As I prepare my students for their O-level exams, I’m struck by a sobering realization. The brightest among them often read to pass, not to understand. Their brilliance shines in memorizing facts, yet falters when critical thinking is required. Even the memorized facts are stored temporarily and discarded after exams. This isn’t just a classroom issue but a mirror reflecting a broader shift in human evolution. We’re not changing morphologically, but our intellectual landscape is transforming, and not entirely for the better. In an era where artificial intelligence increasingly shoulders our cognitive load, I wonder: are we outsourcing our ability to think?
Critical thinking, once the cornerstone of human progress, seems to be eroding. My students, like many in their generation, approach learning as a means to an end: exams, grades, certificates. The more I teach them, the more I get tired. Knowledge for its own sake feels like a relic of a bygone era. I see this mirrored beyond the classroom, in the digital spaces where people turn to AI to debunk misinformation. It’s both amusing and alarming. Why expend mental effort when a quick query to an AI yields instant results? But this convenience comes at a cost. Each time we defer to AI, we risk weakening the muscle of independent thought. And how do we expect an AI to debunk suspected misinformation in real time?
This trend isn’t limited to students or casual social media users. Writers, too, are caught in a strange dance with AI. Many, in an effort to differentiate their work from AI-generated content, are paradoxically adopting an AI-like style - polished, predictable, formulaic. The irony is thick. While trying to prove their humanity, they’re losing the very essence of it, which is their unique voice, their "sauce." The creative spark that once defined storytelling is being dulled, reshaped by algorithms that prioritize efficiency over originality. This isn’t just a professional crisis; it’s a cultural one. If we let AI dictate how we express ourselves, what’s left of our individuality?
The implications are profound. Human evolution has always been about adaptation, but this feels like regression. We’re not just relying on tools, we’re surrendering to them. AI, with its vast knowledge and lightning-fast processing, is a marvel, but it’s a double-edged sword. It amplifies our capabilities while subtly eroding our capacity for deep, reflective thought. The more we lean on it, the less we exercise our ability to question, analyze, and create independently. My students’ struggle to think critically is a symptom of this broader shift. A generation raised on instant answers may lose the patience for complex problems.
So, what do we do? Education must evolve to prioritize thinking over mechanical learning. We need to teach students how to question, not just how to answer. Beyond the classroom, we must reclaim our intellectual agency. Writers should embrace their quirks, their imperfections. Those human elements AI can’t replicate. And as individuals, we should resist the temptation to outsource every query to AI. The next time you’re curious about something, pause. Think. Wrestle with the question before seeking an instant answer. It’s in that struggle that we grow.
The evolution of human thought isn’t inevitable in a negative sense. We can choose to shape it. AI is a tool, not a master. Let’s use it to enhance our creativity and curiosity, not replace them. For my students, for writers, for all of us. Let’s rediscover the joy of thinking for ourselves. Our minds are still our greatest asset. Let’s not let them decline in the shadow of algorithms. The future of our intellectual evolution depends on it.
Or, am I overreacting?
Posted Using INLEO