The argument highlights the risks of AI in education, suggesting writing is essential for knowledge and understanding.
Writing is not merely a communication tool, it is the primary mechanism through which knowledge is discovered, tested, consolidated, and transmitted across generations. As AI-generated text becomes ubiquitous, higher education faces a crisis not just of skill development but of knowledge preservation. This paper argues that when algorithms replace the cognitive work of writing, they sever the connection between expression and understanding that has sustained intellectual traditions for millennia. Universities risk becoming custodians of hollow fluency rather than guardians of human knowledge. Writing must remain central to education, not to preserve outdated traditions, but to sustain the very processes through which knowledge lives and grows.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Giorgio Iemmolo (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: