The question of whether the use of tools like ChatGPT undermines education is a matter of great importance in our time. Throughout history, education has been shaped by the tools available to teachers and students. From the oral traditions of ancient societies to the written texts of classical and medieval schools, and later to the printing press and digital technologies, each advancement has brought both opportunities and challenges. In recent years, artificial intelligence tools such as ChatGPT have become widely accessible, offering students and educators the ability to generate text, answer questions, and simulate conversation on a vast range of topics. This development has led to concerns that such tools may undermine the educational process by making it possible for students to complete assignments and answer questions without genuine understanding or effort. Others argue that these tools can enhance learning by providing immediate access to information and personalized assistance. Given the rapid adoption of AI in educational settings, it is necessary to investigate whether these tools truly undermine education, or whether they reveal deeper issues within modern educational practices.
Many hold that the use of tools like ChatGPT undermines education. First, it is argued that such tools allow students to bypass the effort required to learn, leading to superficial understanding and academic dishonesty. Second, some believe that reliance on AI weakens critical thinking and problem-solving skills, as students may become passive recipients of information rather than active seekers of knowledge. Third, it is claimed that the presence of AI in education erodes the teacher-student relationship, reducing the role of the teacher to that of a mere facilitator or monitor. These opinions appear reasonable, as they are based on observable trends in modern classrooms and concerns about the integrity of academic work.
However, the Catechism of the Catholic Church teaches that “the dignity of the human person is rooted in his creation in the image and likeness of God” (CCC 1700), and that education is ordered to the full development of the human person. Furthermore, Aristotle, in his Nicomachean Ethics, emphasizes that education is not merely the acquisition of information, but the cultivation of virtue and reason. These sources suggest that the true purpose of education is not threatened by tools themselves, but by the manner in which they are used and the standards to which education is held. This introduces doubt as to whether the use of AI tools necessarily undermines education, or whether the problem lies elsewhere.
I answer that the use of tools like ChatGPT does not, in itself, undermine education. Rather, it exposes the shallow quality of modern education, which has reduced learning to activities that can be mastered by machines. Education, properly understood, is the formation of the intellect and will according to truth and virtue. If educational activities are so mechanical or superficial that they can be performed by an AI, this reveals a deficiency in the curriculum and pedagogy, not in the tool itself. As Aristotle teaches, “the soul never thinks without an image” (De Anima III.7), and true learning requires the active engagement of the mind with reality. The Catholic tradition affirms that education must be ordered to the development of wisdom, understanding, and virtue, which cannot be replaced by any machine. Therefore, the presence of AI in education is a test of the quality of educational practices. If students can succeed without genuine understanding, the standards must be raised to require deeper reasoning, creativity, and moral formation. The tool, then, is not the cause of educational decline, but a mirror reflecting its present state.
To the first opinion, that AI allows students to bypass learning, I reply that this is only possible where assignments and assessments are themselves shallow. If teachers require demonstrations of understanding, reasoning, and personal engagement, AI cannot substitute for genuine learning. To the second, that AI weakens critical thinking, I answer that critical thinking is only weakened when it is not required. If education demands analysis, synthesis, and evaluation, students must develop these skills regardless of the tools available. To the third, that AI erodes the teacher-student relationship, I respond that if a teacher’s requirements can be fulfilled by AI, it is the teacher who is neglecting his proper role. The true responsibility of the teacher is to challenge students to think deeply, reason clearly, and grow in wisdom and virtue. When assignments and assessments are so superficial that they can be completed by a machine, it is a sign that the teacher has failed to demand genuine intellectual and moral engagement. The problem, therefore, lies not with the student or the tool, but with the teacher who has abandoned the essential work of education.
In conclusion, the use of tools like ChatGPT does not undermine education by necessity. Rather, it exposes the inadequacy of educational practices that can be replaced by machines. The true purpose of education is the formation of the intellect and will in accordance with truth and virtue, a task that no AI can accomplish. Therefore, the presence of such tools should lead educators to raise the standards of school activity, ensuring that learning is deep, meaningful, and truly human. Thus, it is not the tool that undermines education, but the failure to demand more from education itself.
Mr. William C. Michael, O.P.
Headmaster
Classical Liberal Arts Academy
