But if thought corrupts language, language can also corrupt thought. A bad usage can spread by tradition and imitation, even among people who should and do know better. The debased language that I have been discussing is in some ways very convenient. Phrases like a not unjustifiable assumption, leaves much to be desired, would serve no good purpose, a consideration which we should do well to bear in mind, are a continuous temptation, a packet of aspirins always at one's elbow.

George Orwell, Politics and the English Language (1946)

Before ChatGPTisms, sloppy writing was signposted by Orwellisms. There's a political kind (to euphemize “firebombing a village” vaguely as “neutralize unreliable elements”), but I’m interested in the mundane kind: lazy phrases you default to when you can’t articulate exactly what you mean.

For years, I visualized this as: your idea is shaped like a nuanced path, but without finding [...]

---

Outline:

(01:44) I don't let AI compose ANY original writing for me.

(04:05) So, maybe use AI, but revise all the common signs?

(06:11) So, maybe use AI, but keep obvious signs in defiance?

(07:33) So, maybe use AI, but ask for outputs in a non-AI style?

(09:44) So what if I'm stuck! I'm not a luddite, I'll just use AI.

The original text contained 4 footnotes which were omitted from this narration.

---

First published:
September 21st, 2025

Source:
https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/ksCwps6YjsMFBkEFQ/and-yet-defend-your-thoughts-from-ai-writing

---

Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO.

---

Images from the article:

This appears to be a text interface or document discussing artificial intelligence, writing style, and professional communication, with a

Apple Podcasts and Spotify do not show images in the episode description. Try Pocket Casts, or another podcast app.

“And Yet, Defend your Thoughts from AI Writing” by Michael Samoilov

LessWrong (30+ Karma)

“And Yet, Defend your Thoughts from AI Writing” by Michael Samoilov