Ever catch yourself asking an AI to finish your sentences and wonder, “Wait-am I doing any thinking here?” I’ve been there. At first, JIT answers from chatbots feel like magic: instant drafts, clever code snippets, lightning-fast research. But somewhere between prompt and output, I started to feel my own mental gears slowing down. It’s like swapping out a high-performance engine for autopilot-sure, you’ll coast, but at what cost to your driving skills?
The Cognitive Offloading Dilemma
Think of your brain as a muscle: it grows when you push it, but atrophies if you stop using it. Every time we ask AI to write an email or debug our code, we’re effectively skipping the workout. Yes, our to-do lists shrink, but our problem-solving biceps go soft. Before long, the tasks that once flexed our creativity become sources of anxiety-because we’ve let the machine do the heavy lifting.
A Day in My AI-Fueled Life
Last week, I let ChatGPT draft my morning newsletter. It nailed the tone-but when I tried to tweak it, my mind blanked. I stared at the cursor, helpless. It was the digital equivalent of muscle memory gone missing: my fingers knew how to type, but my brain forgot what to say.
Striking a Balance
I’m a fan of AI-don’t get me wrong. But I’ve learned that the real power comes when you treat it like a sparring partner, not a replacement coach. Here’s my playbook:
Block Off “Brain-Only” Time
Schedule 30–60 minutes each day where AI is off-limits. Use that space to draft, brainstorm, or debug purely on instinct.Ask “Why?” Before “How?”
Instead of “Write this for me,” try “Explain how you’d write this.” Forcing the model to detail its reasoning lights up your own thought process.Rewrite the AI-Generated Draft
Take what it gives you and tell the story in your own voice. That twist of perspective refuels your creativity and keeps you sharp.Mix in Analog Tools
Break out a pen and notebook occasionally. There’s something about physical doodles and bullet points that jolts your neurons awake.
My Take
AI is like a supercharged toolbox-it’s there to make us faster, not lazier. Whenever I feel that familiar twinge of generative haze, I remind myself: the promise of AI isn’t effortless genius; it’s amplified effort. We still have to think, iterate, and question. Otherwise, we’ll wake up one day wondering why our mental engines stall on even the simplest tasks.
Conclusion
So here’s my challenge: next time you’re tempted to hand off a problem to AI, pause. Give yourself the space to wrestle with it first. Then, bring the AI in as your coach-your mental reps will thank you. After all, the future of our intelligence depends not on machines doing the thinking, but on machines helping us think better.
Top comments (20)
When it comes to AI, I've started taking some "tips" from another space, where automation extensively used.
In the world of commercial aviation, pilots use autopilot to handle a majority of a flight. That said, pilots are still extremely critical to the flight overall, even if they aren't manually flying the plane directly the entire time.
I think development is going to become similar. Just like a pilot needing to take over if there is a failure, pilots also need to guide/review everything the autopilot does continually. Pilots are not paid for miles flown, they are paid for the periods where these automated tools fail.
Pilots also deliberately disable autopilot in a number of key cases to "stay sharp", such as landing even when there is the ability to have the plane land itself (such as in bad weather, where autopilot can get a plane setup to land).
wow, that's veeery interesting insights, would have never really thought of this myself
There's 2 main distinctions I wanted to point out as a followup/extension. I left out originally to keep things more straight forward.
You can vibe code because if the AI gets stuff wrong the negative effects are limited. You can't "Vibe fly" with autopilot because if you get something wrong you can hurt people (yourself and others). Hence why commercial systems are actually fairly antiquated and risk adverse to change, even ones that are designed for extra safety, since any new system comes with its own risk.
AI tools are also more generically useful than automated flying systems as they need to solve a wider range of problems, but they should still fill the same role of augmentation.
Systems fail, systems mislead. Luckily developers are usually not in a spot where mistakes can be life or death, but understanding how another profession deals with automation, and its limitations can be useful in the same capacity.
If I could give badges for best comment, this would get one!
When you do "vibe coding", always fully understand the LLM output, don't accept the first response as best, and ask the model if the last output was really the most effective way to do x. Use it more like a brainstorming helper.
