Tag Archives: netnarr23


The internet is the brain of AI, and is filled with information on nearly every muse we could see or imagine. But what about those that we can’t imagine?

That sounds like a strange and somewhat scary question– probably because it is. If the things we can already imagine are scaring us to a point of wanting to stop or censor it, then what about the things that do not make sense to our tiny human brains? How many times have we stood in fear of something people have created? How often do we stand in awe-struck fear of our own Creator, let alone the discipline of the very people who brought is into and up in this world? Does that fear stop our stubborn human nature? Why should something that we have created be any different?

We should not let fear of harm overpower our imagination for the possibilities of what may be the next printing press or internet.

Censoring the technologies of free expression ; Ronald K. L. CollinsRyne Weiss

And that fear is exactly what keeps us running is circles as we ride our muses as a horse in a race.

I would, to some degree, argue that without a muse we are running around in circles rather than reaching a point. For example, theories on geological dating of rocks (especially sedimentary rocks) often depends on the fossils within them. But then again, how do we know when particular fossils were formed? No one was there to observe or record the existence of the fossilized organism, and the rock’s estimated formation is dependent on the fossil? Geologists that don’t play into the young earth ideology that many Christians hold will often say the date of the fossil is dependent on either the formation of the rock (which we’ve already established is informed by the fossil) or macro-evolutionary theory– something that has yet to occur before our very eyes, let alone replicated by scientists. We begin to fall into circular reasoning that I think was best explained by John Morris:

In circular reasoning, instead of proceeding from observation to conclusion, the conclusion interprets the observation, which “proves” the conclusion. … Thus, the rocks date the fossils, and the fossils date the rocks. The unquestioned assumption of evolution provides the context for the entire process.

The Young Earth: The Real History of the Earth– Past, Present, and Future ; John Morris

My point is that when we’re writing, the muse is the point. Though an AI may help us to decipher how to go about that point, it’s not the best at getting to that point on its own in a way that is unique to your muse. And I think we often get caught in the details about the muse, or maybe in how the muse makes us feel or react (I’ve most certainly been guilty of this). But then we use those details to interpret the muse. We then become trapped in this circular reasoning in our writing when we simply observe and don’t ask questions and go somewhere from there.

I like how Nick Cave put it in his letter to the people at MTV:

She comes to me with the gift of song and in return I treat her with the respect I feel she deserves — in this case this means not subjecting her to the indignities of judgement and competition. My muse is not a horse and I am in no horse race and if indeed she was, still I would not harness her to this tumbrel — this bloody cart of severed heads and glittering prizes. My muse may spook! May bolt! May abandon me completely!

My muse is not a horse, Nick Cave

The muse should not be a horse kept in stables and enclosures, or a horse that runs circles. Our creativity should not subject the muse to that. While observations can be beautiful and profound, sometimes with points that can be left for interpretation by the audience, they most often do not answer the questions in such a way that leaves us in awesome wonder. Making plain observations simply leaves the piece at nothing more than a piece of writing– often with little room for the audience to take part in this process of creation (as Madeleine L’Engle often invites her audience into with her work, such as A Wrinkle in Time). Her work leaves people asking questions, and challenges audiences to learn throughout their adventures through her work. I’d like to reiterate a quote from Walking on Water:

When language is diminished, I am thereby diminished, too. In time of war language always dwindles… We think because we have words, not the other way around. The more words we have, the better able we are to think conceptually. … As a child, when I came across a word I didn’t know, I didn’t stop reading the story to look it up, I just went on reading. And after I had come across the word in several books, I knew what it meant… We were capable of absorbing far more vocabulary when we read straight on than when we stopped to look up every word. … If our vocabulary dwindles to a few shopworn words, we are setting ourselves up for takeover by a dictator. When language becomes exhausted, our freedom dwindles…

Walking on Water, Madeleine L’Engle (p.29-31)

And circling back to the point of this class, AI uses the language we are already likely to use. It’s brain is the internet– the lump sum of human output and interaction– and especially when asking AI language programs to put together a creative piece, it calculates something that we are likely to understand. Instead of challenging us, it gives us what we are already comfortable with. Instead of leaving us asking questions or trusting the audience to be able to pick up particular details, it over-explains or makes things so obvious that the reader has no job but to consume. Creative writing is much more than consumption, awards, or race horses running around a track– it’s about the muse.

