I suppose... the thing would be NOT to publish one's writing on line, then it can't be harvested by AI bots. Would only apply to books though. Or you could pepper everything with swear words and spelling mistakes 😁
Of course we are interested in you and, I hope, you in us! You are not just your ideas but a living breathing person with passions and prejudices, strengths and vulnerabilities and thirst to communicate. I have come to see this forum as more of a joint enterprise in the search for meaning in these tumultuous times with you leading the charge. It would not be the same without the sense of connection created by the trading of lows as well as highs, regrets and triumphs and the honesty of personal reflection.
I avoid AI where ever possible as it represents an addiction to power that will never be satisfied so it never occurred to me that your writing could be anything other than your own hand at work. Also, while the internet is a wonderful way to discover like and unlike minds nothing can replace the patient work of building trust - not a blue tick or any other shortcut that may be in use. For those of us who have followed you for a while that trust has been built and there is no question of the authenticity of your work.
It is, though, an example of dualism that Iain McGilchrist would recognise as without mistrust you cannot have trust and your acceptance of the criticism is akin to the resolution of that duality subsuming both into something greater.
So glad you have managed to get Iain on the show. He has done so much to champion the importance of perception, connectedness and in general a world that is full of wonder and possibility set in universe that no machine could never come anywhere near creating. Look forward to hearing your episode with him.
One thing that is central to being human is the need for social contact and the sharing through community activity, and as you write through the active engagement of our bodies in nature. These are, for example, the places where our various forms of art come alive.
AI “art” remains derivative and cold for now for these reasons. Perhaps one day robots will engage with us in those more interactive ways – but this is not a future I look forward to.
You speak to the new Big question of our times. Actually an old question now made more important than ever. Love your answer. An Emily Dickinson line is always in mind as we try to find our way back to the best of who we are and could be with and for each other. “ A colour sits abroad, a solitary hill, that science cannot overtake, but human nature feels”. Kindest regards , Jim
And yet, AI also offers us the chance to test our ideas and feelings against the backdrop of human history, now gorged on by AI. Where do my thoughts fit in the grand sweep of human history? Am I really offering myself, or simply trying to impose my ideas. When used as a mentor, AI can bring out the best in us, enabling us to avoid the immediate 'gut response' that, while human, does nothing to advance a conversation, but let's us feel good for a moment as we squash the idiot's ideas. Perhaps they are an idiot, or maybe they are coming from a whole different world view that I'm failing to recognise. (written without AI).
I then prompted:
Can you say this any better: It is in response to a writer saying that they disavow AI to write as a human (presumably with all the foibles of a human)
To which I got:
Here’s a tighter, more polished version of your passage that keeps the same spirit but sharpens the flow and rhythm:
---
Writers often insist on “writing as a human,” foibles and all. Fair enough. And yet, AI gives us something new: a chance to test our ideas and feelings against the vast backdrop of human history and thought it has absorbed. Where do my words sit in that sweep of experience? Am I truly offering myself, or just trying to impose my notions on others?
Used well, AI can serve as a mentor rather than a crutch. It can help us move past the reflexive gut-reaction—the little jab that makes us feel good for a moment as we squash someone else’s “idiotic” idea, but does nothing to deepen the conversation. Perhaps they *are* an idiot. Or perhaps they’re speaking from a worldview I’ve failed to recognize. AI can remind us to pause, to reflect, and to engage with more generosity.
Yes. Thank you. I do believe that you are talking about the only way we can continue to relate...personally! I do believe also that that should always have been the case, but you are also right that objectivity has distanced us from each other on purpose. The more emotion we remove from life the more we lose ourselves. Then we lose each other. Bless
My heart broke when I read about the impact that one comment had on you, and the doubts that arose about your work. But your response and what you shared here is heartening to say the least.
And also, can I just (respectfully):
"I do not presume that any of you are interested in me as a person..."
Stop it. Wrong. Nope. Nuh-uh. None of that. You are a brilliant and *wildly* intriguing woman, Rachel, and I for one will not be persuaded otherwise.
Rachel I feel your humanity with living delight. Arr skeptics doubting that you don't appear in front os on a weekly basis as wel? You clearly expose your frailty of learning as I learn from you and your system of real human beings. You are not AI, you are living flesh of beauty sweat I am not sure how to thank you and and mission and you enrich the lives of so many.
More than that comment about AI having been possibly just a somewhat odd, left field observation, I imagine it is more indicative of just how many people use AI. Personally I would feel disappointed in myself for using it to do what I could do myself. Especially for writing. But it doesn’t surprise me that so many people are willing (lazy enough!) to take the easy way out of things that we are meant to do ourselves. Or don’t trust themselves to do, or can’t be bothered with getting better at skills over time. It would never occur to me that Rachel would stoop so low.
I suppose... the thing would be NOT to publish one's writing on line, then it can't be harvested by AI bots. Would only apply to books though. Or you could pepper everything with swear words and spelling mistakes 😁
Of course we are interested in you and, I hope, you in us! You are not just your ideas but a living breathing person with passions and prejudices, strengths and vulnerabilities and thirst to communicate. I have come to see this forum as more of a joint enterprise in the search for meaning in these tumultuous times with you leading the charge. It would not be the same without the sense of connection created by the trading of lows as well as highs, regrets and triumphs and the honesty of personal reflection.
