By: Zainab Salam, Staff Writer
As a university student, the past few years have been odd. When I began my university career, the concept of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) felt like a futuristic thing that someone like me, who doesn’t like using technology much, wouldn’t have to deal with for decades. In the past year or so, there was a shift in how the syllabus began to be presented to us. Suddenly, professors were warning us against plagiarism through AI use. Some universities even began to enforce strict GenAI rules. At SFU, the policies surrounding the use of GenAI are at the instructor’s discretion. Ironically, I wouldn’t have even considered that GenAI tools could be used for educational purposes if it weren’t for the unintentional marketing through professors — mostly through banning us from using it.
That being said, we are running into a dilemma. With the increase in AI combatting regulations, we are seeing an increase in the complexity of assignments. Ironically, that increase in complexity is assisted by AI software and encouraged by higher education institutions. Considering that students need to remain in good academic standing, the worth of the grade is estimated at a higher value than the benefit of learning. For the average student, an important question arises: do I work more hours to provide for myself, or do I spend more time studying when the benefits are in the future? The answer to this question is quite simple: when there is an option to help attain higher grades while keeping a roof over your head, you are more likely to take it. It quickly becomes apparent that the overall benefit for our minds takes a backseat to the need of the moment.
Online, it’s been another deal altogether. GenAI and its array of writing tools are often marketed to streamline the writing process. However, with time, it’s become clear that reality is more complex. At its core, writing is both an art and a form of communication, a human process rooted in individuality. Relying on GenAI to write is not just a shortcut; it’s a compromise of authenticity and meaning.
A glaring flaw in AI-generated writing is its illusion of objectivity. While GenAI systems are programmed to produce text that appears neutral or unbiased, this is misleading. The data that GenAI pulls from is riddled with bias stemming from the bias of its sources. So, the outputs may inadvertently reflect stereotypes, outdated perspectives, or cultural insensitivity. For instance, GenAI translation tools may struggle with non-western languages that have complex grammatical structures or idiomatic expressions, resulting in oversimplifications or misrepresentations. This not only can be offensive, but also contributes to cultural homogenization by prioritizing dominant cultural values over those of minority cultures.
“Ultimately, writing is more than just stringing words together; it’s about conveying one’s unique perspective and crafting a message that only a human mind can fully conceive. GenAI cannot encapsulate the creative force or personal depth that comes from writing with intention and heart.”
On the other hand, human writing can embrace both objectivity and subjectivity, depending on our writing needs. Our words are shaped by personal experiences, cultural backgrounds, and diverse ways of thinking. This makes every piece of human writing unique. In contrast, AI-generated text often comes across as generic or hollow because it universalizes inherently personal and varied concepts.
One of the fundamental issues with AI-generated text is that it lacks the personal touch essential to genuine writing. Programs like ChatGPT don’t create from experience. Instead, they generate content by analyzing patterns in vast datasets, essentially reforming existing information. While this may be useful for simple prompts or checking grammar, it cannot substitute for the creative and personal process that human writing entails. Writing is a skill that requires consistent practice to develop. Using GenAI to complete writing tasks robs individuals of the opportunity to refine their voice and storytelling ability. If the words aren’t coming from you, are you saying anything at all?
As of late, GenAI has been converging with our lives. Even credible sources are promoting its use in professional settings in the name of enhancing productivity. However, should productivity be the end goal for all our professional endeavours? Should I aspire to work in a company if GenAI can be and is preferred over me? This sentiment does not extend to cases where GenAI can decrease the level of danger that workers face in physical labour jobs. In that case, the well-being of the person is of the utmost importance.
As a species, we are not the strongest, fastest, or most adaptable in the physical sense. However, we are intellectual. Our communication skills are what make us stand apart from the rest of the living creatures. Language is one type of communication that humans can use. Words are one of our superpowers. Writing has enabled us to articulate ideas, preserve knowledge, and inspire change throughout history. Writing is not just a skill; it’s the expression of our shared humanity. This superpower is as strong as its wielder. When we rely on GenAI to write for us, we are not merely outsourcing a task, we are diluting our ability.
In reality, GenAI falls short when it comes to creating meaningful work. The power of storytelling, which in many ways is relevant even in academic texts, lies in its ability to connect and resonate on an insightful level. Writing is an extension of the writer; their ideas, feelings, and influences are transcribed through their words. Ultimately, writing is more than just stringing words together; it’s about conveying one’s unique perspective and crafting a message that only a human mind can fully conceive. GenAI cannot encapsulate the creative force or personal depth that comes from writing with intention and heart. When it comes to telling your story, the best voice will always be your own.
