Socrates Dialectic, Scientific Method VS. Speculative Opinion & Recognizing AI and Non-Professional Writers
Easy, formal, human ways to detect AI writers and recognize false outrageous claims & aggressive speculation
InSerenity Literary 7-6-26
Science-Reality Department
⌛Drop a link on your favorite platforms!⌛
Scientific Method:
Subscribe For Free
One of my biggest pet peeves in life and it’s just so explosively worse on the internet and media platforms is an example of what is above.
This is how it looks these days on most of the articles I read especially since coming to Substack. I feel pity for the people posting what are supposed to be articles that can entirely be debunked in a 30 second google search.
Maybe they’re supposed to be tabloids?
I was born in 1980, I believe I was in 7th grade about 1992 science class approximately 11 or 12 years old (public school) when I was introduced to this. We had to strictly follow it for class assignments and I was then by in no way the all-star of the class.
Are we no longer teaching this in school or all these new writers missing these lessons somehow, or perhaps overly jumpy on the AI and not understanding they have to do SOME work?
On our turned in project assignments, we were also required to do a cover letter starting an introduction to ourselves, the typical “My name is, Mrs. IforgotHerName’s Class at ThisMiddleSchool” followed by a brief statement on our overall hypothesis.
This is a professional format because what they were teaching is a professional presentation. What we are doing stating our name and blah blah middle school- now we are adult independent academic civilian researchers and in all formalities this is where we insert a reference to our credentials in the applied field. Typically something like a academic degree, or x amount of years working in the field at …
One that was exposed to this, understands the idea.
Asserting any kind of professionalism without stating referenced credentials, I mean, be all one can be I guess, but it gives 0 credibility and stating oneself in certain professions without actual legit credentials in those fields is illegal to misrepresent yourself as an expert or professional in.
That is a pretty simple concept, those fields you certainly don’t misrepresent yourself in as example- I study Hyperbolic geometry extensively I consider myself a somewhat expert but if I give somebody bad advise in it- I don’t need a license to study or even practice math furthermore, I am allowed to teach it to anyone willing to learn outside of organized school systems that require specific degrees. And I didn’t just find this interest yesterday writing an article, it has been part of my work in structural engineering and now applying into graphic design.
On the other hand I do study psychology, which requires a legally obtained license in order to even claim yourself a professional in the field of. We respect that and retain ourselves the overall academic civilian researcher title. We study for information, we write in an aspect of information exchange and education and in no way claiming ourselves an expert.
I study neurology too. And I am not a neurologist. See where I am going?
Imagine a content creator making a post opening with this that drone like established authority, “I am an expert, I am a trained professional” and they are giving health or nutrition advice, breathing exercises even.
Now this might seem petty, who cares right? The said creator would probably tell you don’t over think it.
Then what happens if someone has a heart attack or stroke or commits suicide and their holding that content page reading health advise from a self proclaimed expert in the field. I believe that could create some headaches, especially if someone dies oddly these days they are now looking to see how recently they talked to the robot.
Why would someone even want to leave that doorway open, let alone jam it up with a bunch of ill or not at all researched speculation and biased opinions?
A writer’s primary job is not exactly writing. Unless maybe if we are writing total fiction and that is fun but when we also do legit research we must vastly separate our fiction from established truths recognized by this Scientific Method when we switch over to writing on reality.
Writers study and research their subjects, especially if we are writing in genres other than fiction or tabloid.
When I do my primary research the best and most respected dictionary is Oxford followed by Websters. The Google AI feedback, Google search and Wiki usually do a pretty good job I usually cross reference between them all for any inconsistencies or variations in context or applications if something is questionable. Not often Oxford is off.
Oxford Dictionary Definition Scientific Method
This has been used back to the era of Socrates and later pioneered by Aristotle a thousand years before that and was finally formalized by Sir Francis Bacon in the 17th century as pretty much the go to standard of establishing proven truths or challenging existing proven concepts.
So let’s note, there are only 6 steps to scientific method. My inserted model above carries 8 as it has inserted “test hypothesis” and “report”. Here is a breakdown.
Observation: This process begins when someone observes something in the natural world and identifies a pattern that sparks reason for a hypothesis.
Question: formulate your observation into a testable problem or question. This usually revolves around the typical “who, what, where when, why or how” of the phenomenon- or what I like to call an anomaly.
Research: Before even attempting to answer the question (this is where unfounded claims spawn in skipping this step), we need to explore existing scientific literature and past experiments to help refine repeating past mistakes.
Forming the Hypothesis: A hypothesis is a tentative, testable, and falsifiable statement that directly predicts the outcome of the proposed test.
