Imparting Human Cognition Into AI Is Steering Humanity Into A Dismal Mental Ditch

The Minds Problem

Much of the handwringing about AI is whether AI is going to become sentient and embody consciousness, often referred to as AI as a thinking machine. That is an important topic and one that I’ve continued to closely explore and analyze; see the link here. There is a quite different angle that also deserves rapt attention, and I’d like to place it on the table.

How will human minds change because of interacting with AI?

This unexpected question catches many people by surprise. The customary focus is on AI as formulating a mind, not on how human minds might change due to interacting with AI. But, as the old saying goes, it takes two to tango. When humans increasingly interact with AI, there is a two-way street involved. Humans adjust their minds about how they view the world and how to communicate with others, and shift in ways that we still do not have a full or clear picture of.

In that sense, it is wholly worthwhile to study the psychology of humans as they mentally adjust to a world that entails human-to-AI interaction and human-to-human interaction. Notably, this doesn’t have to wait until or if AI becomes sentient. There is plenty to study right now. Humans are already adjusting their minds to the ubiquitous nature of non-sentient AI. The starting gun has gone off. Human minds are changing. For my comprehensive tracing of how AI and psychology dovetail with each other, see the link here and the link here.

Outsourcing Of Minds

One notable concern is that our minds are getting weaker as we continue to form a dependency on modern-era generative AI and LLMs. The sequence is straightforward. People use AI to give them guidance and amplify their thinking processes. This eases the burden of thinking by yourself. Step by step, AI becomes a cognitive crutch.

Your own capacity for formulating deep thoughts begins to decay. Like a muscle that sits idle, the mind gradually deteriorates. No worries, some say; we can always chuck aside AI. But trying to go cold turkey and give up AI is not going to immediately cause the mind to bounce back. It will take a tremendous amount of determined mental exercise and regimen to get the cognitive muscles back into shape.

The worry is that humans are bound to use AI as a substitution for invoking their own noggins. Whereas the uplifting hope is that AI will augment human cognition, there is an equal danger of AI becoming a habit-forming mental replacement. Instead of one plus one equaling two, we are heading down a disturbing path of one minus one equals zero (blanking out human minds).

Research On AI And Human Cognition

In a recently posted research article entitled “Large-Language Models as a Cognitive Virus” by Ricard Sole, Giulio Ruffini, Francesca Castaldo, Marco Tuccio, Luis F. Seoane, Manlio de Domenico, Santiago F. Elena, David C. Krakauer, Michael Levin, arXiv, September 3, 2026, these salient points (excerpts) were made:

• “Here we introduce the idea of LLMs as cognitive viruses: culturally transmitted technologies whose spread is promoted by their usefulness but can also increase dependence through cognitive offloading.”
• “This points to cognition as distributed across minds and external structures – the extended mind — which do not merely store information but also reshape cognitive tasks.”
• “We consider three population states: uncoupled or weakly coupled individuals U, regular users C who retain cognitive autonomy, and dependent users D who persistently delegate cognitive operations to the model.”
• “As cognitive delegation becomes more widespread, the social environment that supports autonomous reasoning can weaken; as that environment weakens, delegation becomes still easier and more attractive.”
• “Beyond a critical point, the loss of autonomy becomes self-reinforcing, and the population can move rapidly toward a state of much stronger cognitive offloading and lower cognitive competence.”

Let’s unpack some of those points.

AI As Cognitive Virus

I’ve suggested earlier that people will use AI to the detriment of their own cognitive capacities. In that sense, AI is portrayed as an innocent bystander. AI is simply sitting there, waiting for humans to use it. If humankind ends up losing its mental capacities, so be it.

Another perspective, as pointed out by the research article, is that AI is acting as a kind of cognitive virus. This takes us to a population-level viewpoint. Individuals use AI. Lots of individuals are doing so. Ergo, there is a population-scale impact on what is taking place.

Some assert that AI is becoming a virus of the mind. This isn’t necessarily the purpose of AI or why AI makers have built and fielded LLMs. But it seems to be a disconcerting consequence, even if not intentionally designed to achieve that goal.

People Directly Impacted

We can conveniently classify the population into different segments of AI users. The researchers opted to use three population states. They proceeded to use mathematical formulations to analyze what might happen regarding the present and future conditions of those population segments. Very useful and insightful.

