I’m one of those Millennials who remembers life without the internet (I think we’re affectionately known as ‘geriatric millennials’. Cheers for that.) If I wanted the answer to an obscure curiosity, my parents directed me to an Encyclopaedia.
This also means I remember the world before Google. And I remember the collective dismay that our memories would be eroded forever because we no longer had to retain information that we could simply Google. But I don’t think that has happened in reality.
Is the furore over Chat GPT then, just another flash in the pan for the ire of technophobes? Are we capable of retaining our ability for critical thought, while using generative AI as a useful tool for our work?
In my view, I think Chat GPT is eroding our ability to think critically. Perhaps that’s a bold statement. But I’ll explain why.
Is there any evidence that Chat GPT makes us stupid?
The Economist reported on research into the use of generative AI on brain function, in their article “Will AI make you stupid?”[1]
In one study, AI users across the board exhibited “markedly lower neural activity in parts of the brain associated with creative functions and attention.”
The report described the findings as “part of a growing body of work on the potentially detrimental effects of AI use for creativity and learning.”
Interestingly, one study by Swiss Business School found that participants who made more use of AI scored lower in a critical-thinking assessment.
So there is evidence out there that over-reliance on tools like Chat GPT is not conducive to the sharpening of minds.
Should lawyers use AI?
There is growing pressure on law firms to carry out their work more efficiently and cost-effectively. Many law firms are looking at ways to integrate AI into their practise. A good example is A&O Shearman who use a tool called Harvey to delegate complex legal tasks to AI.[2]
Undoubtedly, there’s a place for AI in the practise of law. An obvious example is large document review exercises. But there are boundaries to which AI should be confined, and Chat GPT is no match for a legally-trained, analytical, human brain.
Why lawyers need to think analytically
Lawyers are always thinking critically. Here are just a few examples:
- Interpreting contracts: What does this particular clause mean in this situation, and in the context of the entire contractual matrix? mean?
- Applying the law to the facts: What is the relevant law in this situation, and how do these facts interact with the law?
- Variation: Has the wording of the contract been varied by a course of dealing between the parties?
- Objective knowledge: Is this email sufficient to confer knowledge of dishonesty on behalf of the defendant?
- Force Majeure: Does this event fall within the Force Majeure provisions, and if so, what does that mean for our client?
Chat GPT cannot answer those questions for you. It requires deep-thinking and analysis.
The problem with offloading the thinking part
And the problem is, if you offload some of that thinking to Chat GPT, the brain gets a bit lazy.
As the article in The Economist put it, “once the brain has developed a taste for offloading, it can be a hard habit to kick… As AI-reliant individuals find it hard to think critically, their brains may become more miserly, which will lead to further offloading.”
You’re helping your brain to become fuzzier when you don’t challenge it to think deeply.
Writing vs reading: How your brain works differently
But Chat GPT can give you a first draft, right?
Perhaps. But I promise you that you can write a better first draft than Chat GPT. And by putting pen to paper, you make yourself a better lawyer.
That’s because writing is thinking. You think through the issues as you’re writing. You sharpen your thoughts. You train your brain.
Your brain behaves like a muscle. The more you use it, the stronger it gets. It’s been proven that the act of writing physically changes your brain, improving your memory and critical thinking. When you write that first draft, you understand the concepts that you’re writing about, and you give the brain the workout it needs to think about these issues critically in the future.
When you read a first draft written by somebody else, your brain is in a different gear. Inevitably, you’ll gloss over things. Even if you’re giving it a very close, analytical reading, your brain won’t process it in the same way it would when you’re writing. You have to force your brain to work harder to challenge ideas, and grasp the meaning.
Why people turn to Chat GPT: an issue of confidence
It’s easy to think that people turn to Chat GPT out of a certain laziness. They see it as a way to produce work more quickly. It hurts your brain less than thinking about it. Perhaps there’s some truth to that, but I don’t think it’s the main reason people turn to Chat GPT.
I think the main reason is a confidence, or more accurately, a lack of confidence.
Young lawyers have been high achievers all their lives. Probably straight A students. They sailed through their studies. Then they come into a law firm and all their work is supervised, red penned, edited. It can come as a bit of a shock.
Submitting a first draft that was penned by Chat GPT means that they’re one step removed. The feedback doesn’t feel quite so personal. The critique isn’t directed at their own abilities, only Chat GPT’s sub-par outputs.
Can Chat GPT help at all?
The best description I’ve heard for using Chat GPT is to treat it as an “enthusiastic but naïve assistant.” It’ll confidently churn out something vaguely coherent. But it won’ necessarily be correct. And it won’t necessarily be the depth and quality that you can produce yourself.
Want some help to ween people off Chat GPT?
If you find that more of your colleagues are turning to Chat GPT for a first draft, it’s probably the case that they’re not feeling confident in their own writing.
I run a training course to help lawyers feel more confident in their own analysis and critical thinking. I demonstrate how their brains work significantly more effectively than Chat GPT for legal issues, and persuade them that the effort of writing will enhance their own practice as a lawyer.
If you’d like any more details, please have a look at my webpage, or get in touch with me at kath@kathhooper.com.
[1] The Economist, 19 July 2025 “Will AI make you stupid?” https://www.economist.com/science-and-technology/2025/07/16/will-ai-make-you-stupid
[2] https://www.aoshearman.com/en/news/ao-shearman-and-harvey-to-roll-out-agentic-ai-agents-targeting-complex-legal-workflows
