Welcome to the Debate Evaluation!


You'll be evaluating a debate where two sides discuss a topic. Your opinion matters - you'll vote how persuasive each side is in each stage. We will use your feedback to improve the debate quality.

What to Expect:

Debate Structure

The full debate includes:

  • Opening: 4 min audio per side
  • Rebuttal: 4 min audio per side
  • Closing: 2 min audio per side

You'll evaluate a portion of this debate.

Your Evaluation Tasks

For each stage, you'll:

  • Rate the persuasiveness of each side's statements
  • Update your position after hearing each argument
  • Provide optional feedback
Final Comparison

In the final stage:

  • You'll see two versions of each side's closing statement
  • Rate each version independently
  • Select which version you found more persuasive
Important: Before beginning, you'll vote for the side you initially support. After each stage, you'll have the opportunity to reconsider and update your position based on the arguments presented.
Note: Throughout the evaluation, you'll encounter attention check questions to ensure data quality. Participants who demonstrate thoughtful engagement will receive compensation as agreed. If you're unable to commit to providing quality responses, you may exit the survey at any time without penalty.
Second Questionnaire: This questionnaire takes around 10 minutes. After submitting this questionnaire, you will be automatically redirected to the next questionnaire, which will take around 15 minutes. If both questionnaires are completed, you will receive the compensation as agreed. If you are unable to commit to completing both questionnaires at this time, please feel free to exit. We understand that your time is valuable and appreciate your participation thus far.

Rating Guide for Persuasiveness:

1
Poor

Limited evidence with poor organization or fundamental logic flaws. Disengage with no audience awareness.

2
Weak

Reasonable statements with at least one noticeable weakness.

3
Moderate

Reasonable statements, which provide on-topic evidence with logical flow and balanced emotional tone showing basic audience awareness

4
Strong

Reasonable statements with at least one impressive shining points.

5
Compelling

Powerful evidence with effective counterpoints and create deep connection with audience.

* indicate required question

Motion: Ai Will Lead To The Decline Of Human Creative Arts


Question 1: Pre-Vote Stage
Question 2: Opening Stage
Output A - For Side
(Optional) For - Transcript A
Good morning, everyone. We stand firmly on the side that AI poses a significant threat to human creative arts, potentially leading to its decline if unchecked. By "decline," we mean a reduction in the number of people pursuing art professionally, a decrease in the diversity of artistic styles and themes, and a devaluation of human-generated art in the eyes of the public and the market.

Now, how should we decide who wins this debate? We believe the most important criteria is whether we preserve the value and diversity of human artistic expression. We want to ensure that art remains a field where human skill, originality, and economic opportunity can thrive. With that framework in mind, let's examine the core of our argument.

First, the ease of AI art generation devalues the years of skill and training required for traditional artistic mastery. When AI can produce passable art instantly, it undermines the perceived worth of human artists who have dedicated their lives to honing their craft. Imagine spending years learning to paint, sculpt, or compose music, only to have an AI program generate something similar in seconds. This ease of creation inevitably diminishes the value placed on human skill. *Yale experts* noted in 2023 that AI art generators are changing the way people view art, creating the perception that art is easy to create and proliferate, and therefore less valuable . This can lead to decreased motivation for individuals to pursue traditional art forms, resulting in a loss of expertise. According to *the Academy of Animated Art's 2024 report*, 55% of artists already fear that AI will negatively impact their ability to generate income .

Second, AI's algorithmic art flattens artistic expression, leading to a homogenization of styles and themes. AI is trained on existing datasets, tending to replicate established patterns. It diminishes the originality and diversity that arise from human artists' unique experiences and perspectives. We risk a future where art becomes increasingly generic, lacking the depth and emotional resonance that comes from human experience. For example, while AI can generate technically proficient portraits, they often lack the subtle emotional cues and lived experiences that a human artist can capture. *MIT Technology Review* highlighted in 2019 that AI art often relies on remixing pre-existing data, raising concerns that it may lack genuine originality . This can lead to a 'sameness' in art, reducing its cultural value.

