After helping themselves to Thai food and settling onto couches and chairs arranged in a circle, participants introduced themselves and, when prompted, offered one word describing how they feel about AI right now.
Responses varied, but many conveyed a sense of unease: “Extremely curious.” “Anxious.” “Concerned.” “Optimistic.” “Apprehensive.” “Scared.” “Skeptical.” “Disgusted.”
The evening event, “Human Creativity in the Age of AI,” was part of the McKeen Center’s What Matters series, a campus program that brings students, staff, faculty, and community members together to talk about issues on people's minds.
“These conversations bring people who might not otherwise be in a room together into the same space to have conversations on topics that matter to us or to the world,” said Moana Gregori ’26.
Gregori, with Sam Borne ’26, is a What Matters fellow for the McKeen Center. “We invite you to approach the conversation with curiosity,” she added.
Borne encouraged participants to feel free to disagree, noting that respectful debates are part of the process. “We’re talking about one of the most pressing issues of our time—what is happening with AI and creativity, and we probably have a lot of different opinions,” he said. “But whatever the solution with AI and creativity is, we need to be able to talk about it together, so we’re excited to practice that tonight.”
An earlier What Matters event this semester examined ÁñÁ«ÊÓƵ's community norms and standards; the next will focus on student activism. Gregori and Borne also launched a new What Matters format to encourage participants to take a walk while chatting about weighty matters like immigration, gun safety, and economic inequality.
For the AI exchange of ideas, Gregori and Broene invited and Reed Johnson to help get the conversation flowing. Workman is one of ÁñÁ«ÊÓƵ's two post-baccalaureate AI fellows, and Reed Johnson, a senior lecturer in Russian, East European, and Eurasian studies, is researching people’s attitudes toward AI-generated music, visual art, and literature.
After participants shared their initial feelings on the topic, Workman presented a short quiz. She played snippets from three songs and asked attendees to guess whether they were created by AI, humans, or a combination—and then to share with their neighbor how they reached their conclusions.
It was difficult to tell the difference. Only one student in the room got all three correct. Over the next ninety minutes, the students examined what it means to live in an age when computers can make art that is indistinguishable from human-made work.
One said he has misgivings, even though he thought AI has a role to play in creativity. Many others pointed to how much technology—like software and apps, phone cameras, and high-performance computers—has already helped to produce art we admire and consider deeply human.
Yet many expressed a feeling of “irk” or “ickiness” when encountering works known to be created by AI—or something that feels like it is “posing as human.” As one student put it, “You want to listen to music or see art that took effort.”
The conversation then shifted to whether AI “democratizes” art by enabling more people to create and afford it, or whether what makes art meaningful is the constraints under which it is made and how rare it is.
Johnson wondered whether AI might power a surge in human creativity—if used as an assistant or tool, or if it reduces the daily drudgery of working lives to give people time and space for inspiration.
Others worried about what AI might be doing to our thinking—whether our minds will deteriorate the more we rely on smart machines to solve problems or generate ideas (like essay prompts). Already, some noted, Google and smartphones have diminished our ability to memorize facts.
Mauricio Cuba Almeida ’27, a neuroscience and music major, explained that he came out for the evening discussion because he anticipates AI will play a big role in whatever career he enters. “In any field, it’s important to understand AI to apply it ethically,” he said.