It just occurred to me to look up the actual definition of a muse. There are two forms of the word, both of which I find relevant.

  1. NOUN : a person or personified force who is the source of inspiration for a creative artist.
  2. VERB : to be absorbed in thought ; to say to oneself in a thoughtful manner ; to gaze thoughtfully at.

See, the muse is the source of inspiration, thought, or I would even dare to say it’s the source of questioning. The creative act is daring to explore those questions, while AI seeks merely to answer them. But because of the heavy idolization and reliance on technology, we’ve already been primed, in large part, to want answers more than adventure or experience.

The only other question I have regarding this topic for the moment is one that I already know my answer for– dare I even say, the answer to. I want to challenge you to think about it too though. What is the muse of the muse– it’s source and reason for existing in the first place? Given that the muse inspires so much in us as mere humans, and that we often still have some dominion over these muses, especially in a creative sense, how much more powerful do you think the Artist that created your muse is? Is that something that leaves you in awesome wonder and even asking more questions than the muse itself? I would think so if your answer is anything like mine.


I already find myself glued to my phone enough. Watching everyone build-a-bot like some custom stuffed bear that we used to go out and interact with people to make ourselves with our own hands is… well… depressing. Putting off the pain via these mind-numbing intelligent artificial besties– however custom to the individual they may be– will only cause it to come crashing down if not in this generation, than in the next. Do we really want that for ourselves, let alone our children?

Though I do understand the many things that this sort of technology has helped with, there are many other things that just seem to have gotten worse.

I’m already starting to realize that the most difficult part of this project is somehow using artificial intelligence to write this story. I know how to use ChatGPT already, and last class helped me to understand how to use SudoWrite– I feel completely comfortable using both tools. The issue is arising that I already have an idea of where I want to go with this piece and since short pieces tend to be more of my forte, I’m not inclined to want help because I don’t feel like I need it. (I think part of it is also that these AI’s don’t exactly produce quality content).

As for how last class has helped me, I think being given time to try AI language generators that I haven’t explored yet helped. Before last week, I’d only gotten to try ChatGPT. I tried SudoWrite though; its design elicits more collaboration between the algorithm and the author. I didn’t like exactly how it was formatted, but once I figured that out I liked the way it functions better. I think the next step to this process is to try writing every other sentence based on what I already have written above.


In reading the articles for this week, all I could think of were the several places in the Bible where humanity is advised not to fall into a place of utmost dependence on anything or anyone but God. We should be able to use what He’s provided us with for what needs to get done.

For freedom Christ has set us free; stand firm therefore, and do not submit again to a yoke of slavery.

Galatians 5:1, ESV

and to aspire to live quietly, and to mind your own affairs, and to work with your hands, as we instructed you, so that you may walk properly before outsiders and be dependent on no one.

1 Thessalonians 4:11-12, ESV

In many ways, we are already pretty heavily enslaved to technology. Anyone else ever walked into a pole or tripped on something because you were on your phone? Ever witnessed that happen to someone else? Chances are at least one of those questions, when honestly answered, is a yes. I admit, I’m a yes to both.

This said, there is a scary element to AI that seems to be unfolding behind the major headlines of today. Ever hear of the Federal Reserve’s new FedNow system? It’s essentially a newly announced federal central online bank. Seems convenient, right? Well, let’s remember who’s running it– the government. Let’s also consider what other countries have similar systems already in place, like China, which now has the power to freeze and shut down accounts or take money from accounts when any particular citizen so much as jaywalks, let alone criticizes the establishment.

