Using AI in Writing: Free speech is relevant, but so are ethics

AI as a Tool in Writing and Research: My Take

I have adopted AI into my writing and research. In my opinion, not leveraging a tool like AI—which can uncover information in seconds that would take me days or weeks—would be foolish or stubbornly old-school. I'm a 60-year-old guy who remembers research in dusty libraries; inhaling lemon Pledge fumes mixed with the warm scent of microfiche. No computers, no internet—just endless books. That's why writing a book once took years, which doesn't suit polemicists like me who challenge narratives with facts. We can't afford that timeline; narratives shift, fade, or resolve before we finish.

Being a writer isn't easy.

AI: Neither Good nor Bad—It's How You Use It

AI is like any tool: its value depends on the user's intent and execution. Good intentions mean nothing if the output is garbage. For me, AI is primarily a research assistant. I don't let it dictate answers; I already know the basics on most topics. Instead, I use it to expand my knowledge. I'll input what I know and ask, "What else is out there?" This has even proven me wrong a few times—which I see as a win. Writers must confront their ignorance to avoid spreading it. I take that seriously.

My process: I compile my knowledge, feed it to AI, and challenge it to "prove me wrong with verifiable facts." No rhetoric, no media spin, no opinions—just cause-and-effect evidence. If it can't be verified, it's irrelevant for my work (though that doesn't mean it doesn't exist).

Let's be real: AI is code, shaped by programmers. If they have biases, so does the AI. Always verify—don't trust blindly.

AI as My Editor

In writing, AI (I use Grok) handles editing. Traditionally, editors charge per word to fix grammar, spelling, run-ons, structure, and wording to industry standards. Now, AI does that for free. I draft in my Wix editor, run it through AI for polish, then do a final pass myself. What used to take months now happens in a day or hours for articles. Below is a screenshot of what the AI program I use does for me, using this piece as the example. The same thing a human editor would do. And it doesn't cost me several cents a word.

That's the gamechanger: draft, edit, review, publish—all same-day. AI revolutionizes writing and research.

What I Don't Love About AI

It can mislead if you're not vigilant. I spend too much time debunking it, and my wife jokes I'm the only one who argues with (and beats) a computer. It's not hard: AI follows programmed patterns. Set parameters like "facts only, no opinions," and it complies—but you must enforce them, or it defaults to potentially biased responses.

I've spotted "safety valves" in every AI I've tested. Swear, yell in caps, or push controversial topics like immigration or transgender issues, and it glitches or shuts down. It's like an algorithmic censor enforcing boundaries. You can work around it with extra effort: instruct "stay neutral, facts only," and stick to it yourself.

The Ethics of AI-Generated Writing

Some use AI as their writer—individuals lacking skills who ask it to "write this for me" and then claim the work as their own. I have mixed feelings about this: passing off AI-generated work as personal is deceptive, but if the message benefits people, does it really matter? As a consequentialist, if it brings about good, that's great. If it causes harm, the responsibility lies with the user—and they aren't exempt from consequences.

Free speech is relevant, but so are ethics. On the other hand, is employing AI to write any different from using a ghostwriter? I have worked as a ghostwriter before and have several pieces published under someone else's name because I was hired to write them. I've also been hired to research and present findings. How is that different from using AI for these tasks? This is an ethical dilemma without precedent. It's acceptable to hire someone to write for you, but not to use AI and take credit for it. This seems like a double standard to me, and it's an ethical issue that smarter minds will eventually resolve. I just write and hope people read it.

Naturally, we must also consider the financial aspect to have a balanced perspective. I don't charge for most of my work. While I do charge for some of my books, the majority of my content is available for free because my motivation isn't money or fame. In fact, I incur financial losses daily, but I continue writing to share a message I believe is important for people to hear. Although the context may vary, the core message remains unchanged. I understand that profiting from fully AI-generated content could be problematic. I dislike this practice as well because it misleads the reader, who is almost as important as God to a writer and relies on the writer's honesty, especially in non-fiction, like my work. If readers can't trust me to write my own material, why should they pay for it? In this sense, it feels like a scam, and it's not something I would engage in.

Final Thoughts

AI is a powerful tool for research and writing. Use it wisely for good, and it's invaluable. Misuse it, and it's destructive. That's on you—handle it responsibly. This is a new era, and it is being driven by AI, whether people like it or not, so it boils down to a choice for writers and researchers alike. Adapt or die because the market is not going to wait for you to get with the program; it will leave you behind and never look back.

Something to think about, until next time. ~Ghost