A recent column argues that writers should abandon AI tools entirely - not because they are unethical in all uses, but because they weaken the mental discipline that writing demands. The author calls it a "plea": Don't use AI for school papers, work briefs, emails, speeches, or any writing task. The deeper concern is that relying on AI erodes the thinking that writing forces us to do.
Why writing without AI matters
The argument rests on a claim about what writing does to the mind. "It compels thought," the author writes. "It compels thinking in ways that silent contemplation or spoken language rarely can." Writing requires articulation, grammar, coherence, and the scrutiny of others. That process builds clarity, logic, accuracy, and accountability.
Using AI shortcuts that process. The column compares it to taking an escalator instead of stairs: "The problem with writing with A.I. is that it's mentally enfeebling - an escalator toward a result when you really need to make a daily habit of taking the stairs." Over time, the habit of letting AI write for you weakens your ability to think through complex ideas.
The case against AI-assisted writing
The author acknowledges that using AI is ethically problematic when it deceives - when you pass off AI-generated words as your own. "Writing with A.I. is unethical when it's a deception," the column states. But an acknowledgment can fix that. The real problem is deeper: the erosion of reasoning and creativity on a societal level.
As AI becomes ubiquitous, the column warns, it "undermines not only our individual ability to write but also a society's collective ability to reason, a culture's inner capacity to create and everyone's reason to care." The decline of reading is already documented; AI accelerates the decline of writing, pushing us into what The Atlantic's Rose Horowitch calls a "postliterate age."
What writing demands of the mind
Writing is not just transcription. The column points out that written words carry weight because they are considered. "People may easily forgive a word said in anger but not so easily one written in anger, precisely because the fact that it was written tells us that it was considered." The written word has staying power and moral weight. "I want that in writing" is a phrase that demands accountability.
For writers, the implication is clear: using AI to generate drafts, outlines, or even opening sentences bypasses the thinking that makes writing meaningful. The author says editing an AI draft does not make it your own. The act of writing from scratch is the act of thinking.
Why this matters for writers
Writers who rely on AI risk losing the very skill that defines their profession: the ability to craft precise, logical, accountable prose. The column urges writers to see AI not as a tool but as a crutch that weakens the muscle of thought. For anyone whose job depends on writing, the message is that the struggle to find the right words is not a bug - it is the entire point. Avoiding that struggle leaves you with words that carry no weight, and a mind that no longer knows how to produce them.
AI for Writers resources can help you understand the technology, but this argument says the best use of those tools is to decide not to use them for the actual writing task. For those interested in how generative AI and LLMs work under the hood, the column offers a stark reminder: knowing how the machine writes does not help you write better yourself.
Your membership also unlocks:
