08/26/2026
AI can make us faster. But is it making us better thinkers?
I recently read Ruben Hassid’s “AI brain rot” article, and it raised a question I think is especially important for the legal profession.
There is a big difference between using AI to eliminate repetitive work and allowing it to replace our judgment.
AI can help organize information, analyze large amounts of material, identify patterns, challenge our thinking, and help us see something we may have missed. That is where I find tremendous value.
But I never want convenience to replace the skills that allow us to recognize when AI gets something wrong.
My approach is simple:
Human → AI → Human → Authority
Think first. Use AI to challenge and expand your thinking. Apply your own judgment. Then verify what matters against reliable authority.
The goal should not just be getting more done. I want AI to help me become a better researcher, writer, problem-solver, and critical thinker.
AI is an incredible tool. I just don't want it doing all of the thinking for me.
Here is a great prompt I use often:
"Use my words, ideas, and reasoning. Keep my voice while improving clarity.
Use only verifiable facts and reliable sources. Never invent information, citations, quotes, or statistics.
If I am wrong or missing something important, tell me.
Help strengthen my thinking, not replace it."
Source: Ruben Hassid, “AI brain rot,” How to AI, August 26, 2026.
For educational and informational purposes only. Nothing posted here is legal advice.