And AI has the ability to track these things and record them– the man behind the server being free to sell that information because even if it is illegal, the value that information holds will get him more than enough money to escape with hardly a slap on the wrist.

Now, this is hardly the first time that the idea of a central bank has been thrown around, but it is something to take into account with regard to how technology and AI might affect humanity. We can definitely look back to the short film we watched, frames.

Here’s one of the other things with AI: when we begin to rely on it, it’s like a pot that’s too small for a plant. Hear me out– a large plant in a small pot gets root-bound, meaning its own roots begin to suffocate one another as the plant grows until it just can’t grow or survive. In essence, when we hold heavy reliance in technology, we suffocate our own roots as human beings. We become the dry shrub rolling around that Jeremiah describes:

Thus says the Lord: “Cursed is the man who trusts in man and makes flesh his strength, whose heart turns away from the Lord. He is like a shrub in the desert, and shall not see any good come. He shall dwell in the parched places of the wilderness, in an uninhabited salt land. “Blessed is the man who trusts in the Lord, whose trust is the Lord. He is like a tree planted by water, that sends out its roots by the stream, and does not fear when heat comes, for its leaves remain green, and is not anxious in the year of drought, for it does not cease to bear fruit.”

Jeremiah 17:5-8, ESV

But how is AI a small pot when its “brain” is so vast? The answer to that question is similar to the one I asked before regarding walking into poles or tripping on something because you or someone you observed was on…

We don’t pay attention anymore. We don’t learn to observe and we simply rely on internet searches and how-to guides and videos. We don’t learn to discover with our own hands, through our own mistakes when the use of this technology is so unchecked. Its pervasiveness isn’t what’s necessarily bad– it’s the fact that we have not addressed where the healthy boundary is so that we as humans can still survive without it. In many cases today, I doubt most people can, myself included (which as a Christian is definitely something I should seek more accountability on, hence why I include that detail here).

And there’s a quote that struck me from a book I’m currently reading regarding this (though not specifically AI) regarding writing. I highly, highly, highly recommend Walking on Water by Madeleine L’Engle, regardless of your faith. Even if you’re not a Christian, there’s a lot to be learned on writing and art from the A Wrinkle in Time author. The quote that struck me though is this:

When language is diminished, I am thereby diminished, too. In time of war language always dwindles… We think because we have words, not the other way around. The more words we have, the better able we are to think conceptually. … As a child, when I came across a word I didn’t know, I didn’t stop reading the story to look it up, I just went on reading. And after I had come across the word in several books, I knew what it meant… We were capable of absorbing far more vocabulary when we read straight on than when we stopped to look up every word. … If our vocabulary dwindles to a few shopworn words, we are setting ourselves up for takeover by a dictator. When language becomes exhausted, our freedom dwindles…

Walking on Water, Madeleine L’Engle (p.29-31)

There is a reason that The Word was in the beginning. God spoke everything into existence. Jesus is the Word that John refers to at the beginning of his Gospel narrative, demonstrating once again how the three persons of the trinity were present before, during, and after creation was created. Like I’ve said before though, the power of life and death is indeed in the tongue, whether in speech or on paper or on a screen.

It’s a really busy week ahead for me so I’m getting cut a little short on my thoughts here for time’s sake. I’ll just leave you with one more verse and a question though:

And let us consider how to stir up one another to love and good works, not neglecting to meet together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another, and all the more as you see the Day drawing near.

Hebrews 10:24-25, ESV

How is AI and other technology being used to encourage people, and is it actually doing a good job at it?

(I think particularly of the strong correlations between both certain imperative, life-saving advancements as well as those that plague the minds and mental well being of so many, especially young people).


