Bring a claim. Examine the assumptions.
AI writing discussions often mix questions of capability, ethics, creativity and predictions about the future. The Claim Clinic helps separate them.
Five questions to ask
- What is actually being claimed? Rewrite the statement precisely.
- Which VET dimensions are involved? Valence, effectiveness, trajectory, or several?
- What assumptions are hidden? Does the claim treat all AI workflows as identical?
- What evidence would change your mind? Look for observations that could support or weaken it.
- What remains a question of values? Not every disagreement can be resolved by measurement.
Worked example
"AI-assisted writing is plagiarism."
Does the accusation concern copied expression, misrepresentation of another writer's work, model training, or a particular generated passage?
Plagiarism, copyright infringement and ethical objections to training practices are not interchangeable concepts.
VET can expose assumptions about AI's capabilities and consequences. It cannot independently determine whether plagiarism or infringement occurred.
Try it with your own example
Write down a claim you've encountered. Identify its assumptions, then describe what evidence would change your position.
You can bring your analysis to the PennedCanon Writers' Club for discussion. The exercise does not require an AI model or collect your answers.
PennedCanon created these discussion examples independently. They have not been validated as a measure of critical thinking or endorsed by the VET framework’s author. Reviewed November 7, 2026.
Read the full guide
Beyond the AI Argument explains the VET framework, authorship, provenance and cognitive offloading in more detail.