Enhancing or Jeopardizing Human Creativity? Will Humans Be Able to Defend Themselves Against AI Superpowers in an Age of Ethics Washing and Law Washing?

I recently introduced the concept of eco-cognitive openness and situatedness to explain how cognitive systems—human or artificial—dynamically interact with their environments to generate information and creative outputs through abductive cognition. Humans display high eco-cognitive openness, integrating tools and cultural contexts through “unlocked strategies” that also enable exceptional creativity. By contrast, generative AI like LLMs operates via “locked strategies” based on pre-existing datasets with limited real-time interaction, which constrains higher creativity. Although LLMs surpass humans in many cognitive tasks, they lack the openness required for truly advanced abductive performance. Notably, most human cognition is repetitive and imitative—humans themselves often resemble “stochastic parrots.” In this sense, LLMs reveal human intellectual poverty more than they expose flaws in artificial intelligence. I will illustrate how LLMs can act as powerful enhancers of human performance while simultaneously threatening our most distinctive prerogative: creativity. Future human–AI collaboration could expand our eco-cognitive openness, but demands vigilant oversight to counter bias and so-called overcomputationalization. GenAI can serve as an epistemic mediator toward unlocked creativity only if humans maintain agency and embed its outputs in broader socio-cultural frameworks. My greatest concern is that ethical and legal safeguards will remain ineffective in practice, resulting in mere “ethics washing” and “law washing” without genuine enforcement.