I can’t agree that “Technology is the thing that makes us us,” as Reid Hoffman put it. Yes, it may play a key role in how we develop and acquire knowledge, wisdom, or different types of intelligence, but technology does not (and frankly, should not) hold that kind of power over our identity. Someone last semester in elit mentioned the idea that creation is supposed to submit to its creator– I’d completely agree with that statement, though not without acknowledging that this is not always the case. We’re seeing this with AI developing so fast that it might surpass the intellect of the humans that created it and deviate from its original design, and we’ve seen this before with humanity as a whole deviating from its original design: to live in communion and submission to God. So just as it is not we as humans who define God, we are made in His image in such a way that we also are not defined by the things we create or do. The things we create, such as AI, reflect a piece of our humanity– the difference between the two is so important to realize.

This may seem completely unrelated, but I promise this has something to do with that point still: I’ve placed my identity in a lot of what I’ve put out into the world, what I’ve been able to do for people (including myself), or even in who I am by itself without any sort of foundation– “my truth,” if you will. The reason I say that saying technology or AI somehow defines who we are or what humanity is so dangerous is because making the foundation of who I am what I could make, do, or be was actually so detrimental to my overall health and existence. I mentioned something in my last post about Ecclesiastes 1:9, and this is exactly what is happening here. When humanity’s identity is in anything but its creator, it never ends well. Ever notice how in Genesis Adam doesn’t give Eve her name until after the fall? Yea, a solid foundation for identity is important– submission to the purpose that identity holds is just as important.

That said, it is still something that brings light to what humanity really means. Like I said, the things we create are still reflections of humanity. Hoffman does mention this, though it seemed as if he saw that reflection as the real thing– the actual, legitimate, tangible display of humanity. But also like I mentioned and I’m sure we’ve all noticed at some points in life, humanity is pretty fallen and depraved. Technology doesn’t always work the way we want it to because it reflects that– AI is likely to develop and do exactly that. Example A:

Again, Hoffman acknowledges this as well in his article. What I found to be an interesting statement was this: “Nor would I ever suggest that technologies are neutral, equally capable of being used for good or bad.” I was really going to say that technology itself can be neutral, but I hesitate to even say that a human being can be truly neutral. As this entire post I’ve been harping on about how it reflects our human nature rather than replacing or defining it.

And I know a lot of what I’ve said thus far about the nature of our humanity that technology reflects is negative, but I want to take a moment to actually talk about the goodness of humanity too. Hoffman vocalizes some good and important propositions for which technology, including AI, can be used. Humanity was created and the only thing God created and said was very good. As we are created and seen as a masterpiece by God, we could also say the same of what we create. As God can still use some of the worst people for good, we can still use these potentially bad things for so much good. In many ways it goes back to intention.

So there is some hope for AI being more of a tool than a weapon, as there’s been hope for humanity from the beginning. There are ways to use it to help people. There are better ways to implement it than we’ve seen with things like Chat GPT coming out before software to help detect AI writing has been equally developed.


One of the things I admired about James McBride was not only his acknowledgment of hardship, but what I saw as some level of gratitude for it. It was relatable and genuine, and I thought it especially inspiring that he still spoke not only on learning to persevere but also on what I like to call “burning coals.” In other words, he still displayed a tone of kindness with much of what he talked about, even when it comes to the people that have hurt us (with the boundaries necessary to guard one’s own heart, of course). In a very eye-for-an-eye culture that simultaneously preaches on kindness and acceptance, I know there are a lot of people that probably needed that reminder that we live in the age of grace– Exodus 21 and Hosea 3 were atonements foreshadowing the grace that was then to come, and has now already come. Passages like those demonstrate that there was a price to be paid so we can now stand here with all the details available to us and recognize it was paid for us. Of course, McBride didn’t explicitly preach like that, but the ideas were still present in what he did present.

As for what that has to do with trauma in education, I can say from some of my own experience that this particular point I noticed out of James McBride’s lecture is more important to working with traumatized students, regardless of what the trauma actually is. I’ve tried talking and writing about it as a means of letting it go, but really I was just reliving everything in my mind again. It helped me to some extent, until I plateaued, and sometimes crashed. I held this mentality that I didn’t have to forgive or forget, I just had to get over it or learn to live with it– and I was so, so wrong about that.

