Artificial Abatement (An Ethical Essay on AI)
Written for my Spring 2026 Ethics class.
In a world that’s increasing in loneliness and filled with people seeking the easiest option and the clearest answer, the onslaught of readily accessible generative AI in the past year may seem like a blessing. For the lonely, AI offers a simulated person to talk to. For someone needing a specific and clear answer, sites like Chat GPT give people the ability to quickly find exactly what they want. For those who want something easy, AI tends to cut out the hard work that used to be required from humans in order to do certain things. However, despite these AI bots being presented as a tool, many view them as an enemy.
For artists, the sudden output of AI writing and “art” has left their own creative efforts—which were already struggling to compete with the hordes of prevalent online artists—now competing with AI books and art. People struggling with loneliness now seek comfort in the arms of an artificial companion that more often than not gives the person what they want, even if it’s bad for their mental health. With more teachers struggling to keep their students from using artificial intelligence to do their homework for them, it would also seem that the next generation won’t view AI as a tool, but as a necessary part of life. Generative AI, while having the potential to be used for good, shouldn’t be accepted as wholeheartedly as it has been by the general public because instead of making us better, it will likely make humanity lazier.
For students, the growing dependency on AI tools like ChatGPT may result in a generation of people who are unable or unwilling to critically engage with the content they’re presented with. Furthermore, students currently enrolled in school may find that they don’t even need to learn the material in the class since AI can easily summarize and apply it for them.
The rise of AI may also cause people to stop critically examining the options they’re given and come to enjoy the ease that comes with using these services. The desire to engage in the work before them, likewise, will shrink. It is likely that the ability to critically think will also lessen—the brain functions like a muscle and must be used regularly to maintain the ability to function and by outsourcing certain areas of brain function to AI, the human mind will only grow weaker. This decrease in brain function is especially alarming with younger students who may be unaware of the skill they are losing and, being overfamiliar with the prevalence of AI, see no problem with using it.
There is also an environmental impact to be taken into account. AI’s high environmental cost includes the physical space now used by data centers, the large amounts of water used to cool off the equipment running these programs, and the electricity used to keep the hardware on. As more people turn to ChatGPT and other AI models for their internet searches, email summarizing, and entertainment, the hardware that supports them will continue to consume more energy. With each new model being released, a great amount of energy must be used to train it. This need will only continue to grow as the number of AI users increases.
We have yet to see the mental impact of these programs and their prevalence. Nor have we fully recognized the impact that AI may have on the less fortunate. Power bills may rise in cities that house these programs—how will this effect those struggling to make ends meet? When it comes down to it, those in control of these programs don’t care about the long-term impact. AI doesn’t exist to help everyone. It’s motivated to earn money for the companies running them, helping them eliminate the need for human employees. Ironically, they’re spending billions of dollars to run this AI so they can save millions of dollars in lessening their need for human labor.
I could go on: ChatGPT’s original goal is to affirm the beliefs of the user and if these beliefs are unhealthy or harmful, ChatGPT didn’t have protocols to help. Instead, it affirmed the unhealthy beliefs. While new updates have fixed this oversight, the AI was publicly available without them for a long time, holding the potential to cause great harm. On top of this, the content industry will also suffer, with creatives and artists being replaced with cheaper AI labor and worse final products. Furthermore, the data centers that house these AI programs also emit loud hums, disturbing the neighborhoods they were built in. The value of the houses in the area is thus plummeting and oftentimes the electricity bills in the area are rising due to the amount of power consumed by the data centers. Finally, if AI replaces a large chunk of a company’s work force, that’s now an entire group of people who won’t be able to pay for the services they offer—possibly more, seeing as their dismissal from work may result in their friends and family boycotting the company.
AI is a tool, but that doesn’t mean it’s good. A hammer was made with good intentions and can be used for good, such as building a house. It can also be used as a murder weapon or a tool for robbery. While those with good intentions and brilliant minds may see AI as a wonderful tool to add to their collection, the everyman is not as wise in their use of AI. Just as it is unwise to let a fool carry a loaded gun, it is unwise to allow AI to become so commonplace that society won’t be able to function without it or that the fool may abuse it. With the rise of Artificial Intelligence may very well usher in the end of human intelligence.
What Would God Say?
When it all boils down, AI is a tool. Many believers would argue that all tools are made by God and thus have the potential to help the church. There are already AI “artists” releasing “worship” music—Ironic, seeing how AI doesn’t have a soul and is now being used to create songs of praise. Many church leaders, likewise, utilize generative AI to help with lesson plans, service notes, and Bible study questions. While this may seem like a step in the right direction, does it align with God’s heart?
God values human life (Ephesians 2:10). He wants His children to thrive (Psalm 92:12) and cares for the poor and needy (Luke 6:38). Artificial intelligence doesn’t. AI has become mainstream because it offers a way to erase the need for human labor, ideas, and creativity. AI data centers have put a burden on the residential areas around them and will eventually send more people into poverty when it replaces their jobs. It also erases the need for people to turn to one another for help.
God created us for work. Genesis 2 states that “God took the man and put him in the garden on Eden to work it and keep it.” The book of Proverbs likewise points out that “whoever is slack in his work is a brother to him who destroys” (18:9) and that “in all toil there is profit, but mere talk tends only to poverty” (14:23). It seems that God desires for man to work for it is good for him. AI removes the need for people to work hard, which doesn’t align with God’s heart.
Many believers have argued that the rise of AI will lead to the coming of the anti-Christ. While I may not agree with that extreme, it does seem like artificial intelligence leans heavily into the bad instead of the good. It would seem, based on the cons outnumbering the pros, that AI, despite being viewed by many to be a harmless tool, is doing more damage than it is help.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
“What are the Potential Negative Effects of AI in Education.” The School House Blog. https://www.theschoolhouse.org/post/potential-negative-effects-ai-education
Gooden, Drew. “Greed is Destroying the World.” YouTube. December 1st, 2025. https://youtu.be/W8Z3MfNpJpE?si=Yx9DbItczt7cbeJx
Zewe, Adam. “Explained: Generative AI’s environmental impact.” MIT News. January 17th, 2025. https://news.mit.edu/2025/explained-generative-ai-environmental-impact-0117
