Commentary:

I’ve been experimenting with using AI to summarize articles.

First, it’s brutal to the original piece, often dropping out the feel of the original article. There’s often just dropped details too. However…I did ask for a summary.

Second, these summaries are a way to tell if there’s anything “new” to me on the article. For todays example, this article thinking through more ethical diets. The two women I’d dated in my life (the second now my wife) were vegetarians, and I lived in a vegan co-op for several years. I know all the stuff. As Tyler Cowen once said, one way you start to read more/faster is that you can skip over the things you already know. So getting a summary of this article can tell me there’s anything “new” in it. Having read both the article and the summary…I think the AI worked to show me that there was nothing new to me. The summary dropped the author’s personal experience about all of this but, I guess, do I need to know that?

Third, you can see on my second prompting that asking it to provide more detail kind of works. I wonder if you can ask it to provide only the new detail. I tried this but isn’t wasn’t very good, so I won’t put it below. Are maybe it was good: I just got bored with the exercise. I’ll have to try it on a different article.

Prompt:

Summarize with bullet points in 500 words: https://aeon.co/essays/if-not-vegan-then-what-an-investigation-of-three-options

Response:

The article “If Not Vegan, Then What? An Investigation of Three Options” discusses the three main alternatives to a vegan lifestyle:

1. Omnivore: An omnivore is a person who eats both plants and animals.

• Pros: Omnivores have a wide range of food choices and can benefit from the nutrients provided by animal products.
• Cons: The production of animal products, especially those from industrial agriculture, can have negative impacts on the environment and animal welfare.

1. Flexitarian: A flexitarian is a person who mostly follows a plant-based diet but occasionally includes animal products.

• Pros: Flexitarians can reduce their carbon footprint and support animal welfare while still having the option to consume animal products.
• Cons: The line between being a flexitarian and an omnivore can become blurred, leading to inconsistent ethical and environmental practices.

1. Pescatarian: A pescatarian is a person who eats a vegetarian diet but includes fish.

• Pros: Pescatarians can benefit from the nutrients provided by fish, and the production of fish is generally less harmful to the environment than the production of other animal products.
• Cons: Overfishing and unsustainable fishing practices can contribute to the depletion of fish populations, and the production of fish can still have negative impacts on the ocean environment.

The article concludes by acknowledging that there is no one perfect diet that is best for everyone and that each individual must consider their personal beliefs, values, and circumstances when choosing a diet. Ultimately, the most important thing is to be mindful and intentional about the food choices we make and to strive for a diet that is both healthful and ethical.

Prompt:

Add more detail

Response:

The article “If Not Vegan, Then What? An Investigation of Three Options” is a comprehensive examination of the three main alternatives to a vegan lifestyle. The author provides an in-depth analysis of the advantages and disadvantages of each option, as well as a discussion of the ethical and environmental considerations involved in each one.

1. Omnivore: An omnivore is a person who eats both plants and animals. The author notes that omnivores have a wide range of food choices and can benefit from the nutrients provided by animal products, such as protein, iron, and vitamin B12. However, the production of animal products, especially those from industrial agriculture, can have negative impacts on the environment and animal welfare. For example, the production of animal products contributes to greenhouse gas emissions, deforestation, and soil degradation. Additionally, the industrial production of animal products often involves the use of antibiotics and hormones, which can harm both animals and the environment.

2. Flexitarian: A flexitarian is a person who mostly follows a plant-based diet but occasionally includes animal products. The author notes that flexitarians can reduce their carbon footprint and support animal welfare while still having the option to consume animal products. This can be a more achievable and sustainable option for some individuals who are unable or unwilling to completely eliminate animal products from their diet. However, the line between being a flexitarian and an omnivore can become blurred, leading to inconsistent ethical and environmental practices. Additionally, the author notes that even occasional consumption of animal products can still contribute to the demand for industrial agriculture, which can have negative impacts on the environment and animal welfare.

3. Pescatarian: A pescatarian is a person who eats a vegetarian diet but includes fish. The author notes that pescatarians can benefit from the nutrients provided by fish, and the production of fish is generally less harmful to the environment than the production of other animal products. However, overfishing and unsustainable fishing practices can contribute to the depletion of fish populations, and the production of fish can still have negative impacts on the ocean environment. For example, the production of fish can result in bycatch and the destruction of marine habitats. Additionally, many species of fish are threatened by overfishing, and the demand for fish can contribute to illegal, unreported, and unregulated fishing practices.

The article concludes by acknowledging that there is no one perfect diet that is best for everyone and that each individual must consider their personal beliefs, values, and circumstances when choosing a diet. The author notes that it is important to be mindful and intentional about the food choices we make and to strive for a diet that is both healthful and ethical. The author also emphasizes the importance of considering the environmental and ethical implications of our food choices and taking steps to reduce our impact on the environment and animals.

In conclusion, the article provides a detailed examination of the three main alternatives to a vegan lifestyle and highlights the advantages and disadvantages of each option. The author provides a balanced and comprehensive analysis of the ethical and environmental considerations involved in each diet, and encourages individuals to be mindful and intentional about their food choices.