AI Tools: Crafting harmony or creating dependency?

As AI tools become increasingly integrated into our daily lives, we face a critical question: Are we harnessing their power to enhance our abilities, or are we slowly outsourcing our minds — or both?

As an early adopter of generative AI tools like DALL-E, ChatGPT, Claude and others, I have experienced firsthand how these technologies can boost productivity and creativity. I have used AI to build slide decks, create marketing content and tackle various professional challenges. When faced with tasks requiring critical or creative thinking, my first instinct now is to turn to my AI partners.

I recently completed a task to create new thought leadership ideas, specifically through leveraging surveys or research reports that could enhance the reputation of a company. When starting, a couple of ideas popped into my head, but the assignment needed a few more possibilities and I was stuck. I turned to a chatbot colleague, created a descriptive prompt, reminded it that this was a task at which it excelled, engaged in some back-and-forth dialog and had ten more ideas a minute later. 

Of those ideas, four struck me as good. With a few minor tweaks the assignment was done with a total elapsed time of 30 minutes. More time was needed to put these into a readable format, but the hard part was done, much of it in collaboration with the AI. 

One way to look at this experience is to marvel at the improved efficiency and productivity. Working with the AI, I was able to produce a high-quality product in minimal time. That is a significant advantage for any employee, and for every business. This outcome worked because I have extensive experience and was able to easily ascertain which of the AI-generated ideas had the most merit, as well as how to improve on them for the final recommendation. The final ideas were presented and well received. 

Orchestral AI

In the past, I would have labored more on this assignment. It might have required four or more hours to think about the task from the viewpoint of the requester, as well as determine what would be novel about this IP. This would have required me to do an hour or two of online research, leveraging my experience more fully, and — hopefully — would have led to a strong product. With AI as my copilot, I was able to cut most of this laborious process. Some might say this AI option removed the routine drudge work, and all for the good.

Using AI in this way fits well within the concept of human as AI orchestrator, where a person conducts the various AI tools much as a conductor leads a symphony. For example, Perplexity helps with up-to-date AI-assisted search which, when shared with ChatGPT through a smart prompt can be useful in generating relevant ideas. Those ideas can then be used as input to Claude for further validation and insight, then summarized visually with an image from DALL-E or Designer. Each tool has a specific role to play, with the goal being to produce an output this is accurate, pleasing and harmonious with the assignment. 

However, the line between conducting a harmonious symphony and falling into discord can be perilously thin. As we conduct this AI symphony it is worth asking — are we truly in control, or are we becoming overly reliant on the very tools we orchestrate?

This is good, right?

As a regular user of AI tools, I am hardly a luddite or a technology skeptic. Convenience is wonderful. I really appreciate, for example, how my phone through its GPS and map applications can readily route me on the fastest path to my destination. That said, I have noticed that the innate human skills I have (such as my sense of direction and learned ability to navigate) are getting rusty. I am becoming dependent on technology. 

The use of AI is often discussed as a partnership between humans and machines, transforming the relationship between human creativity and machine intelligence. If my experience is any guide, this partnership is indeed transforming our relationship with machines. But is this transformed relationship a form of collaboration when the technology truly augments human capabilities, or is this a form of dependency where we simply outsource our cognitive skills to the machine? 

Collaboration or dependency

In a collaborative relationship, both parties have an equal and complementary role. AI excels at processing enormous amounts of data, pattern recognition and certain types of analysis, while people excel at creativity, emotional intelligence and complex decision-making. In this relationship, the human keeps agency through critically evaluating AI outputs and making final decisions. 

However, this relationship can easily veer into dependency where we become unable or unwilling to perform tasks without AI help, even for tasks we could previously do independently. As AI outputs have become amazingly human-like and convincing, it is easy to accept them without critical evaluation or understanding, even when knowing the content may be a hallucination — an AI-generated output that appears convincing but is false or misleading. There is a clear risk that human skills could deteriorate due to lack of use as we deploy AI to take over more tasks.

It is a fine line

Making use of AI tools to augment our capabilities provides a tremendous amount of convenience and efficiency that is incredibly useful in the short term. We can now quickly get the information and answers needed. 

But this capability can come at a price, as there is a thin line between collaboration — also known as augmentation — and dependency. Put simply, in using the latest AI tools, I wonder if I am outsourcing critical cognitive abilities such as problem-solving, critical thinking and memory, and in so doing losing human agency. We must all traverse this boundary carefully. If the relationship becomes one of dependency, this could lead to an inability to think for ourselves and open us to manipulation whether it is intentional or not.

Going forward, AI tools are only going to get better and become more engaging and convincing. For example, ChatGPT’s new advanced voice mode sounds remarkably lifelike. According to a CNN report: “It responds in real time, can adjust to being interrupted, makes the kinds of noises that humans make during conversations like laughing or ‘hmms.’ It can also judge a speaker’s emotional state based on their tone of voice.” The company said it is worried that people could become dependent upon this technology. 

As this example shows, the line between collaboration and dependency just became much thinner. As AI continues to advance and become more indistinguishable from human interaction, the distinction between collaboration and dependency becomes increasingly blurred. Or worse, as leading historian Yuval Noah Harari — who is renowned for his works on the history and future of humankind points out — intimacy is a powerful weapon which can then be used to persuade us.

While AI offers immense benefits in terms of efficiency and productivity, it is imperative that we stay mindful of the potential risks associated with over-reliance on these technologies. By fostering a balanced approach that prioritizes human agency and critical thinking, we can harness the power of AI while safeguarding our cognitive abilities and ensuring a future where humans and machines work together in a truly symbiotic relationship. 

The choice is ours: Will we let AI guide us, or will we remain the true orchestrators of our own minds? The implications of this choice extend far beyond mere convenience; they touch on the very essence of human autonomy and our ability to think critically in an increasingly automated world.

Gary Grossman is EVP of technology practice at Edelman.