Thanks Rich, you have explained the cognitive divide so effectively here. And I really hope we can start working with our students and colleagues to help them continue to develop the skills that machines will never be able to replace, whilst also using machines to improve their effectiveness and maximise tasks that humans are ill equipped to do. 🙏
Excellent breakdown and analysis of a problem I’ve sensed but could not explain as thoroughly as you just have. Education in the future will still require the basics as you need to learn the rules in order to break or defend them and yes critical thinking and analysis will be paramount.
Louise, thank you so much. Your opinion is very valuable to me and I appreciate you. It was fascinating as these elements started to fall in line and the golden thread was unassailable. More to come!
I keep watching the same AI tools create two very different humans: the ones slowly outsourcing their brains, and the ones using AI like resistance training for judgment.
“AI got trained. Our cognitive fitness didn’t.” Yep. 2026 is going to make that gap way more obvious, and a lot more uncomfortable.
I read this right after a workout, then,"Resistance training for judgment"... that's the frame I was reaching for. Powerful analogy. The tool is identical. The cognitive direction is opposite. And you're right: 2026 is when the gap becomes undeniable and the uncomfortable conversations finally start.
💯 This is not 'either or'... it's 'yes and' with some new rules. Education in the future needs more thought teaching and less content memorization. AI needs to be in the middle of human thought, with human starting it and human closing the synthesis loop. And many are. More need to 🙂
Then the article was a success, Data Frank, many thanks. I just followed you and welcome any input at anytime. I read and respond to all communication. Happy New Year.
Sam, this means a lot coming from you, and you've articulated the balance better than I did in 4,000 words.
The "whilst also using machines" part is where most of the conversation gets stuck. People hear "develop human thinking skills" and assume it means rejecting AI. It's the opposite. The professionals who will thrive are the ones using AI while strengthening what it can't touch.
Your students are lucky to have someone framing it this way. Seems that the narrative is 'either or' and the greater percey are being taught to use the tools without anyone mentioning that the tools are reshaping what's valuable about them.
This article has put a clear name to something many people feel but can’t quite articulate: the Cognitive Divide.
The key insight .... AI didn’t replace human thinking. It replaced the lowest levels of it. As reliance on AI grows, many people stop practicing the harder skills, such as analyzing, judging quality, and creating new ways of seeing problems.
The real risk isn’t AI. And it isn’t “humanity losing out.” The risk appears when humans stop exercising higher-order thinking and allow AI to think for them rather than with them.
Read this piece. It explains why 2026 won’t just reward productivity, but also who is still thinking 🧠✨
Thanks Rich, you have explained the cognitive divide so effectively here. And I really hope we can start working with our students and colleagues to help them continue to develop the skills that machines will never be able to replace, whilst also using machines to improve their effectiveness and maximise tasks that humans are ill equipped to do. 🙏
Excellent breakdown and analysis of a problem I’ve sensed but could not explain as thoroughly as you just have. Education in the future will still require the basics as you need to learn the rules in order to break or defend them and yes critical thinking and analysis will be paramount.
This is a fantastic synthesis of many of the most important issues for AI and critical thinking. Thanks for such a rich and challenging post, Rich.
Louise, thank you so much. Your opinion is very valuable to me and I appreciate you. It was fascinating as these elements started to fall in line and the golden thread was unassailable. More to come!
I keep watching the same AI tools create two very different humans: the ones slowly outsourcing their brains, and the ones using AI like resistance training for judgment.
“AI got trained. Our cognitive fitness didn’t.” Yep. 2026 is going to make that gap way more obvious, and a lot more uncomfortable.
I read this right after a workout, then,"Resistance training for judgment"... that's the frame I was reaching for. Powerful analogy. The tool is identical. The cognitive direction is opposite. And you're right: 2026 is when the gap becomes undeniable and the uncomfortable conversations finally start.
Ha, love that you read it post‑workout, that analogy literally came from treating AI like a mental gym.
💪💪💪💪
Your breakdown makes me want to rethink how I’m keeping my own brain sharp.
Would love to swap ideas on building habits that actually keep humans thinking in a world full of shortcuts.
💯 This is not 'either or'... it's 'yes and' with some new rules. Education in the future needs more thought teaching and less content memorization. AI needs to be in the middle of human thought, with human starting it and human closing the synthesis loop. And many are. More need to 🙂
Then the article was a success, Data Frank, many thanks. I just followed you and welcome any input at anytime. I read and respond to all communication. Happy New Year.
Sam, this means a lot coming from you, and you've articulated the balance better than I did in 4,000 words.
The "whilst also using machines" part is where most of the conversation gets stuck. People hear "develop human thinking skills" and assume it means rejecting AI. It's the opposite. The professionals who will thrive are the ones using AI while strengthening what it can't touch.
Your students are lucky to have someone framing it this way. Seems that the narrative is 'either or' and the greater percey are being taught to use the tools without anyone mentioning that the tools are reshaping what's valuable about them.
Grateful you took the time to read and respond. 🙏
This article has put a clear name to something many people feel but can’t quite articulate: the Cognitive Divide.
The key insight .... AI didn’t replace human thinking. It replaced the lowest levels of it. As reliance on AI grows, many people stop practicing the harder skills, such as analyzing, judging quality, and creating new ways of seeing problems.
The real risk isn’t AI. And it isn’t “humanity losing out.” The risk appears when humans stop exercising higher-order thinking and allow AI to think for them rather than with them.
Read this piece. It explains why 2026 won’t just reward productivity, but also who is still thinking 🧠✨
Thank you for this post. This is much needed.