{"id":{"repo_id":"queens","oai_identifier":"oai:queensu.scholaris.ca:1974/36397"},"canonical_url":"https://search.dev.ndltd.org/etd/queens/oai:queensu.scholaris.ca:1974/36397","repository":{"repo_id":"queens","name":"Queens University","base_url":"https://qspace.library.queensu.ca/server/oai/request"},"display":{"title":"Art, Authorship, and Artificial Intelligence","abstract":"Scholars have recently taken interest in the phenomenon of AI art. I engage a variety of questions surrounding this topic, especially those pertaining to the art status of AI-generated work and how we might adjudicate authorship in such cases. I begin by arguing that according to contemporary accounts of art, some AI-generated images can count as artworks. I contend that it makes more sense to conceive of such popular works of AI art as bad art rather than non-art. Next, I argue that some AI-generated artworks do possess unique aesthetic properties. I show that by deploying a technique I call bias-prompting, artists are able to exploit the algorithmic bias of AI systems to generate artworks that possess an aesthetic feature I call misalignment. I then consider whether AI is an artistic medium or artform and argue that AI is the vehicle through which the artistic medium and artform of AI art is expressed. I conclude by suggesting that in the case of AI-generated texts there is a curator in place of an author. Whereas an author creates what I call Traditional Texts, a curator discovers what I call Artificial Texts. I argue that the only theory of authorial intent that can explain how Artificial Texts acquire literary meaning is Postulated Author Hypothetical Intentionalism.","abstract_html":"Scholars have recently taken interest in the phenomenon of AI art. I engage a variety of questions surrounding this topic, especially those pertaining to the art status of AI-generated work and how we might adjudicate authorship in such cases. I begin by arguing that according to contemporary accounts of art, some AI-generated images can count as artworks. I contend that it makes more sense to conceive of such popular works of AI art as bad art rather than non-art. Next, I argue that some AI-generated artworks do possess unique aesthetic properties. I show that by deploying a technique I call bias-prompting, artists are able to exploit the algorithmic bias of AI systems to generate artworks that possess an aesthetic feature I call misalignment. I then consider whether AI is an artistic medium or artform and argue that AI is the vehicle through which the artistic medium and artform of AI art is expressed. I conclude by suggesting that in the case of AI-generated texts there is a curator in place of an author. Whereas an author creates what I call Traditional Texts, a curator discovers what I call Artificial Texts. I argue that the only theory of authorial intent that can explain how Artificial Texts acquire literary meaning is Postulated Author Hypothetical Intentionalism.","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Vlaad, Sofie"],"institution":null,"degree_name":null,"degree_level":null,"degree_discipline":null,"degree_department":"Philosophy","school":null,"contributors":[],"advisors":["Stinson, Catherine"],"committee_chairs":[],"committee_members":[],"year":2026,"date_issued":"2026-05-05","date_published":"2026-05-05","updated_at":"2026-07-27T20:35:19Z","subjects":["Philosophy","AI","Art"],"languages":["eng"],"rights":[],"rights_urls":[],"identifier_entries":[]},"links":{"outbound_url":"https://hdl.handle.net/1974/36397","outbound_label":"Handle","outbound_source":"dc:identifier.uri"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:contributor.department","label":"Department","values":["Philosophy"]},{"key":"dc:contributor.supervisor","label":"Supervisor","values":["Stinson, Catherine"]},{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Vlaad, Sofie"]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:date.accessioned","label":"Dc Date Accessioned","values":["2026-05-05T17:46:40Z"]},{"key":"dc:date.issued","label":"Date","values":["2026-05-05"]},{"key":"dc:type","label":"Dc Type","values":["thesis"]}]},{"id":"subjects_keywords","label":"Subjects and Keywords","entries":[{"key":"dc:subject","label":"Dc Subject","values":["Philosophy","AI","Art"]}]},{"id":"language_rights","label":"Language and Rights","entries":[{"key":"dc:language.iso","label":"Language (ISO)","values":["eng"]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier.uri","label":"Identifier URI","values":["https://hdl.handle.net/1974/36397"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description.abstract","label":"Abstract","values":["Scholars have recently taken interest in the phenomenon of AI art. I engage a variety of questions surrounding this topic, especially those pertaining to the art status of AI-generated work and how we might adjudicate authorship in such cases. I begin by arguing that according to contemporary accounts of art, some AI-generated images can count as artworks. I contend that it makes more sense to conceive of such popular works of AI art as bad art rather than non-art. Next, I argue that some AI-generated artworks do possess unique aesthetic properties. I show that by deploying a technique I call bias-prompting, artists are able to exploit the algorithmic bias of AI systems to generate artworks that possess an aesthetic feature I call misalignment. I then consider whether AI is an artistic medium or artform and argue that AI is the vehicle through which the artistic medium and artform of AI art is expressed. I conclude by suggesting that in the case of AI-generated texts there is a curator in place of an author. Whereas an author creates what I call Traditional Texts, a curator discovers what I call Artificial Texts. I argue that the only theory of authorial intent that can explain how Artificial Texts acquire literary meaning is Postulated Author Hypothetical Intentionalism."]},{"key":"dc:description.degree","label":"Dc Description Degree","values":["PhD"]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["Art, Authorship, and Artificial Intelligence"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:contributor.department":["Philosophy"],"dc:contributor.supervisor":["Stinson, Catherine"],"dc:creator":["Vlaad, Sofie"],"dc:date.accessioned":["2026-05-05T17:46:40Z"],"dc:date.issued":["2026-05-05"],"dc:description.abstract":["Scholars have recently taken interest in the phenomenon of AI art. I engage a variety of questions surrounding this topic, especially those pertaining to the art status of AI-generated work and how we might adjudicate authorship in such cases. I begin by arguing that according to contemporary accounts of art, some AI-generated images can count as artworks. I contend that it makes more sense to conceive of such popular works of AI art as bad art rather than non-art. Next, I argue that some AI-generated artworks do possess unique aesthetic properties. I show that by deploying a technique I call bias-prompting, artists are able to exploit the algorithmic bias of AI systems to generate artworks that possess an aesthetic feature I call misalignment. I then consider whether AI is an artistic medium or artform and argue that AI is the vehicle through which the artistic medium and artform of AI art is expressed. I conclude by suggesting that in the case of AI-generated texts there is a curator in place of an author. Whereas an author creates what I call Traditional Texts, a curator discovers what I call Artificial Texts. I argue that the only theory of authorial intent that can explain how Artificial Texts acquire literary meaning is Postulated Author Hypothetical Intentionalism."],"dc:description.degree":["PhD"],"dc:identifier.uri":["https://hdl.handle.net/1974/36397"],"dc:language.iso":["eng"],"dc:subject":["Philosophy","AI","Art"],"dc:title":["Art, Authorship, and Artificial Intelligence"],"dc:type":["thesis"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-27T20:35:19Z"}