Artificial Intelligence (AI) is no longer just a technical tool – it is shaping the economy, public administration, and, increasingly, the creative professions. While many creatives fear automation and job losses, some see immense potential – among them Dr. Thomas Ramge, an expert in digital transformation, Associated Researcher at the Einstein Center Digital Future, host of the SPRIND podcast by Bundesagentur für Sprunginnovationen (Federal Agency for Disruptive Innovations), and author of a position paper on AI. In a conversation with publisher Christian Bracht, he explains why AI can do more than just handle routine tasks; it can enhance human creativity. Ramge remains optimistic, seeing AI not as threat but as an amplifier – provided it is used wisely.
Christian Bracht: Dr. Ramge, you strike an optimistic tone in the debate about AI. What makes you so confident that AI can sustainably advance not only business and administration, but also creative professions?
Thomas Ramge: I am convinced that if we use AI smartly, it can enhance human intelligence. The acronym ‘AI’ should actually stand for ‘augmented intelligence’ – that is, an expansion rather than an artificial replacement of our cognitive abilities. This also applies to creative professions. AI can support human creativity by taking care of routine tasks or providing inspiration. However, we must look very closely: not all creative activities benefit equally. Some industries we would consider creative are, in fact, quite vulnerable to automation. It depends on how much of it is genuinely new and how much is merely an adaptation of something that already exists.
CB: In your paper, you sketch out a positive future with AI. What would that look like, specifically for creatives such as designers, authors, or musicians? You yourself describe AI as an accelerator of your productivity and quality – does that apply to everyone?
TR: AI can take care of routine tasks and thus free up time for more important things. But since the advent of generative AI, it has become apparent that much of what we consider creative – such as web design or screenwriting – is often just a variation of patterns. Generative AI is excellent at recognising and adapting such patterns. This means that it can automate mediocre work, while truly innovative minds can benefit by using AI as a tool.
CB: So AI can support creative processes, but it can also automate them. What do you think remains the unique selling point of human creativity? Will AI actually replace creative work?
TR: Let’s talk about this ‘replacement’ first. In the creative industries, there are profitable but time-consuming tasks such as the post-production of films or podcasts that AI will soon be able to do with a single click. This is entirely predictable, and people will lose their jobs – there’s no denying it. At the same time, I see enormous potential for creatives who use AI as a partner. About a third of musicians already use AI, not only for sound mastering but also for creative experiments that produce exciting new variations. The unique human factor remains the act of creating: the drive to bring something completely new into the world, based on personal experience and individual consciousness. AI systems are not yet capable of replicating that. Artists have an advantage here because their works thrive on personality – an aspect that collectors and the public appreciate.
CB: Many creatives fear that AI will make their work obsolete. Some even actively try to ignore this concern. How do you address this fear, and what new opportunities does AI open up for creatives?
TR: The fear is understandable, but I don’t see AI as an opponent; it is a tool. It won’t be ‘human vs machine’ but ‘human with AI vs human without AI.’ Those who make better use of the new tools will stay ahead. We know this from chess: for a long time, teams of humans and computers were superior to computers playing on their own. In the creative industries, AI will be particularly useful where routine is involved. For true innovation – ideas in data-free spaces – it remains a sparring partner, not a replacement. The potential lies in collaboration: AI can inspire, generate drafts, and accelerate processes, but it takes a human to provide the decisive spark.
CB: Education is a key field for the future. What skills should we be promoting in schools, universities, and companies so that people can work creatively with and through AI?
TR: First, we should introduce AI-supported learning systems that are as captivating as computer games. AI can create learning environments that are individually tailored to students and that introduce an element of fun – something that is often missing from everyday school life. An AI maths teacher could identify a student’s weaknesses and provide customised exercises. I am optimistic about skills: young people learn how to use AI intuitively. Students are already using it creatively, for example by having it solve tasks and deliberately incorporating small errors so as not to be found out. This shows how quickly they’re developing new AI skills – often faster than teachers can convey them.
CB: Germany has a strong AI research landscape, but the transfer into practice is lagging. How do we ensure that AI and education in Germany deliver creative products of international significance?
TR The myth of the world’s best AI research is exaggerated, but we do have a solid base. It’s encouraging to see that support for university spinouts is improving – through political or private initiatives such as the KI-Campus in Heilbronn, supported by family offices like the Dieter Schwarz Foundation, for example. Venture capital is also growing, albeit more slowly than would be desirable. The key lies in three points: accelerating spinouts, incentivising investments – including tax incentives – and reducing bureaucracy. The current AI regulation in Europe is often presented as a means to promote innovation, but hardly anyone in the start-up scene sees it that way. Less regulation would release more momentum.
CB: Finally, a personal question: What inspired you most while writing your paper? Was there a moment when you realised that AI also enriched your creative process?
TR The strongest impetus came from a survey we conducted with 5,000 people. Expectations of AI were alarmingly pessimistic. That motivated me to go beyond writing a classic policy paper. I wanted to develop a positive narrative: What could a world in which we use AI sensibly look like? In my work, AI was my sparring partner – for questions or initial ideas, for example. Just like with brainstorming, sometimes all you get is nonsense, but that’s exactly what often inspires new solutions. I wrote the text myself, and the AI reliably checked for typos.
As featured in SLEEK 84 – CHANGE. Available in print and digital here.