> Well - the point of involving the AI is that very often it explains my intuitions way better than I can. It instantiates them and fills in all the details

> I like to think that I can recognise good arguments, but if I am wrong here - then why would you prefer my writing from an LLM generated one?

Because the AI will happily argue either side of a debate, in both cases the meaningful/useful/reliable information in the post is constrained by the limits of _your_ knowledge. The LLM-based one will merely be longer.

Can you think of a time when you asked AI to support your point, and upon reviewing its argument, decided it was unconvincing after all and changed your mind?