Resolution Theory: Methodology and AI Disclosure

This note addresses a practical question raised by AI-assisted reasoning: how authorship, responsibility, and originality should be understood when a generative system is used in the development of philosophical work. It does not defend AI, claim novelty by default, or assert that the resulting framework is correct. Its purpose is descriptive: to record how Resolution Theory emerged, what role AI played in the process, and which parts of the development chain were human rather than automated. The central claim is that AI served as an instrument for articulation, adversarial challenge, and scope-testing, while the underlying structure and inferences remained the author’s. The note also clarifies the limits of the method, including AI failure modes such as confident error and definitional drift, and describes why sustained adversarial dialogue enabled unusually rapid iteration and refinement.