Artificial intelligence (AI) has transformed the way we think about architecture today. But how would it have influenced the creative and technical processes of great architects of past centuries, such as Vitruvius, Brunelleschi, and Gaudí? Although the technology was unthinkable in their time, we can imagine how its use would have revolutionized design and construction at that time.
An important theme would be inspiration. In the era of history’s greatest architects, sources of inspiration were neither clear nor immediate; they were based on experiences passed on by word of mouth or on trips between cities. Thinking about an infinite source of inspiration, capable of generating multiple sketches and proposals in seconds that would expand architects’ creative possibilities, was unimaginable. However, modern tools, such as parametric generators, would allow experimentation with complex architectural forms and styles that, at the time, were impossible to conceive with traditional methods.
Another key point is the solution to technical problems. Major architectural landmarks, such as Brunelleschi’s dome of Santa Maria del Fiore, required unique structural solutions and unprecedented ingenuity. With the use of artificial intelligence, architects would have had access to advanced simulations to optimize materials, calculate loads, and anticipate potential failures. This would have facilitated the execution of large-scale projects with less risk and greater precision.
This is where process efficiency comes in. In past centuries, manual design and the preparation of detailed plans could take months or even years. Artificial intelligence would have automated processes such as planning, 3D modeling, and environmental analysis, drastically reducing work times. This would have allowed architects to devote more time to the artistic and conceptual aspects of their projects, enhancing their capacity for innovation.
Images created with AI by Cafeína Design
With all of the above, we can conclude that having AI from the beginning would have revolutionized architecture, allowing us to create things we can only imagine today. However, a crucial question arises: can we really compare human creativity with technology?
Creativity has been, and continues to be, the fundamental driving force of architectural design. Even if artificial intelligence (AI) had been available in past centuries, it is unlikely that it would have replaced the architect’s role as visionary. Although AI has the power to transform processes and enhance creative exploration, the act of design transcends the mere generation of forms and data.
Architecture is not just functionality; it is an art deeply connected to the emotions, aspirations, and cultural values of a society. Architects of past eras designed with a unique sensitivity to their historical and social context. Brunelleschi not only built a dome, but created a symbol of innovation and faith for his time. Similarly, Gaudí integrated nature, spirituality, and functionality into his work. These visions are born from human perception and emotional understanding, something that AI alone cannot replicate.
In architecture, technique and creativity go hand in hand. AI would have automated complex calculations and optimized the selection of materials or forms, freeing architects to focus on the artistic and conceptual aspects of their designs. However, true innovation occurs when paradigms are broken and thinking outside the box, a process that stems from human curiosity and intuition.
Furthermore, if architects of the past had relied on AI, they would have faced questions similar to those we face today: how much control should they cede to machines? To what extent should they trust automatically generated solutions? These questions underscore that, even with advanced technology, architects must maintain a critical and creative role, ensuring that their work reflects human intentions and not just efficient algorithms.
At the end of this analysis, we can conclude that AI, at best, would have served as an extension of human capabilities. It could have generated patterns, tested structures, or suggested efficient solutions, but the final decision—the one that gives soul and purpose to the design—would always have been up to the architect. Tools can automate processes and offer possibilities, but they cannot interpret the symbolism of a space or respond intuitively to the cultural needs of a society.
In other words, AI would have expanded the technical capabilities and creative possibilities of architects of the past, but it would not have been able to replace their vision, their sensitivity, or their ability to give meaning to spaces. Human creativity, in its essence, would have remained at the core of every design, while technology would have been a valuable ally in making those dreams come true.
