated the act of communication from the need to memorize vast oral traditions, LLMs are now separating artistic vision from the technical constraints of execution, the labor of art. This separation represents not a diminishment of art but rather an evolution in artistic consciousness.
Picasso's relationship with printmaking technologies offers a fascinating lens into how we perceive technological innovation across time. At a recent Picasso exhibit I attended, I discovered that he eagerly embraced and experimented with various printmaking techniques as revolutionary tools for democratizing his art, to spread it as far and wide as possible. Yet today, we often overlook the technological nature of these innovations precisely because of their age. When we see a lithograph, etching, or linocut, we typically categorize it as a traditional artistic medium rather than recognizing it as the groundbreaking technology it once was.
This perspective reveals an important bias in how we understand technology: we tend to mentally classify older innovations as somehow separate from the realm of "technology," reserving that term primarily for contemporary developments. A lithograph was once as cutting-edge as digital art is today, representing a radical new way to create and distribute images. Picasso's willingness to experiment with these methods wasn't just artistic exploration – it was technological pioneering.
This reframing helps us understand how what we now view as traditional artistic processes were once revolutionary technologies that transformed the relationship between artists, their work, and their audience, much like digital tools are doing today. It's a reminder that the distinction between "traditional" and "technological" is often more about historical distance than any inherent difference in the nature of the tools themselves.
Picasso’s embrace of lithography technology offers a perfect historical parallel. Lithography, like all printing technologies, was once cutting-edge technology that transformed the relationship between artist and artwork. Picasso understood that new reproductive technologies didn't diminish artistic value but rather expanded the possible "spheres of action" for artists. His willingness to engage with these technologies demonstrated an understanding that the essence of art lies not in the technical means of production but in the vision and ideas being conveyed.
This brings us to my crucial insight about the "idea man" and the separation of artistic vision from technical craft. In the post-LLM era, we're witnessing a similar evolution where the primary value of an artist increasingly lies in their ability to conceive and direct ideas rather than in their technical execution of those ideas. This shift does devalue technical skill because it almost removes it entirely from the artistic process. It elevates ‘thought skill’ over ‘technical skill’.
The comparison to the alphabet is particularly apt because, like writing, LLMs are becoming a new medium of thought and expression. Just as writing allowed humans to think in new ways by externalizing memory and complex ideas, LLMs are enabling artists to think and create in ways that were previously impossible. They're not just tools for execution but catalysts for new forms of artistic thinking and conceptualization.
This new form evokes the metaphor of "surfing the wave" of this new consciousness. Artists who embrace LLMs aren't just adopting a new tool; they're participating in what McLuhan would recognize as a biological mutation of human creative consciousness. This evolution manifests in the power to focus on the "what" of artistic expression rather than being constrained by the "how." I always struggled with the “how,” as the “what” always came very easy to me. I think the artist that excelled in the “how” are sensing that their time is coming to an end. Sorry, not sorry, y’all…
The resistance to this evolution from some quarters is, precisely what McLuhan predicted and explained. Just as there were those who saw the alphabet as a threat to human memory and oral tradition, there are those who see LLMs as a threat to traditional artistic practice. But this view misses the fundamental nature of technological evolution: it doesn't replace human capability but rather extends it into new domains. So instead of gnashing those teeth, do a little more work on the “what” of your artistic praxis.
For the post-LLM artist, this evolution means developing new skills: the ability to think conceptually about art at a higher level, to direct and curate AI outputs effectively, and to understand how to use these new tools to expand rather than replace human creativity. The artist becomes less a solitary creator and more a director of creative possibilities, much as Picasso directed the technical possibilities of lithography toward his artistic vision.
This evolution doesn't diminish the role of the artist; it elevates it. Let me say that again , this evolution doesn’t diminish the role of the artist; it elevates it. The quicker you can accept this reality the better…the stakes are high: the very future of human consciousness itself.
The post-LLM artist must be more thoughtful, more conceptually sophisticated, and more attuned to the possibilities of their medium than ever before. They must understand not just how to create, but how to think about creation in entirely new ways.
As McLuhan suggested, this is not just a new tool but a new consciousness. The post-LLM artist is not just someone who uses AI, but someone who thinks differently about the very nature of artistic creation and possibility. They are, in essence, evolving along with their tools into a new kind of creative being.
