Since ChatGPT was unleashed on the world three-ish years ago, AI has begun to feel inescapable. I was trying to fill out a PDF form yesterday and had to dismiss the unwanted solicitations of the “AI Assistant” at least five times for a mere two pages. However, this forced ubiquity has obscured the essential fact that using or not using so-called “generative” AI remains a choice. Generative AI is simply a tool, and like any tool, it is not fit for every purpose: a sledgehammer isn’t much use if you need to tighten a screw, after all. Leaving aside any other considerations, generative AI is not a tool I use in my editing practice for one very simple reason: it cannot provide any value when it comes to my approach to editing.

As I mentioned in my first blog post, I see language as a tool, one whose primary use for human beings is to communicate meaning to other people (the audience) to achieve specific goals (the purpose).  By contrast, so-called “generative” AI does not “generate” text to communicate a message for any reason; rather, it guesses what word or words are likely to come next based on a mathematical computation. Simplifying to the extreme, no matter how impressive or “highly trained” the machine, meaning never enters into the equation.

As I also mentioned in my first blog, my approach to editing prioritizes communication above all else: my job as an editor is to help you and your writing communicate your meaning to your audience as effectively and efficiently as possible. Since GenAI cannot either understand or communicate meaning, it has nothing to bring to the table. Only a human editor can really help you deliver your message.

If you are interested in exploring further what I can do for your writing, please contact me today.