Let AI be just a tool in the engine of our creativity

ARTIFICIAL intelligence promises efficiency, creativity and convenience. But beneath the glossy marketing lies a harsher truth: AI is increasingly a tool for big tech corporations to harvest our cognitive abilities, turning human thought into a commodity like a utility they control.

What appears to be empowerment is often exploitation. Every time we rely on AI to generate ideas, write essays or solve problems, we surrender fragments of our thinking. These fragments are aggregated, monetised and sold back to us as “innovation”.

Think back to the days of sitting for major exams. Students once wrote full essays using only their own minds. Today, many ask AI tools for ideas before they even begin.

The more we outsource thinking, the less we practise it ourselves. AI becomes not a helper but a crutch. Dependency grows, and with it our ability to think independently shrinks.

I was reminded of this reality during one of my classes. Normally, I allow students to use their gadgets to complete in-class activities, but that day I insisted they put everything aside and rely solely on their own minds.

The task I gave them was simple but many struggled to finish it within the time limit. Several admitted that without their devices, even basic problem- solving felt unusually difficult.

That moment revealed to me how quickly dependence on technology can erode the resilience of our minds, even in situations where the challenge itself is not complex.

However, this isn’t a call to abandon AI entirely. In a modern era defined by technological advancement, we must keep pace. The key is to be thoughtful in how we use it. Let AI be a tool in our arsenal, not the sole engine of our creativity and problem-solving.

Big tech billionaires envision a future where intelligence is treated like a power source, one that we must purchase because we can no longer generate it ourselves.

In the end, AI is not just a neutral tool. It is a system designed to reshape intelligence into a commodity. I’m not saying we must reject it. But we do need to be smart and intentional.

Let’s ensure that we remain creators of thought rather than mere consumers of it.

FAIZUL HADI SHAUL HAMEED

Lecturer

Centre of Foundation Studies

Universiti Malaya