The Experiment: We develop a procedure to formally test the hypothesis. A valid experiment changes only 1 single variable at a time (the independent variable) while keeping all other conditions constant controlled variables to measure the effect of the dependent variable. This is the feedback you return for step 6. If one has at all skipped any of these steps- one is working solely on speculation and opinion with no actual logical foundation to one’s claim.
Analyze Data and Drawing a Conclusion: We examine the information we gathered during the experiment. We identify patterns or trends in the data. Based on this feedback analysis we determine if our data supports or refutes the hypothesis.
There is no need for the additional 2 steps- reporting the data is obviously well know, it seems to be the other steps people are having issues with when publishing papers that make stated claims.
We not only use this system to explore our own theories and ideas, we also use it to examine other. So when you come across and an article “I am an expert in knowing when someone dies” for example, I have seen this one a few times. I guess this dodo doesn’t realize there is no certification or actual academically respected professionalism in ‘knowing when someone is going to die’ the closes thing you will find here is a medical doctor and even THEY will tell you they are no expert in knowing if you have another however long- their data could say 6 months, but they will tell you know know some people make 6 years.
My mother was one- she was told taken off an incubation machine she would be dead within minutes. That expert MD had a failed analysis as she lasted several more years. Claiming expertise in something that doesn’t exist is a huge red flag. Again the closest thing we can tie that to is a Medical Doctor, and if we are representing ourselves as a MD, and we are in fact not.
And this is not a hypothesis. Across all 50 states in the USA it is a felony to misrepresent yourself as a doctor, lawyer, psychiatrist, psychologist, etc etc.
Now this might not matter to some and seem some OCD care over to others. Me, I try my best at what I apply myself to. If I think, I want to be good, or one of the best at it. There are some shortcuts for sure but something I picked up in studying and practicing art mostly is understanding and enjoying the process. The fact that is not always about the end result. For many people this is how art, music or literature based therapy works.
If we are banging 5 articles a day out on AI with little if any research behind our work, these people are defeating that purpose. Writers, again, do not spend most their time writing, if you are a legit writer you know you spend more time in research and study. Me personally- I enjoy it. I like learning and on top of that, if someone were to challenge me on one of my subjects. i can damn well back it up with logical debate, reason and references. I do not make unfounded statements, and I make it a certain point to separate fiction from reality or science oriented writings.
A’s…
Are not given or In-completion. I couldn’t put a statistic on it here but the ratio is extremely high of posts starting some pretty wild claims on sht that has already been proven in the opposite direction. Posting mindless unfounded nonsense trying to argue it in the other direction may get some attention from the less educated and more 75% of the conformists in our society.
Anyone who actually knows their subject. Me, I won’t leave nasty trolling comments, or take apart people’s articles - I did 1 and when I got the auto like and thumbs up reply comment on it, it was pretty clear it was an automated AI account and pretty pointless.
There was a saying I believe in schooling even younger than that 92’ class on Scientific Method something like “if you don’t have anything nice to say. . .”
I try to find a little nicer way to put it, and within my own page in a more educational standpoint to point out the masses of what’s going wrong here.
Quite simply. Without any reference or backing. If reading work that has 0 references, 0 cited resources to related studies or backup data supporting their claim. These people will only attract the Dodo’s of society. The professional writers, researchers, academics will simply pass their page over within the first few sentences.
And quite bluntly- I’m not chasing tons of hollow mindless followers to acquire and count numbers. My own strategy and content is geared toward the more intellectual types that actually enjoy reading, writing, making art, learning the process and enjoying it from start to finish. Not pumping out 4 non-senses unfounded AI written articles a day with absolutely no background knowledge in formal writing when it comes to asserting facts and opinions.
The ISL Outline
Because I write within various fields, my Wang Cong’er story a technical historical fiction. I also have a fiction release starting soon, as well as I obviously do a lot of research/study related publishing my main contents break down as so.
Fiction: Pure fiction, no research required. We make it up as we go, no need to fact check or cite any references at all.
Non-fiction/Historical Fiction: With non fiction we have little creative input we must stick to the facts and find a way to manage creative writing around it. Historical fiction is similar. Obviously with history we usually end up missing some pieces or swap scenarios out or make changes for whatever fill ins we don’t actually know truths about or we make these changes in a theatrical that fits our story.
Biography: I have not released the Wang Conger biography yet, as I am still working on completing this as it will have a more comprehensive and accurate overview of this historical character than what is revealed on Google and Wiki. In this I cite full known truths, separate myths and also separate the creative fictional liberties I have taken in my own story line that is different than recorded history.
