I just signed a petition calling for Norwegian universities to use research expertise on AI when deciding how to implement it, rather than having decisions be made mostly administratively. , If you are a researcher in Norway, please read it and sign it if you agree – and share with anyone else who might be interested. The petition was written by three researchers at UiT: Maria Danielsen (a philosopher who completed her PhD in 2025 on AI and ethics, including discussions of art and working life), Knut Ørke (Norwegian as a second language), and Holger Pötzsch (a professor of media studies with many years of research on digital media, video games, disruption, and working life, among other topics). This is not about preventing researchers from exploring AI methods in their research. It is about not uncritically accepting the hype that everyone must use AI everywhere without critical reflection. It is about not introducing Copilot as the default option in word processors, or training PhD candidates to believe they will fall behind if they do not use AI when writing articles, without proper academic discussion. Changes like these should be knowledge-based and discussed academically, not merely decided administratively, because they alter the epistemological foundations of research. Maria wrote to me a couple of months ago because she had read my opinion piece in Aftenposten in which I called for a strong brake on the use of language models in knowledge work. She was part of a committee tasked with developing UiT’s AI strategy and was concerned because there was so much hype and so few members of the committee with actual expertise in AI. I fully support the petition. There are probably some good uses for AI in research, but the uncritical, hype-driven insistence that we must simply adopt it everywhere is highly risky. There are many researchers in Norway with strong expertise in AI, language, ethics, working life, and culture. We must make use of this expertise. This is also partly about respect for research in the humanities, social sciences, psychology, and law. Introducing AI at universities and university colleges is not merely a technical issue, and perhaps not even primarily a technical one. It concerns much more: philosophy of science, methodological reflection, epistemology, writing, publishing, the working environment, and more. […]
fivecats
Okay, so where does that leave the Editing process?
I’d continue on with the thought, but I’m not sure where you’re coming from with your statement, so I’ll just, um, edit myself and leave it at that.
fivecats
______________________________________________
jon
it’s funny to see that line come back at me. it was written in a moment of irritation after struggling to get my creative writing students to recognize the distinction between writing “on the surface” and daring to explore depth. I stand by it though. It has just taken me two novels and a lot of emotional struggle to get there.
fivecats
I don’t necessarily dispute the line nor the sentiment behind it. In many ways I agree with it — it’s part of what makes someone a true Artist. There must be a willingness to risk all with a work that eminates from that quiet place where only you can go.
My guess is that your students lack(ed) the willingness\ability to do the hard self-introspection required to do anything beyond the surface. Most people lack that trait.
I suppose part of my reasons for leaving the comment was due to having (within minutes prior to reading your blog) removed a 5 page blog of my own from my site. After writing it throughout the day yesterday I realized how self-pitying and whining it was. It stayed up overnight, long enough for one friend to read part of it before giving up on it. (i couldn’t even make it through it to edit it) I suppose, as the friend said, the important part was that I wrote it and purged it from my mind, which is a good thing.
My apologies for any defensiveness.
Jill
I’ve been thinking and thinking about this. I don’t think one can or would want to write everything of oneself all at once. Perhaps rather I would like to explore the range of myself in my writing? And risk, certainly risk. I liked your post a lot though, Jon.
'if' ...
home
as time passes home is less and less what’s around lose yourself .