ŁÓDŹ—I am a co-editor of the Journal of Controversial Ideas, an open-access, peer-reviewed journal. Five years ago, my co-editors and I launched the journal to combat the narrowing of the range of “acceptable” issues that can be raised in the humanities and social sciences. We do not reject well-argued articles because their topics are too sensitive, and we allow authors to publish under a pseudonym if they fear that publishing their controversial ideas will harm their careers, or lead to personal abuse and death threats.
Peer-reviewed academic journals exist to advance our knowledge and understanding by publishing the best work being done in a given field. If that is the goal, and the best reviewers—both human and AI—agree that an article generated by AI meets that standard, why should a journal’s editors reject it?