Studies have shown that gratitude cannot be simultaneously processed with negative emotions and details, and that the more we practice processing gratitude, the more resilient our minds become to adversity. I believe it was Dr. Norman Doidge that often recites the principle that “neurons that fire together, wire together.” So the more we recite the details, the more we will experience it again within our own minds, affecting memory.

(To clarify, this does not mean that we should repress and totally avoid thinking or talking about the reality of pain and trauma. This process of rumination is important to post-traumatic growth.)

But to go back to the point of trauma affecting memory, you may be questioning how this might happen. Brittany Piper, whose speaking and activism has helped me a lot to understand my own healing journey and why I’ve been affected in the ways that I have, explains some of the science behind this below :

So basically what I’m saying is that unprocessed or “stuck” trauma puts the prefrontal cortex (which processes logic and learning) and the hippocampus (which processes primarily memories) into a state of shutdown. Some rumination is necessary to overcome this challenge (though how much may depend on the individual), but excessive rumination often leads to the development of trauma and anxiety disorders due to the constant reliving one’s own trauma.

But there have been developments in psychology in the past two decades that are explained in the video below and the part two of it that I’ll link here. We process things “bottom-up,” meaning that memory, learning, and behavior cues are processed and stored in the body– experiencing what we’re learning, in other words, is key. I tend to think that this is largely out of survival adaptation. I think of just how fast some reactions needed to be when hunting or gathering food some thousands of years ago– there was no affordance of time to be able to think much or process things emotionally, what had to be done to survive had to be done. Meanwhile the current generation doesn’t seem to be able to get out of their own heads; they trap themselves in a corner of dissociation using things like video games, social media, pornography, YouTube, and other programs as tools helping them dissociate.

So there’s at least a few things I think we can take out of this in terms of trauma-informed education.

  1. The first would be that talking someone through a hard time whether a panic attack, outburst of anger, etc., only helps to a certain extent. Yes, always leave your door open to your students so long as you are reasonably able, making sure to also leave time to care for yourself. You may not be a therapist– and that is something to make very clear– but as an educator and a mentor to some, you may become part of the reason a student gathers up the courage to go to one.
  2. As well as lending an empathetic ear, it also helps to understand how general stimuli are processed, which is why I decided to somewhat focus on that for this week. Understanding how we process and react to things and how our brain’s networks develop is key to discerning the wisest course of action.
  3. As important as remembering information may be to education, understand that memory is sometimes impacted by trauma, whether temporarily or long-term. Keep encouraging students and reminding them that a person’s worth and intelligence is not ultimately defined by grades or how well they do in school. Encourage students to encourage each other. Encourage a collaborative environment, but also one that students can work independently but still find other ways to love and encourage.
  4. Also off of the memory point, keep in mind how much more memory is stored in the body. Create an experiential learning space. This may help to prevent PTSD or CPTSD from developing by keeping the body and brain building new, positive neural pathways. This may run the risk of potential triggers for some students, depending on their trauma, but over time, and with patience and work, may help to develop an understanding in the child that yes, there was danger there, but that does not mean there is now or always will be.

And this is in part why I think integrating so much technology into education can be somewhat hurtful to development. Whether it’s like what I studied and wrote my final literary analysis and presented on last semester for psych senior sem about the ways we dissociate using technology (though that was a more narrowly focused form of internet dissociation that I studied) and the state of flow that it can put us into, or maybe it’s just the simple lack of body-to-brain experiences, too much of anything in this world can be a bad thing.


While it seems that ChatGPT might help to pick up on the pragmatic points in writing on certain topics, there was still a lack of experience to what we compared in class– our own pieces and the list that the AI developed. There’s a major shift in tone, language use, and overall meaning. Sure, what ChatGPT developed has meaning that we can comprehend, but I’m talking about a different kind of meaning here: intention. I spent much of my last blog speaking on that word as well, so I won’t go too much into it specifically here.

