Hello!

[Arthur Fuchs-Eich]

I picked up a copy of Philosophy Now on a visit to London. I noticed it featured this forum and thought that here might be a fun place to hang out and improve my English. I must confess, I am using AI to present myself as more fluent than is the case, but any questions and arguments presented will be my own and, if all goes well, I shall rely on AI less in the future.

[Impenitent]

welcome, and don't worry- even native speakers of English have trouble articulating at times

-Imp

[RickLewis]

I picked up a copy of Philosophy Now on a visit to London. I noticed it featured this forum and thought that here might be a fun place to hang out and improve my English. I must confess, I am using AI to present myself as more fluent than is the case, but any questions and arguments presented will be my own and, if all goes well, I shall rely on AI less in the future.

On the Forum that's alright in the circumstances you describe. (Yeah, right). But in Philosophy Now magazine we are taking a hard line. No articles written by AI, no articles "improved" by AI. Human content for human readers.

[Arthur Fuchs-Eich]

welcome, and don't worry- even native speakers of English have trouble articulating at times

-Imp

Thank you. I suspect clarity is a challenge in any language.

[Arthur Fuchs-Eich]

I picked up a copy of Philosophy Now on a visit to London. I noticed it featured this forum and thought that here might be a fun place to hang out and improve my English. I must confess, I am using AI to present myself as more fluent than is the case, but any questions and arguments presented will be my own and, if all goes well, I shall rely on AI less in the future.

On the Forum that's alright in the circumstances you describe. (Yeah, right). But in Philosophy Now magazine we are taking a hard line. No articles written by AI, no articles "improved" by AI. Human content for human readers.

I am puzzled. Why do you think this needs to be said in a remote corner of the Philosophy Now forum? Are you addressing me, or has this been stated somewhere with a wider audience?

[mickthinks]

I am puzzled. Why do you think the Introduce Yourself subforum is in any way remote?

[Will Bouwman]

You are right. 199 views and counting. The word is spreading.

[RickLewis]

I picked up a copy of Philosophy Now on a visit to London. I noticed it featured this forum and thought that here might be a fun place to hang out and improve my English. I must confess, I am using AI to present myself as more fluent than is the case, but any questions and arguments presented will be my own and, if all goes well, I shall rely on AI less in the future.

On the Forum that's alright in the circumstances you describe. (Yeah, right). But in Philosophy Now magazine we are taking a hard line. No articles written by AI, no articles "improved" by AI. Human content for human readers.

I am puzzled. Why do you think this needs to be said in a remote corner of the Philosophy Now forum? Are you addressing me, or has this been stated somewhere with a wider audience?

A good question. Initially, I thought it was obvious and didn't need spelling out. Last week, my colleagues told me no, it is not obvious. Since then we have been going back and forwards to agree the most succinct way to say this, and we'll be adding it in the next day or two as an extra sentence in the "For Authors" section of the Philosophy Now website.

https://philosophynow.org/for_authors

(Our Editor thought that my suggested formulation, which included the words "hunt you down", was too violent!)