Maybe we are all thinking about AI wrong
Stop asking what AI is capable of. Ask what you have to say.
Each time we think we have AI figured out, everything changes with new models or ways to use them. Maybe we are all thinking about AI wrong.
We keep trying to put AI into a box. But perhaps what really matters is not what AI can or cannot do, but how we choose to use it.
The blind men and AI
In the classic blind men and the elephant parable, each person touches a different part of the animal and draws wildly different conclusions. None of them are wrong, yet they all completely miss the bigger picture.
Each time I write about the use of generative AI in writing, I receive wildly different responses. The reason? Everyone is using it differently.
The linguistic camouflage
AI can effectively beautify poor or shallow writing, making it appear insightful until you actually read it. But the cracks appear quickly once you look beyond the synthetic coherence.
I personally think the best content will continue to be human written for a long time to come. Because AI cannot replace the craftsmanship and discernment needed to frame and write exceptional stories.
The practical path
Here are some ways I use AI to help me get better at writing, not replace me: quickly extracting quotes from a transcript, critiquing my long-form content, and fine-tuning text when copywriting.
A calculator doesn't make someone a mathematician; a spell-checker doesn't make someone a writer. AI amplifies existing capability rather than replacing it.
When it comes to writing, the question isn't whether to use AI. It's whether you have something to say.
What do you say?
Read the full Substack piece, expanded from last week's commentary, here.