Intention often stems from experience. Perhaps this is the word I’ll camp out on today. There was information, but there was no true experience in the writing of the AI, yet we found so many different perspectives on what makes either high school or college better than the other. Below is a screenshot of my own 7-minute comparison between high school and college:

And if I had the chance to go on, I would likely talk about how in high school, we shared a strange but slight bond over that experience of rolling our eyes at that one classic line our teachers would pull about what we should expect our college professors to be like. There isn’t much to bond everyone together like that in college. If you aren’t close to someone, you likely will never talk to them even once about a small thing like that unless you’re a complete extrovert that gets to know everyone on campus. There are two main issues with that though: 1) everyone gets socially exhausted at some point whether it’s recognized by the individual or not and 2) that’s hard to do in larger schools such as Kean which, in Fall 2021, had just an undergrad enrollment of about 10,500. (The second point really depends on the school though, as it was a bit easier to at least know of almost everyone on campus at my freshman year institution with a Fall 2021 enrollment under 3,000.)

AI doesn’t experience, but rather it calculates and stores data. While I’m sure a majority of us have heard the classic “your college professors won’t tolerate this” line from a high school teacher, regardless of where any of us went to high school, it’s not a piece of data that we would typically include in a formal, technical, and calculated comparative piece. It’s more of something we would write about as a subjective experience, even though many of us have heard it– I’m almost certain about that one. It’s similar to the bathroom situations that many of us encountered (though I admit, the experience with that at my high school was quite a bit different for a number of reasons). In high school, we probably all had to ask to use the bathroom or get a hall pass– in my case, we would do that and go figure out which one was unlocked for all the girls to use while the guys rarely had that issue of only one bathroom being unlocked, then likely get in trouble for taking so long.

So while this may be statistically significant data because it’s such a common high school experience, it’s not the kind of data that a school includes on its website, or that reports like GreatSchools.org or US News would typically mention. While ChatGPT utilizes the entirety of the internet as its brain, for comparative or analytical questions especially, it’s reasonable that it would mainly rely on these often-cited resources as its algorithm would then likely deem it as a reliable source on the topic.

And yes, one could argue that the internet is, to some extent, a summation of human experience and knowledge. But lets be real with that even: how much of the real human experience do we actually include on the internet? Even if we could tell ChatGPT to write something based on our own websites for these blog posts (which you can’t, I’ve tried), there is still only so much of our lives shown on here, on Instagram, on TikTok, on Snapchat, or even on BeReal despite the purpose of BeReal being an attempt at breaking that barrier.

And even if our entire experience was some data set that this algorithm could draw from for data, how often does life go in a direction that can be easily, rationally calculated? The number of times that God’s surprised me with money I didn’t know how I’d get to be able to pay for school or my car… the number of times I’ve been overcome with an inexplicable peace in the midst of some of the most chaotic or grievous times in my life… the number of times I’ve been able to speak before a crowd of people despite my mildly crippling social anxiety… you can calculate a prediction, but you cannot calculate an experience.

As for James McBride, while we were first talking about him in class I looked him up and was intrigued by the titles he’s published thus far. I read through the multiple synopses of his books, and the question popped into my head: how has faith– whether in God, people, or just in general– shaped McBride as an author and artist (considering he’s a musician as well)? Even just looking at the titles the question came up– Deacon King Kong… Miracle at St. Anna (and the cover art for this one)… The Good Lord Bird… even looking at the synopsis for The Color of Water I noticed some details involving Christian culture, though McBride was raised by a Jewish mother.

And I suppose that the other would be this: what would you say has been the most formative experience to you as a writer? I’m always one for a good testimony, which is why I think I’ll be checking out The Color of Water once I get the time to sit and read, probably sometime after I finish at least one more of the unread, brand new books I’ve had for about a year now.


There was one particular line in this week’s article to read that intrigued me and that I would tend to agree with when it comes to the use of AI in writing. The quote was this:

A computer, while not explicitly bringing its own intention, can disrupt the writer’s intention.