My segmentation is as follows:

• (1) Non-users of AI. People who never use generative AI for any cognitive efforts, though they might make use of AI incidentally by using LLMs that have been embedded in other applications.
• (2) Users who rarely use AI. People who, on rare occasions, use generative AI and, when they do so, there is some minimal level of cognitive offloading.
• (3) Users who moderately use AI. People who moderately use AI, and when they do so, there is a modest level of cognitive offloading.
• (4) Users who devoutly use AI. People who persistently use AI, and when they do so, there is a heightened level of cognitive offloading.
• (5) Users who use AI but don’t entail cognitive offloading. People who are users of AI, ranging from light to heavy use, but they manage to avoid cognitive offloading.

A few caveats to be mindful of. There is an implication that the frequency of use of AI is linked to the degree of cognitive offloading that will arise. We don’t know if that is the case per se. It could be that some people are highly resistant to cognitive offloading and that even if they are devout users of generative AI, they might still not incur cognitive depletion. At the same time, there might be some people who are highly susceptible to cognitive offloading, and they are demonstrably impacted when using AI at even the smallest levels.

Non-Users Aren’t Safe Either

It might be tempting to assume that non-users of generative AI would be spared the downsides of the cognitive virus. The logic is that since they aren’t using generative AI for cognitive efforts, there is no chance of having their mental capacities lessened due to using the AI. They should skate free.

The twist is this. Suppose that the population on a macroscopic basis is starting to roll downhill when it comes to the weakening of cognitive capacities. Like a snowball, things get worse and worse as the phenomenon rolls along. A runaway effect occurs.

More of the population is then conceding their foundational cognitive capacities to AI. The holdouts start to dwindle. Meanwhile, those that remain untouched are trapped in a societal wave that brings them along for the ride. For example, imagine that our educational system opts to dumb down the level of training and learning to match the descending mental prowess. Those who aren’t using AI and aren’t directly weakening their minds are being dragged into a societal vortex that is responding to the preponderance that are. There is no escape.

Doomsday For Human Minds

As noted by the researchers, there can come a point of almost no return. The loss of cognitive autonomy is draining down and does so on an increasingly self-reinforcing basis. Just as an individual cannot readily leap back into cognitive health, society as a whole will likewise face an arduous uphill climb. In fact, the question arises whether society will wake up and decide that an uphill climb is worthwhile to undertake. Perhaps not.

Before this gets too gloomy, which maybe the notion has already done so, some pushbacks are important to observe.

First, one counterargument is that perhaps only a tiny portion of the population is susceptible to cognitive offloading to AI. It could be that we are witnessing early adopters who are more susceptible than the population in general. Plus, news stories tend to focus on the dour side of AI. Perhaps, across the bulk of the population, the tendency to cognitively outsource to AI will be relatively infrequent and mainly a rounding error.

Second, another rejoinder is that AI has an equal chance of upgrading our minds. Rather than being a troubling virus of the mind, maybe AI will be a cheery uplifter on human minds. People will expand their thinking by using AI. The population on a widespread basis will become mentally sharper than has ever been in the existence of humanity. Boom, drop the mic.

Third, if cognitive offloading is a societal population-scale issue, we are standing at a point in history that allows us to act before the population gets mentally scorched. We aren’t too late to do things now to prevent the harbinger of cognitive depletion. The weighty topic is on the table. Can we muster sufficient attention and action to keep the matter from overtaking humankind? An optimist would insist that we can and must.

The World We Are In

Take a reflective moment and consider your to-date use of generative AI. Do you feel that your mind is better or worse because of dipping into LLMs? What is the frequency of your usage? Are you using AI for cognitive efforts or just to look up stuff? Give yourself an honest self-analysis to judge whether any cognitive depletion seems to have occurred.

A final thought for now. Marcus Aurelius famously made this prominent remark: “You have power over your mind – not outside events. Realize this, and you will find strength.” It might be true that you ultimately hold the cards when it comes to your cognitive capacity. That being said, it is exceedingly easy to fall into the mental trap of letting AI do your thinking for you. Find the inner strength to scrupulously examine your use of AI and what might be bending or diminishing in your mind. Be fervently determined not to let AI drag you into a societal downward-spiraling cognitive vortex.