Writing Is Essential to Critical Thinking and Should Not Be De-emphasized in Education Due to AI
Source: https://www.facebook.com/americanspectator/. "Writing Is Critical Thinking — Even in the Age of AI | The American Spectator | USA News and Politics." September 30, 2026. spectator.org
The Gist
The author argues that writing is crucial for developing clear, organized thinking, and that schools should not abandon writing instruction in favor of oral communication just because AI is changing education. He believes that writing forces people to think more carefully and precisely than speaking does, and that proposals to de-emphasize writing are part of a broader troubling trend against humanities education.
Conclusion
Schools should not reduce the emphasis on writing (e.g., written exams, writing instruction) in favor of oral communication, even as AI reshapes education, because writing is fundamental to developing critical and reflective thought.
Premises
- Writing forces a person to organize ideas before expressing them, unlike speaking, which happens 'on the fly' and is often haphazard.
- Writing allows for revision and a 'second look,' enabling more precise, refined, and sincere communication than spontaneous speech.
- Oral communication and improvisation (as observed in meetings) tend to produce disorganized, longer-winded, and lower-quality contributions compared to prepared writing.
- Written exams, despite being difficult for some students, are important tools for assessing genuine knowledge; oral exams can torment students and distort accurate assessment of their understanding.
- The push to de-emphasize writing in education mirrors a broader pattern of diminishing the humanities and philosophy, which the author views as harmful to students' capacity for critical thought.
- Writing often exposes when an idea that seemed good mentally is actually nonsensical once put into written form, serving as a check on poor thinking.
Assumptions
- Critical thinking is best cultivated through written expression rather than oral expression.
- The proposal to reduce writing in favor of oral communication is motivated by or aligned with a broader ideological campaign against traditional humanities education.
- Current oral communication practices (e.g., in meetings) are representative of what increased oral emphasis in education would produce.
- The value of writing as a pedagogical tool is not diminished by the rise of AI-assisted writing tools.
- Written exams remain a valid and necessary method of assessment despite AI's potential to undermine their integrity (e.g., through AI-assisted cheating).