Do we hike for the experience or the view?

A reflection on AI and the creative process

A search on Google suggests that of the approximately 650,000 people who climb Snowdon every year, the vast majority (around 80%) walk to the summit, whilst the remaining 20% take the train.

We’re often told that, as humans, we are always looking to take the path of least resistance - A.K.A the easy route. If climbing Snowdon was simply about seeing the wonderful view from the top, then, by this logic, you’d expect the stats to be the opposite way around.

Of course, there are various factors at play here. Perhaps one of the biggest barriers for those not using the train is cost - as of writing, a peak adult return ticket on their standard diesel service will set you back £48 - however, I don’t think this fully accounts for the disparity.

If you were to ask people why they chose to walk up Snowdon, rather than taking the train, I think many would say that it had something to do with a sense of achievement. Taking the train would, I dare suggest, be seen as an easy option but also a lesser option - i.e. you’re missing out on a crucial element of the experience.

In other words, I think there would be a sense of ‘earning’ the view at the top and a certain boost and fulfilment achieved from ‘sacrificing’ your effort to get it.

Where this all started

At the start of the year, I was checking through my emails and the weekly newsletter called Garbage Day, written by Ryan Broderick, landed in my inbox, which explored this idea with regard to the creative process.

This is what he said:

“I can’t speak for everyone, but my mind tends to treat writing an article, making a video, writing a song, cooking a meal, drawing an image, and, apparently, designing software the same way. It’s not a matter of just “generating” something perfect from my head, but exploring the tension that exists between what I’m imagining and the limitations of my stupid meat body.”

A little later, Ryan then adds:

“Vibe coding, like every new trend coming out of Silicon Valley, turns this process — the entire act of creativity, itself — into a slot machine. One more pull on the AI and maybe it will figure it out for you. You won’t understand how any of it works, of course, or feel particularly proud of what you’ve done, but maybe you’ll have something.”

Credit: Freepik (Licensed via Freepik Premium)

I really like this analogy of the slot machine. It perfectly sums up that loss of creative agency, as well as the potluck element of whether you’ll get the output you’re looking for.

I also think, when he’s talking about exploring tension between his creative mind and its physical output, he’s touching on something very profound that isn’t being talked about enough.

Do you want to know what another word for this ‘tension’ is? Learning. He’s talking about the pleasure and joy he gets from learning - both about himself and the world around him. I believe it's this tension, manifested in a more physical sense, that is also what propels people to walk up Snowdon. In other words, whether you're painting a picture or scaling a mountain, you're exploring the territory between what you know you can do and what you believe you can do but haven't yet proved (either to yourself, or the world).

The Great Dumbing Down

I think one of the most damaging fallouts from the rise of AI is the damage it could do to our abilities and opportunities to be creative.

There’s already strong evidence to suggest that smartphones have made us dumber as a society, and I’d bet good money that if we’re not careful, we’ll see a similar ‘dumbing down’ of our creative output (and intelligence more generally) as a society if it becomes our go-to well from which to draw upon.

Creativity is learned. Not a magical power.

I think part of the problem lies in how we understand creativity. For many, it is still seen as some sort of abstract superpower granted to the chosen few who came out of the womb and immediately reached for a paintbrush or writing pen.

In truth, creativity is as much of a skill as something like endurance in running. Sure, we have natural predilections and deviations in our neurology that might make some more naturally creative than others; however, it is still a skill that all of us can (and should) look to nurture and train.

I know it myself from my own experience, but I also know it from discussions with various creative people over the years. As a “creative”, the journey often starts with bad ideas, bad concepts, and flops. But that’s a necessary part of the journey that lets you learn more about yourself and the world around you, and ultimately, to better, and sometimes world-changing, creative output.

What could creativity look like in 2056?

So, let’s fast forward 30 years - what could creativity look like?

My fear is that, if AI is adopted as quickly and prevalently as it currently is, we risk being in a world where our creativity has been stunted. Instead of something that we get to regularly explore through work, as well as play, it is something that only a small minority of highly talented creative people get to explore professionally. These professional creatives would be outliers, those born with exceptional talent who honed their skills in spite of AI’s prevalence, not because of it.

Even if it isn’t quite as bad as the above, I still fear a likely scenario is a world in which the creative department at major companies is effectively turned into a Vegas-style slot machine hall where AI savvy, but creatively stunted, individuals get paid vast amounts of money to continuously ‘pull the lever’ on the AI slot machine and hope that, despite true creativity being outside of AI's capabilities, it generates something that resembles an original and creative version of whatever it was they were hoping to create.

Having now described both of those scenarios, I’m not sure which is worse.

Is this the future of creative departments? Credit: Freepik (Licensed via Freepik Premium)

What’s the jackpot?

To keep with the slot machine analogy, what’s the promised jackpot when it comes to AI? One of the early, and often touted, major benefits of AI is the idea that it will free up our time to work on things we “actually” want to work on. Whilst I agree that AI can be beneficial in terms of assisting with menial, and often mundane, administrative tasks, this does not apply when it comes to creativity.

Creativity is a skill that must be nurtured through the act of creation itself. As Maya Angelou said back in 1982:

"You can't use up creativity. The more you use, the more you have"

Crucially, AI tools like ChatGPT and Claude take away this ability to create for yourself. Instead, they use a bunch of code and technology you often don’t understand and spew out a finished product. Without being truly involved (and therefore personally connected) to the act of its creation, you miss out on the nutrients (i.e., the learning and physiological benefits) that feed your creativity and allow it to grow.

Conclusion

It may be tempting to simply say, "Well, let’s just not use ChatGPT for creative tasks.” The problem is that I don’t think it’s that simple.

If we keep going the way we’re going, then we’re going to see mass layoffs and a reduction in the workforce because of AI. Not only will this lead to major societal issues, but it will also greatly weaken a company's ability to be creative. Creativity is something that thrives in environments where perspectives are diverse, and collaboration is actively encouraged. If half of the workforce has been slashed and the creative department reduced to a handful of AI-savvy tech bros with mega-computers, then simply telling them to go and take a walk in the park and come up with a creative idea simply won’t cut it.

At this moment in time, I fear we’re building a world in which creativity is inadvertently cut off at the knees in the name of cost-efficiency and profits. Not only will this lead to a creativity crisis, I fear it will lead to a world in which we’re dumber, less fulfilled, and less able to appreciate the tops of the mountains we summit because we didn’t get to experience the hike it took to get there.

With all that said, I think we've got plenty of time to avoid this rather gloomy scenario and I still believe that AI can, and will, improve many aspects of our lives. I think AI also has a lot of potential to enhance the PR/marketing sector and my own work as a PR professional. This is something I'm actively exploring and plan to discuss in upcoming blogs.

In the meantime, please share your own thoughts and ideas in the comments below - what do you see as the risks and opportunities with regard to AI and creativity? In an AI-integrated world, how do we ensure that we're still scaling proverbial mountains and learning and growing through that process?