Why Your Fear of AI is Wasting Your Talent (And 5 Ways to Make Your Prose Undeniably Human)
Don’t Fear the Robot: How to Make your Writing Undeniably Human
Possibly the most depressing thing about the current state of the internet is seeing a proliferation of writing strewn across our cyber-space bemoaning new technology. Seeing entirely wasted human talent being used to pump out endless articles bemoaning the rise of Artificial Intelligence in writing is depressing. We seem to spend extensive energy fretting over the perceived “downfall” of writing as a hobby or profession, convinced that every piece of prose on the internet is now entirely generated by an AI or Large Language Model (LLM). This, in my view, demonstrates the futility with which humans often try to understand a new trend or set of technologies. We are hypocrites.
We bemoan the absurdity of a machine apparently taking our jobs and dehumanizing writing, yet still pump out huge amounts of garbage content ranting on about how the end is nigh due to LLMs being used by some writers to experiment with.
As a musician and a writer, I find I have a unique angle on the whole business of writing, or creating, authentically. Though my perspective probably won’t assuage the deepest fears held on platforms like Medium, it might offer a pathway forward. My insights are borne not of the imagined uniformity of the English language, but from the perspective of an artist who loves experimenting, making music in different ways, and embracing new technology as a tool. I won’t use the privilege of you reading this to give you ‘special strategies’ you’ll forget quickly. Instead, I want to offer five usable principles that ensure your writing is so intrinsically linked to your own consciousness that it can never be mistaken for machine output.
I’ve used these principles to prop up my own writing and ensure I’m never accused falsely of “being AI” (surely the most reductive and redundant phrase the internet seems to have adopted without thought.)
Here are the five pillars of undeniably human writing:
1. Use a Unique Range of Vocabulary: Make Your Voice Unique
Idea: I grew up reading Tolkien, Le Guin, C.S. Lewis, Pratchett, Thomas Hardy, Bill Bryson, Douglas Adams, and a broad range of literature before moving on to Descartes, Hume, Kant, Wittgenstein in my teenage years. This resulted in a broad exposure to many types of vocabulary both historical and archaic. I also grew up in the UK and was careful therefore to use English in the most ‘precise’ way possible. This means that even to this day, I still aim to try to use words which are not used as much.
Evidence: Engaging with a diverse range of complex literature and philosophical texts is scientifically proven to build a superior vocabulary. This is because complex texts expose readers to a higher density of low-frequency words, driving a process called incidental vocabulary learning. This continuous exposure leads to enhanced lexical quality, meaning you acquire precise, nuanced knowledge of words, which supports the ability to use language with better accuracy and increased richness.
Reason: AI doesn’t have your unique voice. Stop trying to make your voice sound uniform. Lean in to your comprehensive and unique reading. Revisit old books, re-read your favourites and remind yourself why you’re writing in the first place. Don’t be afraid to make your writing seasonal: use certain words for periods of your writing to distinguish it from other months or years. Essentially, do not be afraid to use unique words, language and even syntax. Make your writing truly unique.
— -The Influence of Reading on Vocabulary Growth: A Case for a Matthew Effect: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4610292/
— -Lexical Precision in Skilled Readers: Individual Differences in Masked Neighbor Priming: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/44569234_Lexical_Precision_in_Skilled_Readers_Individual_Differences_in_Masked_Neighbor_Priming
— -The Impact of Extensive Reading of Novels on Students’ English Vocabulary Acquisition: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/388636520_The_Impact_of_Extensive_Reading_of_Novels_on_Students'_English_Vocabulary_Acquisition
2. Integrate Geographic/Linguistic Flavour: Make Your Context Count
Idea: I deliberately weave my varied literary and academic background into my prose to add authenticity and regional texture wherever possible. This involves choosing my audience first: for Canadian readers, I use Canadian English conventions (e.g., words like colour, neighbour, and certain idioms) and references to Canadian culture. When targeting a global or UK audience, I might lean into British English lexicon and pacing, reflecting my upbringing in the UK. I also have the unique ability to occasionally use Japanese linguistic concepts or cultural observations, drawing on my experience living there, to offer fresh metaphors or specific vocabulary that illuminates a concept in a unique way. Sometimes I’ll accidentally mix up the two conventions which can be somewhat confusing for my readers: am I British or North American? I do pity them, sometimes.
