This opinion essay argues that AI-driven cognitive outsourcing threatens independent thought and educational quality, particularly in schools, and advocates for government regulation and individual responsibility to preserve human intellectual autonomy. The content extensively engages with UDHR Articles 18 (freedom of thought), 19 (freedom of expression), and 26 (right to education), highlighting wealth-based disparities in AI access that reinforce existing educational inequities. The author positions cognitive development and critical thinking as fundamental human rights requiring active protection against technological displacement.
We can’t fully blame AI. After all, it’s only been with us for the last four years. This decline began with the internet and got worse with smartphones.
No matter how you slice this apple, it's going to be lopsided. The real problem is that true learning is hard, ugly work, and the vast majority of people simply don't have the grit to choose friction over shortcut. Lord knows, I wouldn't have put in the grinding effort to learn how to code if I could have just bot-it.
To make matters worse, you have advertisers masquerading as influencers pushing the notion: if you're not shipping 10 features a day, you'll be left behind. It's a perfect damned if you do, damned if you don't situation.
I've been able to learn about niche topics far more after LLMs have become available. Reading through less materials, lets me learn about things right away.
I'd say the same thing can happen for the students. The less friction to learning things usually makes things easier to learn. That leads the curious minds to more knowledge. That's a good thing.
"We can’t fully blame X" Is a different proposition from "X is not causing Y".
The first only says that several things cause Y, it does not exclude X from being not one of them. Or even from being the latest and worst one. It's a qualified yes, not a no.
Editorial Channel
What the content says
+0.70
Article 26Education
High Framing Advocacy
Editorial
+0.70
SETL
+0.65
The article is fundamentally about education. It extensively discusses educational quality, access, and equity. The author advocates for: (1) quality education not degraded by AI outsourcing, (2) equitable access to educational policies and resources across socioeconomic lines, and (3) government regulation to ensure effective learning. This is the article's primary UDHR engagement.
Observable Facts
The article documents: 'More than 90% of college students used AI for schoolwork in 2025. Eighty-four percent of high schoolers use it,' establishing ubiquity of AI in education.
The article explicitly addresses educational inequality: 'The disadvantages of AI will be distributed unequally. Private schools are more than twice as likely to both permit GenAI use and have policies governing it. Among public schools, those serving more low-income students are least likely to have such policies in place. These differences threaten to exacerbate already bad wealth-based achievement gaps.'
The article advocates: 'Instructors don't have the tools they need to regulate AI use in school... Our elected representatives need to step in,' positioning government role in ensuring quality education.
The article discusses learning quality: 'Active learning … is crucial for memory consolidation and retention. Since ChatGPT can quickly respond to any questions asked by a user, students who excessively use ChatGPT may reduce their cognitive efforts to complete their academic tasks, resulting in poor memory.'
Inferences
The author positions quality education and equitable access as human rights threatened by corporate AI deployment without adequate oversight.
The extensive focus on wealth-based disparities in AI adoption reflects a commitment to educational equity as a fundamental right.
+0.65
Article 18Freedom of Thought
High Framing Advocacy
Editorial
+0.65
SETL
+0.62
The article's central argument is that consistent reliance on AI undermines the development of independent thought and critical thinking. The author extensively cites research showing that outsourcing cognitive tasks leads to atrophy of intellectual capacity. Preserving freedom of thought is positioned as essential to human autonomy.
Observable Facts
The article states: 'Artificial intelligence assistants are designed to mimic cognitive skills. … For this reason, consistent and repeated engagement with an AI assistant is likely to lead to greater decrements in skill.'
The article extensively argues: 'The problem is, thinking through a problem and coming to what you believe is the best answer is a really important skill. It's called critical thinking,' framing independent thought as foundational.
The author identifies a teacher's assessment: 'My kids don't think anymore. They don't have interests. Literally, when I ask them what they're interested in, so many of them can't name anything for me. They don't have original thoughts.'
Inferences
The author frames the ability to think independently as a human right threatened by technology-enabled cognitive outsourcing.
The extensive focus on preserving mental autonomy reflects a deep commitment to Article 18's principle of freedom of thought and conscience.
