Amidst the recent controversy over AI-generated art mimicking Studio Ghibli’s signature style, a pressing question emerges: In the age where artificial intelligence answers our questions, finishes our sentences, and even creates our art, is it enhancing human cognition—or quietly replacing it?
Proponents of AI in creative fields argue that these tools democratise art, making it accessible to those without formal training. Sam Altman, CEO of OpenAI, has defended the technology, calling AI-generated art a “net win” for society. He emphasises that it lowers creative barriers and enables more individuals to express their ideas freely.
However, critics warn that this reliance may come at a cost. The struggle that fosters skill and depth can be lost when creation becomes too easy. The process of mastering techniques, exploring ideas through experimentation, or developing a unique style might be sidelined in favour of instant gratification. The result? A possible erosion of artistic intuition, and with it, a decline in the depth and authenticity that define human creativity.
This tension isn’t new. Every major technological shift—from the printing press to the calculator—has been met with fears of cognitive decline. The Canadian media theorist Marshall McLuhan anticipated this decades ago, describing media as extensions of the human body that inevitably amputate something in return. What makes AI different is its increasing autonomy and its influence not just on how we express ideas, but on how we think, sense, and perceive.
AI, at its best, augments human ability. Writers use ChatGPT to overcome creative blocks, artists turn to tools like DALL·E and Midjourney for concept sketches, and even surgeons rely on machine learning to guide diagnostic decisions. These tools accelerate workflows, reduce human error, and expand creative potential.
But as we integrate AI more deeply into everyday life, it also begins to reshape our cognitive habits. Students who use AI to write essays may bypass the critical thinking process altogether. Readers who rely on summaries generated by algorithms lose out on nuance. Ironically, despite being aware of how AI can override our cognitive senses, as I write this very article on that subject, the red lines flagging my errors are subtly reinforcing my dependence on Artificial Intelligence to write more effectively. As AI increasingly filters, ranks, and selects the information we consume, our ability to interpret, question, and reflect is quietly diminished.
This subtle shift extends beyond cognition to our very senses. With real-time translation glasses, object-recognition apps, and AI-powered cameras filtering our environments, we may begin to outsource our perception of the world. The risk is that we trust the machine’s interpretation more than our own—just as we’ve come to occasionally rely on autocorrect instead of remembering how to spell certain words. It’s not a far stretch to imagine AI reshaping the way we see, hear, and interact with our surroundings.
Looking to the past, we can find useful context. The printing press was feared to weaken memory; photography, to destroy painting. Yet both became catalysts for new forms of human expression. The key difference with AI is its capacity not just to replicate but to generate, to make decisions, and to reshape how we think before we even act.
The question isn’t whether AI will change us—it already has. What we must now ask is whether we will let it dull our senses or challenge ourselves to adapt and sharpen them in new ways. Like any prosthetic, AI should support our abilities, not replace the will to use them.
The writer is an enthusiast of Art, Media, Technology, and Culture, with a keen interest in how these four domains influence one another, creating ripples in society and human behaviour. In addition to her focus on technology, Sayanee writes extensively about art, history, food, and media, examining their cultural significance and their role in shaping social identities and practices.
