Eric Schwitzgebel (UCR) argues, in a piece at The Splintered Mind, that philosophy journals should reject AI-written submissions and that he does not want to receive AI-written emails about philosophy, based on a meta-epistemological reason. He states that "the fact that you, an expert human, generated the text is evidence that the view is worth thinking about—more so than if the text were generated by an LLM." Schwitzgebel explains that in a complex world, it helps to have "evidence about the quality of the evidence," noting that "an increasingly large part of the function of journals is to provide evidence about evidence—the value of their imprimatur." He contrasts this with knowing that an email or article was written by a respected colleague, which provides better reason to take it seriously than if it were generated by an LLM. While acknowledging that "a sound argument is a sound argument," he argues that due to limited attention, time, and ability, "it’s helpful to have meta-evidence" to determine what to read and how much to trust the author.