Evidence: Studies show how a speaker’s, or writer’s, geographic and social background influences their language choices, including accent, lexicon, and syntax. Language use is intrinsically linked to identity, and deploying specific dialect features (like British or Canadian regional spelling or vocabulary) activates cultural schema in the reader, leading to a richer, more contextualized reading experience. This deliberate code-switching, or stylistic choice, is a powerful tool for building ethos (credibility) and pathos (emotional connection) with a targeted audience, confirming the writer is an authentic member of that cultural or linguistic group. For me, this is most apparent when writing absurdist prose for my Jake Fidellius series.
Reason: AI models, while sometimes capable of producing linguistically correct regional variations, often lack the intuitive nuance required for seamless, authentic flavour. That is, unless you add a huge extra paragraph to the prompt explaining who you are and where you’ve lived. AI struggles to organically integrate cultural references, specific idioms, or the emotional context behind dialectal choices. By actively choosing a specific dialectal base (Canadian vs. British English) or injecting terms that require lived experience (like concepts from Japanese culture), you create points of connection that are inherently human. Try not to smooth out your linguistic history; use it to establish immediate rapport, clarify your perspective, and ensure your writing is grounded in real-world context that an algorithm cannot replicate.
— -Exploring Role of Language in Constructing Individual Identities: https://ijhss.thebrpi.org/journals/Vol_6_No_3_March_2016/26.pdf
— -Code-Switching and Audience: Code-Switching as a Communicative Strategy in Different Contexts: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/229441199_Code_switching_and_code_mixing_as_a_communicative_strategy_in_multilingual_discourse
— -Cultural Schemata in Reading: The Cultural Component in Reading Comprehension: https://www.jstor.org/stable/358740
3. Employ Novel Analogies & Structural Hooks: Capture Attention Immediately
Idea: I intentionally start writing blocks or sections, particularly when introducing an interesting concept, not with a standard topic sentence, but with a unique analogy, metaphor, or vivid personal example that acts as an interpretive lens. For instance, explaining a difficult philosophical concept by comparing it to an obscure animal such as a peacock (my favourite), or using a specific, highly detailed memory from living in Japan as the foundation for a philosophical principle. The rest of the paragraph or section then unpacks this analogy, linking the concrete image to the abstract idea. I let this happen naturally and sometimes blunderously, but still, I try to create something interesting for readers to follow (even if not all understand my prosaic rants.)
Evidence: Cognitive Psychology research on learning and memory consistently shows that the use of analogy and metaphor is crucial for deep understanding. Analogies function by mapping a novel, abstract domain (the target) onto a familiar, concrete domain (the source). This process, known as Conceptual Metaphor Theory (Lakoff & Johnson, below), allows the reader to bypass mental fatigue and instantly grasp the underlying structure of a difficult idea. In theory this ought to happen, but sometimes I probably miss the mark somewhat. Furthermore, a highly unique or unexpected narrative hook at the start of a passage triggers the curiosity gap, significantly increasing reader engagement, retention, and the perception of the writing as original and insightful.
Reason: AI often produces competent, but predictable, analogies that have been extensively used online (e.g., comparing complexity to a “jigsaw puzzle”). However, we all know that it lacks the lived experience and real-life associations necessary to generate truly novel or domain-specific analogies (e.g., my specific experiences with British literature or Japanese culture after having lived in Kofu new Mount Fuji). By grounding your abstract ideas in unique, specific, and memorable starting structures. such as an anecdote or a personalized metaphor, you instantly inject your own consciousness and history into the text. This technique makes the writing sticky, ensuring the reader remembers your explanation and your voice, not just the prose and what you’re conveying.
— -Conceptual Metaphor Theory and Understanding: Metaphors We Live By (Foundational text on how metaphor structures thought): https://ceulearning.ceu.edu/pluginfile.php/100337/mod_forum/attachment/9319/Metaphors%20We%20Live%20By.pdf
— -Introduction: The Place of Analogy in Cognition: https://groups.psych.northwestern.edu/gentner/papers/HolyoakGentnerKokinov01.pdf
— -Knowledge Gap Illustrations Spark Curiosity: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/394886093_Knowledge_Gap_Illustrations_Spark_Curiosity
4. Embrace Nuance and Contradiction: Show Your Workings
Idea: To signal authenticity, I sometimes deliberately state two opposing or highly nuanced views on a single topic, even allowing them to temporarily contradict each other, reflecting the complexity of real-world decision-making. For example, I might argue forcefully for the efficiency of remote work, and then in the next paragraph, argue equally forcefully for the intangible creative benefits derived only from in-person office culture. This isn’t about hedging; it’s about showing the reader the full spectrum of consideration, making the final conclusion (or lack thereof) more honest. Sometimes I will do this with my perspectives on AI and LLM models, too, meaning I often contract myself openly. I don’t mind this vulnerability and thrive off of it.
