Evaluating AI art through Kantian aesthetics

Volkan Davut Mengi

doi:10.46372/arts.1714896

EN TR

Evaluating AI art through Kantian aesthetics

Abstract

This theory-philosophical study explores the notion of artistic value in the context of artificial intelligence (AI)through Immanuel Kant’s concept of “disinterested aesthetic judgment.”It argues that the aesthetic value of an artwork is independent of its origin, whether human-made or algorithmically generated. Rather than empirical data, the research relies on a logical critique and close reading of Kant’s Critique of Judgment in conjunction with AI-generated art. Key Kantian ideas such as disinterestedness, purposiveness without purpose, and universality without a concept are reinterpreted to support the view that authorship and intention are irrelevant to aesthetic judgment. From this perspective, critiques of AI art based on its non-human origin lose validity. The study concludes that an artwork’s abstract form and its effect on the viewer’s cognitive faculties are sufficient grounds for aesthetic appreciation, offering a universal and author-independent model for evaluating artistic merit.

Keywords

Kantçı estetikle yapay zeka sanatının değerlendirilmesi

Abstract

Sanatsal değerin Yapay Zeka (YZ) varlığındaki tek boyutlu çerçevesi, Immanuel Kant’ın “çıkar gözetmeyen estetik yargı” anlayışı doğrultusunda bu kuramsal-felsefi çalışmada incelenmiştir. Çalışmanın temel amacı bir sanat eserinin estetik değerinin kökenine, insan ya da algoritma kaynaklı oluşuna, bağlı olmadığını göstermektir. Ampirik araştırmalar yürütmek yerine, çalışma mantık eleştirisine dayanmakta ve Kant’ın Yargı Gücünün Eleştirisi adlı eserinin bazı bölümlerini YZ tarafından üretilen sanat eserleriyle birlikte analiz ederek sonuçlara ulaşmaktadır. “Çıkar gözetmeme”, “amaçsız amaçlılık” ve “kavrama dayanmayan evrensellik” gibi önemli Kantçı kavramlar, estetik yargı çerçevesinde yaratıcılık ve niyeti önemsizleştiren yaklaşımı meşrulaştırmak üzere yeniden tanımlanmaktadır. İnsan dışı oluşları nedeniyle YZ sanatını eleştiren görüşlerin, Kantçı estetik perspektiften bakıldığında geçerliliğini tamamen yitirdiği ortaya konmaktadır. Çalışma soyut biçimin kendisinin ve gözlemci zihni üzerindeki etkisinin, estetik yargı için yeterli olduğunu öne sürmekte; böylece yaratıcının kim olduğuna bakılmaksızın sanatsal değeri kapsayıcı bir yaklaşımla değerlendirmektedir.

Keywords

References

Arbiza Goenaga, M. (2020). A critique of contemporary artificial intelligence art: who is Edmond de Belamy?. Ausart journal for research in Art, 8(1), 49–64. https://doi.org/10.1387/ausart.21490
Benjamin, W. (1969). The work of art in the age of mechanical reproduction (H. Zohn, Trans.; H. Arendt, Ed.). Schocken books. https://web.mit.edu/allanmc/www/benjamin.pdf
Clewis, R. R. (2023). Genius and the fine arts. In the origins of Kant’s aesthetics (pp. 101–148). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009209403.006
Dalton, S. (2015). How beauty disrupts space, time and thought: purposiveness without a purpose in Kant's critique of judgment. E-LOGOS, 22(1), 5-14. https://doi.org/10.18267/j.elogos.409
Daniels, P. (2008). Kant on the beautiful: the interest in disinterestedness. Colloquy: text theory critique, (16), 199–210. https://www.monash.edu/__data/assets/pdf_file/0006/1762206/daniels.pdf
Graben, P. B. (2024). A neural network account to kant's philosophical aesthetics. Mind and matter, 22(2), 227–252. https://doi.org/10.53765/mm2024.227
Kant, I. (1914). Critique of judgement (J. H. Bernard, Trans.; 2nd ed., rev.). Macmillan and co., limited. (Original work published 1790)
Kerimov, K. (2019). The time of the beautiful in Kant’s critique of judgment. Epoché: a journal for the history of philosophy, 24(1), 139–157. https://doi.org/10.5840/epoche20191011145

