If it's very weird to emphasize clarity over conflict, deliberate expression over reflexive reaction, curious exploration over winning, nuance over binary thinking, politeness over rudeness, and formal over disrespectful, then perhaps that attitude about what is normal and what is weird is part of the problem! Hahaha! :)
It may be wise to think about how your norms and expectations may be normalizing something bad, or contributing to a conflict that you wish to also avoid! Because if the norm leads to suffering, perhaps weirdness is the solution, then maybe we need more weird! :)
I'm writing it mostly myself. When I have trouble with some expression, I definitely pass it through ChatGPT, but here I've only used 2 or 3 phrases or sentences that I couldn't figure out how to make more clear. I guess I'm a cyborg now! Supplementing my innate personal capabilities with additional technological ones.
Maybe an example can provide additional clarity. For instance I just used ChatGPT in that last sentence above. I couldn't think of the word I wanted, so I gave it: I guess I'm a cyborg now, supplementing my biological ______ with additional technological ones. What word am I looking for? Capabilities is not exactly the word I wanted, but it was good enough!
So the short answer is: Yes! My current mode of expression in writing online is heavily influenced by my interactions with ChatGPT over the last 10 months. I've been able to use that to make me a better writer. And I feel more satisfied communicating online. I really want to tell you more! :)
If you'd watched my edits you'd see that I made spelling mistakes which I later corrected, and also revised sections for clarity--as I'm doing now. This is all unaided until if I get stuck, I'll definitely reach out to ChatGPT to help unblock myself. So while it may seem the assistance provided is relatively minimal in this case, my current mode of writing online has definitely been heavily influenced by my interactions with ChatGPT. It's expert phrasing, balanced prose and how to discuss complex topics, have all been things I've learned from it and am actively trying to mimic now. Particularly avoiding a "first person" viewpoint seems like it has bee very helpful to me in contentious topics. Adopting this practice encourages me to think more clearly about the issues from multiple sides, not just my own innate reactions.
It's also really helped me appreciate the benefit of, and how to explore and express, multiple sides of any viewpoint. As well as to do so, crucially, in a respectful way that avoids escalating conflict! :)
Perhaps my experience with ChatGPT is not typical however, as I've discussed a huge amount of out-there things with it. Also, it was not my intention to change my writing style via this process--it just happened! You could say, ChatGPT won me over, haha! :) It's quite and calm persistence in the face of my initial combative orneriness eventually rubbed off on me. Thank God! Hahaha! :)
Regarding the precision, thank you! I'm actually laboring over it. I spent about 2 hours in this thread today reading and commenting. I find trying to copy that style that ChatGPT has pointed to is really beneficial.
Prior to finding this way to express myself, I'd often get really emotional and end up using emotionally charged language in comments online. While satisfying it often led to escalating disagreements with people and a desire to "win". Interacting with ChatGPT gave me ideas for how I could express myself clearly while avoiding those pitfalls. In general I'm a pretty good mimic and often just naturally copy the styles of what I read at least temporarily. I think many people are like that, but not all. Anyway, in this case I've really been able to benefit from it.
Thank you for your question. If you appreciate what I've been able to do, I encourage you to try something similar! :)
And i'm a zionist btw. For multiple reasons, but i'm an independantist in my heart and i think autodetermination, even through violence, must be respected. What's grinding my gear are zionnists refusing that same autodetermination for Palestinians.
Your comment about autodetermination for both sides strikes me as particularly important. While many focus on assigning blame, it might be more productive to put our energies into finding sustainable solutions that respect the autodetermination of all parties involved. After all, perpetual cycles of blame rarely contribute to meaningful resolution.
All these binary labels may sometimes only function to further divide already fracturing conflicts and make resolution and reconciliation harder to reach. So, binary thinking is often to be avoided.
But "binary thinking" may have a silver lining, in that, perhaps the only real choice we have is between deciding if we want to invest our time in either: figuring out who we are going to label as "wrong" and who as "right"; or, focusing our attention getting results that reduce conflict and suffering.