The growing deployment of artificial intelligence (AI) technologies is raising questions about how it might influence human cognitive abilities. A notable concern asserts that neural networks could, over time, shoulder many mental tasks, potentially altering the way people think. This position was put forward by a researcher from the University of Monterrey in Mexico, who presented his views in a scholarly article published in Neuropsychology.
In the discussion, the researcher highlights ChatGPT as a standout among current AI models. Unlike older neural networks that often miss linguistic nuance, ChatGPT employs a transformer-based approach. This architecture enables responses that align closely with human-like reasoning and expression, echoing how a thoughtful person might respond in conversation.
Dominguez notes that tools like ChatGPT and similar systems can alleviate the burden of problem-solving and planning. They can serve as cognitive aids that free people to focus on higher-level tasks, a shift that some may view as a beneficial form of cognitive training rather than mere shortcut.
However, the publication also cautions about potential risks tied to such deep integration of AI into everyday cognition. The central concern is cognitive offload: when people rely heavily on machines to think for them, the capacity to perform mental tasks independently may diminish. Just as muscles weaken without exercise, cognitive faculties can atrophy if they are not regularly challenged.
As the article stresses, the danger is not solely about laziness or reduced effort. There could be slower progress in cognitive development and problem-solving as people grow accustomed to letting AI shoulder the heavy lifting. Over time, this pattern might erode critical thinking and creativity in society, unless individuals consistently engage in mental exercises beyond AI-assisted processes.
The researcher also clarifies that not all technologies carry the same risks. Many traditional tools still require active human engagement to produce outcomes, and their use supports skill preservation rather than replacement.
Earlier discussions by thousands of scientists have outlined both high-impact scenarios and more cautious views on how AI could shape future human capabilities. These conversations continue to evolve as technology advances, highlighting the need for balanced, informed assessments in research and policy alike (attribution: multiple science forums and peer-reviewed studies, 2020–2024).”