James O’Sullivan argues in his essay on Psyche.Co, “Essentially, the criteria for valuable writing might shift to provenance, from fluency to accountability, and writing that matters will be writing that can still function as evidence of human deliberation—work that cannot be faked because it carries the marks of genuine thought.”
This is romanticisation of writing. In reality, in practical terms, valuable writing is what moves the conversation forward and what a group in a given community considers valuable. One can put the most deliberate work into it and write it for years in a way nobody can fake. If nobody reads or cares, do we consider that writing valuable just because a human wrote it? We never did, and I doubt we will. Writing most move a community from A to B. It must solve a problem after identifying it. And everyone (or the majority) in that community must agree that it’s a problem that needs solving (even when the problem is fictitious).
Source(s): We’ll soon find out what is truly special about human writing by James O’Sullivan