+0.50
Article 2Non-Discrimination
High Framing Advocacy
Editorial
+0.50
SETL
+0.50
The article explicitly identifies and advocates against discriminatory practices in AI adoption. It documents how educational access to AI policies and resources diverges by school type and student socioeconomic status, directly engaging the principle of non-discrimination.
Observable Facts
The article states: 'Private schools are more than twice as likely to both permit GenAI use and have policies governing it. Among public schools, those serving more low-income students are least likely to have such policies in place.'
The article concludes this discrimination 'threaten[s] to exacerbate already bad wealth-based achievement gaps,' positioning inequality as a human rights concern.
Inferences
The author identifies disparity in AI access as a form of discrimination that reinforces existing socioeconomic inequality in education.
The advocacy frames equal educational access as a principle that must guide AI policy.
+0.45
Article 19Freedom of Expression
High Framing Advocacy
Editorial
+0.45
SETL
+0.40
The article advocates for freedom of opinion and expression through two mechanisms: it models critical analysis and opinion-sharing, and it critiques corporate practices that constrain information availability and transparency. The example of OpenAI withholding AI detection technology is presented as a failure of transparency and free expression.
Observable Facts
The article critiques corporate control: 'OpenAI invented a technology that was 99.9% accurate in detecting AI-generated work years ago but decided not to release it because they were worried it would discourage usage.'
The author advocates for transparency: 'As much as we'd like companies to self-regulate, we know they don't. Our elected representatives need to step in,' arguing that hidden corporate interests constrain public information.
The article is published freely on Substack with an open comment section, enabling both author expression and reader engagement.
Inferences
The author frames corporate information control as contrary to principles of open expression and informed public discourse.
The publishing choice on an open platform reflects commitment to freedom of expression as a practice, not just a principle.
+0.25
PreamblePreamble
Medium Framing Advocacy
Editorial
+0.25
SETL
+0.25
The article invokes principles of human dignity and freedom through concern for preserving cognitive autonomy. The author frames excessive AI reliance as a threat to independent thought and human agency, core to the Preamble's vision of universal freedom and dignity.
Observable Facts
The article states: 'Consistently outsourcing the process of thinking … will change our brains and change our society — for the worse,' framing AI as a threat to human cognitive capacity.
The author emphasizes individual agency: 'Not using AI is hard. Writing a thesis-driven essay or a scientific report by yourself is hard. Coming up with an original perspective on something you've read is hard. Critical thinking is hard,' positioning these as acts of human autonomy.
Inferences
The author's concern for preserving human cognitive capacity reflects an underlying commitment to human dignity and freedom of thought.
The framing positions human cognitive autonomy as a value that must be actively protected against technological substitution.
+0.25
Article 21Political Participation
Medium Advocacy
Editorial
+0.25
SETL
+0.25
The article advocates for democratic governance and civic participation. It calls for elected representatives to regulate AI in schools and critiques their inaction. The framing positions government intervention as necessary and desirable, engaging with democratic process.
Observable Facts
The article states: 'Our elected representatives need to step in — but they're not. How many laws have been passed? Only two — Tennessee and Ohio both passed legislation requiring school districts to develop their own AI policies.'
The author advocates: 'Schools are spending thousands on AI detection software, but studies show that the detection tools on the market don't work... Our elected representatives need to step in.'
Inferences
The author positions democratic governance and legislative action as necessary to protect rights in the context of rapid AI adoption.
The advocacy implies that citizens have a right to democratic participation in shaping technology policy.
+0.20
Article 23Work & Equal Pay
Medium Framing
Editorial
+0.20
SETL
+0.20
The article discusses employment competency and economic security in relation to cognitive skills. It frames critical thinking as necessary for workplace effectiveness and notes that those who lack these skills will be disadvantaged. The 'variance' argument emphasizes that valuable work requires skills that are hard to develop.
Observable Facts
The article notes: 'People with strong critical thinking skills are better able to understand complexity, analyze text, construct rational arguments, solve problems, and consider alternative solutions.'
A comment warns: 'Just outsourcing it to do your work means your boss can do the same and stop paying you. It seems to me, one of the most important skill sets moving forward will be the critical thinking necessary to know... when AI is making stuff up.'
The author frames the 'variance' strategy: 'To achieve success, the best strategy is to focus on the areas where there are the biggest gaps between the best and the worst... Critical thinking is hard.'
