On the use by writers of artificial intelligence

Among those of us in the field of writing, many questions have been raised  about the use of AI, Artificial Intelligence. Less mention is made nowadays than was the case a year or two ago,  regarding the moral issue of authorship: Is it inherently wrong to present a piece of writing as one’s own  if wording provided by a robot, so to speak, has been incorporated into the final product?  Does  it constitute gneivas daas? (The deceptive “theft” of a person’s mind, which is prohibited by Torah.) Lately, the moral question has moved over to more practical concerns — for example, to one of pricing: now that the use of AI has become an  increasingly accepted feature of the profession, should the client (a magazine, for example, or book publisher) be informed, and charged less for the job, in spite of the fact that writers are invariably underpaid? On the contrary, say some: isn’t it about time that that inequity be ameliorated, even if not completely resolved? Charging by the hour can take care of that discrepancy, say others; the client gets more for his money when he receives a well-executed, more swiftly delivered product. All stand to benefit from this incredible digital tool provided by the genius of 21^st century computer science; it would seem historically to be as inevitable a phenomenon as the electric light bulb. If a writer can produce good work in less time (and with less sweat), then more power to him; he has the right to charge the same or even more, and in any case, presumably has incurred the expense of buying whatever computer program he’s using.

One thing that remains consistent in regard to these  and related questions is that whether one is a writer of fiction or non-fiction, a translator or an editor, an historian, poet or journalist,  or in any other profession related to the art or writing…then the habit of dependence on AI brings about a weakening in one’s powers of thought, and less originality (obviously) in the words given to the reader. The growth of one’s mind that is intrinsically part  of the difficult struggle to find the right word, and the most beautiful manner of self-expression, and factual accuracy, is largely forfeited.

One can object to my objection by correctly pointing out that every new human invention–including the automobile, the telephone, and the typewriter (which some objected to when it was invented as an unnecessary convenience; why not write by hand?)  involves a weakening of Divinely given human powers, and that this too shall pass. i.e. a naysayer in response to artificial intelligence such as myself will end up as the butt of laughter, as time goes by.

True.

So, it’s your choice, fellow writer.

But don’t be surprised when some of the joy and satisfaction to be had by taking a plunge into your own mind and coming up with diamonds…is diminished.

The question is less about lowering our prices than lowering our standards.

Above all, perhaps, one won’t experience to the same extent the emulation of the Creator’s creating which has always been represented by the art of words. And the reader, unknowingly eating recycled junk food–a sort of quasi group plagiarism–may not know the difference.

I believe that my opinion about this is relevant even when a writer is engaged in more superficial management of words, as in advertising or website building.

If one is willing to give over sovereignty, to some extent, of one’s brain, then b’vakesha, take it easy and become part of this mass abdication of personal writerly responsibility.

(And by the way, the loss to our brains that comes about by not writing by hand anymore is indeed a real one, not only for us but for emerging generations.)

—

The above piece appeared originally in Ami Magazine.