Art, creativity, and the human touch are often considered the heart of writing. However, the advent of artificial intelligence has blurred these lines, leading to heated debates and conflicts among writers.
One such instance was recently brought into light by a 28-year-old woman on Reddit who expressed her discomfort with her younger brother’s decision to use AI for writing his debut novel. In her post, she grapples with the ethical dimensions of writing and the role of AI in this creative process.
Woman’s dispute over brother’s AI-assisted novel writing
In the Reddit thread, the woman, a self-published author of three books, expressed her deep-seated concerns and conflicts over her brother’s use of AI in his writing journey. The crux of her distress was rooted in the belief that AI, beyond its function as a spell-check or grammar tool, undermines the human creativity and effort that form the essence of writing.
She shared, “He’s been asking AI for ideas of things to write about in his novel like how to describe things and how to further character development, things that I consider to be part of the creative process, a creative process that shouldn’t be replaced by AI.”
Despite explaining her stance to her brother, she found herself constantly subjected to his attempts at seeking her approval. Her brother drew parallels between using calculators in math and using AI in writing, arguing it was a faster and more efficient way to pen down a story.
However, the debate turned bitter when she suggested he shouldn’t publish or make money off his AI-assisted book. Her warning was met with defiance and a sharp retort from her brother who said, “Just don’t be mad when I do publish and become successful because of writing assisted by AI.”
The thread sparked a flurry of comments from other Reddit users. One user, Longwinded_Ogre, expressed staunch disapproval, saying “AI is bad at writing. Let him use his little idiot-crutch and suffer the consequences of not knowing how to walk right when the time comes.”
Another user, firelark_, echoed similar sentiments and highlighted potential legal implications. They wrote “For all he knows, the AI was trained on large fantasy writers… Imagine him thinking the AI ‘wrote it better’ only to have Terry Brook’s lawyers hit him up because the AI decided to rewrite one of the magical items in the story as the actual Elfstones.”
Despite the majority of users siding with her stand against AI-assisted writing, the woman found herself questioning if she was in the wrong for discouraging her brother’s creative process.
AI in writing: A tool or a crutch?
At the heart of this familial conflict lies a broader issue that is increasingly finding its way into the discourse around writing and creativity – the role of Artificial Intelligence. As AI becomes more sophisticated, its application in various fields, including writing, is expanding. However, its use in creative processes often brings up questions of authenticity, creativity, and ethics.
The brother’s defense of using AI as a faster and more efficient method to write raises critical questions. Does efficiency trump authenticity in writing? Does AI, which relies on algorithms and data to generate content, truly capture the human essence that often forms the crux of stories? Or does it merely mimic the creative process without truly understanding or experiencing it?
On the other hand, there’s the question of whether AI could indeed serve as a tool to aid new or struggling writers. As one Reddit user pointed out, the use of AI could be seen as akin to using calculators in mathematics – a tool to simplify the process but not replace understanding.
However, as many have pointed out in the thread, there’s a fine line between using AI as a supportive tool and using it as a crutch or shortcut that bypasses the creative process. This brings up ethical considerations that cannot be overlooked.
The question of legality also comes into play, with concerns about copyright infringements when AI is used extensively for creating content. Critics argue that AI, which is trained on vast datasets that often include copyrighted works, could inadvertently produce text or ideas that closely mirror existing material. This not only risks potential legal repercussions but also raises moral concerns about originality and ownership in art.
Bridging the generational and philosophical divide
The woman’s conflict with her brother underscores a broader generational and philosophical divide in how technology is perceived and adopted. For her, as a writer who has honed her craft through years of practice, writing is as much about the journey as the outcome. The hours spent brainstorming, struggling with drafts, and refining ideas are integral to the process. It is through this labor that many writers feel their voice and identity are formed.
Her brother, on the other hand, represents a generation that has grown up alongside rapidly advancing technology. For him, AI is not a threat but a tool—one that eliminates tedium and opens up new possibilities. He sees no contradiction in embracing AI as a means to achieve his creative goals, even if it challenges traditional notions of authorship.
The divide is not just generational but philosophical. To the woman, creativity is a deeply human endeavor that relies on imagination and emotional experience. To her brother, creativity can be augmented—or even revolutionized—by tools that push the boundaries of what is possible.
The debate continues
As AI technology continues to develop, debates like this are likely to intensify. Some argue that resisting AI in writing is akin to resisting earlier technological advancements, such as word processors or the internet, both of which were once seen as controversial but are now indispensable. Others counter that AI’s ability to actively generate content—not just assist—marks a fundamental shift that cannot be compared to past tools.
The woman’s story is not unique. Many creatives are grappling with similar dilemmas, questioning whether embracing AI diminishes their work or enhances it. In the Reddit thread, a few users pointed out that the ethical debate might become moot as society gradually normalizes AI’s role in creative industries. “The market will decide,” one commenter quipped, suggesting that readers and consumers will ultimately determine whether AI-generated works hold the same value as those created solely by humans.
A resolution—or lack thereof?
For now, the woman and her brother remain at odds, their differing perspectives a microcosm of the larger debate. While the brother seems steadfast in his belief that AI can be a valuable partner in his creative journey, the woman’s concerns about the erosion of human creativity remain valid.
Perhaps the resolution lies not in choosing one side over the other but in finding a balance. AI, when used responsibly, could complement human creativity rather than replace it. As one Reddit user suggested, “Let him experiment. Maybe he’ll discover that AI isn’t a shortcut after all, but a stepping stone to developing his own voice.”
