There is much dialogue over the role of artificial intelligence in countless areas of society: privacy, security, healthcare, the arts, employment … the list goes on and on. In the realm of education, I expect that many of my peers have come across arguments against its pervasion. The use of artificial intelligence reduces authenticity in college applications, abuses the privilege of education when employed to write and submit coursework and presents a threatening image of the future when those who depended on ChatGPT, Gemini, etc. to pass their college classes enter the workforce. Therefore, there’s no need for me to continue laboring over this recurring discourse. Instead, I hope to make a case against the use of artificial intelligence in everything from Canvas discussion posts to research papers for a more significant reason — when we relinquish our right to create, we hinder our ability to make the world a better place.

As aphoristic, dramatic and corny as that is, I believe that when students use artificial intelligence (AI) as a substitute for their creative voice, they are actively conditioning themselves to be complacent with society as it stands today. I hope that I do not need to make explicit the many issues that plague our world. However, even if you are comfortable with the world’s status, you should be disturbed by the idea that you are willing to give up the very words you use to communicate your unique thoughts and personality to not only someone, but something, that is not you.

Of course, I am not talking about the generated AI summaries that appear upon a Google search, automatic spelling and grammar corrections, nor even asking Gemini to help refine a sentence’s structure, produce ideas about an unfamiliar topic or provide guidance on how to understand a newfound complexity. Even if many of these are seemingly inevitable aspects of academic culture, I do think that these are effective ways to utilize AI. However, it is a tragedy that instead of giving more energy to AI’s capacities to assist in more tedious tasks — folding laundry, doing taxes, cleaning dishes, reducing traffic — we use it to poison artistic expression with cheap “AI slop.”

We as a society are grossly obsessed with optimization and productive capacity. Therefore, I find it extremely concerning that using AI has already established itself as a quick-and-easy alternative to producing authentic, creative work. Why wouldn’t we want to use AI for the quotidian engagements of humanity, so that more individuals have the chance to assist in resolving the injustices that harm billions of people around the world? So that more people can give their time to being an artist, a writer, a musician, a scientist, a dancer and paramountly, a lover and defender of humanity? 

If you are a student at UC Santa Barbara and reading this article, I am obligated to inform you that you have won the “genetic lottery,” a term coined by Kathryn Paige Harden. This is not to disregard or invalidate your traumatic experiences and past challenges, but merely to further emphasize the wondrous opportunities that we are afforded through our privilege of being here. I digress, but I do not intend to paint myself as infallible. During my four years at UCSB, I have ignored assigned readings, skipped classes because I was hungover and lazily used AI to suggest synonyms or organize a bibliography. However, I have never surrendered my individual voice, and I will continue advocating for the importance of creative authenticity throughout my further studies and lifetime. It’s also vital to note that learning does not have to be confined to the formal academic environment. Allow me to indulge in an anecdote regarding a fascinating article I read recently by anthropologist Emily Martin.

In her article, she argues that the language used by biological texts and frameworks regarding the egg, sperm and fertilization overtly perpetuate stereotypes about gender norms. Not only is this narrative apocryphal — new research has revealed that the egg plays a far more active and mutually significant role in the fertilization process — but this language has ingrained society’s dictation of women as passive, incomplete, “waiting” entities, and by extension, serves as the justification for women’s subjugation throughout history and in the contemporary era. It was a brilliantly insightful read, and I urge you all to explore it yourselves, but what’s also important about this tangent is where I discovered this article: TikTok.

An automatic, programmed algorithm brought Martin’s article to my attention. As a result, it has generated a new dimension of thought and inspired the beginnings of a Ph.D. dissertation within me. My intention here is to show that I am not ignorant of AI’s possible benefits, even if they are unintentional, as it allowed me to come across a piece that I would not have encountered in my formal studies. Furthermore, I propose that maintaining one’s creative individualism is more than choosing — what is seen as the “high road” — to not give in to the fanaticism surrounding AI, as we must also continue to nurture our innate, human desire to learn more about our passions. 

Education provides us with all the social, intellectual and moral mobility to rise above society’s imposing stratifications and ask “why?” 

It’s a garden to imagine possibilities absent from our current reality; upon enacting these potentialities we give rise to a more accepting, loving future. I commit to continue championing learning’s paramount importance, particularly in an era that deifies conformity and efficiency. It is humanity’s obligation to learn. How can we collectively progress if we fail to comprehend the injustice pervading our society today?

It is painfully ironic that we have more information at our fingertips than any generation before us, yet the increasing reliance on AI to generate creative or academic work suggests that we are suffering from a period of intellectual regression. As debilitating, challenging and stressful as college can be, we must never abandon our curiosity, especially when society tries to convince us that optimization is the hallmark of success and the temptation of convenience is just seven presses on a keyboard away. The introduction of AI into the world may be irreversible, but how we choose to employ it is not set in stone. I implore you to not forsake your right to read, to learn and to better understand the beautiful chaos of the planet we call home. If not for yourself, then for someone on the other side of the world who is just as full of potential, but was unfortunately, and arbitrarily, not granted the same uplifting learning environment we have.

When we use AI to undermine the purpose of education, we take for granted the immense privilege of being here. Worse, we cruelly patronize millions of people just like us who face far greater challenges than a five-page essay. How lucky are we that our typical concerns are meeting that paper deadline, studying for that exam or getting that summer internship rather than where we will sleep, what we will eat or if the sounds of warfare will be louder when we wake up tomorrow morning?

If you have found this article dramatic, then I consider myself partially successful, for I will gladly be labeled as excessive or emotional if I have at least brought awareness to the graveness of our circumstances. Electing to rely on AI to write and learn entails giving up one’s unique voice, hindering possibilities for one’s future success and a disturbing acceptance of negative peace that blinds us to the devastation of millions of people. 

Language’s vastness is unparalleled — it is a medium that encompasses our entire ability to express love and meaning. Therefore, if we surrender our language to AI, we also surrender our ability to express the infinite beauty and peculiarity that exists within us all. Furthermore, giving up our right for unique expression weakens our capacities to deviate and be different, and by extension, our power to resist oppression, corruption and tyranny. Coupled with contemporary society’s zeitgeist of optimization, the ramifications of AI’s popularity become disturbingly clear. Giving up our right to learn limits our ability to write and speak authentically, and in turn, weakens us to fight against inequality. For how can we protest wrongdoing when subscribing to productivity’s supremacy comes at the cost of losing the language necessary to identify immorality?

However, in a hopeful contrast, resisting the propaganda to use AI can be seen as an act of revolution. Rebellion is defined as “opposition to one in authority or dominance.” Cultural developments and proponents of artificial intelligence indicate that AI’s pervasive advancement, if left unchecked, will dominate nearly every major industry in our lifetime. This impending uniformity should concern us all, and while I understand how easy it can be to copy and paste a prompt to generate an essay for that inconsequential general education class, we cannot be accomplices to the diminishment of our individualism. I urge us all to be rebellious. 

Do not waste your education, but take advantage of it to leave a legacy that is uniquely your own and not the voice of a bodiless entity, devoid of emotion and lacking humanity’s singularity. To me, part of freedom is patience. This period in our lives and the environment that we find ourselves in grants us the marvelous gift of having the time to reflect, and it is our duty to use this privilege to wonder and ask why to liberate those who don’t always have the luxury of pensivity. So, be a rebel, be authentic, be a deviant and tenaciously defend your right to be unapologetically curious.