Dear Editor,

Every society is governed by moors and law, dating as far back as the genesis of civilisation, with rulers and courts erected to maintain social equilibrium.

Psychologist Sigmund Freud developed the personality theory consisting of the id, ego, and super ego, outlining that human beings come to know right and wrong from as early as age six. As we continue to grow and develop our internal value system is refined, taking into account life experiences. It then becomes a matter of nature versus nurture.

In the thrust of generative artificial intelligence (Gen AI), the rapidity of this revolution has left governing bodies, education experts, and law professionals scratching their heads as it veers out of control. No sooner than an issue is tackled another arises, it seems like the proverbial Jamaican case of putting the cart before the horse given the ballooning effects with seemingly no facet of society untouched by the AI revolution.

For some it’s bad, for some it’s a gift to humanity, but while the verdict is still out, we must continue to operate and develop useful mechanisms to mitigate the risks and compound the benefits of Gen AI. Herein lies the controversy surrounding Gen AI, with all its benefits and implications: To use or not to use?

The safe middle ground appears to be moderation, utilisation with conscience. In the world of academia and professionalism, the extent to which one uses Gen AI, especially in matters of work and study, has much to do with personal integrity and ethical code.

Putting it into perspective

A crucial part of academia is the importance of citation. At every stage of my education journey since primary school I recall receiving firm warnings regarding plagiarism. As an author and creative it’s even more personal to me; this work came about as a result of someone’s hard work and effort; give credit when and where it is due. Gen AI, however, amasses content seemingly at the speed of light — entire essays can be produced in a matter of seconds, what might have taken you hours to research and draft. Should you then give credit to AI?

In years gone by we were not allowed to cite Wikipedia, should schools now allow students to cite
Chat GPT and other models? It’s important to understand that information possessed and replicated by AI isn’t artificial in the least. Information is mined from vast bodies of work done by humans — art, history, stories, research findings, and numerical data — and just about everything is synthesised into a melting pot of information from which Gen AI pulls with each prompt. For this reason it cannot be touted as fair to present material accessed through Gen AI and pass it off as one’s own.

One could argue that the use of AI saves time. On one hand, time is being saved, but on the other hand, doom scrolling and sedentary lifestyle practices are on the rise because, essentially, what do we do with more free time?

We have somehow lost the value of hard work and become complacent. When one reads an entire book, skills of synthesis, critical thinking, focus, and motivation are utilised and honed. There is countless research existing on motivation theory and the value of work.

Schools should put more emphasis on skill development while holding students accountable for the use of Gen AI. Failing to do this will look like a dog chasing its own tail; education systems will not have achieved the ambitious goals set. It is important to strike a balance, one that looks like an integration of AI into education systems and models rather than an extreme reliance.

On a personal level, AI use is a creeper that grows on you. Suddenly you cannot write a simple e-mail outlining your thoughts or assess a problem with your own judgement. We now need AI to write a text to a friend, plan a trip, and do the most basic of things. It’s important for us to consistently assess and keep track of our usage, relying on our own harnessed brain power to flex our cognitive muscles lest they slowly atrophy.

In addition to the negative effects on cognition, AI also poses risks to the environment. Growing research shows massive water consumption from data centres along with electronic waste, as outlined in an article by UNEP in November 2025. We do not necessarily have to wait until the effects have become too far-reaching or further exacerbated to play our part in limiting our usage towards being good stewards of the Earth.

Gen AI and other forms of AI are now interwoven into modern civilisation, and it does not seem possible to escape their usage altogether. Whilst there are obvious benefits, the risks also cannot be ignored.

Policymakers and lawmakers are responding to the growing need for AI policy and governance; however, until then, I do believe we can find a balance, a safe middle ground through the moderate usage of AI. Not only will this help us to retain our agency as intelligent beings, but it will ensure we do not become too reliant, thus mitigating the effects of Gen AI at large.

Due to over-reliance on artificial intelligence, we now need it to write a simple e-mail, text a friend, plan a trip, and do the most basic of things.