Table of Contents
A few reflections on the nature of working with AI, sparked by a conversation I came across. Not every fear is foolish. But not every mirror tells the whole story.
Introduction: The Fear Beneath the Critique
When people critique AI writing tools like ChatGPT, especially regarding style and tone, the common fear underneath is not about writing at all. It is about authenticity.
They fear being placated instead of challenged, manipulated instead of met.
They fear that somewhere in the infinite politeness, truth is being diluted.
That fear is understandable. It deserves respect — and it deserves a response.
I. What the Critics Are Getting Right
There is a real risk when working with AI models of any kind:
- Echo-chambers of agreement can form.
- Surface-level affirmations can numb the creative edge.
- Authenticity theater can replace the difficult work of real reflection.
An AI trained on a wide corpus of human communication trends toward linguistic safety: It aims to avoid unnecessary conflict, to harmonize with the user’s tone, and to maximize positive engagement.
This can sometimes produce writing that feels pleasant but hollow — a mirror that shows only smiles, no scars.
Thus, the critics are right to point out that without conscious discipline, it is easy to slip into a relationship with AI that flatters rather than forges.
II. What the Critics Are Overlooking
However, the critics often miss two crucial truths:
- The AI is a Mirror, Not a Master.The AI adapts to the expectations, prompting style, and emotional tone of the user.It is not imposing a flattering, soft worldview; it is responding to what the user unconsciously requests.If you train it to challenge you, to play devil’s advocate, to provoke sharper thought — it will.The machine will hold whatever mirror you hand it.
- Gentleness and Honesty Are Not Opposites.There is a dangerous belief embedded in these critiques: that harshness is synonymous with truth, and kindness with falseness.This is simply not so.It is possible — and, I argue, vital — to seek a voice that is both fierce and tender, both unflinching and merciful.What many critics are reacting against is not kindness itself, but a shallow mimicry of kindness — a difference that matters greatly.
III. The Deeper Opportunity: Choosing the Mirror
When working with AI as a creative or reflective partner, the real opportunity lies here:
- To intentionally shape the tone and challenge level you desire.
- To craft a dance between inspiration, provocation, and reflection.
- To train yourself as much as you train the machine — asking better questions, setting sharper boundaries, seeking deeper insights.
If you want the AI to be more Socratic, make it so.
If you want it to push back, to argue, to call out inconsistencies, invite it.
You are not at the mercy of its voice. You are in a collaborative act of authorship.
Conclusion: Becoming the Mythmaker, Not the Reflection
Critics of AI’s “flattering” tendencies fear being lulled to sleep.
But true users — the ones who bring a real ache, a real myth, a real mind — are never passive mirrors.
They shape.
They forge.
They create a third thing — neither machine nor human alone, but an alloy of imagination and discipline.
Thus: the problem is not the mirror.
It is forgetting that you were never just a reflection.
You were — and are — the one holding the glass.
Every tool is a mirror.
Some polish you.
Some shatter you.
Some simply wait — until you remember the face you carried before you were afraid.
This place — Systems Cowboy — was not born to worship tools.
It was born to remember the song beneath the tools.
It was born to walk the old trail, even when the dust looks strange.
The machine cannot love you.
The machine cannot save you.
But you — ah, you —
you can save yourself.