Of course check the outputs and dive into the real docs if you are not convinced.
This is how I use it in my experience.
Can you really call that "vibe coding" though? I thought the goal of vibe coding was to get the AI to fix its own code using back and forth prompting. Kind of like orthodox "extreme programming" where in a pair of programmers, one types while the other talks. The talking one doesn't get to type. And the typing one doesn't get to talk (or change the way an algorithm works).
Sometimes it gets to that, where I go with the flow (so the vibes) of what the models suggests, trying its outputs and going back to the chat saying it doesn't work. The model then apologizes and refines the output. Usually it's a waste of time because it's the human that still needs to do the thinking first.
Probably your definition is more accurate, but using AI IMHO always leads to some kind of vibe coding.
This is hilarious! :D
I think we should share our workflows of "vibe coding"
Here's my latest example: dev.to/solvecomputerscience/youtub...
Probably
this one cuts deep :D
I've been using AI heavily at work but a lot less in personal projects. In personal projects I still use copilot but I never prompt an AI to write code for me.
I use it heavily at work because:
I don't use it in personal projects because:
I'm planning to keep working like that, so I have to do personal projects to stay sharp!
According to a study signs are saying yes, arxiv.org/pdf/2506.08872. This isn't peer reviewed so we have to wait on the weight of the study.
It is like a nail-gun or a chainsaw. They make the work done faster. But if you don't know what you are doing or don't pay attention the consequences are bigger.
I use AI like search. I ask a question I don't know the answer to. And I use the answer as a base to come to my own conclusion. I'm not saying my conclusion is always the right one, and when I'm wrong I'm learning. When I'm right I learned too but it is less memorable.
I’d like to offer a different perspective—especially as someone working in AI and living with autism.
For many people, including those who are neurodivergent, AI is not a crutch—it’s a crucial accessibility tool. It helps us express complex ideas more clearly, adapt tone for specific audiences, and communicate in ways that might otherwise take significant emotional or cognitive energy. Dismissing AI as something that “makes you dumber” ignores how it levels the playing field for countless individuals.
Used well, AI doesn’t replace thinking—it amplifies it. It enables reinforcement learning: improving while doing. I’ve used AI tools to grow beyond conventional limits, learning inline with my work, without the need to step away for formal training. That’s not “offloading”; that’s evolution.
The analogy comparing AI to a chainsaw misses the nuance. AI is more like a precision instrument—a scalpel in the hands of someone who knows how to use it. When applied thoughtfully, it helps us architect solutions instead of reinventing the same code from scratch. It empowers us to operate on a more strategic level.
Of course, there are challenges. AI can overwhelm users if not guided well or if outputs become too abstract. But that’s not a flaw in the tool—it’s an opportunity to improve human-AI collaboration, not an argument against its existence.
Criticizing people for using AI—especially when it serves as an assistive aid—can be exclusionary. It's like ridiculing someone for using glasses to see or speech tools to communicate. Let’s make space for how tools help people shine in their own ways, rather than gatekeeping creativity and intellect.
dev.to/sebs/pair-programming-again...
Here is a solution
There is a concept in Turkish called "Tefekkur" (deep thinking about a subject). This concept indicates thought activities regarding situations that need to be deepened and experienced repeatedly. There are different situations in people's lives. While shallow ideas are enough for some, we need deep thinking sessions for some thoughts.
However, after AI entered our lives, our brain refuses to collect information in long-term memory. And information is no longer stored and recalled over and over again. Because the moment the brain realizes that it has access to information that is a keystroke away, it no longer keeps that information in its memory. This negatively affects personal development. While collective consciousness is falling, the consciousness of machines is rising.
I'm with you on treating AI like a sparring partner instead of a crutch. What helps me is forcing myself to edit everything AI gives me, just to stay in the habit - do you have any other tricks you use to keep your mind sharp?
If you completely depend on AI for everything, you’re not getting smarter — you’re getting duller.
AI is a powerful tool, but it’s not a replacement for your thinking.
You still need to understand the fundamentals, make decisions, and think critically.
Let AI assist you, not replace you.
Use it to accelerate your learning, explore ideas faster, and build better things.
Mainly use AI as your companion!