“The [source texts] that I love [writing] best are the ones that I've researched the most and had to leave out so much of it, but I'm so much richer for having researched these topics about the Transcontinental Railroad and the Mayflower and the Amazon Rainforest. These are fascinating subjects that I know so much about, but I know this because I wrote these and AI did not.” Julie Walker shared this perspective in Episode 458 of our Arts of Language podcast. Her anecdote adds to a list of arguments defending thinking as a human skill, not to be relinquished to a machine. We must recognize AI’s imperfections in understanding context, creativity, and its bend to bias and inaccuracy in order to combat the overuse of this technology.
While AI can synthesize a vast amount of information to present an answer, as Andrew Pudewa notes in Episode 400 (timestamp 17:00), it does not have a soul. In Episode 376, Drew Formsma further articulates that AI is a mechanical system with no wisdom, discernment, or intuition. It may have been able to save Julie the time she spent researching, but she would have lost the furnishment of her mind and the continual revelry in the beauty that knowledge illuminates. AI cannot discern or add nuance to the information it gathers. Yes, it can hone what it has accumulated and correct the grammar, but it cannot reason. Therefore, we cannot hand over our thinking caps, if you will, but we must act as our own prompt engineers, formulating and asking questions so that we control the output. Limit your interaction with AI to brainstorming or utilizing its organizational tools and then start your own journey. Mull over your sources and ponder each thought until it is ready to be written down. Let us maintain our mental muscle and not exchange our critical thinking skills for soulless ease and efficiency.
We have many families who inquire about creative writing as they consider using IEW. Budding novelists sit at dining room tables and squeal with excitement when the page turns to a Unit 5: Writing from Pictures assignment. AI can produce amazing art and graphics, possibly enhancing school projects and marketing campaigns. However, is it truly creative? Does it use imagination? AI simply draws on algorithms and known information to determine an answer. Only the human mind is able to take all of the information it has gathered, ruminate over it, and generate a new idea. Let us enjoy AI’s ability to translate a foreign phrase or transcribe a podcast while we maintain our inherent creative capacity. Do not forsake the easel, the digital pen, or the fervor of a speech, believing that a machine can do better. With your human capacity, continue to originate, invent, design, fashion, generate, write, and create—from your thoughts!
For those not familiar with AI’s processes, ChatGPT answers are not reused but are generated for each request. If you type in the same question repeatedly, you will receive a different amalgamation of the response every time. This makes it hard for teachers to identify plagiarism. To tackle the issue, many schools have students write in class. Others schedule in-person or online meetings after papers are submitted. In the meetings students have to summarize their papers and defend their ideas, proving the thoughts contained originated with them. Accuracy and bias are also at stake as we consider AI’s input, which determines its output. In Episode 450 (timestamp 10:27), Andrew admonishes us to ask AI, “Where did you get your information?” Track down its primary sources and verify that they match the product and are accurate. If it is not your distinctive thinking, then it is not your work, and you will not be able to fully vet the product generated or know its information well.
AI’s inability to understand context, create new ideas, and ensure accuracy give us every reason to reconsider AI as an acceptable substitute for human thinking and writing. Drew Swanberg discusses his experience in Speech & Debate:
I find that much of the value I get from competing in debate is how study of the subject matter affects me and my understanding of the world. After being in Locke and Adam Smith for a year on the property rights resolution, I came away with a new understanding of the concept of justice, and what it means to engage with the government as a Christian. Study of the previous year’s resolution about Rationalism and Empiricism led me to develop an understanding of why I believe what I do, and helped me find understanding for people who would believe differently.
Value exists for maintaining our human skills and keeping our critical thinking sharp. While this technology can look new and shiny to some, Andrew Pudewa predicts that twenty years from now there will be two types of people: “people who can think and people who have outsourced it entirely.” May we be in the first category: people who can think and therefore can write and speak with nuance, creativity, and fidelity.
by Katie Eades
Bibliography
Heegaard, Sara. “Writing with AI: Everything You Need to Know.” Articulate, 26 Feb. 2025,
www.articulate.com/blog/writing-with-ai/.
Huff, Charlotte. “The Promise and Perils of Using AI for Research and Writing.” American
Psychological Association, 1 Oct. 2024,
www.apa.org/topics/artificial-intelligence-machine-learning/ai-research-writing.
Swanberg, Drew. “LD in NCFCA 2024-25.” Lasting Impact! Heather Neumann,
1 July 2024, lastingimpact.info/ld-in-ncfca-2024-25-by-drew-swanberg/.