Evidence: Embracing Aporia (a state of puzzlement or doubt) is a time-honoured method for deep intellectual engagement. Furthermore, Cognitive Science research (below) on human decision-making confirms that people rarely hold perfectly consistent beliefs. Instead, we operate with multiple, competing frames of reference simultaneously. When a writer presents a smooth, internally consistent argument, it often feels synthetic. When a writer articulates a legitimate tension, such as acknowledging that two opposing views both hold merit, it mimics human internal dialogue. This, in turn, shows your humanity and flexibility. AI cannot do this, unless given a large prompt asking it to do so. By the time you’ve told the prompt or AI model to comntradict itself, you might as well have just written the article yourself: a futile waste of time indeed.
Reason: AI excels at generating boring, consistent, black-and-white responses because it prioritizes the highest probability outcome based on its training data, minimizing conflict. It rarely presents genuine ambivalence or ideological tension unless explicitly forced. By consciously contradicting your own points or expressing doubt about a previous assertion, you inject intellectual humility and real complexity into the prose. This shows the reader that the topic is not simple and that you, the writer, are genuinely grappling with difficult trade-offs. This technique builds trust and demonstrates that your conclusions are the result of consideration, not merely calculation. Basically, show your messy, human workings.
— -Rhetoric, discourse and the hermeneutics of public speech: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0263395720933779
— -Consistency and Cognitive Dissonance: A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance: https://www.apa.org/pubs/books/Cognitive-Dissonance-Intro-Sample.pdf
— -Understanding the Dual Nature of Ambivalence: Why and When Ambivalence Leads to Good and Bad Outcomes: https://journals.aom.org/doi/10.5465/annals.2014.0066
5. The Final Principle: Just Write (Quantity over Perfection)
Idea: My most fundamental humanizing technique is sheer, unfiltered writing volume. I aim for a minimum output every day (i.e., around 1000 words after several espressos), prioritizing the consistent act of creation over immediate editorial perfection. The goal is to fill the page with my stream of consciousness, cultural baggage, flawed logic, unique word choices, and emotional reactions. This raw, voluminous output ensures that my deeply individual voice and perspective dominate the text, creating a body of work that is intrinsically unique to me. When I publish on KDP or other platforms, I often leave editing for an updated edition as I like to show readers my raw writing, streams of conciousness etc.
Evidence: Educational and writing studies emphasize that writing frequency and quantity are the strongest predictors of developing a distinctive and confident voice. This practice aligns with the theory of Fluency and Expertise Development, where high-volume practice, even if flawed initially, deepens neural pathways for complex skills and allows unique stylistic elements to emerge organically. Researchers note that true individual style, i.e., the human ‘flavour’, is not designed, but discovered through the continuous process of high volume creation. AI, despite its speed, operates by calculating probability, not by participating in this iterative process of personal discovery. Essentially, you cannot tell an AI or LLM model to be ‘messy’ and ‘human’. To do so would take more effort than simpoly sitting down and writing your stream of conciousness out onto a blank Google Docs page.
Reason: AI is trained to produce the median best answer; it cannot produce the idiosyncratic energy of a messy first draft driven by enthusiasm or frustration. You are a human: you hold the power. Your daily writing habit, regardless of the quality of the output, guarantees a high concentration of personal history, unique syntax, and momentary self-contradictions that AI cannot replicate or synthesize on its own. Your volume of work is your ultimate defence, your workings and your ramblings are armour against Ai generated crap.
Write! Literally just write. Even if it’s just 1000 words per day, just write. AI cannot write by itself. You are a human: you hold the power. Get on to it, now!
— -Writing fluency: Its relations with language, cognitive, and transcription skills, and writing quality: https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2024-80300-003
— -The Effects of Quantity and Frequency in Writing Instruction: High-Volume Practice and Student Writing Achievement: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/326084954_When_the_type_of_practice_matters_The_relationship_between_typical_writing_instruction_student_practice_and_writing_achievement_in_first_grade
—A Surefire Technique for Finding Your Voice: https://www.writingclasses.com/toolbox/articles/a-surefire-technique-for-finding-your-voice
