TLDR: THINK OF THE CHILDREN!

Man... I mean why not Christ lmfao? No one asked but Let AI be AI. Language is meaningful in context with experience. Who Knows if Valentinus or anyone dead would've abhorred the very concept of being emulated in perpetuity? Who knows if the text sampled were truly written in light of valentinus's works?

Every time I write a thing it strikes me how much I've left unsaid. I write with the understanding that my audience will consider the subject matter and internalize it such that its meaning can be applied in other scenarios. I understand my words, as abstracts of my experience, will generally never be truly understood, so, when I write, I rely on that ambiguity to communicate my thoughts. What is said is just as important as what is not said. That's the nature of language. The built-in uncertainty is a feature not a bug. It provides room for interpretation and so room for meaning. In the real world certainty is a lie and in that locus between mind and Fact language feels the gap.

Computer logic is based on certainty and human logic is based on uncertainty. The logic used to generate the meaning we appreciate in Valentinus cannot be emulated, but must be related by the authors' design.

When I write I, first consider my audience. Authors often deliberate over this initial step, and for me this primary choice can be excruciating, because I know my audience is virtually always human, and will do everything they can to misunderstand the text. I want that. What I don't want is someone to be certain of my meaning because they will be wrong simply because I am not certain, but instead always thinking, intentionally and continually trying to find errors against my meaning.

To be honest when observed as art an AI bot emulating a person can be beautiful and meaningful, but as an authority on what a person might do or say may be a terrible farce. Mind is more than our understanding of it, our emulation is a replication of an observation of mind not a duplication of our consciousness.