I think that the key to this might be to recognize that YOUR MAGNUM OPUS ALREADY EXISTS, word-for-word, but it's buried very obscurely inside the Library of Babel and/or down a very distant path through lexical vector-space.
Maybe people need to realize that if they produce a bunch of halfass notes, it can AT LEAST be used to burrow through the LLM to a point where the machine can be used to create non-trivial extensions of the human output.
There's something to be done with Romantic irony & fragmentary philosophy VS the tendency of many people to have an unwritten magnum opus in their imaginations.
Like... NaNoWriMo is some overachiever shit. I want to see a 12 hour period where people just drink a whole pot of coffee and write their halfass version of "Speculative notes toward X." The world would be much richer for it.
With all due apologies, I find it very improbable that "Cat's in the Cradle" breaks through anyone's shell. People who have raised little kids up to be grown adults will either already know at some level that they've been shitheels or they never will.
It's a solid song, though, and I think it's been a useful work of art for expressing and facilitating conversations by kids about parenting.
It's hard to explain what I think is so magical about this chain of transmission.
You start off with the dog-torturing asshole Descartes giving us some real drunk dad philosophy about how you can't trust anything. You start in this really grim position of this corpse-universe of efficient action grinding away empty matter on empty matter.
But by the end of this chain of critique, you actually come all the way around to this fascinating view of reality as intrinsically meaningful.
Part 4. Peirce says "no," these things attributed to the mind are all fake, the mind is fake, most of the phenomenal ooze is fake, EXCEPT there are a handful of transcendental bits that are actually totally real and necessary for signs to work. And signs working is the base reality now.
(Wait a minute, you may say: If the mind is fake then what is receiving all the signs? Of course the answer is that semiosis interprets itself, you silly goose. Semiosis is the atomic form of phenomenal ooze.)
Humanist interested in the consequences of the machine on intellectual history.