Many people often deride Esperanto as being “artificial,” as if that somehow makes it inferior to natural languages.

However, in my daily life, I interact with many things that could be regarded as artificial, which are often more convenient than natural alternatives.

For instance, cooking atop an artificial fire, i.e. my stove, is a lot more convenient than building an actual fire in my kitchen.

Getting to work via an artificial horse, i.e. my car, is a lot more convenient than riding an actual horse to work and then having to figure out what to do with it once I arrive.

Reading with my artificial eyes, i.e. my glasses, is a lot more convenient than squinting and straining.

Rather than being a downside, I think the artificialness of Esperanto is actually an upside. Natural languages are filled with all sorts of complexities, such as irregular conjugations, weird exceptions, silent letters, and the like.

Esperanto, in contrast, is relatively straightforward. Indeed, it makes communicating cross-culturally much more convenient than using a natural language that all parties may not be native speakers of.

When it comes to cooking, traveling, and reading, most people don’t disparage that which is convenient just because it’s artificial. The same should go for languages.