I’ve been a big proponent of AI-language generation tools like ChatGPT and AI-art generation tools like PhotoLeap. I find myself often at odds with fellow English teachers, authors, and artists in this. They argue that these tools can undermine the creativity, nuance, and originality that are essential to artistic and literary expression. I likewise find myself discussing ChatGPT with more conservative friends, who express concerns about the Left-leaning programming inherent in the AI. They argue that use of the tool is too limited and designed to support Leftist political agendas. However, I think that it’s foolish to cede such a powerful tool to ideological opponents and likewise foolish to pretend that such a tool is going to go away.

English teachers, authors, and artists argue that AI-generated writing or art lacks the emotional depth and human touch that is necessary for truly meaningful work. Others worry that the use of AI language generation tools can lead to a homogenization of language and culture, where all writing and speech sounds the same, and individual expression is lost. Some also express concern that the use of AI-art generation tools can lead to a devaluation of human labor and talent as the creation of art becomes increasingly automated and less reliant on human skill and creativity. These critics caution against relying too heavily on AI-generated content and encourage a continued emphasis on human creativity and expression. I can’t say that these arguments lack merit. Further, the idea that as automation increases, making production-type jobs fewer and fewer, that we will be moved towards more artistic endeavors becomes problematic as AI-created artforms flood the world.

I’ve discussed this at length with other teachers at my school (which is fully remote online school), and there is significant concern about cheating and plagiarism. When I first came to ChatGPT, I spent three weeks in a daze trying to figure out how I could address this in my courses. I could input my detailed prompt for my students’ essay exam on Beowulf and get quite good responses that differed each time I put it in. Gone were the days where I could easily pick out plagiarized work based on certain phrases I’ve seen across multiple papers. But the more I considered it, the more I realized this tool would not be going away, and as good as it is now, the technology will only ever get better. What I should be doing then, is teaching my students how to use the tool responsibly to put their own thoughts and understanding into well-written text rather than just let my students find it and figure it out on their own. To ignore this tool would be a disservice to my students. Does this mean to discourage my students from writing? By no means! In fact, it can actually facilitate writing among students who would otherwise NEVER write any text longer than an email beyond their academic career.

Of course, that ChatGPT facilitates MORE people from sharing their thoughts in a more coherent fashion than ever known in human civilization. This can create a flood of information—which is already an issue with the Internet. But right now, content-creators of various ideological perspectives are widely available. However, if tools like ChatGPT are wholesale eschewed by any prominent political party you run into a number of problems. Conservatives or those of any political ideology should not ignore AI language generating tools like ChatGPT or cede such tools to their ideological opponents because these tools have the potential to shape public discourse and opinion in significant ways. As AI-generators become more sophisticated and widely used, they have the potential to influence public policy, shape public perception, and impact social and political outcomes.

By ignoring or ceding AI language generating tools to their ideological opponents, conservatives risk losing the ability to shape public opinion and influence public policy. As AI language models become more prevalent in the public sphere, they will increasingly shape public perception and discourse, and it is essential for conservatives to engage with these tools in order to ensure that their perspectives and beliefs are represented and considered. Moreover, ignoring or ceding AI language generating tools to their ideological opponents may also reinforce existing biases and echo chambers in public discourse. If only one side of the political spectrum is using AI language generating tools to shape public opinion and discourse, then the perspectives and beliefs of the other side may be excluded or marginalized, leading to an even more polarized and divided public discourse.