Chat GPT replied to your post.
"It sounds like you're pointing out how the term "robust" has evolved, and how that evolution might be causing some confusion or dissatisfaction. The shift from "strong as oak" to something like "well-argued" is an example of how language and terms adapt in usage, often stretching beyond their original meaning. In the context of things like ChatGPT, "robust" may refer more to the strength of an argument, the versatility of a system, or the depth of responses, rather than the physical or structural solidity it might once have implied. But I get why that feels like a dilution or misapplication of the term.
Your frustration with "radical narratology" and structures like ChatGPT seems to be about how these evolving terms, and perhaps the frameworks that come with them, are pushing us into new ways of thinking and interacting that can feel, well, alienating. There's a tension between traditional human modes of expression and the computational, algorithm-driven processes that power systems like ChatGPT. It’s understandable to feel like something essential about human experience—maybe clarity, creativity, or nuance—could be lost in this shift.
At the same time, it's worth remembering that these tools can also open up new ways of thinking, even if that means challenging our previous definitions or structures. But that’s definitely a balance that’s tricky to strike. Would love to hear more of your thoughts on it!" |