AI Reveals the Most Human Parts of Writing, Katy Ilonka Gero

That word intention has a lot of power behind it– it’s the why in anything you write, say, or do. I don’t think I mentioned it too much in my blog from last semester, but one of the first questions my abuelita ever asked my dad (through the translation of my mom) was “what are your intentions?” If you’re going into a relationship just to stay in a relationship, or if you’re going into a relationship based on feelings that can come and go from time to time, what kind of a relationship is that? If you’re going to build a house, are you going to build it on sand or soil that could wash away in a storm? Or would you rather build on a solid and intentionally built foundation?

In many ways it’s the same concept with writing. An author builds a relationship with the audience through the language of the piece– what is said, how it’s said, and why it’s said.

When it comes to using Artificial Intelligence (AI) in writing, I don’t think it’s a great tool if it’s the main source of language in any case. However, it can, for some writers, be a great source of inspiration– I personally don’t like this for most of my own writing unless I’m using it for an idea I already had and just have trouble putting into words. For some this is an incredibly useful tool to chip away at the infamous wall of writers block. AI writing is not my cup of tea for the most part though because it does not bring the same intention that human writing so often does. The intention of AI writing is in its code– its intention is to formulate a sentence that makes sense about a topic provided for it. That said, AI does not feel, and has its limitations on how it can perceive patterns of how certain emotions are expressed. Intention then becomes distorted in formula. A destination is reached in writing, but what does the journey mean– or is there a journey at all– when it’s based on a formula rather than a purpose?

There was another quote from Ilonka Gero’s article that also had me thinking about what it really means to be an honest writer, or even an honest person. (Not to say that writers using AI are inherently dishonest– the point is that AI might sugarcoat that honesty or in some ways limit the full truth the writer is attempting to convey).

Most writers are eager to get eyes on their work, and a computational eye may feel less frightening than your best friend; the computer might judge you, but not in a way that’ll impact your future relationship with it.

AI Reveals the Most Human Parts of Writing, Katy Ilonka Gero

What sticks out to me here is that while making things “less frightening” is sometimes helpful, making it so readily available can take away part of the experience and development of the writer as a person. Fear is, to some extent, necessary for healthy human development. Growth is uncomfortable. This fact is well known and not some sort of major plot twist or revelation.

I mean even if you think about it from a Biblical standpoint like I do, even Jesus Himself said that there would be hardship in this world. There will be times when speaking up or standing up, however necessary, will be scary and difficult. Example: Jonah. Example 2: Moses. Example 3: Gideon. Example 4: Jesus in Gethsemane. There are numerous other examples, but my point is that what is the point in expressing thoughts that everyone is already having? Express the thoughts that might face some opposition and that start genuine conversations where people might learn a thing or two from one another.

And that brings me back to another part of what the article said:

…other writers simply take pride in sitting down and pumping out a thousand words. It’s like exercise. You need to keep it up, otherwise your skills atrophy.

AI Reveals the Most Human Parts of Writing, Katy Ilonka Gero

Pushing limits and boundaries is not comfortable, nor is protecting your own boundaries at times. But it takes practice. And to make it so readily available that AI can “protect us” from the sort of interaction that might help us to develop as people and as writers is something to be wary of.

This all said, the use of AI in writing isn’t entirely bad. Much like with what and how we actually write, how we use this technology is also important to take into consideration. Computers to not bring their own intention into creating, but might suggest a way of phrasing or displaying the intentions of the user that is actually behind creating the piece at hand. Something someone said in e-lit last semester that I think is really applicable here is this idea that creation submits to its creator. I would agree wholeheartedly that is how it’s designed, but as we human beings don’t always submit to the will of God, technology doesn’t always submit exactly to the will of man as we picture it to either. In the case of technology not always doing things exactly how we might picture it, sometimes that can turn into a beautiful, serendipitous moment of inspiration. So using AI as a tool alongside human writing is a beautiful thing of course, though I personally feel convicted to avoid that for the sake of challenging myself more. The question for me is more along the lines of how this might get out of hand.