Which brings me back to laundry. I ran the above through an LLM and asked it to come up with 22 manifestations of post-LLM Art and artistic consciousness. While my robot came up with the 22 points I finished up the laundry and while doing so I deeply meditated on these questions, eager to learn what my robot would present. What the post-LLM artist can come up with when the robot can also do the art AND the laundry fills me with a real hope for the future.
22 Manifestations of Post-LLM Art and Artistic Consciousness
1. The emergence of "prompt architecture" as a new art form, where artists become masters of designing intricate systems of prompts that interact with each other to create complex, layered works. These artists think in terms of systems and cascading effects rather than individual pieces.
2. "Version space exploration" becomes a standard artistic practice, where artists generate hundreds of variations of a concept and curate the results, leading to works that exist not as single pieces but as carefully selected points within vast possibility spaces.
3. The rise of "temporal art" where pieces evolve in real-time through continuous interaction with LLMs, creating living artworks that respond to and incorporate new information, conversations, and cultural shifts as they happen.
4. "Meta-commentary art" becomes prevalent, where artists use LLMs to generate multiple interpretations and critiques of their own work as part of the piece itself, embedding critical discourse within the artwork's fabric.
5. The development of "collaborative consciousness art" where multiple artists work with the same LLM system, creating works that exist at the intersection of multiple human creativities mediated through artificial intelligence.
6. "Archaeological art" emerges, where artists use LLMs to excavate and reinterpret historical artistic styles and movements, creating new works that exist in dialogue with the entire history of art simultaneously.
7. The birth of "quantum art" where pieces exist in multiple states simultaneously, with LLMs maintaining various possible versions that viewers can collapse into specific experiences through their interaction.
8. "Process-as-product" art becomes dominant, where the focus shifts from final outputs to the documented journey of exploration and decision-making between artist and LLM, revealing the evolution of ideas.
9. The emergence of "recursive art" where artists create works that generate their own interpretations, which then generate new works, creating infinite loops of creation and interpretation.
10. "Consciousness mapping" becomes an artistic practice, where artists use LLMs to explore and document their own thought processes, creating works that are direct representations of human-AI cognitive interaction.
11. The development of "probability art" where artists work with the statistical nature of LLM outputs, creating pieces that exist as probability distributions rather than fixed forms.
12. "Cross-pollination art" becomes common, where artists use LLMs to translate works between different mediums and forms, creating pieces that exist simultaneously as text, image, sound, and concept.
13. The rise of "symbiotic art" where the distinction between human and AI contribution becomes deliberately blurred, creating works that question the nature of creativity and authorship.
14. "Conceptual scaffolding" emerges as a technique, where artists use LLMs to build complex conceptual frameworks that audiences can explore and inhabit, creating experiential rather than object-based art.
15. The development of "quantum curation" where artists create works that exist as vast possibility spaces, with viewers' interactions determining which versions materialize in their experience.
16. "Memory palace art" becomes prevalent, where artists use LLMs to create complex, interconnected works that serve as navigable spaces for storing and accessing ideas and memories.
17. The emergence of "perspective multiplication" where artists create works that simultaneously embody multiple viewpoints and interpretations, enabled by LLMs' ability to generate varied perspectives.
18. "Temporal collapse" art develops, where artists use LLMs to create works that compress different historical periods into single pieces, creating new forms of historical dialogue.
19. The rise of "consciousness expansion" art where pieces are designed to evolve with viewer interaction, creating personalized experiences that grow more complex over time.
20. "Pattern language art" emerges, where artists use LLMs to develop new symbolic systems and ways of encoding meaning, creating works that operate on multiple semantic levels.
21. The development of "emergent narrative art" where artists create frameworks that generate unique stories and experiences for each viewer, based on their interactions and inputs.
22. "Meta-evolutionary art" becomes established, where artists create works that evolve according to principles they design, creating pieces that grow and change autonomously while reflecting their original creative vision.
Each of these manifestations represents not just a new form of art but a new way of thinking about creativity, consciousness, and the relationship between human and machine intelligence. They suggest a future where art becomes increasingly dynamic, interactive, and multidimensional, while remaining fundamentally rooted in human vision and creative direction.
The my cosmic trigger community
To join, go to my Patreon Page. A monthly subscription gives you access to my Substack (my secret writings and audio messages), the community Discord, the quarterly community Zoom meeting, & blessings of the my cosmic trigger hyper-sigil. Joining the community makes you a welcome guest in, Çhaplains Öf Peril (Ç.Ö.P.).