Are we giving up thinking to AI?

There has long been a fear that new technologies weaken human abilities. Socrates worried that writing would erode memory. Centuries later, people believed calculators would destroy mathematical skills, and many feared that the internet would ruin our ability to concentrate. Yet the concern surrounding artificial intelligence (AI) feels different. With AI now deeply integrated into everyday life, from homework help to professional decision-making, the question has gained new urgency: are we losing the art of thinking in the age of AI?

Across classrooms, workplaces and homes, AI has become both a convenient assistant and an almost invisible companion. Students routinely use AI tools to summarise chapters, draft essays and generate entire assignments. In universities, professors also rely on AI to design assessments, prepare teaching material and streamline administrative tasks. This has quietly become an everyday reality.

AI can make knowledge more accessible, support learners who struggle and increase efficiency. But beneath the optimism lies an uncomfortable possibility. As machines grow more capable, human cognitive skills may diminish. When the first instinct is to ask a model for answers, abilities related to analysis and reflection weaken through lack of use. Over time, this may reshape not only how we learn but how we think.

Children are especially vulnerable to this shift. Cognitive development grows out of doing hard things, working through problems, forming arguments and dealing with ambiguity. These experiences are the foundation of intellectual maturity. If AI is introduced too early or used too heavily, children risk skipping the stages that cultivate creativity, resilience and critical thinking.

In universities, the core issue is integrity. If students allow AI to complete assignments without engaging with the ideas, their degrees no longer reflect real learning. If lecturers depend too much on AI to prepare course content, academic quality and originality may decline. The danger is not that AI will replace teachers or learners. The danger is that AI may replace the thinking that teachers and learners need to do.

This does not mean we should turn away from AI. A more useful question is how to ensure that AI strengthens rather than weakens human intelligence.

The answer lies in our approach.

First, assessments need to be rethought. Traditional take-home essays and predictable problem sets no longer serve their purpose when AI can generate flawless responses. Educators need to emphasise in-class reasoning, oral examinations, real-world projects and reflective writing, formats where thinking cannot be outsourced.

Second, we must teach AI literacy, not only how to use AI but also how to question it. Students should learn to critique AI-generated material, identify inaccuracies and recognise bias. In this way, AI becomes a stimulus for critical thought rather than a replacement for it.

Third, we must reinforce the idea of AI as a tool rather than a crutch. A calculator did not remove the need to understand arithmetic. It allowed mathematicians to move forward. In a similar way, AI can free people from repetitive tasks so that they can focus on creativity, strategy and innovation. This benefit appears only when AI use remains mindful, like a tutor who guides rather than a service that completes the task.

We should avoid framing AI as a dire threat or a future tyrant. The real risk lies not in machines taking control but in humans voluntarily surrendering their own thinking. Intelligence is more than the ability to produce answers. It involves judgement, interpretation and understanding. These are human qualities, and they sharpen only with use.

AI will continue to evolve. Its power will increase. But the future of human cognition is limitless. If societies design educational and cultural systems with care, AI can elevate human thought rather than diminish it. Parents can support this by modelling mindful use and encouraging independent thinking.

The challenge before us is simple but profound: to use machines without allowing machines to use us.

The writer is chairman of Unilever Consumer Care Ltd