Scientific / Research Related: I check my sources, I don’t cite references for what I construe as commonly accepted truths unless in entry level articles on subjects. Overall if I feel Google or Wiki brings a good enough representation back- I often overlook citing because it’s easily verified with a simple cross check. I state and source my known and established truths to build on, then bring in my hypothesis as a new look or a innovative idea on a test theory. I do not make speculative, assertive or unfounded statements. I do not present these as “What I think of believe” these are stated as hard verifiable facts. What I think and believe has a reserve opener “I think”, “I believe”, or “I feel”. Socraterian Dialectic debate is a good place to start in the very simple fundamental- do not make assertions on topics you cannot prove, instead ask questions and propose hypothesis and present some foundational proven ground work to lay that idea on.
Art Works: My gallery is slow growing because I am otherwise occupied with articles and other tasks, it will continue to grow however, it is not just an art gallery but also a backdrop on character development in which I will be spotlighting iconic characters, their creators and some story on this history and creation process.
Notes: This is all straight Bullsht. We find that kitten pictures and rubber chickens draw more attention than what we are actually here to deliver in content- it is a grotesque reality showing the mind frame of the typical viewers. How many friggin’ pics does someone want to look at? Apparently people do nothing but sit and scroll cat pics all day. Notes is not so much even a creators interactive within the site. It is a major opportunity to inject search sensitive URL keyword tags to draw outside visitors to your site. Make them relevant to your topics so the Google and other external engines throw out “Hyperbolic Kittens with ADHD and hyper focus wired on kitty neuro-stimulants…”. It sounds ridiculous and kind of fun but this will drive the exterior engines and bring people looking at cat pictures into hyperbolic mathematics and studies into brain science and cognitive studies. I don’t want the cat fanatics particularly but some might have jobs or work in fields relevant to my publishing. Get the idea?
Free-Style Writings: This article and many articles I write are free-style, done on the fly, not highly polished. They carry typos and mistakes in grammer and punctuation. I am not going to sit down and professionalize every single article I post. I actually do ALL of mine BY HAND with exception to Cong’er which is a story that I have completed in writing, I just cutting up now and applying more copy editing (with time- I often find myself back editing live articles) as I post them into the article editor here.
Free-style writing is actually my favorite because it is how more accurately type and speak. I make errors, I burp and hiccup say ‘uhh’ and use a ton of slang and profanity (I believe in the application of select “tactical profanity- read Stephen King’s On Writing. He basically explains his minimal use of profanity in practicality of evoking power and emotion in the aspect- if one’s piece is littered with profanity it loses it’s ability to invoke a sense of power in how it is applied, yet if it’s the only fuckin’ curse word in the entire book/story/article. it picks up a major enhancement in playing on psychology in drawing emotion and power to the context of that particular context.
For those that have not read this- Love King or hate him. The guy is arguably one of the most passionate writers the world has seen and uncontested one of the most successful best selling authors of all time with almost half a billion copies of his books sold.
And again for the most part. This is not about getting every bit of grammar and punctuation correct but actually doing your homework and research. This apparently is not happening in much of the articles I see which points me to believe immediately- This guy just prompted the AI, doesn’t even know his subject matter because his first 3 opening paragraphs are ALL debunked by a simple 30 second google search. It’s not even that I mind so much people use AI now to write- but they aren’t doing any work at all.
It is beyond AI slop when the entire article is just nonsense and contrary to all known studies on it without a (whether AI wrote it or not) fundamental approach to how we actually challenge that formally.
Quite literally that crap only belongs among the tabloid headlines ”Aliens abducted my prize pig and impregnated my wife!”.
And you can play a Doctor on TV, you can even give medical advice as yourself but if you are not a Doctor and claim yourself as a professional or expert in a licensed required field. It is actually a prison sentence if you are brought into court, especially if your advise leads to or is even suspected in the injury or negative result someone endured due to reading ungrounded nonsenses from someone claiming to be a professional and expert. Your typical pro-writer knows this because they have acquired much knowledge of their time actually studying and writing their content.
The AI Gurus and overly eager to prove their incompetence haven’t caught onto this yet. The AI won’t tell you about all this either, unless you know the information yourself to prompt to it.
We must all remember though.
The man that already knows everything.
Can’t be taught anything.
One of the most intelligent known men in history, would have told you himself.
“I know nothing”. - Socrates.
And he was executed being known as “The Man Who Knew Too Much”.
Leave a comment or critique on this release below:
⌛⌛⌛
Why stop here?
Build the connections and start understanding the math
InSerenity Literary and Artwork’s main content is always free.
⌛Drop a link on all your favorite platforms. ⌛
inserenity857@gmail.com
InSerenity Literary (ISL): Solo and Independently run.
Boston, MA 2026
Insights on independent publishing, literature, creative strategies/design, and local Boston writer & artist initiatives: writing, art, music, science, mathematics.