Kraatz, K., & Xie, S.-t. (2023). Why AI art is not art: a Heideggerian critique. Synthesis philosophica, 76(2), 235–253. https://doi.org/10.21464/sp38201
Liu, J. (2025). Kant on the aesthetic idea in judgment and creation. European journal of philosophy, e13063. https://doi.org/10.1111/ejop.13063
Ostaric, L. (2019). Critique of judgment and the unity of Kant's critical system. Cambridge University Press.
Palmer, L. (2008). A universality not based on concepts: Kant's key to the critique of taste. Kantian review, 13(1), 1–51. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1369415400001084
Sasa, M. S. (2019). An appraisal of the concept of beauty in Immanuel Kant’s philosophy. Gnosi: an interdisciplinary journal of human theory and praxis, 2(2), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4071560
Silbey, J. (2025). How theories of art can inform debates about AI. Emory law journal, 74(5), 1229–1292. https://scholarlycommons.law.emory.edu/elj/vol74/iss5/5
Smakic, K. (2025). Aesthetic values of artwork generated by artificial intelligence tools in the context of Benjamin’s “aura”. Theoria, 68(1), 185–193. https://doi.org/10.2298/THEO2501185S
Smith, A., & Cook, M. (2023). AI-generated imagery: a new era for the “readymade” [Preprint]. arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2307.06033
van Hees, J., Grootswagers, T., Quek, G. L., & Varlet, M. (2025). Human perception of art in the age of artificial intelligence. Frontiers in psychology, 15, 1497469. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1497469
Wasielewski, A. (2023). Computational formalism: Art history and machine learning. MIT Press.
Zylinska, J. (2014). Minimal ethics for the anthropocene. Open humanities press.

Details

Primary Language

English

Subjects

Media Technologies, Arts and Cultural Policy, Digital and Electronic Media Art

Journal Section

Research Article

Authors

Volkan Davut Mengi ^*
0000-0003-4803-7999
Türkiye

Publication Date

October 22, 2025

Submission Date

June 5, 2025

Acceptance Date

October 8, 2025

Published in Issue

Year 2025 Number: Yapay zekâ ve sanat özel sayısı

DOI

https://doi.org/10.46372/arts.1714896

IZ

https://izlik.org/JA58GF48XG

Cite

RIS / Bibtex

APA

Mengi, V. D. (2025). Evaluating AI art through Kantian aesthetics. ARTS: Artuklu Sanat Ve Beşeri Bilimler Dergisi, Yapay zekâ ve sanat özel sayısı, 167-183. https://doi.org/10.46372/arts.1714896

AMA

1.Mengi VD. Evaluating AI art through Kantian aesthetics. ARTS. 2025;(Yapay zekâ ve sanat özel sayısı):167-183. doi:10.46372/arts.1714896

Chicago

Mengi, Volkan Davut. 2025. “Evaluating AI Art through Kantian Aesthetics”. ARTS: Artuklu Sanat Ve Beşeri Bilimler Dergisi, no. Yapay zekâ ve sanat özel sayısı: 167-83. https://doi.org/10.46372/arts.1714896.

EndNote

Mengi VD (October 1, 2025) Evaluating AI art through Kantian aesthetics. ARTS: Artuklu Sanat ve Beşeri Bilimler Dergisi Yapay zekâ ve sanat özel sayısı 167–183.

IEEE

[1]V. D. Mengi, “Evaluating AI art through Kantian aesthetics”, ARTS, no. Yapay zekâ ve sanat özel sayısı, pp. 167–183, Oct. 2025, doi: 10.46372/arts.1714896.

ISNAD

Mengi, Volkan Davut. “Evaluating AI Art through Kantian Aesthetics”. ARTS: Artuklu Sanat ve Beşeri Bilimler Dergisi. Yapay zekâ ve sanat özel sayısı (October 1, 2025): 167-183. https://doi.org/10.46372/arts.1714896.

JAMA

1.Mengi VD. Evaluating AI art through Kantian aesthetics. ARTS. 2025;:167–183.

MLA

Mengi, Volkan Davut. “Evaluating AI Art through Kantian Aesthetics”. ARTS: Artuklu Sanat Ve Beşeri Bilimler Dergisi, no. Yapay zekâ ve sanat özel sayısı, Oct. 2025, pp. 167-83, doi:10.46372/arts.1714896.

Vancouver

1.Volkan Davut Mengi. Evaluating AI art through Kantian aesthetics. ARTS. 2025 Oct. 1;(Yapay zekâ ve sanat özel sayısı):167-83. doi:10.46372/arts.1714896