We’re surrounded by huge amounts of discourse on human versus artificial intelligence – on how brands and individuals can use AI to amplify creativity rather than replace it. From Pope Leo’s ecclesiastical essay to A24’s recent collaboration with Google DeepMind, the conversation keeps circling the same axis: intelligence, optimisation, enhancement.
But at Protein, we’ve been looking the other way. Not toward smarter systems, but toward what AI reveals about our own stupidity – and whether that word might deserve a second look. In an age obsessed with information, what happens to the value of not knowing? Of having fewer answers, and better questions? As John Waters once put it, “Sometimes, stupid and cute are enough.”
That tension opens up harder questions than the industry usually likes to ask. How might AI actually erode our intelligence and creativity as much as it promises to extend them? What even counts as intelligence – can it be measured, standardised, tested – or is it something more slippery and human? And finally: could certain kinds of “stupidity” actually be useful?