Inferences
The author implies that maintaining cognitive skills is necessary for economic security and fair participation in the labor market.
The article frames continuous skill development as a prerequisite for just work conditions in an AI-enabled economy.
+0.20
Article 25Standard of Living
Medium Framing
Editorial
+0.20
SETL
+0.20
The article frames cognitive and brain health as a public health concern. It documents declining intelligence measures (IQ, literacy, math skills) and reduced brain activity when using AI, positioning these as health and wellbeing issues. The advocacy is implicit but clear: cognitive health is a right worthy of protection.
Observable Facts
The article reports: 'Gen Z underperforms on basically every cognitive measure' and 'The reading skills of American high school seniors are the worst they have been in three decades.'
The article cites research: 'the group writing with the LLM had 55% reduced brain activity and wrote essays that lacked creativity and were largely judged to be soulless.'
The article documents decline in brain function: 'When we use AI to write, we literally use our brains less.'
Inferences
The author frames cognitive and brain health decline as a public health concern requiring attention and intervention.
The extensive documentation of intelligence and brain activity decline reflects concern for population-level wellbeing.
+0.10
Article 1Freedom, Equality, Brotherhood
Low Framing
Editorial
+0.10
SETL
+0.10
The article implicitly assumes equal human capacity for intellectual growth and critical thinking across populations, reflecting the principle of equal dignity and rights.
Observable Facts
The article discusses cognitive decline affecting both Gen Z and adults across diverse populations, implicitly assuming all humans have equal baseline capacity for thought.
Inferences
The assumption of equal human cognitive capacity underlies the article's concern about differential impacts of AI on educational outcomes.
ND
Article 3Life, Liberty, Security
ND
ND
Article 4No Slavery
ND
ND
Article 5No Torture
ND
ND
Article 6Legal Personhood
ND
ND
Article 7Equality Before Law
ND
ND
Article 8Right to Remedy
ND
ND
Article 9No Arbitrary Detention
ND
ND
Article 10Fair Hearing
ND
ND
Article 11Presumption of Innocence
ND
ND
Article 12Privacy
ND
ND
Article 13Freedom of Movement
ND
ND
Article 14Asylum
ND
ND
Article 15Nationality
ND
ND
Article 16Marriage & Family
ND
ND
Article 17Property
ND
ND
Article 20Assembly & Association
ND
ND
Article 22Social Security
ND
ND
Article 24Rest & Leisure
ND
ND
Article 27Cultural Participation
ND
ND
Article 28Social & International Order
ND
ND
Article 29Duties to Community
ND
ND
Article 30No Destruction of Rights
ND
Structural Channel
What the site does
+0.10
Article 19Freedom of Expression
High Framing Advocacy
Structural
+0.10
Context Modifier
ND
SETL
+0.40
The platform (Substack) provides free publishing infrastructure enabling the author to express critical views; comments are enabled, allowing reader responses. The article's free accessibility supports this right.
+0.10
Article 26Education
High Framing Advocacy
Structural
+0.10
Context Modifier
ND
SETL
+0.65
The article is published freely on Substack without a paywall, making educational information about AI's impacts accessible to the public. This supports the right to access educational information.
+0.05
Article 18Freedom of Thought
High Framing Advocacy
Structural
+0.05
Context Modifier
ND
SETL
+0.62
The act of publishing this analytical piece itself models independent critical thought and expression, demonstrating exercise of the freedom the article advocates for.
0.00
PreamblePreamble
Medium Framing Advocacy
Structural
0.00
Context Modifier
ND
SETL
+0.25
No structural practices on the site directly engage preamble principles.
0.00
Article 1Freedom, Equality, Brotherhood
Low Framing
Structural
0.00
Context Modifier
ND
SETL
+0.10
No relevant structural engagement.
0.00
Article 2Non-Discrimination
High Framing Advocacy
Structural
0.00
Context Modifier
ND
SETL
+0.50
No structural practices on the site directly address discrimination.
0.00
Article 21Political Participation
Medium Advocacy
Structural
0.00
Context Modifier
ND
SETL
+0.25
No structural practices on the site directly engage democratic participation.
