Why Even Basic A.I. Use Is So Bad for Students


ALT Text: A distressed student sits at a desk with their head in their hands, surrounded by laptops displaying AI interfaces. Labeled "INTELLECTUAL STAGNATION." Image (and typos) generated by Nano Banana.
The weight of intellectual stagnation: How reliance on AI can hinder genuine learning and critical thinking in students. Image (and typos) generated by Nano Banana.

Source

The New York Times

Summary

Anastasia Berg, a philosophy professor at the University of California, Irvine, contends that even minimal reliance on AI tools threatens students’ cognitive development and linguistic competence. Drawing on her experience of widespread AI use in a moral philosophy course, Berg argues that generative AI erodes the foundational processes of reading, reasoning, and self-expression that underpin higher learning and democratic citizenship. While past technologies reshaped cognition, she claims AI uniquely undermines the human capacity for thought itself by outsourcing linguistic effort. Berg calls for renewed emphasis on tech-free learning environments to protect students’ intellectual autonomy and critical literacy.

Key Points

  • Over half of Berg’s students used AI to complete philosophy exams.
  • AI shortcuts inhibit linguistic and conceptual growth central to thinking.
  • Even “harmless” uses, like summarising, weaken cognitive engagement.
  • Cognitive decline could threaten democratic participation and self-rule.
  • Universities should create tech-free spaces to rebuild reading and writing skills.

Keywords

URL

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/10/29/opinion/ai-students-thinking-school-reading.html

Summary generated by ChatGPT 5


How Generative AI Could Change How We Think and Speak


A glowing, ethereal blue silhouette of a human head and shoulders against a dark, starry background. Within the head, vibrant cosmic energy and swirling light converge, symbolizing thought and consciousness. From the head, streams of complex code, abstract data visualizations, and various speech bubbles with different languages and concepts flow outward, representing language and communication. Above the head, two pairs of translucent, glowing hands reach down, seemingly interacting with or guiding the processes. On either side, futuristic holographic interfaces display intricate data and neural networks. Image (and typos) generated by Nano Banana.
Generative AI is not just changing how we create, but how we fundamentally process information and express ourselves. Explore the profound ways this transformative technology could reshape human thought patterns and linguistic communication in the years to come. Image (and typos) generated by Nano Banana.

Source

The Conversation

Summary

Antonio Cerella examines how generative AI may reshape the cognitive and linguistic habits that underpin human thought. Drawing on psychology, neuroscience, and linguistics, he argues that over-reliance on AI tools risks weakening creativity, critical thinking, and language mastery. Just as GPS technology has diminished spatial memory, constant AI-assisted writing and problem-solving could erode our ability to form and express original ideas. Cerella warns that when language becomes pre-packaged through AI systems, the connection between speech and thought deteriorates, fostering a “culture of immediacy” driven by emotion rather than understanding. Yet for those with mature linguistic awareness, AI can still serve as a creative partner—if used reflectively and not as a substitute for thought.

Key Points

  • Overuse of AI may dull critical thinking and creative language use.
  • Psychological research shows that technological reliance can reconfigure the brain.
  • AI-generated language risks weakening the link between thought and expression.
  • The loss of linguistic agency could erode democratic discourse and imagination.
  • Conscious, reflective engagement with language can preserve creativity and autonomy.

Keywords

URL

https://theconversation.com/how-generative-ai-could-change-how-we-think-and-speak-267118

Summary generated by ChatGPT 5