I love A.I.
It's what computers should have always been. Hey, go do things for me. Research. Run calculations. Challenge my assumptions. Make things easier.
But I don't use AI to write the articles on this site.
The historian David McCullough said:
Writing is thinking. To write well is to think clearly. That's why it's so hard.
I agree.
We assume writing happens after thinking. First have the idea. Then we write it down.
Except it doesn't work that way.
Sometimes, I start writing thinking that something is obviously true and discover, halfway through, that it isn't. Or I can't explain something simply, which is a signal I don't understand the topic well enough. Or I can't find the words to match my enthusiasm. Happens often. My enthusiasm usually outruns my ability.
So, the writing is the thinking.
Rewriting, too.
Changing a word can change the claim. Cutting a paragraph can reveal the point. Editing is really just more thinking. And thinking again. And again.
I do use A.I. for some things. I want it to find evidence. Find the flaws in my argument, like an editor would. Tell me when I might have gone wrong.
But it can't think. It mirrors thinking.
I do love machines that do useful stuff. I often use a drum machine, for example. A drum machine is very good at playing drums. It keeps perfect time. And it doesn't drink my beer. But someone still has to decide what it should play. Or whether it should play at all.
And you often need to introduce flaws to make it sound like music. Push some beats, drag others, hit things a bit off-centre. But the machine does makes execution easier for non-drummers.
However, the human questions remain.
Why?
Is this any good?
Is it true?
Does it land?
One day, perhaps the A.I. machine will be able to do the thinking, too.
Until then, I'll keep doing the thinking and hammering away at the typewriter.