Background: In this paper, we explore the question "Why can't AI be a coauthor?" and reveal a rarely discussed reason.
Methods and results: First, allowing AI to be a coauthor disregards the uniquely human experience of writing texts. This means that human authors are seen as mere producers of texts rather than rational beings engaged in a value-added and humanized learning process expressed through the paper. The relationship between the human author and the thesis is reduced to a mere result of generation rather than a result of individual human critical thinking. Second, allowing AI to be a coauthor leads to self-delusion about one's own rationality and thus violates the responsibility to understand the world correctly. In this process of self-deception, it is not as if those who grant AI coauthor status do not realize that AI is not the same as humans; however, they self-deceivingly assume that AI has the same internal state as humans. This means that the relationship between the author and the work is no longer seen as a position to be respected, but as something probabilistic and gamified.
Conclusions: Finally, we discuss the potential consequences of these rationales, concluding that including AI as a coauthor implies a disregard for humanization.
Keywords: AI coauthorship; authorship ethics; humanization; self-deception.