Second Journal Response

Reflection

I think ChatGPT did a great job playing devil's advocate to my claim. While I still hold strong to my beliefs, I believe my stance on AI use in writing is more of a societal problem of people having too much access to it, and less of a problem with the tool itself. This framed it very nicely that AI can be used as a brainstorming first step so that writers can spend more time and money on the second line of brainstorming and framing. It also claimed that society, in return, needs to prevent this ideology by having control over its use of this abundance of information. By doing this, there is still an authentic idea that is simply aided by the use of this tool. This response didn't change my stance, but it gave me a broader perspective on the role that society needs to have in the use of this tool rather than condemning the tool itself. Just like much of modern technology, if it isn't abused, it is a great tool for thought. One question to consider and further examine is the role society needs to play now. Should there be classes and standards set in place to ensure that writer quality remains unique, or should people take it upon themselves to learn?


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

First Journal Outline

9/23/2025

9/25/2025