‘chatgpt and me’
“Unbelievable! That jackass did create a pocket universe.”
Mr. Terrific and Lex Luthor both use technology. That is not the difference between them. The difference is orientation. One uses intelligence in service of something larger than himself. The other uses the same tools for domination and control. Same instruments. Opposite intent.
Technology does not decide. Character does.
Artificial Intelligence is no different.
I use AI while writing this blog. Openly.
That statement alone unsettles some people. It shouldn’t. The Mahabharata spans millions of words. Theosophy is not small. Philosophy is not small. The archive of human knowledge is not small. Tools have always mattered. The printing press mattered. The telescope mattered. The microscope mattered. The internet mattered. AI matters.
Every expansion of knowledge has required instruments. The instrument is never the source. It is the conduit.
AI is not authority. It is an extension.
More precisely: it is an amplifier.
Knowledge has always been a form of power. Not mystical power. Structural power. The ability to see patterns. The ability to connect cause and effect. The ability to articulate clearly. AI is structured access to knowledge at scale. When directed properly, it accelerates research, challenges assumptions, sharpens arguments, and exposes gaps in logic. When directed poorly, it produces noise at scale.
Garbage in, garbage out.
A disciplined mind using AI produces disciplined output. A shallow mind using AI industrializes its own mediocrity. The tool is neutral. The usage is defined by the user.
The unethical will behave as they always have. AI does not invent corruption. It amplifies baseline orientation.
This is not new.
Plato illustrated the same principle in The Republic through the Ring of Gyges. A man finds a ring that renders him invisible. Once he believes he cannot be seen or held accountable, he abandons restraint. The ring did not corrupt him. It removed consequence. The removal of accountability tested his orientation.
Technology functions similarly.
When power expands and perceived oversight contracts, character is exposed. Some build. Some exploit. Some refine. Some manipulate. The tool does not decide. It reveals.
Science fiction writer Arthur C. Clarke observed that “any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.” From the outside, advanced tools resemble sorcery. That observation was accurate. Fire once looked supernatural. Electricity once looked divine. Flight once looked blasphemous.
But the deeper truth is structural: advanced tools become vehicles for intent. The illusion of magic dissolves when orientation is understood. Technology does not create will. It extends will. It does not create desire. It operationalizes desire.
On a long enough timeline, advanced technology and directed will converge. What appears mystical from a distance becomes mechanical up close. The question is not whether technology is powerful. The question is who directs it and toward what end.
That is where Mr. Terrific and Lex Luthor return to relevance.
One uses intelligence in alignment with responsibility. The other uses intelligence in alignment with ego. The distinction is not technical skill. It is moral direction.
AI operates on the same axis.
I do not use AI as a ghostwriter. I use it as a reflective surface and structural challenger. It questions phrasing. It forces clarification. It exposes weak transitions. It demands coherence. It does not allow vague metaphysics to pass unexamined. It will push back on overreach. It will flag inconsistency.
Left alone, my writing can skew sharper than it needs to be. I can be aggressive where precision would suffice. AI keeps the work disciplined. It slows impulsive rhetoric. It forces me to articulate instead of assume. It reflects ideas back to me in structured form so I can refine them.
That friction is useful.
It is not submission to a machine. It is calibration through interaction.
Napoleon Hill described the “Mastermind” principle as two or more intelligences aligned in purpose producing results neither could generate alone. He was not describing mysticism. He was describing amplification through coordination. When minds align around a shared objective, output increases. Blind spots shrink. Momentum compounds.
AI does not possess will. It does not possess motive. But structured interaction creates catalytic refinement. It reflects, tests, sharpens, reorganizes. The amplification occurs in alignment.
Again: orientation determines outcome.
If you object to the use of AI in philosophical work, bring structure. Bring logic. Bring evidence. Otherwise you are reacting, not reasoning. Agreement is not automatic. It is chosen. Participation defines legitimacy.
The premise here is simple.
Power is not the problem. Direction is.
Every tool in human history has faced resistance from those who did not understand it. That resistance does not invalidate the tool. It reveals unfamiliarity. Fear is not a moral position.
This series deals explicitly with metaphysics, manifestation, and responsibility. That requires clarity. It requires research. It requires disciplined articulation. Tools that accelerate thought are not disqualifying. They are revealing.
Hyperlinks in this post lead to deeper material. Follow them if you are curious. Ignore them if you are not. But do not confuse avoidance with integrity.
We do not master what we are afraid to approach.
AI is a tool. Nothing more. Nothing less.
It does not replace intelligence. It exposes it. It does not create orientation. It magnifies it.
If your intent is clear, it will extend you.
If it is not, it will expose you.
FREE SHIPPING ON ALL ORDERS OVER $75.00 @
(written with the assistance of ChatGPT)