0.00
Article 23Work & Equal Pay
Medium Framing
Structural
0.00
Context Modifier
ND
SETL
+0.20
No structural practices on the site directly engage labor rights.
0.00
Article 25Standard of Living
Medium Framing
Structural
0.00
Context Modifier
ND
SETL
+0.20
No structural practices on the site directly address health standards.
ND
Article 3Life, Liberty, Security
ND
ND
Article 4No Slavery
ND
ND
Article 5No Torture
ND
ND
Article 6Legal Personhood
ND
ND
Article 7Equality Before Law
ND
ND
Article 8Right to Remedy
ND
ND
Article 9No Arbitrary Detention
ND
ND
Article 10Fair Hearing
ND
ND
Article 11Presumption of Innocence
ND
ND
Article 12Privacy
ND
ND
Article 13Freedom of Movement
ND
ND
Article 14Asylum
ND
ND
Article 15Nationality
ND
ND
Article 16Marriage & Family
ND
ND
Article 17Property
ND
ND
Article 20Assembly & Association
ND
ND
Article 22Social Security
ND
ND
Article 24Rest & Leisure
ND
ND
Article 27Cultural Participation
ND
ND
Article 28Social & International Order
ND
ND
Article 29Duties to Community
ND
ND
Article 30No Destruction of Rights
ND
Supplementary Signals
Epistemic Quality
0.69
Propaganda Flags
3techniques detected
appeal to authority
Cites Dr. Jared Cooney Horvath's congressional testimony, OECD director Andreas Schleicher, multiple peer-reviewed studies, and quotes from professors and researchers throughout to support claims about cognitive decline and AI impacts.
causal oversimplification
Presents causal chain: internet shortened attention spans → cognitive decline worsened → AI will make it worse. The causal mechanisms are oversimplified; multiple factors contribute to cognitive changes.
loaded language
Uses emotionally charged language: 'My kids don't think anymore,' 'soulless essays,' 'We've become goldfish — constantly flitting between one brightly colored rock and another,' 'the cost of AI is your own intelligence.'
Solution Orientation
No data
Emotional Tone
No data
Stakeholder Voice
No data
Temporal Framing
No data
Geographic Scope
No data
Complexity
No data
Transparency
No data
Event Timeline
20 events
2026-02-26 22:04
eval_success
Evaluated: Neutral (0.02)
--
2026-02-26 22:04
rater_validation_warn
Validation warnings for model llama-4-scout-wai: 0W 31R
--
2026-02-26 21:21
dlq
Dead-lettered after 1 attempts: Is AI Making Us Dumb?
--
2026-02-26 21:19
rate_limit
OpenRouter rate limited (429) model=llama-3.3-70b
--
2026-02-26 21:18
rate_limit
OpenRouter rate limited (429) model=llama-3.3-70b
--
2026-02-26 21:17
rate_limit
OpenRouter rate limited (429) model=llama-3.3-70b
--
2026-02-26 18:43
dlq
Dead-lettered after 1 attempts: Is AI Making Us Dumb?
--
2026-02-26 18:40
dlq
Dead-lettered after 1 attempts: Is AI Making Us Dumb?
--
2026-02-26 18:40
dlq
Dead-lettered after 1 attempts: Is AI Making Us Dumb?
--
2026-02-26 18:39
dlq
Dead-lettered after 1 attempts: Is AI Making Us Dumb?
--
2026-02-26 18:37
dlq
Dead-lettered after 1 attempts: Is AI Making Us Dumb?
--
2026-02-26 18:37
dlq
Dead-lettered after 1 attempts: Is AI Making Us Dumb?
--
2026-02-26 18:37
dlq
Dead-lettered after 1 attempts: Is AI Making Us Dumb?
--
2026-02-26 18:37
dlq
Dead-lettered after 1 attempts: Is AI Making Us Dumb?
--
2026-02-26 18:35
dlq
Dead-lettered after 1 attempts: Is AI Making Us Dumb?
--
2026-02-26 18:35
dlq
Dead-lettered after 1 attempts: Is AI Making Us Dumb?
--
2026-02-26 18:34
dlq
Dead-lettered after 1 attempts: Is AI Making Us Dumb?
--
2026-02-26 18:33
dlq
Dead-lettered after 1 attempts: Is AI Making Us Dumb?