I avoid AI where ever possible as it represents an addiction to power that will never be satisfied so it never occurred to me that your writing could be anything other than your own hand at work. Also, while the internet is a wonderful way to discover like and unlike minds nothing can replace the patient work of building trust - not a blue tick or any other shortcut that may be in use. For those of us who have followed you for a while that trust has been built and there is no question of the authenticity of your work.
It is, though, an example of dualism that Iain McGilchrist would recognise as without mistrust you cannot have trust and your acceptance of the criticism is akin to the resolution of that duality subsuming both into something greater.
So glad you have managed to get Iain on the show. He has done so much to champion the importance of perception, connectedness and in general a world that is full of wonder and possibility set in universe that no machine could never come anywhere near creating. Look forward to hearing your episode with him.
One thing that is central to being human is the need for social contact and the sharing through community activity, and as you write through the active engagement of our bodies in nature. These are, for example, the places where our various forms of art come alive.
AI “art” remains derivative and cold for now for these reasons. Perhaps one day robots will engage with us in those more interactive ways – but this is not a future I look forward to.
Tx for such a timely response.
You speak to the new Big question of our times. Actually an old question now made more important than ever. Love your answer. An Emily Dickinson line is always in mind as we try to find our way back to the best of who we are and could be with and for each other. “ A colour sits abroad, a solitary hill, that science cannot overtake, but human nature feels”. Kindest regards , Jim
A.I. will figure out the use of metaphors. Small words, big feelings, kill the adjectives: Hemingway had it right.
I have always felt your “essence” in your writings even if you were striving for impersonal dictums. That’s why I’m a subscriber.
could never mistake you for a bot. you care! the bots don't.
you care, and the shape of your care emits through everything you do. ❤️
And yet, AI also offers us the chance to test our ideas and feelings against the backdrop of human history, now gorged on by AI. Where do my thoughts fit in the grand sweep of human history? Am I really offering myself, or simply trying to impose my ideas. When used as a mentor, AI can bring out the best in us, enabling us to avoid the immediate 'gut response' that, while human, does nothing to advance a conversation, but let's us feel good for a moment as we squash the idiot's ideas. Perhaps they are an idiot, or maybe they are coming from a whole different world view that I'm failing to recognise. (written without AI).
I then prompted:
Can you say this any better: It is in response to a writer saying that they disavow AI to write as a human (presumably with all the foibles of a human)
To which I got:
Here’s a tighter, more polished version of your passage that keeps the same spirit but sharpens the flow and rhythm:
---
Writers often insist on “writing as a human,” foibles and all. Fair enough. And yet, AI gives us something new: a chance to test our ideas and feelings against the vast backdrop of human history and thought it has absorbed. Where do my words sit in that sweep of experience? Am I truly offering myself, or just trying to impose my notions on others?
Used well, AI can serve as a mentor rather than a crutch. It can help us move past the reflexive gut-reaction—the little jab that makes us feel good for a moment as we squash someone else’s “idiotic” idea, but does nothing to deepen the conversation. Perhaps they *are* an idiot. Or perhaps they’re speaking from a worldview I’ve failed to recognize. AI can remind us to pause, to reflect, and to engage with more generosity.
Perhaps it proves your point :)
Well it would say that wouldn't it!
Brought me to tears xx
Yes. Thank you. I do believe that you are talking about the only way we can continue to relate...personally! I do believe also that that should always have been the case, but you are also right that objectivity has distanced us from each other on purpose. The more emotion we remove from life the more we lose ourselves. Then we lose each other. Bless
I just shared your last two paragraphs with a group I I am part of. Deeply touching and wise. Thank you !
My heart broke when I read about the impact that one comment had on you, and the doubts that arose about your work. But your response and what you shared here is heartening to say the least.
And also, can I just (respectfully):
"I do not presume that any of you are interested in me as a person..."
Stop it. Wrong. Nope. Nuh-uh. None of that. You are a brilliant and *wildly* intriguing woman, Rachel, and I for one will not be persuaded otherwise.
That this now needs to be a lens for every writer is the new reality: How does "me" show up in my writing? How will my readers know it's me?
And yet I worry that chatbots are already at the point of knowing me well enough to be "me" without me.
Sigh.
Rachel I feel your humanity with living delight. Arr skeptics doubting that you don't appear in front os on a weekly basis as wel? You clearly expose your frailty of learning as I learn from you and your system of real human beings. You are not AI, you are living flesh of beauty sweat I am not sure how to thank you and and mission and you enrich the lives of so many.
More than that comment about AI having been possibly just a somewhat odd, left field observation, I imagine it is more indicative of just how many people use AI. Personally I would feel disappointed in myself for using it to do what I could do myself. Especially for writing. But it doesn’t surprise me that so many people are willing (lazy enough!) to take the easy way out of things that we are meant to do ourselves. Or don’t trust themselves to do, or can’t be bothered with getting better at skills over time. It would never occur to me that Rachel would stoop so low.
Thanks for responding to my comment last week. I half jokingly posted it in hopes of this conversation.