AI As A Tool, Not A Pen

Why authorship still belongs to the living mind

Introduction:

There is a lot of debate out there today on the use of Artificial Intelligence, AI, in both professional writing and in the classroom. AI has become the defining topic in creative writing, so let’s address it for a moment, shall we?

Every conference, workshop, and online forum now seems to be asking the same questions: Will AI replace writers? Will my teacher know if I use it? Will my publisher? The debate has become a very loud, repetitive, and, in fact, circular argument. In my opinion, much of the debate misses the fundamental truth that AI is not the writer. It is a tool capable of assisting human thought, but incapable of forming it.

What does that mean? It’s actually simple. The difference between assistance and authorship must be guarded. Machines can process language, but they do not possess living memory nor intent, both of which are required for true authorship. Creative writing at its core depends on a human’s ability to relay feeling through words. The act of arranging words into a coherent sentence is not the same as giving those words meaning. That distinction is paramount today.

Personally, I use AI. I use it often. I use it for research and idea development. I test ideas against it, the same way I would another person. What I do not do is allow it to replace my process of writing content or context. Much of my writing depends deeply on my own lived experiences, something a machine can never duplicate.

Let’s step into a few more specific areas.

AI as a Brainstorming Companion

AI can offer real and valuable assistance, both at the early stages of a project as well as throughout the entire process. When I begin a new novel or other literary project, I typically begin by exploring my idea, doing research on the specific subject matter, and gathering other pertinent information. AI can be an excellent tool to assist with this.

The only difference in asking an AI and running a series of web searches is that AI can do it faster. Please, don’t take that to mean that the information you get from your GPT should be taken without verification. AI can and does make mistakes, just like a human. What it can do is run the searches, compile information from multiple sources, and provide answers in seconds instead of hours.

Think of the tools that you use every day; perhaps a hammer, drill, shovel, or even your car. Each of these tools is designed to improve efficiency, reduce your workload, and make your work easier. But none of these tools can operate independently of your direction. The same can be said for AI. It is simply another tool.

When a writer is staring at a blank page, the challenge is rarely a lack of ability. It is almost always a lack of direction. AI can assist here. As a writer, most of us have that one trusted person who is always there to offer opinions, options, and ideas. Think of AI as a sounding board. It can take your ideas and help you organize them, and even provide suggestions for possibilities.

However, the line must remain clear. Brainstorming is not writing. Writing requires judgement, attention to detail, rhythm, tone, and structure. It requires decisions on what to say and when, what to include, and what to leave out. AI cannot make those decisions. It can only approximate what it calculates as the next most logical word in a string of words.

Ask it questions. Let it offer options, counterpoints, possible directions, but when it comes to the words on the page, those have to come from you. Writers should not be afraid to use AI as an evolving tool, in the same way we have gone from ink and paper to typewriters to digital word processors.

The Writer’s Voice

Every writer develops a voice. It comes from years of reading, listening, observing, and reflecting on thought. Your rhythm, tone, and even your point of view are reflected in your writing style, or… voice.

Readers don’t respond to correctness; they respond to emotion, to authenticity. AI can not produce those nuances. It doesn’t care what a sentence means. It doesn’t feel the emotion of the loss of a pet or family member. It doesn’t feel the relief when a favorite character escapes a suspenseful moment.

When a writer outsources prose to an AI, the words may appear fluent, but they lack intent. The most memorable writing comes from experience, intent, and emotional agency.

AI Detectors

In many classrooms and workplaces, AI detectors have become the new authority. Teachers, editors, and administrators rely on them to determine if a piece is authentic or machine generated. In theory, this sounds reasonable, and perhaps even necessary. In function, this is deeply flawed.

AI detectors analyze statistical patterns. They look for sentence structure, word frequency, and even the clarity of phrasing. They are designed to pick up rhythm, grammar, punctuation. They look for AI generated text by using the same principles that AI was trained on, and the reality is that AI was trained on human writing.

Here’s the trouble. If you write well, if you use proper grammar, sentence structure, and punctuation, the detectors are likely to give a “false positive” because your writing style is what the detectors look for.

To give you an example, I wrote a 557 word scene directly into the text field of one of the most popular AI detection tools. Each word was my own, written in my voice, and was not preplanned. When I hit the button, it came back with a 98.7% AI generated probability.

I then gave identical prompts to three of the most popular AIs, asking them to generate a similar scene to what I had written. Without going into specific results and turning this into a scientific text, I will just say that I received results ranging from 41.1% to 100%, using several provided examples.

I then copied text from several published novels. I chose a variety of authors and genres, from the most current to pieces written centuries ago. My results are, I would like to say, surprising, but they weren’t. I received results up to 94.7%, and please don’t tell me that T.S. Eliot and William Shakespeare were using AI to write their prose.

So, what can we take from this? I believe that the only answer is, the theory is sound, but in practice, detectors have a long way to go before they can be considered reliable.

A Balanced Approach

In my opinion, using AI as a tool for creative thought assistance can be an invaluable addition to our workspace. But we must use caution to keep the process of creative writing human.

You will hear people, read articles and comments online by those so passionate against the use of AI, who say, “I have never, and I won’t ever use AI, for any reason.” I want to be the first to say that I applaud those individuals for their conviction, and I respect that conviction, but I find it unlikely to be completely true.

We have all been using AI for decades, and I challenge anyone to prove to me otherwise. AI has been included in word processing software, in its most rudimentary form, since the 1980s.

The spell checker, grammar checker, and automated thesaurus inside all of the popular systems are indeed a form of AI. Each time you see that little red squiggle under a misspelled word, or the solid red line suggesting a different word or form of punctuation, you are seeing AI.

When you right-click on the word and accept the suggestion it offers, you are using AI. The difference here is that you are using it as a tool, not as a content generator.

If you refuse all digital assistance: the spell checker, the grammar corrector, the word processor itself, then turn off your phone, tablet, or computer, and pick up a pencil and paper. For everyone else who accepts the efficiency of modern tools, use AI as a tool, not a replacement.