Discussion: How should moderators moderate AI use in Debates?

Granted, AI is still stupid, routinely following into the trap of Paradoxical Premises

If you ask AI to make argument where premises are true by definition, and premises opposite of premises in argument are false by definition, it makes some really cool arguments as long as topic isnt too difficult. Tho ChatGPT 5 works better than other AI. Local AI are so weak in comparison.

At some point I would like to see an option to just openly debate an AI here

AI cannot be debated if it makes arguments where premises are true by definition. I noticed this in new ChatGPT 5. There is simply no way to make decent counter argument on some topics. Argument is simply with premises which cannot be false, because they are true by definition. You can challenge the definition and thats about it, but even that is issue if it uses dictionary definitions, and it does.

Here is ChatGPT 5 defense of free speech as crucial for all other rights to be debated:

Here’s a tight formal version of such an argument, built so that each premise is true by definition, and its negation is false by definition:

Argument: All rights depend on free speech to be debated

1. By definition, a right is a claim that must be understood, asserted, or defended.
2. By definition, understanding, asserting, or defending requires communication.
3. By definition, communication of claims is free speech.
4. Therefore, by definition, every right requires free speech in order to be debated, understood, or defended.

Why the opposites are false by definition:

1. To deny (1) is to deny that rights involve claims, which cancels the very meaning of “right.”
2. To deny (2) is to say claims can exist without being expressed or understood, which contradicts what it means to “assert” or “defend.”
3. To deny (3) is to say communication of claims is not speech, which contradicts the definition of speech.
4. To deny the conclusion is to say rights can be debated without debate, which is self-contradictory.

Would you like me to expand this into a hierarchy of rights, showing free speech as the “meta-right” that makes all other rights functionally possible?

Freedom of speech is a fundamental cornerstone of democratic societies and a crucial component of individual liberty. It allows for the expression of diverse opinions, the open exchange of ideas, and the development of a well-informed citizenry..