**· **
Dr. Abdulmohsen Al-Huqail: There can be no comparison between a creator who creates a work and another who simply copies from AI platforms!

**· **
Ibtisam Al-Buqami: Artificial intelligence is a technical partner that supports the writing process, but it cannot replace the presence of the creative human being.

**· **
Hala Al-Jiroudi: The content must carry the spirit of humanization.

**· **
Adel Qadi: In the face of the challenge posed by algorithms, will the true creative become a memory of the past?

Ahwal Al-Ma'rifa – Special

AI-generated writing has recently spread across poetry, novels, short stories, and theater, as well as literary criticism and article writing. These are forms of writing produced rapidly and driven by technology, and by the accelerating media age with all its technological tools, which have, in one way or another, reduced the time spent thinking deeply and reflecting carefully during the writing process. Do these forms of writing represent the best choice for new literary generations, or are they a necessity brought about by rapid technological advancement that shortens the time required for writing and its various stages? Are there artistic differences between such writing and personal writing produced by creative men and women? Is the difference found in language, style, or personal imprint? Or in the distinctive creative vision? And does such writing weaken the qualitative level of literature and culture and hinder the values of human thought?

Can the Comparison Be Made?

Poet and critic Dr. Abdulmohsen Al-Huqail asked in astonishment: A difference between what and what? The difference between a creator who creates a work and another who simply copies from AI platforms?!

Does such a comparison make sense? And in poetry: artificial intelligence writes with broken meter and does not care, so would a poet accept that?!

And if we accepted and agreed to hold an interview with this impostor, what would his answers be? Should we prepare ourselves for comedic scenes?!

Perhaps artificial intelligence can help with research or academic studies, and even then, relying on it alone would be the height of stupidity when dealing with AI platforms.

The Creative Imprint:

For her part, short-story writer Ibtisam Abdullah Al-Buqami presented the picture in a focused manner, comparing AI writing in terms of technical efficiency and the human creative imprint. She believes that the cultural world has witnessed profound transformations in recent years as a result of the rapid development of artificial intelligence. Its presence is no longer limited to technical and scientific fields, but has extended into the realms of literary and intellectual creativity, from poetry, novels, and short stories to literary criticism and article writing. This expansion has sparked widespread debate about the very nature of writing and the future of human creativity in the age of algorithms.

Ibtisam Al-Buqami added: It cannot be denied that artificial intelligence systems possess a significant ability to produce linguistically coherent and rapid texts that vary in style and subject matter. They rely on analyzing vast quantities of previously written texts and then reconstructing linguistic and semantic patterns in ways that imitate human writing. From this perspective, AI writing appears to be an effective and tempting tool for new generations who belong to an age of speed and digitization, as it saves time and provides knowledge in an organized and fluent language.

However, considering AI writing to be the "best choice" for new generations remains a judgment that requires considerable critical caution. Writing is not merely a grammatically correct linguistic structure or a coherent stylistic form. Above all, it is a human act connected to experience, memory, emotion, and the existential context of its author. A true writer does not merely write words; they write themselves, their anxiety, their questions, their brokenness, and their particular vision of the world.

Ibtisam Al-Buqami explains the distinction clearly, saying: The artistic difference between AI writing and the personal writing of creative individuals does not lie in language alone. Artificial intelligence can imitate multiple linguistic styles with a high degree of accuracy. Style itself has also become partially reproducible through algorithms. But the fundamental difference lies in the personal imprint and the distinctive creative vision. A human creative text always carries the trace of its creator, whether through linguistic choices or through their unique way of seeing and interpreting things.

Artificial intelligence produces a text based on statistical probability and learning from data, whereas human writing emerges from suffering, experience, consciousness, and the unconscious together. Therefore, it can be said that artificial intelligence has the ability to "simulate" creativity, but it does not experience the psychological and existential conditions of creativity that form the essence of a genuine literary work.

From a critical perspective, the real conflict may not be between humans and machines, but between two concepts of writing: writing that views the text as an informational product that can be generated automatically, and writing that considers it a profound human act carrying the imprint of the individual and their psychological and cultural history. Therefore, the challenge facing new generations is not choosing between the writer and artificial intelligence, but learning how to employ this technology as an assisting tool without sacrificing intellectual independence and creative individuality.

Ibtisam Al-Buqami concludes by saying: Artificial intelligence can be viewed as a technical partner that supports the writing process, but it cannot completely replace the presence of the creative human being. True creativity is not measured solely by linguistic accuracy or speed of production, but by the ability of a text to carry a unique vision and create an emotional and intellectual impact that goes beyond technical formulation into the depth of human experience.

Humanizing Writing:

Poet and writer Hala Al-Jiroudi rejects the idea that artificial intelligence should constitute the best choice for new generations in writing, saying: I do not believe that AI-generated writing is the best option in absolute terms, particularly when it comes to literary writing such as poetry, authorship, or novels.

In poetry especially, there are elements that artificial intelligence finds difficult to imitate, such as personal human experience, emotions associated with an event experienced by the writer, and the author's particular philosophical or aesthetic vision. Here, literary writing must be humanized, meaning that the content must carry the spirit of humanity.

Hala Al-Jiroudi adds: The artistic difference is also important. It is not merely about linguistic correctness or the beauty of rhetorical imagery, but about the source of creativity itself.

We do not deny that artificial intelligence has become a useful tool in some aspects of practical life, particularly in terms of speed and efficiency. However, from a literary perspective, I do not believe this is the case, because artificial intelligence tends to produce an average style that combines characteristics from many sources. It may therefore be difficult for it to possess an independent artistic "imprint" in the literary sense, and it often struggles to maintain the psychological depth and artistic consistency that distinguish great literary works.

The Death of the True Creative:

Writer and journalist Adel Abdullah Qadi wondered: I do not know how far the conflict between artificial intelligence and genuine creators will go. Will personal creativity withstand the challenge posed by algorithms and their rapid development, or has the death of the true creative come close, so that they will soon become a memory of the past?

To be honest, I am not optimistic in the face of this overwhelming tide of algorithms that has swept through various aspects of life and entered the field of creativity and creative professionals through its widest doors, extending into authorship, article writing, poetry, short stories, novels, and theatrical scripts. Even literary criticism has not escaped it.

To be honest, the competition is fierce, and the balance may tilt in favor of artificial intelligence. This has produced

names of writers who are outsiders to literature and who know nothing about writing or its world, yet have become prominent figures in the publishing scene thanks to artificial intelligence.

We suddenly find ourselves facing thousands of fake poets, novelists, and writers, the "children of artificial intelligence,"

some of whom have no hesitation in publishing dozens of books every year across different fields and disciplines, despite perhaps knowing nothing about them beyond their names or even merely the title they selected through ChatGPT,

without having made any intellectual effort of their own.

We therefore find ourselves facing another form of literary theft, if the expression may be used. Adel Qadi concludes his remarks by saying:

In general, we are facing an unavoidable reality with the world of artificial intelligence and the challenges posed by algorithms.

The true creative must continue creating and producing their own writing before genuine creativity dies and disappears completely, taking emotions with it.

We are facing the challenges of this monster called artificial intelligence, which has gone beyond language and style,

yet the pleasure and enjoyment carried by personal writing will remain more beautiful because of the spirit and human emotions it contains, expressing what lies within the human soul.