Essay argues human value in the AI era should not depend on outperforming machines at creative work

The article critiques arguments that defend human creativity by claiming people still produce better or more distinctive work than AI. It argues that tying human worth to a shrinking capability gap is fragile, and that society can simply assert humans are valuable without making that value conditional on output quality.

As generative AI improves, defenses of human labor based only on superior performance may become harder to sustain. The piece points toward a broader cultural shift: valuing human agency, intent, and dignity as intrinsic, not merely as competitive advantages over machines.

You can just say it