Art that fails to inspire thought has a simpler name: propaganda. It addresses consumers—not listeners, readers, or viewers—and prevents them from engaging in the act of interpretation. Propaganda hands down answers directly rather than encouraging their discovery. True art surpasses the artist precisely because it allows multiple interpretations: an answer sought one hundred years ago may yield entirely new discoveries a century later. Propaganda, in contrast, is uniform, monotonous, and devoid of individual interpretation. Its meaning is presented so clearly that it silences independent thought.

Art versus Propaganda

Hence, the true conflict has never been the contrast between supposedly sophisticated and trivial art forms, but rather between genuine art and propaganda. With the disintegration of aesthetic standards at the onset of modernity, consensus on whether art must indeed be good, true, or beautiful disappeared. Nevertheless, there are numerous examples in painting, music, and literature that—though perhaps not considered high culture—can certainly qualify as art due to their influence, inspiration, or at least latent metaphysical message, even if only as homage to an original.

Contemporary cultural institutions, however, predominantly produce propaganda. Propaganda here should not be narrowly understood as political in the sense of promoting “woke” or “right-wing” ideologies. Rather, it involves playing out familiar tropes that view nuanced thinking as problematic. The widespread impression today that films disseminate left-wing extremist propaganda results more from their form than their actual content. Thus, film projects immediately collapse once viewers detect their flimsy frameworks. A Latina Snow White or a Black D’Artagnan are merely superficialities.

The Problem with Contemporary Culture

The core issue is that contemporary art relies on schematic repetitions. Instead of inventing new narratives, it recycles old stories to convey messages that might have resonated thirty years ago—or earlier—but today quickly fade. They vanish because they rely on mere effects, superficial excitement, or empty spectacle, without truly addressing issues of significance to society. They fail to create inspiring characters with whom viewers—not propagandists—can identify, nor do they offer stories capable of cleansing people from their worries and anxieties, even if only for half an hour, rather than plunging them into depression.

Artificial Intelligence, therefore, is both a useful and dangerous tool. It duplicates copies instead of generating originality. It irons out clichés rather than questioning them. It follows existing patterns but provides no solutions. Its answers, as repetitions, amount precisely to propaganda.

Statement

Artificial Intelligence remains an important instrument: it can refine, correct, and even draft. Yet it cannot believe, cannot love, and cannot hope. It cannot invent new ways of speaking with God. That is the ultimate creative distinction separating the animate from the inanimate. Anyone who fails to grasp this also fails to understand the difference between programming languages and music.