Ambeth Ocampo on Why AI Cannot Replace Human Creativity

At Vogue Talks, the historian addresses the concerning influence technology has on disinformation

On the second day of Vogue Threads 2026, Filipino historian and academic Ambeth Ocampo discussed how AI or artificial intelligence, exacerbates the already overwhelming problem of disinformation and raised the implications of a future where AI is altering the way we learn about the world and our own history. 

In a fully packed room, Ocampo began his talk like every class lecture he has taught in the Ateneo de Manila University, preferring to show history through anecdotes. Years of teaching have led him to notice how the learning patterns of his students evolved.  

Before the advent of Large Language Models (LLMs) like Gemini or ChatGPT, Google Scholar sped up the process of searching for academic articles. During his time, a research database was the physical card catalog. Though technology has shortened the painstaking task of looking through every index, the process is where learning occurs, and where the mind can understand why and how knowledge is arranged. “People say, ‘Nobody is reading.’ That’s not true; we are reading more today than when the Gutenberg Bible was written.” The question is, what exactly are we reading?

He told the story of a class activity where he asked his students to analyze one of Rizal’s diary entries from his time studying abroad, which listed his daily purchases. Acknowledging that colleagues have found this activity trivial, Ocampo illustrated that humans can derive important context from life experiences that AI simply cannot. In attempting to understand why Rizal’s money had gone to postage stamps, his students realized that Rizal was homesick. As Ocampo explains, these are the blind spots of this new technology. “What remains is that we must have curiosity, critical thinking, and primary sources.” 

Despite sharing the mishaps of AI, such as hallucinating new elements when prompted to create a colorized restoration of archival photographs, he notes that these models will only be more commonplace in our daily lives and will continue to amplify historical distortions that have long existed before ChatGPT. “You cannot stop a tidal wave; you will drown. The best is to move with the wave.” 

As a frequent Gemini user, Ocampo knows that his stance on AI, where he is willing to compromise with some of it, is divisive among fellow academics. Still, the historian is adamant about using AI only as a tool, fully recognizing that it predicts what people want to hear. “AI intends to please; it will give you what you want. That’s the thing that makes you fall for it.” When people treat it as a substitute for creativity, learning, and human processing, he raises red flags. 

Throughout his stories, glimpses of the serious harm AI poses are evident, recounting an instance when a friend of his, who was suffering from depression, had planned to fly to Switzerland on his chatbot’s advice that legally assisted suicide would be his only solution. 

“Artificial intelligence is not intelligent; it works on patterns; it is currently incapable of insight, that is a purely human thing,” Ocampo said. Though a brief point in his lecture, this story offered a bleak look into a possible future where AI is outsourced for sensitive matters that require nuance, empathy, and true wisdom. 

For creatives who thrive off of threading new ideas and novel ways to connect and learn about people, AI hampers these possibilities altogether. As a historian, Ocmapo posed the question: “Can AI replace Ambeth Ocampo?” Through his many entertaining tidbits and nuggets of knowledge, the straight answer he provides for the attendees is that it cannot. “Artificial Intelligence is not intelligent; it works on patterns; it is currently incapable of original thought, insight, and creativity.”