It’s me, again

I could go on about myself like I did last semester for e-lit, but that sounds a bit redundant. So if you’re interested in learning (or re-learning) a bit about my faith, my past self, my present self, and who I’m striving to become, it’s in the hyperlink above. If you’re anything like me and don’t really feel like reading two whole posts for the answers you could easily be getting in one, I’ve got you there too. Here’s some of the basics about me:


If my other blogs, or writing pieces, or social media accounts, or my JLY sweatshirt (15% off code : BIANCA) on the first day of class didn’t give it away enough, I’m openly and unapologetically Christian. I’m not exactly about denominations– the Church is the Church, as far as I’m concerned, and the Bible doesn’t outline anything about any denomination being more or less righteous than another. That said, not every denomination holds doctrine that is actually backed by the Bible, so that’s why I simply consider myself a Christian.

I’m also not exactly the type to seek out conversation, but I am more than happy to talk or just listen if anyone is curious, hurt, or confused by anything Church- or Bible-related. I promise I won’t bite or judge, as it unfortunately seems that being judgmental is a stereotype for most Christians. The questions you might have, I’ve probably had at some point too or at least had a friend wrestle with that question. Ecclesiastes 1:9 mentions that there’s nothing new under the sun; that applies to struggles, doubts, fears, you name it. You aren’t alone. That said, I may not have all the answers, but Galatians 6 talks a bit about this co-learning process that this class is even modeled around.

You’ll probably find that faith is a huge part of what, how, and why I write, and that’s because it most certainly is. On my last blog post from last semester, I talked a lot about why that is, though it also is in many ways an overflow of gratitude for all He’s done and how He loves us.

why i write

I’ve said this many times to friends and as part of my testimony, but I genuinely believe that writing as an art was the crutch God gave me to make it to the moment I came to a place of full reliance on Him. That’s really just how I started writing though. I kept it up for a number of reasons, including the fact that it is a crutch in many ways when I’m walking through a difficult season of life.

Among these other reasons, I write because it helped me feel heard– like I had a voice at least the pages would listen to when no one else would– and it would be selfish of me to keep that entirely to myself. I consider this especially now that these issues aren’t as prevalent in my life and I understand writing is a resource, not The Source.

Writing also takes up a large portion of my prayer life. I keep a few different journals for prayer

other things i do & other commitments

I might’ve mentioned this at some point last semester as well, but one of those commitments I have other than school is that I’m a youth leader at Sparta Church, where I go just about every Sunday for high school core classes, services, and also for work. But as for youth, I’ve been doing this every Sunday morning and night for almost two years now. My senior girls have a special place in my heart, and I’ll be missing them so much as many of them leave for college at the end of the summer, but so proud of the bold, bright lights they are for Jesus. In many ways, the co-learning structure of this class makes me think of them because they teach me so much more than I think they’ll ever realize.

While this was a daunting challenge at first as well, I was a camp counselor last year for Sparta’s summer camp, Breakaway Day Camp. I’m an introvert, and though I like trying to be more extroverted at times, this was a lot to handle. I can’t say that I didn’t love it though. As exhausted as I was, these were some of the best weeks of my summer last year. And if I end up sticking around this summer, I’ll be so excited to go back.

I’m also going to be in-season as a swim coach for both the Sussex YMCA, and for my former high school, Pope John XXIII. I’ve been a swimmer since I was eight years old, and it didn’t take long after the pandemic forced me to quit the swim team here at Kean after half a season and lots of progress for me to want to jump back in somehow. Ever hear the saying “you can take the girl out of Jersey, but you can’t take Jersey out of the girl?” Yea, same thing here. Something about the love/hate relationship almost every swimmer has with this sport tends to keep us roped in somehow.

The high school season will be keeping me roped in at least until early March though, as we’re entering championship and state’s season, both for team states, and for individual states to top it off in March.