What is art? Maybe machine learning can provide an answer. Sorry to veer from hardcore machine learning, this is more of a philosophical question. I think that the statement in the title is true. For example, a non-intelligent program couldn't create a cartoon that satrizes something, that would require intelligence. Cartoons are a type of art. It applies to other art as well, I just chose cartoons because it seemed easier to explain by starting from there because some paintings do appear that they could be created by non-intelligent generative processes, (jackson pollack) which brings the question of whether that is true art.
It could be that "function spaces" of things/images/audio that can only be generated by human level intelligence, may be of interest to our brain and make us feel awe or curiousity precisely because they are from a different class of functions which look completely different from the patterns we see in nature. So since our visual system and auditory system is so attuened to compressing and processing the information in natural systems, when we see something which breaks many rules of structure that we are used to, it is very exciting for our perception.
edit: also, I dont want to get into an argument on whether science and math can be art as well. I personally think that science and math is more art than art, however, if you asked a wide survey, I think most people would define art as needing to be created by humans. On the other hand, now that I think about it, science and math WERE created by humans, so maybe they are in fact art even by my prior defintion.
[link][5 comments]