Reducing all Human Stanford Binet IQs by 10-15 % over β€˜2005’ levels for Alz & Dmntd 𝜢⁺ -profits Investors

LADIES & GENTLEMEN there ff the second Antonio Gramsci-inspired radical critique of mine these 3 or 4 hours..

Therefore my exquisite 5 set series formatting, document coherency epistemological validity and Third-decade of 21C thematic clarity are assured but I’ve not reviewed the shit.

We have no time to fool around OR look after numpties, gangsters and sads like my $300 a wk live-in landlady who verbally abuses me each 10 daze or so for managing my tenancy & working days with Γ¨clat..

We as ever thank good old Tim Cook of ο£Ώ for a keypad with squiggly things above English vowels did i get that right and below consonants continents and shit did i get that right too?

πŸ₯Έ

β€œA researcher spent two years documenting what AI is doing to the way humans think.

β€œHis conclusion fits in one sentence.
AI is standardizing human thought. Across societies. Across cultures. Across generations. Simultaneously. At a scale no technology in history has ever achieved.

β€œThe paper is called “The Impact of Artificial Intelligence on Human Thought.” Published July 2025 on arXiv. Written by independent researcher RΓ©nald Gesnot, categorized under Computers & Society and Human-Computer Interaction.

β€œIt is not a benchmark paper. It is not a capability paper. It is something rarer β€” a systematic analysis of what happens to human cognition, creativity, and intellectual diversity when billions of people outsource their thinking to the same machine.

β€œHere is the mechanism the researcher describes.
When you ask an AI a question, you get an answer shaped by the model’s training data, its fine-tuning, its alignment process, and the preferences of the company that built it. That answer is not neutral. It reflects a specific set of values, framings, and assumptions. Usually Western. Usually English-dominant. Usually optimized for engagement and approval.

β€œWhen 500 million people ask the same AI similar questions and receive similar answers, those answers become reference points. People quote them. Build on them. Argue from them.

β€œThe diversity of starting points β€” different cultures, different intellectual traditions, different ways of framing problems β€” begins to compress.

β€œThe researcher describes this as cognitive standardi [s] ation.


β€œNot censorship. Not propaganda. Something subtler and harder to reverse. A gravitational pull toward the outputs of a small number of models, trained by a small number of companies, reflecting a small number of worldviews.

β€œThe paper also documents algorithmic manipulation β€” AI systems that exploit cognitive biases to influence behavior.

β€œThe way recommendation algorithms produce filter bubbles.

β€œThe way AI-generated content exploits confirmation bias.

β€œThe way personalization systems learn what you already believe and feed it back to you amplified.
β€œAnd then the creativity question β€” the one nobody wants to answer directly.

When AI can produce a poem, an essay, a business plan, or a research summary in seconds β€” and when that output is often indistinguishable from or preferred over human-generated content β€” what happens to the human practice of creating those things?

β€œNot the output. The practice. The struggle. The failure. The slow development of a personal voice through years of imperfect attempts.

β€œThe researcher argues that cognitive offloading β€” delegating thinking tasks to AI β€” does not merely save time.

β€œIt atrophies the mental capacity that the offloaded task was building.

β€œMicrosoft and Carnegie Mellon found this empirically in 2025: higher AI trust correlates directly with measurably lower critical thinking.

β€œThe researcher provides the theoretical framework for why.
The paper ends with a question the researcher admits he cannot answer.


β€œOnce a generation grows up with AI as the default thinking partner β€” once the habit of outsourcing cognition is formed before the habit of independent thought is developed β€” what does intellectual autonomy even mean?

β€œAnd is it already too late to find out?”


Source: Gesnot, R. Β· “The Impact of Artificial Intelligence on Human Thought” Β· arXiv:2508.16628 Β· arxiv.org/abs/2508.16628 Β· July 2025

🌏

MANY thanks 2 our writer ≣ acknowledgement ff tomorrow ELT

🦘

JOHN BLUNDELL 🦘🌏

β€’ Thematics 2-5 set series logic

β€’ Neurocognitive education and health

β€’ Reform of the internet – the involution

β€’ Immediate re-orientation of all studies in 25k universities

β€’ REMOVAL of all Healthy-age circa 12-15 arrested psycho-spiritual development sociopaths in positions of public trust, authority & responsibility, worldwide, immediate

Leave a comment