A Philosopher Argues That an AI Can Never Be an Artist

We have no idea how generalized intelligence emerges, but neutral nets have already confirmed that very simple nodes in an error-minimizing network can achieve very good approximations of specialized intelligence. We also know that our own brains are just networks of very simple nodes. Betting against the brain being nothing anything more than a computational network is a losing fight. I suspect that generalized intelligence is going to emerge from changes in the way neutral nets have their incentive/reward/error feedbacks handled, as well as improved generalizations a-la convolutional nn, but otherwise basically maintain the same premise. Then, the creativity that AI has already demonstrated can be said to have arisen from the consequence of a generalized consciousness, optimally with motivating factors approximating a human's, and this philosopher can shut the fuck up.