Artificial Intelligentsia Argumentum

Davy Carren
5 min readMay 7

“You know everything about literature, except how to enjoy it.”

“All they teach you in those wrting classes is how to sound just the same as everyone else.”

“That’s all the robots can do. They just generate information. That’s not writing; that’s regurgitation. It’s fine. It can be useful. But that’s not what a writer does.”

“It’s like this. Sell your shirt. Or is that the shirt off your back? Did you give it? Whose is it to take? How much? A diary entry for your thoughts. Need I go on?”

“Probably. This is a discusion after all. We are people. We discuss things.”

“I can say, ‘Blah!’ and then, ‘Blah, blah.’ But what difference does it make? Is it merely puncutaion followed by letters, grammar, diction, etcetera?”

“We are more than the sum of our pieces.”

“You mean ‘parts’?”

“That’s just it! Yes! Correct my spelling for me when I’m finished, will you?”

“Sure. We got robots to do that.”

“But do they do it always correctly, orderly, like you’d like it, huh?”

“Perhaps, no.”

“And by whose standards? Are the machines too fast for us to keep up?”

“They are.”

“Then it’s hopeless. We are at their mercy. But they can’t be us; they can only ape, copy, flail around in our semblance.”

“And in our sentences.”

“Sure. A robot could vomit words all over the page, but it’d be artificial vomit, fake puke. Not like mine. Not the real, putrid, intestinal stuff like ours. Even freewriting is a craft, and it’s one beyond learning. It just…is.”

“I hate it when you get ellpitical.”

“Ah. Auto-generate this!”

“Pleased as a sucker’s last drop of coffee. Ah.”

“We’re wafting waffling’s purest intent, again.”

“Let me note (and I’ll say it like this too, for now): nobody punctuates like you punctuate, Darling.”

“A robot could keep up and pass us, but it’d never know the real score, the unintentional intenionality of our puposes. A robot, a machine, it’s purpose is…

Davy Carren

The only writer who matters