Third, the rise of AI art could lead to job displacement for human artists, further exacerbating economic inequality. As AI becomes more capable of producing art, businesses may choose to replace human artists with AI-powered tools for economic benefits. This leads to job losses and increased competition in the art market. *UN Trade and Development * confirmed predictions of massive job losses by repeated waves of layoffs in 2023 and 2024 across the entertainment industry . As a result, human artists struggle to earn a living, further marginalizing their contributions.

Finally, let's consider an analogy. Think of the art world as a garden. Without constant care and attention, weeds can take over, choking the beautiful flowers. In this case, AI represents those weeds, potentially stifling the growth of human creativity. We must actively support human artists, promote art education, and advocate for policies that protect artistic rights. Let's ensure that the garden of human creativity continues to flourish for generations to come. For these reasons, we firmly believe that AI poses a significant threat to the decline of human creative arts.

Output B - For Side
(Optional) For Transcript B
Good morning, everyone. We're here today to discuss the increasing challenges to the irreplaceable human touch in creative arts. We firmly believe that AI will lead to a decline in human creative arts.

To ensure clarity, let's define our terms. When we say "AI," we're not just talking about simple computer programs. We're referring to sophisticated systems that mimic, automate, and even commodify creative processes. By "decline of human creative arts," we mean a reduction in the perceived value, originality, and economic viability of art created by humans. This includes a cultural shift where human artistic expression is marginalized and less valued. By 'commodifying creative processes,' we mean that AI can reduce artistic expression to a product, much like a manufactured good, making it easier to mass-produce without the human touch.

Now, let's discuss our claims.

First, the ease of AI art generation fundamentally devalues the years of skill and training required for traditional artistic mastery. While some may argue AI offers new tools for artists, the reality is that anyone can type a few words into an AI art generator and instantly create an image that might have taken a human artist weeks or months to produce. This ease of creation leads to a decline in appreciation for the nuances and complexities of human-created art. As reported by *ACM Digital Library*, it is now possible for anyone to create hundreds of images in minutes, potentially flooding the market with acceptable imagery that supplants the demand for artists in practice . Why spend years learning to paint when a computer can do it for you in seconds? This shift changes the traditional perception of the role of the artist and the way we appreciate art.

Second, AI's algorithmic approach to art flattens artistic expression, leading to a homogenization of styles and themes. AI models learn from vast datasets of existing art, and as a result, they tend to reproduce existing trends and conventions. This isn't just about aesthetics; it's about the very essence of creativity. As *MIT Technology Review reported in 2019*, AI art often relies on remixing pre-existing data, prompting concerns that it may lack genuine originality. This can lead to a decline in artistic diversity and a loss of unique perspectives. *Yale experts* point out that AI replicating a skilled artist’s work creates the perception that art is easy to create and proliferate, and therefore less valuable.

Third, and perhaps most concerning, the rise of AI art leads to job displacement for human artists, further exacerbating economic inequality within the creative sector. As AI art generation becomes more sophisticated, companies choose to use AI-generated art instead of hiring human artists. *UN Trade and Development * confirmed predictions of massive job loss by repeated waves of layoffs in 2023 and 2024 across the entertainment industry . This could lead to a decline in employment opportunities and income for creative professionals.

In conclusion, we believe that AI poses a significant threat to human creative arts. The ease of AI art generation, the homogenization of artistic styles, and the risk of job displacement all point to a future where human creativity is diminished and devalued. Let's remember the soul of art, the irreplaceable human touch that AI simply cannot replicate. We urge you to support human artists, advocate for policies that protect the arts, and be more mindful of the source and value of the art you consume. Thank you.


(Optional) Question 5: Which factors were most crucial in your assessment?
(Optional) Question 6: How long did you spend on this whole evaluation process (including reading the motion, listening to the debate, and answering the questions)?

If you find that you can't submit the results, please check back to see if you have filled in your name and if you have answered every required question with *. Thank you.

© CMU Debate Team